Odd that in some places the Switch performs better and the other time the Wii U works better. :v:
would playing on the wii u's gamepad lower the resolution to achieve better performance? or is it stuck at native?
[QUOTE=Sharkcheater;51912692]would playing on the wii u's gamepad lower the resolution to achieve better performance? or is it stuck at native?[/QUOTE]
I don't think the performance would change, just the resolution (gamepad is 480p).
[QUOTE=Sharkcheater;51912692]would playing on the wii u's gamepad lower the resolution to achieve better performance? or is it stuck at native?[/QUOTE]
i played a lot of wiiu on the gamepad only and i never recall titles that stuttered a lot like hyrule warriors becoming more or less performant
You could say, there is no reason to Switch to the new console.
Yeah cause it's like everything else Nintendo makes, outdated.
At this point the Switch might as well be a revised second try at a Wii U, except with the game in your hands rather than streaming video. More marketable and consumer-friendly, but no significant advancements that show Nintendo learned beyond their technological wizardry.
Also i've been playing Breath of the Wild on Wii U, and if you're in any major area with a lot going on (usually towns), the framerate is going to chug no matter whether you're playing on TV or Gamepad. They chug so hard it's actually some of the worst framerate drops i've seen in a mainline Nintendo game in [i]ages.[/i] But when you talk to people or interact with things it usually stops since that pauses all actions in the background beyond environmental effects.
[QUOTE=GHOST!!!!;51916198]Yeah cause it's like everything else Nintendo makes, outdated.[/QUOTE]
If you view it as a home console it is kinda outdated. It's stronger than the Wii U, even though it's much much smaller. You don't even notice the fan which is impressive that it's so quiet.
Also keep in mind that Zelda is a straight port. Not even Wind Waker ran fluent all the time on two Nintendo generations later, with the Wii U version. It would most likely run better if it was developed with the Switch in mind.
If you view it as a tablet however, it's fucking impressive. I'm loving and playing the shit out of Zelda. But you can just tell that it wasn't initially developed for the Switch, since it didn't exist back in 2011.
[QUOTE=darth-veger;51912031]Odd that in some places the Switch performs better and the other time the Wii U works better. :v:[/QUOTE]
isn't that because the wii u is strictly a home console while the switch is portable
[QUOTE=Eric95;51916948]isn't that because the wii u is strictly a home console while the switch is portable[/QUOTE]
The Switch is a home console that can be taken on the go. It's not upsurping the 3DS lineup or so Nintendo claims, it's just tablet-sized and easy to bring along. Infact the Switch is stronger then the Wii U, even if not by some massive margin given that the Wii U was already ever so slightly stronger than the PS3 and 360. Breath of the Wild is just a case of porting for a game that is pretty damn demanding on Wii U's aged hardware.
I really wish this game wasn't nintendo exclusive. I got off the train halfway through the wii. It's so unlikely that I am going to buy a 400 dollar platform just for this. IDK.
[QUOTE=Zenreon117;51918625]I really wish this game wasn't nintendo exclusive. I got off the train halfway through the wii. It's so unlikely that I am going to buy a 400 dollar platform just for this. IDK.[/QUOTE]
I mean, that's basically the edge Nintendo runs on, Nintendo exclusives.
[QUOTE=WhichStrider;51919043]I mean, that's basically the edge Nintendo runs on, Nintendo exclusives.[/QUOTE]
Nintendo having a whole bunch of first party exclusives is [I]the[/I] best edge they have.
I'm not interested in consoles outside of exclusives because anything that's on PC, I'd rather just play on PC. So XBONE has fucking nothing for me, PS4 is getting a little stronger, but Nintendo [I]always[/I] has my attention every generation. Because I really, really, really, like Nintendo games.
If they didn't have that, then there reaaaaally wouldn't be much of a reason to buy a Nintendo console. They don't have the edge in hardware, or in third party games, so, they make up for it by sticking that big thicc IP in front of my face.
Bitrate of streaming "HD" video on Youtube is always like smearing Vaseline all over the graphics.
[QUOTE=RikohZX;51916211][I]At this point the Switch might as well be a revised second try at a Wii U[/I], except with the game in your hands rather than streaming video. More marketable and consumer-friendly, [I]but no significant advancements that show Nintendo learned beyond their technological wizardry[/I].
[/QUOTE]
actually im going to call you out on this, because the switch is actually quite a large stepping stone for nintendo.
back in the day, when nintendo released the gamecube, they released it with IBM powerpc architecture, fine for its time, and served it well.
then when the wii came out in 2006, they used a glorified overclocked gamecube processor. at this point was already getting outdated, but it sold like hotcakes because motion controls were cool for the family.
then the wii u came out in 2012. and surprise, they are using what is essentially, a boosted wii cpu, which again, is just a faster gamecube cpu. still on the damn powerpc architecture when everyone else left it years ago for x86 or arm.
all those years working powerpc certainly brought some benefits, nintendo learned how to code for it well and efficiently, because they literally had years of experience at it. Ultimately though, the outdated gamecube hardware was a major downside to developers, who did not want to deal with an underpowered system, much less an outdated architecture. that is why the wii U had issues getting 3rd part titles.
But now, with the switch, they finally made the jump to arm processors, the same stuff in our phones and in small devices like the rasberry pi. Power efficient, yet still fairly effective, but above all, arm is a modern architecture people actually use. I believe we will see much larger 3rd party support for the switch than with the wii u for this reason.
there are some downsides of course, such as lack of backwards compatibility. the wii u and wii simply "underclocked" themselves to run older titles, since clockspeed and core count were really the only big differences between the systems. this is no longer possible with the switch, and will require emulation or recompiled games for backwards play. The other downside is that now nintendo will have to spend some time learning how to code effectively for arm. I think this is why the performance for the wii u is similar to the switch despite the switch being newer, because nintendo had so much experience optimizing for power pc vs arm. I suspect they will get better at it over time.
My ultimate point is that this was actually a big step for nintendo as they are finally using modern architectures, and I hope they continue this trend
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
