Can we all agree Nintendo nailed it with the Switch?

  • 61 results
  • 1
  • 2
Avatar image for PCgameruk
PCgameruk

2273

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#1 PCgameruk
Member since 2012 • 2273 Posts

It was getting alot of hate after the Wii U and mainly doubts they could ever come back to the glory days. Nintendo has always been about making new ways play, but the ideas sometimes are terrible and has cost them in the past with third party games.

Lets face it the Wii despite its sales was a fail. It didn't bring anything new to carry on its next gen cycle. Alot of people who bought the Wii were not gamers but buy hype puppets with cash. Later on last gen the Wii sales sunk because that hype from those casual gamers at best lost the give a shit mode.

The 3DS this was the biggest gimmick fail ever that was ultimately Nintendo's life line. The only thing that kept it going was its sheep fan base and Sony's lack of supports for Vita. Dissagree? Do you remember what the original 3DS? Compare it to a newer 3/2DS its a different machine. Nintendo released a 3DS with a bigger screen with a second analog stick then a 2D version then the New 3DS and then scrapping the whole 3D gimmick all together.

Then you have the Wii U. An underpowered console with a generation of graphic whore gamers. Yet the idea was to play anywhere! (around the house...) It offered nothing and wouldn't get those third party games to attract those M$ and Sony wank stains.

So the Switch Yay! Nintendo took the fails and ideas and learned to implement that New way to play! Nintendo took the motion from Wii and created joy con controller. The play anywhere they learned from the Wii U. And most of all they've attracted third party games. fuk yeah Nintendo you did good.

Love you lots miss you loads even you PS4/Xbox wank stains xx

Avatar image for Archangel3371
Archangel3371

43988

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#3 Archangel3371
Member since 2004 • 43988 Posts

Well so far so good however the jury is still out on how their paid online service will turn out and they really should have voice chat through the system itself instead of needing to go through a lousy app on a separate device. If those issues can be alleviated and it continues to get strong third party support then the future for the Switch should be very bright indeed.

Avatar image for Chutebox
Chutebox

50494

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#4 Chutebox
Member since 2007 • 50494 Posts

Playing Mario kingdom while watching college ball = win

Avatar image for drlostrib
DrLostRib

5931

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#5 DrLostRib
Member since 2017 • 5931 Posts

Can we all agree....

No, the answer is always no

Avatar image for deactivated-5acbb9993d0bd
deactivated-5acbb9993d0bd

12449

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#6 deactivated-5acbb9993d0bd
Member since 2012 • 12449 Posts

It will have a big place in the market, that is for sure, even if portable mode ends up being the majority use.

Far more intersting than HTPCs

Avatar image for iambatman7986
iambatman7986

4569

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 15

User Lists: 0

#8 iambatman7986
Member since 2013 • 4569 Posts

I'm absolutely loving mine. The games lineup is great, it feels great in my hands, and it is functional to my current lifestyle.

Avatar image for judaspete
judaspete

7201

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#9 judaspete
Member since 2005 • 7201 Posts

The Switch is a cool piece of hardware, but no, I would not say they nailed it. Nailing it would entail online features up and running out the gate, or at the very The Switch is a cool piece of hardware, and I do plan to get one. But no, I would not say they nailed it. Nailing it would have meant having Virtual Console up and running or at their plan for it clearly outlined and with timetables of when things would be implemented. Voice chat would not be through a mobile device. Also, the 32gb hard drive is just not enough and means some games will require an SD card, even with a physical copy.

What they did nail, was the marketing campaign. Those initial ads really highlighted whats cool about the thing in a way that was immediately apparent. Really could not have done a better job in that department.

Avatar image for knight-k
knight-k

2596

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#10 knight-k
Member since 2005 • 2596 Posts

Hope they redesign the switch to a smaller handheld version.

But yes Switch is better than the trash hardware Nintendo released in the last decade.

Still not close to PS4 though.

Avatar image for pyro1245
pyro1245

9384

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 0

#11 pyro1245
Member since 2003 • 9384 Posts

Maybe if you like portable games that run at 20fps.

Avatar image for Alucard_Prime
Alucard_Prime

10107

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 23

User Lists: 0

#12 Alucard_Prime
Member since 2008 • 10107 Posts

The hardware design is smart. They didn't directly compete with mobile because there is no competition there, why the hell would I want to play and strain my eyes on a minuscule cell phone screen that is not even designed for gaming in the first place. A nice, large screen such as the Switch's is the minimum standard for me if I want to game on a portable device. I can't speak much about the games, because I never played them. They're off to a good start that's for sure.

Avatar image for FLOPPAGE_50
FLOPPAGE_50

4500

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#14 FLOPPAGE_50
Member since 2004 • 4500 Posts

I'd say so

Nintendo is rolling in money

Avatar image for raugutcon
raugutcon

5576

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#15 raugutcon
Member since 2014 • 5576 Posts

The answer to: " can we all agree " is always a big NO

I was hoping for a more traditional console from Ninty after the WiiU **** up, now we have a Wii/WiiU/3DS hybrid which in itself is not a bad thing, I hope it sells a lot and has a big bunch of games ( the WiiU didn't have ) like the 3DS and Wii have.

Avatar image for AzatiS
AzatiS

14969

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 0

#16  Edited By AzatiS
Member since 2004 • 14969 Posts

@judaspete said:

The Switch is a cool piece of hardware, but no, I would not say they nailed it. Nailing it would entail online features up and running out the gate, or at the very The Switch is a cool piece of hardware, and I do plan to get one. But no, I would not say they nailed it. Nailing it would have meant having Virtual Console up and running or at their plan for it clearly outlined and with timetables of when things would be implemented. Voice chat would not be through a mobile device. Also, the 32gb hard drive is just not enough and means some games will require an SD card, even with a physical copy.

What they did nail, was the marketing campaign. Those initial ads really highlighted whats cool about the thing in a way that was immediately apparent. Really could not have done a better job in that department.

I agree with you.

Besides that isnt too early to decide that ? Who can forget Wii as TC mentioned. Who can forget the " haha Wii U is the best " back in 2014 with sheep hyping Wii U like is the next big thing.

@PCgameruk

As i said before Switch even release , and for the fact i was one of the few gaving it a nice chance to do well , even more than some sheep themselves or some hypocrites that now attacking me , the big bet for Nintendo with Switch is not if System will sell well even if thats the ideal for company itself.

The biggest bet for nintendo is if theyll keep consistency to great game releases for the majority of generation and if Switch will end up being in soft/hard life support half thru or not like its happening for over a decade now.

This is not if fans care or not or if someone has 3 different platforms so he doesnt care.

So to me , when Nintendo proves to me that they will keep supporting their system with GREAT ( not shovelware ) games , 1st or 3rd , exclusives or time exclusives , multis or not thru the entire Switches lifespan , then ill be the first ill say they nailed it and congratulate them.

Will they keep up what they started ? Will be able to compete with other consoles in the near future ? Will let support go little by little the moment Switch lose hype and momentum ? Only Nintendo knows at this point so ill say they doing great but nailed it ? Not yet , from gamers perspective speaking always.

Avatar image for PCgameruk
PCgameruk

2273

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#17 PCgameruk
Member since 2012 • 2273 Posts

@pyro1245 said:

Maybe if you like portable games that run at 20fps.

What Switch game runs at 20fps?

Avatar image for speedfreak48t5p
speedfreak48t5p

14411

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 62

User Lists: 0

#18 speedfreak48t5p
Member since 2009 • 14411 Posts

No, we can't agree.

Avatar image for xantufrog
xantufrog

17875

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 5

#19 xantufrog  Moderator
Member since 2013 • 17875 Posts

@PCgameruk: if love to see the numbers, because as far as I'm aware Nintendo puts a much greater premium on gameplay and performance than the avg multiplat on psxbox. There are few games running 60fps on the ps4+xbox, and plenty of examples of 30fps games stuttering below

Avatar image for AzatiS
AzatiS

14969

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 0

#20 AzatiS
Member since 2004 • 14969 Posts

@xantufrog said:

@PCgameruk: if love to see the numbers, because as far as I'm aware Nintendo puts a much greater premium on gameplay and performance than the avg multiplat on psxbox. There are few games running 60fps on the ps4+xbox, and plenty of examples of 30fps games stuttering below

. . .

Avatar image for xantufrog
xantufrog

17875

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 5

#21  Edited By xantufrog  Moderator
Member since 2013 • 17875 Posts

@AzatiS: I'm not joking. Most Nintendo developed games I've played run completely rock solid. Most games I've played on the ps4 have at least mild frame rate issues. Now, with multiplats getting ported to the Switch, we're seeing that flip, because the 3rd party games were built for ps4+xbox hardware and not to run as well as possible from the ground up on the switch.

I love my ps4, but its frame rate performance has been underwhelming. I just think most 3rd party devs favor eye candy over reliable performance on the ps4 and Xbox.

*edit* here we go - haven't fact checked, but this looks like a reasonably comprehensive list for PS4: http://www.videogamerplus.com/2014/09/60-fps-native-1080p-ps4-games-list.html?m=1

Good list, but out of 1609 games that are out on the ps4... that's roughly only 100 games. It's hypocritical to act like those are somehow powerhouse 1080p60fps systems.

Avatar image for moosewayne
MooseWayne

361

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#22 MooseWayne
Member since 2017 • 361 Posts

Love my Switch, it's one of those you either get it or you don't.

Avatar image for stuff238
stuff238

3284

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#23 stuff238
Member since 2012 • 3284 Posts

No. The switch is a failure. It is filled with ports of Wii u/PS3/PS4/360/Xbone games we all played from the last few years.

If you own those other consoles, there is NO reason to own a switch.

It is legit: Wii 3. All they did was take the terrible Wii u, slice off the sides/make them detachable, then cut the cord and made it wireless.

That is all it is.

These supposedly amazing sales are a joke. Every console does well in it's first year. Let me know how well they are doing after a year when all the 3rd parties drop support and Nintendo only pumps out 1 game every six months to a year LOL.

We have seen this happen every gen for the last 20 years. Why would things change now?

Avatar image for deactivated-5cd08b1605da1
deactivated-5cd08b1605da1

9317

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 27

User Lists: 0

#24  Edited By deactivated-5cd08b1605da1
Member since 2012 • 9317 Posts

Since I have no use for an handheld disguised as a home console... nope, I cant agree

Avatar image for Legend002
Legend002

13405

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 1

#25 Legend002
Member since 2007 • 13405 Posts

It's a retry of the Wii U. The fad probably won't last long unless they kill off the 3DS ASAP and use the supports such as Pokémon and Fire Emblem

Avatar image for AzatiS
AzatiS

14969

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 0

#26  Edited By AzatiS
Member since 2004 • 14969 Posts

@xantufrog said:

@AzatiS: I'm not joking. Most Nintendo developed games I've played run completely rock solid. Most games I've played on the ps4 have at least mild frame rate issues. Now, with multiplats getting ported to the Switch, we're seeing that flip, because the 3rd party games were built for ps4+xbox hardware and not to run as well as possible from the ground up on the switch.

I love my ps4, but its frame rate performance has been underwhelming. I just think most 3rd party devs favor eye candy over reliable performance on the ps4 and Xbox.

*edit* here we go - haven't fact checked, but this looks like a reasonably comprehensive list for PS4: http://www.videogamerplus.com/2014/09/60-fps-native-1080p-ps4-games-list.html?m=1

Good list, but out of 1609 games that are out on the ps4... that's roughly only 100 games. It's hypocritical to act like those are somehow powerhouse 1080p60fps systems.

Well to be honest most of Switch games if not all of them , can easily run on past-gen consoles like Wii U or even PS3/X360 if you ask me , therefore for them to run on 60fps is easy on a new system. Then if you take into consideration that some of them are not even 1080p to begin with , well.. I wouldnt expect anything less than 60fps .. Zelda for example didnt have frame drops even from 30fps docked mode ? Thats not great performane imho for a game that supposed to release in a past gen console.

Some other games that are 60fps .. with that kind of technical level graphics wise , a PS4 could do 120fps or more on same game based on hardware capabilities alone.

Then as you mention the moment they are to play something from current gen , resolution and/or fps drop dramatically compared to other consoles let alone we need to see what other compromises have been made in technical level as well like shadows , lighting etc so games that run on PS/X at 60fps wont run on Switch even on lower resolution.

Im fan of 144+ fps and i have 60fps my minimum as a gamer but there are games you bypass frames like Zelda for the experience right ? You embrace the graphics and the quality sometimes dont you ? Because Zelda to run on 1080p/60fps would have to look way worse.

Avatar image for xantufrog
xantufrog

17875

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 5

#27  Edited By xantufrog  Moderator
Member since 2013 • 17875 Posts

@AzatiS: I th8nk we're on a completely different wavelength here: they made a claim that the Switch was just mobile 20fps games, and I said "bullshit, games tend to run great on Nintendo devices" and proceeded to point out that most games on ps4 and Xbox are not exactly shining examples of high frame rate. Now you're coming on about "well yeah but the graphics on switch are bad, so having good framerates isn't hard" - but that wasn't my point.

I'd also prefer good framerates be prioritized more on my ps4, but sadly I don't run the game companies.

Avatar image for AzatiS
AzatiS

14969

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 0

#28  Edited By AzatiS
Member since 2004 • 14969 Posts

@xantufrog said:

@AzatiS: I th8nk we're on a completely different wavelength here: they made a claim that the Switch was just mobile 20fps games, and I said "bullshit, games tend to run great on Nintendo devices" and proceeded to point out that most games on ps4 and Xbox are not exactly shining examples of high frame rate. Now you're coming on about "well yeah but the graphics on switch are bad, so having good framerates isn't hard" - but that wasn't my point.

I'd also prefer good framerates be prioritized more on my ps4, but sadly I don't run the game companies.

You said:

" Nintendo puts a much greater premium on gameplay and performance than the avg multiplat on psxbox. There are few games running 60fps on the ps4+xbox, and plenty of examples of 30fps games stuttering below "

And im saying that having 900p and 30fps with fps dips on Zelda i wouldnt call it greater premium on performance , specially when we speaking multiplatforms , because we just saw what happened with multis on Switch .. compromises everywhere to even play at 30fps.

Then you said :

"Most Nintendo developed games I've played run completely rock solid. Most games I've played on the ps4 have at least mild frame rate issues "

Well Zelda BOTW , the best game for Switch at the moment , one of the greatest ever ( or thats what everyone says so ) Nintendo developed for past generation system is not running completely rock solid and i never heard anyone say anything about it. Also it had issues before a patch , was dipping from 30fps on 900p. Game is not even running at 1080p.

Now for Zelda BOTW to run 1080p/60fps on Switch there would be compromises on things that most likely would have an impact on its overall experience that developers didnt want to sacrifice for performance therefore they decided to lower res and frames to provide far better shadows or lighting or depth of feild that is crucial to open world games etc based on hardware capabilities. And everyone liked that. So maybe other developers think the same for their games with PS4/X1.

I dont think for example there will be any developer out there to make a game ala ARMS or Splatoon and having it play at 30fps on PS4. Compromise FPS for what on these titles ? Better shadows , lighting , physics , depth of feild and textures ? It doesnt make any sense , so 60fps all the way.

Imo , im against anything below 60fps , but as i said numerous times if the experience is great i can bypass some 30s. Now if im about to play a game that technically even 12 years old console can handle , i wouldnt be surprised about this 60fps running on a few months product on release . Thats my opinion about the other , very light 60fps Nintendo games that in technical level are very simplistic.

Avatar image for xantufrog
xantufrog

17875

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 5

#29 xantufrog  Moderator
Member since 2013 • 17875 Posts

@AzatiS: again, I'd like to see the numbers. I'd bet you framerates are on average higher and more stable for Nintendo products than Sony and 3rd party products. The link I posted above, if accurate, indicates that roughly 94% of PS4 games put a premium on something other than 1080p60fps. Now, perhaps many are 800-900p in order to maintain 60fps, in which case I'd applaud the choice - but I don't think that's the case. I think its well documented that frame dips and pacing issues abound on these machines

Avatar image for svaubel
svaubel

4571

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 133

User Lists: 0

#30 svaubel
Member since 2005 • 4571 Posts

The longevity still needs to be tested, but at present Nintendo is really rocking it.

I already use the Switch more than my PS4 and Xbone

Avatar image for deactivated-5c1d0901c2aec
deactivated-5c1d0901c2aec

6762

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#31 deactivated-5c1d0901c2aec
Member since 2016 • 6762 Posts

@AzatiS: What about titles like Super Mario Odyssey? It's not uncommon to see other 3D platformers like Ratchet & Clank or Crash Bandicoot run at 30fps whereas Super Mario Odyssey is going to be 60fps.

There is still some level of disconnect though. Titles like Breath of the Wild and Samus Returns this year are both 30fps titles, but Nintendo definitely like to go for smooth frame-rate in genres like fighting, racing and platforming. The latter of which has seen its fair share of 30fps games on other platforms.

Avatar image for deactivated-6092a2d005fba
deactivated-6092a2d005fba

22663

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#32 deactivated-6092a2d005fba
Member since 2015 • 22663 Posts

Not when it's best game is a remaster.

Avatar image for deactivated-5c1d0901c2aec
deactivated-5c1d0901c2aec

6762

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#33 deactivated-5c1d0901c2aec
Member since 2016 • 6762 Posts

@i_p_daily: Breath of the Wild isn't a remaster. :P

Avatar image for deactivated-5c1d0901c2aec
deactivated-5c1d0901c2aec

6762

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#34 deactivated-5c1d0901c2aec
Member since 2016 • 6762 Posts

I wouldn't say they nailed the Switch. There are still some flaws that need to be addressed such as the online solution. It is a good system though and I am very satisfied with it.

Avatar image for AzatiS
AzatiS

14969

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 0

#35 AzatiS
Member since 2004 • 14969 Posts

@xantufrog said:

@AzatiS: again, I'd like to see the numbers. I'd bet you framerates are on average higher and more stable for Nintendo products than Sony and 3rd party products. The link I posted above, if accurate, indicates that roughly 94% of PS4 games put a premium on something other than 1080p60fps. Now, perhaps many are 800-900p in order to maintain 60fps, in which case I'd applaud the choice - but I don't think that's the case. I think its well documented that frame dips and pacing issues abound on these machines

Thats a fact that PS4/X1 having way more games with frames issues playing at 30fps , percentage speaking. But then developers trying to push boundaries with new engines and new techniques all the time , something you wont see on Nintendo consoles anymore. Not that this is bad by any means, personally i like artistic approach like Marios or Zeldas ,but its something we need to consider when we talking about performance.

I dont think there are many developers want their games to run at 30fps by all means to be honest but they dont want to compromise other things as well , similar to what happened with Zelda BOTW. Game wouldnt look the same on Switch or Wii U if was about to run 1080p/60fps at all times , i really think that. They pushed it as hard as they could to find the balance between performance and looks.

Avatar image for deactivated-6092a2d005fba
deactivated-6092a2d005fba

22663

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#36  Edited By deactivated-6092a2d005fba
Member since 2015 • 22663 Posts

@jumpaction said:

@i_p_daily: Breath of the Wild isn't a remaster. :P

But I was talking about it's best not second best.

Avatar image for deactivated-5c1d0901c2aec
deactivated-5c1d0901c2aec

6762

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#37 deactivated-5c1d0901c2aec
Member since 2016 • 6762 Posts

@i_p_daily: Oh, sorry, you mean Breath of the Wild! Yes, like I said. It's not a remaster. ;)

(I know you're referring to Mario Kart 8 Deluxe which, no. I think BoTW is a better game.)

Avatar image for AzatiS
AzatiS

14969

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 0

#38  Edited By AzatiS
Member since 2004 • 14969 Posts

@jumpaction said:

@AzatiS: What about titles like Super Mario Odyssey? It's not uncommon to see other 3D platformers like Ratchet & Clank or Crash Bandicoot run at 30fps whereas Super Mario Odyssey is going to be 60fps.

There is still some level of disconnect though. Titles like Breath of the Wild and Samus Returns this year are both 30fps titles, but Nintendo definitely like to go for smooth frame-rate in genres like fighting, racing and platforming. The latter of which has seen its fair share of 30fps games on other platforms.

I wont speak for each title individualy because i can ask you the same about other titles that run 60fps and go back and forth like this. Or do you think that if developer wanted Crash Bandicoot couldnt easily run at 60fps on PS4 ? So dont ask me , ask the developers why. I wont bite to this Sony vs Nintendo bait post again.

Do now you want to compare Mario KArt 8 for example to Gran Turismo and Forza and Smash bros to what ? Street Fighter 5 and Tekken 7 in technical level ? What are you talking about ? What are you trying to say i dont understand

Avatar image for deactivated-6092a2d005fba
deactivated-6092a2d005fba

22663

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#39 deactivated-6092a2d005fba
Member since 2015 • 22663 Posts

@jumpaction said:

@i_p_daily: Oh, sorry, you mean Breath of the Wild! Yes, like I said. It's not a remaster. ;)

(I know you're referring to Mario Kart 8 Deluxe which, no. I think BoTW is a better game.)

You think too much :P

Avatar image for deactivated-5c1d0901c2aec
deactivated-5c1d0901c2aec

6762

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#40  Edited By deactivated-5c1d0901c2aec
Member since 2016 • 6762 Posts

@AzatiS: No, no. Not a vs. thing at all. I'm just reflecting on Nintendo's approach to frame-rate per genre. I think generally when they can, Nintendo will go for 60fps at the expense of graphics. They'll trim down on draw distance or object detail in order to get a smooth frame-rate for a number of their games. Not inherently comparing them to games that just appear on Sony platforms, just the preferences of other developers.

Like, I can imagine if it were Nintendo producing a game like Crash Bandicoot, there would be less detail in favor of 60fps. That's just how Nintendo approach a platformer.

I think that's why many of their games come out at 60fps, because they produce lots of titles in genres where 60fps is preferred. It's not uncommon though for them to produce 30ps games too. The Legend of Zelda and Xenoblade for example.

Avatar image for deactivated-5c1d0901c2aec
deactivated-5c1d0901c2aec

6762

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#41 deactivated-5c1d0901c2aec
Member since 2016 • 6762 Posts
@i_p_daily said:
@jumpaction said:

@i_p_daily: Oh, sorry, you mean Breath of the Wild! Yes, like I said. It's not a remaster. ;)

(I know you're referring to Mario Kart 8 Deluxe which, no. I think BoTW is a better game.)

You think too much :P

And you don't think enough.

I'm just kidding with you. :P

Having played both games though, I prefer Breath of the Wild. Mario Kart 8 is solid but it still has bad examples of negative feedback loops that can make the game really stink at times.

Avatar image for deactivated-6092a2d005fba
deactivated-6092a2d005fba

22663

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#42 deactivated-6092a2d005fba
Member since 2015 • 22663 Posts

@jumpaction said:
@i_p_daily said:
@jumpaction said:

@i_p_daily: Oh, sorry, you mean Breath of the Wild! Yes, like I said. It's not a remaster. ;)

(I know you're referring to Mario Kart 8 Deluxe which, no. I think BoTW is a better game.)

You think too much :P

And you don't think enough.

I'm just kidding with you. :P

Having played both games though, I prefer Breath of the Wild. Mario Kart 8 is solid but it still has bad examples of negative feedback loops that can make the game really stink at times.

Thinking's too hard :( but think about this, botw was announced and created for the Wii U right? then the remaster was announced for the Switch, stay with me. Now yes they were released at the same time, yet the only difference is the graphics, thus it really is a remaster.

Mind blowing I know :P

Avatar image for AzatiS
AzatiS

14969

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 0

#43  Edited By AzatiS
Member since 2004 • 14969 Posts

@jumpaction said:

@AzatiS: No, no. Not a vs. thing at all. I'm just reflecting on Nintendo's approach to frame-rate per genre. I think generally when they can, Nintendo will go for 60fps at the expense of graphics. They'll trim down on draw distance or object detail in order to get a smooth frame-rate for a number of their games. Not inherently comparing them to games that just appear on Sony platforms, just the preferences of other developers.

Like, I can imagine if it were Nintendo producing a game like Crash Bandicoot, there would be less detail in favor of 60fps. That's just how Nintendo approach a platformer.

I think that's why many of their games come out at 60fps, because they produce lots of titles in genres where 60fps is preferred. It's not uncommon though for them to produce 30ps games too. The Legend of Zelda and Xenoblade for example.

But Nintendo making very light games in terms of engines . They basing their games in far simplier technics and way more on the artistic cartoony style for years now. Its logical to be far easier to them to aim for 60fps.

They can aim for 60fps way more easily than developers that trying to push graphics , physics and everything related to next-gen graphics more and more. The moment Nintendo tried to provide something with way bigger scope than usual even with the same "light" graphical approach with BOTW , you saw performance compromises all over the place including FPS dips. Xeno looks one of the same , big worlds etc ... i found logical to not push 60fps and having mist or excessive pop ups in such a game that is all about big worlds and how they look etc.

30fps is one thing that i dislike consoles for but then where else youll find those great exclusives ?

Now about Crash , no idea why the developer choose 30 fps , maybe to stick to original experience of PS1 ? Maybe engine wasnt optimized enough ? I dont know but i doubt was about lack of power...

Avatar image for deactivated-5c1d0901c2aec
deactivated-5c1d0901c2aec

6762

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#44  Edited By deactivated-5c1d0901c2aec
Member since 2016 • 6762 Posts

@AzatiS: That's true, though the stylized games Nintendo goes for tend to work out pretty well. Some of their games looks gorgeous and run at 60fps.

It's a little different for games like Uncharted who are pushing boundaries on a technical level to produce beautiful games but a game like Crash Bandicoot probably would have been better going for 60fps instead of 30fps.

Avatar image for deactivated-5c1d0901c2aec
deactivated-5c1d0901c2aec

6762

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#45  Edited By deactivated-5c1d0901c2aec
Member since 2016 • 6762 Posts

@i_p_daily: A remaster is a new mastering of an existing product. Since Breath of the Wild wasn't released before the Switch version came out, it's by definition not a remaster... :P

Extending the production time of a game doesn't mean the game is a remaster. Both versions are the same game. It can't be a remaster of itself. There aren't any changes.

Avatar image for deactivated-6092a2d005fba
deactivated-6092a2d005fba

22663

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#46  Edited By deactivated-6092a2d005fba
Member since 2015 • 22663 Posts

@jumpaction said:

@i_p_daily: A remaster is a new mastering of an existing product. Since Breath of the Wild wasn't released before the Switch version came out, it's by definition not a remaster... :P

A game doesn't need to be released to exist, and it was in existence before the Switch version was announced, there were trailers and the like for the Wii U version, thus making the game exist. So sorry but that doesn't fly, you will need something better lol.

Avatar image for xantufrog
xantufrog

17875

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 5

#47  Edited By xantufrog  Moderator
Member since 2013 • 17875 Posts

@AzatiS: You're fixated on the graphical quality as an excuse (valid or not) for the frame rate priority difference. It simply isn't relevant to my point - I was giving a very simple reply to a very simple false satement: that the Switch is a 20fps machine.

I get why/how you are justifying the lower/more variable framerates on ps4 and x1. I think you are right. I don't think that's the right way for the devs to prioritize things when developing for those systems, but that's a separate discussion from my point. Was the poster above right that the Switch is a 20fps system? No. Was I accurate in reminding them that a looooot of games on ps4/x1 turn in pretty low framerates, and thus it's a pretty weird angle of attack on the Switch? Yes. It wasn't meant to be this complicated

Avatar image for deactivated-5c1d0901c2aec
deactivated-5c1d0901c2aec

6762

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#48  Edited By deactivated-5c1d0901c2aec
Member since 2016 • 6762 Posts

@i_p_daily said:
@jumpaction said:

@i_p_daily: A remaster is a new mastering of an existing product. Since Breath of the Wild wasn't released before the Switch version came out, it's by definition not a remaster... :P

A game doesn't need to be released to exist, and it was in existence before the Switch version was announced, there were trailers and the like for the Wii U version, thus making the game exist. So sorry but that doesn't fly, you will need something better lol.

No but a product needs to be completed production in order to be remastered. If the product hasn't finished production, and it is tweaked, then that is just a continuation of the production.

By your logic, Prey is a remaster of itself because it runs better on PC than PS4 and Xbox One.

Nintendo decided to extend the production cycle of Breath of the Wild to include a Switch version but production on the game wasn't finished until both Switch and Wii U titles were completed and released simultaneously. Just because the Wii U version started production first, does not mean the Switch version is a remaster of the Wii U version. it's the same game and the development process ended upon releases of the titles which came at the same time.

Your understanding of the remastering of a product is just not correct. :P

The term has been widely used across mediums to describe remastering original recordings of music or films. For example, digitally remastering music to remove compression. In order to REmaster a product though, an original mastering needs to exist.

The original mastering of Breath of the Wild is the Switch/Wii U release. Then a remaster would be going back to the source and updating it maybe to improve textures or sound quality, if that ever happens.

At the end of the day though, the games use the exact same assets across both platforms. One just runs the product better than the other. A remaster needs for the product to be refined in some way to actually count as a remaster. Source

But the Wii U and Switch versions are literally the same game. One just performs better than the other.

Avatar image for omegamaster
omegaMaster

3448

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#49 omegaMaster
Member since 2017 • 3448 Posts

No, well not yet. Sure, the Switch has some third party developers, but I am uncertain whether they will sell. Give the Switch a year and we'll have a better indication. Right now the Switch is doing great and they must sustain that, otherwise they are screwed like the previous consoles.

Avatar image for deactivated-6092a2d005fba
deactivated-6092a2d005fba

22663

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#50 deactivated-6092a2d005fba
Member since 2015 • 22663 Posts

@jumpaction said:
@i_p_daily said:
@jumpaction said:

@i_p_daily: A remaster is a new mastering of an existing product. Since Breath of the Wild wasn't released before the Switch version came out, it's by definition not a remaster... :P

A game doesn't need to be released to exist, and it was in existence before the Switch version was announced, there were trailers and the like for the Wii U version, thus making the game exist. So sorry but that doesn't fly, you will need something better lol.

No but a product needs to be completed production in order to be remastered. If the product hasn't finished production, and it is tweaked, then that is just a continuation of the production.

By your logic, Prey is a remaster of itself because it runs better on PC than PS4 and Xbox One.

Nintendo decided to extend the production cycle of Breath of the Wild to include a Switch version but production on the game wasn't finished until both Switch and Wii U titles were completed and released simultaneously. Just because the Wii U version started production first, does not mean the Switch version is a remaster of the Wii U version. it's the same game and the development process ended upon releases of the titles which came at the same time.

Your understanding of the remastering of a product is just not correct. :P

The term has been widely used across mediums to describe remastering original recordings of music or films. For example, digitally remastering music to remove compression. In order to REmaster a product though, an original mastering needs to exist.

The original mastering of Breath of the Wild is the Switch/Wii U release. Then a remaster would be going back to the source and updating it maybe to improve textures or sound quality, if that ever happens.

At the end of the day though, the games use the exact same assets across both platforms. One just runs the product better than the other. A remaster needs for the product to be refined in some way to actually count as a remaster. Source

But the Wii U and Switch versions are literally the same game. One just performs better than the other.

Woah take it easy, i'm just having fun :P