By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
bonzobanana on 21 September 2017
Edit Thread
Miyamotoo said:
bonzobanana said:

Lets wait to see how portable mode turns out. I certainly do feel there is a cpu deficit in the Switch design but only by the ratio I have already stated based on benchmarks and evidence. We don't know how much dynamic resolution is being used or seen final retail code. It doesn't matter about age only peformance. The wii u was based on later technology but often performed below ps3/360 levels because it was low performance costed hardware. Again we had all this before with Nintendo fans claiming wii and wii u were more powerful than they were but the facts got through in the end and those fans were shown to be incorrect. Lets not forget not only do they have to make the game run at a much lower performance level in portable mode but give reasonable battery life too. There may be other power saving issues we haven't seen yet that the retail code will get. Again this is all premature we need to see final retail code. There are also other factors like compression on cartridges. Rayman Legends has a lower frame rate and inferior graphcs on Switch than wii u. Not because of any shortfall in Switch performance but because of minimising file size with heavy compression. That could also be a factor with larger games like this for retail code. It's naive in the extreme to base performance on what publishers and developers want you to see before the game is launched. 

Also I've been writing in the past about the Switch being capable of running VR versions of many 360 and PS3 games if a VR headset becomes available for Switch like the Nintendo patents. I'm fully aware of the superiority of Switch over 360 and PS3 in many areas. Admittedly I believe such a headset will be reliant on a power connection so it can run at docked performance level though.

Fact that some multiplatform games were performed below PS3/360 is not prove that Wii U hardware is weaker, simple because devs learned to use most of PS3/360 hardware in 2012, while devs in 2012. were just started working on Wii U hardware and they stilld didnt learn to proparly use it not to mentione to use most of them. Just compare PS3/360 multi platform games from their first year 2005/2006 with multi platform games from 2012/2013, or Wii U multiplatform game from 2012. with  those PS3/Xbox360 games from 2005/2006. and you will get picture, we talking about night and day difference here (for isnstance CoD 3 from 2006. and CoD Black Ops 2 from 2012). And fact is that Wii U is more capable than PS3/Xbox360, Wii U has less capable CPU, but has more modern and capable GPU and 2-4x more RAM, so used in right way, Wii U hardware could achive more. Evrething we saw until now tells us how much more capibile Switch is compared to PS3/360/WiiU (again, Switch currently hardly has any game that runs at 720p (they are 900p-1080p in most cases), while only few were above 720p on PS3/Xbox360 and we actualy had plenty of sub HD games, that fact also tells you what is difference in power, and devs yet need to start taking out most of Switch hardware). Rayman Legends is heavily compressed on Switch and that's actually only game that has some miniuses compared to PS3/360/WiiU versions of games.

Nintendo definitely has some VR/AR plans with Switch, what exactly it remains to see, they definitely have lotsa a interesting ideas and patents.

Not some, almost all and the learning curve for wii u with a simple 3 core CPU arrangement without multi-threading and well documented radeon gpu is not going to be hard. It's a mute point anyway the wii u is done and so we can see exactly how it performed for its whole life cycle and that is it performed very badly.