Nintendo Switch Is Not "Technically Capable" Of Running Call Of Duty Games, Says CMA

Well they're not wrong are they? Unless of course it is a cloud version, which presumably helps prove the CMA's point in that regard? However to be fair to Microsoft they were talking about the next 10 years, so how can the CMA be sure that the Switch 2 couldn't run a pretty darn good version of CoD by then?

The CMA are hardcore Nintendo fans and just want the Switch 2 reveal 😉

If you straight out port one then they are right.

But they forget about a thing called “optimising”, MS could tone down settings or maybe even change the engine to make a Switch specific port.

Because that’s a thing you know CMA

COD 4 can run on a modern day toaster. So it can run an Switch. 😂

The best way to respond to this would be to immediately release CoD on Switch, provided they did like every one else and foresaw this coming, and thus secretly started porting it.

We all know "Nintendo" can run CoD remembering the Wii U era. No one says it has to run at 4K 60 to be CoD.

Which engine does CoD use these days? Considering that some engines work just fine being scaled down to Switch, Like Unreal 5, IDtech and Redengine. So could definitely see it being possible. Or is the CMA expecting the same graphical fidelity as xbox and ps? If so then they are the wrong group to decide this as they have no idea how games / hardware works....

The switch can run all the good call of duty games.
Cod modern warfare 1,2,3
Cod WW2
World at War
The new ones suck anyway

This whole thing is turning pretty sour lol. If I ever had interest in this series on Switch I probably lost that now since this just tells me they don't even want to put it on Switch, and even if they do it won't be a very good game.

Well, whatever. Moving on!

@Rayquaza2510 "a version of CoD that is similar to those in Xbox and PlayStation"
Reading is a thing you know.

Well I wasn't expecting that deal to start on Switch anyway.
If Microsoft would buy Activision I'd assume it still would take 1-3 years til we actually get a COD since the current ones aren't being developed with the Switch in mind and till then the successor is most likely out

I don't think the deal is a good thing, but the CMA sound like they don't have a clue. Nintendo consoles haven't had a COD game for years, I didn't see them complaining about that.

'....in terms of quality of gameplay and content'. Of course it can!! It can't make the graphics look as nice, but the gameplay would be there as would the content. Look at Wii port of Call of Duty - the graphics were obviously stripped back, but the gameplay was spot on. CMA are clueless.

But the Switch can run Crysis.
😜

Exactly even the CMA can smell the bs.
.

Microsoft should just buy the CMA.

Ofcourse the Switch isn’t technically capable, it has SNES hardware inside right?

It is not like we played Call of Duty games on Gamecube, Xbox and Playstation 2 hardware. Yes, totally impossible.

They're not wrong, to be fair. Without serious cuts, I couldn't see Modern Warfare II running on the current Switch model.

Even the last gen PS4 and Xbox One consoles have to drop larger game modes like Ground War down to 30fps

On the current platform, something akin to CoD Mobile might be more suited than a dramatically downgraded MW2.

I think it could run it, but not without major concessions such as a lower resolution or a 30fps frame rate which by the terms Microsoft used would be as you would expect when it comes to games like that being ported to Switch.

It could be done but if it had online crossplay I think that wouldn't be fair to Switch owners going against people on more powerful hardware.

I am sure they would add an option to play against only Switch users if that was the case though.

@Pigeon Yeah I can tell you are a Microsoft fanboy. Like Microsoft you think alike. I don’t have the creativity to make any good triple A games in the past decade so I just throw around money I haven’t earned with gaming. Buy up as many publishers and dominate the market not buy creativity and hard work but just by money. What I don’t know or have I will buy.

The acquisition is dead. The EU won’t go against the CMA decision and block it as well. People just move on. If you want to play call of duty so badly buy a steam deck or the new Asus handheld.

Kinda glad they’re drawing attention to this. Claiming to support Nintendo with CoD is such an empty gesture on Microsoft’s part in my opinion. Anyone with eyes could tell you that a hamstrung Switch port of CoD is in no way competitive with Xbox and PC.

Limitations breed creativity

They could make a Switch only Call of Duty, with good storyline and music instead of graphics.

@Johnno137426 To be fair, although CoD Wii had a very cool community of players, those games were particularly lighter in terms of content.

Cut game modes, cut kill streaks, features like killcams just omitted entirely.

https://callofduty.fandom.com/wiki/Differences_of_Call_of_Duty_games_on_the_Wii

With how complex MW2 is now, I think the CMA's statement is probably fair as it concerns current hardware.

@ComfyAko yeah because that’s what Activision and Microsoft are so good at. Story driven shooters.

CMA just called cloud gaming "a bright future for gamers", so unless the UK has 6G hotspots on every corner, I'm not sure if they get to comment on gaming matters for the visible future.😅 And not that I care much for CoD, but Switch itself has handled a lot more packed games, and the contract's 10 year span inevitably covers a part of the even more powerful successor's shelf life anyway.

@ComfyAko Modern Warfare trilogy ported at Crysis levels, anyone?

(On a side note, Krile FTW)

The switch might, and its a very slight might, be able to run the current COD. But with major concessions, blurry graphics and struggle to get 30fps.
The problem would be next year when COD will be new gen only, programmed from the ground up to run from ssd's only. There would be no chance then.
Then again maybe MS know what Nintendo have in the pipeline hardware wise. I am hoping the switch 2 is a beast.

@Gelantious It's the IW 9.0 engine.

It's Infinity Ward's proprietary game engine.

i always believed gtom the beginning the xbox- nintendo deal was a scam for microsoft to use in it's battle with sony for the activision deal..

The CMA sounding like internet forum trolls is more than a little absurd.

Wish they would have released some COD collections of the older games.

@IronMan30 half of them comment on Nintendolife.

@IronMan30 pretty much agree. They don't seem to understand the industry they're commenting on and making decisions for... Sounds like government bureaucracy to me.

If you have unskilled programmers than yes it’s not possible.

But nevermind. The switch has much better games than this. So no loss.

oh but it can run, they just need to make the same s** they did with kingdom hearts on switch ;V

We don't care because the Switch has the best games.

Besides, CoD is for little kids.

@Fiskern exactly reading is a thing and so I did.

It's like playing a PC game on low settings because you lack the hardware for high ones, still the same game though no matter the settings.

Same could be done for the Switch, eventually with a different engine.

And I am not claiming they will do it, it wouldn't be cheap so I doubt they go that route, but the possibility is there.

Microsoft were ridiculous claiming switch would get day one COD equal to ps5 and Xbox.

It was a not worth the paper it was written on that 10 year deal.

CMA rightly saw through that.

@Wheatly Worth looking at the Xbox One version of the game for an idea. It runs at comparably 'low' settings, doesn't keep a stable framerate in single-player or multi-player, sometimes dropping to 30fps in some campaign levels.

I feel like a Switch version would be looking at 30fps for the most part. Can't say I disagree with CMA here when they say the Switch version won't be comparable to PlayStation or Xbox iterations of the same game.

Now here's the funny thing:
Neither Nintendo nor CMA are at fault here, it lies completely on MS and their stupid 10 year contract that strictly states that CoD will run with "content and feature parity" on present and future platforms.

So yeah, if PS5/XSX can run at 4k60Hz they NEED to make a Switch port that can run the same, which, as we all know, is not possible in any feasible way.

Acceptable level? Yes, definitely.

Comparable level? Not likely - The devil will be ice skating in hell before that happens.

Either way I don't really care as COD never interested me. Microsoft can keep it FAIC

@BadPlayerOne UK is no longer part of the European union, there is no reason why they would have to religiously follow decisions of a British commission (CMA).

@Wheatly that’s probably why Capcom created a Switch specific version of the RE engine. Monster Hunter Rise uses it on Switch. All it takes is some engineers to make a customer engine for the hardware and use it to release Switch specific versions on CoD. However, by the time that would happen, the Switch successor would probably be coming out, so if it’s specs are still not close to ps5/Xbox series of consoles, then do the custom engine on that new Nintendo console. Keeping in mind the current Switch runs Doom, Doom Eternal and Wolfenstein 2 at a near perfect 30fps and the games still look graphically pleasing(at least to me they do) and I guess also it runs The Witcher 3. I think the best way to get a CoD game on Switch would be to either port a series of older games(original MW trilogy or the Blops trilogy) or make a custom engine for a new one.

@CielloArc I don't think Fps and resolution counts as features in this case, probably it's referring to something more like crossplay.

@WiltonRoots lol, you joke but it seems that way.

@BadPlayerOne well, they would have to outsource a ton of work since Activision doesn't have good writers, or music composers, or... anyone really. But I would love to see how much could be done by actually skilled people with such budget. It could get activision from 6/10 games to being able to actually produce something worthwhile. It's a dream, of course, but a beautiful one.

I don't see this as a bad thing.

Just give me the classic COD from PS2 an Xbox 360, BO1, MW1, MW2, and World at War

@jbarry25 this is what I want. Port the good old call of duties. But Microsoft promised the new games. That’s where I don’t even believe their claims are possible.

Whenever someone says the Switch isn't capable, they actually mean they just don't wanna invest in making it compatible.

There are some very great and complex games running on the Switch, quite a few ported from systems like PS4 and while they do make cuts in visuals and presentation, the games usually remain pretty fine. No Man's Sky for instance is just crazy on the Switch. But then again, people play NMS for the sheer experience of travelling from planet to planet and managing resources. Not for story-cutscenes, immersive scripted elements and realism. After these are key elements to COD players, its clear they can't just downgrade COD to be playable on a Switch.

I personally do ask myself, if a game needs certain hardware to be fun, what does this say about the game itself?

@sixrings MS promised COD to support Nintendo for 10 yrs to come. I don't believe they said the Switch. And with a 6 year old system, its absolutely OK to talk about future systems.

@Issac1070 At some point it would have made perfect sense for Capcom to create a Switch exclusive RE game with exactly that engine like Revelations or Code Veronica.
I mean looking at what consoles they did (at that time) exclusives for, Gamecube, Dreamcast ... the Switch would have been quite a lucrative business case.

Nintendo does not currently offer CoD, and we have seen no evidence to suggest that its consoles would be technically capable of running a version of CoD that is similar to those in Xbox and PlayStation in terms of quality of gameplay and content.

People should read more. The Switch came out in 2017, the tech it uses is at least 2 years older than that so of course you wouldn't get the same experience. PS4 was released in 2013 and even that would run better.
It would run as fine as you'd expect but no one wants to put effort into doing it. Look at EA, they use the same FIFA since 2019 but reskin it

Good don't try. ✌️

I don't really care whether Microsoft buys Activision or not, but the whole basis for blocking the sale just seems flimsy to me. They are acting like Call of Duty is like, the ultimate video game that nothing else can compare to. The series sells a lot of copies, but it's not like it's the only first-person shooter out there. Activision doesn't have a monopoly on first-person shooters. It seems like if Sony is worried about Microsoft making the series Xbox-exclusive, it would behoove them to COMPETE with their own first-person shooter.

“Similar in quality” is a very picky choice. The platform has proven to be able to run Overwatch, Fortnite and Apex very well, and have them all be very desirable versions of the games, without having them run at “similar quality”.

It sounds those additional Jimbo trips did change the CMA tune.

Ridiculous. Call of Duty Ran and looked great on the WiiU. A much less powerful machine.
Yes it will look downgraded in some aspects but it would still look great and play well.

CMA: It won’t be good for the fast growing cloud gaming market.

Real gamers: Oh, no! Anyway…

@Yosher You do realise that this statement was from CMA, not Microsoft or Activision Blizzard?

It doesnt take much to get cod running... Get 90fps on a 3 year old laptop at 1080p with mostly high settings.. totally viable to get a version at 720p without high detail and shadows to run at 60fps on a switch... The graphics and physics seem to be the same game after game for like a decade not a game like say doom eternal

So the CMA didn’t take away COD from Nintendo after all (which seemed kind of obvious to most of us already)

@bransby the last COD made $800 million in 3 days. Only gta5 has ever done better, and COD is a yearly product. Its a global brand phenomenon! There are millions of casual gamers out there that buy it ever year and its pretty much all they play.
To say anyone can just make a first person shooter to COMPETE is laughable. EA has thrown millions at battlefield and its not even close. To come out yearly they have 3 different studios making them, at one point in 2021 they had 8 studios and 2000 people helping.

While I don’t want COD to head to Nintendo platforms in this way didn’t CMA just extol the virtues of cloud gaming? So that’s one way, also by the time the deal goes through the switch successor will be out so different specs, supposedly the engine that COD uses is scalable so it would be like doom if native which is still the full game. And honestly the onus is on Microsoft who would likely have to build an internal switch team (perhaps with Nintendo’s input). They would have to figure out how to make it work same as they would with a low spec PC. Honestly I feel this CMA decision is hindering gaming more than helping based on their arguments. As they would rather no effort be made to get the game on a Nintendo system as has been the case for six years.

@KoopaTheGamer Right, sorry. Posted that work a sleepy head, my bad. 😅

They just need to sacrifice Bobby Kotick to the god of optimisation. I'm sure it would be enough to get CoD to run on the Switch. That and hiring a talented team. But mostly the Kotick thing.

@ParadoxFawkes brand new engine launched in 2019 with new physics. The switch is 10 year old tech, no chance it could hit 60fps.

@fenlix the EU and UK barely escaped a severe trade war because of Northern Ireland in the light of the Brexit. You really think they will add another potential conflict. Because of some merger which will add another trade hurdle.

I mean, as long as avatar X in building Y (or location Z) matches on all platforms, it doesn't really matter what the graphics look like on Switch.

It could be all basic geometry and textureless cel-shading running at 720p on Switch and they could play with everyone else. Ultimately, all the logic of "pew, pew, pew" can run anywhere - everything else is window-dressing.

@Ryu_Niiyama with how friendly Microsoft and Nintendo are with each other, I would not be surprised if Microsoft already have dev kits for the next Switch. So odds are ports would be rather easy to make if the communication between the two remains warm.

Unless they make an original game from the ground-up, specifically for Switch hardware, then I’d agree. The only other options are a cloud version (which would be awful for a fast paced shooter where timing is everything) or a port of a 360/PS3 gen game… maybe a lower-texture One/PS4 game.

I’m just surprised they haven’t ported CoD 4 over with gyro-controls.

@Stocksy they never said it was equal to ps5/xsx you patriot larper

They are not wrong. It would look and perform terribly but let’s face it, the deal was to put some games on but nothing about how good they would be.
All smoke and mirrors but Nintendo isn’t really losing anything if the deal is blocked.
Just move on. Nothing to see here!

Kotick had an interesting interview on CNBC this morning. Apparently the CMA had a closed door meeting in Washington with the FTC. He alleges that the FTC is having the CMA do it's dirty work - also it is illegal to discuss active litigation between two parties.

It is a strong point. Activist governments are bad imo.

@CielloArc,

Or Sony's fault for getting annoyed at Microsoft buying everything, but of course all their money hatting for exclusives on the Ps4 was totally o.k. Sony just do not want this deal to go through, which is not going to happen at this point.

@WiltonRoots,

Have you got your popcorn ready?.

Finally the CMA said something coherent

@Wexter
would be interesting to see what they could do with the next switch considering the good track record Microsoft published games tend to have on switch

@GamingFan4Lyf
if anything i imagine 720p with more stylized textures would mean better framerate on switch (as opposed to trying to go for higher end visuals) so more pews per second.

@BadPlayerOne Yeah, because an american company acquiring another american company that makes videogames is going to start a conflict beetween the EU and UK .-. Obviously it's the same as disputes related to political events in the region -_-

I would prefer the retro COD4 with 60FPS and lighting upgrades over MW1 with 30FPS anyway.

They're also neglecting Titanfall, I mean come on guys? Titanfall 1 ported to Switch? Hellooo

@Mgalens Exactly my point. 60fps would need to be the minimum for proper multiplayer to work across platforms (assuming a Switch version even does cross-play).

Shaderless boxes to represent a player with different colored rectangles to represent different guns in box buildings and stick trees on one platform and highly detailed graphics on another would still work because it's the 1's and 0's of "Player shoots other Player with Some gun at Neat Location" that matter in the end.

The Switch is more capable than that scenario, but what we see locally isn't what matters. It's the integration of the code that makes the game work that matters - something, I think, the Switch can handle.

@johnvboy All I've eaten for the past few days is popcorn. 6 years for it to get into people's heads what the Switch can and can't do, yet here we are...specs were out there before launch, yet people still act shocked like it's day one and we still don't know what it can do. Any excuse to cry methinks.

Pretty sure the Switch could run any Call of Duty games including the new ones, sure it'll be waterdown a bit but the experience would be fantastic for on the go player.

Again... the Switch can run the current version of Unreal Engine... it can run anything else with proper optimization. Some dev's are just very lazy/greedy is all.

Of course it could run.
It's just whether you REALLY REALLY want it to.

They created Modern Warfare Reflex for Wii because they wanted it out for the Wii audience. Putting the new games on Switch would take less of an effort than that.

Well, it seems the popular opinion is we need a new hardware from Nintendo.
I'm not against this, I just hope is a hybrid console like Switch again.
I'm so used to playing in handheld mode, then docked, then handheld again. I'm not sure if I'm ever gonna enjoy other way of playing. Am I the only one with this on mind?
I just need this to be hybrid again. Please.

I suppose the CMA has never heard of Panic Button or Saber...

Sure, you can't get a shot-for-shot experience. That wasn't what Brad Smith was saying. What Brad Smith was saying was, much like the ports we've seen from Panic Button and Saber, the gameplay quality is going to be compromised, but the amount of content available will remain the same.

I'm here just watching the funny arguments.

@fenlix we live in a world economy not the US. The EU was worried products from the UK that do not comply with EU rules could enter through the borders of Northern Ireland into the EU and vice versa. Now imagine a product or service that is allowed in the EU, but not in the UK. That is a potential conflict. And if both of them block the acquisition it’s over. Europe is the second biggest economic market. End of discussion.

@BadPlayerOne Pigeon is joking.

... In the same universe where the DS and Wii got a COD 4 game and many others, because they were popular platforms, and they were very much playable (and the PS Vita got a badly optimised COD).

cma are dumb as rocks most past cods can run on switch this whole thing is a bloody mess.

What does CMA knows anything about software development? This seems like a Sony advise disguised comment.

The Switch should be able to run the Golden Age CODs easily!! (CoD4-BO2)

I know Activision can’t take their ball and go home but I feel like there is going to be a lot of bad blood after the dust settles.

Uh….who is to say Nintendo can’t run CoD games? Pretty sure

• Switch is powerful enough to play the PS3/360 era CoD games aka the most well known ones
• A Switch CoD can be made from the ground up
• There was literally a CoD in the last Nintendo platform

This is an even more stupid “reason” then the cloud excuse lol. I bet they are not even aware Crysis trilogy or Doom Eternal is already on Switch.

@Ooccoo_Jr Except they are wrong. The Switch is perfectly capable of running a CoD game. A CoD game doesn’t need to be 4k/120 FPS to be a CoD game.

@Rayquaza2510

Finally someone with common sense

@Fiskern Take your own advice and learn to read

“Similar” isn’t identical version. Ghosts on Wii U was “similar” to the other platforms, but obviously wasn’t identical.

Microsoft lying? What a shock, shock i say.

But the Switch can run a Call of Duty game. Especially a remaster of the older ones. This is absolute codwash and shows a total lack of appreciation for hardware. If we get Modern Warfare 2, then what? I think Microsoft have been hard done by here (and I hate aquisitions, so that's saying something!)

@BadPlayerOne The irony when you sound like a Sony fanboy. Imagine throwing mud at MS about lack of games and “lack of creativity” when the PS5 after this long barely has any noteworthy PS5 only games nevermind first party ones lmao.

@BadPlayerOne If the UK doesn't approve it after the appeal, it's basically over, it doesnt matter if the European commission approve it in that situation. Microsoft isnt going to choose being banned from UK just for a videogame company.

Also, what you say is based on expeculations, the CMA and the European Commission have been operating as usual so far, being the CMA more aggresive than the EU(and if their decision werent independient, that would make the european union look like joke, and probably make more countries quit in the future)

And yeah, they are not going to start a conflict because some people is smuggling pieces of plastic from a company that make mostly digital good.

@Arawn93 I would put Microsoft and Nintendo in the “ lack of creativity” too because nothing i’ve seen from them scream creativity except the same old tired franchises. The big three lack innovation all together.

@Rayquaza2510 I think the CMA is right here, though. Toning down the settings and then charging $60 - $70, while the same game at a higher quality is available for the same price on other platforms is anti-consumer. This has been the general practice with AAA Switch ports, so it’s actually nice to see the CMA acknowledge this.

They are wrong and anyone who thinks they are right are wrong. You can optimize the hell out of these titles and they still look decent, even the newer ones, and they run solid. If they can get COD Mobile looking and running well, they can easily do it with the main line games. Maybe no open world campaigns and just strictly multiplayer/zombies (which is what the true big draws are). I see the Switch getting the rumored remasters of past entries (which I will remind you, those games launched on the Xbox 360/PS3), and then future entries getting multiplayer only releases for a lower price. The only concern would be storage, but Microsoft has truly talented developers and teams under their books for optimization. Look at how well they handled Ori (I get that's a platformer, but still that's a beautiful game that runs beautifully as well).

@Arawn93 First of all I talked about Sony and Nintendo and secondly I didn’t mention Sony exclusive games. I was talking about triple A games from Sony and Nintendo. Both of them release great games on a regular basis. Something Microsoft hasn’t done for a decade. Don’t try to hide that you are obviously an xBox fanboy by accusing me to be one for Sony.

@MrHonest Then maybe you should be the creative genius to bless us with your totally unique works to put the big 3 in their place? Easier said then done right?

Also objectively Nintendo IS doing a better job then both MS and Sony on this front. Last I checked when comparing the wiki first party titles the Switch only games dwarves the first party PS5 and Xbox only lists. The new Kirby game alone has more creativity then most games released that year.

Every game has some level of creativity and you can’t have creativity displayed if you don’t have the games at all.

@SonOfDracula I think it's pretty fair, usually switch games requiere a lot more effort to port them. Also, using that logic console games should be cheaper than the PC versions...

@fenlix Stop making excuses for downgraded ports. It takes much more effort to put out a high quality game than it does to downgrade an existing one for the Switch. I’m saying it should be dependent on the quality of the port. At least when you put a PS5 port next to a PC one, they look comparable and therefor, can compete within a similar price bracket. Switch ports of high end games are noticeably downgraded, and should take a comparable price cut.

Soooo Microsoft lied what a shock 🙄

@Arawn93

“ Also objectively Nintendo IS doing a better job then both MS and Sony on this front. Last I checked when comparing the wiki first party titles the Switch only games dwarves the first party PS5 and Xbox only lists. The new Kirby game alone has more creativity then most games released that year.”

When you have to use a remake wii game to argue that Nintendo is creative then i would say you proved my point.

Thank you for showing me that Nintendo lack creativity right now lol.

“We see no evidence to suggest…”

Perhaps they haven’t seen the unbelievable ports that I have. I know there are limitations, but I have a number of games that I never would have believed could run on Switch until I saw them do it.

@SonOfDracula Well, it's the very same game content-wise, and you basically are paying for the portable mode. Also, they shouldn't be cheaper, after all, their prices are good by nintendo switch price standards and they are pushing the limits of the hardware, despite of looking inferior to other versions, they are impressive nintendo switch games, therefore there is no reason why they shouldnt be allowed to have the Nintendo switch price tag.

My first thought wasn’t for COD to run on the Switch, but on Nintendo’s next console. So I wonder if this statement is a bit premature. By the time things are worked out (or not) Nintendo will have to be on the verge of releasing something new…
I mean…hopefully…I absolutely love the Switch, but it’s getting a bit long in the tooth…

@fenlix Downgrading a game so that it can run on something old/outdated isn't pushing the hardware lmfao.

Pushing the hardware would mean they had a comparable experience on a handheld, despite being of lesser hardware. Can Nintendo fans really not spot the difference between a quality port and a downgraded one? lul

Surely it can run Call of Duty. It would just take more effort, like reducing graphics or other things. It just is probably more effort than they'd consider economically viable.
Like the old days of gaming when they had to rewrite games for each target console.

@SonOfDracula In my day, yes we could spot the difference between an arcade/computer game and a downgraded console port. Thing is WE DIDN'T CARE as long as it PLAYED reasonably close.
If the loss of a bit of graphics or sound quality mattered... well, then SNK had the console for their fans. For fans who wanted to buy a $600 console and $200 games (over $450 after inflation). That's the price you pay.
Same thing, go buy a PC or PS5 then and then you don't need to worry about Switch ports at all. Especially on PC, enjoy spending all your money on hardware upgrades that could have been spent on games. That's the price for highest fidelity gaming!

@gmbbr yes it did. That’s exactly what the ten year deal said. Knowledge is power.

@KingMike You aren't seriously comparing an upgradeable PC to the Switch? Aren't you shooting yourself in the foot with that argument?

@Stocksy proof with a direct quote or screenshot of the document?

@Xiovanni It was 3GB of RAM, just like the Shield TV. I believe that was confirmed in the Nvidia leak, but then again, the 2GB might have possibly been what the Switch would have had if Nintendo did not go with Nvidia with the Tegra X1. Nintendo was initially working with another company for a portable that was weaker than the Wii U, having a single 480p 3D screen.

There seems to be a claim of specifics going on here when there doesn't seem to be any, as far as I can tell. Everyone is saying that MS was talking about the Switch, yet were they? Last I checked, they said "Nintendo platforms", which could very well be the Switch successor, which is rumored to release as soon as the end of this year. It would already take time to make any Nintendo version if one wasn't already in development.

definitely won't be in any acceptable state if they to get it on this weak outdated hardware

Man people still play Call of Duty?

You can boast about graphics all day long, but having the same exact game just with a new coat of paint gets repetitive real quick. Hell not to mention a $60 game already watered down and cut to pieces that'll be sold as dlc for an extra $80.

IDK why courts are acting like Microsoft is acquiring Mario or something. The Xbox has been lacking exclusives and I just don't see it surviving in the long term at this pace. Sony must have some strong connections because this acquisition doesn't seem like it's going to change anything.

...
Do we tell them about CoD on the Wii?

This is a ridiculous argument. a game like CoD can be optimized to run on the switch, yeah, the graphics would have to be downgraded, but that's a trade Switch owners are all aware of and more than happy to accept.

Uhh Overwatch 2 would like to have a word with you. If THAT can run a almost perfect 30 constantly in HH with all of its intense colors and particle effects going on, it can run some half assed ports of Call of Doody.

Agreed, any version would either be cloud-based, missing content or reduced quality. Getting a pre-owned PS4 and buying the last-gen version would be a more sensible option.

this is BS. Cod used to be in the ps3 360 era and the switch can run those games with no problem at all.

Well they have a point

The best thing would be a remaster of the original cod. That would be amazing

Switch ports - Doom 2016, Wolfenstein II, Doom Eternal, Crysis 1/2/3 Remastered, Zombie Army 4, and Sniper Elite 4 have entered the room.

@Serialsid But just selling an incredible amount of copies doesn't make something a monopoly. The existence of Call of Duty isn't preventing competitors from trying make their own games in any way.

@bransby not saying it's a monopoly. Just saying that at this point it's almost impossible to compete with a franchise that launches yearly, and has a core fanbase of millions which was your point.
Any publisher may be able to make a great fps that does well. But not be able to churn them out year after year and casual gamers constantly just eat them up.
If it was that easy, microsoft would have done it with their billions rather than just taking the easy route.

Well, there’s always CoD Mobile. 😅 I’m surprised they haven’t had the thought of bringing the game to Switch.

If they mean a 1:1 PS5/XBSX port, with no optimisation, they are correct. But that is such a weak argument, that only an illogical moron would use, especially when a smart phone version and last-gen versions also exists. Meaning a version could be made specifically for the Switch.

Hey CMA... there is absolutely NO EVIDENCE that the Switch (at least in its current form) will even be Nintendo's console in 10 years, or the end of Microsoft's agreement with Nintendo and the others. Hell, I'd be surprised if it's around in more than five years from now. I'm not sure what they're trying to get at, it's a stupid point--do they really think the ten-year deal will die with the Switch and that Nintendo will go out of business or something following the Switch's life? I hope that was not their line of reasoning for blocking the deal, because if it is--they've only proved just how f---ing stupid they are.

Wouldn’t it just take Activision (who also want this deal to go through) just be able to build a tech demo disproving this? It’s a long shot they will, but between this and the cloud gaming statement. MS is gonna drag this out and it’ll be hard to 100% prove both against them

I think they skipped the Wii entries that cut content/downgraded the graphics. If the Switch has PS3/360 like games on there it's not hard to do the same with that level of stuff to downgrade the games to.

Then again Nintendo has done fine regardless of COD. Sure there is an audience that may enjoy COD on Switch just like the GameCube, Wii, DS and Wii U but still people are still buying Nintendo systems for whatever else is offered.

Did they forget the DS has unique versions made for it. Cloud exists. Mobile versions of COD exist. COD MW1 Remastered and MW2 remastered exists. Did no one think outside the box or just the big versions.

That or the 4 disks for 360 games that were for PS4/Xbox One. Anyone want that again clearly these people don't know what's been done before of downgrading games but if someone really had to play Wolfenstein New Order on their Xbox 360 they had to install 4 disks into their hard drive.

I think devs are used to limitations of systems over the years of generations from N64 cartridges to the 360 disks compared to PS3 Blu-Ray to whatever hard ware limits or target audiences.

If Witcher 3 and Doom and others can be on Switch what's to say COD can't, do these people actually understand more than oh COD big IP, oh big game with lots going on it can't run on Switch. It can if people try. If I can play Borderlands 2 on PSVR and a PS Vita I can see Switch getting COD if people try, you have a port studio to assist with it unlike Treyarch working on the Wii ports.

Besides that well Nintendo's next console will come around. Maybe have specs like a PS4/Xbox One with 8GB of RAM, whatever mobile CPU and GPU that's close to a PS4/Xbox One and those had I think laptop parts so it's possible if they can have MW2 to run on a PS4 Slim built for 2022 they can on Switch/their next console. Besides COD is linear and a big action shooter it's not hard to scale it down like an open world or other things or whatever stuff they want a game to have of lighting, cutscenes, particles and so on texture detail.

It's not hard to think outside the box but some people just don't think especially if they don't understand the gaming industry and players even if we do or don't care for COD can have a better idea how things work let alone developers it's just if they have the people, teams and resources to do it in time and a deadline that's possible to achieve it.

COD Black Ops on the Wii was an excellent version of the game. Of course it was stripped down and noticeably different than the other version. Still, they made that happen and it would require that same amount if care to make it happen on switch.

I trust Microsoft and Activision in this case far more than I do old British politicians lol.

The problem with all this CMA theater show is why didn't they talk about this sooner? But waiting the eleventh hour when the deal was closing to make this? You have to wonder why this is? I suspect it's another party that is making CMA do its work on behalf of them. Because if this was such a issue before why wait to tell them so late in the merger and not sooner to give M$ and Nintendo to respond or resolve this?? So you have to ask why so late here??? And whom is pulling CMA strings.

@SonOfDracula No. Not anymore that what you're doing yourself.

Since when was the CMA experts on video game development?

@MrHonest “remake Wii game”. Lol when did I ever refer to that game? Cmon now buddy utilize some critical thinking in that little noggin of yours and maybe realize I obviously meant Forgotten Land.

Inb4 you reply back with another attempted witty layered “that is not creative either” type of reply lol.

Regardless thanks for proving MY point that you have no idea what you are talking about in regards to “creativity” and whatever supposed metric you utilized to determine what is “creative” to you is not what normal people decide.

No one (Activision) bothered to even try.

A tailor made version of COD could run on Switch. Wii U did it. Hell, the DS had 5 COD titles.

I know it's a big franchise but they are obsessed with CoD. Anyone else get the feeling microsoft could have bought nintendo, sega and capcom and these regulators wouldn't have cared much (like every other big acquisition the last decade eg Bethesda)
I suspect they pay attention when it's CoD, fifa, GTA or Fortnite only.

@Roibeard64 They tried to buy Nintendo a long time ago and failed miserably.

I almost feel bad for laughing about this….almost.

Okay, let's say they're right (arguably), that's an issue for what, another year or two?

CMA has absolutely no idea what they are talking about lmao, did they even consult any game developers or are they just lobbying with Sony?

@Rayquaza2510 that is not optimizing, it's downgrading. If you downgrade, you can have it run on a Game & Watch.

@Arawn93 All i know is that remaking or remaster a game isn’t creativity in any way. Unfortunately it’s obvious that you’re blinded by your own bias for Nintendo.

@Wheatly I mainly bring those games up for those who haven’t played them before on other consoles or PC. I’m not a big graphics guy, I do like them to look nice, but gameplay trumps all. I can see why others may not like them though, 30fps for shooters, especially Doom where it’s so much more fun at 60 or higher.

This reads like it's never happened before, this organization sounds like they've been payed off, or are just incredibly out of touch. They're acting like Atari 2600 didn't get Pac Man even though it wasn't capable of running the arcade game. Gameboy got Killer Instinct and Mortal Kombat, GBA got Super Monkey Ball Jr, Space Channel 5, Jet Set Radio, they put Dragon's Lair on the NES. Those games weren't as good as on their original hardware, but this much weaker hardware is perfectly capable of running anything you make for it, it just has to be made specifically for that system in mind.

We have to remember Sony was forced to admit for the record they tampered this merger in court papers and all the suddenly now CMA is in the business of determining now is the time to block? No this smells of Sony fingerprints all the way back to corporate headquarters. I think end of CMA coming soon and they will have admit they have no facts and back off then leaks will tell Sony was behind this using CMA as their lobbyists.

@MrHonest You sound like someone who's never built a wearable 1 to 1 robot exoskeleton.

I was under the impression they would make switch specific CoD games.

The CMA just haven't got a clue on the whole matter.

@MidnightDragonDX they also tried to buy Sega. This was when they were trying to enter the market in the late 90s/early 00s. I mean Microsoft prefers buying successful companies in emerging markets (like Skype and Nokia as an examples) rather than build in it was the steep investment costs and risks of failure. So it makes sense.

@Nintendo_Thumb Sorry who are you again?

@MrHonest This is a public forum, I'm responding because you said Nintendo isn't creative, and I said that sounds like something somebody who hasn't built a 1 to 1 robot exoskeleton would say.

So have you built one or not?

@Nintendo_Thumb

Have you?

Of course, Nintendo always makes the most creative games. If you're going to say they're not creative the least you could do is play the games, if you don't even know what games they make how can you say how creative or uncreative their games are? This is a 1st party Switch game btw. This is just more proof that Nintendo makes weird games, but if it's not Zelda or Mario people just ignore it, and act like it doesn't exist.

[If you haven't figured it out, I was talking about Labo 02: Robot Kit. You build from flat sheets of cardboard a series of weights and pulleys and straps and infra-red tape, etc. a wearable robot exoskeleton with interactive visor that reacts in game 1 to 1 with your movements (counts your calories burned as well). And as amazing as it is, that might be the least interesting Labo kit (edit: of which the Switch has 5 including Game Builder Garage).]

If it's older games then problem but if it's the newest one then they're correct

@Arawn93
"Switch is powerful enough to play the PS3/360 era CoD games aka the most well known ones"
"A Switch CoD can be made from the ground up"
"There was literally a CoD in the last Nintendo platform"

A lot of people here have made these points, but they're not all that relevant. Microsoft has promised feature and content parity versions of the next decade of CoD games. Not ports of games from 15 years ago, not brand new games built just for Nintendo ala the DS CoDs. And yes the Wii U had Black Ops 2 and Ghosts, not the same scale as MW2 2022, let alone whatever's coming in the next few years.

The bigger problem than graphics is file size to be completely honest. The newest games are colossal in file size compared to pretty much every other title being released, and to have a single CoD on your PlayStation or Xbox means sacrificing a significant portion of your hard drive space, and they're all running with much larger capacity. 64GBs maximum, versus 500GBs minimum. A Switch 2 is unlikely to go further than 128GBs. And if you want to play Warzone as well? Sheesh... Whatever is going in with those games, it's clear that they cannot resolve that issue with the current pipeline because it's been a consistent problem for years now.