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

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - We Need to Talk About Xenoblade DE's Resolution

Tagged games:

 

How do you feel about 378-540p resolution in a major 2020 release?

Doesn't bother me at all. 33 52.38%
 
It's not great, but I'm g... 5 7.94%
 
I'm a little disappointed. 6 9.52%
 
It's a big let down. Real... 6 9.52%
 
This isn't acceptable for... 11 17.46%
 
I'm putting my Switch in the microwave. 2 3.17%
 
Total:63
Otter on 27 May 2020

So 98% of the time its 720p docked, 540p portable. Sounds fair.

540p on a massive screen is not cute unless the games art is designed to be shown at low res (i.e retro/minimalist), but by the sounds of it this isn't a problem and its mostly 720p. I always used to laugh at DF reviews when they complain about the briefest frame/resolution drops. Unless the game is literally stuttering, I've never found the occasional hitch to interupt my experience. Infact I remember actually finding it cool when I was younger in a few games where so much shit was happening the FPS started to fail, I saw as a reflection of the in-game chaos lol




Around the Network
curl-6 on 27 May 2020

I'm not buying the game, and 720p doesn't bother me, but I am a little bothered that a team that once pushed the hardware of the Wii and Wii U to astounding heights can't seem to get good results out of the Switch so far.

Granted, it could just be the fact that Xenoblade DE and 2 were developed by smaller teams in shorter timeframes, but it's a shame Monolith have declined a lot in the technical standard of their releases. Hopefully their next game breaks the slump and delivers the wow factor they used to be known for.



Immersiveunreality on 27 May 2020

For a full priced game that is rereleased so many years after the initial release i do wonder if there has been enough investment and work to justify buying it,that's me personally ofcourse as i have no emotional attachment to this series.



Jumpin on 27 May 2020
pikashoe said:
Everyone thought it looked great until they were told a number.

Accurate.

Although, I always maintained that I wasn't a fan of the flat looking character art. It might work for some kind of anime license game, or Harvest Moon/Story of Seasons, but I expect something less cartoony in a Xeno-game.

I really like the added details to the environment. But, IMO, the environments were the stronger point of the first edition of Xenoblade and Xenoblade 2 (character art kind of sucked in that one, too).



I describe myself as a little dose of toxic masculinity.

curl-6 on 28 May 2020
RolStoppable said:
curl-6 said:

I'm not buying the game, and 720p doesn't bother me, but I am a little bothered that a team that once pushed the hardware of the Wii and Wii U to astounding heights can't seem to get good results out of the Switch so far.

Granted, it could just be the fact that Xenoblade DE and 2 were developed by smaller teams in shorter timeframes, but it's a shame Monolith have declined a lot in the technical standard of their releases. Hopefully their next game breaks the slump and delivers the wow factor they used to be known for.

I don't see a decline, just a shift in focus on what's most important.

The original XC had low quality character models in order to afford the geometry of its world. Not even the highest LoD character models were meeting the average of what was possible on the Wii.

XCX forewent the implementation of hit detection between allies and enemies and even cars in New Los Angeles which obviously frees up CPU resources for something else. The character models still weren't anything to write home about. The game had trouble loading enemies fast enough even with its optional install providing assistance.

XC2 provided a tremendous upgrade to character models and foliage. The draw distance for grass is notably higher than in previous games while being actual 3D. The tradeoff for this are resolution and framerate drops in areas with dense population or foliage (hence why Gormott shows struggles both inside and outside of its town). The Torna expansion was a step forward with none of the detail lost while maintaining higher resolution and framerate.

XC:DE swapped all the grass sprites of the original for 3D grass like in XC2. That among other things is the reason why its resolution target didn't get bumped up to 1080p.

Lastly, much of the wow factor of XC and XCX was owed to clueless people telling Nintendo fans that Nintendo hardware is shit, so an artificial shift for expectations manifested. It's very similar on Switch when a few Nintendo fans marvel at the accomplishment of a Doom port when there was never a good reason to doubt that it would be possible. XC2 arrived so early on Switch that it was never up for discussion if a game like it is even doable on Switch, nevermind that Breath of the Wild was a launch title of gigantic scope.

It's not that Monolith Soft has declined, rather it's that Switch is the first Nintendo console with Xenoblade games on it where it's more than just Nintendo investing in getting something done.

Character models in 2 and DE are still simplistic while textures are nothing special and resolution is low. In the first two games the scope and detail of the worlds were both great by hardware standards, while there's really nothing in the latter two that's impressive for the Switch.



Around the Network
curl-6 on 28 May 2020
RolStoppable said:
curl-6 said:

Character models in 2 and DE are still simplistic while textures are nothing special and resolution is low. In the first two games the scope and detail of the worlds were both great by hardware standards, while there's really nothing in the latter two that's impressive for the Switch.

Exactly what I was talking about.

My expectations are not "artificially shifted", I am and was well aware of the capabilities of the Wii and Wii U's hardware.



StuOhQ on 28 May 2020
curl-6 said:

I am a little bothered that a team that once pushed the hardware of the Wii and Wii U to astounding heights can't seem to get good results out of the Switch so far.

I agree.

For me, the visual updates and QoL improvements are enough to bring me back to the game and justify a purchase, but I'd really like to see Monolithsoft stretch a little more in terms of visual fidelity. If they aren't going to at least target 900 or 1080p dynamically, lock the visuals at 720p - which is honestly a low bar to set for games designed specifically for the system. There are plenty of third-party ports from more powerful hardware that manage to maintain higher resolutions, and their own Xenoblade entry on the Wii U managed to do just that.

As far as portable mode is concerned, it seems that Monolithsoft is dismissive of it altogether. They have made UI improvements that allow the game to be more playable handheld than XCX was (that TINY font lol), but they seem unphased by the fact that they're turning out some of the most unpolished portable performances of any Switch titles... as a Nintendo 2nd party. Up until ARK came out, XC2 was generally considered to be the worst undocked optimization on the system.

These aren't gripes that will keep me from buying their products, but I'd be thrilled to see them take feedback and make improvements.



Retro Tech Select - My Youtube channel. Covers throwback consumer electronics with a focus on "vid'ya games."

Latest Video: Top 12: Best Games on the N64 - Special Features, Episode 7

Shaunodon on 28 May 2020
StuOhQ said:
curl-6 said:

I am a little bothered that a team that once pushed the hardware of the Wii and Wii U to astounding heights can't seem to get good results out of the Switch so far.

I agree.

For me, the visual updates and QoL improvements are enough to bring me back to the game and justify a purchase, but I'd really like to see Monolithsoft stretch a little more in terms of visual fidelity. If they aren't going to at least target 900 or 1080p dynamically, lock the visuals at 720p - which is honestly a low bar to set for games designed specifically for the system. There are plenty of third-party ports from more powerful hardware that manage to maintain higher resolutions, and their own Xenoblade entry on the Wii U managed to do just that.

As far as portable mode is concerned, it seems that Monolithsoft is dismissive of it altogether. They have made UI improvements that allow the game to be more playable handheld than XCX was (that TINY font lol), but they seem unphased by the fact that they're turning out some of the most unpolished portable performances of any Switch titles... as a Nintendo 2nd party. Up until ARK came out, XC2 was generally considered to be the worst undocked optimization on the system.

These aren't gripes that will keep me from buying their products, but I'd be thrilled to see them take feedback and make improvements.

I'm guessing you didn't watch the DF review yet, but they mentioned it made some improvements in portable mode over Xenoblade 2, while still not being ideal.

It's possible expectations for this game were set a bit too high. Outside of static trees, not ideal portable mode, and underwhelming resolution with occasional dips, this game still looks fantastic.

This is still a significantly improved version of an all-time classic, that wasn't easily accessible to buy. Along with even adding in bonus content. People that want to spend more time dwelling on small missed opportunities, could really use some perspective in this matter. Not that I'm accusing you.



DonFerrari on 28 May 2020
curl-6 said:

I'm not buying the game, and 720p doesn't bother me, but I am a little bothered that a team that once pushed the hardware of the Wii and Wii U to astounding heights can't seem to get good results out of the Switch so far.

Granted, it could just be the fact that Xenoblade DE and 2 were developed by smaller teams in shorter timeframes, but it's a shame Monolith have declined a lot in the technical standard of their releases. Hopefully their next game breaks the slump and delivers the wow factor they used to be known for.

Can't even really use the excuse of small team. It was still greenlit by the company who thought that was enough and allocated those resources, and is selling full price.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

brendude13 on 28 May 2020

It's not a good look releasing a £50 remaster, let alone one that's incredibly half-arsed. I'll buy it when it goes on sale...probably sometime closer to 2030 given Nintendo's recent attitude towards pricing.