
I absolutely adore the System Shock remake from Nightdive Studios. When it launched on the PS5 last year, this reimagining of Looking Glass' 1994 classic was just about all I could think about for weeks on end thanks to its immersive gameplay, oppressive atmosphere, and stunning visuals that blend pixel-art textures with advanced lighting technology.
I do not, however, adore System Shock on the Switch 2. In fact, the game’s performance on Nintendo’s console is so poor at launch, I’d recommend giving it a wide berth for the time being.
Let’s start with the positives. In terms of content, everything from the PC and console release is retained here on the Switch 2 port. This is a strictly single-player narrative experience with three difficulty options available across four separate categories: Combat, Mission, Cyber, and Puzzle – lots to tinker with to suit your tastes, then.

Your mission is to survive the horrors within Citadel Station and bring down the rogue AI, SHODAN. The station itself is separated into distinct floors, starting with Medical. You’ll need to explore each floor thoroughly, collecting audio logs, equipment, and weapons, while combating a plethora of cybernetic monstrosities. Although System Shock 2 is widely regarded as the spiritual predecessor to BioShock, you can still see the latter’s DNA in the original game, and Nightdive’s remake showcases it wonderfully. The audio logs, in particular, really help to provide key narrative context.
System Shock’s FPS gameplay is slow and methodical; you’ll inch your way around the station to get the drop on your enemies, while the in-game inventory will need frequent TLC to ensure you’re only carrying the essentials. Thankfully, any junk you do pick up on the way can be vaporised into scrap via the inventory screen. This can then be taken to designated locations in the station and swapped for cash.
You’re encouraged, then, to pick up as much stuff as you can and vaporise what you don’t actually need. This may prove tedious for some, but for me it was reminiscent of the attache case from Resident Evil 4, with larger items taking up more inventory slots. I enjoy the rhythmic maintenance required to keep it in tip-top shape.

Weapons procured along the way do a good job at fending off enemies, and there’s a healthy mix of melee and projectile at your disposal. Ammo is quite scarce, so you’ll often find that using the wrench or pipe is a good option for some of the weaker foes, while stronger enemies will require beefier weaponry. Like most modern Nightdive games, gyro aiming is included for fine-tuning, but you can also tinker with its sensitivity in the options menu if you want a greater range of motion.
At various points during your stay at Citadel Station, you’ll also hack into Cyberspace terminals to access locked doors throughout each floor. The Cyberspace is a digital maze in which you fly around in first-person and shoot down colourful enemies. It’s a pretty psychedelic experience; one that Jeff Minter would be proud of, and the visuals on display are truly spectacular.
What’s even better is that these areas don’t outstay their welcome; the bulk of your time will be spent exploring the station, so when the Cyberspace sections do occasionally show up, they add a welcome dose of variety. Meanwhile, other puzzles on each floor are perhaps a bit closer to BioShock in their presentation, requiring you to rewire circuits to direct the flow of electricity and unlock new passageways. These are fun, if a bit throwaway.

I’d love to end the review there and urge you to buy System Shock on Switch 2; fundamentally, it’s a great remake that remains faithful to the original while introducing a host of improvements for modern audiences. Unfortunately, the frame rate is absolutely all over the place and it ruins the experience. [Update: A delayed day one patch has been announced and is due before the end of December 2025 which, according to Nightdive, will aim to improve performance.]
Nightdive is gunning for 60fps here, but it almost never reaches its goal, and the unlocked frame rate results in some frequent, heavy drops while exploring. It makes basic aiming feel off all the time, and although gyro helps stabilise it somewhat, it’s still nowhere near as smooth as it should be.
It’s especially frustrating when you consider that System Shock would be the perfect showcase for mouse controls on the Switch 2. You can toggle this option for both normal exploration and the Cyberspace sections, and in theory it works really well. There’s very minimal input lag which, compared to the disastrous Skyrim port recently, is very welcome, while opening up the inventory screen immediately brings up an on-screen cursor to make management much easier.

Again, however, even with the mouse controls, the frame rate suffers from frequent hitches that make it near-impossible to aim accurately. You’ll pan the camera around to get an enemy in your sights, but when the game tries to manage all the background visual information, it instantly judders, causing you to completely overshoot your mark. It’s extremely frustrating.
Curiously, the Cyberspace sections run perfectly – a solid 60fps with no noticeable drops. This is great, but as I mentioned earlier, these jaunts are few and far between, so the vast majority of System Shock is, sadly, plagued by poor performance. To be doubly sure that it wasn't something iffy with my Switch 2, I transferred the game from the SD Express Card to the onboard memory – sadly, the issues remained unchanged, and a pre-release patch seemingly did nothing to smooth things out.
Coming from Nightdive, a team that prides itself on delivering slick gameplay experiences, this is a disappointing port, to say the least.
Conclusion
System Shock is, on paper, a brilliant remake that thoughtfully updates the 1994 original for modern systems, introducing both gyro aiming and mouse support along with a host of graphical upgrades. Unfortunately, the move over to the Switch 2 has tanked the performance, resulting in a game that never feels satisfying enough to play.
Should this get fixed in the future, it may well be worth investigating, but for now, you'll be better off playing it on another platform.





Comments 96
What a shame. Just wait until the patches come.
Brutal! Surprised this game is a game to have performance issues.
Nightdive Studios' quality seems to have taken a, ahem, dive recently
> but for now, you'll be better off playing it on another platform
Getting flashbacks now. Surely this is not a trend, right? ... right?
For the one negative, Nightdive didn’t add any new puzzles to the game. Everything that was in the original 1994 game is here, just with much better visuals. Playing it on PC, they still recommend a keyboard and mouse.
This is very unlike Nightdive. What a shame. This seems to be a recurring theme with Switch 2 at the moment.
i got this game in humble choice and didnt care for it, it felt like i was drunkenly stumbling from location to location doing random stuff in order to progress instead of progressing organically or solving puzzles normally, i guess. this game is definitely too old school for me, and nightdive didnt really do anything to change the game for the modern day. at LEAST have a normal map system, yknow
Sounds like they rushed to get this out the door before the holidays.
What a Shock, a Nightdive game that has performance issues...
Sounds like the game would benefit from a 30fps cap. Last gen versions up to Xbox One X all ran at 30fps. If Nightdive wanted to put more effort into the port though, I’m sure they could get it to 60fps with the right tweaks. When it released in 2023, I played through System Shock at 60fps on my Steam Deck with a mix of low/medium/high settings. I had a great time with it.
No excuse for this. Honestly these companies should be ashamed releasing something like this in this state.
I'm growing increasingly despondent with the Switch 2. I know that lucklustre ports aren't on Nintendo but the list of games that I was excited to play on Switch 2 are now making their way onto my PS5 wishlist instead.
Wonder how the Switch version runs!
PS4 performance was quite disappointing too, I picked the game up there a while back and didn't seem to be a stable 30fps, not sure if was uncapped but was very distracting playing the game. I was wondering how it would even work on Switch one, as PS4 was struggling.
Oh no! I was so hyped to have this on my Switch. Okay I will continue with SS2 during Christmas.
That's not like NightDive at all.
Confident they will have a patch out for it soon.
Most powerful Nintendo system ever + 30 year old game = performance issues? Wow.
A game that should run well on a system, and then shocking everyone with its shoddy performance?
Now that is a System Shock.
How on earth did Nightdive manage to mess this one up. With their track record they should be more than competent to release this game in a good state and not a mess like this. Baffling.
Thanks for the review, wasn't as interested in this personally considering its genre (although based on what people mentioned last time and now this review I might give it a try at some point), but I hope it will be improved sooner rather than later at least through patches - by the way, this is exactly why I wish people considered all the aspects of games, look at how disproportionate the complaining has been about other games in general and in particular ports on Switch 2 despite them being at the very least decent if not straight up good or better overall, for example the latest Tomb Raider port which is perfectly fine and especially when it comes to playing it unlike this...
Why are we getting so many Switch 2 games with such bad performance??? Surely these devs need taking to task because it’s sheer laziness.
Yep. That's an Atari game.
honestly worried Atari's acquisition of Nightdive is starting to erode Nightdive's quality and integrity
Ouch! I know this one has been talked about a lot, too. Some sloppy ports lately. But I guess that is video games, particularly for late Nintendo-console ports. Not all the time, naturally. Hopefully this gets patched up well! I'm curious about it.
Lazy, unoptimized ports weren't going away because we have better hardware.
This needed to come out before christmas as some other horrible performing ports recently... I hope they patch it
A rare miss from Nightdive I'll have to give this a shot on PS5 instead.
Some info:
https://nightdivestudios.com/system-shock-remake-day-one-patch-preview/
Looks like delayed day one patch. Let's hope it will be very quick.
The only one other review on Youtube is saying that the game runs great without any hitches at 60fps and the footage shows it, so who's to believe? lol
@gamepadnomad This doesn't make me despondent about Switch 2, but about Nightdive. I won't be buying this game on ANY platform if this is how they're going to treat customers on this one. Meanwhile, the console has a glut of great experiences to enjoy right now, so I don't think I'm missing much.
Nightdive has been incredible. I am going to go ahead and blame Atari for this one.
@Kulhy I wouldn't be surprised if it's Nintendo's certification taking forever again, Nightdive probably expected this patch to be approved by Day One if not even earlier and it had to be delayed because of Nintendo's awful patch approval process.
Well there's a patch but not until end of December:
https://nightdivestudios.com/system-shock-remake-day-one-patch-preview/
edit: beaten
"Game's performance is terrible on Switch 2!"
Switch 1 owners:

This is becoming a common theme. Wish Nintendo would do more hands-on quality control and approval
Sounds like it will run as smooth as butter on Switch 3!
More interested in hearing how the Switch 1 version runs.
@FantasiaWHT so this came out in 2023.
Why do these devs continue to sabotage their hard earned reputations. Shocking, something should be done in my opinion, we deserve better.
I am guessing this review is based on version 2.0 which was the review build but the game had a patch 2.0.2 which makes a big difference to performance - could the reviewer confirm which build they played? The patch went live around 30 hours ago so very unlikely it's the patched version reviewed.
@LikelySatan So this came out in 1994.
@FantasiaWHT this isn't an upgraded port of the 1994 version, it's rebuilt from scratch and shares none of the code or assets with the 1994 version
Honestly, the console should just be called “Switch 2: Performance Issues.”
It’s underpowered by design, and developers seem stuck choosing between “barely runs” and “couldn’t be bothered optimising.”
How could they launch it in this state? Really disappointed in Nightdive, although if I had to guess I’d pin it as a “nice” perk of being under ATARI’s ownership now, more than their decision…
Still, off to the wishlist it goes, hopefully they can get it to a much better state asap.
This recent slate of bad Switch 2 versions is baffling… I won’t support it with my money.
@johnnymind can we stop it with the gaslighting? I see you in every thread posting the same stuff over and over. Maybe “perfectly fine for you”, comparisons are out there and are undeniable facts as much as you want to make us look like we’re a bunch of entitled gfx nerds, the reality is that you just have way lower standards (I mean, Tomb Raider is perfectly fine? Sure…) and that’s ok, more power to you, but kindly avoid twisting the facts because there is no reason for the game to be so technically lacking compared to other platforms, we paid more than 500 bucks for a successor upgrade and the hardware is more than capable, we have reasonable expectations and we don’t have to bend and say grace just because a PS3 game runs with a better framerate…
you guys could’ve just stuck with the Switch 1 then
@Pat_trick not true. We already have amazing ports so early in the hardwares lifespan, and they already have a patch to help with the performance so it's not the hardware.
It's just laziness,
Why even release it yet? It's appalling the mentality of publishers/developers these days, rush it out, make the cash and fix it later. Best thing consumers can do is refuse to pay for any release in this state on launch, just wait and purchase once fixed, it's the only way they will learn this can not be tolerated. Surprised to hear this from Nightdive
@PushMyGran86 I wonder what having the Switch 2 dev kit was like for them. They are Nightdive. Perhaps the kits aren't very compatible or that they used most of their expertise doing something else. Who ports the port studio? Or maybe it all just sucks and was gonna suck from day one. Switch 2: the port and patch system.
@PushMyGran86 Saying “we already have good ports” doesn’t prove the Switch 2 isn’t underpowered, it proves how hard developers already have to work just to make games run.
Every “great” port is leaning on DLSS, aggressive resolution drops, and CPU cuts, and the fact that performance patches are needed this early is a red flag, not a defence.
When multiple studios across different engines hit the same limits on a brand-new console, that isn’t laziness, that’s mobile-class hardware already running out of headroom.
@DashKappei What the hell? If your opinion is valid, then so is his. And @JohnnyMind basically lives here. We wait for his opinions, even if we don't agree or relate. Who are you?
Edit: My bad, you've been here a long time. Surely if anyone could question him, it's you, but are we not all different people? We need to coexist. I don't think there's gaslighting going on here...
@Pat_trick yes the hardware is underpowered because it's a glorified handheld. But like is said studios have taken the effort to utilise the systems tricks, dlss etc to give us amazing ports of cyberpunk, outlaws, shadows...
They haven't, they rushed it out when they knew it wasn't ready, and now we wait for a day one patch to rectify it when it should have been when it was released.
I'm noticing a trend.
@DashKappei calm down. @johnnymind is our person who can find the good in the bad. opinions are not facts.
@Zeeba I heard NintendoLife had to start charging @JohnnyMind rent. Well said though, that was a bit over aggressive and uncalled for to be honest, the point could have been made in a nicer manner if needed to be made
When will devs learn to stop rushing games out and patching later? We've been saying that for 10+ years though.
They borked the System Shock 2 remaster with gyro that barely moved at all with no sensitivity settings, and they borked this release by not capping at 30 when all the similarly powered systems run it at 30. I don't mind them going for 60 if they can hit it but if they can't, just cap at 30. Or do 40 for goodness sakes! Why isn't this capped at 40!
@Pat_trick
Every system has limits. "Underpowered" is all perspective. PS4 is underpowered compared to PS4 Pro. PS4 Pro is underpowered compared to PS5. PS5 is underpowered compared to PS5 Pro. PS5 Pro is underpowered compared to PC.
Switch 2 is exactly where it's supposed to be. When it's running Final Fantasy VII Remake better than Steamdeck and PS4, it's perfectly suited to run a game like this. When Resident Evil Requiem and Pragmata are releasing day and date because it's so easy to run on Switch 2, it's perfectly suited for games like this.
Anyone can cherry pick bad ports and claim "underpowered". For some games it actually will be underpowered to do them justice. This is not one of them. And 95% of games released thus far, have ran perfectly satisfactory.
@PushMyGran86 We actually agree that the Switch 2 is underpowered.
Where I disagree is calling it “developer laziness.” Optimising for a low-power hybrid console is expensive, time-consuming, and often cut due to deadlines and budgets, not apathy.
When the same performance issues show up across different studios and engines, the common factor isn’t effort, it’s limited hardware capacity.
@JaxonH I agree that “underpowered” is relative, but it’s not meaningless, it’s about how much compromise is needed to run modern games well.
Switch 2 outperforming PS4 or Steam Deck in specific cases doesn’t mean it has comfortable margins, it means those titles were heavily tailored to fit.
You can cherry-pick bad ports, but you can also cherry-pick amazing ports that got extra time and resources, which you're doing. The recurring need for heavy scaling, DLSS, and early patches shows the system is already operating close to its limits, not incapable, just constrained.
@Pat_trick it's laziness because they released a game in such a state when they know it can be better (hence the patches). Clearly not really interested in something they made, if you are going to do a port, put the effort in.
Also this game doesn't exactly run great on some other consoles too, so yes it is laziness in my opinion
@PushMyGran86 Shipping a game in a rough state doesn’t automatically mean the developers didn’t care, it usually means deadline and budget pressure. If they truly weren’t interested, they wouldn’t be patching it at all.
And if the game struggles on other consoles too, that actually undermines the “laziness” argument. Recurring issues across platforms point to production and engine constraints. But I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.
@Pat_trick
All games should be tailored to fit. That's the point. Yet not all devs do that.
Having said that, Final Fantasy VII Remake was heavily tailored to PS4 (the system it was built for) and was heavily tailored to Steamdeck and even has it's own Steamdeck settings in game under graphics profiles.
So you can't say it was "just tailored to Switch 2 and that's why". No. It was tailored to all systems, and Switch 2 runs it better.
So there's no excuse for games like this. The problem here is they were overly ambitious (or downright foolish, hard to say which tbh) and didn't cap at 30, when other similarly powered systems were capped at 30.
@JaxonH I agree games should be tailored per platform, but FFVII Remake is the exception, not the rule. It got years of post-launch work and heavy platform-specific optimisation everywhere it released. Most ports don’t get that level of time or budget.
Calling it “no excuse” ignores that capping at 30 isn’t always a simple switch. Late-stage CPU, memory, or engine constraints aren’t easy to sort out. That’s not laziness, it’s scope and hardware limits colliding with deadlines.
It’s become common to label developers as incompetent whenever a game isn’t well optimised but the issue is far more complicated and that attitude is overly dismissive.
@Pat_trick
I can literally cap any game on my Steamdeck with a toggle. I can literally cap any game on my chipped Switch OLED with a toggle.
It absolutely is that simple. And the original release was literally capped at 30.
@Pat_trick
I would say you're not wrong for being angry at the state of this game's release, but direct your anger appropriately. These devs should have set a cap like every other version (and like the Switch 1 version I might add!). That's where the anger should be rightfully directed. That's where mine is directed.
@Pat_trick I love how whenever a game launches in a pisspoor state on PS5/Xbox/PC its "the developer/engine/publisher/literally everything under the sun" issue but when the exact same thing happens on Switch 2 it's "omg underpowered trash, developers already hitting the limit, Nintendo is cooked, they need taylor made ports" etc
The double standards are real and absolutely ridiculous.
@JaxonH You’re conflating a user-level frame limiter with a development-side cap, they aren’t the same.
System toggles only limit output they don’t change simulation rates, CPU scheduling, streaming, or frame pacing. That’s why 30fps targets are designed into engines early, not safely added at the end.
The fact that this title struggled on multiple platforms matters, because it tells you where the constraint actually is: engine and CPU-bound systems under an ambitious scope. Late capping doesn’t resolve those bottlenecks, it just hides them.
That’s why this isn’t about effort or caring. It’s about technical limits meeting production realities. Reducing that to “they should’ve just capped it” is an oversimplification.
@Solid_Python That’s a straw man, you’re arguing against a position I haven’t taken. I don’t give PS5, Xbox, or PC a free pass for bad launches; the same factors apply across all platforms: engine limits, production decisions, and deadlines.
If you want to argue consistency, that’s fine, but do it against what I’m actually saying, not a caricature of it.
SO will nintendo life re-review the game in the end of month? lol
@Pat_trick considering your entire comment history on this website is nothing but constant skepticism and pessimism against Nintendo - no, you are the caricature of that guy online.
I don't believe you hold the same standards towards other platforms because there's no basis in me beliving you beyond your word, your word which is nothing but complaining about Nintendo 90% of the time.
Constantly parroting "Switch 2 is underpowered" is categorically wrong for the type of device it is. It's underpowered if you compare it to nothing but 200w giant coffins that are constantly tethered to sockets. It's a powerful hybrid device especially for it's price, that's not debatable.
@Solid_Python That’s pure ad hominem. You’re not engaging with the argument at all, you’re trying to dismiss it by attacking my supposed motives and comment history. That’s not evidence, it’s avoidance.
Criticising Nintendo more often doesn’t magically invalidate technical points, nor does it prove I hold different standards. It just means Nintendo is the topic being discussed. If you think something I’ve said here is wrong, then point out what is wrong and why.
Hand-waving it away as “you just hate Nintendo” isn’t a rebuttal,it’s a refusal to argue on substance.
If you want to make a point about the subject, namely System Shock on the Switch 2, make it. Right now you're just running away from the discussion.
Does the PS5 ever have real performance issues like this? Just stop putting games on this thing if they are broken! Modern gaming is such a pain....
@DashKappei So Nintendo Life themselves in their reviews, all those who have been playing games like Tomb Raider (and that's just an example, I've seen exaggerated reactions even towards games such as Age of Imprisonment despite Digital Foundry's overall praise) mentioning it overall being fine exactly because it has some issues, but far from the extent of ports like this one have been "gaslighting" people as well?
This is exactly what I've been pointing out, such reactions are disproportionate - there's no good reason to be that aggressive in general and even less so when it comes to something like this...
@beltmenot I’m as calm as a cucumber, on the other hand your rudeness is uncalled for.
@zeeba Who am I? So I couldn’t talk because you thought I was a new member but now I can because you’ve seen I’ve been around 15 years longer than Johnny? What kind of gatekeeping hive mind logic is that?
Everyone is entitled to their opinion on both camps, what is getting old is seeing the usual two or three posters constantly calling out others because they criticize games for their technical performance and call it like it is. Technical specifications are not opinions, they are facts. What is subjective is the experience. I don’t see people here constantly commenting “wow you guys are such pushovers tech-illiterate enjoy your awful ports” when people comment on games failing to me certain criteria, yet it’s a constant seeing people in the comments, with the same people always there, gaslighting people who have different standards and it’s getting old.
@johnnymind, if you thought that was aggressive, instead of simply being a pushback to your rhetoric after the millionth similar post then I’m sorry you felt that way, wasn’t my intention, nuance is lost in written post sometimes, my bad. My point still stands tho, and you seem to have completely missed it, there is no issue in being ok with Tomb Raider or Age of Imprisonment or the MGS collection on Switch any other game, just accept you have lower standards instead of putting the blame on people who expect a Switch port of a PS2 game to not run at half the framerate or a PS3 game on Switch 2 being in many ways graphically inferior.
@beltmenot yeah, I always appreciate his commentary, in most threads he adds a lot just by reminding everyone to think about it differently.
Also I tend to agree people blame The SW2 for bad ports too much. Cyberpunk alone proves how much it can do, and more recent multiplatform games released on it have have had stellar graphics.
Part of me wonders if it's a technical difference, like if porting games that weren't built aware they need to be ready for SW2 is harder than designing a AAA game that works for all consoles including a SW2, because ports seem to run the gambit in quality but most new games either have reasonable downgrades or work amazingly well from what I have seen.
@Pat_trick
Again, the Switch 1 version has a 30 fps cap.
It's ok to accept evidence as information and not an attack.
@Ganon821 sure it does, recent example is Skate Story. Awful performance even on PS5 Pro.
@Pat_trick yeah no, not gonna work here buddy. Your comment history shouldn't be ignored because it shows your clear constant focus on this website, it shows your intent and your Push Square comment history supports that as well.
Well would you look at that at the sister Playstation website - nothing but constant gloating about how Xbox and Nintendo are competing in who's the worst, how Switch 2 is underpowered trash, handwaving publishers saying PS5 is too expensive in Japan, YOU YOURSELF handwaving performance issues on PS5 with the latest one being on Borderlands 4 saying "I will just buy it when it gets patched in a year or two" and nothing else.
But wait, what happend about "criticizing the pipeline of development" in constantly giant paragraphs like you do about Nintendo? Where's your comment about how Playstation is an underpowered trash that can't handle games? Hmmmmm, but on the Nintendo website the comment history from you is nothing but constant pessimism and skepticism towards Nintendo, calling Switch 2 underpowered from the day it was revealed, posting nothing but negative takes and contrarianism yet i'm supposed to take you and what you say seriously?
You work under the clear agenda my guy and your comment history supports that, you're not fooling anyone here. Engaging with you or what you're saying is pointless because you're nothing more than just another boring concern troll that is here to farm ragebait talking points while trying to present himself as "holier than thou".
@JaxonH No one’s being “attacked” here. Pointing out technical context isn’t an emotional response, framing disagreement as hurt feelings is.
If evidence or pushback feels like hostility, that’s a rhetorical move to sidestep the substance, not an insight into my state of mind.
We can discuss the facts, or we can keep speculating about emotions. Only one of those advances the argument.
@Solid_Python This isn’t an argument, it’s character assassination because you can’t deal with the substance. Digging through comment history and screaming “agenda” is what people do when they’ve got nothing technical to push back on.
Criticising Nintendo hardware more often isn’t bias, it’s proportional. They ship lower-powered systems, so the constraints show up more visibly. I criticise PS5 issues too,acknowledging that patches happen isn’t “handwaving,” it’s reality.
You haven’t challenged a single point I’ve made. You’re just trying to disqualify the speaker so you don’t have to engage. That’s not exposing an agenda, it’s avoiding a debate you can’t win.
@Pat_trick
Nobody said anything about emotions.
I'm pointing out my observation that you're rejecting clear evidence as information that should be considered, digested and used to reassess... simply because it attacks your worldview.
@JaxonH No, you’re still pathologising disagreement instead of defending your claim. Disagreeing with your conclusion isn’t “rejecting evidence,” it’s interpreting that evidence within a wider technical context.
The 30fps cap is a data point, not a trump card. Treating pushback as “defending a worldview” is just a way to avoid explaining why that evidence should be decisive. If my reasoning is wrong, show where it fails, don’t speculate about my mindset.
Hang on, am I on Reddit or something??
Nope, after a check I guess it's just fun times in the NintendoLife comments.
Guys, you have all made your points, time to move on and let bygones be bygones. Nobody is going to win, it's done now.
@Pat_trick
I've already defended my claim. You're just pretending not to see it for some reason.
Your Claim: System Shock Remake could not cap at 30 fps
Supporting Evidence: [none]
Counter Evidence:
It is not I who is "not defending my claim".
@Pat_trick I don't need to "challenge" your points because your points are the same boring cliche people like you constantly parrot without any substance behind it.
You're not providing any riveting discussion or commentary here by saying "Switch 2 is less powerfull than a PS5" yeah no sh1t Sherlock, PS5 is a giant white coffin that eats 200w of power while constantly needing to be connected to a power socket.
And yet you EXPECT Nintendo to produce a hybrid hardware that pushes to the same limits as that coffin at 450$ at 10-25watts when even 1000$-1500$ portable PC's can't reach that power? Holy technically innept Batman. Switch 2 isn't "uNdErPoWeReD", you're not scaling it's power fairly in any way, shape or form.
But please, do remind us how glad you are that you didn't buy a Switch 2 yet you're still constantly on this website.
@JaxonH You’re misrepresenting my claim, then declaring victory over it. I never said “System Shock Remake could not cap at 30fps.” I said that late-stage capping is not equivalent to designing and validating a platform around a 30fps target, especially on new hardware.
None of your “evidence” contradicts that.
System-level frame limiters are not engine-level caps. Existing 30fps caps on older consoles reflect decisions made earlier in development under different constraints. And “any game not tied to framerate can cap” is a generalisation that ignores CPU scheduling, simulation step coupling, streaming, and frame pacing issues that surface per platform.
So yes, you’ve listed data points. What you haven’t done is explain why those data points invalidate the claim about development timing, platform constraints, and technical risk.
Asserting equivalence isn’t the same as demonstrating it.
To quote you: "I've already defended my claim. You're just pretending not to see it for some reason."
@Solid_Python You’re still arguing against things I haven’t said. I’ve never expected Switch 2 to match PS5 power, and pretending I did is just another straw man to avoid the actual point.
Saying Switch 2 is relatively underpowered isn’t a value judgment, it’s a technical description of how tight its performance margins are for modern engines.
And the fact you’ve pivoted from technical claims to insults, power draw comparisons, and “why are you even here” says enough. If the argument were as weak as you claim, you wouldn’t need to dodge it this hard.
Keep running away, buddy.
There are far more visually impressive games running with buttery performance on this system. Clearly a developer rush job. It's possibly Nintendo's fault for not getting dev kits in time, but the bottom line is developers shouldn't release games that aren't ready yet. This is an industry wide problem. Release it, fix it later.
@Pat_trick
I didn't declare victory. I just bullet pointed the evidence. It's not my fault if it grossly leans in favor of my stance and against yours.
Nor is your claim misrepresented. Anyone can go read your post claiming they couldn't just easily cap at 30, despite Switch version doing exactly that.
@DennyCrane
It's never about "winning". Most people commenting are tribalists with a predefined worldview warped by their biases and emotionally driven preferences.
It's more about exposing the claims to other readers. I never engage with a debate thinking I will change their mind, even if I present all the evidence in the world. But I can expose the faulty logic for others. And I think I've done that clearly and convincingly.
@DashKappei Your point makes sense, I'm just saying that we are commenters on an article on a video game website. If someone accepts the limitations that a portable console has, I don't think it's right to say they are gaslighting everyone else. For example, I'm looking forward to Pragmata and I have since the beginning. I preordered a PS5 copy, but I would like to try it on the Switch 2. There are games I will only buy on PlayStation. But since this is a Nintendo forum, I come here for Nintendo details.
Criticisms are welcome by me. It's been this forum that informs me what is or is not a game key-card, and we definitely have apologists for those cards.
You likely never planned to stop posting but your posts are important. I only hope that my posts provide people with ideas as yours do. But I still don't think we need to attack each other over the limitations we accept. It's sad that System Shock has so many problems. But I fear this problem is about to get much worse... In 2026.
@JaxonH You keep collapsing my argument into something simpler because it’s easier to attack. I never said a 30fps cap was impossible, I said late-stage capping is not the same as designing and validating a build around 30fps on new hardware.
None of your bullet points address that distinction. Listing existing caps doesn’t prove equivalence, it just ignores the technical difference. Repeating it louder doesn’t change that. You can keep shouting the same thing louder and louder, the meaning stays the same.
Did Nintendo just give no one S2 dev kits...?
Perhaps you should review the game with the day 1 patch since that's how the public will actually play it. That being said, performance issues are so overblown most the time. I was just reading up on the Turok trilogy remake, and just for fun went back and watched some of the N64 videos of the game. Amazing fun at low frame rates. Having just played the SS2 remake, this is not doom. The slow methodical pace of the game should minimize the impact of the performance issues from a gameplay standpoint.
For those who own both Switch 1 and 2: I bought the Switch 2 version, I can download the Switch 1 version for free from the eShop with a 100% discount! Nice.
Hm, having played the remake on PC, I'm somewhat surprised at the wonderful visuals being listed as a Joy. I would describe the graphics style as... odd. I found the visuals hard to parse, due to them being extremely busy, noisy and strangely lit. Having played the original back in '94, I know it's trying for a modern take on the combination of sprites and 3D interiors, but the end result is not easy on the eyes. On top of that, the text size in the PC version is tiny and not adjustable, making it virtually unplayable on handhelds, unless you have 20/20 vision. I wonder if they added a text size option for the Switch versions?
Just like the Switch 1, for every impressive port you'll have one that's shocking.
So tired of publishers pushing out games for this system when they’re not ready. If this keeps up, I am just going back to Steam for third party games.
Is it possible it's not the games fault but the Switch 2's limited hardware?
I really expected this one to run at a locked 60, I have already played it on Steam Deck and was going to double dip if that was the case but with the port being in the state it is I will pass until it gets updates to make that happen. If it ever does.
Better get used performance issues from 3rd party games as its only going to get worse.
Show Comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...