Quantcast
DigitalFoundry: Doom on Switch: The Complete Technical Analysis!

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - DigitalFoundry: Doom on Switch: The Complete Technical Analysis!

30fps is a hindrance to gameplay. Drops below that is a big hindrance to gameplay.

With that, the port is impressive considering the anemic hardware it's trying to run on.
In short... If you own other platforms, it's best to get the game on those rather than the Switch version.



--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--

Around the Network
Normchacho said:
Shiken said:

Portability

A list price twice that of the other versions, paired with significant performance issues and severely scaled back visuals seems like quite the cost for just portability.

Except I have actually played it on the Switch.  I can assure you the game looks fine and feels smooth in action.  I am not saying that there are not drawbacks, but considering all dlc packs are included and I can play it in two different ways, I feel like I got my 60 bucks worth.

 

And this is coming from someone who has the option of playing on either a PS4 or X1 also.



Nintendo Switch Friend Code: SW-5643-2927-1984

AngryLittleAlchemist said:
Shaunodon said: 

 

"And no, I don't bear a grudge against you. But you keep saying these things, and I keep having to write these responses I don't want to write."

Holy shit, I didn't even say it this time! Literally didn't even mention it. Lol. 

You're reading too much into my comment. You are trying so hard to act like he has some great point and that i'm the epitome of the stupidity he's battling against - it's not like that at all. My original "smart ass" comment was, guess what, supposed to be a smart ass comment. And it was a correct one, with a point that was easy to understand and communicate. You replied to that comment by saying that i'm exhibiting exactly what he was talking about. The irony is that I never even mentioned frame rate or resolution until I replied to your claim. So if you want to say I am a "caricature" of what he's describing now? Go ahead ... but in context I only provided those points because the conversation was furthered and you, not me, brought up resolution and frame rate. I know you know this, so I don't understand why you're making this into some huge battle about how I'm a smart ass or how he's right and I'm just a caricature of what he's fighting against. We don't have to talk like that, man. It's just a conversation worth having. My stance has always been "good job on the port, happy it's on the console". Not "this is terrible because it's x frames and y resolution!" I know you won't do me the curtsy of believing this, but I'd actually like to think on this topic I'm fairly nuanced. I can argue against a stance and a developer's statement, and still agree that the port was worthwhile. 

I do think it probably delivers on the DOOM experience. That's great, and I'm happy for Switch owners getting the ability to play it. I have it on PC, and I think this is one of those games that doesn't personally benefit from a handheld format. So I'll skip it. But it's a decent port. And yes at the end of the day fun is what matters the most. But it's not like resolution or frame rate don't matter. The latter especially does effect how fun a game is, especially a game like DooM. 

All I tried to say was, of course he'd say that, he wants the product to make money. At the end of the day, that's all that matters. His statement holds some accuracy, but it is also severely overblown and overshadows what benefits a better frame rate or resolution could provide. It's not just some small insignificant thing that some people are too anal about, it's a real concern. It's so hyperbolic, that I'd wager quoting it in a forum to make a point is useless. 

AngryLittleAlchemist said:

Pretty unexpected for a developer delivering a game with low framerate and low resolution to say that. 

 

It's also pretty clear the dev was airing a personal grievance, on something he actually feels quite passionate about. So I'm not sure why you seem to believe it's just him trying to sell his game.

They delivered Doom last year with a great framerate, and great visuals, and probably never expected they'd be porting it to a handheld. Expecting them to have a version ready that could have complete parity with PS4/Xbone is just unreasonable.
I'm not sure why you're using this as fuel for your crusade, when it's obvious they're quite devoted to bringing the best possible versions of their games they can. But they're also not miracle workers.



There was an audience for Tony Hawk games on Gameboy Advance.

A fully 3D game with licensed music that took full advantage of the PS2/GameCube/etc and people were buying the pixelated sprite version for GBA.

You guys are looking at this through the eyes of hardcore gamers with awesome setups and 4k displays. I bought Doom to showoff to some friends at work. Everyone I've shown has been blown away by how good it looks. Same with NBA 2K18. It's essentially one of the gen's prettiest games running decently on ab powerful handheld device (or weak home console--pick your poison). Remember this when you think of ports for PSP and Vita. The Switch version is almost fully featured AND portable. That's why I bought it.



Twitter: @d21lewis  --I'll add you if you add me!!

I've been playing on portable mode all day. I am impressed with it as a portable game, it looks and plays fantastic. I haven't played it on tv yet though. Probably won't if I'm being honest.



Around the Network
Shaunodon said:

 

Hold up. My original comment might have, in literal terms, mentioned low framerate and low resolution, but the comment wasn't about that. It wasn't about that at all. I brought them up as a matter of fact. Because, of course someone who is selling a product wouldn't want a negative aspect to be emphasized. That's the point of my original comment, not frame rate or resolution, but the developer's words. So again, I wasn't a "caricature" of what the developer is talking about, I literally didn't care about arguing resolution or framerate till you said I did. Then I felt I needed to expand on it. You know this, so I don't know why you're playing the fool. It takes but a glance at the original comment to understand my point, and it had nothing to do with the port quality but the developer's intent.

"They delivered Doom last year with a great framerate, and great visuals, and probably never expected they'd be porting it to a handheld. Expecting them to have a version ready that could have complete parity with PS4/Xbone is just unreasonable."

Wait a minute ... so your conclusion about DOOM on Switch is literally the same conclusion I have about the port ... yet you started a huge argument because ... ? Again, this just shows that you need to calm down, read a post and try to understand what's being communicated. I never criticized the port in my original comment(even further comments were just explaining the importance of resolution and frame rate, not that the port was bad). So there was no need for these rants to begin - all I was getting at was that the intent by the developer is uncertain and there is no use using their words as an argument or fact for why a port is great. Use someone else's words, use facts, use your opinions but their words? That is shakey ground.

"I'm not sure why you're using this as fuel for your crusade, when it's obvious they're quite devoted to bringing the best possible versions of their games they can. But they're also not miracle workers.""

Crusade? What are you even talking about? I'm not attacking the dev. I'm not attacking you. I'm agreeing with you and saying the dev did a good job. I'm just providing a counter-point as to why the devs words should not be used as a frame of discussion or argument. How is that a crusade? You keep saying you aren't making negative replies out of a specific bias, but then out of nowhere you say i'm on a crusade! Or earlier that no one asked for my viewpoint .. even though you continue to be interested in it. You keep bringing up these random characterizations that literally have no place in the discussion. Is a normal discussion too much to ask? 



Well, it is on a portable device, it is amazing however it looks or runs.



My grammar errors are justified by the fact that I am a brazilian living in Brazil. I am also very stupid.

Normchacho said:
I'm surprised the game came to Switch at all, but I can't see why someone would buy this version unless you don't have anything else to play it on. It looks and runs way worse and is more expensive than the other versions of this game.

I have the PC version; play it at 1440p. Bought the swirch version dor portability.



Everyone that is playing it says it plays good, it looks superb in handheld mode and its a lot of fun, I still haven't seen anyone saying the framerate is ruining their experience or anything remotely similar. Meanwhile forum dwellers only look at the numbers of a DF video to dismiss the game and say things like "why would anybody want to play this version when it runs worse?" is like... seriously? Are you asking why would anybody play the best portable FPS ever on their favourite console? lol

Last edited by Goodnightmoon - on 11 November 2017

Miyamotoo said:
Zekkyou said:

DF actually seem to think it's a very impressive port, but there's a limit to how much you can accomplish on the Switch with a title that was originally built for higher spec hardware. If Doom was a Switch only title it'd likley look and run better, but it'd also have been designed very differently. The big fire fights in particular seem to be a problem.

All in all i think the final result is about what many were expecting: It's a pretty shit 2017 home console title, but a technically exceptional portable one. I think most Switch owners interested in Doom will be okay with that.

PEEPer0nni said:

*Not a console with good specs. 

But it can't be! Nintendo can't do no wrong! It's the fault of the publishers. With such an attitude from Nintendo fanbase no wonder that they're always left in the dark in terms of 3rd party support.
Sony paid Capcom to keep MH:W out of the Switch! Am I doing this right?

nuckles87 said:

They took a game designed to run on current-gen hardware and crammed it onto a console powered by a tablet chip. And as someone who owns game on both Xbone and Switch, I can confirm it plays great. This isn’t just a playable port, it’s a damn impressive port, and demonstrates the ingenuity of the development that ported it and the flexibility of id’s technology.

Honestly, I think the most noticeable difference is the texture downgrade and the frame rate hitches, the latter of which doesn’t happen very often.

Johnw1104 said:

Actually, it's an excellent port. I'm really enjoying it... Seriously, it plays wonderfully and is easily the best FPS I've ever played on a portable system.

They're pushing the hardware to its limits; they can fix the frame stuttering, but otherwise this is about what we can expect from 3rd party ports.

 

Game runs and looks almost same in portable and handheld mode, It runs 576p in handheld mode and 612p in docked mode, thats very low difference in resolution, its hard to belive they couldnt make it run it at higher res than 612p in docked mode if portable mode is 576p. It seems to me they were focused on portable mode and didn't really pushed extra GPU power for docked mode that could result higher res.

Panic Button is also working on port of Rocket League, if they make Rocket League port again that has same resolution in portable and docked mode (and it seems it will be 720p in both modes), than my teorie is correct, that they (Panic Button) relly don't care about docked mode and that priority for them is portable mode.

Or...Panic Button is porting current gen games that have no business running on a mobile processor to the Switch, and you are overestimating how much extra power the Switch has in docked mode. It's not as if they are better examples of this kind of port.

Last edited by nuckles87 - on 12 November 2017