By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - DF : Ark Survival Evolved on Switch - 360p (docked) / 216p (handheld) goodness!

 

Would you be proud to launch a game like this?

yes 11 20.37%
 
no 43 79.63%
 
Total:54
curl-6 on 14 December 2018
Barozi said:
curl-6 said:

Wolfenstein II isn't 1080/60fps on Xbox One, it's 810p, yet it was ported to Switch fairly well.

Of course it isn't since PS4 and Xbox One aren't identical in power and developers try to push PS4 as much as possible. I just didn't want to make the post more complicated. 810p is a poor job indeed as it's usually 900p for X1 when PS4 runs it at 1080p. It also doesn't run at a locked 60FPS on both consoles, but you get the idea. 1080p 60FPS is easily portable to Switch. A little below that is tricky but possible. Something significantly lower than that (900p30FPS/720p60FPS on X1 or 1080p30FPS/900p60FPS on PS4) is going to be a huge problem and everything below that (Ark, PUBG and maybe others) will look exactly like the pics above.

Wolf 2 on Xbone wasn't necessarily poorly done, the game's base technical makeup may simply have emphasized the areas where the system bottlenecks the most.

At any rate, I don't think Ark is really a great example as it's a notoriously ugly and unoptimized game on every platform.



Around the Network
Barozi on 14 December 2018
Miyamotoo said:
Barozi said:

While not as drastic, similar results could be seen if devs ported other games to Switch that aren't targeting 1080p 60FPS on PS4/X1.

You could see similar results only if devs that are porting game dont know meaning of optimisation, game is mess on every platform and probably worst optimised game of generation on every platform. For comparision RDR2 thats looks like most impresive and demanding game of generation works at 1080p on base PS4, while Ark Survival Evolved on base PS4 runs at around 640p with much worse frame rate.

That's why I said "not as drastic". I know the game is terribly optimized on every platform. RDR2 would definitely perform and look better than Ark on Switch. But better doesn't mean that it would look and run in an acceptable state.



Luke888 on 14 December 2018

This is some Telltale Batman level of resolution



Thechalkblock on 14 December 2018

wow. definitely needs to be released at a cheaper price point in that case. whoever buys this game is sure to be disappointed



Barozi on 14 December 2018
curl-6 said:
Barozi said:

Of course it isn't since PS4 and Xbox One aren't identical in power and developers try to push PS4 as much as possible. I just didn't want to make the post more complicated. 810p is a poor job indeed as it's usually 900p for X1 when PS4 runs it at 1080p. It also doesn't run at a locked 60FPS on both consoles, but you get the idea. 1080p 60FPS is easily portable to Switch. A little below that is tricky but possible. Something significantly lower than that (900p30FPS/720p60FPS on X1 or 1080p30FPS/900p60FPS on PS4) is going to be a huge problem and everything below that (Ark, PUBG and maybe others) will look exactly like the pics above.

Wolf 2 on Xbone wasn't necessarily poorly done, the game's base technical makeup may simply have emphasized the areas where the system bottlenecks the most.

At any rate, I don't think Ark is really a great example as it's a notoriously ugly and unoptimized game on every platform.

The base X1 version of Wolfenstein II is indeed a bit poorly done. That's easy to see because Xbox One X can run it natively at 4k. Something that should only work with 900p games (as MS promised and is usually the case). All current gen consoles have the same bottleneck. CPU power. Even the X only has a maginally better CPU, so it's definitely not a problem in this case. GPU-wise X1 and PS4 aren't that far apart to justify a 44% lower resolution and worse framerate (usually it's 37% lower resolution and near identical framerate).



Around the Network
curl-6 on 14 December 2018
Barozi said:
curl-6 said:

Wolf 2 on Xbone wasn't necessarily poorly done, the game's base technical makeup may simply have emphasized the areas where the system bottlenecks the most.

At any rate, I don't think Ark is really a great example as it's a notoriously ugly and unoptimized game on every platform.

The base X1 version of Wolfenstein II is indeed a bit poorly done. That's easy to see because Xbox One X can run it natively at 4k. Something that should only work with 900p games (as MS promised and is usually the case). All current gen consoles have the same bottleneck. CPU power. Even the X only has a maginally better CPU, so it's definitely not a problem in this case. GPU-wise X1 and PS4 aren't that far apart to justify a 44% lower resolution and worse framerate (usually it's 37% lower resolution and near identical framerate).

Xbox One X has 326GB/s of RAM bandwidth to just 68.3GB/s on the base model, perhaps that's where the bottleneck lies.



Mr Puggsly on 14 December 2018
haxxiy said:

The lowest it got was 304x170 on undocked, that's some Gameboy level stuff. Not that it was unexpected, this game is just terribly unoptmized in every aspect.

Edit - my mistake, that's actually on docked mode. Oh my.

This was unexpected though. On paper it sounds like a big task bringing this to Switch but a mobile version does exist... so there is probably a foundation there for Switch.

In reality this looks like the laziest port job ever. Not even trying to build around the limitations of Switch.

I find this port interesting simply because this means just about any 8th gen game could function on Switch.



Recently Completed: 
River City: Rival Showdown for 3DS (3/5) - River City: Tokyo Rumble for 3DS (4/5) - Zelda: BotW for Wii U (5/5) - Zelda: BotW for Switch (5/5) - Zelda: Link's Awakening for Switch (4/5) - Rage 2 for X1X (4/5) - Rage for 360 (3/5) - Streets of Rage 4 for X1/PC (4/5) - Gears 5 for X1X (5/5) - Mortal Kombat 11 for X1X (5/5) - Doom 64 for N64 (emulator) (3/5) - Crackdown 3 for X1S/X1X (4/5) - Infinity Blade III - for iPad 4 (3/5) - Infinity Blade II - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Infinity Blade - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Wolfenstein: The Old Blood for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Origins for X1 (3/5) - Uncharted: Lost Legacy for PS4 (4/5) - EA UFC 3 for X1 (4/5) - Doom for X1 (4/5) - Titanfall 2 for X1 (4/5) - Super Mario 3D World for Wii U (4/5) - South Park: The Stick of Truth for X1 BC (4/5) - Call of Duty: WWII for X1 (4/5) -Wolfenstein II for X1 - (4/5) - Dead or Alive: Dimensions for 3DS (4/5) - Marvel vs Capcom: Infinite for X1 (3/5) - Halo Wars 2 for X1/PC (4/5) - Halo Wars: DE for X1 (4/5) - Tekken 7 for X1 (4/5) - Injustice 2 for X1 (4/5) - Yakuza 5 for PS3 (3/5) - Battlefield 1 (Campaign) for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Syndicate for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: MW Remastered for X1 (4/5) - Donkey Kong Country Returns for 3DS (4/5) - Forza Horizon 3 for X1 (5/5)

haxxiy on 14 December 2018
Mr Puggsly said:
haxxiy said:

The lowest it got was 304x170 on undocked, that's some Gameboy level stuff. Not that it was unexpected, this game is just terribly unoptmized in every aspect.

Edit - my mistake, that's actually on docked mode. Oh my.

This was unexpected though. On paper it sounds like a big task bringing this to Switch but a mobile version does exist... so there is probably a foundation there for Switch.

In reality this looks like the laziest port job ever. Not even trying to build around the limitations of Switch.

I find this port interesting simply because this means just about any 8th gen game could function on Switch.

This game is the laziest ever, not just the laziest port I'd say. At least in terms of how well it is running. This is supposed to be UE4 for God's sake, not some obscure third party engine.

Even though it's trash, it still sells tons because it occupies a niche no one so far has cared much about (dinosaurs!).



 

 

 

 

 

DonFerrari on 14 December 2018

I have played and survived since Atari, Phantom System (NES rip-off) at friends, Genesis/SNES, PS1/Saturn/N64, PS2/GC, PS3/X360/Wii and now, and this still is a very bad showing for the time it is unveiling. This isn't the 80's.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

DonFerrari on 14 December 2018
Signalstar said:
Bring on the RDR2 port next!

Bring PUBG =p

Oneeee-Chan!!! said:

https://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/ark-survival-evolved

Metascore  70 

It's a mediocre game.

70 is just to much for this atrocity.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."