• 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

K

KageMaru

Member
I don't understand some people in this thread. Yes 30fps is disappointing but it also wasn't entirely unexpected. If it can hold a solid 30fps, I'm sure it will be very playable. It's still a very impressive showing for what's essentially tablet hardware.

Niceguydan8 said:
To an extent of course.

That being said, the larger market has shown that they generally prefer higher graphical quality > 60FPS, for example. Or on the flipside, that 30FPS is an acceptable standard.
Click to expand...

Actually the success of many Nintendo and CoD games show a strong indication that the market prefers 60fps over graphics. The biggest problem is being able to market the benefits of higher framerates to a consumer base that doesn't know what framerates are.

EDarkness said:
That's the thing, I don't think ANYONE expected the game to look like the PS4 version and I think people would have been perfectly fine with the graphical trade off in order to get that 60fps.
Click to expand...

It looks like this could be CPU bound, meaning lowering the graphics to PS1 levels wouldn't help the framerate.
 
D

darkstar0155

Member
Mike Golf said:
Exactly the fix I was going to make.

Take that comment and apply to any game not played on PC at a high spec then.

Look, I'm bummed about the drop to 30fps too but the fact is on the Switch's screen there will be no input lag and that makes a lot of difference to the feel of a game, even at 30fps. It's the same reason a locked 30fps game on a CRT doesn't feel sluggish by nature.

I hope Bethesda puts out a demo for the game so everyone can get a feel for themselves how it plays before buying.
Click to expand...

Exactly, I mean I wish it was 60 too, but come on look what your getting on a handheld. If its not up to someones standards that's cool, but no reason to trash what appears to be a solid port with some sacrifices.

A demo would be awesome but im sorta doubting it.
 
E

Elfotografoalocado

Banned
KageMaru said:
I don't understand some people in this thread. Yes 30fps is disappointing but it also wasn't entirely unexpected. If it can hold a solid 30fps, I'm sure it will be very playable. It's still a very impressive showing for what's essentially tablet hardware.



Actually the success of many Nintendo and CoD games show a strong indication that the market prefers 60fps over graphics. The biggest problem is being able to market the benefits of higher framerates to a consumer base that doesn't know what framerates are.



It looks like this could be CPU bound, meaning lowering the graphics to PS1 levels wouldn't help the framerate.
Click to expand...
If the entire graphics pipeline was changed and only the logic was the same, then perhaps it'd be able to run at 60FPS. But the complex pipeline and the texture compression possibly make it difficult on the CPU end.
That and the shader complexity of course on the GPU end. After all, it has the full renderer unchanged.
 
pixelation

pixelation

Member
TheMagician said:
I remember people on here saying NBA 2K wouldn't be any good on Switch at 30fps.

Turned out it looks, plays and feels great.

Of course, 60fps is preferred and better but it's not a killer when porting to a far less powerful console, and having 30fps is clearly a necessary sacrifice to putting Doom on a portable piece of hardware in the first place.
Click to expand...

I think resolution is the worse aspect of this port, you need pin point accuracy when playing shooters and i remember having to squint really hard to "see" clearly when playing PS3 shooters, something tells me it will be the same here (low resolution, blurriness, etc.).
 
E

efyu_lemonardo

May I have a cookie?
Dear Bethesda,

I am pleased with what was shown of DOOM so far and intend to purchase it on Switch if it's this playable throughout the single player campaign.

I also appreciate your other efforts and long term commitment to this platform and believe DOOM will not be the only one of your games I buy for Switch.

Thank you and keep up the good work.

Sincerely,
lemonardo
 
Q

Qassim

Member
EDarkness said:
That's the thing, I don't think ANYONE expected the game to look like the PS4 version and I think people would have been perfectly fine with the graphical trade off in order to get that 60fps.
Click to expand...

It doesn't look like the PS4 version now, they'll a reasonably big graphical trade off to get it running at 30fps at reasonable resolution on the Switch, let alone 60. GPU time may not even be the primary limiter, it could be that to get the game on - without modifying level, enemy counts, etc - 30fps is the only reasonable target.
 
O

OryoN

Member
I was hoping for 60fps as well, but, admittedly, with MUCH LESS graphical flare than this. 30fps is playable, and is fine as long as they maintain that performance for the vast majority of time.

Seems like some trolls got caught off guard by how good it looks on Switch too. When the only major thing they can pick on is the 1/2 framerate of this port, on a console 1/5 the power of PS4, then that tells me Bethesda/Panic Button did a hell of a job! Kudos!
 
H

Hermii

Member
KageMaru said:
It looks like this could be CPU bound, meaning lowering the graphics to PS1 levels wouldn't help the framerate.
Click to expand...

Imo the biggest mistake Nintendo made with the Switch hardware was not getting the cpu up to par with current gen consoles, even if it would have taken a delay. Would have made ports much less of an issue and its the one area where its possible for a tablet to match and even exceed current gen consoles.
 
G

Gotdatmoney

Member
Hermii said:
Imo the biggest mistake Nintendo made with the Switch hardware was not getting the cpu up to par with current gen consoles, even if it would have taken a delay. Would have made ports much less of an issue and its the one area where its possible for a tablet to match and even exceed current gen consoles.
Click to expand...

Honestly. Die shrink and upclock on the current chipset is all they needed to do. It is what it is though.
 
A

AndrewDean84xX

Banned
Hermii said:
Imo the biggest mistake Nintendo made with the Switch hardware was not getting the cpu up to par with current gen consoles, even if it would have taken a delay. Would have made ports much less of an issue and its the one area where its possible for a tablet to match and even exceed current gen consoles.
Click to expand...
And that wouldn't make the Switch souls cost anything extra, huh?

Price is a part of why the Switch is super hot right now.
 
M

Mr Swine

Banned
Gotdatmoney said:
Honestly. Die shrink and upclock on the current chipset is all they needed to do. It is what it is though.
Click to expand...

If they go with Volta’s manufacturing node they could boost the clock speed very much and have similar battery life, and probably ad 2GB extra ram for the OS. I would be glad if games that have scalable resolution could use the max one with a faster switch
 
MrCunningham

MrCunningham

Member
I guess 60fps was a bit too much to ask for the Switch port, especially in handheld mode.

Neat video, I do love Leadbetter's little Jaguar core powered PC to try and emulate the Switch. But running Doom on that system in low settings is not equal to what the Switch version will be like, given that the Switch port will use custom settings. But his Jaguar build would actually be pretty good for comparing XBOX One and PS4 games to a degree.


Gitaroo said:
My hope for potential of prime 4 running off idtech 6 @60fps is out of the window.
Click to expand...

Personally, I believe that Nintendo will be using their own branch of UE4 for Metroid Prime 4. But I believe that they could get a game like Metroid Prime 4 to run at 60fps on iDTech6, if they did go in that direction. If Nintendo targeted the game to run at 60fps at the start of development, they could make a really nice looking Switch game that runs at that framerate at 720p docked. It wouldn't be pushing as many effects or be quite as detailed as Doom, but I bet Nintendo could make a really nice looking FP Metroid on that hardware.

Doom was originally developed for high end PC's and crunched down to run on Switch hardware. It is still quite impressive for what it is, and shows the flexibility of iDTech6. But the Switch still is a mobile tablet for the most part.
 
K

KageMaru

Member
Elfotografoalocado said:
If the entire graphics pipeline was changed and only the logic was the same, then perhaps it'd be able to run at 60FPS. But the complex pipeline and the texture compression possibly make it difficult on the CPU end.
That and the shader complexity of course on the GPU end. After all, it has the full renderer unchanged.
Click to expand...

The iDtech 6 engine is highly optimized as is. We see effects used on the other consoles that are usually reserved for 30fps titles. I wonder how much wiggle room a studio would have with the Switch, even with a new renderer.

OryoN said:
I was hoping for 60fps as well, but, admittedly, with MUCH LESS graphical flare than this. 30fps is playable, and is fine as long as they maintain that performance for the vast majority of time.

Seems like some trolls got caught off guard by how good it looks on Switch too. When the only major thing they can pick on is the 1/2 framerate of this port, on a console 1/5 the power of PS4, then that tells me Bethesda/Panic Button did a hell of a job! Kudos!
Click to expand...

I think the trolling is embarrassing in this thread but you can pick out plenty of cutbacks with this port. It's still impressive but framerate is not the only major thing noticeable.

Hermii said:
Imo the biggest mistake Nintendo made with the Switch hardware was not getting the cpu up to par with current gen consoles, even if it would have taken a delay. Would have made ports much less of an issue and its the one area where its possible for a tablet to match and even exceed current gen consoles.
Click to expand...

I wonder if the problem was nVidia, Nintendo, or both with not wanting to customize the hardware. It would have been interesting if they were able to include 8 Arm cores and used two for the OS. That likely would have increased the chances of a lot more cross platform ports.
 
C

conpfreak

Member
Hermii said:
Imo the biggest mistake Nintendo made with the Switch hardware was not getting the cpu up to par with current gen consoles, even if it would have taken a delay. Would have made ports much less of an issue and its the one area where its possible for a tablet to match and even exceed current gen consoles.
Click to expand...

I think it's been pretty clear that the X2 or whatever people think it's called wasn't ready for production before the launch of the Switch. Even the newest NVIDIA Shield used the same chip. There is always revisions for spec bumps, but the X1 was the best they could get. There is no magical SoC out there from NVIDIA that would have provided the performance you are looking for, at least for 2017.
 
H

Hermii

Member
conpfreak said:
I think it's been pretty clear that the X2 or whatever people think it's called wasn't ready for production before the launch of the Switch. Even the newest NVIDIA Shield used the same chip. There is always revisions for spec bumps, but the X1 was the best they could get. There is no magical SoC out there from NVIDIA that would have provided the performance you are looking for, at least for 2017.
Click to expand...
I’m not even talking about x2, a die shrunk x1 would have done wonders.

This have been discussed to death and it is what it is, so let’s not.
 
P

Panajev2001a

GAF's Pleasant Genius
conpfreak said:
I think it's been pretty clear that the X2 or whatever people think it's called wasn't ready for production before the launch of the Switch. Even the newest NVIDIA Shield used the same chip. There is always revisions for spec bumps, but the X1 was the best they could get. There is no magical SoC out there from NVIDIA that would have provided the performance you are looking for, at least for 2017.
Click to expand...

Agreed, but someone could also say that they have enough money in the bank to invest on a semi custom CPU and not just get whatever is available at a time though.
 
M

M3d10n

Member
MrCunningham said:
I guess 60fps was a bit too much to ask for the Switch port, especially in handheld mode.

Neat video, I do love Leadbetter's little Jaguar core powered PC to try and emulate the Switch. But running Doom on that system in low settings is not equal to what the Switch version will be like, given that the Switch port will use custom settings. But his Jaguar build would actually be pretty good for comparing XBOX One and PS4 games to a degree.




Personally, I believe that Nintendo will be using their own branch of UE4 for Metroid Prime 4. But I believe that they could get a game like Metroid Prime 4 to run at 60fps on iDTech6, if they did go in that direction. If Nintendo targeted the game to run at 60fps at the start of development, they could make a really nice looking Switch game that runs at that framerate at 720p docked. It wouldn't be pushing as many effects or be quite as detailed as Doom, but I bet Nintendo could make a really nice looking FP Metroid on that hardware.

Doom was originally developed for high end PC's and crunched down to run on Switch hardware. It is still quite impressive for what it is, and shows the flexibility of iDTech6. But the Switch still is a mobile tablet for the most part.
Click to expand...

I think, iDTech6's reliance on megatextures makes it not very suitable for the a device where storage is at premium like the Switch, even if Doom itself is a good port. For a game from the ground up a modified UE4 sounds more of a match, specially since it already contains all sorts of ARM and mobile GPU optimizations.
 
Ragnarok

Ragnarok

Member
The original Doom is the best first person shooter ever made and it's 35 fps. It is a bit disappointing but it always makes me laugh when people think 30 fps is unplayable. It's Doom in your hands. On the toilet. On the bus. In your bed. It's Doom!
 
D

Dictator93

Member
M3d10n said:
I think, iDTech6's reliance on megatextures makes it not very suitable for the a device where storage is at premium like the Switch, even if Doom itself is a good port. For a game from the ground up a modified UE4 sounds more of a match, specially since it already contains all sorts of ARM and mobile GPU optimizations.
Click to expand...

I know idtech 6 still uses virtual textures, but I do not think it uses the idtech5 style of "megatexture" art work flow where it involves tons of artist stamping and baking. But even then, yeah, the huge download size is not exactly fit for switch.
 
T

ThoseDeafMutes

Member
KageMaru said:
Actually the success of many Nintendo and CoD games show a strong indication that the market prefers 60fps over graphics. The biggest problem is being able to market the benefits of higher framerates to a consumer base that doesn't know what framerates are.
Click to expand...

The CoD = 60 fps = success syllogism is really dubious. It's not that I think it doesn't make games feel smoother, but I really don't think the market as a whole bares this out and there are easy too many secondary factors to possibly isolate frame rate.

In terms of critical reception, a very large fraction of metacritics top games of all time are 30 hz and a few are 20 with dips. It's basically mostly Mario that is 60 along with soul caliber and Metroid prime until you get into the 20s.
 
H

Huge Succeeded

Banned
Pankratous said:
I really wish people on this forum would just enjoy videogames instead of video game performance.
Click to expand...

Let me spell something out for all of you who think like this. What follows is a fact. If you don't like it, it's nobody's fault but your own, so figure out a way to deal with it. Here it goes:

performance affects gameplay

That's why people who play games sometimes value it.

It couldn't be any easier to understand why people might not want to play DOOM at 30fps
fast, frantic DOOM
better at 60fps DOOM

and yet here we are.

I don't agree with the "don't buy" standpoints. I'm buying the game. But seriously, why sit here and whine about how some people feel that way? Some people just don't wanna play a shooter like DOOM at 30fps, and as someone who has played the shit out of DOOM as it is, I totally get that. It's perfectly justifiable. Deal with it already, goddamn. It's 2017 and we've still got crowds on GAF whining about how people give a shit about performance. mindboggling.
 
N

Neiteio

Member
DOOM will still be fun at 30 fps. For some of us it's just a question of whether we'll buy this game again when we already have it at 60 fps on PS4, etc. It's amazing how this looks nearly identical to the PS4 version (framerate aside). To have it on a portable is tempting.

Those who played it said it feels perfectly fluid and responsive, and it's clear they've retained most of the visual detail that gives the game its particular look and feel. So I think I'm willing to give this a shot at 30 fps.

Sometimes it's just a matter of adjustment. After playing Nioh at 60 fps, I thought that going back to another Soulslike, Bloodborne, at 30 fps (and with frame pacing issues) would be "unplayable." But you acclimate, and the core design shines bright as ever.
 
F

funkystudent

Member
I just think its cool the legacy of Doom being ported kicking and screaming to other platforms maybe not capable of running it properly lives. Downports are always fascinating.



Still, its hard to expect more downports since not many AAA games this gen where able to do full fat 1080p / 60fps on even the Xbox One like Doom and Wolfenstein. Cant exactly half the FPS of a 30fps game.
 
P

PantsuJo

Member
funkystudent said:
I just think its cool the legacy of Doom being ported kicking and screaming to other platforms maybe not capable of running it properly lives. Downports are always fascinating.



Still, its hard to expect more downports since not many AAA games this gen where able to do full fat 1080p / 60fps on even the Xbox One like Doom and Wolfenstein. Cant exactly half the FPS of a 30fps game.
Click to expand...
This is true.

Even some games made in UE4 can't be ported, apparently (Ace Combat 7, for example).
 
K

Kilrogg

paid requisite penance
Skittzo0413 said:
I thought GameXplain was told it was 720p handheld. Wouldn't that indicate at least 720p docked, more likely 900p?

Potentially up to those numbers with dynamic res.
Click to expand...

Highly doubt it. Remember that GameXplain initially thought the game was running at 60 fps - though, in fairness, they were playing at an angle with tons of glare because of their camera setup. He might not be able to really tell how crisp the image was, and/or the rep didn't know what they were talking about... And/or it's technically not true now but that's what they're aiming for for the final version.

Anyway, every single piece of footage we've seen so far seems to indicate a fair deal of blurriness. Digital Foundry said as much. I'm leaning towards low variable res with a good AA solution to make up for it. So 720fps docked, and definitely lower undocked.
 
R

Relaxed Muscle

Member
ThoseDeafMutes said:
The CoD = 60 fps = success syllogism is really dubious. It's not that I think it doesn't make games feel smoother, but I really don't think the market as a whole bares this out and there are easy too many secondary factors to possibly isolate frame rate.

In terms of critical reception, a very large fraction of metacritics top games of all time are 30 hz and a few are 20 with dips. It's basically mostly Mario that is 60 along with soul caliber and Metroid prime until you get into the 20s.
Click to expand...

I think there's a reason why most FPS goes 60fps (on consoles): COD, BF changed 30fps to aim to 60fps this gen, TF2, Overwatch, etc...

Own Bethesda FPS have aimed to 60fps since last gen, with their last two engines aimed spoecifically to provide this target framerate.

Bungie basically had to come out and defend his decision to go with 30fps (they had to if they wanted to keep their own game design), because of the backslash,with many people just waiting for the PC version because of this.


Is clear than 60fps is quickly becoming the standard in the genre. And is also clear is not casuality (other FP games like Dishonored or Deus Ex aren't trending to higher framerates)
 
C

Clov

Member
30 fps is pretty disappointing. I'll wait for more impressions for now. I'm curious to see how it runs in docked mode...
 
J

Jonneh3003

Banned
xenist said:
You know what the world needed? A portable version of Doom, that runs worse than every other version, plays worse than every other version and looks worse than every other version. They should do a port for smartphones next.

I can't wait for Wolfenstein.
Click to expand...
Jesus
 
T

Tom Nook Sawyer

Member
Kilrogg said:
Highly doubt it. Remember that GameXplain initially thought the game was running at 60 fps - though, in fairness, they were playing at an angle with tons of glare because of their camera setup. He might not be able to really tell how crisp the image was, and/or the rep didn't know what they were talking about... And/or it's technically not true now but that's what they're aiming for for the final version.
Click to expand...

I don't remember Gamexplain mentioning the resolution at all. It's also disingenuous to say they thought it was 60fps, when they only mentioned that within the context of clarifying it's 30.
 
P

plagiarize

Banned
Tom Nook Sawyer said:
I don't think Gamexplain mentioned the resolution at all. It's also disingenuous to say they thought it was 60fps, when they only mentioned that within the context of clarifying it's 30.
Click to expand...

Yeah, both weren't 100% sure which it was, but were pretty confident it was 30 fps. It's very disingenuous to claim they thought it was 60 fps.
 
E

Easy_D

never left the stone age
xenist said:
You know what the world needed? A portable version of Doom, that runs worse than every other version, plays worse than every other version and looks worse than every other version. They should do a port for smartphones next.

I can't wait for Wolfenstein.
Click to expand...

Not like the world needs video games at all, nor does this port existing detract from your daily life in any way.
 
K

Kilrogg

paid requisite penance
Tom Nook Sawyer said:
I don't remember Gamexplain mentioning the resolution at all. It's also disingenuous to say they thought it was 60fps, when they only mentioned that within the context of clarifying it's 30.
Click to expand...

plagiarize said:
Yeah, both weren't 100% sure which it was, but were pretty confident it was 30 fps. It's very disingenuous to claim they thought it was 60 fps.
Click to expand...

If this is really the case, I must have not been focusing on the video enough. My bad if so.
 
MrCunningham

MrCunningham

Member
ThoseDeafMutes said:
The CoD = 60 fps = success syllogism is really dubious. It's not that I think it doesn't make games feel smoother, but I really don't think the market as a whole bares this out and there are easy too many secondary factors to possibly isolate frame rate.

In terms of critical reception, a very large fraction of metacritics top games of all time are 30 hz and a few are 20 with dips. It's basically mostly Mario that is 60 along with soul caliber and Metroid prime until you get into the 20s.
Click to expand...

I think steady 60fps only really matters in COD's multiplayer mode. It's not something that Activision ever advertises, but I do think that the reason why COD's multiplayer has been a huge selling point for so many years is because it still offers one of the smoothest online experiences available on a console. Even if the core non-tech-savvy audience doesn't understand the underlying technology behind the game itself, I still think customers resonate to this series as an online go-to game because it does just feel right.

the COD series to this day still offers some of the lowest latency gameplay in an online death match FPS setting.


Dictator93 said:
I know idtech 6 still uses virtual textures, but I do not think it uses the idtech5 style of "megatexture" art work flow where it involves tons of artist stamping and baking. But even then, yeah, the huge download size is not exactly fit for switch.
Click to expand...

Yeah iDTech6 seems to have a different workflow when handling textures, but I honestly don't know how it works in comparison to idTech 5. It is a shame that the PC version of Doom 2016 doesn't come with any real mod/ development tools outside of snapmap. I would like to experiment with idTech 6 myself.
 
M

mokeyjoe

Member
Neiteio said:
DOOM will still be fun at 30 fps. For some of us it's just a question of whether we'll buy this game again when we already have it at 60 fps on PS4, etc. It's amazing how this looks nearly identical to the PS4 version (framerate aside). To have it on a portable is tempting.

Those who played it said it feels perfectly fluid and responsive, and it's clear they've retained most of the visual detail that gives the game its particular look and feel. So I think I'm willing to give this a shot at 30 fps.

Sometimes it's just a matter of adjustment. After playing Nioh at 60 fps, I thought that going back to another Soulslike, Bloodborne, at 30 fps (and with frame pacing issues) would be "unplayable." But you acclimate, and the core design shines bright as ever.
Click to expand...


Sure, but original Doom still plays better at higher resolutions and at 60fps.

I’m significantly less interested in this at 30fps, but I don’t think all 30fps feels equal. Certainly there are some racing games that I’ve played that I’ve been surprised are running at that rate. Rock solid with good motion blur can be surprisingly effective. For a handheld this is fine.
 
1

120v

Member
when it comes to console i leave technical expectations at the door. 30 fps without bells and whistles? cool, just do a competent job

but DOOM is the one game i'd nope the hell away at sub 60
 
O

Oregano

Member
Probably a good time to point out that the Wii versions of COD ran at 30fps and were all pretty successful considering the massive gulf in graphics.
 
A

AzaK

Member
OryoN said:
I was hoping for 60fps as well, but, admittedly, with MUCH LESS graphical flare than this. 30fps is playable, and is fine as long as they maintain that performance for the vast majority of time.

Seems like some trolls got caught off guard by how good it looks on Switch too. When the only major thing they can pick on is the 1/2 framerate of this port, on a console 1/5 the power of PS4, then that tells me Bethesda/Panic Button did a hell of a job! Kudos!
Click to expand...
Just remember that any crud sized down to a small handheld size will look pretty good. It’s when it’s on the big screen that it will be interesting.
 
M

Mutant

Member
It's a shame that polygon said the joycon sticks feel funky with this game. Between this, Disgaea 5, and Infinite Golf I've noticed that some devs don't design with these specific control sticks in mind and the results are pretty wonky. But at least D5 and IG are turn based, wonky handheld controls in Doom is a bummer.
 
T

TheGreatMightyPoo

Banned
Neiteio said:
DOOM will still be fun at 30 fps. For some of us it's just a question of whether we'll buy this game again when we already have it at 60 fps on PS4, etc. It's amazing how this looks nearly identical to the PS4 version (framerate aside). To have it on a portable is tempting.

Those who played it said it feels perfectly fluid and responsive, and it's clear they've retained most of the visual detail that gives the game its particular look and feel. So I think I'm willing to give this a shot at 30 fps.

Sometimes it's just a matter of adjustment. After playing Nioh at 60 fps, I thought that going back to another Soulslike, Bloodborne, at 30 fps (and with frame pacing issues) would be "unplayable." But you acclimate, and the core design shines bright as ever.
Click to expand...
Yeah.
I'm kind of a framerate whore but this seems a strong effort from a third party.
I'm in even though I was telling myself I wouldn't be at 30 fps.
I would balk if it was just an average first person shooter but people were raving like it was the second coming...
 
N

Neiteio

Member
Thunder Monkey said:
I mean... it's not reaching if he's right.

Doom Switch looks shockingly close to the PS4 game, given you're talking about hardware a fifth as powerful.

Closest analog I can think of is an Xbox game ported to the PS2.
Click to expand...
Thank you, Thunder Monkey :)

I played the heck out of the PS4 version. Started like five threads on it here when it came out. I know what the game looks like, and just going off the offscreen footage they've shown so far, it's an impressive port.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

[SwitchUp] Red Dead Redemption Nintendo Switch Technical Performance Review!
Analysis
23
3K
Mephisto40 replied
  • Poll
[The Verge] It’s time for Microsoft to build an Xbox Steam Deck
2 3
128
7K
Nydius replied
Digital Foundry: Nier Automata for Nintendo Switch - DF Tech Review - Another Impossible Port?
2
78
5K
bender replied
A handheld Xbox? Microsoft’s gaming chief can’t stop thinking about it
2 3
113
4K
Reallink replied
[IGN] Seriously, Nintendo, It’s Time to Release a Switch Pro
2 3 4 5 6
296
18K
Knightime_X replied
Top Bottom