Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Wolfenstein 2 on Switch is a good product if you don't care about resolution...

KBG29 said:
Medisti said:

Again, what about the power draw? Battery tech hasn't improved too much lately, and the breakthroughs that have happened aren't in consumer products yet. It's easy to say "Oh sure, just throw this chip into a Switch 2, 4k 60fps portably," but the reality is far more complicated than that.

I am considering battery draw, and where things are projecting for chips coming in 2019 - 2021. There is no way a mobile form factor device is going to play next gen games at 4K/60, but a mobile device doesn't need to. A device with a 5 - 6" screen needs to be able to run at a stable 720p, and the IQ will be excellent. On the 7nm process the AMD layout I am suggesting should be possible in the same power window as Switch right now. That will improve even more with 7nm+. I have no doubt Nvidia is capable of matching or exceeding these results. 

Nintendo should be able to launch a Switch 2 in 2021, that is comfortably capable of playing 720p versions of PS5/XB4 games, while having equal or better battery life to the current Switch. I think with next gen Switch, Nintendo will implement their supplemental GPU power dock design, we have seen, which will allow them to hit 4K while docked for those that want it. I believe Switch 2 will have a Basic dock model, and a Pro dock model to reach more consumers. I don't think Nintendo has to compete directly with Sony and Microsoft in the power race, but they do need to stay current.

I think the Switch was a great rebound for Nintendo, and I am really enjoying it. There first party titles have been excellent, and it offers just enough to give Switch only owners an option to play current gen titles. Next gen, they should be in position, to have a competitive platform from all angles, so Wolfenstein 3 can be a much less compromised expereince on their platform.

The thing is though, these ports and such that the Switch has gotten in the first year and a half of its life have kept the 17m+ people who got the Switch really happy for that time period, keep in mind that it's possible gamers just had a gap in their time/pocket for the device exactly the way it is now and aren't really put off by the Sub HD graphical output of it, I know more power opens up more doors in terms of making it easier for companies to port a more complete version of a game to the system, but not since the Sega Nomad have we gotten a handheld type machine which is capable of playing these sort of full AAA titles on the go in any real capacity at all.

I just think that when it comes to options to play these games on the big screen gamers have the option to get out an X1X or a PS4P and play them at higher resolution than Switch, heck if all people wanted was the best resolution for all their games all we would see in the charts would be 100% of consoles being sold be the X1X or else no console at all since all gamers would be using an i9 with a 1080ti in it, that's not the world we live in though, the reality is that most powerful console out there now is likely to be making up 5-10% of the weekly sales of the X1 or in numbers terms around 4-8k per week in comparison to the 480k combined PS4's, Switch and standard X1 systems which sell. When you look at the numbers of what actually sells each week, that means that somewhere in the region of 1-2% of gamers (console) opt for the most powerful choice to play their games on.

I'm not contesting that you have a point with the advancement in hardware comes with the possibility for the addition of GPUs in the dock and such for those who really want that UHD experience, all I'm saying is you should look at the data we have on the sales right now and see exactly what % of the market is going out to buy that product and how many in the real world are happy to be able to fight their way out of Hell or destroy the Fuhrer on the go, even at sub hd/30fps.

 

(imagine being able to connect one of these to any console, the Jaguar wouldn't know what to do with it, but the tech is there to allow this sort of addition if people have the money to spend https://www.amazon.co.uk/GIGABYTE-Nvidia-Gaming-External-Graphics/dp/B076XVLWHM/ref=pd_sbs_147_1?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_i=B076XVLWHM&pd_rd_r=9aed9f8e-7d06-11e8-9757-4d6404bb6412&pd_rd_w=bqpaY&pd_rd_wg=wLyZx&pf_rd_i=desktop-dp-sims&pf_rd_m=A3P5ROKL5A1OLE&pf_rd_p=5179604776422437276&pf_rd_r=1AZGSGEF0NV1FT0MJAD2&pf_rd_s=desktop-dp-sims&pf_rd_t=40701&psc=1&refRID=1AZGSGEF0NV1FT0MJAD2 )



Fancy hearing me on an amateur podcast with friends gushing over one of my favourite games? https://youtu.be/1I7JfMMxhf8

Around the Network
Ganoncrotch said:
KBG29 said:

I am considering battery draw, and where things are projecting for chips coming in 2019 - 2021. There is no way a mobile form factor device is going to play next gen games at 4K/60, but a mobile device doesn't need to. A device with a 5 - 6" screen needs to be able to run at a stable 720p, and the IQ will be excellent. On the 7nm process the AMD layout I am suggesting should be possible in the same power window as Switch right now. That will improve even more with 7nm+. I have no doubt Nvidia is capable of matching or exceeding these results. 

Nintendo should be able to launch a Switch 2 in 2021, that is comfortably capable of playing 720p versions of PS5/XB4 games, while having equal or better battery life to the current Switch. I think with next gen Switch, Nintendo will implement their supplemental GPU power dock design, we have seen, which will allow them to hit 4K while docked for those that want it. I believe Switch 2 will have a Basic dock model, and a Pro dock model to reach more consumers. I don't think Nintendo has to compete directly with Sony and Microsoft in the power race, but they do need to stay current.

I think the Switch was a great rebound for Nintendo, and I am really enjoying it. There first party titles have been excellent, and it offers just enough to give Switch only owners an option to play current gen titles. Next gen, they should be in position, to have a competitive platform from all angles, so Wolfenstein 3 can be a much less compromised expereince on their platform.

The thing is though, these ports and such that the Switch has gotten in the first year and a half of its life have kept the 17m+ people who got the Switch really happy for that time period, keep in mind that it's possible gamers just had a gap in their time/pocket for the device exactly the way it is now and aren't really put off by the Sub HD graphical output of it, I know more power opens up more doors in terms of making it easier for companies to port a more complete version of a game to the system, but not since the Sega Nomad have we gotten a handheld type machine which is capable of playing these sort of full AAA titles on the go in any real capacity at all.

I just think that when it comes to options to play these games on the big screen gamers have the option to get out an X1X or a PS4P and play them at higher resolution than Switch, heck if all people wanted was the best resolution for all their games all we would see in the charts would be 100% of consoles being sold be the X1X or else no console at all since all gamers would be using an i9 with a 1080ti in it, that's not the world we live in though, the reality is that most powerful console out there now is likely to be making up 5-10% of the weekly sales of the X1 or in numbers terms around 4-8k per week in comparison to the 480k combined PS4's, Switch and standard X1 systems which sell. When you look at the numbers of what actually sells each week, that means that somewhere in the region of 1-2% of gamers (console) opt for the most powerful choice to play their games on.

I'm not contesting that you have a point with the advancement in hardware comes with the possibility for the addition of GPUs in the dock and such for those who really want that UHD experience, all I'm saying is you should look at the data we have on the sales right now and see exactly what % of the market is going out to buy that product and how many in the real world are happy to be able to fight their way out of Hell or destroy the Fuhrer on the go, even at sub hd/30fps.

 

(imagine being able to connect one of these to any console, the Jaguar wouldn't know what to do with it, but the tech is there to allow this sort of addition if people have the money to spend https://www.amazon.co.uk/GIGABYTE-Nvidia-Gaming-External-Graphics/dp/B076XVLWHM/ref=pd_sbs_147_1?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_i=B076XVLWHM&pd_rd_r=9aed9f8e-7d06-11e8-9757-4d6404bb6412&pd_rd_w=bqpaY&pd_rd_wg=wLyZx&pf_rd_i=desktop-dp-sims&pf_rd_m=A3P5ROKL5A1OLE&pf_rd_p=5179604776422437276&pf_rd_r=1AZGSGEF0NV1FT0MJAD2&pf_rd_s=desktop-dp-sims&pf_rd_t=40701&psc=1&refRID=1AZGSGEF0NV1FT0MJAD2 )

To KBG29I should point out, there's no way a Switch 2 (or whatever the successor is) will launch in 2021. A four year cycle for the Switch? Wii U got a four and a half year cycle and it was an unmitigated failure. Not counting refreshes, I don't expect to see the Switch successor until at least 2023. An upgraded dock is very possible, though. Not to mention, Nintendo has almost never used "next-gen" materials. The X1 had been around for awhile before it was in the Switch. If you expect them to do that in 2021 with a Switch 2, I think you're setting yourself up for disappointment.

To Ganoncrotch: the strongest console has rarely won the console wars. PS4 is winning, but it isn't just because of power. Microsoft put their foot in it so hard in 2012 that PS4 would be winning even if the specs were reversed.



The undocked performance and quality should have been compared with other mobile options.

According to "LowSpecGamer" that game wouldn't even run on many UltraBooks, because many of them aren't Vulkan compatible. And his performance boost by removing shadows looks very ugly:


View on YouTube

On the other hand, with the right settings it looks better on the GPD Win 2 than on the undocked Switch due to the higher resolution:


View on YouTube

If the Switch version had some optional FX to turn off in favor of the resolution, it could help many issues.



Conina said:

The undocked performance and quality should have been compared with other mobile options.

According to "LowSpecGamer" that game wouldn't even run on many UltraBooks, because many of them aren't Vulkan compatible. And his performance boost by removing shadows looks very ugly:


View on YouTube

On the other hand, with the right settings it looks better on the GPD Win 2 than on the undocked Switch due to the higher resolution:


View on YouTube

If the Switch version had some optional FX to turn off in favor of the resolution, it could help many issues.

Oh nice the GPDWin2. How much does that thing cost?




As with Doom port, I think they went too far in "turn down resolution until it works" direction. It really looks terribly blurry.
I realize that some other approach would be more costly, but I don't feel this is the right way to port games.



Around the Network
OTBWY said:

Oh nice the GPDWin2. How much does that thing cost?

It's quite pricey, on amazon at £714.95 (on sale from £799) https://www.amazon.co.uk/GPD-LPDDR3-1866-Dual-Band-Bluetooth-Touchscreen/dp/B07CJ2N8BC 



Naum said:
By looking at the replies from this thread and the locked one is that in the end what upset people the most isnt the framerate or resolution of the game but instead that people can actually enjoy the game and have zero problems with it while playing it on the Switch.

Pretty much. Hell he even admitted the xbox one version wasa bit blury compared to the xbox one x

Hell why not throw up 8K images of PC version?

No one buying it on Switch gives a fuck about resolution, just like they didn't give a fuck about it on 3DS or VITA. If they cared they buy it on another system. This is common sense.

But again another not so clever bash thread at the switch.



 

 

Green098 said:
OTBWY said:

Oh nice the GPDWin2. How much does that thing cost?

It's quite pricey, on amazon at £714.95 (on sale from £799) https://www.amazon.co.uk/GPD-LPDDR3-1866-Dual-Band-Bluetooth-Touchscreen/dp/B07CJ2N8BC 

Damn. I guess the comparison kind of falls flat when taking that into account. 




Cerebralbore101 said:
So in portable mode you get resolutions equal to PS2 games? Ok.

Screenshot comparison is a big difference, but we're comparing 720p with 4k. Of course it's going to look hilariously different!

No. Even in docked mode the Res drops to 360p at times. 



mjk45 said:
The best looking portable FPS I recall was Killzone Mercenary for Vita it looked good on the original oled screen running in Vita's native res , so I wouldn't mind seeing how the more demanding Wolfenstein on Switch plays and compares.

Killzone: Mercenary runs at a higher resolution. Wolfenstein 2 has more detail. I'd still say Wolfenstein would look better as Killzone: Mercenary is like a PS3 game.