HoangNhatAnh said:
Then why are you here and attack Switch ver for being 25-30fps? |
If you weren't so rushed to try and attack me you would have understood firsthand without even needing to reply.
I was questioning people that say gameplay is the most important thing and if it isn't 60fps it isn't worth playing. If they believe both are true, why are they praising the port? Now do you understand?
HoangNhatAnh said:
You forgot DS game was even 190p, Switch low resolution is nothing compared to it. Also ARK: Survival Evolved, WWE2k18 or Saints Row: The Third on Switch, did you forget those games even existed? "Are you sure you're not a child?" just like when you made up about the word "impossible" and didn't admit it? OK, heh |
One thing that you expect when generations move forward is that resolution go up.
PS5 and Xbox next not being 4k won't be looked fine because PS360 were more often than not below 720p.
HoangNhatAnh said:
As long as it have very beautiful graphic, the casual audience will still grab it like crazy. And admit? Like when you ignored on purpose what i said about the word "impossible" for many times? Yeah sure, heh |
How beautiful would be this 240p/15fps on Switch? Do you really think people would flock to purchase it?
I'm very confused on how you define beautiful graphic.
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."