Quantcast
Dragon Quest XI S reviews: Meta 90, OC 91

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Dragon Quest XI S reviews: Meta 90, OC 91

Some of you need to give it up. The games scored better, so far. Some of you say, the game looks blurry and has a horrible frame rate. Well, I havent seen a video on the switch version yet that shows the game to have a bad framerate. I know most of those complaining are gamers on one of the other 2, and when games like this pop up on any other system, they're Almost Beligerant. The graphics s are actually really close to the ps4, the fps is just about locked at 30. So.... what's the issue? Is it because you dont like when anyone else gets a few games?



Just an old man, a family man, and a gamer. My family is more important to me then life itself. 

Around the Network
SwitchUP said:
Some of you need to give it up. The games scored better, so far. Some of you say, the game looks blurry and has a horrible frame rate. Well, I havent seen a video on the switch version yet that shows the game to have a bad framerate. I know most of those complaining are gamers on one of the other 2, and when games like this pop up on any other system, they're Almost Beligerant. The graphics s are actually really close to the ps4, the fps is just about locked at 30. So.... what's the issue? Is it because you dont like when anyone else gets a few games?

No one in here said it looks blurry or horrible frame rate. And i dont think anyone here would care about it not being ps4 exclusive anymore. Maybe you assumed that because you are one of them who hates it? The switch version scored better because it added more content after 2 years? Maybe they should keep adding more content until it scores 100 on metacritic



Pinkie_pie said:
Shaunodon said:

Why should I have to explain it to you? Did you actually read all the reviews for all the games you've mentioned to see what their feelings were? I simply showed that this isn't the first time a newer version of a game has scored higher, and so there's precedence.

FFXV- "Although I appreciate what the Royal Pack has brought to the lore of Insomnia, its paltry additions may only appeal to the most hardcore fans who don’t mind replaying the definitive edition of a single chapter."

As for basically every other game you mention (you felt Fairy Fencer was worth mentioning?), they were all released well after the original versions, and thus would be expected to have vast improvements.


For the record, and most ironically, Persona 4 Golden also scored a few points higher on metacritic than it's original. Did you even bother to check either Persona 3 or 4 before making your rather ill-looking "guarantee" about Persona 5 Royal?

Ff15 royal has more content and only appeal to the most hardcore fans? Isnt that exactly the same with dragon quest 11 s? The last of us on ps4 released a year after the original. It has more content, looks better and runs at 60 fps but it didnt score higher than ps3 version. Gta 5 ps4 2 years after the original, dq 11 on ps4 already has enough content as it is, adding a few more after 2 years shouldnt make it have a higher score 

A good example of you still not bothering to actually read any of the reviews you're here to criticise.

Not sure why you think GTA V is somehow relevant when it already had a 97 metacritic to begin with. Scoring any higher than that is practically impossible on aggregate sites, otherwise it probably would have.

You just seem to be grasping at straws over a meaningless non-issue. More people having access to a great game is a positive thing, and having a substantially improved version of a great game is even better.



Shaunodon said:
Pinkie_pie said:

Ff15 royal has more content and only appeal to the most hardcore fans? Isnt that exactly the same with dragon quest 11 s? The last of us on ps4 released a year after the original. It has more content, looks better and runs at 60 fps but it didnt score higher than ps3 version. Gta 5 ps4 2 years after the original, dq 11 on ps4 already has enough content as it is, adding a few more after 2 years shouldnt make it have a higher score 

A good example of you still not bothering to actually read any of the reviews you're here to criticise.

Not sure why you think GTA V is somehow relevant when it already had a 97 metacritic to begin with. Scoring any higher than that is practically impossible on aggregate sites, otherwise it probably would have.

You just seem to be grasping at straws over a meaningless non-issue. More people having access to a great game is a positive thing, and having a substantially improved version of a great game is even better.

Did i say i have a problem of more people getting to play it? You think its correct that Ff15 royal didnt score better than the original but its fine that DQ 11 S scores better than the original? I dont need to read the review of ff15 royal because i played the original and the royal content. Its much improved more so than DQ 11 S with more bosses, new characters stories, new area, online mode and much more 



Pinkie_pie said:
Shaunodon said:

A good example of you still not bothering to actually read any of the reviews you're here to criticise.

Not sure why you think GTA V is somehow relevant when it already had a 97 metacritic to begin with. Scoring any higher than that is practically impossible on aggregate sites, otherwise it probably would have.

You just seem to be grasping at straws over a meaningless non-issue. More people having access to a great game is a positive thing, and having a substantially improved version of a great game is even better.

Did i say i have a problem of more people getting to play it? You think its correct that Ff15 royal didnt score better than the original but its fine that DQ 11 S scores better than the original? I dont need to read the review of ff15 royal because i played the original and the royal content. Its much improved more so than DQ 11 S with more bosses, new characters stories, new area, online mode and much more 

Just think of it as reviewers love Nintendo more than any others and move on...

Anyway nice to see it getting good scores. Looks like a worthy port indeed.



Around the Network

If we were talking about a game like DOOM, which was 1080p 60fps on PS4 and on Switch it's 720/576p at 30fps and also lost a lot of visual detail, I would agree with you: the Switch version should score less. Because the difference is big enough to make a relatively negative impact on both graphics and gameplay (although I must say DOOM is one of the best games the Switch can offer, third party or not, even at 30fps)

But DQXI? The game was 900p 30fps on PS4. On Switch it moves between 900p and 720p at the same framerate. Sure, it has some more pop in and texture detail is slightly reduced... but in general, the technical differences between Switch and PS4 are some of the smallest we have seen in an AAA current gen game ported to the Switch. It's so small that if I show you random screenshots of the Switch version many of you will probably say it's the PS4 one.

So, in a visual and technical level, DQXI on Switch can stand on his own as one of the prettiest games on the system. Add to that all the extra content in the form of 2D Mode, new story arcs for each character, more mounts, an orchestrated soundtrack and many other QoL improvements like speeding up battles... and you have definetly a much better game than PS4 and PC. And as such, it should score higher.



Random_Matt said:
Looks worse and performs worse, cannot take any of those reviews seriously.

Someone's bitter about the exclusive content I see.



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

Pinkie_pie said:
Shaunodon said:

A good example of you still not bothering to actually read any of the reviews you're here to criticise.

Not sure why you think GTA V is somehow relevant when it already had a 97 metacritic to begin with. Scoring any higher than that is practically impossible on aggregate sites, otherwise it probably would have.

You just seem to be grasping at straws over a meaningless non-issue. More people having access to a great game is a positive thing, and having a substantially improved version of a great game is even better.

Did i say i have a problem of more people getting to play it? You think its correct that Ff15 royal didnt score better than the original but its fine that DQ 11 S scores better than the original? I dont need to read the review of ff15 royal because i played the original and the royal content. Its much improved more so than DQ 11 S with more bosses, new characters stories, new area, online mode and much more 

Just sounds like your very subjective opinion over something completely meaningless. Especially when you're comparing it to a game you can't have played yet, on a system I assume you don't own.



Vodacixi said:
If we were talking about a game like DOOM, which was 1080p 60fps on PS4 and on Switch it's 720/576p at 30fps and also lost a lot of visual detail, I would agree with you: the Switch version should score less. Because the difference is big enough to make a relatively negative impact on both graphics and gameplay (although I must say DOOM is one of the best games the Switch can offer, third party or not, even at 30fps)

But DQXI? The game was 900p 30fps on PS4. On Switch it moves between 900p and 720p at the same framerate. Sure, it has some more pop in and texture detail is slightly reduced... but in general, the technical differences between Switch and PS4 are some of the smallest we have seen in an AAA current gen game ported to the Switch. It's so small that if I show you random screenshots of the Switch version many of you will probably say it's the PS4 one.

So, in a visual and technical level, DQXI on Switch can stand on his own as one of the prettiest games on the system. Add to that all the extra content in the form of 2D Mode, new story arcs for each character, more mounts, an orchestrated soundtrack and many other QoL improvements like speeding up battles... and you have definetly a much better game than PS4 and PC. And as such, it should score higher.

I finished it on ps4 and the game was already to large. Adding a few content after 2 years i think doesnt deserve a higher score. I also played the demo on switch and ps4 definitely look much better although i cant tell the difference of frame rate. 



Shiken said:
Random_Matt said:
Looks worse and performs worse, cannot take any of those reviews seriously.

Someone's bitter about the exclusive content I see.

Nah, frame rate far outweighs that. 30/sub 30 is barley playable, should always be an automatic penalty in reviews, the only reason it is not is to keep the console gamers happy. 720p and crappy visuals, more point docking should occur, PC versions should always come on top, period.