deleted by creator

lmfao have you never heard of the source engine? Garry’s mod? HL2 was just the first game running Source that really showed some of the physics and creativity off.

While the physics on totk are cool, and the crafting system is impressive, especially for the hardware it’s running on, nothing it does is exactly revolutionary. Plenty of games have been doing similar stuff for a very long time, on much older hardware.

Not exactly the same, and they certainly deserve credit bc what totk has is impressive, but acting like totk was some revolution in videogame physic and one of the best games ever is a bit of a stretch IMO. It’s a fun, well-made, complete open-world game, that builds on the previous title’s map.

Also, there are AAA games that struggle with frame rate drops on PC, PS5, and Xbox series X

Yeah but their stuttering is dropping from 60FPS to 50FPS, or 180FPS to 100FPS, and because they’ve got actually capable hardware, they also support freesync, which greatly reduces how jarring FPS drops feel.

But claiming some stuttering in totk when players have set up chaos means it proves the switch is underpowered is just incorrect

Any game that can barely run at 30FPS (totk relies heavily on dynamic resolution scaling in denser areas, even without player contraptions) and drops to 20FPS when loaded with stuff built in game is a stuttering mess. Be it on PC, Xbox or Switch. Switch doesn’t get a break on a game being a stuttering mess because it’s weak.

That’s literally the whole reason ppl are criticizing the switch. It makes games like totk a stuttering mess, instead of allowing people to enjoy incredible games like that at a nice smooth 60 or 90FPS

My two-year-old phone can run games at beyond 1440P, 120FPS, with better graphics than a Switch.

Any game that gives you a set of tools and the instructions ,“go” stutters when there’s too much going on.

Yes every game is gonna have a limit to the physics it can crunch. TOTK’s limit before stuttering is pretty damn small, relatively speaking.

And dorsnt it prove the .ain point of this thread? That Mortal Kombat could have looked good with a tweaked art style for switch but was just a bad port?

No. Because that would have required the devs to literally create new textures for every single asset in the game, with new art style, which especially in a game that people are often very competitive in can cause massive headaches for the devs.

Ok, but if there are zelda/nintendo fan boys it follows that nintendo are consistently making great games

Andrew Tate is a good person bc he has a lot of fanboys, right? If that logic doesn’t follow, why would it follow for videogames? Fanboys are known for irrational support, not rational criticism.

fan boys wouldnt be enough alone to get a game that highly rated.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_review-bombing_incidents

Remeber that this game only released on switch, meaning it didnt have all the pa5 and xbox owners to help boost its numbers.

Wow, REALLY?? Nintendo didn’t release Zelda on Xbox??? 🤪

So whilst im sure the fanboys had something to do with it, its likely that the fact that the game is good played a kuch bigger part.

I never said it wasn’t a good game. It’s a great game. Not my speed, but it’s great. I don’t think it’s anywhere close to top 10 tho, and the only reason it’s even in that discussion is because of fanboys who are okay with Zelda becoming just another open-world RPG with towers to climb and now crafting shit.

Is it the one with the shit textures

Yep, that’s the one.

Yeah when they chose the type of games they’d be known for in the 80’s, it sure was specifically because their crystal ball told them

Nintendo’s shift towards simpler games has absolutely coincided with their consoles being less powerful than the competition. And since we’re name-calling like children (bc some of us are fanboys who can’t accept valid criticism)… this has been apparent for the last 20 years, and I made the observation as a child during the Wii era, numbskull!

Nintendo is currently not known for their 80s catalog of titles beyond generally being associated with Mario and Co. - they are known for the games and systems that most people grew up with - and statistically, that’s overwhelmingly Wii/DS and newer.

During which time their hardware has consistently lagged behind other systems, and rather than focus on graphics, like Nintendo once did - when they were pushing the hardware envelope - with titles like Super Mario 64, Nintendo has shifted focus and decided to use commodity hardware for their consoles.

Now, as a shift in strategy, I’m not saying it’s necessarily wrong, but don’t try and deny what’s going on.

They absolutely chose the hardware for the switch because it was cheap. There isn’t anything particularly special about that Nvidia chip, it had been commercially available for two years by the time the switch came out, so yes it’s reasonable to assume Nvidia was offloading it cheaply.

Use your brain and maybe put away the Nintendo kneepads.

Yeah, the physics on botw and totk are so simple. It hurts my brain how basic those games are.

Half Life 2 had physics like that 20 years ago.

Also totk is a stuttering mess when anything sufficiently complex happens unless you overclock the switch, which just proves the point of how underpowered the switch is.

Also also, art style CARRIES those games’ graphics. Running those games at higher res (or just on a TV) really shows the constraints they had to work within to get the games to run.

Two of the highest rated games of all time.

Yeah, and I’m sure the loyal Zelda/Nintendo fanboys have nothing to do with that.

Don’t get me wrong, they’re fantastic games, but I don’t think they’d be nearly as popular/well-received if they weren’t Zelda titles.

If you need an example in the opposite direction, I don’t even need to look up which Pokemon game it was that looked like dogshit on the switch bc you know exactly what I’m talking about.

Right which is why first-party titles, which are built for the stupidly underpowered hardware found in a switch, run and look pretty damn good for the hardware inside. They are building the entire game around a singular shitty-ass chip. It can be optimized perfectly for just that.

But a developer creating a game for PC, Xbox, Playstation, potentially other platforms, AND Switch isn’t going to change the design of the entire game to accommodate the Switch’s dinky-ass hardware.

And yes old consoles and games used clever tricks to run well on slower hardware and it was amazing. But I guarantee that every single title you could think of as an example was either a first-party title, or in the case of something like Crash Bandicoot, was exclusive to that console.

You’re delusional if you think that third-party devs should be able to meet Nintendo’s level of polish on their console while creating graphically demanding games for current gen.

And yes it makes sense to be angry at “one of the greatest game consoles ever made” (okay fanboy) when that console was underpowered when it launched 6 years ago, has TERRIBLE controllers (joy cons are literally the least enjoyable controllers I’ve used, ever, and have serious drift issues), and has held back game development and caused headaches like the situation at hand for devs - they’re essentially in a no-win situation here.

Yeah I looked and idk what to say - it looks like a switch game.

If you bought a switch, which was an extremely underpowered when it was released 6 years ago, and then get upset when AAA games releasing on current gen consoles look like dogshit… You have nobody to blame but yourself.