They know it exists, but they don't use it enough in my opinion, it is a standard in modern video games, and Nintendo should meet this standard. There's really no good reason for a game releasing on hardware of PS3/360 calibre or better not to have AA.

And yeah Mario Odyssey will also likely use dynamic res; free-roaming games with a more variable rendering load will likely adopt this method while games with a more controllable load (like ARMS, and likely also Kirby, Yoshi, etc) will still use a fixed resolution.

I think you got it wrong, I meant that the resolution has drops to 936p or to 1536x864 :P, i'll adjust To avoid confusion again.

1536x864 is not 936P, It is 864P as it's a 16:9 progressive resolution. So it's not "or".

936P would be: 1664x936.

**********

Clearly they prioritised framerate over resolution, which is the right priority for a game like this... But it would have still been nice to have it locked at 720P/1080P. It's just not realistically possible with such restricted hardware capabilities.

I think given the time, they could lock it to 720p/1080p, we may see this in an update later on.

I think it is fair to assume they are using the same engine as the first game, so perhaps if they had built an engine that was better optimised for the Switch's architecture we would  see better visuals.

Like Eurogamer mention, its point about their priorities, and they always choose better performance (60 fps for instance) instead of better IQ.

Agree, dynamic res for more demanding games (and we already saw that on Zelda BotW and Splatoon 2, most likely one Mario Odyssey too) and fixed 1080p for less demanding games.

It's not so much a matter of time or architecture as one of variable rendering load. In a game like Splatoon where the player has full control of where the camera points and where ink exchanges can fill the screen with alpha, the rendering load of any given moment can vary enormously. There are three ways to deal with this; allow resolution to vary with load, allow framerate to vary with load, or lock both to the worst case scenario. I think Nintendo chose correctly in taking the first option.

I am just saying the engine was (very likely) not built from the ground up for the Tegra X1 so some inefficiencies are probably present that may have been smoothed over if they had spent more time porting their engine.
It may not have been 100% 1080p but perhaps they could, and still can get it to 1080p 80 -95% of the time.

It's not so much a matter of time or architecture as one of variable rendering load. In a game like Splatoon where the player has full control of where the camera points and where ink exchanges can fill the screen with alpha, the rendering load of any given moment can vary enormously. There are three ways to deal with this; allow resolution to vary with load, allow framerate to vary with load, or lock both to the worst case scenario. I think Nintendo chose correctly in taking the first option.

Yeah I get that it's how they prioritize, but to forego such a basic component of modern graphics is still a mistake in my opinion. Not a huge deal, but still a slightly annoying niggle.

The one I'm really interested to DF cover is Xenoblade 2, which as a massive open world title presents a somewhat different rendering challenge than most of Nintendo's games.

Yes, with seems that AA is not on their list of priorities.

I expecting that res will above 720p in any case.