Video: Digital Foundry Gives Panic Button's Wolfenstein II Port The Tick Of Approval

Better to have occasional low resolutions than no game at all.

The fact that it runs at a higher framerate than Doom is pretty damn impressive. This and Doom really shows the upper-bounds of what's possible for third-party games.

Of course, I'm expecting 60fps and at least 800p-900p docked with Metroid Prime 4, considering Metroid (except on the 3DS) was always 60fps, even Other M.

I love digital foundry. But I feel that they were rather harsh on DOOM. As long as I can turn motion blur off on this, I will be perfectly satisfied. I understand this isn't my PS4, lol.

Looks to be a pretty good port, hopefully a patch can fix the performance of Wolfenstein 3-D.

After 2 big wins for Panic Button, I'm really interested to see what they are making for the Switch next.

@JHDK 3 big wins.
-Rocket League
-Doom
-Wolfenstein II

Can’t be convinced that AAA third-party games can’t run on Switch after these two awesome ports. This game is amazing.

"The resolution in docked mode ranged from a top end of 720p to 1216x684 to 540p and 432p, all the way down to 640x360."

OK even DOCKED the game runs not stable 30fps and can go lower than a Nintendo WII resolution in 2018... I cannot UNDERSTAND that...

60€ for that thing ? No thank you ! It's in between 5 and 10€ for XBOX ONE and PS4 with solid 60fps and 1080p with highres textures...

Incredible to defend the fact to pay 10 time the price for a really subsubsub version of the game...

@AlternateButtons OW ok 60€ for the portable version, ok ok

But less than 10€ for 60fps/1080p constant :

https://www.cdiscount.com/jeux-pc-video-console/ps4/wolfenstein-ii-the-new-colossus-jeu-ps4/f-1030401-3612402194361.html?awc=6948_1530423357_ed71be35d0a579cb9db23db152c45082&refer=zanoxpb&cid=affil&cm_mmc=zanoxpb-_-169249

Everything's alright ! :/

@Cobalt
This game doesn't even run at 1080p 60fps on XBO/PS4. Stock XBO hits 840p and PS4 is 1080p but neither of them keep a solid 60fps. They drop to 50fps and below at times, with cutscenes at 30fps. If you want the performance you speak of it'll have to be PC.

@Cobalt Weren’t the PS4 and XBOX versions released at the same price? Won’t the Switch version go down in price as well in a few months?

@AlternateButtons

Sure but gosh, we talk about docked mode here ! Meaning displayed on TV ! :/

I understand the people who only have a Switch but to be honest, I'd prefer to litteraly skip this game then if I had only a Switch !

Switch needs its OWN GAMES ! They have to show what the system is capable of... because it's not dumb to be scared for the next Metroid Prime after that...

@Mrtoad Good call. I forgot about Rocket League.

Good god, look at those resolution. I loved this game - playing it this butchered is a waste.

@AlternateButtons

Yeah BUT Nintendo sells the Switch as A HOME CONSOLE that you can bring everywhere ! I'm sorry but in that case, the Switch is an handheld that you can eventually plug on your TV !

There is something not right in their communication then... :/

@EvilLucario I don’t think this and Doom are the upper bounds. I think more is possible with time, money and experience. Nintendo has already done better.

While this is great, I believe more can be done with the Switch. We just need more than a year to see what its truly capable of. I mean try comparing the first PS2 games and the last PS2 games and just see the technical differences between them. It takes time to really utilize a console to its fullest, and Panic Button is making some remarkable progress.

@CaPPa @Mrtoad @AlternateButtons There's not much point using logic with @Cobalt , going by his previous posts he seems to lack common sense.

@Medic_alert You mean like it's been having for the entire year and a few months it's been out? Come on. Can we stop pretending it hasn't already?

Despite the sacrifices this port looks amazing, though i wonder why this is.

I understand that framerate and resolution is more based on power, but textures?

I think the textures are low because of keeping the data as low as possible. For instance if the Switch version had larger data or 32 gb cards at minimal, would they be able to raise the texture quality without effecting the performance?

I think it works like that but i dont really know for sure.

Only ports play worst on Switch, if Bethesda truly want to test the water they'll release an exclusive title for Switch like how Doom 64 was exclusive to just N64. The reason Doom 64 ran great at smooth 60fps with solid gameplay is that the team developing it didn't have to cut corners cause there's no other ports that holds it back.

@Nunya When you know that a Wii is about 480p with no HDMI output... o_O !

@Mrtoad I am actually surprised that Doom is also still at (almost) full price, think cheapest is something like 45-50 EUR. Maybe not enough competition. With recent/upcoming releases like fortnite, paladins, shadow gun legends maybe doom will finally drop in price. I was lucky with a 3 = 2 deal in January so I paid around 37 EUR for it.

I wonder if the people here commenting about the resolution actually bought and played the game themselves?
I bought it and I'm having a great time with it, the resolution is absolutely fine and when it drops it doesn't stay that way for long.
I waited for the game to be released on the Switch and I don't regret it.
For my needs, it is a perfect fit as I can take it anywhere and play on the TV at night.
People here moan about something that didn't even try. Crazy.

Digital Foundary - notoriously harsh - say they game is a technical feat and even with the compromises is still a feat and a worthwhile gaming experience - internet snarks still say it’s rubbish (probably without playing) and say it shouldn’t exist!

Haha I love the internet.

I've only played it in handheld mode but I think it looks great on that little screen. Runs better than Doom and is a real blast to play through.

There are differences between this version and the PS4 of course, but it's not as bad as, say, the SNES version of Doom was.

I hope it does well. Nintendo fans have to do without AAA third party support usually. Hopefully Bethesda is finding it worth their while to put out these great games.

Also, comparing it to the best version of the game in the XBOX One X, was a bit unnecessary, in my opinion...
But anyway, this is an example that the EXACT game that was released on the other consoles can be ported to Switch. Sure, it won't look quite the same, and with open worlds would be much harder, but hey, it's the same game played on the go, and it runs great!

@Cobalt don’t think it’s actually that stable on Xbox and ps4

@Cobalt why do you care so much anyway? Go and do something useful instead of writing silly comments on here

Damn these guys are good
Good job

Will definitely be getting this!

Now give us a GTA 5 pimped up PS3 version!

@Medic_alert I completely agree. Nintendo should be looking to bring games similar to this to the switch, built specifically with the switch in mind. It’s great to see ports running on here but at that price point it is unjustified.

Are they testing this on default settings? This video doesn't go into the graphic options. Lots can be tweaked there. I know I was able to make DOOM's graphical quality better by changing the visual settings. Quite an oversight for Digital Foundry.

@Sanangelo89

That's a good question. The problem here is that Wolf 2 is not a game that was from the beginning made for Switch. Nowadays many developers don't want to make the same mistake many developers have made at the last generation (360 and PS3) were texture can load even 30 second after the player takes controll of the character (many UE3 engine games have that problem on last gen). Then you need to think about speed of loading those textures. Basic XO and PS4 have much better bandwith to load all those textures and effects Of course if they would have to say 2 years to make this port with bigger budget with 32 GB cards or even this 64 GB (that Switch dont have yet) then it could look better. But who knows? I think its looking really good (apart some really low res situations). People just forget that not every machine need to be a 1080/60 fps beast. Its a portable machine that can be plug in to TV. Some other games have 900/1080p res but it was obvious that some or even many 3rd Party games made first for PS4/XO would be 720p on Switch (when they are 900p on base XO).

@Cobalt You need to read the article again because you got mixed up.

It looks good to me.

Just like with DOOM, plenty of people were saying that it wasn’t worth playing it on Switch... Well, I bought the game, played it and I can say that it was a blast. Blurry? Yes, that didn’t stop me from enjoying the game while running and shooting like crazy.

I’m pretty confident it’ll be same with Wolfenstein.

For those who own other consoles or a gaming PC, just ignore this game because it wasn’t made for you. Let the people who actually want the game enjoy it, would you? That it isn’t worth for you doesn’t mean it isn’t worth for me.

Ah, well that's good, I'll sleep well tonight now that we've got Digital Foundry's approval.

These posts are just fodder for the guys that like to diss a game because of the technical numbers, not how it plays. I much preferred doom on my switch than my Xbox because the console suits me better. I have Wolfenstein on my Xbox one S I only paid 12gbp for it but I can’t get into it. The exact same thing happened with Doom. Couldn’t get into it on Xbox, loved it on Switch. Tech specs don’t always matter if it plays well. Horses for courses. I haven’t picked this particular game up yet as I have a bajillion games in my backlog already so I’m hoping to find it sub 40gbp somewhere down the line, which I’ll be happy to pay.

@OorWullie He seems like he's the biggest bedwetter on the site right now.

@Cobalt It's just a game, not happy with it? Walk away. No one died.

@BensonUii I just don't get why people are surprised when you can't put these graphical beasts on the Switch without some sort of compromise. It's been pretty much spelt out since the get go what the machine can do, and yet we still get cretins crying because the graphics take a hit. If it means that much to them, then get a PC and piss off.

@Cobalt @AlternateButtons
Blaming Switch versions for not being on par with on PS4 makes as much sense as considering a GameBoy version of a game terrible because "it is too black & whitish" compared to the Snes version.

@WhiteTrashGuy I only noticed slowdown maybe twice playing Doom. Really enjoyed playing it

I’ve been playing this for the last two days on my switch. It looks very good, no complaints. I own Wolfenstein 2 for PS4 as well and I am just as happy playing it on the switch as I was for my PS4.

I’m shocked at how good it looks. I haven’t noticed any major flaws in how the game looks or plays yet. I am still early in the game so maybe thats why. Either way, thank you Panic Button!! It’s amazing to have the option of playing a triple A game like Wolfenstein on the go.

@BensonUii

Let me tell you that if you gave me the opportunity to rule the port of Wolfenstein with the same team, I would have make a totally different work.

1st 60fps target
2nd 720p target
3rd make not a direct port but an original Switch version.

because let's make it clear, the choice they made is the dumbest one : trying to make the PC/PS4/ONE version on the Switch, RI DI CU LOUS !

So don't say stupid stuff about the fact that I couldn't understand blablabla.... If you understand that the port is not great BECAUSE of the choice they made, YOU UNDERSTAND EVERYTHING !

PEACE

Don't panic with Panic Button on the case! Seriously, those folks seem to know what they're doing.

We’ve come so far.

So can you adjust settings like in doom to make the game smoother?

@Nunya Remember if Sega port the SNES Aladdin to Sega Genesis, it would had been worst than the SNES version cause of the graphical differences, if Capcom port the Genesis version of Aladdin to SNES, it would had been awful due to the slower processor of the SNES which can't handle the smooth framerate animations of the game. It was a good idea that both Aladdin were different games and both were made with their intend console in mind instead of simply just a port job which made both entries unique to their system.

The problem with games nowadays is that almost everything are basically just that, a port job and usually the later ports are the ones that are worst than the original. Chrono Trigger was awesome on SNES but as a PS1 port, it ran horribly, DS version was better but had terrible sounds, some of the grunts and spell effects doesn't sound accurate to the original and that's the problem with ports, we always compare them to the original we had to as that is what we need to do to see improvements.

Mortal Kombat starts as an arcade game, every ports there after were just barebone terrible, it wasn't until the arcade version got emulation that we get a good MK to console version but even with that there are still sound issues and netcode problem especially if you got the MK Arcade Kollection version. In my opinion ports are never better than the original. Would Doom 64 been better had it was release on PS1 first instead of N64, yes cause then people will say the N64 version lack the cool CGI movie scenes from the game and instead use blurring FMVs, with it being exclusive to N64 there are no comparison and the game ran as it should, any ports that came after would be compare to it whether good or bad (it mostly going to be bad though).

@BensonUii

I'M CONVINCED they NEVER target 720p/60fps !!!

Simple reason that they know the hardware relatively well and no way they could achieve that with a port of the original game...

Another thing, 60fps is a norm for fps games or should be if you prefer... You know that even in the beginning of gaming 60fps was just a standard ?

Now, your point about "how much it'd cost..." let me explain you an important thing.
The game sold not that well on PC/PS4/XBOX and it'll be the same on Switch (probably even worst)... so now the big question :

Don't you think that the global investment made for the development of Wolfenstein + publicity + all the extra fees / the money that the sells made is already not really good for viability ?

Now, you come with an extra investment (not that big because all the basis of the assets are already done) to make a really good and unique Switch version. You'll make good money with because you actually sell good on Switch when your game is well made.

So, if you have to choose, what do you think is the most efficient ?
Trying to port a PC/PS4/ONE version on Switch knowing that the sells are gonna be not great
OR
putting a little extra money and sell like cupcakes ?

You know, I'm just a small indie so I can't talk as if I was a big company but one thing is clear for me, the game is not gonna sell well in the end... :/

@BensonUii

In the case of Wolfenstein it's not making an entire new game.... goddd, like you just said "all the assets are already done"

By saying "new game" is just to rearrange the original one to make it fits better the switch specs...

No needs to have all those effects, the 10 enemies at the time on screen etc...

Everything is a question of compromises to achieve something good...

But ok, it's to difficult for you to understand...

I'm enjoying my copy of Wolfenstein II on the Switch very much!

@Cobalt
The point is to have a portable version of the original game. Even if all the flashy effects are cut and the resolution reduced to 144p or something, what's important is that the complete gameplay experience is converted in its entirety.

What you're describing could easily end up as something like Lego City Undercover on the 3DS. It reuses multiple assets and game mechanics that are tweaked or rearranged to better fit a portable console, but became an inferior game in the process. The "portability" benefit was also lessened due to being a different experience altogether.

@_aitchFactor

So Nintendo is wrong when they claim that the Switch is a home console then ? Because what you just explain is that the Switch is a portable console, isn't it ?

@Cobalt
So, are you complaining about the "weak" specs of the Switch, Panic Button's judgement, Bethesda's judgement, Nintendo's marketing or my explanation?
The switch is a hybrid, so it can be anything it needs to be, really. Much like your constantly changing argument, I guess.

@retro_player_22
> Ports have never been better than the original

You've never played Bayonetta 1 and 2 on Switch? Runs better than their original versions on Xbox 360 and Wii U respectively with no screen-tearing and better framerates. Bayonetta 1 on PC can also run at 4K and the highest settings at a locked 60fps. Backwards compatibility with Xbox One X to 360 games enhance performance, like Bayonetta 1 and Red Dead Redemption. And everything else from there like The Last of Us to PS4, compilations like Metal Gear Solid HD Collection on PS3/360, etc.

It may have been true back then, but times have changed as the video game industry evolves. Porting games to more powerful hardware has often granted better visuals and performance more often than not, and those going backwards are those simply adapting the game to fit weaker hardware.

@roboshort I'm talking about third-parties. Nintendo always gets the most out of every system they make, what with them getting Odyssey out at 60fps and BotW as vast as it is with barely any loading times and a mostly stable 30fps.

Doom and Wolfenstein II also have multiple advantages to them. First off, they were initially 60fps games. Cutting the framerate in half already reduces a ton of requirements. Outlast 1 and 2 also have that despite looking remarkably close to the PS4/Xbox versions. Secondly, id Tech 6 is extremely scaleable and well-optimized, which unlike other engines like Frostbite can work fine on the Switch.

So really Doom and Wolfenstein, with all that in mind, are what we can reasonably expect from AAA demanding games.

Pretty damn fun game to me so far. Looks noice! He's red, I'm still in the wheelchair buy it looks fine to me so far. I'm sure if I got this on my Xbox One X, I'd drop the Switch version but I also wouldn't be able to play it at worky😏 Like I said, cool game.

@EvilLucario The censored Bayonetta and Metal Gear Solid Collection though plays okay on Wii U, PS3/Xbox 360 were nothing compare to the more uncensored original versions which made them not as good. It's like leaving home then returning to it several months later only to find out your original doors or windows got replaced with uglier ones or got completely barred. Like I says ports were never better than the original cause they tend to tinker with stuff the original have then made them worst or attempt to make it better and sacrificing or censoring a lot of the older contents. DBZ Budokai 1 for PS2 was great but the HD remastered port censored most of the violent in that game.

@retro_player_22 Even if they were censored (which I doubt), you're ignoring the other things like upscaling emulation of Xbox One X's backwards compatibility that leaves the games untouched but at a higher resolution and framerate, and you said "Wii U version of Bayonetta" when I actually said "Switch version".

Your blanket statement of all ports being worse than the original is just flat out wrong, especially when we have ports/remasters that completely bring the entire game over except just unarguably better like Ocarina of Time 3D.

@Agramonte Certainly, that resolution is getting to sub HD, plus the low textures and the frame rate, this is not a preferable way to play the game on an actual TV / monitor, unless it's the only option you have I guess.

@Ristar24 Exactly... I I've been a Wolfenstein, DOOM, Quake fan long before I ever had a Switch. I don't want to play a sub-HD version.

The Switch is a handheld with a TV dock. Tons of other games that actually works well in that format.

Rather pay $30 for a good HD home version of Wolfenstein 2 and $15/$30 for a good Switch game like HK. Before being stuck with a $60 so called "hybrid"... that does neither well.

@Agramonte Yes, I've always seen hand held gaming as quite different, GBA and DS were great, even with the Vita I played the 'console' style games less, partly as 3D first person games on a coach or train tend to make me motion sick. I think the switch is technically very impressive as a hand held, but as a console to play big budget games at home (beyond the high quality 1st party games), it would not be a preferable choice for me.

It runs smooth as butter on Switch. Frame rate feels like 60 tbh.

Resolution definitely takes a hit but it looks good enough to still enjoy on the handheld.

Wouldn't really recommend DOOM or Wolf2 for TV play, but if you are looking for great games to play when you aren't sitting in your recliner, it's this or Candy Crush. I will take this every single time.

I actually played Wolfenstein 2 for several hours at work yesterday (weekends are extremely slow and I always get to play games for a few hours). I can't tell you how freaking awesome it is to play this game at work.

If the compromises don't work for you then just play something else. There are a lot of us handheld gamers who are used to running lower spec. That just comes with the territory of handheld games. Personally, the enjoyment I got out of playing this game on a handheld Switch with gyro, surpassed the enjoyment I get from 95% of the games out there.

So there's no need to make a big deal about it. If you absolutely have to have high spec, then just go play another version. It's no big deal. If you just want to enjoy the game wherever you are, this is a fantastic option for you. At least the option is there. And there are a good number of people who want to play games like this when they're not sitting at home in front of their TV. That's who this game is for. People like me, who want something more from portable FPS gaming than Borderlands 2 and Resistance on Vita.

@JudgeMethos
Ya, most Switch games look close enough to other versions to easily substitute for TV play (just look at Dragonball Fighter Z at full 1080p 60fps, or Resident Evil Revelations 1/2 which almost look better than the X1 version, or LA Noire or Skyrim which looks surprisingly good).

But there are a couple games that have to make more severe sacrifices, like DOOM and Wolf 2. For those games in particular I would recommend playing on X1X for TV play. I own both of those games on X1X. But when you are playing games in any other situation, I'd rather have the game as seen here, then not have it at all. And the Gyro aiming really makes the game more fun and more enjoyable.

So ya, I just keep 2 versions for these 2 games specifically. For most other Switch games, Switch is good enough to use as the console version also.

Just as I did with gatorboi, it's time for me to put that troll Cobalt on ignore.

I really enjoy the Switch version of Wolfenstein II, even more so than I did enjoy Doom. If one wants to play it with better graphics and higher FPS, go for the other versions. If one wants a well done port on the go with some compromises made for it to run as well as possible, go for this version. Then we can all be happy!

Glad I got this game!

@Cobalt Nintendo wasn't wrong but come on dude. The switch is running on mobile technology and draws 7W power consumption.

Can anyone really call the switch a console. When you take into account the specs of the switch, having games like Wolf II running is mighty impressive.

It's a tablet man. People should remember this.

I feel like with Wolfenstein 3D they should just have just blacked out the surrounding graphics and done whatever was necessary to allow it to run at 60 FPS. But I love this port. I've been playing it a ton since release.

@JaxonH It's pretty amazing indeed. I've been in another town without my PS4, but I'm still able to play this even when I'm in a car. I love that.

Is anyone here a bit more impressed that gaming development studios are looking at dynamic resolution to get certain games on Switch to work?

I mean, impressive that people make it work on the budding little system, but moreso that I can see this sort of thing being more utilized in other games going forward where need be. Not talking about stuff like how Dark Souls muddies framerates of things you're not looking at, but more encompassing if some ports from PC can actually happen to older models of systems as well.

Played a few hours of this portably on a trip this weekend and it was an awsome experience to have a game like this on the go. Playing with motion controls also makes a huge difference!

I'd gladly sacrifice some pixels and some occasional frames for a portable experience with superior controls. I have barely played my PS4 since Switch, much like my PS3 it's become a movie disc player that happens to run games when I feel I'm missing out on content exclusively available on it. And just like now, I used to prefer a better controlling Wii version (like The Godfather, Blazing Angels, even COD4, and I'm sure I forgot a few great ones here) over a better looking PS3 game.

@EvilLucario That makes sense. Definitely being 60fps is a big help, but those games also were not developed initially with the Switch in mind so far as I know. Also, there is the question of how well id6 is optimized for the Tegra X1, which I don't really know. My guess would be there is still a bit of room for improvement. There was already a decent amount of improvement between Doom and Wolfenstein apparently, so I think we can expect more, though perhaps not a tremendous amount. If Nintendo really wants to improve the quality of docked mode a lot, I would imagine sort of post-processing chip in the dock or some other mechanism is necessary.

An impressive achievement, but it goes without saying that if you have literally ANY other platform this game is on, choose that version instead. This is massively compromised in every way.

My Switch is for games built for the Switch, or for retro stuff which runs well. I have my PS4 and PC for everything else.

@Toshiro_Baloney Both Doom and Wolf 2 are 60fps games. This gave Panic Button an instant head start as they could half the frame rate to 30fps on the Switch. If Panic Button were to start with a 30fps PS4/XO title, they would be in a much, much trickier spot. Halving to 15fps is simply not acceptable. And of course, the vast majority of PS4/XO games are 30fps...

@tourjeff

I just shake my head @ many of these so called gamers these days. Funny thing is they act like graphic whores when it comes to the Switch, yet most seem to settle for an Xbox or ps4. If you are truly all about "grafixx and rezzolushunz" your arse is PC gaming, straight up. And I say this because I actually know people who aren't full of convenient hot air about resolution, graphics & tech. They pay the cost to play boss and actually get or build a rig to play on the premier platform.

Stop with all the phony posturing and just play games man. As it stands, if you are console gaming you are compromising anyway. No matter how much you kid yourself or try to square a circle. Funny to watch folks fight to see who's the tallest little person in the room. As no matter what, you're still not taller, bigger or badder than that guy over there swinging his mouse around.

I played doom on switch mostly docked and looked absolutely fine for everyone that does not count pixels. However I ended up selling it before finishing the campaign due to the lack of proper controls (k+m) and for that reason I will skip wolf2. Now can the trolls let others enjoy the port (and yes, let third parties get all the ports they can)

Wii U could've run this at 720p60. The system was never pushed.

@Cobalt,

You are missing the point..this game is not aimed at Ps4 and Xbox One owners as they already have it.

It's aimed at the Switch market that will have not played the game and care little abouut texture and frame rates,you may also get as few Ps4/Xbox One owners that see value in this as a portable title.

@gameboy1975 Yes, it is really weird that people would moan about the resolution and frames more than if the actual game is fun to play.
And, as you said, they keep comparing it to another console! if they were really worried about resolution and etc then they should be playing the games on a PC. Period.
To come here and complain about the Switch limitations that are known is ridiculous. Specially when they didn't even buy the game to try for themselves!
At this point, these kind of games (multi-platform) should be appreciated (or not if it's bad) based on its own performance on the Switch.
At this stage we all know that the Switch is not as powerful as a PS4/Xbox, let alone the PC, so it's just stupid to comment the same thing over and over for every single game that comes out.
Not happy about the game on the Switch, good, purchase it on another platform and be happy.

Very impressive work!
Shame about the water, where some tricks could have probably been pulled, if they had time. The original Wolf 3D running at half speed seems like a complete oversight, or something they just never found the time to even get started on.

Areas with fps drops to around 20 were likely MUCH worse at first, so it's fair to assume that this is where the last hours have been spent, finding the sweet spots that make every part of the game fully playable.

@EvilLucario
Aye. A game built ground up for Switch should target 60, and leave out any effects that compromise this, opting instead for aesthetic solutions that can do without.

@Cobalt
As a parent it is hard for me to find time to play Mature rated and 100 hr+ games on the TV. The WiiU and the Switch allowed me to game on my schedule and if my kids want me for anything I just put it in sleep and come back when I can. This is more valuable to me than graphics.

"Despite the cuts, I hope this video helps you better appreciate what the development team was able to achieve here... A port like this remains no easy task" - Digital Foundry

Not gonna list any names, but for some reason there's certain people on this site that think Digital Foundry is out to get Nintendo ports. This is the third time I've heard them applaud Panic Button. So sure, there's certainly some bad ports out there, but the Switch has been pretty darn successful with ports so far, thanks in large part to Panic Button doing a fantastic job. Sounds like they did even better with this game than Doom, and that was pretty great too.

On a somewhat unrelated note, i wish sales numbers were more accessible when it comes to video games. Everyone is always morbidly curious about these figures, but they're hardly ever known or disclosed.

I'd love to see somewhat accurate figures for the likes of Doom, and now for this game, etc. Oh well.

@Chrno-x thanks for your reply, i dont mind graphics that much, i am playing Doom and i think the graphics look great. I see it in comparison videos but actually playing i wonder what people are fussing about.

I just wonder that if they make a realistic looking game from the start for Switch how will that turn out?

To me Wolfenstein 2 and Doom still hasnt shown the full potential of the Switch, it has just shown its raw power compared to PS4 and XB1 with these games.

Same goes for a lot of ports, DBXV2 too i just now that it would look a bit better would it be build from the ground up, instead of compressing it for porting.

@kobashi100

I call it one. And I've owned (and gotten rid of) a ps4 and have the most powerful console out currently the Xbox1X. Still feel it's a great console & will be picking it up on Switch so that I can enjoy the game anytime anywhere. It is SO MUCH easier to pack up my Switch and truly have such quality gaming to go than it is to pack up any of my other consoles. Luckily some of us actual gamers play games instead of specs still.

Nope.. the difference is too obvious to me so I’m gonna skip the Switch version