By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Switch is performance wise between Wii U and Xbox One

SpokenTruth said:
Drakrami said:
Whats the point even if it is easy to develop? Switch will never get 3rd party support with that low horsepower.

Out of the 10 launch titles in the US, 7 were 3rd party.

I mean AAA games, not shovelware and indies. 



Around the Network
SpokenTruth said:
Safiir said:

I agree with the rest of the post but not with the bolded part. Power has a lot to do with ease of development. If you have to spend extra time optimizing the game so it runs the way you want it to run, then having great tools, great APIs, great libraries, etc might still not be enough to offset it. Obviously it would be dependent on the game and the vision of the devolopers but it is an absolutely important point to condiser.

That's still irrelevant.  That means ease of development is only a factor of what you are trying to do with it.   If I wanted to push the PS4 to run some high end CERN physics application, that would require an insane amount of work to get it to do anything.

Ease of development means exactly what it says it means.  It's a factor of the programmer having any easier time developing, not a factor of the hardware having an easy time processing.   It means it is easy for the programmer to work with.  It DOES NOT mean a programmer can make it do things it physically can't do.

I'm not talking about making it do things it can't do. I'm talking about making it do things you want it to do, that it can theoretically do. Look at Zelda for example. It looks quite good. You won't see a 3rd party game looking this good on the switch. That's not because it can't be done (obviously it can) but the time required for squeezing out this kind of performance would be prohibitive for any but the biggest developers which would prefer releasing for more powerful hardware since it can simply bruteforce it without requiring an excessive amount of optimization.



Alkibiádēs said:
potato_hamster said:

So the Switch is going to get all of the lovely little indies that the PS3, Xbox 360, Wii U, PS4, Xbox One, 3DS and PS Vita get already. That's splendid news from months ago.

I didn't know the Vita was getting Yooka-Laylee and Rime. 

Stop trying to downplay so much, it's pretty obvious what he was talking about. You're basically saying the PS3 is easier to develop for than the SNES because "it's more powerful". That's not what he's talking about and it's so obvious it shouldn't even need to be told. 

"Ohh shit, he threw the Vita in there, and the Vita isn't getting very many indie games anymore considering it's pretty much been abandoned by Sony at this point! I'll ignore all of the indie titles the Switch has or is getting that the Vita already has, and the other six platforms potato mentioned, because these two games aren't coming to the Vita! His entire point is invalid!"

It's amazing how you think.



Miyamotoo said:
Mr Puggsly said:
I'm sure performance is a lot closer to Wii U than X1.

I mean all Switch did for Breath of the Wild is raise the resolution from 720p to 900p. But still impressive for a portable device.

In raw power Switch is closer to Wii U, but technically it's much closer to X1 (and maybe above X1 more modern tech/arhicture).

Well Switch did raise MK8 resolution from 720p to 1080p, or Fast RMX from 720p to 1080p with better visuals and frame rate. One game doesn't mean much.

 

 

SpokenTruth said:

Ease of development does not equate to everbody jumping on board to develop for it. 

Why are so many of you bent on "ease of development" = "3rd party development parity"?

It means what it means...it's easy to develop for.   Great tools, great APIs, great libraries, etc...how that is supposed to mysteriously translate into 3rd parties shifting their resources (which are usually planned out 5 years in advance) to Switch is beyond me.  

 

Just stop.  It means it's easy to develop for.   It doesn't mean you can slap a PS4 game on it an hour and call it day.  It just means the average effort required to extract a given task from a piece of hardware is easier on Switch than PS4.  Nothing to do with power.  Nothing to do with 3rd parties altering their 5 year plans.  And everything to do with being easy to develop for.

Agree.

It's kind of a stupid statement then, with no context. It's like saying the NES is easy to develop for ... Okay, lol 



potato_hamster said:
Alkibiádēs said:

I didn't know the Vita was getting Yooka-Laylee and Rime. 

Stop trying to downplay so much, it's pretty obvious what he was talking about. You're basically saying the PS3 is easier to develop for than the SNES because "it's more powerful". That's not what he's talking about and it's so obvious it shouldn't even need to be told. 

"Ohh shit, he threw the Vita in there, and the Vita isn't getting very many indie games anymore considering it's pretty much been abandoned by Sony at this point! I'll ignore all of the indie titles the Switch has or is getting that the Vita already has, and the other six platforms potato mentioned, because these two games aren't coming to the Vita! His entire point is invalid!"

It's amazing how you think.

The Switch is a new platform that is not backwards compatible. Indies and developers are porting their current titles to it since it is lower risk and a normal thing to do if you want to prepare the ground during the launch period. We've seen this before.

If anything they should be porting older classics due to the easy development mentioned here.



@Twitter | Switch | Steam

You say tomato, I say tomato 

"¡Viva la Ñ!"

Around the Network

Between Wii U and Xbox One?

it's cool that it's easy to develop for.



bigtakilla said:
Miyamotoo said:

In raw power Switch is closer to Wii U, but technically it's much closer to X1 (and maybe above X1 more modern tech/arhicture).

Well Switch did raise MK8 resolution from 720p to 1080p, or Fast RMX from 720p to 1080p with better visuals and frame rate. One game doesn't mean much.

 

 

Agree.

It's kind of a stupid statement then, with no context. It's like saying the NES is easy to develop for ... Okay, lol 

No it's not, statement is very simple and clear, and thats "is easy very to develop for Switch, even easier than for PS4". Also, we received similar statements from multiple sources that Switch is very easy for developing:

 

“I would say the Switch is light years ahead of the Wii U,” he said. “It’s an incredibly easy system to develop for, even compared to other consoles.”

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=226502&page=1


“The Switch is, by far the easiest and most programmer friendly so far,” he said. “I know this sounds like lip service to Nintendo, but it’s actually not. If this wasn’t true, we wouldn’t be able to get these games up and running as quickly as we have, and we wouldn’t be able to have a launch title. It’s light years ahead of what we were doing with Wii U.”

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=225763&page=1



Wow, Factor 5 ! Reminds me the good old days of Gamecube !



Barkley said:
walsufnir said:

How does PS4's performance correlate with what Eggebrecht said? He said it is as easy or even easier to develop games for the Switch.

How does it not? Development of games that demand a lot of power will obviously be harder on a system with less power available to it.

The PS1 was easier to develop for eventhough it was weaker than N64. Power has nothing to do with ease of development.



Miyamotoo said:
Mr Puggsly said:
I'm sure performance is a lot closer to Wii U than X1.

I mean all Switch did for Breath of the Wild is raise the resolution from 720p to 900p. But still impressive for a portable device.

In raw power Switch is closer to Wii U, but technically it's much closer to X1 (and maybe above X1 more modern tech/arhicture).

Well Switch did raise MK8 resolution from 720p to 1080p, or Fast RMX from 720p to 1080p with better visuals and frame rate. One game doesn't mean much.

More modern tech doesn't mean a lot if it doesn't have the power to really push beyond what Wii U is doing. Granted its doing Wii U content at higher resolutions. For example, if you bu a new low end card, it can do the modern effects but not particularly well. I expect a lot of Switch content to be in the realm of Wii U's capabilities.

Very curious to see Mario Odyssey, that should demonstrate what the hardware can really do. Even more so than Breath of the Wild.



Recently Completed
River City: Rival Showdown
for 3DS (3/5) - River City: Tokyo Rumble for 3DS (4/5) - Zelda: BotW for Wii U (5/5) - Zelda: BotW for Switch (5/5) - Zelda: Link's Awakening for Switch (4/5) - Rage 2 for X1X (4/5) - Rage for 360 (3/5) - Streets of Rage 4 for X1/PC (4/5) - Gears 5 for X1X (5/5) - Mortal Kombat 11 for X1X (5/5) - Doom 64 for N64 (emulator) (3/5) - Crackdown 3 for X1S/X1X (4/5) - Infinity Blade III - for iPad 4 (3/5) - Infinity Blade II - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Infinity Blade - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Wolfenstein: The Old Blood for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Origins for X1 (3/5) - Uncharted: Lost Legacy for PS4 (4/5) - EA UFC 3 for X1 (4/5) - Doom for X1 (4/5) - Titanfall 2 for X1 (4/5) - Super Mario 3D World for Wii U (4/5) - South Park: The Stick of Truth for X1 BC (4/5) - Call of Duty: WWII for X1 (4/5) -Wolfenstein II for X1 - (4/5) - Dead or Alive: Dimensions for 3DS (4/5) - Marvel vs Capcom: Infinite for X1 (3/5) - Halo Wars 2 for X1/PC (4/5) - Halo Wars: DE for X1 (4/5) - Tekken 7 for X1 (4/5) - Injustice 2 for X1 (4/5) - Yakuza 5 for PS3 (3/5) - Battlefield 1 (Campaign) for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Syndicate for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: MW Remastered for X1 (4/5) - Donkey Kong Country Returns for 3DS (4/5) - Forza Horizon 3 for X1 (5/5)