sc94597 said:
HintHRO said:
There are remasters from PS3 games to PS4 that perform at 60fps and full-HD (GoW III and TLoU). This is especially impressive when you consider the big differences between PS3 and PS4 hardware. Nintendo is king of optimization, even (way) better than Sony. If they could get Zelda 60fps/1080p on Switch, they would do it.
|
These were dedicated remasters that released many months after the PS4. If they were launch titles 60fps would not have been guaranteed, likely not because of performance problems, but because of the glitches caused by changing framerates for titles which were not intended to run at more than one framerate.
Breath of the Wild Switch released with the Wii U version and it is obvious that the game was rushed because of the performance problems (caused by data streaming) on both platforms. Furthermore, Breath of the Wild is a very cpu-intensive title when compared with GoW III and TLoU -- which rely on scripted events. It is much more difficult to get a CPU-intensive game at that 60fps benchmark. A more comparable example is Grand Theft Auto V on PS4/XBO vs. PS3/360 where all versions aim for 30fps.
|
sc94597 said:
HintHRO said:
That's not the point. Switch will never be able to run MH World. Have you seen how stunning it looks?
|
There is nothing technically impressive about Monster Hunter World. It is only stunning relative to the PS2 level visuals that the series has had for the past ten years. Breath of the Wild has more impressive physics/cpu-heavy tasks, and the visuals are pretty sub-par for PS4/XBO standards, with a few downgrades the game would be scalable to the Switch in the same way the PS2 games were scalable to the PSP portable titles.
|
I keep trying to tell people this. The only "impressive" thing in Monster Hunter World is the lighting and draw distance for certain details. Both pretty easily adjusted.
