Skip to content

CMA reveals that the regulator doesn’t believe Call of Duty will run adequately on Switch

Microsoft recently announced that it has now signed a ten year agreement to bring Call of Duty to Nintendo platforms if the Activision Blizzard gaming deal goes through. The deal, which has come under intense scrutiny including by the United Kingdom’s Competition and Markets Authority, seems to be on a knife-edge. The Competition and Markets Authority says that it doesn’t believe that the Nintendo deal with Microsoft will work with the Nintendo Switch as the Nintendo Switch isn’t able to replicate the visuals, frame rate and online features that are a core part of the Call of Duty game’s series, which is correct in someways. Though the CMA does seem to forget that that this deal would most likely be for a future Nintendo gaming system.


6 thoughts on “CMA reveals that the regulator doesn’t believe Call of Duty will run adequately on Switch”

  1. Hmm, not sure I agree with the interpretation of the regulator here. Activision tried and failed to port COD to Switch before? That may be true but there wasn’t a contract signed requiring them to do it so they probably gave up pretty easily. For me the question isn’t could they port COD to the Switch – having seen games like The Witcher, Doom Eternal, and Fortnite (I’m mentioning because it demonstrates multiplayer) come across I have no doubt they could if they put in the requisite effort. The question is whether they would bother. Again, that’s where the contract comes in.

    Of course by the time this happens, we might be talking about a new, more powerful Nintendo console anyway which would make it easier to port.

  2. Anonymous Skywalker

    Dude, CoD can run on a literal potato. Also, what makes them say that when Doom and Crysis can run on Switch? If Switch can run both of these far more demanding games it can run CoD. Let’s also not forget about The Witcher 3 running on Switch.

  3. The switch could run CoD perfectly fine with no issues, the problem is the file sizes right now for the game are way bigger than they need to be.

  4. “Microsoft buying Activision Blizzard is violating competition rules!”
    Microsoft makes a deal with Nintendo for 10 years to bring CoD to Nintendo Systems
    “…. We don’t believe the Switch can run CoD”

    Can you say “Sony Shill” anyone?
    Microsoft is willing to allow CoD on multiple Platforms even after it’s purchase of the company and yet the CMA still wants to drag their heels and make excuses. I feel like they’re getting paid off by Sony so that when Sony buys them, suddenly it’s not a bad thing despite seeing how Sony is restricting the VR Games marker by making features like Resident Evil VR Games exclusive to their niche headset that barely anyone has.

  5. An actual gamer, not a poser or Nintendrone fanboy like the other fodder in this comment section.

    Framerate and graphics would be horrendous on the Switch. Fortnite is an example and people who say otherwise have no idea what a consistent 60fps framerate looks like. Nor do they know how vitally important framerate and visuals are for online multiplayer fps games.

    1. The cap for multiplayer shooters should be 30fps, no 30fps isn’t garbage you elitist, if it’s consistent then it’s fine. But the PS5 runs these games at 60fps, dude the PS5 struggles to run these games at a consistent 60fps, PC on the other hand struggles less with this. The thing is, do you want the Switch version to look good or run good? Can’t have both. If you want both then get a PC cuz you can make tweaks to get the perfect look and perfect frames plus if the devs do a horrible job at optimization for the PC version then you can always count on the modding community cuz they have your back unlike Activision.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: