Was it addressed whether or not this is something that can/will be patched? I'm at work :s
Who knows.
Was it addressed whether or not this is something that can/will be patched? I'm at work :s
If this was not Zelda it would have been hammered.
It bumps the resolution, meaning it makes performance worse.
It's an alt-post-truth fact, we have to live with that.Why do people keep saying this. We've seen plenty of games not get hammered for performance issues. Some even shipped in worse states than Zelda.
Why do people keep saying this. We've seen plenty of games not get hammered for performance issues. Some even shipped in worse states than Zelda.
any breakdown of increased draw distance, increased detail/shadows - anything? Because even if portable mode is using the rumoured increased clocks, 900p is only 50% more pixels and docked mode should be minimum 2x GPU clock speed.
It just doesn't make sense.
There's only about 5 games with that same meta score. The only game above run at 20 fpsBut have we seen 98 rated games with performance this bad?
20 fps in 2017 is a bummer.
Why do people keep saying this. We've seen plenty of games not get hammered for performance issues. Some even shipped in worse states than Zelda.
Every DF thread. Performance issues are either downplayed or over exaggerated depending how a poster feels about the game.Proof? Receipts? Anything?
Yeah I was noticing very weird drops in just completely random locations. I think this can and will be patched soon, I don't think it'll stay this way
But have we seen 98 rated games with performance this bad?
There is... it's a console game running on a handheld. Docked or not, it's still a portable.No excuse for the docked performance.
Gta IV on pc?But have we seen 98 rated games with performance this bad?
If this was not Zelda it would have been hammered.
20fps at 900p with that kind of graphics.
Switch is massively underpowered. Is it even as strong as a ps3?
Actually a 99 game. But yeah, it was named Zelda, sorry.But have we seen 98 rated games with performance this bad?
If this was not Zelda it would have been hammered.
I think it says a lot though, that even with these performance issues, it did not affect the scores at all. Any other game would have been hammered. Bloodborne I remember took a hit in scores because of its performance issues.
More disappointing too considering Horizon's rock solid performance.
20fps at 900p with that kind of graphics.
Switch is massively underpowered. Is it even as strong as a ps3?
To my untrained mind this seems like a fairly simple thing to fix.
Proof? Receipts? Anything?
I've noticed the fps issues but apart from that the game looks beautiful to me. I guess I'm just blind to aliasing issues because the game looks great both undocked and docked. I'm gonna stay away from videos like these because they might make the problems more apparent and sour my experience. Still don't know what frame pacing is and my experience with bloodborne was nice and smooth because of that.
If this was not Zelda it would have been hammered.
If this was not Zelda it would have been hammered.
To my untrained mind this seems like a fairly simple thing to fix.
Common sense is all one requires to see it. Other games have the screws put to them over such issues, but Zelda is a darling and you cannot convince me otherwise.
Yes, of course. By a lot. But it seems like it's a not entirely optimized port from a console that is very weak.20fps at 900p with that kind of graphics.
Switch is massively underpowered. Is it even as strong as a ps3?
If this was not Zelda it would have been hammered.