• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Doesn't the Switch show graphics/power DON'T Matter?

The highest rated games this year, and this gen are on the Switch which has around 360/PS3 level hardware within it.

If the power of the PS5/XSX lead to better games, why is this the case?

Answer:
Because GRAPHICS/POWER can ENHANCE A GAME but DON'T MAKE IT BETTER.

it-prints-money-switch.gif
 
Last edited:
Less power doesn't make it better.

It's other stuff that works for it. Nintendo hits home runs and stumbles from time to time, irrespective of power of the platform.
 

Doesn't the Switch show graphics/power DON'T Matter?


No.

The Switch shows there's a market for a device with lower specs and graphics power, and that market has taken decades to adjust itself to very specific franchises and game genres to become successful.


Trying to take Switch's success to simplify everything into something as crude as "graphics/power don't matter" is at the very least a very naïve and poorly thought interpretation of how the videogame market works. Not to mention the fact that it's completely undermining all the excellent work that Nintendo's executives have been doing throughout the years to adapt their company into a blue ocean.
 
It matters to a different demographic. To go back to a bland car analogy, good electric bike sales doesn't mean a car engine doesn't matter. Different people value different things.
 
Last edited:
You just wait. Nintendo is feigning weakness when in reality they'll release a switch successor that's stronger than both the PS6 and Xbox MiniSeries.
revenge of the sith episode 3 GIF by Star Wars

power remake GIF
 

Doesn't the Switch show graphics/power DON'T Matter?


No.

The Switch shows there's a market for a device with lower specs and graphics power, and that market has taken decades to adjust itself to very specific franchises and game genres to become successful.


Trying to take Switch's success to simplify everything into something as crude as "graphics/power don't matter" is at the very least a very naïve and poorly thought interpretation of how the videogame market works. Not to mention the fact that it's completely undermining all the excellent work that Nintendo's executives have been doing throughout the years to adapt their company into a blue ocean.
The highest rated games this year are ToTK and Metroid Prime Remaster, this is despite it's competitors offering much stronger hardware.

RedFall for example is next gen only and has a sub 50 metacritic, what about the power though?

Didn't make the game better.
 
Zelda botw and totk are created by aliens not Nintendo. But yah, Nintendo has to stay within a certain pice range for mass market penetration. Remember the original 3ds at 250? They had to cut price to 170 because of poor sales. So their hands are tied.

Coming to your question - power and graphics do matter. Fortunately we have other companies that can take risk. Do you not like games like rdr2?
 
I can play 30fps, 60fps, 720p, 1080p or whatever - it really doesn't matter as long as I'm having fun with a game. End of.

I suspect the vast majority of gamers feel the same way, looking at the sales of the Switch.

You'd never believe that on Gaf though. You'd be led to believe that the most interesting topics in gaming were fps and acquisitions. Neither of which float my boat.
 
The highest rated games this year, and this gen are on the Switch which has around 360/PS3 level hardware within it.

If the power of the PS5/XSX lead to better games, why is this the case?

Answer:
Because GRAPHICS/POWER can ENHANCE A GAME but DON'T MAKE IT BETTER.

it-prints-money-switch.gif
Games that are fun sell. And Nintendo make some pretty fun games.
 
The highest rated games this year, and this gen are on the Switch which has around 360/PS3 level hardware within it.

If the power of the PS5/XSX lead to better games, why is this the case?

Answer:
Because the graphics/power can ENHANCE A GAME but DON'T MAKE IT BETTER.

it-prints-money-switch.gif
In the last 6 years, Switch has one game that can stand toe to toe with the best AAA games on other consoles. 2 if you really want to count BOTW which was a Wii U game.

Thats not proof of anything. If Nintendo could make Elden Ring, Uncharted 4, TLOU2, GoW, Red Dead 2, Sekiro, Bloodborne, Death Stranding or FF7 they would have. Just look at what Platinum was able to do with Bayonetta and Astral Chain. Both games are simply not on par with AAA games on other consoles.

Fact is they are held back by the hardware.
 
The highest rated games this year are ToTK and Metroid Prime Remaster, this is despite it's competitors offering much stronger hardware.

RedFall for example is next gen only and has a sub 50 metacritic, what about the power though?

Didn't make the game better.

The fact that the data of your argument consists of 3 cherry-picked examples in a year that isn't even half-way through is a sign on how precipitated your conclusion is.
 
N64 and Game Cube had better graphics than their competitors, but Nintendo's older games were not any less than their modern games in terms of game design. Therefore, the question of "imaging what Nintendo could do with better hardware" is already answered.

Nintendo started to focus less on graphics from the Wii era onwards because they realized that the game industry (mainly game critics) did not reward the amount of effort put into graphics (or technology in general). Even though N64 and Game Cube had better graphics, they did not sell more. Nintendo decided that competing in that established market was not worth it, and they tried to reach new audiences (who did not care much about technology) with ideas such as motion control, 3D screen, Wii U pad, and now the hybrid concept.

So, does graphics make better games? As someone already mentioned, it matters to certain demographics, the real problem lies in the concept of "better", or what defines a good game in general. The game critics' rating system, such as metacritic (which seems to me that you have solely relied on to decide whether a game is good or not), does not give enough weight to graphics (or technology in general) when evaluating a game. To put it simply, the demographic that has the power to give scores to games, that had the power to influence public opinion towards video games, does not care much about technology.

Now for a thought experiment, what if every media outlet that gave scores was like Digital Foundry? This shows that in terms of art criticism, good or bad are subjective. It is not the game's fault that graphics or technology are not taken seriously. However, for the demographic who cares about technology, no amount of convincing will change their mind because there is no definitive way of enjoying a certain hobby. Just like how people can claim "story does not matter in video games, video games should only be about game mechanics", or "graphics do not matter, video games should only be about fun" are both arrogant assumptions. No one should have the right to dictate what a medium should or should not be (the semantic of "video game" should not matter here). There are people who play video games only for the story, and there are people who prioritize technology over anything else. Enjoy what you think is the best and do not try to stop other people from having their fun.
 
Last edited:
Just imagine a Full Blown Pokemon game with top notch graphics and not the shit we received with scarlet.

Top Notch Graphics + 2 or more regions of pokemon (hell make all seasons in it) , Gigantic detailed world and the gamelplay of Arceus = Perfect pokemon game

but game freak and nintendo hate the idea
 
In the last 6 years, Switch has one game that can stand toe to toe with the best AAA games on other consoles. 2 if you really want to count BOTW which was a Wii U game.

Thats not proof of anything. If Nintendo could make Elden Ring, Uncharted 4, TLOU2, GoW, Red Dead 2, Sekiro, Bloodborne, Death Stranding or FF7 they would have. Just look at what Platinum was able to do with Bayonetta and Astral Chain. Both games are simply not on par with AAA games on other consoles.

Fact is they are held back by the hardware.
I agree, which is why ToTK and Metroid Prime Remaster are the highest rated games this year and scored higher than all those games you mentioned.

drive-away-luigi.gif
 
Zelda botw and totk are created by aliens not Nintendo. But yah, Nintendo has to stay within a certain pice range for mass market penetration. Remember the original 3ds at 250? They had to cut price to 170 because of poor sales. So their hands are tied.

Coming to your question - power and graphics do matter. Fortunately we have other companies that can take risk. Do you not like games like rdr2?

Yes. Glad we have those other companies that take super crazy risks as opposed to Nintendo who rarely changes anything about their console and controller design from generation to generation.
 
Last edited:
But now imagine what Nintendo could achieve with MORE POWER:
  • Even longer development times
  • More expensive games
  • Less output per year, if that´s even possible (looking at you, Metroid Prime 4)
But then they could bring back the tagline "NOW YOU'RE PLAYING WITH POWER!" Worth it.
 
Yes. Glad we have those other companies that take super crazy risks as opposed to Nintendo who rarely changes anything about their console and controller design from generation to generation.
You are missing my point. I am not criticizing Nintendo. Their business model depends on survival first and foremost.
 
Graphics and cinematic production quality don't matter too much for some people and do attract other people. That's why there's a market for both. There is space in the market for both lower fidelity indies and Switch games and there is market demand for The Last if Us and God of War type games. To say that visuals don't matter isn't true imo. They only don't matter to a particular segment of the market.
 
Thanks for the pro tip, and while I enjoy my one AAA game per gen and a remaster of a 22 year old game...

Enjoy, you welcome.
I am. Hogwarts, RE4, Star Wars, FF16, Diablo, Street Fighter, High Fi Rush are all in the high 80s or 90s. All in the first 6 months while you got to play one AAA game in the last 6 years thanks to Nintendo's refusal to release a console powerful enough to play current gen games.
 
The highest rated games this year, and this gen are on the Switch which has around 360/PS3 level hardware within it.

If the power of the PS5/XSX lead to better games, why is this the case?

Answer:
Because GRAPHICS/POWER can ENHANCE A GAME but DON'T MAKE IT BETTER.

it-prints-money-switch.gif
Oh Yeah Yes GIF by Ryn Dean


The way more powerful consoles would be a nice playground for new innovations and courageous design, but unfortunately we see nothing of it, so except for hur dur graphics it really doesn't matter how powerful the console is.

They could/should advance in ai, physics, a lot of other things, or at least bring the level of all of those things back to the ps2/ps3 gens where some developers actually tried to create something new, but alas.
 
I am. Hogwarts, RE4, Star Wars, FF16, Diablo, Street Fighter, High Fi Rush are all in the high 80s or 90s. All in the first 6 months while you got to play one AAA game in the last 6 years thanks to Nintendo's refusal to release a console powerful enough to play current gen games.
Nintendo can play all those things, but with less graphics. There's not a single innovative new thing that's not possible except for graphics for all those games. So if the studios wanted to, they can make all of these run on switch easily.
 
Last edited:
Pretty much.
Nintendo and TotK in particular are proof that at least for the last 10 years the limiting factor hasn't been the power of the hardware but the fact that most devs decide to focus on size and graphics above everything else.

With that said power can still make a good game better. TotK is great but it would simply be even better on Ps5/SX/PC running at say 1800p-4K 60fps instead of 900p/25-30fps.
Also I think it's a bit unfair to not take into consideration that Nintendo has some of the longest running and most beloved franchises in gaming...ever. People are like "Well Zelda looks dated and has performance issue but it sold and reviewed really well so no dev should focus on graphics", but IMO the truth is that the visuals and performance of TOTK would be a way bigger hurdle to overcome for a new IP from a lesser known dev instead of a new mainline Zelda by Nintendo.
 
My top 5 games of all time have the polygon count of a cube.
So the day subpar graphics make me not want to play a game is the day I quit the hobby altogether.
 
Nintendo can play all those things, but with less graphics. There's not a single innovative new thing that's not possible except for graphics for all those games. So if the studios wanted to, they can make all of these run on switch easily.
No no it cant, with the exception of hogwarts (which has been delayed multiple times, wonder why) none of those games are coming to switch.
 
I am. Hogwarts, RE4, Star Wars, FF16, Diablo, Street Fighter, High Fi Rush are all in the high 80s or 90s. All in the first 6 months while you got to play one AAA game in the last 6 years thanks to Nintendo's refusal to release a console powerful enough to play current gen games.
Congrats, it's about time good games arrived.

How did the last couple of years treat ya, they sure were barren if you were looking for good AAA quality titles.

Unless you had a SWITCH.
 
Last edited:
I don't think the switch's success means graphics/power don't matter. I think it says that those things don't matter as much when it comes to Nintendo games.

Is it a double standard that Nintendo is able to "get away" with lesser visuals? Maybe. But that's life. Double standards exist. Get over it.
 
Last edited:
I mean sure, Nintendo's style translates well to lower powered machines and still look great. But I'd like to play Mario Wonder in 4K and not 1080p.
 
Even if they don't utilize that power at least keep the overhead to maintain premium image quality and performance.
That's all I ever wanted from any platform.

If switch games played like they can on Yuzu I'd be immensely happy.
 
Last edited:
From a sales & player count perspective? No it doesn't matter at all.

The last two Pokémon games have looked and run like trash, but they sell in the millions. Minecraft, a game with pixelated block graphics, is the top selling game of all time. My kids elementary school is non-stop talk about Roblox games.

The Switches success gives me hope for gaming's future, because since launch it's just consistently pumped out fun games, and the hardware and software sales show people respond to that. We deal with non-stop obnoxious message board threads crying about power and mobile chipsets, whatever, the games keep coming. We deal with whiny game journalists pissed they were all wrong about Switch Pro and demanding new hardware, whatever, the games keep coming.

That's not to say visual fidelity and performance aren't appreciated when they are there, but per thread question of "does it matter", no they ultimately do not.
 
Last edited:
If graphics doesn't matter, we would still be playing on Pong graphics.

Graphics does matter. PERIOD

What changes is what is acceptable and how much are you willing to pay.
 
The highest rated games this year, and this gen are on the Switch which has around 360/PS3 level hardware within it.

If the power of the PS5/XSX lead to better games, why is this the case?

Answer:
Because GRAPHICS/POWER can ENHANCE A GAME but DON'T MAKE IT BETTER.

it-prints-money-switch.gif
I have a more existential wonder: what the point to use bold font when almost you ENTIRE message is just bold font ?

Confused Little Girl GIF
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom