The claim I objected to was that these are the kind of results we'd see if games that aren't 1080/60fps on PS4/Xbone are brought to Switch. I simply pointed out that this isn't necessarily the case, as there are already examples of games that aren't 1080p/60fps on those platforms reaching Switch without results even remotely close to this bad.

Agreed, they deserve to be sued for this. It's textbook false advertising, it's like if they sold the Gameboy version of Mortal Kombat with footage of the arcade version claiming that's what it would look like on Gameboy.

I think what you're missing is Ark is significantly more GPU taxing. That's why Ark is sub-30 fps on X1 while Wolf II sits mostly at 50-60 fps at a similar resolution.

On the Switch, Wolf II reduced the GPU demand simply by reducing the resolution, graphics settings, making tweaks to the levels and cutting the frame cap in half. Even if the game was a solid 480p on Switch that be massive decrease in pixel count versus the X1 pixel count at its lowest.

 Ark could do many of the same tweaks, but they couldn't cut the frame rate in half to reduce GPU load.

Frankly, I'm not sure what direction they go with Ark on Switch. Even if they improve the resolution via optimization, its still hideous due to the low quality effects. Like DF suggest they need to get rid of some effects entirely, like maybe shadows, reflections, lighting, etc. Essentially it needs a more simplistic and cartoonish presentation because this ain't working.

Right, Ark is exceptional when it comes to bad Switch ports. I can't imagine we'll see worse than this.

Although, any game that's doing 60 fps with a reasonable resolution on X1 seems like a good candidate to work well on Switch. I mean the latest BF games would likely work better on Switch than the latest AC games.

Simple, they lied to drum up hype.

Yeah I think this is as bad as it gets honestly, it'd be tough to get any uglier than this muddy, buggy monstrosity. I'm still kinda shocked this was actually allowed to release like this in this day and age. Reminds me of when Life of Black Tiger hit PS4, that blew my mind too, that at no stage did somebody put their foot down and say "guys, no, this just won't fly."

And yeah, being 60fps on the stronger consoles definitely makes it easier to port to Switch.

I think Snake Pass is an interesting example of a cross-platform title, as another UE4 game. It's 864p/30fps on the base PS4/Xbone and 675p/30fps on Switch, though they make up the difference by parring back some of the game's more subtle effects like water caustics and depth of field, so that the basic look is quite similar while still closing the performance gap in ways that aren't super noticeable.

With some visual compromises Snake Pass could probably be a 60 fps game on base X1 and PS4 though. The Pro and X1X plays it at a locked 60 fps so the bottleneck on base consoles are probably not the CPU when you consider how easily the mid gen upgrades handle 60 fps. Any game the mid gen upgrades can play at 60 fps well are technically not CPU intensive games because they weren't given a huge upgrades per se.

Ark is also a GPU heavy game, which is probably why the Switch version has a surprisingly okay frame rate. I'm suggesting the base X1 and PS4 versions of Ark would actually run well if they lowered the visuals further. The X1X version even hits 60 fps if you drop all the visual settings to the lowest.

Frankly, the visuals of the mobile version of Ark seems like what all the consoles should have received. It looks okay, it looks kind of like an Elder Scrolls game on 7th gen consoles with better lighting.

Snake Pass in its current form is a 864p/30fps game on base PS4/X1 though, so clearly it's not just 1080p/60fps games that can make the jump to Switch in good shape, was all I meant.

Honestly if Ark was programmed with any competence whatsoever it could probably be a solid 1080p/60fps on PS4, 900p/30fps on Xbone, and maybe a dynamic 720p-648p/30fps on Switch with some settings tuned down. But it was apparentlyu coded by concussed monkeys.

That mobile version though does look surprisingly good, can't see why for the Switch version at least that wasn't the base.

Yeah I think this is as bad as it gets honestly, it'd be tough to get any uglier than this muddy, buggy monstrosity. I'm still kinda shocked this was actually allowed to release like this in this day and age. Reminds me of when Life of Black Tiger hit PS4, that blew my mind too, that at no stage did somebody put their foot down and say "guys, no, this just won't fly."

And yeah, being 60fps on the stronger consoles definitely makes it easier to port to Switch.

I think Snake Pass is an interesting example of a cross-platform title, as another UE4 game. It's 864p/30fps on the base PS4/Xbone and 675p/30fps on Switch, though they make up the difference by parring back some of the game's more subtle effects like water caustics and depth of field, so that the basic look is quite similar while still closing the performance gap in ways that aren't super noticeable.

Yeah I thought so too, it just looks totally unfinished, like a super early build of a game filled with placeholder assets where half the code isn't working properly yet.