Quantcast
Wolfenstein 2 on Switch is a good product if you don't care about resolution...

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Wolfenstein 2 on Switch is a good product if you don't care about resolution...

Thing is that Wolfenstein is far from terrible or not playable. Everyone would prefer ifd it didn't get as blurry as it can get, but basically that's it.



Around the Network

After replaying some VERY choppy N64 games recently, I can safely say that I don't give more than just a few fucks about resolution.

Those game wanted to impress with textures and resolution because they were Expansion Pack enabled, and they suffered horrible frame rate dips as a result, and seemingly had to be reconfigured late in development to even be playable, with taking out enemies, cutting draw distance, finding ways of reducing area sizes and so on.

In a game like this, it's the performance that matters. And particularly for a port of this caliber, it's vital that the overall look and feel is the same.
I can take a resolution hit. It's not like it's a game about sniping at long distances anyway.



Ganoncrotch said:
Naum said:
By looking at the replies from this thread and the locked one is that in the end what upset people the most isnt the framerate or resolution of the game but instead that people can actually enjoy the game and have zero problems with it while playing it on the Switch.

"It hurts me to my very core that someone can play a game on this system when I think of my x" screen that I play games on...."

I'm like... time to hit my Switches Fortnite Icon and get back into a game....

 

Nothing beats playing games on a 130" Screen imo, regardless of the resolution. But then again, I grew up playing 4 player Goldeneye at about 10fps on a 16" portable, I think going through things like that hardened me to just enjoy gaming, no matter how big or small, just love the hobby for all it gives.

Amen, brother.



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

Podings said:

After replaying some VERY choppy N64 games recently, I can safely say that I don't give more than just a few fucks about resolution.

Those game wanted to impress with textures and resolution because they were Expansion Pack enabled, and they suffered horrible frame rate dips as a result, and seemingly had to be reconfigured late in development to even be playable, with taking out enemies, cutting draw distance, finding ways of reducing area sizes and so on.

In a game like this, it's the performance that matters. And particularly for a port of this caliber, it's vital that the overall look and feel is the same.
I can take a resolution hit. It's not like it's a game about sniping at long distances anyway.

I agree with you, too!

I've been gaming for as long as I can remember and I don't understand the mindset of the current gen gamer. I've played games like Double Dragon on the NES where it didn't even have the ability to have a two player mode! Games like Splinter Cell on the GameCube where whole levels had to be cut out or redesigned. GoldenEye on the DS where I was just happy the game didn't explode.

 

This current gen where "It's 60fps on console A but it dips to 59fps on console B!" just makes my head hurt. Yes, I purchased a PS4 Pro and XBO X on day one but I'm more concerned with having the ability to play what I want the best way possible rather than how it compares to other systems. During the 6th gen, we couldn't care less if Resident Evil 4 ran better on the GameCube. We were just happy to have it on the PS2.

 

I have Wolfenstein for the Switch so I can play it at work. It's the best option and the game (in my opinion) is a marvel to behold. I didn't think it could be done. 



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

I for my part am happy that we got such ports at all on Nintendo Switch. More important than resolution, effects and framerates is how well they sell on Nintendo Switch. If they sell good enough we will have other ports in the future. I think Doom and L.A. Noire did ok so far, Skyrim sold over 1 million incl. digital sales, that's a pretty good number.

I wonder what Nintendo's business plan was for 3rd parties. Assuming that the Nintendo Switch will do well, what kind of support did they expect from thirds? Did they really think that it will get lots of big budget ports or did they banking completely on indies only? They knew that the Nintendo Switch was considerably less powerful than Xbox One and PS4, so I don't really think that they had big budget titles in mind when thinking on thirds. I think they're banking on partnerships with Nintendo IP's in it like the successful Mario + Rabbits. I strongly think we will see more of those partnerships in the future, not just with Ubisoft. How about a Call of Duty where Samus Aran is selectable? Or a whole mini-story part with her?



Around the Network

Now, if they could just figure out how to make the games smaller. My 240GB card didn't last nearly as long as I thought it would. I wanted to go full digital but games like this, NBA 2K18, WWE 2K18 and others are ruthless in their consumption of storage space!



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

It looks awesome really, everytime I see it I am surprised, but just don't put it next to the PS4 or XBOX1...The gap is too much.

It is certainly ok for casual gaming but that's all..As a speedrunner I would never touch the ~28 fps version of the switch.

This port has acheived 1 thing only for me : it answered this question by a yes :

"can the Switch perform significantly better than the XBOX360 ?"



Current PB on Secret of Mana remake : 2h27 (World Record)
Strongest worldwide achievement on TGM : 1st European S13
Current PB on Power Ranger (Game Gear) : 10min06 (World Record)

Amnesia said:

"can the Switch perform significantly better than the XBOX360 ?"

I knew that before any games needed to be released to demonstrate that. ;)



captain carot said:
Thing is that Wolfenstein is far from terrible or not playable. Everyone would prefer ifd it didn't get as blurry as it can get, but basically that's it.

Agree, most people here just commenting numbers (in this case resolution).



Miyamotoo said:
captain carot said:
Thing is that Wolfenstein is far from terrible or not playable. Everyone would prefer ifd it didn't get as blurry as it can get, but basically that's it.

Agree, most people here just commenting numbers (in this case resolution).

Well, resolution is indeed really, really, really low.

My main issue with this sort of ports is praise that Panic Button gets for them, when it, more or less, boils down to half the frame rate, lower resolution, and then start turning stuff off and optimizing thing or two. I have no doubt they actually know their job and that they could've actually made the game still look good by doing better otpimizations and cutting other stuff before resolution, but I think that Bethesda (or Zenimax, whoever is paying for port) were just being cheap about it.

Eventually, people vote with their money, so whether is someone bothered with resolution and this approach to porting is up to them, but this is the reason why I don't find Doom and W2 ports worth the praise they're getting.