Capcom Not Bringing Resident Evil To Nintendo Switch

"We have no plans at the moment regarding Resident Evil on Switch."

326 Comments
Please use a html5 video capable browser to watch videos.
This video has an invalid file format.
00:00:00
Sorry, but you can't access this content!
Please enter your date of birth to view this video

By clicking 'enter', you agree to GameSpot's
Terms of Use and Privacy Policy

Now Playing: GS News Update: Resident Evil Won't Arrive On Nintendo Switch

Capcom has said it is potentially interested in making games for the Nintendo Switch, but it doesn't look like the Resident Evil series is among them, at least not yet.

No Caption Provided

Producer Masachika Kawata told Express Online about the Switch, "I think it's a very unique piece of hardware." However, Capcom isn't bringing Resident Evil to Switch now or anytime soon.

"I'm looking forward to the possibilities of the system itself, but we have no plans at the moment regarding Resident Evil on Switch," Kawata said (via NeoGAF).

Capcom is among the dozens of development partners for the Switch, so it's possible some Capcom games will come to the console.

Resident Evil 7 launches on January 24 for PlayStation 4, Xbox One, and PC. It was recently confirmed that it's an Xbox Play Anywhere game for Xbox One and PC.

The next Resident Evil movie, The Final Chapter, meanwhile, comes out on January 27--watch the newest video for it here.

As for the Switch, it comes out on March 3 for $300.

Got a news tip or want to contact us directly? Email news@gamespot.com

Join the conversation
There are 326 comments about this story
326 Comments  RefreshSorted By 
GameSpot has a zero tolerance policy when it comes to toxic conduct in comments. Any abusive, racist, sexist, threatening, bullying, vulgar, and otherwise objectionable behavior will result in moderation and/or account termination. Please keep your discussion civil.

Avatar image for Crystal-Flavor
Crystal-Flavor

I honestly don't see any reason for any developer to develop for Nintendo or even to buy a Switch unless you are super rich and you got too much time in your hands or you QQ to your parents all day or your a fanatic.

Nintendo wont fool me this time. I got all nintendo consoles since nes (yes I am kinda old) and every time the only games I owned were Mario Zelda and Metroid. If it wasn't for Bayonetta 2 I wouldn't own a wiiu. I aint gonna throw 300+bucks for ancient hardware with no games once more after 20 years.

Sorry Nintendo but you are really in a tight spot.

1.Mobile gaming is owned by smartphones (which probably in 2 years will be more powerful than a switch). Remember PS Vita fail?

2. For that price tag you can get a ps4 or x1 that can also:

3. Play record and share media music and videos with the rest of the world and are not dust crawlers of the living room.

My father once bought me a nes. I won't do the same mistake for my child now.

Avatar image for isariamkia
Isariamkia

@Crystal-Flavor: You owned only Mario, Zelda and Metroid games because that all you wanted. You can't say Nintendo hadn't any other games, they had plenty of other games which were good.

However, I may have misunderstood your post, but as I read right now, I have the feeling you're angry at them because they made only a few games when it's not the case.

Avatar image for Crystal-Flavor
Crystal-Flavor

@isariamkia: I am more frustrated not angry that Nintendo is releasing Switch 3.5 years after the other consoles and they keep focusing on younger market and not adults.

I may have exaggerated about 3 games only but seriously the library of wiiu is very limited (I think half of the wii?) and when you are in your 40s you don't care much about dance party type of games or rereleases like skyrim.

Every console needs some exclusives tittles and if only those 3 IPs after 30 years are the main reason to look forward to a new Nintendo console each time they running out of options.

Avatar image for isariamkia
Isariamkia

@Crystal-Flavor: Now I get your point. I didn't get the Wii U, I bought the Wii when it was released and I played with it for years and the market doesn't really disturb me but I have the feeling that they are trying to get more people involved this time, not only kids/families.

Even if they don't have new exclusives IP (at least not much), they still want to get some games for adults too (Fighting game, sports games) but they keep making game for all public and that's why I like them, a lot of people are hating and basing the 1-2 Switch games but I don't see the reason, it's not for their price, they are a cool idea, something you can play with friends, kids, family, when you have people at home and you don't know what to do there is the Nintendo console for you.

Now we'll see, the console will be released in march, there is still time to have new games announced and we can hope something new will come, there are a lot of game announced already, even if a lot of them are ports.

Avatar image for doctor_mg
Doctor_MG

@Crystal-Flavor:

"I honestly don't see any reason for any developer to develop for Nintendo or even to buy a Switch unless you are super rich "

When did 299 become premium pricing? I mean, I can understand if you don't feel it is worth it, but to say that there is no reason to buy it unless you are super rich is downright laughable.

299 is literally 25 dollars a month. It really isn't that big of a deal. At least, not to the average American it probably isn't.

Avatar image for Crystal-Flavor
Crystal-Flavor

@doctor_mg: No its not much I meant its much for what switch asking and in comparison to what the other consoles are offering. If someone don't have -any- gaming platform then 300 (+100 for game /controller) its ok but if you have a gaming pc, ps4, xb1 +300 for switch is overkill. Again I am judging from my pov because they are sitting in the closet.


Then again who am I to judge. Chances are that if somebody has 2 or 3 gaming systems he can afford another one. Thats my 2c. /rant

Avatar image for doctor_mg
Doctor_MG

@Crystal-Flavor:

Why does everyone think you have to spend the money on a controller...a controller comes right out of the box. Technically two controllers come right out of the box. You don't have to buy a Pro controller any more than I (as an Xbox One owner) have to buy an Elite controller.

I have a PC, PS4, Xbox One and I already pre-ordered the Switch. I definitely don't think I'm rich...I drive a Prius for crying out loud.

Avatar image for Crystal-Flavor
Crystal-Flavor

@doctor_mg: I've recently read that Switch won't come with a charging device for the controller and we know how much Nintendo loves to sell accessories (and they made a good profit from them). So 1 extra acc. +1 game ~ 400.

Oh and I couldn't play seriously Bayonetta 2 with the default wiiugamepad controller so I got a pro. I assume the same will apply for any similar games that may come for switch.

That's all.

Avatar image for doctor_mg
Doctor_MG

@Crystal-Flavor:

The Switch console is the charging device for the controllers. The controllers last 20 hours, and the controllers charge when the console is charging, even when using just a standard USB cable. No it doesn't come with a charging power grip, but you don't actually need one. Unless you game for longer than 20 hours in a single day.

Well the Switch joycon grip (which it does come with) is actually extremely comfortable according to all the gaming news sites I've visited. They said that it looks like it would be uncomfortable, but once you are holding it you don't really get that feeling at all.

Avatar image for lilhurk1985187
lilhurk1985187

@doctor_mg: Umm,the controllers last between 2-6 hours i think.

Avatar image for doctor_mg
Doctor_MG

@lilhurk1985187:

No. The switch is between 2-6 hours. The joy cons are 20 hours

Avatar image for nikon133
nikon133

@Crystal-Flavor: I would disagree that mobile gaming is owned by smartphones.

Yes, a lot of people "game" something on smartphones. But, very few of those games are really worth considering proper games.

Smartphones' games are like quick snack of the gaming world. They help between real meals, but cannot replace them.

Besides, Switch is also desktop console. One with more compromises than others, but still.

I never had Nintendo and will be looking at Switch. Probably not on release, but later on - when I get some feel if it will turn to be successful or not... but regardless, I just can't see myself considering iOS/Android smartdevice as an alternative.

Avatar image for Crystal-Flavor
Crystal-Flavor

@nikon133: The handheld gaming market share is dominated by smartphones. Its not my opinion its a fact, google it up.
I really don't know where Nintendo is aiming. The lion's share for handhelds ? Kinda tough.
Most advanced console ? Probably not.
Another gimmicky controller that will be forgotten like virtual boy and nunchuk? Blurry.

Avatar image for nikon133
nikon133

@Crystal-Flavor: Sure.

What I'm saying is, I don't think that many people who are exclusively playing smartphone games would otherwise be investing in gaming consoles or gaming PC. I don't think that smartphones are "stealing" consumers from either. It is different category of gamers. They buy expensive phone because they want one - not because they are planning to game on it extensively - and then they end up also gaming on it, because why not - most games being played are free.

How many youngsters that really want to play Mario/Ratchet/... will settle down for playing Angry Birds or another endless-run game...?

Besides, console doesn't have to be most advanced to be success. Most successful ones were not. PS1, PS2, Wii, various Gameboys. Cost, choice of games and eventually novelty factor are more important than power, imho.

Attractiveness of Switch? The way I see it right now:

Access to Nintendo exclusives, of course. This has to be marketed, of course, because people forget - but Nintendo exclusives are more kids/family friendly than other platforms.

2-in-1. Not just the novelty of convertible console, but underlying logistics. How many kids (and grown-ups) ended up having desktop console/PC and GameBoy/Vita/PSP? Two platforms, different games libraries for each. Cost ramps up. Now one can have console that will cover both usage scenarios. Same Mario game to be played at home and on the go, single purchase. There is value in that. Not for everyone, but for some.

Social aspect (though it remains to be seen). Console is designed to be shared on the go, with those controllers. Vita, PSP, GB... could not. This hits spot for me - I prefer co-op and multiplayer games in general. My wife, also, games occasionally, and also loves social aspect. She would not play something like Dragon Quest Builders on her own, but let her play something like that with me - there she goes.

I think Switch can succeed. Maybe it will require price drop shortly, maybe it will take time to ramp up games library to a level where there is enough content for many gamers... maybe it will not happen. But I think it has fair chance.

I'm not overly emotional whether they succeed or not. Switch failure might make Nintento rethink their strategy and turn them into software company. Having all their franchises on PS4/X1/PC would be quite sweet, imho. So... either way, it will be interesting. But I think they'll make it with Switch.

Avatar image for jt2251
jt2251

@nikon133: The only problem I have is your second point. How many people are going to buy the Switch without owning another console whether it be PC, PS4, XB1? I mean how many consumers are going to be purchasing their first console of this generation and the console they choose be the Switch?

Not the majority, right? I think it's safe to assume that would be the case if we think logically. That right there eliminates this cost-saving theory you're claiming. Most people already have a console or gaming system. People that don't, at this point, aren't getting a Switch unless it's one of the incredibly small subsets of the market a.k.a consumers who only own a WiiU. How many of those people do you know? Me, I know 0 people that only have one current-gen console that happens to be a WiiU.

Basically, the Switch is going to relive the same life the WiiU has already lived. The Nintendo exclusives will be great games that only Nintendo fans will be exposed to which is a shame. Lack of third-party support (despite all the flowery things we heard months ago from devs) will again be the deciding factor in a market represented by consumers who want a steady, if not constant, supply of games. Nintendo simply cannot keep up with that kind of demand when it comes to pumping out 1st party titles which, according to most people I've heard defending this system, is the only reason people are buying it in the first place.

Hope I'm wrong.

Avatar image for nikon133
nikon133

@jt2251: Well, I did say "value for some". Maybe you are right about people, in general... but kids? :)

I'm at tender age of 48... and I do know handful or two of people who did get their kids both portable and home console. Some of them also did insist on both being Nintendo as they are (quote) "most kids friendly"... which is not untrue, really. Those could easily be buyers of Switch, since Wii U is being discontinued, and GB has aged. And they get both in one new device, functionality wise.

Most of them are from similar geeky background as I am, basically working in IT. Thus most of them do have other consoles and/or gaming PC, but good chunk of them try to prevent their kids from playing more adult oriented games - those with graphic violence, horror, nudity... those things. Some of them also tried to get only home console and substitute portable entertainment with smartphone, but eventually, grunty smartphone is not cheap either (and repairing dropped Samsung Galaxy S6 is more expensive in New Zealand than bying new Switch - confirmed twice), and games are just not on the same level on average. It actually made me somewhat happy to see that some of them gave up on that idea and turned to more expensive but also more proper solutions that will do more good to their kids' imagination than average free/cheap smartphone games.

But like I said, most of them are from geeky circles, or are being friends with geeks, thus are exposed more than some others. How many of those looking for kids friendly home and portable overall? No idea. But every extra sold console counts. Consoles have avalanche effect - more in wild will create more sales, from new kids (and grownups) being exposed to consoles their friends and relatives have. Half a million consoles sold around the world for this reason can create additional millions from that exposure.

Avatar image for jt2251
jt2251

@nikon133: Sure but I don't think that can be the answer for Nintendo without them going the way of Sega. I just don't understand why Nintendo can't do both? Wouldn't that get more consoles out "in the wild"? Is a PS4 or XB1 any less kid friendly than a Switch? At that point the power is in the parents hands to make sure their children are playing titles appropriate for their age.

Nintendo fans have said to me "If you want AAA FPS, sports games and blah blah blah then play it on your PS4 and XBONE. If you want gameplay then you get a Switch."

Take me for instance. I game on PC. I don't have any current-gen consoles. What's my incentive to buy a Switch? Say I like each consoles exclusives equally. Why would I get a Switch over a PS4 or XB1? At this point I'm leaning towards getting a PS4, tbh and I haven't owned a Sony system since the PS1.

Avatar image for nikon133
nikon133

@jt2251: That is good question, why insisting on hardware when more often than not it seriously limits their software sales. N64, GameCube, Wii U... must have hurt sales of all those Nintendo exclusives that were released in their time.

Maybe some kind of corporate pride? Nintendo was always console maker. I don't know.

As of individual scenarios... well, one shoe never fits all, right? I kind of see value in Switch, but I don't presume it is applicable to everyone. I never really had Nintendo, so all their franchises are fresh to me, even if latest Mario Cart (or any other game) might be quite similar to the previous one. Also... I'm PC and PS4/PS3 gamer, and I'm getting a bit saturated with "serious" games... I'd like more Ratchet & Clank type games on PS4, but there aren't many... so again, I am attracted somewhat to Mario & Co. And finally, I travel a lot, and I occasionally travel for a month, even a bit more. I usually carry light, non-gaming laptop/convertible for my photography and other mundane needs... however, I do run across bad weather where I mostly sit indoors for days and think that having something portable and game-able would be nice. I used to carry PSP back in the days, skipped on Vita... Switch has some value for me there, too.

And eventually... some of my friends would play some easy-to-get-into games when visiting me, but are not "experienced" enough gamers to get into more serious games. you know, Mario Cart split-screen, yes - Gran Tourismo, nice to look at but not really. Especially that PS4 does not have too many split-screen games nowadays. So docked Switch could be good party gaming machine.

I can see that Switch would be under-utilized compared to PC and PS4, but still. I'm interested. Not waiting-in-a-queue interested, but a few months later, maybe towards end of the year... just to get some good feel first, about how well console sells, and how games library grows.

Avatar image for jt2251
jt2251

@nikon133:I can understand its appeal especially to someone like yourself. Maybe I'm just a cheapskate lol. I've always been on the look for "value". Something that's multi-faceted in it's abilities and perhaps that's just the disconnect between myself and Nintendo.

It's the same reason I got into PC games. Big initial investment, long-term cost savings, incredible flexibility and utility. I guess I already don't have time to game any more than I do now. The idea of spending $400 on a specialty gaming console seems silly.

I definitely agree with taking a wait and see approach. Quick side question. Which would you get if you were me: PS4 or Switch?

Avatar image for nikon133
nikon133

@jt2251: PS4. But, that's because I am me ;)

I also had PS2 and PS3 beside my gaming PC, before I got PS4. I got to love some of PlayStation franchises (and devs) and wanted to know what is next in line for those franchises - God of War, Uncharted, Gran Turismo, Ratchet, Infamous... others, too. Essentially, I wouldn't sacrifice PS4 for Switch. I would add Switch as a sidekick, sort of. It would be Robin to my PS4 Batman. Which probably makes my PC a Superman :)

If I was you, though... I'd figure out what exclusives interest me more, is portability of any importance to me, what console my friends I'm planning to game with already have. It is still a bit unfair comparison since PS4 is out 3 years already and has build up solid library of exclusives, plus some multiplats that can be interesting on console... and there's much bigger chance some of friends already have it, too... while Switch is only starting to built library and user base.

Considering all that, I think I'd go for PS4 as well, if I was you. It has more to offer simply by being out much longer, and that is not going to change overnight. Unless Zelda or any other Nintendo exclusive is in your "life event" category, or portability is a must.

Avatar image for jt2251
jt2251

@nikon133: I think PS4 is where I'm leaning. Unfortunately, LoZ hasn't been enough of a draw for me which means I haven't played one of those game since Twilight Princess.

PS4 exclusives look too awesome, especially God of War.

Avatar image for nikon133
nikon133

@jt2251: Yep... I'm really keen to see where this new approach to God of War goes. Not just in terms of visuals, but the whole concept that seems to differ significantly from previous titles.

First two GoWs on PS2 were absolutely amazing for that platform... arguably the most imposing, breath-taking visuals I have ever seen on PS2, smooth and fast gameplay... even idea was quite fresh, slaying Olympians was so brutally satisfying. PS3 has pushed visuals further, but formula was becoming tired... I haven't even completed last GoW on PS4, the Ascension. Not that I hated it, but it was too much same-same, so I've put it to side with idea to return and complete it at some point... never happened.

So I'm really happy that this GoW feels very different.

Avatar image for Crystal-Flavor
Crystal-Flavor

@nikon133: The enormous fan base that Nintendo has established over 30 years, Mario, Zelda and their high profits from Gameboy /3DS is what keeping them to the game. They are close to be another Sega they know they can't go toe to toe with the competition and the keep throwing controllers and touchscreens.

Nintendo is like an old magician who's giving a show and he have performed all of his tricks and searching his sleeves for that last trick that will keep the audience entertained a little longer.

Avatar image for nikon133
nikon133

@Crystal-Flavor: Like I said, I wouldn't mind that at all - great Nintendo games on more powerful 3rd party hardware, can't see how that could end up bad. We are talking about more than 150 million "serious" gamers across PC, PS4 and X1. Gamers who are willing to pay full price for the game, at least once in a while (something that doesn't really apply to too many smartphone gamers).

I think Nintendo games would sell like popcorn across those platforms. Much more software sales, no income from hardware sales - do we know how much does Nintendo really makes from each console sold, anyway? - but also no R&D expenses in designing new hardware. I think financially, they would do better, really.

Avatar image for gregrout
gregrout

Nintendo doesn't seem to get it. It takes on average 3 years to make an AAA title. It becomes a labour of love for developers. You're going to have a hard time convincing these developers to not just water-down the game they're building but to add additional Nintendo hardware functionality to the game. The Wii-U control pad functionality was rightfully ignored by 3rd party developers and Nintendo decided to complain about developers not taking advantage of the pad's screen and touch pad functionality. As the Switch is using the same functionality we're looking at the same problem. I doubt Nintendo has learned anything from this.

Avatar image for doctor_mg
Doctor_MG

@gregrout:

The Switch isn't using the same functionality at all. I don't even understand how you could think that.

The Wii U's "gimmick" was that you could play a game like the DS. That is, have the viewing screen, then a touch screen for other inputs. The Switch doesn't have this at all. Yes it has a touchscreen, but, while docked, you cannot use the touchscreen. Therefore, games won't use this as an input method and it seems to be designed for menu navigation and apps almost explicitly.

Nintendo isn't expecting developers to use the screen like the Wii U's gamepad.

Avatar image for nikon133
nikon133

@doctor_mg: And rest of controls is exactly the same as with other consoles. Two analogue sticks, dpad left, 4 buttons right, two extra buttons top, and 4 shoulder buttons. If there is problem with games' porting, it will be architecture - ARM vs. x86, not control method. But that wasn't such a problem back in non-x86 consoles' days, so it shouldn't be such an obstacle today either.

Avatar image for doctor_mg
Doctor_MG

@nikon133:

Exactly, the reason why there aren't any ports has less to do with hardware and more to do with install base. With the high cost of development publishers want to ensure that they are able to receive as much net profit as possible. We can try to blame it on gimmicks or underpowered hardware, but gimmicks didn't stop third parties from making games on the Wii, and underpowered hardware didn't stop the PS2 from getting the majority of games.

If the console sells we will see more games being developed or ported to the platform.

Avatar image for ecurl143
ecurl143

I just don't think the Nintendo Switch could do this title justice. Simply not enough power required to bring something as graphically demanding as this to the system.

It's as simple as that really.

Avatar image for veryDERPY
veryDERPY

nintendo plebs dont buy anything that isn't first party anyway

Avatar image for aross2004
aross2004

@veryDERPY: Bayonetta1/2, Monster Hunter, SMT games, Bravely Default1/2, the list goes on...

But I wouldn't expect anyone who refers to Nintendo fans as "plebs" to understand.

Avatar image for veryDERPY
veryDERPY

@aross2004: i can name a bunch of good games you didn't buy either. you're not making a good point

Avatar image for aross2004
aross2004

@veryDERPY: Because I have time to list them all. Those were off the top of my head.

Avatar image for RS13
RS13

@veryDERPY: I think this is a bigger issue than the lack of power (although they probably feed into each other): People who buy Nintendo consoles don't buy games from third party devs even when they are ported over. So why would devs bother?

Avatar image for ticklemepink
ticklemepink

@RS13: If Nintendo had the strongest console for a change, then people would buy 3rd party games for it.

Avatar image for RS13
RS13

@ticklemepink: I think there's two interconnected issues. Part of it is that nintendo made an underpowered console *again.* Desv can't bring their game over if it won't run on the Switch. Part of it is a reputation problem: people think nintendo consoles are for kids.

You're right that releasing a super-powerful console would go someways towards dispelling the "for kids" label, but it wouldn't go all the way. They'd still need a lineup to match. And I don't think pure power would convince devs to bring their games over. Unless devs think there's a market for their games, they're not bringing them over regardless of the power (same reason that Madden doesn't come to the PC even though PCs are more powerful and sports games sell themselves on their fancy graphics.)

And it's not like nintendo hasn't had enticing third-party exclusives in the past: resident evil remaster, 0 and 4 for the gamecube (4 later came to PS4 then everything else), madworld and no more heroes for wii and Bayonetta 2 for wii U. Nintendo consoles weren't just the best way to play those games, they were *the only* way to play those games. And most gamers still took a pass.

Nintendo's in a tricky spot. If they want to survive they need to draw gamers that don't give a flying **** about nintendo games. But to do that, they need a library that will draw them. But to get that kind of library they need to convince devs that the fans will show. A hyperpowerful console might do some of that, but I think they'd need to do more than just that. A change in marketing would be an important second step. Providing some sort of enticements to Devs would be another.

Or...They could they just release another gimmick machine. Yeah, that'll do it.

Avatar image for veryDERPY
veryDERPY

@RS13: bayonetta technically 1st party. major flop, and that was 2 games

but half the wiiu plebs bought mario cart. they have no idea what good games are

Avatar image for isariamkia
Isariamkia

@veryDERPY: Yeah because Mario Kart, Zelda, Bayonetta, Metroid, Bomberman, Mario Party, Mario Galaxy, Mario Sunshin aren't good games, you're totally right, and calling us "plebs" helps you to make your point, right ?

Try to take your head of your ass and look around. Nintendo has great games which only Nintendo has since they are exclusives. But only because they are Nintendo games then they aren't good games ?

Avatar image for veryDERPY
veryDERPY

@isariamkia: maybe you should take what's inside you ass out of it. none of you bought bayonetta and it died

you blind fanboys will buy anything mario and let everything else pass

Avatar image for Thanatos2k
Thanatos2k

"Insert Game Here" not coming to the Switch announcement number 17 of 243

Avatar image for Fia1
Fia1

i rather play with my eyes on a rooftop party than play this on the switch, good lord who would actually want a game like this?

Avatar image for e3man01
e3man01

And guess what Nintendo, no other 3rd party is giving you AAA games either, Congrats!

Avatar image for playstationzone
PlaystationZone

aslo be possible run on switch if not case Res7 last gen game.

Avatar image for playstationzone
PlaystationZone

Reason why because if switch sales be yes if don't sale be no.

Avatar image for videogameninja
videogameninja

As a fan of the resident evil franchise it always is disappointing when I hear news like this. After all, the more people exposed to great games on as many different platforms the better for the growth of the franchise.

However, I do think holding onto the idea that Capcom would release RE7 or something even remotely similar on the Switch is a bit of a delusional belief, especially when taking into account the hardware of Nintendo’s new console.

The way things are shaping up for the Switch is very reminiscent of its predecessors. Depending on one’s perspective that could be really good or very, very bad.

-NINTENDON’T HAVE RE NINJA APPROVED-

Avatar image for owlcoholic
owlcoholic

Ah, I was hoping to have a portable way to play RE 7 while i'm on the toilet, taking a Crapcom.

Avatar image for e3man01
e3man01

@owlcoholic: Bwahahahaha, a Crapcom, Lol.

Avatar image for flashn00b
flashn00b

This is what happens when Nintendo tries to play catch-up with what's relevant: Developers will look at the machine and ask themselves "What the **** can the Switch do that the PS4 and Xbox One can't!?"

I'd say something about the notion that Nintendo should go third party, but the more i think about it, the more it seems as if we're headed towards another industry crash.

Avatar image for aross2004
aross2004

@flashn00b: When was the last industry crash?

Avatar image for aross2004
aross2004

@aross2004: I don't recall that the videogame industry crashed in 83. What did I miss?

Avatar image for flashn00b
flashn00b

@aross2004: 1983.

Avatar image for Abomination713
Abomination713

"no plans" = we'll bother when you guys actually manage to build up some kind of player base.

Avatar image for gameroutlawzz
GamerOuTLaWzz

Please, just re-release Outbreak and File 2 from the PS2 with functional servers and it would be the best RE experience you'd get for the switch.

Avatar image for EcksTheory
EcksTheory

@gameroutlawzz: Forget a re release. Take the idea of outbreak, mix it in with the division: survival and you have yourself a best selling game.

Avatar image for NeoCloudZero
NeoCloudZero

@gameroutlawzz: wow for once I find someone that knows and wants the true gem of Resident evil. I wish they can put both of them together and release monthly new scenario, because I know it's asking for a lot for a more frequent update. I mean I'm good with 3-4 new ones every half a year too.

Avatar image for doctor_mg
Doctor_MG

This game is not really the type of experience that I would use the Switch for to begin with. I'd just end up screaming in the airport and get tackled by security.

I'll wait for the reviews and buy it on my PS4 though.

Avatar image for dribblesbarbax
dribblesbarbax

@doctor_mg: Playing a horror game in broad daylight with many people walking around is hardly scary. The screams would more likely come due to the battery dying.

Avatar image for aross2004
aross2004

@doctor_mg: LMFAO!

Avatar image for siritokakyou
siritokakyou

Wait till we see how Switch can handle the Outlast 1 graphics first then we'll talk about RE7. Simple as that.

Avatar image for desert_thief
desert_thief

@siritokakyou: Graphics, graphics, graphics! Why is that every time I enter a website, there has to be someone says that? It's sickening to see that people treat a game like a movie instead of a "game". If gameplay is bad, what's the point of the graphics?

Avatar image for siritokakyou
siritokakyou

@desert_thief: And to tell you one more thing. Silent Hill 1, 2, 3, 4, 0. All of them have decent gameplay, not too bad, but not too good either, it is still a bit cheesy to be honest. But what makes the game good is the experience, one big thank to the sound, and another to the [shit gone crazy hell] stories, and last but not least to the visuals - the darkness, the shadow, the blood, flashlight, the fog, the rusty, the models, the clearance. Check out A DF Retro - Silent Hill 2 by Digital Foundry and you will see why the graphic is important too. How about Fatal Frame series? Amnesia, SOMA?.

Avatar image for siritokakyou
siritokakyou

@desert_thief: Meh, Outlast is an old game and its graphic is pretty standard now, so Switch must at least run it properly. It is not about the ULTRA HI-RES 1080 or 4K or anything, it is about having enough power to deliver the experience. I say you need a certain level of power to describe the shadows, the lightings, the atmosphere, the ghosts or enemies so that you can feel the tense, combined with the sound in order to get eerie and get scared of it. Too weak graphic + many dark room scenes will lead to you seeing nothing (you need to see!, especially when you play in handheld mode), it may also look like cheap-ass-jumpscare games you saw on the youtube, and some hell/crazy transition scenes need the graphical effect too (just don't be huge and buffy like The Evil Within, no thanks). Not to mention RE7 graphic is complex, people almost misunderstood it with P.T, which known by also have a very good and realistic graphic too. Therefore, it is a charm that makes the game scary.
Nevertheless, there is no way the Switch can handle the RE7 graphic completely, thus they must come to downgrading and in my opinion downgrade it to the same level as Outlast 1 is good enough (both game is kinda similar in term of gameplay also). Enough to be scary, enough to keep the experience, that's all you need. But whatever, I need to see whether the Switch can handle Outlast first.

Avatar image for deactivated-5a0b0bf0c8fa5

Can't say I blame them

Avatar image for Fia1
Fia1

@CallMeDuraSouka: yea if you can afford all consoles and have them all, then just enjoy gaming man, but some people actually want to have a main console, and the switch is not a main console it's a device you will use for 5-8 games, and then you have your ps4 that you use for 50 games, thats the problem right there...

Avatar image for isariamkia
Isariamkia

@Fia1: And where's the problem exactly ? If people want a main console to play AAA games they just have to get a PS or a XBOX, they even have the choice between two consoles ! There is no need to whine about the Switch which doesn't get AAA games... That's pointless. These articles gather lot of haters and misinformation from them.
But Gamespot doesn't care about information, they care about money only and these articles work well.

Avatar image for aross2004
aross2004

@CallMeDuraSouka: There have always been stupid people. The internet just allows them to make it more obvious.

Avatar image for jtmellon
jtmellon

@CallMeDuraSouka: Hey now, thinking like that can only get you in trouble.

Avatar image for titang1
TitanG1

Kind of expected that.

I don't expect the Switch to get quite a few games the XB1 and PS4 get, if anything the Switch will get "versions" of these games, or get its own games completely.

Avatar image for rodoxthedark
rodoxthedark

A pattern is starting to form

Avatar image for aross2004
aross2004

@rodoxthedark: Yeah. The pattern is that we're apparently going to get an article for any existing or shortly upcoming PS4/XBone games that weren't developed for Switch.