Switch graphics are unquantifiably awesome shit. *cycle*
- Thread starter Goodtwin
- Start date
- Status
tongue_of_colicab
Veteran
I doubt Bethesda or any other dev is expecting buyers who already own a xb1/ps4/PC to buy the switch version.
Most likely they are aiming at people who don't already own one of the other platforms and for those people ports the Switch version only has to be similar to the other versions.
tongue_of_colicab
Veteran
Granted I'm watching on a 5.7 inch screen but apart from no camera flashes and no dof and a far less shiny floor the switch version looks pretty much the same to be? Can't say the game looks very impressive even on the PS4.
30fps is very meh but than again, this is EA and it wouldn't surprise me if this is one of those "press of a button" ports.
This post is more complete about the differences : http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=249075800&postcount=105
I think that they managed to make important technical downgrades without impacting too much the visuals. The only big difference being the framerate. Also, you won't really notice those differences if you play in the portable mode.
However, sports games tend to be far less demanding. For instance, the game runs at native 4k on PS4Pro. Doom will be the real test for the Switch. However, for the moment, 2k18 probably remains the best available comparison. It's the closest to an AAA title.
Last edited:
Heres the thing. The big problem I see with some of these AAA games coming to Switch is while they may be technically able to scale down enough to run on Switch.... the art style/design was still made for the realism look that AAA most games go for on the other consoles/PC. So the result is going to be "muddy-looking" graphically realistic games. Contrast that with games like Zelda: BOTW and Mario Odyssey which I think look great and game like Metroid Prime 4 that will probably look a lot better than DOOM. But that's because they are designed with a non-realism art design from the ground up.
Speaking about NBA 2K18. I think graphics is good for their first game on Switch. Next year graphics could be more impressive. Maybe NBA 2K19 even will run in 60 fps. (Same situation was with first NBA on PS3). I think DOF also missing because of lack of experience with Switch, because it works good in many other Switch games.
I think you have a point (even though I feel the issue may be greater for games with downscaled realistic graphics as opposed to designed to target, which may be what you allude to with the Metroid example). On the other hand, on a 6.2" screen and immersive action, stopping to admire the lightning effects on the age wrinkles of a Hell Knight may not be topmost on the prioritylist of the players.
I just took a factor of 2-3 step up in graphics performance on my PC and in all honesty it hasn't affected my appreciation of the titles I've played at all. The moment you play the game as opposed to checking out the shadow resolution, these things fade away and if you're DOOMing on the go....
Wolfenstein, to a greater extent, is enhanced by its setting.
phoenix_chipset
Regular
For starters, if Switch is the only console they have to play them on.
I'll buy good ports just to support them and for the novelty though.
Silent_Buddha
Legend
By this logic absolutely none of the non-exclusive games on PS4/XBO are technically demanding since they are just ports of games that can run at 120-160 FPS on PC.
And since even exclusives rarely do anything much beyond multiplatform games that means nothing on console is technically demanding.30 FPS games should be portable as well depending on whether the CPU is the limiting factor and whether the CPU load can be reduced without impacting the gameplay. If it is the GPU that is the limiting factor then there is almost nothing preventing a port to the Switch.
Fallout 4 on both PS4 and XBO can't maintain a solid 30 FPS and is rumored to be coming to the Switch just proves that point (assuming it happens).
Regards,
SB
Last edited:
The resolution of 2k18 will give us a clearer picture. Going from 1080p/60fps to 900p/30fps will not sound good. Don't forget what Sebbi said : 720p 60fps > 1080p 30fps. So 1080p 60fps >>> 1080p/30fps. However, anything is possible if developers really choose to make the job.
But clearly, porting a game like Andromeda which runs at 900p/30fps on XB1 (unlike Fallout 4) should translate in a severely downgraded Switch version while 2k18 made a good job to preserve the core graphics.
But clearly, porting a game like Andromeda which runs at 900p/30fps on XB1 (unlike Fallout 4) should translate in a severely downgraded Switch version while 2k18 made a good job to preserve the core graphics.
Muddy realistic looks good on Alan walker and quantity breakdown tho.
Heck, I played Alan when it was such a blurry thing on x360.
I think there were discussions somewhere in b3d about what if devs starts focusing on visual quality and starts sacrificing resolution substantially
Many. Fortunately many Image Quality is Unacceptable or Photo-Realistic garbage dump cleanup spinoff threads have been forgotten and successfully repressed from memory.
Silent_Buddha
Legend
Well, sure not many here, if any, are claiming that ports won't make it to the Switch without some graphical compromises.
But that is no different than PS4/XBO games that feature numerous graphical compromises compared to the PC versions (resolution, settings, textures, framerate, etc.). Where's all the handwaving about games never coming to consoles because they have to be downgraded?
So, we have PC -> downgraded PS4/XBO -> downgraded Switch.
As long as people enjoy playing the game on their platform who cares? On the big screen of a TV, the Switch will obviously be graphically downgraded from other version when compared side by side. But many people will never know that the graphics are downgraded since they either don't play games side by side with other versions, or they have never played the other versions in the first place.
Additionally, when played on the go on the small portable screen, almost everyone will be hard pressed to notice visual downgrades without putting the screen right up to your face side by side with the other versions.
Regards,
SB
Last edited:
It's not there because they (Xbox and PlayStation) have a healthy market place with tens of millions of potential consumers who will buy the game. We're not talking about a device that has substantially less sales with a history of typical consumers who will only buy games from the hardware console creator (Nintendo in this situation).
By this logic absolutely none of the non-exclusive games on PS4/XBO are technically demanding since they are just ports of games that can run at 120-160 FPS on PC.
30 FPS games should be portable as well depending on whether the CPU is the limiting factor and whether the CPU load can be reduced without impacting the gameplay. If it is the GPU that is the limiting factor then there is almost nothing preventing a port to the Switch.
Fallout 4 on both PS4 and XBO can't maintain a solid 30 FPS and is rumored to be coming to the Switch just proves that point (assuming it happens).
Regards,
SB
Talk about missing the point.
60fps on ps4 is way easier port then a 30fps demanding ps4 game, because developers can drop the frame, rate and resolution making the port job much easier, developers can't drop the frame rate in a 30fps game. According to a developer here, 720p/60fps is more demanding then 1080p/30fps for developers, which basically means they fit perfectly within the switch's specs, it's won't be a hassle to port. 30fps game on ps4, you can only drop the resolution, because a game running at 15-20fps is not considered good to most people. for example nba 2k18 on ps4 overall shows a 4-5x hardware jump, when you look at sacrifices that were made in the switch version.
If you can't point to their quotes in this forum to respond to and disprove, then your talking about a population that might be entirely imagined. Please have a discussion about real points with real people on this board.
I don't care about the Switch - I've no emotional investment in any box of electronics or multinational business. I'm taking the low quality of discussion personally as a mod and member of this board. You haven't been here that long so maybe don't appreciate what a conversation on B3D is supposed to be like. You need a posit or opinion or theory, and you need to weigh in on whether you agree or disagree. This thread has no overarching opinion, such that there can't be 'defenders' because there's no concrete POV being defended.
In fact I'm going to axe it. If someone wants to make a proper argument like, "Switch cannot reproduce PS4 level graphics when docked," then by all means create a new thread. Although that's a trollish argument that'd make for a poor discussion. This things 100% noise and a waste of everyone's time.
I recommend a good discussion would be, "What compromises do/have Switch devs made in porting XB1/PS4 games?"
Last edited:
- Status