Give me one good reason why this shouldn't happen.

>>385185843
>switch
>even handling DS1 graphics

good joke op, thread dies here

I'd play them but I would expect sub-30 fps unless the graphics get a major downgrade

>>385185843
the switch can't even run mobile shovelware, let alone an actual game

>>385185843
Dumb asses would tell you that the Switch couldn't handle it, ignoring that the series started on PS3, but whatever. It's pretty much just OKAY though, OP. If it were better, people would be much more a better series.

>>385185843
Because I've already played and beat them all.

I would rather play Dark Souls 1 HD with cut content restored and covenants fixed.

>>385185843
Because nintendo fanboys hate third party games. They won't buy it unless it's made by nintendo.

Porting over a third part game would be a waste of time and money.

>>385186216
But would you rather get laid?

>>385186095
>bitches about people ignoring PS3 games
>ignores PS4 game that would melt Switch unless they made DS2 out of it
>sour grapes
lel

>>385186493
Shut up

File: low.jpg (44KB, 699x258px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 699x258px

>>385186493
>what is reading comprehension?
>what is DS1 graphics?
>ignores common sense
it's like you're not even trying.

>>385186426
No I'd rather have the Dark Souls.

good for dev, publisher n nintendo

bad for gamers wanting a new experience.

>>385185843
Because it doesn't have Demon's Souls which is arguably more essential than Dark Souls II

Also the Switch would melt trying to play a game that isn't before 2009

not that nintendo gamers are necessarily bad, but it would be such a shock to the system compared to what they're used to getting. they would riot. also, and this is the main reason, it wouldn't sell well.

Itt: Tards believing Switch wouldn't be able to run DS1

>>385187328
It wouldn't

>>385185843
I already have all of them. Souls on the go sounds neat but I'd rather have something new.

>>385187781
Multiple sources have claimed that FromSoft has managed to get DS3 running on it.

>>385188000
Holy shit, you are a fucking idiot

>>385188000
>maybe if I keep citing my source to that blog posting mentally ill tranny site the future will come true
Sad!

>>385187781
Not him but the switch is more powerful than the PS3 and 360.
Souls 3 is the only one it would have a tough time with without downgrades.

>>385187781
>system more powerful than the PS3 and 360 wouldn't be able to run a PS3 and 360 game
???

^

provided the games would work well on switch, who the fuck wants to play dark souls on a switch?

Why do people think it's a Souls game when Namco was never mentioned in Nintendo's partnership with From?

>>385187781
Here we go again.

File: abc.jpg (34KB, 1080x592px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 1080x592px

>>385187328
>>385187076
>>385186036
>>385185941
Didn't they show gameplay from a dark souls 3 switch build that ran at 30 fps and looked fine?

I never fact checked it, but it was streamed showing off content for the new DLC. I might be wrong but I definitely remember it.

>>385185843
Wasted money on two bad games no one wants to play

Zelda souls spinoff would literally sell +1B copies, not even exaggerating

>>385189027
IGN or GameSpot left a switch watermark on the screen on accident once

>>385189182
Ah, that's probably it.
I remember it didn't look like a current gen version but it was probably a beta build at that point

>Essential

So Demon's, Dark Souls 1 and BB?

>>385185843
>consolebabbies buy new consoles to play remastered versions of old games
The sad state of neo/v/

>>385188859
Yes they were? Dragonball Xenoverse 2 is coming to Switch.

>>385189513
>petitioning race

>>385189513
>consolebabbies buy new consoles to play new exclusives

Go figure

>>385185843
Portable Souls could be alright

>>385189981
The reality is that Souls would actually work really well on portable devices, since you're generally never far from a bonfire, and the time lost from having to end play abruptly usually isn't that major.

>>385189297
The video was clarified to be PS4 gameplay, Dark Souls 3 just isn't very impressive technically, I'm still surprised that it only hits 30fps on consoles, great art style though.

>>385189548
I never said that Bamco wasn't supporting Switch at all, Namco museum is coming, I just don't remember Namco being discussed in the partnership with Nintendo and From, I'd rather not get a port, and I don't even think it's feasible, the Switch undocked is still more powerful than last gen systems but if they want to run DS3 on Switch it will run like shit on Docked and even worse undocked.

File: AAA1-noscale.jpg (929KB, 1334x750px) Image search: [Google]

929KB, 1334x750px

>>385185843
Switch wouldn't be able to handle it. But don't worry, Slashy Souls would be perfect on Switch!

>>385190319
still better than bloodborne

>>385189935
>consolebabbies buy a console and play with inferior controls and graphics for one good exclusive
Figured

>>385185843
I'm actually waiting for a bundle to play 2 and 3 (and finish 1, I had to move across the pond). I'm okay if it'll be on PS4 though.

>>385186417
what if the game got some nintendo exclusive shit in there? Like swords, armor, a new covenant, etc.

You know faggots love to see ninty shit in other games

BLIGHTTOWN
L
I
G
H
T
T
0
W
N

The Iron Keep in SotFS is absoluyte garbage. I'm sick of seeing these hammer bro turtle guys. They couldn't think of another design for a slower, stronger enemy? This game is mediocre compared to an incomplete DaS1. Disappointed. Also, if I use another soul vessel, can I not spend all the points and return to lower level pvp?

>>385192787
>Also, if I use another soul vessel, can I not spend all the points and return to lower level pvp?

no

>>385185843
because the switch is marketing other types of games and certainly not franchises like Dark Souls.