Would there be more Switch multiplats if Bethesda licensed out id Tech 6/7?

Avatar image for flashn00b
flashn00b

3747

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#1  Edited By flashn00b
Member since 2006 • 3747 Posts

Noticed some talks about the uncertainty of a few games on Switch which has me wondering: Would id Software's engine beat out Epic Games' Unreal Engine 4 if Bethesda didn't make it proprietary?

I'd like to think that the licensing of id Tech would be something along the lines of "it prints money" for Bethesda due to the Switch's popularity and if you look at a game like Wolfenstein: The New Colossus, it'd probably overheat the Switch to the point of being a hand grenade if it ran on any other engine than id's. I can definitely see a larger adoption rate of id Tech in Japan due to the regional popularity, and being able to make PS4/Switch multiplatform games would be a massive win for most companies. At the end of the day, id Tech 6 and 7 has something Unreal Engine 4 doesn't and that thing is scaleability. I feel like the engine being proprietary ensures that the scaleability factor will always be underutilized.

Avatar image for enzyme36
enzyme36

4373

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#2 enzyme36
Member since 2007 • 4373 Posts

I dont know the business reasons... But I do know that Switch needs more Fallout.

Avatar image for flashn00b
flashn00b

3747

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#3  Edited By flashn00b
Member since 2006 • 3747 Posts
@enzyme36 said:

I dont know the business reasons... But I do know that Switch needs more Fallout.

Not what I had in mind. Rather, if Square-Enix finally DOES decide "You know what? Chrono Trigger needs a remake" and rather than use Unreal Engine 4 like they did for Kingdom Hearts 3 and the FF7 remake, they instead were allowed to use the same engine that will be used to power Doom Eternal. I think there'd be a lot less issues trying to scale down an id Tech 7 game to be played on the Switch compared to scaling down an Unreal Engine 4 game to be played on the Switch.

Games like Bloodstained, Rad Rodgers Radical Edition and Redout Enhanced Edition highlight just how badly an Unreal Engine 4 game needs to be cut down in order to even run on Nintendo's hardware

Even a game like Daemon X Machina which was a timed exclusive for the Switch also highlights how problematic the engine can be on Nintendo's hardware, and I've been hearing a lot of murmurs regarding a willingness to double-dip on the game due to how bad the performance is.

Avatar image for saltslasher
SaltSlasher

1475

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#4 SaltSlasher
Member since 2015 • 1475 Posts

This is what SW has come to?!?

Avatar image for flashn00b
flashn00b

3747

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#5 flashn00b
Member since 2006 • 3747 Posts
@saltslasher said:

This is what SW has come to?!?

IMO, i think it's a discussion worth having because I legit think that Bethesda is what's holding back the Nintendo Switch. Sure, its hardware is worse than the Xbox One's, though id Software has made a game engine that is capable of scaling down for the hardware difference while the only graphical downgrades involved are rendering resolution, target FPS and texture/shadow resolution. Meanwhile, the graphics of Rad Rodgers had to get shaved town to look like a crappy mobile game, Bloodstained had to have most of its lighting effects removed with some textures no longer being normal mapped and in the case of RedOut, entire pieces of environment had to be removed to such a degree that you get a flat world, the track itself and maybe a few doodads where the dev team can afford to place them.

Avatar image for IMAHAPYHIPPO
IMAHAPYHIPPO

3433

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 0

#6 IMAHAPYHIPPO
Member since 2004 • 3433 Posts

Not sure I understand the post, but if I'm reading this correctly, no, developers wouldn't choose to use a specific game engine because it could be ported to Switch, and no, that would never be the deciding factor in any business decision. Having third-party games on Switch is dope AF, but it is absolutely not the primary source of revenue for any third-party developer.

Avatar image for sakaixx
sakaiXx

7018

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 5

#7 sakaiXx
Member since 2013 • 7018 Posts

@flashn00b said:
@enzyme36 said:

I dont know the business reasons... But I do know that Switch needs more Fallout.

Not what I had in mind. Rather, if Square-Enix finally DOES decide "You know what? Chrono Trigger needs a remake" and rather than use Unreal Engine 4 like they did for Kingdom Hearts 3 and the FF7 remake, they instead were allowed to use the same engine that will be used to power Doom Eternal. I think there'd be a lot less issues trying to scale down an id Tech 7 game to be played on the Switch compared to scaling down an Unreal Engine 4 game to be played on the Switch.

Games like Bloodstained, Rad Rodgers Radical Edition and Redout Enhanced Edition highlight just how badly an Unreal Engine 4 game needs to be cut down in order to even run on Nintendo's hardware

Even a game like Daemon X Machina which was a timed exclusive for the Switch also highlights how problematic the engine can be on Nintendo's hardware, and I've been hearing a lot of murmurs regarding a willingness to double-dip on the game due to how bad the performance is.

DQXI S running on UE4, runs and looks fine.

Avatar image for Litchie
Litchie

25231

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 12

User Lists: 0

#8  Edited By Litchie
Member since 2003 • 25231 Posts

@saltslasher said:

This is what SW has come to?!?

You've made the exact same comment like 10 times this month. If you want SW to be purely "my gaming system rules and yours suck" you should probably find some other place.

Or change personality.

Avatar image for R4gn4r0k
R4gn4r0k

32543

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#9 R4gn4r0k
Member since 2004 • 32543 Posts

DOOM and Wolfenstein look and run fantastic.

I'd like more ID tech 6/7 engine games in general.

Screw Unreal Engine.

Avatar image for NoodleFighter
NoodleFighter

10738

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#10 NoodleFighter
Member since 2011 • 10738 Posts

I doubt several devs would jump ship to ID Tech 6 just to get their games on Switch. I do think that the Nintendo Switch should have had some like DLSS. The Digital Foundry video of Switch capture footage being being upscaled through Nvidia shield's AI tech really shows how much it can do it for it. Devs wouldn't have to have the resolution as high and it leave would them some room to dedicate resources elsewhere.

Avatar image for pc_rocks
PC_Rocks

2994

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#11 PC_Rocks
Member since 2018 • 2994 Posts

No because having a third party engine means dedicating vast resources to support and stuff. It also needs to have a robust set of tools to fulfill needs of wide variety of developers. ID Tech is made to fulfill the specific needs of Id and Bethesda. John Carmack commented on the very same comparison in the past saying exactly that they are a small studio and can't focus their resources on support. It also hinders the advancement and experimentation.

Just having a solid functioning engine is not enough. Look at Crytek with their Cryengine.

Avatar image for osan0
osan0

15572

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#12 osan0
Member since 2004 • 15572 Posts

I don't think so.

As mentioned above: switch support, or lack there of, is not going to be a deciding factor of whether it's the engine to use or not for a project. In terms of engines the indie and AA side is already well supported for the switch. the big publishers are generally trying to have one engine to rule them all in house. e.g. i wouldnt be surprised if the next elder scrolls and bethesdas space RPG also run on Id Tech in some form.

multiplat support, at the end of the day, comes down to money. would a switch port be worth it to them? would it sell enough? would it make enough profit?

Avatar image for pyro1245
pyro1245

5870

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 9

User Lists: 0

#13 pyro1245
Member since 2003 • 5870 Posts

Switch just needs to hop on one of these streaming services.

It's not a great devices for even moderately-demanding games. Why try to be something you're not?

Avatar image for R10nu
R10nu

1557

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#14 R10nu
Member since 2006 • 1557 Posts

It's not the engine scaling well with Switch, it's the people handling the ports.

UE4 also scales extremely well, as seen with Fortnite, it's just nobody cares to put in the effort.

Avatar image for madrocketeer
madrocketeer

7006

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#15  Edited By madrocketeer
Member since 2005 • 7006 Posts

I'm not sure it would make much of a difference. Ability of porting studio matters just as much as, if not more than, the engine of the game.

Another thing to consider is the fact that Unreal is built from the ground up for third-party licensing, with user-friendly tools and intuitive construction language. It might not be the cutting edge of technical excellence, but it's versatile, reliable and easy to learn and work with. Whereas at this point, id Tech would probably look like your typical in-house engine; thoroughly user unfriendly, full of arcane and opaque language, and would erupt into an explosion of bugs if handled for 20 minutes by anyone who doesn't know the code's quirks and workarounds.

It would take a substantial amount of work to turn id Tech into something as intuitive and reliable as Unreal, and I'm not sure Bethesda are interested into putting in that kind of work.