Nintendo Switch Version?

[Farmer man]

get pc and fs 17 for that you won't ever play it any other way again

[NateS]

The guy asked of it was worth $69.95, not $699.50. "Get a PC" Does not at all answer his question.

I have not played the switch version or seen a review for it but I would say if you have a switch and like FS17, it would probably be well worth it.

[Magnarex]

So what’s the consensus, is it worth 69.95

It's not worth the full price they're asking for it so wait until it goes on sale in the e-shop. Which it already did once, not sure if it still is on sale.

If you want a farming fix while you're on the go the Switch version will fill that role, and it plays fine when docked of course. It's base FS17 and that's it. Two maps, no mods.

And just my two cents worth on the constant console bashing here in regards to this game. There's nothing wrong with the power of any of the current consoles. The problem is with THIS GAME. The game engine has to be 15 years old. Very little lighting effects, low anti-aliasing, yet it struggles to play on consoles and low powered PCs. You can turn around and play any number of modern games (most) on the same hardware and they look like works of art. Don't bash everything else, yell at Giants to start using a modern engine.

[Smith Modding]

Here's the thing. GIANTS uses their own engine, which makes modding a lot easier. And it struggles to run on lower end computer because it's a different type of game. It's having to load most if not all of map at one time to keep your crops growing and the AI working on your fields. This means it takes up more resources than most games. Plus, it plays better than a lot of games. With my old card I could barely play some games at 1080p at any graphics level, even if I met the recommended requirements, on FS I had no problems on high. Also- the game came out in 2009, so there's a very small chance that it's engine is 15 years old.

[Magnarex]

Here's the thing. GIANTS uses their own engine, which makes modding a lot easier. And it struggles to run on lower end computer because it's a different type of game. It's having to load most if not all of map at one time to keep your crops growing and the AI working on your fields. This means it takes up more resources than most games. Plus, it plays better than a lot of games. With my old card I could barely play some games at 1080p at any graphics level, even if I met the recommended requirements, on FS I had no problems on high. Also- the game came out in 2009, so there's a very small chance that it's engine is 15 years old.

I disagree completely. The game isn't doing anything unusual that takes a lot of horse power. Take something like Skyrim which is a huge, open world environment with tons of lighting effects, atmospheric effects, animated, photo-realistic, and able to be modded to the extreme (PC). It ran in original form in 2011 better on any platform than FS17 does now.

With the Switch release they lowered the graphics again with a shorter draw distance and less anti-aliasing (jagged edges). Anyone that has played Zelda: Breath of the Wild on the Switch can testify that there's nothing wrong with it's horse power either if the engine is done right.

So I stand by my statement. How FS runs on a console has little to do with the console and everything to do with the engine. Giants needs to convert to a new engine before one of these other farming game upstarts actually gets the game play down right.

The engine being 15 years old was an arbitrary number. It LOOKS like it's 15 years old.

[Smith Modding]

Here's the thing. GIANTS uses their own engine, which makes modding a lot easier. And it struggles to run on lower end computer because it's a different type of game. It's having to load most if not all of map at one time to keep your crops growing and the AI working on your fields. This means it takes up more resources than most games. Plus, it plays better than a lot of games. With my old card I could barely play some games at 1080p at any graphics level, even if I met the recommended requirements, on FS I had no problems on high. Also- the game came out in 2009, so there's a very small chance that it's engine is 15 years old.

I disagree completely. The game isn't doing anything unusual that takes a lot of horse power.

With the Switch release they lowered the graphics again with a shorter draw distance and less anti-aliasing (jagged edges). Anyone that has played Zelda: Breath of the Wild on the Switch can testify that there's nothing wrong with it's horse power either if the engine is done right.

I agree, Breath of the Wild is a beautiful game. But it is a different type of game. More than likely, it is like most games in which what you see is the only things being rendered. Plus, from the lets plays I've seen and reviews about the game, in the forests, you get some pretty bad frame drops. I'm not saying the Switch isn't powerful, I'm saying that Farming Simulator is in fact a more demanding game, maybe not as much in graphics, but it does use the CPU and RAM a lot more than most games. Again, this is because it has to keep all parts of the map running so all aspects of the game continue to run.

[Magnarex]

I'm saying that Farming Simulator is in fact a more demanding game, maybe not as much in graphics, but it does use the CPU and RAM a lot more than most games.

You're correct, it is more demanding on a system. The reason is because it's a poor, outdated engine. I've read that it doesn't even have multi-core support. It may take a lot of cycles on that single core but it's barely utilizing the full CPU. That in itself is probably 3/4 the reason why it runs the way it runs on consoles and older PCs.

The purpose of my comment on the "console bashing" was because someone posted that the Switch is lagging behind so it can't do certain things like mods, etc... And that is not the case. And that's not the case with all of the current consoles. All of the current consoles are so far beyond this game if the engine would properly utilize them.

[FordFarmer97]

^^ Pretty sure the mod thing was not up to Giants, Nintendo is pretty strict on user content.

[Smith Modding]

^^ Yeah they also didn't allow the DLC's

[Magnarex]

I wasn't addressing Nintendo's policies with my comments. I was addressing stuff like "That's probably because of the limitations of the Switch, not GIANTS fault" and someone else's off-base performance comments in another thread.

It isn't a limitation of the Switch or any other console, it's a limitation of the game engine that doesn't take advantage of multiple cores and modern hardware.

[Lukejf]

Thanks for the updates, I won’t be purchasing. If the switch can’t run the full version properly, yet runs Skyrim something is seriously wrong with the engine.
Cheers