• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

DigitalFoundry analysis of DOOM for Nintendo Switch

Neiteio

Member
Just watched the Gamespot video. It's all offscreen so it's probably hiding some imperfections and downgrades, but man this looks pretty much exactly like I remember on PS4, right down to the sparks, bloodstains, shiny floors, solid materials, DOF and motion blur. Most important is they preserved the glowing lights and deep dark shadows that are so important to this game's look. I think I saw some brief frame drops on the Martian surface, but other than that and 30fps, this looks borderline uncanny in its similarity. Great stuff!
 

00ich

Member
Botw and doom are two different things. Fps and fighting games are optimal at 60 fps. Thats why any game from those genres that are even remotely competitive push for 60 fps. Even uncharted online is 60fps. So is gow4.

And single player games in 30 fps are perfectly fine.
 

Alienous

Member
The Switch being able to handle a 60fps current-gen game at 30fps and a reduced resolution seems like pretty standard fair, so I'm not finding this port to be particularly impressive. Seems to follow a pattern we've already seen.
 

m00h

Banned
So because you don't care, pretend it doesn't exist?

At least because everyone who's primarily interested in DOOM multiplayer, will play it on PC. I'm quite sure that there isn't a single person out there who's gonna buy DOOM for the Switch to exclusively play it online.
 

Neiteio

Member
The thing with DOOM's multiplayer framerate is, everyone playing it on Switch will be playing it with other Switch players anyways, so... Even playing field!
 
At least because everyone who's primarily interested in DOOM multiplayer, will play it on PC. I'm quite sure that there isn't a single person out there who's gonna buy DOOM for the Switch to exclusively play it online.

Really depends on how well online works for the Switch. The Switch doesn't really have many options for competitive online FPS's and Doom would be a nice addition in that sense.Multiplayer Doom on a handheld might be pretty cool if it is done right. Even just single player death match with bots could be a fun time waster.
 

Murdoch

Member
At least because everyone who's primarily interested in DOOM multiplayer, will play it on PC. I'm quite sure that there isn't a single person out there who's gonna buy DOOM for the Switch to exclusively play it online.

I've finished it on PS4 but will primarily be buying it for online on the go / when i'm working away from home?
 

Sayad

Member
At least because everyone who's primarily interested in DOOM multiplayer, will play it on PC. I'm quite sure that there isn't a single person out there who's gonna buy DOOM for the Switch to exclusively play it online.

A lot of people don't play FPS games on PC(mouse/keyboard control), and Doom is pretty much the highest profile FPS with multiplayer on the Switch right now. Don't know, feels like it would have had some potential if it wasn't an optional download!
 

mario_O

Member
The big question here for third parties is, do people want to play their games at a lower res ,image quality, and half the frame rate, for the sake of portability? And I'm pretty sure what the answer is, but we'll see. Skyrim, Doom, etc will be a good test.
 

Head.spawn

Junior Member
The big question here for third parties is, do people want to play their games at a lower res ,image quality, and half the frame rate, for the sake of portability? And I'm pretty sure what the answer is, but we'll see. Skyrim, Doom, etc will be a good test.

The resolution in handheld mode isn't that much of a factor considering the devices display resolution. Also, if they're using that magic sauce TSSAA and some sharpening that part won't be too bad considering.
 

Unison

Member
The people whining about 60fps in here are out of control! Not sure what some of you expected from this hardware...

Obviously if you don't want it, don't buy it, but you can't squeeze blood from a stone.

Do we know anything about how it runs in docked vs. handheld?

edit: I saw the hypothesizing about it having increased docked performance in the DF video, but wasn't sure if anything concrete came to light since that...
 

Kilrogg

paid requisite penance
To understand the "Doom = 60 fps", you have to understand the culture Id Software circa Carmack built on that benchmark.

https://web.archive.org/web/2013062...tty-at-60fps-than-graphics-as-the-only-thing/


Carmack also preferred a locked framerate to a variable one.


http://www.develop-online.net/news/carmack-next-gen-games-will-still-target-30-fps/0113660


Carmack even showed off Rage running on an iPhone back during QuakeCon 2010... in 60 fps of course.

This focus on framerate was important in many of id's games in the previous generation. It became a part of the fanbase's general culture. This carried forward even after Carmack left id. That's was the framerate was something Doom 2016's devs.

https://www.gamespot.com/articles/doom-dev-we-want-to-be-the-best-looking-game-out-t/1100-6429178/


Like, I'm trying to get you to understand, 60 fps has been a selling point for id Software. It's been a thing they themselves have made a very big deal.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2016-doom-tech-interview


https://twitter.com/idSoftwareTiago/status/721238218113351680


It was a stated goal on their official blog.


So if you're wondering why some folks are dipping, some of that is they prefer those higher (or locked) frame rates. But there's also the folks that have been told, for a very long time, that id Software games are 60 fps. That's the selling point, that's the key. And whether it actually bothers them, or they believe it does, that's why they're passing on the concept of the experience.



It's probably better to save your disgust for something more worthwhile. As I noted above, Carmack got Rage running at 60 fps on iPhone with heavy caveats in 2010.

A port is always doable, it's just a matter of what cuts a developer or publisher want to make to the experience to fit it on a different platform. What becomes a problem is the insistence that a dev or publisher do so. Some want to reach as many platforms as possible. Some developers, like id Software usually (which is likely why Panic Button is doing most of the heavy lifting on this), aim for higher spec systems and platforms. That's what they do. Especially in the case of some PC developers, the graphical presentation at those levels is a part of their vision for the title.

What becomes an annoyance - note, not an actual problem - is that the decision not to make those cuts to your title is presented as wrongdoing and malfeasance. Ubisoft has a number of games on the Switch already, but the Assassin's Creed team deciding not to try and cram Origins onto the Switch isn't them being bad developers. They have completely valid reasons not to port to that platform, one of them being that their vision of the game leans on a graphically detailed open world.

The PSP, Vita, and 3DS have played host to some interesting ports of graphically-intensive games, as have many mobile devices like iOS/Android tablets. Anything can fit on the Switch, but it's a matter of A) if developers want to make those cuts and B) if fans are willing to stomach those compromises to buy the projects. Those are things publishers take into account in deciding to do a port.

All true obviously - thanks for the research! -, and what I'm about to say is only speculation, but, like everything else, 60 fps requires trade-offs on a less powerful system. That's fine, it's not a big deal if the game looks uglier as a result. But from your quotes, Carmack's philosophy doesn't seem to be "60 fps at all costs" so much as "gameplay at all costs". 60 fps should absolutely be the goal... so long as it doesn't start affecting gameplay. Given how blurry the game already looks on Switch, you have to wonder how much legibility the game would lose if the graphics were brought down even more to achieve 60 fps.

I just watched Easy Allies's impressions yesterday, and they said that, on the tiny screen on the Switch and the low res/blurry IQ, things were sometimes hard to see in the distance. No doubt that would be even worse if the game was 60 fps. Maybe the devs thought this was the one case were going for 60 fps would actually be more of a detriment to gameplay than just reducing graphical quality. It's all about balance in the end, isn't it?

Then again, I'm not in the know. Maybe 60 fps would have been possible with a few morre cutbacks without making the game any harder to see. Who knows. But if it wasn't possible, then I fully understand why, just this once, they went for 30 fps instead.
 

t hicks

Banned
60fps would've been incredible for this port, but I'm fine with 30 personally just so I can play the DOOM 2016 campaign wherever :)
 
This thread reminds me of this, very nostalgic.
lynx_buts_ad.jpg
 
I do not think it is exactly conjecture on DFs part to assume the game is CPU linuted. Seems luke a pretty safe assumption given the numbers and scaling we see on other platforms.
 
I do not think it is exactly conjecture on DFs part to assume the game is CPU linuted. Seems luke a pretty safe assumption given the numbers and scaling we see on other platforms.

Well, the Jaguar Quad core CPU in Leadbetter's PC build that is being used to approximate the Switch is different architecture from the A57 quad core in the Switch. Yeah, the A57 is a little more powerful per core than the Jaguar CPU, but the Jaguar CPU is clocked higher, so it becomes kind of a wash. Doom would hit limitations on both CPU's regardless. His PC approximation does use Vulkan to get it as close as possible to what you would see on the Switch, but the real difference will be the all the custom detail settings in the Switch game.

Also the example PC he made is actually much closer to the Switch in docked mode. All we have seen of the Switch version has been in handheld mode.
 

Ombala

Member
Half the framerate, reduced resolution and textures.
Not that hot tbh and I'm not really using my Switch in portable mode so that's not a plus either.
 

GenericUser

Member
If you have other platforms that can run the game in 60fps, I'd say play it there. If you are switch only and/or the portability factor is important for you, I guess the switch version is still serviceable.

30fps is a bummer but then again, Doom is mainly a SP game, so I personally think it's not THAT big of a deal.
 

rjc571

Banned
I wish developers would just give console ports the option to reduce graphics quality and resolution in favor of improved performance, so that gamers who prefer 60 fps don't feel left out all of the time.
 

Rayis

Member
I hope people really aren't expecting docked mode to increase framerate because that's impossible, the only thing docked would do is increase resolution, the CPU runs the same whether docked or undocked.
 

pksu

Neo Member
I love Digital Foundry, but these "we built this PC to simulate console hardware X"-features are just dumb fillouts. If they would have any actual hardware architecture experience i'm sure they would just stay away from that type of guess-work comparisons.
This. Also limiting affinity with task manager after the game has been launched (and it has created workers & probably done affinity settings too for four cores in startup) can cause nasty performance problems & overhead.
 

Minsc

Gold Member
It's probably better to save your disgust for something more worthwhile. As I noted above, Carmack got Rage running at 60 fps on iPhone with heavy caveats in 2010.

It was only Rage in name, the game itself is a light gun / rail shooter. Really nothing in common with the console / PC version, nor is 60fps gaming on the iPhone all that unusual. I'm sure if they did the same thing with the Switch (completely gutted the game to be a rail shooter with tiny tiny levels the size of a few rooms), people would be laughing even more.
 
The people whining about 60fps in here are out of control! Not sure what some of you expected from this hardware...

Obviously if you don't want it, don't buy it, but you can't squeeze blood from a stone.

Do we know anything about how it runs in docked vs. handheld?

edit: I saw the hypothesizing about it having increased docked performance in the DF video, but wasn't sure if anything concrete came to light since that...

I've seen some of the same people in past threads saying they have no interest in Switch...
 

SandTorso

Member
Still blows my mind how good it looks. When I eventually get a switch I'll probably double dip just so I can play Doom on my lunch break.

Like, I have it on PC and to think I could have portable Doom, even at 30fps, is just insanity. Honestly I think it'll be more difficult to adjust to dual sticks rather than mouse controls than 30fps rather than 60.,
 

Minsc

Gold Member
Still blows my mind how good it looks. When I eventually get a switch I'll probably double dip just so I can play Doom on my lunch break.

Like, I have it on PC and to think I could have portable Doom, even at 30fps, is just insanity. Honestly I think it'll be more difficult to adjust to dual sticks rather than mouse controls than 30fps rather than 60.,

If you put it on a laptop you can have portable Doom at 120fps, and ultra settings to boot.
 
Top Bottom