Please don't make blatant and false allegations. - I am not "frustrated".

Again. Red Dead Redemption has a clean presentation, but it's using last-generation visual feature sets. It's not pushing "graphics".

Crysis 3 is doing more, CryEngine is a very flexible and scalable engine... Which is why us PC gamers love that game engine.

Xenoblade 3 is using a ton of stylized visuals... But you are also forgetting something.
Scale. Xenoblade has more.
And yes... Red Dead has a "ton" of vegetation, but keep in mind how that vegetation is actually rendered, it's essentially 2D pictures stuck together in various directions to simulate complexity.

Also... The WiiU and Switch share more hardware similarities than the Xbox 360 and Switch.
More modern Radeon architecture with compute makes a helluva difference... Which is why Breath of the Wild translated over so well.

Need to give a nod to Metro, it's turning some brilliant results for a 7th gen title.

If you wish to be informed... Then yes.

Breath of the Wild is 900P and Red Dead is 1080P when docked.
To say it's "dated and ugly" is a lie when comparing them both on the Switch.

Breath of the Wild scales up on big panels really well thanks to it's stylized visuals.

However... And again, it baffles me that I need to reinforce this intrinsic fact...

The impact of resolution is entirely determined by panel size and the viewing distance from the display, at a certain distance you will not be able to discern the difference between 900P and 1080P on a 42" panel.

Again, just resolution alone is a useless metric... Especially in the era of temporal up-scaling.

That and not everything in a games world is rendered at the output resolution anyway.

A game that outputs at 720P with 720P shadow resolution will have better looking shadows than a 1080P output and quarter-resolution shadows. Aka 540P, the shadows will look more blocky and aliased on the 1080P output.

It's the same issue with "bits" and "gflops". - People see a number and automagically assume bigger is better, which is often the case, but not always.

The Switch also has an OLED variant which looks positively brilliant in games designed to leverage those high contrasts and inky black levels.

There's nothing wrong with having, or wanting to participate in, a discussion. But I think there comes a point where no new thoughts are being made, and discussion is just in a loop and not being advanced anymore. 

You'd think Xenoblade was made by Gamefreak and not Monoliftsoft the way it's talked about.

I do think that there are sometimes more advanced games that look worse than less advanced games. Bayonetta 2 looks way, way better than Bayonetta 3 in my opinion, even knowing that 3 is a more advanced game built for more advanced hardware. The ambition of Bayonetta 3 was simply too much for the Switch, so the extra horsepower went into places other than having better textures and higher fidelity character models. I recently saw a discussion of Star Wars games where the Youtuber claimed that the ship models in Rogue Squadron 3 were worse than the models in Rogue Squadron 2 because that was the only way the game's greater ambition would work on the same hardware. The Mario and Rabbids games are possibly another example.

And from personal experience I can tell you reconstruction methods are not as great as people make them out to be.  It is an AI model.  The more data input, the better the output.  Reconstruction works amazing with 1440p (loads in input) to 4k.  540p is meh, at best.  

Don't get me wrong, I love the Switch.  Outside PC it is my favorite device.  But low resolution of the switch is very perceptible.  I am hoping the S2 can hit 1080p native, because than AI modelling will work well.  

Which is worse than DLSS and DLSS doesn't work great with low resolutions.  

I have played through the entirety of Xenoblade Chronicles 3 in docked mode, I am very familiar with how it looks and so from personal experience I can tell you it doesn't look anything like a straight 540p. 

Tears of the Kingdom uses FSR; Xenoblade Chronicles 3 uses a custom in-house solution.

You can say whatever you want.  I've played 50+ switch games docked..  they are low resolution, and it shows on the big screen.

Sure they are all playable and many of them are some of the best games ever created. 

Pikmin 4 moving between 720p and 820p on a 55 inch screen is blurry.  1080p is starting to be meh on large screens.  But the good news is 1080p reconstruction to 1440p should work well for the S2.    

If everything on Switch automatically looks bad to you, then you're entitled to that opinion, but in that case do you actually have anything constructive to add to this thread, or are you just here to further derail discussion?

Just giving my opinion, no different than you. 

And I didn't say it looked bad, I said switch games are clearly low resolution....  and they are.  Facts are facts.  

I think one of the reasons LM3 looks good is it targets 1080p.  I didn't see it drop to lower resolutions like a lot of the bigger switch games.  

Edit

And I am hoping Nintendo does something cool with the S2, like upscaling switch games to 4k.  That would be nice.  It can't be that hard.  I emulate ps2 games at 4k and it really does wonders.