Quantcast
View Post

Ideally, I would like a high resolution and 60 FPS. However, if that is not possible then my preference on which should be sacrificed will largely depend on the game in question. If the game has high speed motion or requires high precision movements (think of speed platformers like Sonic, racing games, and fighting games) then I think frame rate should be prioratized. However, if the game is slower paced and has more exploration (often times these games draw the player's attention through specific details in the scenary) then I would say resolution should be prioratized.

CrazyGamer2017 said:


The Switch is way too under powered which as the latest 2017 system out there should have no excuse for its lack of performance. Too much needs to be sacrificed to reach 60fps

The Switch is a handheld console with an SOC that is built around a similar process node size of a PS4 and XONE (20 nm for Switch and 28 nm for PS4 and XONE). Not to mentioned it consumes 15 watts of power versus over 100 watts that its stationary counterparts consume. There is no way it could perform the same way as a PS4 or XONE (Which you already mentioned did not meet your resolution and framerate expectation) and it would be impossible for it to exceed those systems. In fact, there is NO mobile chips out there today that Nintendo could have used to get similar performance as the XONE and PS4 and maintain the same form factor or price point of the Switch (the impossibleness of what you expect, is a pretty good excuse as to why not all games on Switch run at 1080P 60 FPS as far as I am concerned). If it was all this easy, Sony and MS would have made a portable PS4 and XONE (and heck one that would run all games at 1080P 60 FPS) as opposed to making their systems slightly slimmer.