Anyone else feel resolution is overrated?

[Mr Puggsly]

curl-6 said:

Mr Puggsly said:

I do believe Skyrim did that to an extent as well. I mean you had the open world but going into cities, buildings or caverns took you out of that open world and had a load screen. There isn't a debate about that being an open world. Rage had an open world and areas you would enter that were essentially like a linear action game.

Switch is really a mixed bag of resolutions. If its a technically demanding game, its often doing 720p and sometimes lower for dynamic resolutions. But on average its certainly hitting resolution well above last gen.

Base X1 is generally hitting 900p is technically demanding games. But resolution isn't the whole story, Switch and X1 are doing vastly different visuals at equal resolutions.

Skyrim had massive open areas where you could wander out into the wilderness and explore though. Rage never did, it had relatively small hubs, linear levels, and linear corridors in between. It tried to create the illusion of being open world, but it never really was one.

And yeah, Xbox One is clearly more graphically capable than the Switch, all I meant was that so far, the best looking games on both seem to hit around 900p.

Rage is a less impressive open world then Elder Scrolls, but its still is in that genre. Meanwhile Elder Scrolls had to load in many areas.

Games are generally designed around performance and resolution first. So the average game is built to hit 720p to 1080p from the start. I mean no game intended for Switch is aiming for 480p regularly like Doom and Wolf II.