@nintendolie Literally doesn't matter if they're open world 3rd person games. Both of them performed like garbage and were games that originally released around the same time as Diablo 3. Diablo 3 was also confirmed by DF to be running a previous gen version with small tweaks from the "next gen" ports. Which was expected and why AC3 and SR3 failed. They were downgraded direct ports of rereleased games intended to resemble the newer versions that were parred down for Switch instead of tweaked versions of classic ports.
For specifics. Diablo 3 is running at a lower dynamic resolution than MUA3 while docked to ensure that it hits 60fps which ends up making the game look ridiculously blurry in comparison to not just MUA, but other versions of Diablo. Runs at 900p and can dip as low a 756p docked. Handheld running 720p dropping to 540p. But. they also tell you that the drops that MUA3 has are similar and aren't bad at all albeit noticeable. There are significantly less effects on screen in Diablo 3 and the models in MUA3 are also in a significantly higher poly count. Making it taxing on the GPU.
Also. this being a console exclusive made by a third party developer means literally nothing for Nintendo or the system. Nor does it mean that they should arbitrarily target a frame rate that doesn't matter. I'd rather have a visually pleasing experience at the cost of a halved frame rate than garbage that I could play on my phone. If I wanted to play Marvel Future Fight. I'd play that on my phone. If I'm looking for something in 1440p or 4K. I'll just jump on my PC. I don't think this game needs 60fps. What it needs is a stable 30 and they can achieve that through a patch.
If it's not a game made by Nintendo EPD. I'm not thinking too hard about frames. MK8D, Odyssey, and Smash run 60fps flawlessly. Zelda is the only 30fps Nintendo EPD exclusive that I own. Pokemon is third party, targets 30fps and (for whatever reason) unlocks it's frame rate on the pause screen showing it can go higher. Warframe is multiplat, targets 60, doesn't hit it often. It's all moot. But. To claim it NEEDS to hit 60fps is ridiculous.
@nintendolie You do realize that the criticisms of the AC3 and SR3 ports are valid because both of those games are just as old as Diablo 3, right? Saint's Row 3 actually releasing a year before both AC and Diablo 3. There is no excuse for them to be performing as poorly as they are.
The reason why Diablo 3 is smooth sailing is because it's a port of a game that had already been ported 3 times. It SHOULD perform during it's FOURTH rerelease.
Another good example of this as much as I hate to say it is Skyrim. Targets 30fps and hits it near flawlessly. The game is also several years old with too many rereleases, but enough for them to know how to make it RUN.
@Stocksy Nope. The game ships with 34 known characters. There are (I think) a few unlockable characters in the game that we weren't advertised or shown in anything as "playable". But. Let's for the sake of this say. There's one for certain. They're adding 3 more with the Cyclops, Colossus, and Loki update in August and the 4 pack in the "fall". Which is likely October. That's 8 more to the roster.
So. Let's say there are. 4 heroes each in the next two DLC packs. That gives us 8 more playable heroes via expansion pass. So. That's already 15 new characters. (Not counting the known secret character already in the game.) Totaling out to 49 right now.
All of that math is irrelevant though. You can look at the tweet and clearly see that there are 50 DLC slots. As well as a Playable character list tweeted July 18th. Which has mild roster spoilers. It shows Loki, Vision, "Bolt", Medusa, and Valkyrie. So. Loki was confirmed a day before he was announced at SDCC. Soooooooooooo. To edit my math. If Vision, Blackbolt, Medusa, and Valkyrie are sneakily planned to be added. That's 19 DLC slots used. 53 characters total in the roster.
Comments 3
Re: Datamine Reveals New Marvel Ultimate Alliance 3 Characters
@nintendolie Literally doesn't matter if they're open world 3rd person games. Both of them performed like garbage and were games that originally released around the same time as Diablo 3. Diablo 3 was also confirmed by DF to be running a previous gen version with small tweaks from the "next gen" ports. Which was expected and why AC3 and SR3 failed. They were downgraded direct ports of rereleased games intended to resemble the newer versions that were parred down for Switch instead of tweaked versions of classic ports.
For specifics. Diablo 3 is running at a lower dynamic resolution than MUA3 while docked to ensure that it hits 60fps which ends up making the game look ridiculously blurry in comparison to not just MUA, but other versions of Diablo. Runs at 900p and can dip as low a 756p docked. Handheld running 720p dropping to 540p. But. they also tell you that the drops that MUA3 has are similar and aren't bad at all albeit noticeable. There are significantly less effects on screen in Diablo 3 and the models in MUA3 are also in a significantly higher poly count. Making it taxing on the GPU.
Also. this being a console exclusive made by a third party developer means literally nothing for Nintendo or the system. Nor does it mean that they should arbitrarily target a frame rate that doesn't matter. I'd rather have a visually pleasing experience at the cost of a halved frame rate than garbage that I could play on my phone. If I wanted to play Marvel Future Fight. I'd play that on my phone. If I'm looking for something in 1440p or 4K. I'll just jump on my PC. I don't think this game needs 60fps. What it needs is a stable 30 and they can achieve that through a patch.
If it's not a game made by Nintendo EPD. I'm not thinking too hard about frames. MK8D, Odyssey, and Smash run 60fps flawlessly. Zelda is the only 30fps Nintendo EPD exclusive that I own. Pokemon is third party, targets 30fps and (for whatever reason) unlocks it's frame rate on the pause screen showing it can go higher. Warframe is multiplat, targets 60, doesn't hit it often. It's all moot. But. To claim it NEEDS to hit 60fps is ridiculous.
Re: Datamine Reveals New Marvel Ultimate Alliance 3 Characters
@nintendolie You do realize that the criticisms of the AC3 and SR3 ports are valid because both of those games are just as old as Diablo 3, right? Saint's Row 3 actually releasing a year before both AC and Diablo 3. There is no excuse for them to be performing as poorly as they are.
The reason why Diablo 3 is smooth sailing is because it's a port of a game that had already been ported 3 times. It SHOULD perform during it's FOURTH rerelease.
Another good example of this as much as I hate to say it is Skyrim. Targets 30fps and hits it near flawlessly. The game is also several years old with too many rereleases, but enough for them to know how to make it RUN.
Re: Datamine Reveals New Marvel Ultimate Alliance 3 Characters
@Stocksy Nope. The game ships with 34 known characters. There are (I think) a few unlockable characters in the game that we weren't advertised or shown in anything as "playable". But. Let's for the sake of this say. There's one for certain. They're adding 3 more with the Cyclops, Colossus, and Loki update in August and the 4 pack in the "fall". Which is likely October. That's 8 more to the roster.
So. Let's say there are. 4 heroes each in the next two DLC packs. That gives us 8 more playable heroes via expansion pass. So. That's already 15 new characters. (Not counting the known secret character already in the game.) Totaling out to 49 right now.
All of that math is irrelevant though. You can look at the tweet and clearly see that there are 50 DLC slots. As well as a Playable character list tweeted July 18th. Which has mild roster spoilers. It shows Loki, Vision, "Bolt", Medusa, and Valkyrie. So. Loki was confirmed a day before he was announced at SDCC. Soooooooooooo. To edit my math. If Vision, Blackbolt, Medusa, and Valkyrie are sneakily planned to be added. That's 19 DLC slots used. 53 characters total in the roster.