A simple indie port to a single platform typically takes 3 to 6 months, though the exact range depends heavily on the target: a well-structured 2D Unity game going to Nintendo Switch usually lands at 3 to 5 months including certification, while a Steam port can move through raw engineering faster but still extends with QA, store preparation, and potential resubmissions. A mid-sized multi-console project runs 6 to 12 months. A large-scale AAA port should be planned at 12 to 18 months minimum, and that’s before engine migrations enter the picture.
The actual schedule hinges on four variables: codebase complexity, target platforms, how many certification rounds you clear on the first try, and whether your team has done this before. Late discovery of memory and performance issues and failed certification cycles are among the most common causes of delays, and those factors interact in ways that make optimistic estimates genuinely dangerous. This breakdown gives you realistic ranges, the key phases inside them, and the delay drivers worth building buffers around.
Key takeaways
- Simple ports, 3 to 6 months: Clean titles targeting one platform with limited third-party plugins, no custom engine layers, and existing input support. Switch ports typically run 3 to 5 months including certification; Steam ports can be faster on the engineering side.
- Mid-sized ports, 6 to 12 months: Unreal or Unity titles across multiple consoles; each platform after the first adds 1 to 3 months rather than a full development cycle.
- AAA scale, 12 to 18+ months: Custom engines, complex rendering pipelines, live service layers, and broad platform requirements push these projects significantly longer.
- Certification takes real time: Plan 4 to 8 weeks per console platform, including at least one rejection and resubmission cycle.
- Team size has limits: Diminishing returns begin around 8 to 12 specialists; scale by independent workstreams, not by schedule compression goals.
Timeline by project scope
Scope is the single biggest determinant of schedule. Here is how the three tiers compare in practice:
| Scope | Typical duration | Key characteristics |
| Simple / indie (one platform) | 3 to 6 months | Clean codebase, limited plugins, no custom engine layers, existing input support. Switch: 3–5 months with certification; Steam: faster on engineering, longer with QA and store prep. |
| Mid-sized (two to three consoles) | 6 to 12 months | Infrastructure built for the first console carries forward; each additional platform adds 1 to 3 months |
| AAA / large-scale | 12 to 18+ months | Custom engine dependencies, multiplayer, live service layers, broad platform requirements |
Simple and indie ports
For small, well-structured projects, platform choice drives the timeline more than anything else. A 2D Unity game going to Switch typically takes 3 to 5 months when certification is included. A Steam port can move faster through raw engineering, but total project time still extends with QA, store preparation, and any resubmissions.
Mid-sized ports
The schedule here is not strictly additive. After the first console establishes platform infrastructure, controller support, achievement systems, save handling, and entitlements, each additional similar platform generally adds 1 to 3 months rather than another full cycle. The work done on the first platform carries forward in ways that meaningfully compress subsequent platform efforts.
AAA and large-scale ports
At the top end, a bespoke-engine-to-Unreal migration for an existing title runs 12 to 24 months on its own, separate from platform-specific work. The critical gap is between getting a game to boot on a new platform and getting it production-ready. Custom rendering pipelines, multiplayer layers, and live service infrastructure all require independent platform work that doesn’t compress easily.
What the key phases look like inside a port
Every port moves through the same sequence of phases, even if their durations vary by scope. The first is a technical audit: how portable is the code, what platform-specific APIs need replacing, what performance headroom exists, and what certification requirements demand. For a mid-sized project, this phase typically runs 2 to 4 weeks. Skipping or shortchanging the audit is a common reason ports blow their budgets later in the schedule, when issues that could have been caught early turn into expensive rework.
Platform integration and optimization is the longest phase. It covers rendering, memory, loading times, input systems, and platform services including achievements, saves, and online features. For a mid-sized project, this phase runs 4 to 10 weeks, and often longer for AAA scope. QA runs in parallel once a testable build exists. Then comes certification, which deserves far more planning time than most teams give it.
How long certification actually adds to your schedule
The practical rule: budget 4 to 8 weeks per console platform from first submission to approval, assuming at least one rejection. Each failed submission effectively restarts the review clock. Fixes, regression QA, and queue time together add roughly a month per cycle. Day-one patches require their own separate certification, plan to submit them at least 1 to 1.5 months before release to leave room for rejection and resubmission.
What actually causes ports to run over schedule
Performance gaps surface late and hit hard. A game running comfortably on PC is a fundamentally different porting job from one already pushing its memory and CPU budgets. Memory pressure, shader compilation, and loading times expose problems on console hardware that were invisible during PC development. Engine complexity adds another layer: heavily customized engines carry dependencies that don’t transfer automatically, turning a 4-month estimate into a 12-month project.
Team size is also commonly misread as a direct schedule lever. In practice, larger teams produce proportionally smaller schedule gains on larger projects while multiplying coordination overhead significantly. The effective rule is to scale teams by independent workstreams, not by how much you want to compress the timeline. For most mid-sized ports, 3 to 5 developers and 1 to 2 QA testers per platform is the productive range before returns begin to diminish.
When to bring in a dedicated porting team
Studios that port infrequently spend the first 4 to 6 weeks of every project rebuilding platform knowledge: console SDK setup, certification tooling, compliance rules, and submission workflows. A dedicated porting partner has already done that work for every active platform. They bring active SDK access across all major platforms and compliance pipelines that an in-house team typically builds during the first project, neither of which is fast or cheap to develop from scratch.
At Kokku, we operate as a co-development partner rather than a handoff vendor. Kokku integrates directly into client studios’ pipelines. Kokku provides porting and certification services across consoles and platforms.
The honest summary on timing: take your engineering estimate, add 4 to 8 weeks for certification per console platform, and add one rejection buffer on top of that. For teams without console porting experience, engaging a specialist early is simply the faster path to a quality release. Contact us for a tailored porting timeline estimate.
Frequently Asked Questions
How many developers and QA should we plan per platform to avoid diminishing returns on a mid-sized port?
Plan about 3 to 5 developers and 1 to 2 QA testers per platform as the productive range before returns begin to diminish. Scaling beyond that multiplies coordination overhead and yields proportionally smaller schedule gains, so scale by independent workstreams instead of just adding heads.
How should we factor submission rejections into our schedule estimates?
Budget at least one rejection buffer and treat each failed submission as effectively restarting the review clock. Fixes, regression QA, and queue time together add roughly a month per failed cycle, so add that month per expected rejection to your timeline.
What’s the practical difference between getting a game to boot on a new platform and making it production-ready?
Getting a game to boot is only the first milestone; production readiness requires platform-specific work on custom rendering pipelines, multiplayer layers, live service infrastructure, performance optimization, and certification. That additional work often cannot be compressed and is what pushes mid-sized and AAA projects into much longer timelines.
How should we schedule day-one patches and mobile submissions around certification timelines?
Submit day-one patches at least 1 to 1.5 months before release to leave room for rejection and resubmission. For mobile, plan 1 to 3 weeks for a submission with one rejection factored in.