ok back OT, I started playing today and although it looks amazing overall, I really wish the had applied at least minimal anti-aliasing. I notice the jagged edges and lines flimmering constantly and it's tainting my experience. On the handheld I find it even stronger. I am a sucker for smooth image quality tho, I always take that over a higher frame rate (so I'd preferred AA with 30fps).

And there you go. You just proved my own point! You get mad so easily at things so trivial. You're a cool user, i'm sure you know that I think that by now ... until you do shit like this : 

This dude is complementing the game and you have to butt in and contest him for no reason

This dude is stating his opinion in a calm, rational way. He's saying that Nintendo has an excellent track record of delivering, and that it's a bit disappointing that they can't deliver consistency here, even if it's a few frames in a few areas. 

And what's your response to this? Vitriol and negativity. Saying that "It only happens .001% of the time!" doesn't change anything he said. I don't think it's a big issue myself but I do agree with him that it could use more polish if that's the case. If he's personally disappointed in it that's fine. And me personally, I would rather have someone always putting up a monocle of a criticism, rather than some of what you have in this thread now where people are either saying it's ridiculous to level any criticisms at the game's performance, or that they just say so because DF said it!(just because you don't notice something until DF says it doesn't make it less compelling, especially when you consider the game isn't even out? So how else could they notice it yet ...),  or people just trolling any concerns over the game's performance.

It's just dumb in my opinion that we have to lambast someone for such criticisms, and you know this is just because we're on a Nintendo thread. come on guys, we can all get along!

I believe that the hardware while great, is small compared to what they needed to achieve the perfect performance.

Reminds me kind of the 64 era. A lot of frame drops or small tricks (like the fog), but the ambitious experience is there for us to enjoy and overcome those flaws.

Shows how art direction can easily trump ultra graphics

The common resolution is 810p and it's using temporal reconstruction in portable mode just like Killzone Shadow Fall or Quantum Break so it's not even shaded at the screen's native resolution ?

This is actually just what I wanted from Switch devs; to stop chasing 1080p and put the power into better shaders/effects/assets instead.

Best looking game on the system so far in my opinion; the lighting is just gorgeous, and at 60fps to boot.

It's funny. This is a better looking game than Sonic Forces, but it manages double the frame rate and resolution. Look at how actual effort affects the outcome.

Just for claryfication, I think John from DF himself mentiones that 'it runs like butter 99% of the time'. Most of the dips where as little as 1-2 frames and there's only one bigger dip of ~12 frames in one specific area of New Donk City.

All in all when paired with the visual fidelity that the game displays, it's an impressive and ambitious result. Also note that Odyssey is the first 3D exploration Mario game ever to hit 60fps.

It's a tech analysis thread so the "price" I was referring to should be pretty evident, though it seems you were seeing red.

But technical conservatism is relative to the hardware at play. Nintendo used to know well what the limits to the hardware is relative to the game developed and obtain 60fps. I'm saying now their development paradigm seems to be more in line with other AAA devs. For whatever reason Nintendo is now saying "close enough" instead of refining to perfection.