Stop lying.  You were claiming the S2 could render at 360p, even suggested 240p was on the table.  Plus there were many who said the S2 would DLSS to a 4k picture quality.  None of those things turned out to be true, because there isn't enough data at 360p and 540p isn't enough data to get remotely close to 4k image quality.  

Nobody here said DLSS wasn't a huge benefit.  Even with my 4090 I use it.  I never render at 4k, always 1440p and upscale.  540p to 1080p is reasonable and a huge benefit, but still very clearly behind native 1200p+.  

You really need to stop exaggerating what people actually said.  

Edit

Proof linked below:

"Soundwave said:

I'd like to see really solid DLSS implementation even for handheld mode where the game can render natively as low as 240 or 360p and look like a 1080p image on the portable side"

Doesn't help the S2, except maybe a Pro model, but have you checked out DLSS 4.5?  The technology is already excellent and just keeps getting better.  I do think the future of gaming is bright, because of DLSS.  If Nvidia keeps upgrading their AI tools, low end hardware is going to start putting out high end graphics.

I am going off memory, so my numbers will be a bit off, but I want to say 50% of people (in a blind study) preferred 4k DLSS (version 4.5) over native 4k.

That is correct, in an extreme stress case you probably could use like 360p as a base resolution for handheld and it would still look better than things like that Witcher 3 port on Switch 1. At 540p, you're already seeing good results from Resident Evil as is, not just "barely usable" either.

You were saying things like DLSS needs 1080p resolution to be worthwhile at all and anything below Quality wasn't usable. 

The games are saying otherwise. Lots of people enjoying RE9 on Switch 2 and the general consensus I see online is people like the port and are loving playing it on Switch 2. These message boards are way out of touch with reality a lot of times, enthusiasts get caught up in their own bubbles versus practical reality. 

Beating out W3 on the Switch is a low bar.  And you continue to mix talking points.  

1) DLSS is better at 1080p than it is at 540p is NOT the same argument as DLSS is pointless.  Nobody said DLSS is pointless.  In fact most everyone here, if not everyone, is a fan of DLSS.  I use it 100% of the time, even when I don't need it, because it keeps my temps lower.    

Edit

And people should be enjoying the RE9 port on the S2, it is a very good port, would be excellent with a more stable framerate, which could be patched.  But mass-market appeal isn't the same discussion of technical differences.  Personally, I think Nintendo is well positioned.  Most people are not tech savvy and graphics have hit "good enough" for the vast majority of gamers.  Add in the prices of goods (ram, M2, GPU, etc.) sky rocketing, the S2 is well built.  But none of that is really the point.  The point is nobody said DLSS was pointless, that is yet another made up argument.    

For a current gen game targeting 60fps, I'd say the results are excellent.

I saw some of it on Digital Foundry, crazy stuff.

It was already established that ML based reconstruction was "magic" via DLSS 2.0 in 2020, and it's fantastic to see that realized in a handheld device 5 years later. But people shouldn't ignore the fact that RE9 is an outlier in that it used garbage upscaling compared to what's available on base PS5 and Xbox Series consoles. This helps the Switch 2 looking close-ish to PS5, and the PS5 Pro version looking near generationally ahead (4x clarity + RT reflections and global illumination).

Capcom seemingly didn't optimize the console version that will dominate (base PS5's). Perhaps FSR2-3 isn't suitable for this particular game, and would have made it look worse than spatial upscaling in some areas. Even on PC, it apparently supports FSR1 and FSR4 but skips the in betweens.

I don't know that I'd call Requiem unoptimized on PS5, it's a locked 60fps with very good quality graphics.

Maybe temporal upscalers had a higher performance overhead or didn't play nicely with some of the techniques they're using or something.

At any rate, I wouldn't say Requiem is so much an example of "look how close to PS5 Switch 2 is in capability" and more an example what you can accomplish on Switch 2 when you play to its strengths and make careful cuts in the right places.

They should have made FSR2-3 an option and left it to the players to choose which mode to go with. Heavier and lighter games than RE9 support FSR2+, and it's almost universally preferred to FSR1, even when scaled up from lower resolutions.

It's a curious choice, but I assume Capcom had some reasoning for it. What that was though, I have no idea.

I don't think it's a major problem though for a game that looks this good and runs at 60fps, I'd still say the PS5 version is a good rendition of the game.

Hmm, I'm also a bit sus of the base PS5 version.

Normally we've seen PS5 be able to handle one kind of RT and hit the VRR window. It just feels very coincidental that this game showcasing Pro now has a worse upscaler compared to its predecessors/other RE engine games and no RT option unlike the previous games

It could just be this is what happens when you have 2 extra platforms taking up resources.

The 120hz mode on Pro is typically in the 90s, since it doesn't use RT it can be used to gauge how much headroom the base console would have and I'd guess it's mostly in the mid 70s based on previous DF comparisons between base PS5 vs Pro in traditional rasterised performance (15-30% difference normally in real performance gains )

That's a lot of headroom on the base PS5 version.

At the very least it would nice to have some of those optimisations from the S2 version be used to offer up a RTGI mode or up the image quality.