Login

Square-Enix explains why Dragon Quest XI is coming to Switch later than PS4 version

Wondering why Dragon Quest XI is taking so long to come to Switch? Square-Enix producer Hokuto Okamoto explained the situation to GameSpot.

"It's true that the Nintendo Switch version is under development at this moment in time. Specifically with regards to the development, this game was developed on the Unreal Engine, but the version for Unreal Engine needs to be updated, I suppose, in order to support Switch. In that sense, the development is still expected to take a very long time. It's still a long ways out.

Of course, we did consider releasing PS4 and a Switch version around the same time if that was even a possibility, but right now the outlook for the Switch version is still unclear at this moment in time. The Japan team, they wanted to release Dragon Quest a XI and bring it overseas as soon as possible for our fans overseas, which is why they proceeded with the PS4 [and] Steam version[s] this time."

Comments

Top Rated Comment
ezereal
Sat Apr 07 18 06:31pm
Rating: 5

That's exactly the same explanation they had last summer: DQ11 developed on PS4 with UE4.13.
Switch only support the most recent version of UE => UE4.15.
But I'm skeptical, they're talking like 4.15 is an all new engine.. Outlast 2 was on UE3 and they still ported it fast.

No, the truth is...what they just said is bullshit! What they hope is that if they release it long enough after the PS4/PC release with a lot of new content then people will be willing to double dip because portability+new content will be appealing to them, increasing the sales.

ezereal
Sat Apr 07 18 06:31pm
Rating: 5

That's exactly the same explanation they had last summer: DQ11 developed on PS4 with UE4.13.
Switch only support the most recent version of UE => UE4.15.
But I'm skeptical, they're talking like 4.15 is an all new engine.. Outlast 2 was on UE3 and they still ported it fast.

No, the truth is...what they just said is bullshit! What they hope is that if they release it long enough after the PS4/PC release with a lot of new content then people will be willing to double dip because portability+new content will be appealing to them, increasing the sales.

ngamer01
Sat Apr 07 18 06:36pm
(Updated 1 time)

Or they want NoA to pay for the Switch version. Square tends to not support Nintendo very much unless Nintendo money hats for stuff.

So it's either that or Square cancels the Switch version or at least keeps it Japan release only.

If the PS4 version localization already they won't need Nintendo to do anything...maybe publishing it at best but that'd be pretty easy so Nintendo wouldn't mind in that case.

No, with all the elements we have it's clearly a deliberate strategy to maximize the sales of this Switch version.

bpm
Sat Apr 07 18 07:03pm
Rating: 2

Huh, you're right. Outlast 1+2 were made on Unreal 3, and seems like they ported them pretty easily to Switch. So then, what's the excuse for Hat in Time? :V

I don't know the inner workings over at Square-Enix, so I can't be quick to judge them on this. It does suck that seems like we won't see DQ11 Switch until next year, at the earliest, but who knows what's really going on. After all, DQ11 is a "bigger" game than Outlast 1+2.

If I remember right, which I probably don't the developers of Hat in Time just didn't want to do it.

The reason the HIT devs didn't want to port the game over is because UE3 to UE4 is a lot more work than just porting a UE4 game to Switch, and for a team of their size focusing on other things they had planned it wouldn't be practical to put all those things on hold for a port of the game, which makes sense.

Yes, changing from Unreal 3 to 4 would be a big undertaking (the two engines really aren't compatible with each other, despite one being the evolution of the other), but we've already seen several Unreal 3 games on Switch.

Rocket League was originally on Unreal 3, but was ported to Switch by Panic Button (who also ported Doom to Switch).

Outlast 1+2 were also Unreal 3, but were ported to Switch in-house at the original developer, Red Barrels.

Granted, I don't know exactly how either of them brought these games to Switch (ported Unreal 3 to Switch? Ported game to Unreal 4? Custom engine entirely?), but the point is that the lack of Ureal 3 support on Switch hasn't stopped them.

I haven't read what they said but I just know it stinks of $***.

An even bigger crime was snubbing the cool and unique 3DS version.

Despite the fact it's on a dead system and such the task wouldn't be worth the effort? I think anyone would go with Switch over 3DS any day...

I would have preferred the 3DS version, but it's for selfish reasons. Most turn based games these days can't keep my attention due to how long combat takes and I just am not patient enough for it, but the classic style of DQ on 3DS really appealed to me. I know I'm a teensy bit minority here as someone who also owns a Switch, but even though I can absolutely see why they wouldn't it's still disappointing.

This notion that is a dead system needs to stop. It just had it's best year in 2017 and they have announced games through 2019. It would have done great in that platform.

They are releasing it in September which seems to be packed in terms of big games. There decision of getting it out faster for the West will probably hurt them.

There is probably something else to consider that Square Enix didn't mention here. This game is huge. And if it's going to come to Switch as the full fat version, and taking advantage of the Switch's hardware to its limits... then it's going to be a really big game. Being a Dragon Quest game, they won't want to make it an eShop only title, especially not in Japan. By taking their time with it, they may play for time while prices for cartridges will slowly come down, so they can use a larger cartridge by the time the game is finished. Naturally it may also be that they never prioritised the development of the Switch version to begin with.

In fact, reading that bit makes me think that this is exactly what happened :

The Japan team, they wanted to release Dragon Quest a XI and bring it overseas as soon as possible for our fans overseas, which is why they proceeded with the PS4 [and] Steam version[s] this time.

That, to me, says it all. The development team simply didn't care for the Switch version as much as they did for the PS4 and Steam versions, so they just delayed it to focus on releasing those two first as quickly as they could.

Another interesting thing to see is that I don't think avoiding a 32GB cartridge will be possible. Well it is, but it requires sacrifice. The game was 30GB on PS4. If it's a partial digital download then I'll forget about it already.

donzaloog
Sat Apr 07 18 07:28pm
Rating: 1

This is one of the worst excuses I've ever heard. Square is deliberately dragging their feet on this. I'm start to get the impression that they're being paid to do so.

Honestly Horii probably announced dq11 for Switch after they decided to do it but way before Switch development started. Thus it ended up becoming a weird PR situation.

Poor excuse, but I hope Square Enis doesn't complain about poor sales when everyone has it on another platform by the time it releases on Switch.

This smells of bullshit but I'll try and make sense of it.

So Nintendo normally pays for the localisation of the dragon quest games on 3DS to help push the 3DS. They probably didn't do that this time as the switch is printing money.
Square Enix were probably not too happy about not getting a free ride so they focused on the PS4 and the PS4 to PC localisation port.
They probably moved the Switch version to the back burner as they weren't getting a free ride with the 3ds localisation.

As for version differences. They can cause game breaking issues and depending on the game and if you planned to upgrade to a newer version it can be torture to get a game running correctly on the new version without a lot of work.

They as we know from previous interviews made the game with a team for 3ds and a team for the ps4. So they wouldn't have liked most companies, built one game that can be adapted to multiple systems. They didn't plan for that because they treated it as though they were making two games to run specifically on that hardware.
As for the PC port, it is likely just the ps4 version
with some changes to the control options. I doubt any more effort would have been done.
However, building for a different console is a very different thing if you did not build you game with any plan lower or raise the system requirements or scale anything for other versions. This version was made one way. The ps4 specs.

We'll have to wait and see what kind of effort they put into the PC port. If it is the bare minimum, then they aren't talking total bollocks. If it's a lot, then we should worry as that means they've put a huge amount of time and effort into a gaming market that isn't known for buying dragon quest games.

Why the need to worry about them expanding their base? Nothing wrong with more people enjoying the game. Good PC ports like FFXV or FFIX are important compared to awful ports like FFIII-VI or Chrono Trigger. Focusing on systems that do better in the west is a smarter move, and the Switch would be one of those systems if the version was out on time. At least they're realizing that delaying it forever for the sake of a Switch port is pretty dangerous. I have a feeling they'll throw in some goodie for the Switch DQXI port to make it worth a bit of a wait so I wouldn't worry that much anyway

Who else knew that the Switch version (NX version back then) of DQ11 would go nowhere after its announcement, and later talking absolutely nothing about it afterwards?

I be wondering...would it be far fetched to believe, Square-Enix made no mention of the 3DS version, to let Nintendo announce it at E3? Since they be likely to ones to publish it over here....maybe wanted it to be secret announcement for E3 or for a Direct. Just a thought.

Sounds like another Project Cars situation.

Remember. This is the same company that just poorly ported Chrono trigger and final fantasy 6 on steam. Anyone who doesn't even care about that much of their work obviously will make excuses one way or the other.

They actually starting to Patch Chrono Trigger to satisfy every Weeaboo. It‘s not that they are completely ignorance when it comes to criticism. Chrono Trigger isn‘t broken by the way.

This here is a complete different story. They obviously have problems and they obviously have to spend lot of work and money to realize a port maybe, when it will see a release, the majority will not even care anymore because of the PlayStation 4 version. This sounds to me more like: „If Nintendo want this port that badly, they have to pay for it.“

Ok then. What about final fantasy 6 and 5? Just because it isn't broken which is the steam port, doesn't mean it's a fine port. The steam port looks ugly compared to the original.

Well it's not like dragon quest sells well in the west. We don't know whether 7&8 sold that good at all for the 3ds.

Never had a problem with the new artstyles though. But I knew the community was bat shit crazy about it. Giving the people the chance to let them choose between different graphics and getting rid of the mobile UI which don‘t work well on the big screen and the PC ports are good to go.

Sales numbers for the Dragon Quest VII Remake weren‘t that impressive. Haven‘t seen the numbers for VIII. But even if both games performed great Square Enix wouldn‘t still give a damn about the 3DS in the West. This was also the case for their DS releases. If it wasn‘t published by Nintendo, the game either stayed in Japan or was released with the most minimal efforts here. Meaning, english dialogues only.

Never had a problem with the new artstyles though. But I knew the community was bat shit crazy about it. Giving the people the chance to let them choose between different graphics and getting rid of the mobile UI which don‘t work well on the big screen and the PC ports are good to go.

Sorry, but I have to disagree there. Final Fantasy 6 has more issues than just graphics alone particularly that it constantly crashes and is glitchy.

Also, just because they are fixing those issues doesn't mean they are good all of a sudden. Why the hell would a health bar be on the character if you can see the HP of the character in the first place? And this also applies for Final Fantasy 6 and the only reason that game is somewhat good on Steam is because of mods.

They knew a tactic like that would only screw the fanbase and yet they still do it. I only hope DQ 11 gets the quality done and good.

Atleast Nintendo tried to get them to the west. And here I thought Squenix was interested in wanting DQ to be popular in west.

Search

Today's VIP

scottthechiger's avatar
Joined: March 2017
Enthusiast

Social Services

Want to join this discussion?

You should like, totally log in or sign up!