Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Digital Foundry: Wolfenstein II on Switch

Darwinianevolution said:
Medisti said:

"Forced port"? Whatever, dude. Nothing of this caliber has been run on this form factor with such a tiny power draw. The fact that it exists is amazing and even though it's blurry, there's no way they just stretched and it magically happened. A lot of work went into it. So forced.

Hey, I'm not saying it's a bad port, I'm just saying the sacrifices made to make it possible are too big for my taste to consider buying it on Switch.

Nothing wrong with that. You worked for that money, so spend it one what you want. But, it's very demeaning to the team who made this work by calling it a "forced port."



Around the Network
HollyGamer said:
shikamaru317 said:
Why would anyone play a 360p 30 fps shooter? It's so blurry at some points in the video that it hurts my eyes. Even in docked mode the average resolution looks really blurry. Why not simply downgrade some effects down to 360/PS3 level so they could hit 720p 60 fps and actually make the game playable?

Maybe some people  want to play on the go, but 2.5 hours batteries life for a blurry FPS games is a bit a stretch. I am understand the novelty of playing FPS games on the go, but this a bit too much. Nobody will enjoy the games at this condition compared to the consoles version or PC version. 

You shouldn't talk for other people...



Vodacixi said:
HollyGamer said:

Maybe some people  want to play on the go, but 2.5 hours batteries life for a blurry FPS games is a bit a stretch. I am understand the novelty of playing FPS games on the go, but this a bit too much. Nobody will enjoy the games at this condition compared to the consoles version or PC version. 

You shouldn't talk for other people...

???? 



JRPGfan said:

This has me abit worried about when PS5 & XB2 release..... at that point I think its done with Switch ports.
Switch wont be able to run ports of the PS5/Xb2.

 

Switch docked:


XB1X:

Well, I'd be worried about Switch if 3rd party Western support was Nintendo's bread and butter...but it isn't. I'd understand if Nintendo relied on games like this to sell hardware but traditionally, they haven't. Japanese 3rd party support and Nintendo 1st party support and indies will always be and always has been what sells on Nintendo platforms. Yes, Switch isn't getting many if any at all PS5 or Xbox2 games, but I don't think they'll necessarily need them to be successful. 

I also would like to remind us that the Wii's graphic capabilities were garbage compared to the competition, but western 3rd party developers still developed on it. Not because it was a competent console, but because it sold well and if they didn't support it, you're just throwing away money. 



JRPGfan said:

This has me abit worried about when PS5 & XB2 release..... at that point I think its done with Switch ports.
Switch wont be able to run ports of the PS5/Xb2.

 

Switch docked:


XB1X:

That's the risk of making a hybrid consoles. It might be a hybrid but the inner part is still a handled/ Mobile gaming platform with a capability on playing handled games on TV.  The problem is even on handled mode it lack a capability of a true handled platform with small batteries life. It's a jack of all trade gaming platform. 



Around the Network

Looks very impressive to me. So many people are suddenly pretentious about graphics these days. The same types who extolled the virtues of PSP and Vita and berated Nintendo for producing weak handhelds are now suddenly unimpressed that a handheld can run console quality games at a reasonable cost and with a reasonable resolution/frame rate/effects and  texture quality trade-off.  Does anyone remember how common were sub-720p games @ 30 FPS and below last gen? Yet here you have a handheld that is able to pull this off with current gen games, and people are still unhappy? If handhelds are not for you, don't buy handhelds. But don't use this higher than thou attitude to judge a handheld by current gen home console standards. That's ridiculous, unfair, and unrealistic.

Last edited by Helloplite - on 30 June 2018

Helloplite said:

Looks very impressive to me. So many people are suddenly pretentious about graphics these days. The same types who extolled the virtues of PSP and Vita and berated Nintendo for producing weak handhelds are now suddenly unimpressed that a handheld can run console quality games at a reasonable cost and with a reasonable resolution/frame rate/effects and  texture quality trade-off.  Does anyone remember how common were sub-720p games @ 30 FPS and below last gen? Yet here you have a handheld that is able to pull this off with current gen games, and people are still unhappy? If handhelds are not for you, don't buy handhelds. But don't use this higher than thou attitude to judge a handheld by current gen home console standards. That's ridiculous, unfair, and unrealistic.

PSP I bought for multimedia before smart phones come out

PS VITA i bought for how impressing of a gaming system it was for a portable.

Switch is no different.

Also they are comparing it the Generational upgraded consoles not so much PS4 and XBOX ONE.   Hell  they are comparing a game running on 1tflop portables vs 6 tflops xbox one x lol.



 

 

I was mainly curious to see if they cut the framerate in half as per usual. Not because of how it affects this game in particular, but as a precedence for future potential ports of open area games like this. In particular games that already struggle to hit 30f on PS4.
Looking at what they sacrificed for this port though, they'd probably have to give up a lot of details to target 60f so this looks like the right choice.
Just a bit weird that it's still 30f even for the Wolf 3D minigame. But I guess they had their reasons, and it's just a little side game.
For those who are interested in this game, don't have a PS4/XBO/PC or want to play it on the go, it looks like as good of an experience as you could have reasonably expected.
It's pretty clear that they worked hard on this port. Hopefully it pays off and people buy it.

Last edited by Hiku - on 30 June 2018

Impressive port, but still, seems they had to force too much to make it run

Still amazing what they did



Cobretti2 said:
Helloplite said:

Looks very impressive to me. So many people are suddenly pretentious about graphics these days. The same types who extolled the virtues of PSP and Vita and berated Nintendo for producing weak handhelds are now suddenly unimpressed that a handheld can run console quality games at a reasonable cost and with a reasonable resolution/frame rate/effects and  texture quality trade-off.  Does anyone remember how common were sub-720p games @ 30 FPS and below last gen? Yet here you have a handheld that is able to pull this off with current gen games, and people are still unhappy? If handhelds are not for you, don't buy handhelds. But don't use this higher than thou attitude to judge a handheld by current gen home console standards. That's ridiculous, unfair, and unrealistic.

PSP I bought for multimedia before smart phones come out

PS VITA i bought for how impressing of a gaming system it was for a portable.

Switch is no different.

Also they are comparing it the Generational upgraded consoles not so much PS4 and XBOX ONE.   Hell  they are comparing a game running on 1tflop portables vs 6 tflops xbox one x lol.

Exactly. They are not even comparing the Switch to the PS4 and XBOX One as such. They are comparing it to the PS4 Pro and XBOX One X. Of course, if Microsoft comes out with a portable XBOX One in a couple of years from now, the exact same types will be praising the return of portable handheld gaming. It's not even bias. It is outright pretentiousness.