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

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - DOOM Eternal for Switch launches December 8

Barkley said:
curl-6 said:

Panic Button have yet to fall short in their ports to Switch so far despite the ambition of their projects, so I have faith in them to deliver once again with Eternal.

They fall short a lot in my expectations. Dropping to 360p is unacceptable. Their priority of maintaining graphical effects at the expense of resolution means I will never play the games they port. Their priorities are all wrong in my opinion, but they get praised.

Eurogamer about Wolfenstein 2 - "We pixel counted a wide variety of shots from the docked mode, and came up with a whole host of results. Everything ranging from a top end of 720p to 1216x684 to 540p and 432p all the way down to 640x360. When played in portable mode, 768x432 and 640x360 are common pixel counts... When using docked mode on a 55-inch 4K TV, I found the game to be exceptionally blurry. Just like Doom before it"

I couldn't stand to play them, though worth noting that eurogamer also praise the ports. I'd rather have it look like a PS3 game at 720p portable then try to be a ps4 game and drop to 360p.

But for those that don't mind it, enjoy. It seems I'm in the minority that think Panic Button are terrible.

Skyrim is an example of a switch port done right.

Wolfenstein II was patched to boost the resolution; Panic Button have continued to update and improve all their Switch ports post-launch I believe.

Things like budget need to be taken into account; rebuilding the entire game with Switch-specific assets and effects, or even to "look like a PS3 game at 720p portable" would be an expensive process they likely cannot afford within the resources they're allotted. 

Games like Doom 2016, Wolfenstein II, and Doom Eternal were designed to push the limits of hardware considerably more powerful than the Switch, so the fact it can run them at all in a playable and recognizable form is a credit to PB.

As freebs2 points out, Skyrim is a very different case as it's a lot easier to take a game originally designed for weaker hardware and spruce it up than it is to cram a high end PS4 game onto a mobile device, so it's an apples to oranges comparison.



Bet with Liquidlaser: I say PS5 and Xbox Series will sell more than 56 million combined by the end of 2023.

Around the Network

Oh and I'm unsure if it's been mentioned yet, but Gyro aiming confirmed:

https://gonintendo.com/stories/373489-doom-eternal-switch-faq-confirms-gyro-controls-dlc-and-more



Bet with Liquidlaser: I say PS5 and Xbox Series will sell more than 56 million combined by the end of 2023.

curl-6 said:

Oh and I'm unsure if it's been mentioned yet, but Gyro aiming confirmed:

https://gonintendo.com/stories/373489-doom-eternal-switch-faq-confirms-gyro-controls-dlc-and-more

No t-rex normal controls, I'm in. Waiting for complete edition with all DLC.



curl-6 said:
Barkley said:

They fall short a lot in my expectations. Dropping to 360p is unacceptable. Their priority of maintaining graphical effects at the expense of resolution means I will never play the games they port. Their priorities are all wrong in my opinion, but they get praised.

Eurogamer about Wolfenstein 2 - "We pixel counted a wide variety of shots from the docked mode, and came up with a whole host of results. Everything ranging from a top end of 720p to 1216x684 to 540p and 432p all the way down to 640x360. When played in portable mode, 768x432 and 640x360 are common pixel counts... When using docked mode on a 55-inch 4K TV, I found the game to be exceptionally blurry. Just like Doom before it"

I couldn't stand to play them, though worth noting that eurogamer also praise the ports. I'd rather have it look like a PS3 game at 720p portable then try to be a ps4 game and drop to 360p.

But for those that don't mind it, enjoy. It seems I'm in the minority that think Panic Button are terrible.

Skyrim is an example of a switch port done right.

Wolfenstein II was patched to boost the resolution; Panic Button have continued to update and improve all their Switch ports post-launch I believe.

Things like budget need to be taken into account; rebuilding the entire game with Switch-specific assets and effects, or even to "look like a PS3 game at 720p portable" would be an expensive process they likely cannot afford within the resources they're allotted. 

Games like Doom 2016, Wolfenstein II, and Doom Eternal were designed to push the limits of hardware considerably more powerful than the Switch, so the fact it can run them at all in a playable and recognizable form is a credit to PB

@Bolded Can we really consider these games as pushing the hardware of those systems? It's weird. When a game is really well optimized and pushes some technological innovations, like Doom Eternal does with iD Tech 7 for example, I guess you could say it pushes innovation. But I don't really think that's what people mean when they say it pushes a console, no? We can at least make the excuse for Doom Eternal that technically it running and looking better than Doom 2016 on the same base hardware platforms is counterbalanced by the fact that it's on a new engine which maybe less optimized for Switch, thus making the port even more impressive despite the game already running better on the same weak hardware known as the Playstation 4 and Xbox One. Doom 2016 and Wolfenstein II though, I don't think there's any excuse for saying those were designed to "push the limits of hardware considerably more powerful". They were designed for hardware that was considerably more powerful, yes, but they didn't push the limits of that hardware. And I'm not even saying that because they're  60fps, because adding that contextualization just makes Doom Eternal more impressive on the PS4/Xbox One, but Doom 2016 and Wolfenstein II? Eh. And on Switch Eternal had half the framerate to work with, and probably about half the resolution, too. 

I think all of these ports are pretty impressive, mind you. Just ... saying that 2/3 of those games are made to push the limits of hardware considerably more powerful seems odd. My medum-end PC gaming specs (which include a GPU from 2014 and a CPU from 2015) match the recommended specs for Doom Eternal, and that's on PC where games aren't tailor-made for specific hardware configurations. Again in Eternal's case it's probably just godly optimization, but still. 

Last edited by AngryLittleAlchemist - on 01 December 2020

AngryLittleAlchemist said:
curl-6 said:

Wolfenstein II was patched to boost the resolution; Panic Button have continued to update and improve all their Switch ports post-launch I believe.

Things like budget need to be taken into account; rebuilding the entire game with Switch-specific assets and effects, or even to "look like a PS3 game at 720p portable" would be an expensive process they likely cannot afford within the resources they're allotted. 

Games like Doom 2016, Wolfenstein II, and Doom Eternal were designed to push the limits of hardware considerably more powerful than the Switch, so the fact it can run them at all in a playable and recognizable form is a credit to PB

@Bolded Can we really consider these games as pushing the hardware of those systems? It's weird. When a game is really well optimized and pushes some technological innovations, like Doom Eternal does with iD Tech 7 for example, I guess you could say it pushes innovation. But I don't really think that's what people mean when they say it pushes a console, no? We can at least make the excuse for Doom Eternal that technically it running and looking better than Doom 2016 on the same base hardware platforms is counterbalanced by the fact that it's on a new engine which maybe less optimized for Switch, thus making the port even more impressive despite the game already running better on the same weak hardware known as the Playstation 4 and Xbox One. Doom 2016 and Wolfenstein II though, I don't think there's any excuse for saying those were designed to "push the limits of hardware considerably more powerful". They were designed for hardware that was considerably more powerful, yes, but they didn't push the limits of that hardware. And I'm not even saying that because they're  60fps, because adding that contextualization just makes Doom Eternal more impressive on the PS4/Xbox One, but Doom 2016 and Wolfenstein II? Eh. And on Switch Eternal had half the framerate to work with, and probably about half the resolution, too. 

I think all of these ports are pretty impressive, mind you. Just ... saying that 2/3 of those games are made to push the limits of hardware considerably more powerful seems odd. My medum-end PC gaming specs (which include a GPU from 2014 and a CPU from 2015) match the recommended specs for Doom Eternal, and that's on PC where games aren't tailor-made for specific hardware configurations. Again in Eternal's case it's probably just godly optimization, but still. 

I think its fair to say they pushed PS4/Xbone; they built a whole new high end graphics engine for both Doom 2016 and Eternal, and substantial upgrade of one for Wolfenstein II in the mean time, all with PS4 and Xbox One as the baseline. Both Doom 2016 and Wolf 2 push some really great materials, shaders, and particle effects and were praised highly for their visual fidelity including by Digital Foundry. 

ID's games are just really well optimized as well as sophisticated.



Bet with Liquidlaser: I say PS5 and Xbox Series will sell more than 56 million combined by the end of 2023.

Around the Network
Barkley said:

They fall short a lot in my expectations. Dropping to 360p is unacceptable. Their priority of maintaining graphical effects at the expense of resolution means I will never play the games they port. Their priorities are all wrong in my opinion, but they get praised.

Of course they get praised. Here's how prorities should go:

- framerate

- visual effects

- resolution

What's the point of playing Doom Eternal on the Switch with 1080p resolution if the textures are like a N64 game ?



"Quagmire, are you the type of guy who takes 'no' for an answer ?"
"My lawyer doesn't allow me to answer that question"

PSN ID: skmblake | Feel free to add me

Panic Button on why it took this long for the game to come to Switch:

“When we took on the project we knew that Doom Eternal was going to be a large undertaking that would require every ounce of experience we had. We’ve obviously had previous experience working with the idTech engine to bring games like Doom (2016), Wolfenstein 2: The New Colossus, and Wolfenstein: Youngblood to Nintendo Switch. But Doom Eternal is on another level entirely. Marty Stratton and Hugo Martin have both talked about Doom Eternal being one of the most ambitious projects in id Software’s history, and we couldn’t agree more. Faithfully recreating that ambition for Nintendo Switch players took a little extra time. We’re confident it will be worth the wait!”

“Other than the sheer size and ambition of the game we did not encounter any unique factors that impacted development. However, like many other companies, we face the challenges of a work-from-home environment. Our company reacted early and has kept the health and safety of our employees as a top concern. With that transition, we were forced to deal with an unfamiliar work environment, but with some collaboration and support from id Software and Bethesda, we were able to quickly adapt and accomplish the goal of bringing Doom Eternal to Nintendo Switch. We are very excited about it and look forward to launch!”

https://gonintendo.com/stories/373729-panic-button-explains-why-doom-eternal-s-switch-port-took-so-long



Bet with Liquidlaser: I say PS5 and Xbox Series will sell more than 56 million combined by the end of 2023.

curl-6 said:
AngryLittleAlchemist said:

@Bolded Can we really consider these games as pushing the hardware of those systems? It's weird. When a game is really well optimized and pushes some technological innovations, like Doom Eternal does with iD Tech 7 for example, I guess you could say it pushes innovation. But I don't really think that's what people mean when they say it pushes a console, no? We can at least make the excuse for Doom Eternal that technically it running and looking better than Doom 2016 on the same base hardware platforms is counterbalanced by the fact that it's on a new engine which maybe less optimized for Switch, thus making the port even more impressive despite the game already running better on the same weak hardware known as the Playstation 4 and Xbox One. Doom 2016 and Wolfenstein II though, I don't think there's any excuse for saying those were designed to "push the limits of hardware considerably more powerful". They were designed for hardware that was considerably more powerful, yes, but they didn't push the limits of that hardware. And I'm not even saying that because they're  60fps, because adding that contextualization just makes Doom Eternal more impressive on the PS4/Xbox One, but Doom 2016 and Wolfenstein II? Eh. And on Switch Eternal had half the framerate to work with, and probably about half the resolution, too. 

I think all of these ports are pretty impressive, mind you. Just ... saying that 2/3 of those games are made to push the limits of hardware considerably more powerful seems odd. My medum-end PC gaming specs (which include a GPU from 2014 and a CPU from 2015) match the recommended specs for Doom Eternal, and that's on PC where games aren't tailor-made for specific hardware configurations. Again in Eternal's case it's probably just godly optimization, but still. 

I think its fair to say they pushed PS4/Xbone; they built a whole new high end graphics engine for both Doom 2016 and Eternal, and substantial upgrade of one for Wolfenstein II in the mean time, all with PS4 and Xbox One as the baseline. Both Doom 2016 and Wolf 2 push some really great materials, shaders, and particle effects and were praised highly for their visual fidelity including by Digital Foundry. 

ID's games are just really well optimized as well as sophisticated.

Id is sophisticated since Doom classic. And aways support Nintendo consoles, since Doom 64



Agente42 said:
curl-6 said:

I think its fair to say they pushed PS4/Xbone; they built a whole new high end graphics engine for both Doom 2016 and Eternal, and substantial upgrade of one for Wolfenstein II in the mean time, all with PS4 and Xbox One as the baseline. Both Doom 2016 and Wolf 2 push some really great materials, shaders, and particle effects and were praised highly for their visual fidelity including by Digital Foundry. 

ID's games are just really well optimized as well as sophisticated.

Id is sophisticated since Doom classic. And aways support Nintendo consoles, since Doom 64

They had Doom running on the SNES.



--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--

Pemalite said:
Agente42 said:

Id is sophisticated since Doom classic. And aways support Nintendo consoles, since Doom 64

They had Doom running on the SNES.

yeah i know, they have a good relationship with Nintendo.