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

Forums - Gaming - Digital Foundry: Minecraft technical analysis Switch vs PS4

Bandorr said:
What an odd comparison. They must be really hard up if they are comparing Minecraft versions..

Based on the comments: Wii U has 11 chunks, and windows 10 is around 50 ish?

A wii U vs Switch one may be more helpful. Both being "Off TV".

Huh? They do these types of videos on all types of games.



Around the Network
Bandorr said:
What an odd comparison. They must be really hard up if they are comparing Minecraft versions..

Based on the comments: Wii U has 11 chunks, and windows 10 is around 50 ish?

A wii U vs Switch one may be more helpful. Both being "Off TV".

There is nothing odd about it. They do it with pretty much every relevant game and Minecraft is one of the most successful games ever made. It's one of the games you would expect them to do it the most with. 

Just because it's not a game with crazy good played models or whatever doesn't mean that frame rate, resolution or drawing distance is nothing people care about it this game. 



Chunks...? Sounds racist. What are "chunks?"



LivingMetal said:
Chunks...? Sounds racist. What are "chunks?"

Think of minecraft as a massive grid.

A chunk is 16x16 blocks on that grid. That includes everything from bedrock to the sky limit.
As you walk around the world, 16x16 chunks are loaded in/unloaded.

Minecraft can actually get technically demanding when loading a ton of chunks, especially on the CPU and Ram. None of the consoles have been able to match the PC thus far.




www.youtube.com/@Pemalite

Bandorr said:
Leadified said:

Huh? They do these types of videos on all types of games.

Sure but Minecraft? Just feels odd. Perhaps not.

I just can't see many people being interested in it. The comparison that is, not the game. People will get it for the switch because it is portable. It wasn't on the 3ds, and the vita isn't exactly a big seller.

So even if it ran way worse in everything they would still get it. It having "a better framerate" I doubt means little to kids.

You could make the same argument for games like Snake Pass and Lego City Underground, which they've also done videos on and got a respectable amount of views.



Around the Network
Leadified said:
Bandorr said:

Sure but Minecraft? Just feels odd. Perhaps not.

I just can't see many people being interested in it. The comparison that is, not the game. People will get it for the switch because it is portable. It wasn't on the 3ds, and the vita isn't exactly a big seller.

So even if it ran way worse in everything they would still get it. It having "a better framerate" I doubt means little to kids.

You could make the same argument for games like Snake Pass and Lego City Underground, which they've also done videos on and got a respectable amount of views.

Its funny because they barely ever did indie comparisions before.......all of sudden since thats all the switch has they started doing them every other week. Chosing the worst games to compare....games that dont take anything 



Preston Scott

Are those the total chunks rendered at any time or the radius?
Sounds like a radius to me (or it would be very little), which seems to be confirmed by the Wiki
7 chunks in portable mode = 225 chunks rendered
12 chunks in docked mode = 625 chunks rendered
18 chunks on ps4 / Xbox One = 1369 chunks rendered
http://minecraft.gamepedia.com/Options
(Fov should affect that too though)

So Switch renders at 44% of the resolution, 45%/16% of the world detail docked/undocked.
That's still not bad compared to 512 gflops for Switch vs 1.84 teraflops for ps4 and it runs slightly better.



DaveTheMinion13 said:
Leadified said:

You could make the same argument for games like Snake Pass and Lego City Underground, which they've also done videos on and got a respectable amount of views.

Its funny because they barely ever did indie comparisions before.......all of sudden since thats all the switch has they started doing them every other week. Chosing the worst games to compare....games that dont take anything 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eUqosQazzZE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C9dgvSUg3KI&list=PLY9cZ8nX4xmmynNEmbkE87eqTWflnADGP&index=104

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HKk_OgZss1Q

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bwr41T_Gkpg&t=4s

Come again? They've always compared a range of different types of games. Btw stop calling games that are not 'indie games', indie games. The only indie games Digital Foundary have compared are Snake Pass and Thumper with PS4/Xbox One/PC. Minecraft, Lego City Undercover, I Am Setsuna and Dragon Quest Heros are not 'indie' so I don't think they've been doing a lot of indie game comparisons. The main reason they even compared Snake Pass was that it was the first Unreal Engine 4/ multiplatform game on Switch.



DaveTheMinion13 said:
Leadified said:

You could make the same argument for games like Snake Pass and Lego City Underground, which they've also done videos on and got a respectable amount of views.

Its funny because they barely ever did indie comparisions before.......all of sudden since thats all the switch has they started doing them every other week. Chosing the worst games to compare....games that dont take anything 

There's more to these videos than how technically demanding a game is. If that were the case then 95% of all DF videos would be comparisons of PC games running at 4K and 120 FPS.



Bandorr said:
Leadified said:

Huh? They do these types of videos on all types of games.

Sure but Minecraft? Just feels odd. Perhaps not.

I just can't see many people being interested in it. The comparison that is, not the game. People will get it for the switch because it is portable. It wasn't on the 3ds, and the vita isn't exactly a big seller.

So even if it ran way worse in everything they would still get it. It having "a better framerate" I doubt means little to kids.

They've done minecraft videos before you know...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eUqosQazzZE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zmfyx-9nmlo