Represent.
Represent(ative) of bad opinions
I don't see the issue here.
What, did you want them to target 60fps and make the game even uglier and have it run even worse?
If it can barely run at 30 with 4 enemies on screen.. imagine them targeting 60.
Its a weak machine, 30fps should be the standard.
You framerate warriors need to slow down and think sometimes lol
What, did you want them to target 60fps and make the game even uglier and have it run even worse?
If it can barely run at 30 with 4 enemies on screen.. imagine them targeting 60.
Its a weak machine, 30fps should be the standard.
You framerate warriors need to slow down and think sometimes lol
Last edited:
jm89
Member
Sounds like PS4 is the natural point of comparisonOk we have:
LordOcidax : Switch 2 Handheld = Base PS4+ , Switch 2 docked PS4 Pro+
kevboard : Switch 2 Handheld = Sub Base PS4, Switch 2 docked Between Base PS4 and PS4 Pro.
@Mr Moose: Switch 2 Handheld = Base PS4, Switch 2 docked Between PS4 Pro and Series S.
PC handhelds get every third party game day 1. Nintendo consoles haven't been a practical option for third party games since practically forever, and it doesn't seem like switch 2 will change that.
At the end of the day Nintendo consoles are designed for the games Nintendo wants to make, not for the wider industry. And in turn people buy their consoles specifically to play the games made by Nintendo. You can see this in all the software charts, especially in Japan, with very few third party games selling comparably. There isn't going to be much overlap between the audiences for Mario kart and borderlands. This affects how much resources third parties dedicate to switch 2 development.
LordOcidax
Member
In handheld mode, obvious.Sounds like PS4 is the natural point of comparison
Mozza
Member
Yes that must be it.
MisterXDTV
Member
Sounds like PS4 is the natural point of comparison
If we move the bar to 2016 PS4 Pro, Switch 2 is already dead
So yeah Nintendo lovers should stick with Base PS4 from 2013 and tell the world how amazing it is to have better than PS4 games on the go....
Too bad most people play it docked anyway
LOL
Woopah
Member
There's not much overlap between those audiences, but doesn't matter too much when the difference in userbase is so big. They'll be more people playing third party games on Switch than there are on any PC handheld.
Last edited:
Romulus
Member
That's fine. I just can't go back. 60fps really feels like bare bones to me at this point but definitely manageable.
keefged4
Member
Is anyone really surprised? Honestly?
Couldn't care less about Borderlands 4, but IF I did, a Nintendo console in 2025 would be the last choice to purchase it on, as is with every other third party release.
My Switch 2 is for first party games only, and that's fine. I'd wager a lot of those with Switch 2 are in the same camp.
Couldn't care less about Borderlands 4, but IF I did, a Nintendo console in 2025 would be the last choice to purchase it on, as is with every other third party release.
My Switch 2 is for first party games only, and that's fine. I'd wager a lot of those with Switch 2 are in the same camp.
Last edited:
Kataploom
Gold Member
It was always stated it's in same ballpark GPU wise, with even some advantages due to Nvidia hardware and better memory configuration, and that remained true, where's the missing clue?
Baemono
Gold Member
Well, in the goalpost update
As in the classic « people who were expecting PS5 Pro level performance are delusional » despite no one expecting that. And when you make such claim, you can highlight yourself as the conoisseur, based on nothing
Last edited:
LordOcidax
Member
Looks like we were expecting a PS5 on the go according to some people here… An others moved the goalpost from is not going to be as powerful as a PS4 to LOL is running PS5 games at 30fps.
rodrigolfp
Haptic Gamepads 4 Life
Just trolls and retardeds/ignorants.
LordOcidax
Member
And is not going to stop.
Polygonal_Sprite
Gold Member
Current gen games that run at 60fps on Series/PS5 targeting 30fps on Switch 2? That was always the expectation. It's a 20 watt hybrid console lol.
The console will shine with PS4/XBO ports. This is part of the reason Nintendo are being selective about dev kits. Because they know third parties are going to go absolutely nuts with 100's of ports from last gen and they don't want high profile ports like 2077, FFVII Remake, Elden Ring and RDRII to be lost in the shuffle of the avalanch of ports in year one. You'll see 100's of PS4 gen ports to Switch 2 in '26/'27. It's going to have the best library available when you consider the Switch 1 library + Switch 2 exclusives + Virtual Console + PS4 gen + some PS5 gen ports.
The console will shine with PS4/XBO ports. This is part of the reason Nintendo are being selective about dev kits. Because they know third parties are going to go absolutely nuts with 100's of ports from last gen and they don't want high profile ports like 2077, FFVII Remake, Elden Ring and RDRII to be lost in the shuffle of the avalanch of ports in year one. You'll see 100's of PS4 gen ports to Switch 2 in '26/'27. It's going to have the best library available when you consider the Switch 1 library + Switch 2 exclusives + Virtual Console + PS4 gen + some PS5 gen ports.
Last edited:
Baemono
Gold Member
The Series S comparisons were made by Digital Foundry, regarding Street Fighter 6 especially, and also recently Apex Legends, which are both pretty close
Baemono
Gold Member
I mean indeed no one should be surprised… as the devs told about it several weeks ago already
kevboard
Member
Digital Foundry was literally attacked by fanboys and YouTube grifters, like Super Retard Dave 64, for telling the public the truth, which is that the Switch 2 is closer to PS4 than Series S.
the only reason they compare to the Seires S is to compare image quality of DLSS in SF6 for example. while they also constantly reminded everyone that SF6, outside of the image quality, still uses PS4 settings and runs like the PS4 version (30fps World Tour fights, no SSR in stage backgrounds, no dynamic debris, no muscle deformation layer etc.)
neither SF6 nor Apex Legends are "close", they just have really good image quality due to DLSS. Apex Legends runs lower settings than Series S, and it lacks the 120fps mode entirely for example. it simply runs like a more stable, cleaner PS4 version of the game.
Last edited:
Baemono
Gold Member
You missed my point
Or you just quoted me to keep repeating what you always repeat in every Switch 2 related topic « it isn't powerful, stop enjoying the console, the controller is shit too » regardless of the topic or what people say. Everybody got your point already
Last edited:
kevboard
Member
there was no point to your comment. just a bad interpretation of what DF did.
I never said the Switch 2 isn't powerful, I in fact have constantly defended it in the past.
all I do is correct nonsens people say, like that whole "it's almost as powerful as a Series S" bullshit.
but yes, the contoller is shit and not even worth half its asking price. anyone can tell you that tbh
Last edited:
cireza
Member
A lot of people have been saying this would be like, or better, than Series S. You yourself are only talking about the GPU here. So, what do you think of how the consoles compare on the CPU side ?
Baemono
Gold Member
kevboard
Member
Proof that you missed it.
so what was your point then? enlighten me.
Baemono
Gold Member
I wrote it then I erased it as it is silly to keep arguing about this. I agree with everything you said overall, I responded to a comment I founded to be nonsense (for me comparing doesn't mean same power level)
We're all old men yelling at clouds at the end, but arguing about framerates and image quality isn't the best side of us all I believe
remember reading that Borderlands was running very well because of an off screen video of the game running at Gamescom, taken from afar, and that was the final proof ER, Cyberpunk and Madden were just the result of poor optimization, i can't remember if it was here it was just 2 days ago
Dr. Samuel Hayden
Member
Bitch 2
demigod
Member
UE5 stutter?
The twitter made it seem that the game hovers in the 20's FPS. It seems 30 FPS with some stutter. He should be clear. The game is still released weeks later than the other consoles in October, I'll evaluate the port I'm never gonna buy till then rather than make drama on twitter .
And the other platforms evaluated while we're at it because people's shouldn't celebrating too hard on trolling what they're seeing on switch 2
Considering..
There's stutter there on a 5090
You obviously didn't watch the video.
Baemono
Gold Member
They thought people were caring about the graphics of the game rather than its framerate
RodriGames40
Member
It's an UE5 game presumably using all the basic features. No idea what those disappointed were expecting.
Dr. Wilkinson
Member
There was never a chance it would run higher than 30fps docked. Hopefully no one was seriously holding out hope for that. It won't even have split screen.
As soon as it was announced for Switch 2 I just instinctively knew it would clearly be a 30fps game. I'm just surprised anyone would have had such unrealistic expectations that Switch 2 could somehow do more than that with this kind of game.
That it can run the game at all at comparable fidelity is impressive. That should be enough for anyone.
As soon as it was announced for Switch 2 I just instinctively knew it would clearly be a 30fps game. I'm just surprised anyone would have had such unrealistic expectations that Switch 2 could somehow do more than that with this kind of game.
That it can run the game at all at comparable fidelity is impressive. That should be enough for anyone.
Last edited:
Mozza
Member
Who said that?
MisterXDTV
Member
Sure, when Switch 2 wasn't available
Then on Cyberpunk, those were debunked
It's clearly behind PS4 Pro
So last gen CP 2077 ranking would be:
1) One X
2) PS4 Pro
3) Switch 2
4) PS4
5) One S
Last edited:
cireza
Member
Pretty sure I saw many posts and threads around the comparison between Switch 2 and Series S. This goes back before the Switch 2 was actually released.
Stuff like Switch 2 is going to be very close to Series S, thanks to Series S existing we are guaranteed to have all games on Switch 2 etc... After release, we did get a few "this game is better on Switch 2 than Series S" as well based on screenshots, or KT saying it was between PS4 and Series S so some people were like "yeah it is like Series S".
Not saying that everybody was saying this, but clearly the idea was floating around here, and around the internet as well. Comparison shots between Switch 2 and Series S like it is a big win, but in the end what is likely to happen are comparisons shots where you have a picture on Series S and nothing on Switch 2. Because the game just won't run due to the lacking CPU.
Last edited:
Kataploom
Gold Member
Yeah, GPU wise, and even those claiming it was in a general level ended up changing their opinion for the CPU when more info or proof came out, but the graphics side was always what we expected from the Nvidia leaks years ago, in some cases even better because I wouldn't think Nintendo would put a XSS/PS4 Pro equivalent GPU with better tech inside Switch 2 before the info started to be confirmed.
Kataploom
Gold Member
They were attacked for using compressed YouTube videos to make conclusions instead of wait for the actual console to come out, and they've been"surprised" of better than they thought it is in some cases like Apex.
kevboard
Member
they weren't surprised by Apex, because there was no real pre release footage to look at.
and the things they were surprised by aren't necessarily a good thing. thinking a game is native 1080p and then finding out it isn't is not a positive surprise... it's just a surprise...
or finding out that the reconstruction solution that doesn't look anything like DLSS is in fact DLSS but still looks more like FSR3 than DLSS is also not a positive surprise that suddenly puts the port into a completely different light... it's just a surprise.
those were the most common "surprises". basically, them thinking SF6 is 1080p would have put the system in a more positive light than finding out it's 540p using DLSS. sure it's impressive how good DLSS looks, but 1080p native would be a more impressive outcome when it comes to evaluating the hardware power of the system.
AngelMuffin
Member
Didn't buy a Switch to play AAA 3rd party titles and I don't think anyone else did either.
Last edited:
BlueManifest
Member
What's handheld mode then
CloudShiner
Member
Switch 2 hype is more like The Sound Of Silence already.....and people have to 'enjoy' this potato for the next seven or eight years? Jesus.
Last edited:
Stratostar
Member
Dead-on.
The amount of damage control replies in this thread alone is wild, even wilder considering the majority of the posts were made by just a few users. Those users predictably being the usual suspects, who very clearly physically cannot stay away from these highly-triggering threads.
I'm not a SW2 "HaTeR," I'm a day one SW2 owner who wants the best for the console.
But I will call a spade a spade.
30fps for any first-person game, let alone an unstable 30fps for a first person shooter, is objectively a substantially compromised experience compared to any other platform that runs the game at twice the framerate or higher. If this port was $50, I wouldn't even feel compelled to chime in here. But SW2 users are being charging the same $70 for an objectively worse version, and the fanboys here will all have you believe that's perfectly fine.
Same goes for PS5 Pro as you mentioned. Sony 100% deserves be raked over the coals for their pathetic support for their now $800-after tax flagship console, without a fucking disc drive.
I love consoles. I bought both enhanced machines last gen, and I do feel they were worth the money. I play my XB1X to this day. I don't plan on ever buying a PS5 Pro. But I'm rooting for it. It's a capable box and I think it's disgraceful how little value Pro owners have gotten for the money they invested.
SW2 is capable as well, and is objectively a massive jump from SW1.
But the reality is its CPU is blown out of the water by the previous current gen lowest common denominator, Series S, and for largely that reason, third party ports of current gen games will mostly suck and will continue to suck as the 8th gen consoles get left behind to make way for more CPU-intensive games.
BL4 is a heavy game. A look at the minimum PC specs will tell you that.
If Panic Button can achieve a locked 30fps by launch, I'll be impressed, but I still wince at the thought of Nintendo diehards willingly forking over $70 to line Randy's pockets when much better versions are available on other platforms for the same price.
I get that not everyone can afford multiple platforms, but the Nintendo Defense Force show their whole ass every time a third party game predictably runs poorly on their precious tablet. Absolutely zero self-awareness. Boggles the mind.
FinalBossWithTheMostPower
Member
Imagine buying a Nintendo console for third-party games.
IAmRei
Member
some of japanese games or indies, is okay though to be fair.
Imagine buying a Nintendo console for third-party games.