How do the visuals on the Nintendo Switch compare to those of the Xbox 360 & PS3?

[curl-6]

quickrick said:

curl-6 said:

Not necessarily true at all. Would you say Goldeneye on N64 (realistic) is more demanding than Ratchet & Clank on PS4? (Cartoon)

A game with a cartoony art style can easily be more demanding than a game with a realistic style if it uses more advanced rendering techniques, more memory, higher resolution and framerate, etc.

Technically yes, but in reality, at least with the current applications of NRR in games, NRR is less demanding. You don't need anything like as many texture and surface layers as a photorealistic car, and you don't need subsurface scattering and super-detailed facial textures. In fact painterly textures can get away with being lower resolution. Conceptually, a game could render photorealistically and then apply a transmogrification filter to make it look like a painting for maximal demands on the hardware, but that's not likely to happen, making non-photorealistic rendering a 'cheaper' rendering approach (you can still saturate hardware with. i'm also not arguing that you cant get away with having a much better looking game aesthetically with much less demand on performance, just that the reason that is, is because you are literally doing less, and human beings cant tell because its not a direct comparison to reality, not because the style magically makes it easier on performance in a 1:1 situation. 

That's an oversimplification. A game with a cartoonish style can have more advanced and demanding effects than a game with a realistic style.

Would you say that this:

Is more demanding than this: