curl-6 said:
Otter said:
I actually disagree in the sense that most switch owners own another platform... So it's a natural part of their decision making to weigh up where they want to play a game and whether a games quality on Switch makes it worth a double dip.
This doesn't invalidate the Switch 2 version or mean it's a deal breaker for everyone but it does shift significantly the player base. I think this matters less to games that are significantly able to sell to children though.
For sure DF is graphic focused in a way that doesn't reflect the average consumer, but the gulf in these very ambitious ports is definitely understood by most the audience.
Again we see this in consumer behaviour. Games that play and look especially well on Switch 1 sell much better on it and actually sometimes outsell the PS5 and PC versions, because people know they are not suffering any huge compromise. It's a very holistic experience of knowing something is well suited to the platform, so not anything as specific as "Switch 2 version has too much disocclusion fissile or bad frame pacing".
Again, this isn't about validating/invalidating a port, but simply DF is not being out of touch highlighting the struggle of Outlaws. People made it seem like they spent 15mins complaining about something very niche and attacking the worthiness of the Switch 2 hardware.
|
If people cared strongly about high end graphics then they wouldn't buy a Switch 2 in the first place as it is well known to be mid-range portable tech.
The DF guys are tech enthusiasts, most of the general audience is not; John for instance got annoyed by Donkey Kong Bananza using FSR rather than DLSS, but I'd bet money that 90% of DK's audience couldn't even tell you what DLSS or FSR are.
|
I love DLSS and know what it is, but even I don't give a fuck about this issue, lol. DK Bananza looks great with a very nice and clean image quality to my eyes. I don't really care if its FSR or DLSS, FSR is likely just because it started development on Switch 1.
