Topic: The Nintendo Switch Thread

Same mindset as conservatives who'll complain when you suggest a change that'll improve things. "Why do you hate our country!". Just because we complain about what the Switch is and how Nintendo approaches things doesn't mean we don't have a stack of Nintendo games that we play and enjoy

I mean, a stable high framerate is undoubtedly more desirable. And the Switch generally struggles more than any other platform to meet that. But I think the thing that's often lost in this discussion is that the thing we want is a stable high framerate. The issue with poor framerates most of the time is about pacing not the framerate specifically

I mean step back from our pitchfork brigade here for just a second. @GrailUK is mocking DF here and their performance analysis, have you actually watched their videos on some of the "impossible ports" on Switch? Because 30fps, they don't really complain about it. Instead they praise these games for maintaining a stable 30fps. DF is never really going on about framerates. They're pretty much always about frame timings, which isn't the seme thing

Why? Well, 30fps means every frame is showing for 33ms. Without any kind of VRR if your display is running at 60Hz if you miss a frame window that means you're waiting another 17ms. So if you're hovering at that framerate your options are to either A. drop to 15fps or B. keep going for the next frame window and have frame timings alternate between 33ms and 50ms. Invariably it's the latter, which means the game will stutter

At higher framerates? Lets go one step up and say you're targeting 60fps on a 120Hz display. At 120Hz the frame window comes along every 8ms and at 60fps you're showing a frame every 17ms. If you miss the window, the next one comes around in another 8ms. So you're alternating between 17ms and 25ms. Which still isn't ideal and will still result in some jitter but it's FAR less perceivable

But the real thing that changes the game here, VRR. Which REALLY needs to become a thing everyone is using for all gaming devices and especially lower performing ones. Because with VRR if you're delivering a frame every 34ms you're no longer jumping between 33ms and 50ms delivery. Instead you're showing a frame every 34ms. Someone joked about "infinite framerates" just above, well, mathematically VRR is effectively an infinite refresh rate monitor.... within a specific range of framerates

@skywake I'm just being silly mate. I don't even own a pitchfork!

@GrailUK
Sure though still mis-directed silly. The DF performance analysis didn't say Bayonetta 3's framerate was poor or that the Switch sucks. And the idea that what they want is infinite framerates is not only absurd but it also completely misunderstands what they're saying. I mean, the rah-rah PC/XBox/PS fanboys take that out of it but that's not what it is

The complaint was actually about the relatively unstable framerate (unstable != low) with a hope tagged on the end that with new Switch hardware seemingly imminent it might be something worth revisiting. Which I think is a fair point to make. Although, with that said, it doesn't change my interest in Bayonetta 3 in the slightest. We're not talking performance like those new Pokemon games, Bayonetta 3's performance good enough that I'd still be buying it on Switch even if it was multi-platform

But...... there are certainly games where that isn't the case, it is most definitely something to note and it is also one of the many reasons why Nintendo does need to release new hardware at some point. And to go back to my other rant, hopefully I'll be able to get that performance from Bayonetta 3 when they do without having to buy the entire game again

@skywake
All of those criticisms are valid and ones I agree with.

The disagreement I tend to have with ppl is not the observational facts or desire for improvement, but rather the response to those facts and the interpretation thereof.

Everything has become so polarized, ppl now scour analyses like a hawk looking for anything that can use to "disqualify" a game and say, "see, X and Y is wrong with it ergo it's unplayable ergo I'm not missing out on anything". It's a coping mechanism for fanboys to shore up their insecurities.

I've played all types of games with all types of framerates. There's two types of games I've encountered. Ones where stutters were consistently visible and interfered with gameplay, and ones where that's not the case. Usually the ones that have exhibited such issues are 30fps games that dip into low 20's, and 60fps games that have sudden swan dives down into the 30's and back up again. It's not so much about how many frames under 60 it is, but rather how quickly it deviates (the slope of the function, if you will... steep slopes cause sudden stutters, like Zelda Link's Awakening when it would instantly drop from 60 to 30 and back up to 60).

Games like Fire Emblem Warriors Three Hopes, and Bayonetta 3, and Neo The World Ends With You... these games all run above 30fps but don't hold a constant 60. Bayonetta 3 comes closest out of all of them. And yet none had issues to the extent my experience was severely impacted. Common theme among them? All higher framerate games that strive for as close to 60 as possible.

Meanwhile other games (The Witcher 3 in certain towns, Y's IX, Ni No Kuni 2, etc.), these games did have issues that severely impacted my enjoyment. The common theme among them? They're all 30fps games that dropped into the low 20's or even further.

@skywake
All of those criticisms are valid and ones I agree with.

The disagreement I tend to have with ppl is not the observational facts or desire for improvement, but rather the response to those facts and the interpretation thereof.

Everything has become so polarized, ppl now scour analyses like a hawk looking for anything that can use to "disqualify" a game and say, "see, X and Y is wrong with it, ergo, it's unplayable, ergo, I'm not missing out on anything". It's a coping mechanism for fanboys to shore up their insecurities.

I've played all types of games with all types of framerates. There's two types of games I've encountered. Ones where stutters were consistently visible and interfered with gameplay, and ones where that's not the case. Usually the ones that have exhibited such issues are 30fps games that dip into low 20's, and 60fps games that have sudden swan dives down into the 30's and back up again. It's not so much about how many frames under 60 it is, but rather how quickly it deviates (the slope of the function, if you will... steep slopes cause sudden stutters, like Zelda Link's Awakening when it would instantly drop from 60 to 30 and back up to 60).

Games like Fire Emblem Warriors Three Hopes, Bayonetta 3, Neo The World Ends With You... these games all run above 30fps but don't hold a constant 60 all the time. Bayonetta 3 comes closest out of all of them. And yet none had issues to the extent my experience was severely impacted. Common theme among them? All higher framerate games that strive for as close to 60 as possible.

Meanwhile other games (The Witcher 3 in certain towns, Y's IX, Ni No Kuni 2, etc.), these games did have issues that severely impacted my enjoyment. The common theme among them? They're all 30fps games that dropped into the low 20's or even further.

That's not to say games that don't hold a perfect 60 are perfect. Sometimes you might notice a minor blip here and there. But the vast majority of the time, it just feels smooth. That's also not to say there aren't games with unlocked framerates that feel bad at times. I distinctly remember Monster Hunter Stories 2 having some noticeable stutters in one or two areas, for example. But even then, it was fine most of the time. Having imperfections isn't the game breaking issue many make it out to be nowadays.

Of course, with power platforms delivering better performance by comparison, people have a tendency to lose perspective and think all games should be able to meet the same benchmarks and if they don't, it's "unacceptable". Forgetting that it wasn't that long ago many PS4/X1 games were releasing at 30fps with drops into the mid 20's (Monster Hunter World), which is far more noticeable than a 60fps game dropping to 50, and many PS4/X1 games also dropped from 60 to 50 and even 40 (Sonic Racing Transformed) and yet ppl still bought them and enjoyed them just fine. In the PS3/360 generation performance was about what we see on Switch. Worse, even. And yet most ppl brushed it off unless it was absolutely dismal.

The performance analyses aren't the problem, it's the kool-aide drinkers buying into and parroting whatever ideology is being peddled by fanboys and elitists that's the problem. The whole, "X types of game needs 60" is the biggest lie ever told. I have a Steamdeck, and in order to conserve battery I run everything at a locked 30. And I have yet to play a single game that didn't feel amazing at 30. Games that people often rattle off as "needing 60" because they're "fast and fluid".

@JaxonH
Yeah, not much disagreement with you there. Like with most things the actual metric that matters is lost on the average person who skims the headline. So you get comments from both sides where people end up arguing over a side effect

I’m already seeing the pirates using the DF review to rationalize not paying but still playing the game. Granted most of them will pick any excuse. I always hope those folks have mountains of cash since they don’t wanna buy anything.

@Ryu_Niiyama
As someone who spent a fair amount of time in the past doing just that very thing, you don't need an excuse for piracy. I hate saying that things are a slippery slope because those arguments are usually BS but with piracy it really is. Once you've crossed that threshold where you can mentally justify pirating content that you both haven't purchased in any form AND have the ability to purchase? You're just going to pirate all the things

I mean I still sail the seas occasionally myself but it's almost purely limited to "I brought this on Vinyl and want the mp3" or "I physically have this old cartridge and I want the ROM". If I had a Steam Deck you can bet I'd be grabbing Switch game images for games I already own on Switch. So I think there are also some grey areas

@JaxonH theres some game genre that demand a high framerate to work( hack e slash, shooters, plataform, racing games e fighting), not having 60fps locked on them could be detrimental to them, how a game like Super Smash Bros Ultimate would play if was runing at 30fps istead of 60fps?(think of this) this genre demand huge deterity and skill level and response from the player, that why 60fps is ideal for this genre
https://www.ign.com/articles/2014/11/05/understanding-frame-r...

It does seem like every 1st party or major 3rd party new release nowadays brings up more questions about when new hardware. Though with PS5/Series X owners very used to 60fps and games starting to creep back to 30fps like Gotham Knights and Plague Tale Requiem there will probably be questions about where's PS5 Pro/Series X2 in the near future.

@Giancarlothomaz
I understand why it's desired, I understand why it's better. But "detrimental"?

There comes a time where you have to start thinking for yourself and stop adopting all your opinions from other people.

Unless you're playing competitively on a national level, any game can run at 30fps. And anyone telling you otherwise is parroting narrative. Yes, it'll feel better. Yes, we all want it. Yes, it's preferred. But "NEEDED"? Absolutely not.

One frame is every 1/60 second in 60fps, versus 2/60 second in 30fps, a difference of only 16 ms at most, and an average of just 8 ms. That's not enough to turn something from "ideal" to "unplayable". I have throughly studied and investigated this topic, with both mathematical evidence and personal experience. You cannot challenge me on this by parroting others opinions. You didn't come to those opinions yourself. You adopted them from others.

They're wrong. It's as simple as that. Yes, games are better at 60. Yes, we all want it. No, the games won't be "ruined" at less.

I'm really not gonna continue arguing about this. I have to explain all this every time some cocky little fanboy starts going off about how "some games need 60". I'm just tired of it. No game NEEDS 60. Some benefit more from it, but no game NEEDS it. Anyone telling you otherwise is just parroting what they've heard.

This whole mantra stems from ignorance and elitism, abusing the word "unplayable" to define it as anything less than optimal. The mindset started among the PC Master Race and then spread among PS/Xbox gamers when they finally got consoles that could justify the elitism. And, it'll spread to Nintendo gamers as well as soon as a new system releases. Human nature I guess.

I dk man...I'm sure that person 60_Frames_Please who hangs out in the comment section might care about frame rates 😜

@NintendoByNature
Lol 😆

There's a lot of ppl who do. But their obsession with it is based in elitist privilege rather than necessity.

Don't get me wrong, I'll be incredibly happy when we get a new system that can iron out performance. Nearly every single Switch game could benefit.

Got some slick merch in for Persona 5 Royal and Bayonetta 3.

The Joker statue was on eBay in like new condition for less than its original MSRP. Goes nicely next to Rise Kujikawa from Persona 4 Golden, with a space in the middle for 2B when the reprint releases summer 2023.

The Bayonetta 3 Trinity Masquerade is embossed, and just looks more impressive overall than the Bayonetta 1/2 Climax Edition. Also have a spot for the Persona 5 Royal One More Edition whenever that comes in, and the shelves will be complete.

@JaxonH for sure lol. I personally don't care one way or another. I didn't even have a problem with the "terrible" port of RotN!

@NeonPizza
Misconstruing what was said.

Nobody claimed those who prefer 60 and flock to it are elitists

I prefer 60 and flock to it

What was said was concerning those who claim anything less than flawless 60fps perfection is "unplayable" or even a massive problem, when many games for most ppl can be enjoyed just fine despite not reaching flawless perfection.

And I stand by every word of that.

Nobody's saying 30 is just as good. Nobody's saying games that can't hold perfect 60 are just as good. Nobody's saying perfect 60 isn't ideal. Only that many games that less than perfect are still good enough. Not every game. There's some I've crossed off my list because performance truly is terrible. But most of those are games that dip into the teens and low 20's. And not just once, but frequently.

@JaxonH when you play a game that demand high reflexes to win, you will understand my point.

@Giancarlothomaz
I've played more games than you can shake a stick at. I've been gaming since the late 80s.

I've played every type of game there is. And not once in my entire life have I ever played a game that needs higher framerates. Not shooters, not even fighters (ya, I said it, not even fighters). Those games benefit from it, and they should strive to achieve it whenever possible, but it's not needed.

Name a game, any game on earth (well, on Steam anyways). And I'll fire it up on Steamdeck right now, cap it at 30 fps and take a video proving its perfectly playable.

Even games "demanding high reflexes" don't demand reflexes so high that 8ms is going to make a flip of a difference. The average total latency you experience is at least 50 ms, for any game. Another 8 isn't gonna break the experience. I don't care what anyone says. I trust mathematical truth over arbitrary opinions.

Unless you're on an eSports team where the upper echelon of talent is all tightly bound at the tail end of the skill distribution to the point winning and losing depends on mere milliseconds, it's nothing more than a luxury that feels better. And last I checked, you're not an eSports gamer competing against the world's best. In fact, you probably don't even have a quality setup to reduce latency as much as possible. It astounds me ppl go off about the average 8ms latency from 30 vs 60 but are completely oblivious to the 20-30 ms extra latency from their TV. "That average 8ms extra latency from 30 fps will make these games unplayable, but the 20-30 ms from my tv/controller won't" is flat out irony. Even more so when talking about a 60 fps game that simply dips to 50fps, which is only a 3 milliseconds difference.

At least some ppl here are aware of their TV and controller latency and are consistent in their beliefs, and specifically buy newer TVs with quality gaming modes of around 10ms (still must account for system and controller latency). I can at least respect that.

I'll say it again. These are not opinions you came to yourself. These are opinions you were taught. It's ideology. Gamers buy into whatever is repeated ad nauseum whether it's right or wrong, rarely questioning the narrative to come to their own conclusions.

So far situations like the end of the September 2021 Direct trailer are the only times when framerate has been a problem in Bayonetta 3 (it's hard to dodge in those instances). I also have trouble blocking with Viola but that's not a tech related issue.

Finally starting to get into the swing of things in Bayonetta 3.

When I first started out, it became painfully obvious I was rusty as heck. With wicked weaves gone and a new system introduced, with new combos, even the few I remembered had changed. I couldn't even remember how to dodge for goodness sakes.

But now, I'm finally starting to get back into the groove. That last fight was intoxicating. Getting better at dodges and witch time, getting better at combos. When everything starts coming together it feels so dang good.