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

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

IF graphics/power wouldnt matter, the PS5 wouldnt sell like hell.

Nintendos advantage is that the device is portable, so it is two in one.
 
Nothing matters more than games in the grand scheme of things, but hardware still matters. I want my Nintendo games running at better settings. I can say I'd probably have bought many more Switch titles if it wasn't so weak (I might have 60 games instead of 30)
 
Last edited:
paprikastaude said:
Nintendo fans hyped Wind Waker into being an alleged classic solely because of graphics, while gameplay is forgettable and level design pretty mediocre. Same for Kid Icarus looking flashy on 3DS, while the gameplay is so bad, it can literally hurt your hand.
Click to expand...
People hype Wind Waker's art style, not its graphics. The game came out on the Gamecube and still looks good now because it had a unique and well put together aesthetic.

While I think having more powerful hardware is always a plus, the priority should be in allotting that power to gameplay rather than graphics.
 
Make good fun games and the graphics/performance shouldn't matter

Would I like it if TOTK was higher resolution with smoother frame rate? Yeah of course but I'm having too much damn fun playing the game to care. If I really wanted I could emulate the game on PC but I can't be bothered with the hassle of setting it up.

I obviously like my games to look good because I built a PC but if people feel that they need pretty graphics and high fps to enjoy a game then it can't be that good a game! On my PC if I need to lower settings or settle for 60fps then I'll do it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
LazyParrot said:
The ultimate proof that graphics don't matter is that there is zero evidence that video games were any less fun 30 years ago than they are now.
Click to expand...
So true. I remember having amazing times with Mario 2 & 3, Castlevania, Duck Tales, Zelda 1, Contra and many more NES games.

I remember the sense of awe for games like Zelda, a Link to the Past, Super Castlevania 4 and Donkey Kong Country. I'm not sure if it was 4th gen or the next with Mario 64, Metal Gear Solid, Final Fantasy 7, or Ocarina of Time that that sense of amazement and wonder stayed constant.

Sure new games like Starfield look mind blowing (in terms of scope and concept, as well as visuals), but so did Metal Gear Solid 1 in its day.
 
Bo_Hazem said:
Yeah I agree with you. I enjoyed playing GOWR, GOT, TLOU2 on the switch. Who needs power? Only stupid people.
Click to expand...
I swear some peeps on here are only capable of thinking in two dimensional, black and white kind of scenarios. It's always extremes, either "performance doesn't matter at all" or "resolution is everything", nothing in between. As if social media is eating away their brains. The term balance is never used in these threads, it doesn't even come up when someone explains that hardware design has a lot to do with developing the best compromise for a certain target use case. Everything's always divided into exactly two camps, and you're supposed to take a side because you can't be not in one of the two.
Edit: So yeah and second your sentiment.
 
Last edited:
Nintendo games looks awesome and age very well.
Im done with graphics, because path tracing is the future and we already saw it. Also realistic graphics have diminishing returns and we past that point already (enough graphics). So much wasted money and time to make games looks like reality, like a movie.
 
Nopes it proves that artstyle and gameplays is more importants now you still need some powers though

Whats if Switch was powerful as N64 you would never haves TOTK
 
TheBROgamer said:
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
Click to expand...
Games are scored based on their platform. A game could come out on game boy and have a 10. It does not mean it is better than any ps5 or xbox series game.

Power has some importance. That is why the switch is not just a thinner game boy
 
alucard0712_rus said:
Nintendo games looks awesome and age very well.
Im done with graphics, because path tracing is the future and we already saw it. Also realistic graphics have diminishing returns and we past that point already (enough graphics). So much wasted money and time to make games looks like reality, like a movie.
Click to expand...
This. I think games in general look good enough (for now). Let's please focus on gameplay and AI. Especially AI hasn't developed at all since the PS3 days, really.
 
Last edited:
Nintendo has shown since 1989 that graphics horsepower doesn't matter, I'm talking about the Nintendo Gameboy.....many competitors came and went and couldn't knock it off its perch.....arguably the Atari Lynx was the most powerful handheld you could get...but that flopped....Game Gear could barely touch it the sales of the Gameboy, and then consider how long it took Nintendo just to bring a colour version of their flagship hand-held device..
 
When you think Nintendo, you don't think graphic powerhouse.

The other remaining devices gotta cope with both - achieving graphic powerhouse content with innovative gameplay, getting lost in-between along the way.

Nintendo is just smarter.
 
Last edited:
the_master said:
Games are scored based on their platform. A game could come out on game boy and have a 10. It does not mean it is better than any ps5 or xbox series game.

Power has some importance. That is why the switch is not just a thinner game boy
Click to expand...
To be fair,Tetris one of the best games of all time.
 
ToTTenTranz said:

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.
Click to expand...

I don't think it shows there's a market for a device with lower specs and graphics power per se, what it shows is games quality is paramount and can overcome low specs to still produce both a comercial and critical success.
 
Last edited:
Depends on if it is a Zelda game or not. One could even extend that to Nintendo games in general.

I don't really care about cutting edge graphics, personally, though good looking games are nice.
 
graphics matter, even pc gaming is bigger than ever and people are willing to spend more money on gpu's just to get that premium experience. That is like saying eating a home made meal doesn't matter and we all should settle and eat from the garbage.
 
Syphon Filter said:
graphics matter, even pc gaming is bigger than ever and people are willing to spend more money on gpu's just to get that premium experience. That is like saying eating a home made meal doesn't matter and we all should settle and eat from the garbage.
Click to expand...
Steam Hardware Survey indicates that the most popular gpu is the 1660 Ti (old and cheap by now).

It also reports that 1080p is the most common resolution.

Summary: Check your data.
 
Consoles are designed to kill boredom, graphics are only critical to games like Gran turismo, and Spider-Man which is developed as a true open world sandbox.
 
Moses85 said:
IF graphics/power wouldnt matter, the PS5 wouldnt sell like hell.

Nintendos advantage is that the device is portable, so it is two in one.
Click to expand...
It's advantage is Nintendo games first and foremost.

I don't play portable, my switch barely ever leaves the dock and is wish a stationary Switch even with same power but better cooling to unlock clocks.

The accessibility features are big for many people but had Nintendo put their games somewhere else, the switch wouldn't have sold a tenth by now.
 
It depends on the game they want to make. Nintendo have always done kid games that focus on gameplay, that's why they have been able to survive without the top specs.

If they ever do a AAA Zelda, Metroid or Starfox, people would probably like the best graphics and technology. And even then, TOTK is still epic without the top notch graphics.
 
We've gone from 3DS and PS Vita level graphics to something more powerful than an Xbox 360 and PS3 that is the size of a small, pocketable tablet.

Personally I think Xbox 360 and PS3 graphics hold up very well. I could happily play The Last of Us or Uncharted 2 today on the original hardware.

The hardware is maturing well. TotK and Prime Remastered look and play amazingly well. Super Mario RPG looks incredible, as does Super Mario Bros. Wonder.

You can say 'it doesn't look as good as PS5 games do'. Ok, buy a PS5 then? If you want a handheld device the Switch is still very good.
 
Only a fool would say that graphics doesn't matter in a largely technological industry, while also putting a graphics behemoth (relative to its hardware) like Zelda as an example of that.

Graphics matter and that's why people bitch on Pokemon's graphics because they know that the Switch is capable of much better results, as seen in Zelda, Xenoblade or the recent Metroid Prime remaster.
 
Last edited:
TheBROgamer said:
The Wii outsold the PS360 and was a gen behind technically.

Explain
Click to expand...
Because the Wii sold mostly to casuals who were brought in by the motion gaming gimmick and cheap price. It was half the price of the PS3, $249 vs $499.

Of course, those casuals didn't stick around all gen. It's why after 3 years of crazy sales, the sales for Wii began plummeting and 3rd party game sales, other than other casual games, were poor on the system. When Nintendo tried going for those casuals, again, with motion and tablet gaming, they failed miserably.

It's also why the Wii barely outsold the other consoles. Even with the huge headstart from those first 3 years of outstanding sales, and Nintendo fanboys thinking it would pass the PS2 easily, the Wii only outsold the PS3 by 14M units, and fell short of outselling the PS1. In comparison, the PS2 outsold its competition by over 100M units.
 
Last edited:
Power and graphics dont matter either for those who like to show how cool they are for not being a Sony /MS fan.
 
Last edited:
Trunx81 said:
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)
Click to expand...
Not necessarily, people play TOTK on PC with higher resolution and 60 fps mode and that required 0 extra development from Nintendo.
 
A majority of people who own a switch want to play their Nintendo games on it. What's the alternative? There's still a sizeable chunk of that who DO want better graphics/frame rates.
 
We've reached a period of diminishing returns in graphics, so now it's just those who obsess over blades of grass and petty things like fps and ray tracing nerd shit that most of us don't have the time to bother with. Graphics look nice on all systems these days. Power is just for the most ardent of tech heads who would rather spend hours counting frames than actually playing games.
 
Last edited:
Lol except switch is not 360 level it's closer to Xbox one (more powerful than the Wii U) ….. regardless Nintendo made a handheld capable of giving you console visuals on the go (took the psp marker) and combined it with their popular Wii / Ds market . That and their games are some of the best regardless of tech. Mario odyssey visually can stand up there with any platformer from the ps4 era.
 
SlimySnake said:
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.
Click to expand...

Reality proves you wrong.

ToTK, Mario Odyssey, Fire Emblem Three Houses, BotW, Luigi's Mansion 3, Xenoblade Chronicles 2, 3, and its expansions for both. I can keep going. Plenty of games that stand toe to toe with the "best" AAA games on other consoles, selling just as much if not doulbe to triple what the competitors sell.

The only studio in its repetoire that is being held back by hardware is Game Freak, and that is more to do with the lack of care from Pokemon Company than it does from the hardware itself. No one can produce a high quality open world RPG with hundreds of monsters in under 2 years.
 
nemiroff said:
If graphics didn't matter we'd still be playing text adventure games.
Click to expand...
That's a drastic over exaggeration.

Obviously graphics do matter, or else we would be playing Pong.

BUT, we are at a point where essentially the baseline of graphics is good enough for the average person.
 
TheBROgamer said:
we are at a point where essentially the baseline of graphics is good enough for the average person.
Click to expand...

I don't know what this "average person" means.. Seems like a random notion to me. I have not recently met anyone who isn't into graphics and welcome improvements and iterations. Even my son is talking about it, at eight years old he already knows what's up. We was playing Diablo IV coop two days ago for the first time and his first comment was how much better it looked than Diablo III. It's a regular conversation topic in the office as well.

Look, I play a lot of pixel graphics indies, I have a RTX4090 and Dead Cells is still one of my recent favorite games. I just don't understand where and why some people come up with these contrived narratives. Making a arbitrary hard limit of what's "good enough" makes no sense because this is all contextual, highly subjective, nuanced, and relative to where we are in time.

I can f.ex. enjoy Dead Cells in one moment for then to start enjoying Cyberpunk and MS Flight Simulator in another, it's not a binary thing. Maybe I wouldn't appreciate Dead Cells with a realistic look, perhaps I wouldn't appreciate Flight Simulator with pixel graphics.. And while I don't feel an urge to see technical improvements in Dead Cells, I'd like to see even further improvements in Flight Simulator.
 
Last edited:
No, the Switch shows lightning in a bottle. it's not happening the same way twice, that's why they are being careful with the follow-up and will likely announce it out of nowhere because they now that the circumstances this time won't be the same in 2017 and 2018.

Sure, you don't need to be the best choice graphically, but the Switch was an outlier that went beyond under powered when it came out.
 
Graphics matter if it adds to the gameplay. Elden Ring wasn't the best looking game, but it still made me stop and stare many times.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Monster Hunter Stories 3 | Switch 2 - Xbox Series S - PS5 | Graphics Comparison
34
239
Ryseer replied
Reanimal Nintendo Switch 2 vs Xbox Series S Graphics Comparison
Analysis Trailer Platform 
28
106
videogamedude replied
GRID Legends Switch 2 Review: An Excellent Arcade Racer, Stacked With Graphics Options
24
357
DeafTourette replied
Fallout 4 Nintendo Switch 2 vs PS5 Early Graphics Comparison
Analysis Trailer Platform  2
52
271
Bojji replied
Pragmata Demo Switch 2, PS5, PC, Xbox Graphics Comparison + FPS Test
Analysis Trailer Platform  4 5 6 7 8
373
868
Danjin44 replied
Top Bottom