D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
He was going to go to the park and shake his first at a cloud but it was raining, so..... this post instead.
Last edited by a moderator:
Nintendo Switch Technical discussion [SOC = Tegra X1]
- Thread starter Alucardx23
- Start date
-
- Tags
- nintendo nintendont
D
Deleted member 13524
Guest
I think the point is the general public is still completely oblivious of the performance disparity between the 4-year-old consoles and the Switch.
DuckThor Evil
Legend
To be honest Tekken 7 at least to me look graphically very unimpressive. Barely above the last gen versions. Better particle effects, but that's just about it.
All that should and is known about the Nvidia Tegra in the Switch. Read the thread.
The thing about SnakePass is UE4 is horrible and the devs didn't do anything in way of optimizations. It should be a 1080p/60fps title on PS4, but it's suboptimal. Its sad.
The thing about SnakePass is UE4 is horrible and the devs didn't do anything in way of optimizations. It should be a 1080p/60fps title on PS4, but it's suboptimal. Its sad.
Errr, Thraktor on neogaf is hardly representative of "the general public". (And he was responding to claims re: Tekken on Switch being impossible with Snake Pass as a counter example showing that arithmetic differences in theoretical performance do not necessarily translate directly into game performance. Which is actually valid. He is biased rather than ignorant of the issues.)
Generally speaking, fighting games have used the same basic mechanics for ages, and they are games of timing and skill - compromises in graphics are pretty much irrelevant to their game play. The genres that are more obviously challenged would be some turn based strategy games where the AI takes ridiculous amounts of time on high end PCs to figure out what to do. (CPU discrepancy) Or the games that are basically about the graphics (visual story telling) with token gameplay elements like the Order:1886. (GPU discrepancy) At the end of the day only those developers with an intimate knowledge of the internals of a game can make a reasonable assessment of how easy/hard it would be to port that particular title and what compromises might be involved. Snake Pass demonstrates that nicely. Armchair speculation just doesn't go very far.
GAF reputation means nothing here, so it can't be assumed anyone knows anything about anyone there. The post from recop had zero qualification. It was asked what that has to do with B3D. Tot suggested an explanation. You suggest he should know better. Ultimately if people just damned well told us what links were about we'd all be a lot happier.
eg.
Dev talks about Switch
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=239024973&postcount=61
or Random person talks about Switch
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=239024973&postcount=61
There's also a link tool which means you can replace the link with a description.
Dev/Random person talks about switch.
Very good habit to get into, to use the tool for links and provide them in context. Which in actuality is what hypertext was invented for, instead of a meaningless hyperlink made up of a URL.
ToTTenTranz understood my point. I can't see how the Switch could run Tekken 7 without a massive downgrade compared to the XB1 version.
People keep bringing unreliable examples (Snake Pass or Lego City) to support the point that the Switch is finally not that far to the PS4 or very close to the XB1.
I mean, just compare the technical gap between Snake Pass and Zelda, between Snake Pass and Ryse (both games are launch titles). And then, you can clearly see which console has been underutilized.
People keep bringing unreliable examples (Snake Pass or Lego City) to support the point that the Switch is finally not that far to the PS4 or very close to the XB1.
I mean, just compare the technical gap between Snake Pass and Zelda, between Snake Pass and Ryse (both games are launch titles). And then, you can clearly see which console has been underutilized.
Silent_Buddha
Legend
If you're going to compare Snake Pass to a launch title, comparing them to exclusives that didn't need to account for features that exist or are missing on other platforms isn't the right way to go about it. It'd be more like Battlefield 4, Fifa 14 or COD: Ghosts. All of which ran on hardware that was significantly less powerful than the PS4/XBO. Also the difference in power and capabilities between PS4/XBO and PS3/X360 is far greater than the difference between PS4/XBO and the Nintendo Switch.
There's no reason Tekken 7 wouldn't run on the Switch.
Looking at the PC port of the game, it scales down quite far in its requirements. It obviously won't be a graphical match for PS4/XBO, but it also wouldn't necessarily require a "massive" downgrade. It may or it may not.
Regards,
SB
SedentaryJourney
Regular
It's still hard to gauge at this point how Switch fares against its competitors, but Tekken 7 might actually fare better on the switch vs ports of games on other engines.
Snake Pass and now Tekken 7 seem to suggest an issue with unreal engine 4 performance on GCN consoles. I mean 720p and no ambient occlusion on Xbox One in a game where there are only two characters on screen in a tightly constrained stage? No object based motion blur either, which is something previous titles had. It's just too bizarre given what other titles achieve to accept that Tekken 7 was running into some real hardware limits.
I also agree that there's no reason Tekken 7 couldn't be ported to Switch, but then given enough time and effort it could probably be ported to PS3 in some fashion.
Silent_Buddha
Legend
That's certainly a consideration. On PC, UE games tend to run better on NV hardware. Epic is also a close partner to NV, so that perhaps isn't much of a surprise. That might make UE multiplatform console games easier to port to the Nintendo Switch, especially if the developer hasn't done much to optimize the engine for their game or a target platform.
Snake Pass would be a good example of a small developer that potentially didn't have the resources to do much optimization for specific platforms.
Regards,
SB
Yep, just because a game is demanding on high settings doesn't mean it cant scale to pretty meager hardware. The idea that Tekken 7 could not scale to Switch is pretty ridiculous in my opinion. Tekken isn't exactly all that different from the PS2 days. Engine compatibility is not an issue either, UE4 fully supports Switch. The end result may make Tekken 7 look more like Tekken Tag 2 on Wii U/360, but that is a far cry from not being able to run the game at all.
Street Fighter 5, Gears of War 4, Paragon.
Tekken 7 might bet badly optimized on all consoles, but if the same effort was put on the Switch version, there is no reason to believe that the result would not be much worse than the XB1 version.
So far, the Switch showed that it is only able to run WiiU games at a higher resolution without any improvements. The only exception being Fast RMX, but i guess it's because the game was not perfectly optimized on WiiU.
I can't see how a small indie studio could compete with Nintento himself. IMO, the best examples of Switch achievements come from Nintendo games : Mario Kart, Zelda, Arms.
Edit : there's also Lego City which runs at a higher resolution + better graphics but with worse reflections compared to the WiiU version.
Last edited:
Fifa 18 would have been a good occasion to see what the Switch can do on a semi-AAA title, but it doesn't use the same engine.
Another strange case is Minecraft. The developers said that the game could eventually run at 1080p but the performances are already pretty unstable in the 2 players mode at 720p and the PS4 is even worse in this mode... so, what kind of performances should we expect at 1080p with 2 players ? 10fps ?
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2017-minecraft-switch-face-off
Another strange case is Minecraft. The developers said that the game could eventually run at 1080p but the performances are already pretty unstable in the 2 players mode at 720p and the PS4 is even worse in this mode... so, what kind of performances should we expect at 1080p with 2 players ? 10fps ?
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2017-minecraft-switch-face-off
Last edited:
Silent_Buddha
Legend
Some interesting data points in there.
Number of chunks (16x16x256 [widthxlengthxheigh) blocks form a chunk) rendered at any given time.
PS Vita - 5
Switch (undocked) - 7
Switch (docked) - 11-12
PS4/XBO - 18
PC - 22
Max world (map) size in blocks.
Wii-U - 864x864
PS3/X360 - 1024x1024
Switch - 3072x3072
PS4/XBO - 5120x5120
No comments from me on that. I just found it interesting.
Regards,
SB
Max world size should scale roughly based on available memory. PS3/X360 had roughly 500 MB total available for the game. Wii-U had 1 GB (1 GB was reserved for OS). XB1/PS4 have 5 GB for the game. Switch has 4 GB total, but I don't know how much the OS takes.
Number of chunks rendered is based on platform performance. These numbers seem reasonable. Bit less than theoretical performance differences between the platforms.
But the framerate is even lower on PS4 despite its faster CPU. So, it's certainly because the PS4 version has more CPU dependent settings (more chunks, more blocks).
