Nintendo Switch Technical discussion [SOC = Tegra X1]
- Thread starter Alucardx23
- Start date
-
- Tags
- nintendo nintendont
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
It's a good job Zelda is good then. The Switch has a difference balance of performance to XBO and PS4. If you want an example of how it's a bit odd just take a look at Lego City Undercover where the Switch runs a higher resolution than XBO but clearly not higher quality graphics settings.
I'm certain that Lego City could have run at 1080p on XB1. GTA 5 is much more impressive in every aspect and still runs at 1080p on XB1.
Lego City is one of the least impressive multiplatform game on PS4/XB1.
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
Lego City Undercover and GTA 5 are nothing alike - there is absolutely no point in comparing these games. The games that demonstrate differences between the hardware are the games running on the same engine on all three platforms.
I don't agree. Sometimes, you have to make undirect comparisons to get a better comprehension.
Lego City is certainly one of the most impressive Switch game while it's the complete opposite if we consider the XB1.
The technical gap between Zelda/Lego City is clearly not the same than that between Lego City/GTA5.
Not to mention that other Lego games run at 1080p on XB1 with better graphics.
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
I fundamentally disagree because its impossible to quantify the quality of the code between different games. That's why same game (preferably same developer) and same engine are the most telling. You're most likely have to the least amount of code quality and software architectural differences. LCU, Snake Pass - those games are useful.
Those games aren't even good to compare the XB1/PS4... parity in Snake Pass ? Let's see when the Switch is able to run a proper AAA.
Other games definitly help to make your judgment. I mean, when you see HZD, you know there's somehting wrong with the "Life of Black Tiger".
I have the exact same feeling with Lego City (GTA5, Destiny, Mad Max).
No single multi platform game is every able to paint a clear picture of how hardware stacks up, but I shouldn't be written off either. There are trends that can be easily seen over time, and so far, Switch stack ups pretty much how we would have expected a Tegra X1 powered console to perform. Discrediting games like Lego City simply because they don't fit your narrative shows bias. If you want to throw out evidence based on nothing more than your believe that the game somehow underperforms on one platform compared to another is straight up bias. Sorry, but you can cherry pick the games that fit your narrative.
Switch hits the middle ground pretty well. It seems to be able to run 360/PS3 level content but in 1080p docked. This is a good deal less than what PS4/X1 are capable of, but really pretty darn good for a console that is also portable. For those people who simply want to play all their games on Switch, a step up from PS3/X360 may be perfectly acceptable for them. For those where this isn't the case, how likely were they to have been interested in the Switch to begin with?
Switch hits the middle ground pretty well. It seems to be able to run 360/PS3 level content but in 1080p docked. This is a good deal less than what PS4/X1 are capable of, but really pretty darn good for a console that is also portable. For those people who simply want to play all their games on Switch, a step up from PS3/X360 may be perfectly acceptable for them. For those where this isn't the case, how likely were they to have been interested in the Switch to begin with?
No, i'm not bias... i don't see anything that justifies such a low resolution on XB1 and i think exactly the same thing for Snake Pass. Actually, Snake Pass should have run at 1080p on XB1 too. 900p/60fps or 1080p/30fps.
All other Lego games runs at 1080p on XB1 and they also look better.
Even with different engines, we can see a trend. Most of multiplatform games run at a much lower resolution on XB1 regardless the engine.
If i was bias, i would only speak about DQ2... without a port that really pushes the XB1/PS4, you can't draw any proper conclusion.
I always agreed on that.
All other Lego games runs at 1080p on XB1 and they also look better.
Even with different engines, we can see a trend. Most of multiplatform games run at a much lower resolution on XB1 regardless the engine.
If i was bias, i would only speak about DQ2... without a port that really pushes the XB1/PS4, you can't draw any proper conclusion.
I always agreed on that.
Silent_Buddha
Legend
So, now that Skyrim is confirmed to be coming to the Nintendo Switch, it'll be very interesting to see how it compares to the PS4/XBO version as well as the PS3/X360 version.
Regards,
SB
Regards,
SB
The Switch version likely doesn't have Voice Commands, so not as engaging as being able to shout Yol Toor Shul and see it all burn.
Full Voice List
Full Voice List
Silent_Buddha
Legend
Xbox One has limited 32 MB pool of ESRAM. Scaling resolution up might cause non-linear increase of cost if your most important RTs don't fit to ESRAM anymore. Sometimes it is simply better to keep the resolution down and increase the visual fidelity of the pixels instead.
900p@60fps (= 86.4M pixels/s) is significantly more expensive than 1080p@30fps (= 62.2M pixels/s). 720p@60 fps is pretty close to 1080p@30fps. But this only takes final pixels into account. Rendering also includes costs that don't scale directly based on resolution (such as shadow map rendering). The cost of these passes don't scale linearly down when you decrease resolution. Also the pixel counting takes only GPU into account. 60 fps also doubles the CPU cost, and many AAA games can't afford this on the consoles. Thus 1080p@30fps is definitely an easier target than 720p@60fps for AAA console games.
Doesn't look like we will be getting many titles to help compare Switch to rival platforms. Fifa 18, Skyrim, and Rocket League will be on the short list to draw some conclusions. Sledgehammer games pretty much dismissed the idea of COD WW2 coming to Switch anytime soon. I still believe it comes down to publishers skeptical of a good return on investment, and the investment required to port modern AAA games to Switch likely isn't peanuts. I'm sure DF will have some footage of these games and run some test later this week. Developers of Need for Speed Payback commented that there is no reason their game couldn't run on Switch, but currently have no plans to bring it to the platform. I'm not sure we will ever have a definitive answer to just how much the technical limitations hold these titles back from the platform. Seems like the business side of things will be the biggest factor. Should still be fun to see how much a game like Skyrim can be improved over the 360/PS3 iterations on a portable console like Switch. Bethesda and EA both made comments about how impressive the Switch is as a portable, pretty much avoiding even calling it a console. Its hard to make your game sound impressive when its actually a downgrade from their PS4/X1 efforts, unless of course the context is understood. And that context is the idea that Switch is indeed a portable first, and a console second.
Silent_Buddha
Legend
That's the big one. So far.
UBIsoft, embracing the Switch whole heartedly with 2 exclusives on Switch.
EA and Bethesda, taking a cautious approach by porting some titles over to the Switch.
Activision/Blizzard are looking at it, but haven't committed. I'm not sure about 2k games.
Japanese developers mostly embracing the Switch to some extent. Some with exclusives, some with ports.
And then you have indie devs that are jumping over themselves trying to release titles on Switch.
Can't blame the big pubs that are hesitant. They got burned on the Wii-U. And there's a publisher that went out of business because they bet heavily on the Wii-U.
Regards,
SB
Who went out of business due to the Wii U?
Silent_Buddha
Legend
THQ bet big on the Wii-U with a large investment in uDraw, a drawing game that included a drawing tablet and stylus. They invested a lot into that game and had a lot of them produced expecting high demand. All that hardware meant the up front investment was incredibly high. When the Wii-U failed to take off, and sales of their game was way under projections as a result, they were in trouble.
They were already in a bit of a rough state prior to that, but nothing they couldn't have recovered from. uDraw went on sale at the end of 2011, in 2012 they defaulted on a loan of 50 million USD and were desperately trying to avoid bankruptcy.
That's when they went to Humble Bundle to try to raise some money by putting their games into the Humble THQ Bundle. That raised 5 million USD which was not nearly enough to pay off their debts and subsequently filed chapter 11 bankruptcy just a few days after the sale ended.
Regards,
SB
cheapchips
Veteran
Betting the house on a drawing tablet peripheral for a console with a bundled tablet doesn't seem that great a move in retrospect.