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

Forums - Nintendo - Rumor: Mario Kart World will have a 120 FPS Mode.

Biggerboat1 said:

Appreciate the info.

I guess I'm just a bit puzzled that from what we've seen so far Nintendo seems uninterested in using DLSS (according to DF none of the 1st party footage shows evidence of DLSS).

It's of course early days and way too early to draw conclusions so we'll see.

MK8 on Wii U was a showcase for the system and by all accounts pushed it near it's limits, whereas MKW, by virtue of not harnessing DLSS is not. MKW looks nice but it could def look better. They've had forever to develop it so I just find it a bit perplexing...

Who says they aren't interested? We are yet to see the final build of any of these games. It will be used a lot.



Around the Network
CaptainExplosion said:
BasilZero said:

In a way its a bit smoother form of experience but varies between people

I'm okay with 120 FPS but 60 FPS I prefer more because it doesnt compromise whether I am able to play a game at 4K.

Then I will have to try it myself.

From my own experience (Pennys Big Escape on PS5) I couldn't tell it was 120fps. Just felt like 60 so definitely does vary by person. 



Otter said:

From my own experience (Pennys Big Escape on PS5) I couldn't tell it was 120fps. Just felt like 60 so definitely does vary by person. 

I can definitely tell there's a difference at 120fps. But going from 30 to 60 is like witnessing the birth of your firstborn child. 60 to 120 is like finding out they gave you a free extra chicken wing. Outside of a game like overwatch (with mouse) I've never really cared much about FPS above 60.

120 is nice but I don't think there's ever going to be a time when I boot a game and go "gross it's only 60fps".



Going back to 30fps is not a big deal. Its a bit unconfortable at first, but your eyes get used to it after a few moments, ofc only when the gameplay experience is worth to pass the adaptation time

I hate my mind for making this look like something else lol

Last edited by 160rmf - on 14 April 2025

 

 

We reap what we sow

curl-6 said:
Biggerboat1 said:

Appreciate the info.

I guess I'm just a bit puzzled that from what we've seen so far Nintendo seems uninterested in using DLSS (according to DF none of the 1st party footage shows evidence of DLSS).

It's of course early days and way too early to draw conclusions so we'll see.

MK8 on Wii U was a showcase for the system and by all accounts pushed it near it's limits, whereas MKW, by virtue of not harnessing DLSS is not. MKW looks nice but it could def look better. They've had forever to develop it so I just find it a bit perplexing...

If the game does indeed have a 120fps mode, then the lighting, models, textures, etc would have been built around this performance target, which would explain why it looks relatively modest graphically, as any really fancy tech would be off the table as it wouldn't run at 120.

Personally I'm hoping that this isn't going to be their approach. 120fps i nice but I don't want it to restrict how pretty the game could have been if they'd just aimed for 60...



Around the Network
LordGustang said:
Biggerboat1 said:

It's difficult to find specific benchmarks for the RTX 30350 laptop that show 4K DLSS performance vs 1440p native I guess it's not the sexiest GPU so didn't attract a lot of coverage), though generally the consensus seems to be that using DLSS is highly recommended for the GPU precisely because of it's underwhelming specs...

Here's Cyberpunk benchmarks using DLSS on a RTX 3050 (desktop version, obvs a bit more powerful). It shows a significant increase in frame rates when using DLSS no matter the resolution.

I'm admittedly no expert but in what scenario would it not be beneficial to use DLSS? In it's recent iterations there's negligible visual degradation/artifacting unless the gulf in native vs output res is big.

For MKW, even forgetting 4K DLSS Performance, why would it not be better to run the game at 1440p DLSS balanced (1080p internal) than native 1440p, then free up headroom for upping environmental density or whatever? Genuine question.

If I remember correctly TOTK used FSR on S1... If S1 can handle upscaling surely S2 should find it a breeze.

Can you show an example where any GPU has worse performance when using DLSS vs native? (again, genuine question, trying to figure all of this stuff out)

Could it be Nintendo just being Nintendo & inexplicably ignoring the feature, just like AA?

The only scenario where it's not worth it is when the game can already run at 4k 60fps or 1440p 120fps without dlss. 

By the way, dlss balanced to 1440p would be between 720 and 960p native.

I guess what I'm saying is that if the game can run at 4k 60fps or 1440p 120fps without DLSS then it means they've aimed too low...



LordGustang said:
Biggerboat1 said:

Appreciate the info.

I guess I'm just a bit puzzled that from what we've seen so far Nintendo seems uninterested in using DLSS (according to DF none of the 1st party footage shows evidence of DLSS).

It's of course early days and way too early to draw conclusions so we'll see.

MK8 on Wii U was a showcase for the system and by all accounts pushed it near it's limits, whereas MKW, by virtue of not harnessing DLSS is not. MKW looks nice but it could def look better. They've had forever to develop it so I just find it a bit perplexing...

Who says they aren't interested? We are yet to see the final build of any of these games. It will be used a lot.

Yeah, I'll reserve judgment, though this game has likely been cooking for a very long time & Nintendo has known the S2 specs for ages so would seem odd to wait this long to implement it...

Ultimately it looks like MKW simply doesn't need DLSS & for me that's potentially a bit disappointing.

But maybe 5 mins into my first grand prix I won't give crap.



Biggerboat1 said:
curl-6 said:

If the game does indeed have a 120fps mode, then the lighting, models, textures, etc would have been built around this performance target, which would explain why it looks relatively modest graphically, as any really fancy tech would be off the table as it wouldn't run at 120.

Personally I'm hoping that this isn't going to be their approach. 120fps i nice but I don't want it to restrict how pretty the game could have been if they'd just aimed for 60...

Yeah personally I'd also prefer better visuals at 60, but I don't expect all of their Switch 2 games will shoot for 120, probably just the kind of stuff that was already 60 on Wii/Wii U/Switch 1.



Zippy6 said:
Otter said:

From my own experience (Pennys Big Escape on PS5) I couldn't tell it was 120fps. Just felt like 60 so definitely does vary by person. 

I can definitely tell there's a difference at 120fps. But going from 30 to 60 is like witnessing the birth of your firstborn child. 60 to 120 is like finding out they gave you a free extra chicken wing. Outside of a game like overwatch (with mouse) I've never really cared much about FPS above 60.

120 is nice but I don't think there's ever going to be a time when I boot a game and go "gross it's only 60fps".

Yeah, that mouse thing is what is crucial. Sure, high refresh rates also look nice, but it is mouse responsiveness that is the key.

Back in days, in CRT era, there were quite a few (at least from my memory) monitors that could push 100+ Hz, even as back as late 90s/early 00s, so when LCDs replaced them, that 60Hz limit felt awful and it was quite usual to play with vsync off, which teared the picture up and made it look worse, but made mouse as responsive as it used to be with CRTs.

I currently run 1440p/144Hz VRR monitor, but whenever I play with gamepad I cap the game to 60fps...honestly, there is no reason to push for more, if I can push visuals higher due to lower frame rate. But, whenever I game with mouse, yeah, fuck visuals, give me all those Hertz.