TheDuskwalker
Member
Last edited:
-
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.
Bloodstained: Ritual of the Night with only be 30FPS on Switch at 720p.
- Thread starter TheDuskwalker
- Start date
Whitesnake
Banned
To the PS4 it goes.
The portability of the switch necessitates sacrifice. Unless a game is remade from the ground-up for it, there’s going to be some issues in porting. People should not always expect a game that’s made for PS4 and XBO to run on a 10in x 4in x 0.5in tablet without losing anything.
The portability of the switch necessitates sacrifice. Unless a game is remade from the ground-up for it, there’s going to be some issues in porting. People should not always expect a game that’s made for PS4 and XBO to run on a 10in x 4in x 0.5in tablet without losing anything.
Kamina
Golden Boy
This
Why is it surprising to anyone?
iconmaster
Banned
Kamina
Golden Boy
Looking at the graphics however they seem to be very detailed. So i assume they weren’t able to hit 60 consistently and decided to go for stable 30 instead.
TF is this supposed to mean? I don't know how anyone can say this after seeing Smash, Odyssey, Splatoon, BotW, Kirby, Yoshi... Can you name any other graphically similar 2.5d games that run at 720p30? That's absurd.
Last edited:
ThatGamingDude
I am a virgin
A lot of times on the Switch instead of killing frame rate they'll kill background texture quality, and in portable mode drops down things like the draw distance to help with that, since it's a controlled screen size, and the screen is 720p anyways.
I feel you about there should be no shock and awe, but it does kind of suck since they've figured out some tricks to do to make it work and still look decently pleasant.
I think the shock stems from is that it doesn't scale up to 1080p in docked mode; that IS a little bit different, even if it was still capped at 30FPS and using the same texture packs etc, it's typical from them to kick it up to 1080p.
Last edited:
TheDuskwalker
Member
They've improved it since then, however I've seen more graphically impressive Switch games that hit 60FPS and 720p on the same engine.
Given they said it's 30FPS and a fixed 720p in handheld mode, and 30FPS at a dynamic resolution with additional effects and visuals, looks like they could have at last tried for a optional docked option for cutting said additional effects and visuals for having the handheld mode graphics but at 60FPS (or at least a targeted 60FPS) at a dynamic 720p? Clearly more of a optimization issue than a Switch issue, same thing happened to Dead Cells, which has now been fixed.
That said, I'm more concerned on the input lag that was reported in the Pax build which I just realized they didn't address in the article.
Last edited:
The Hermit
Member
Welp, there goes my purchase
#Phonepunk#
Banned
Fine with me. I could switch to pc but I want that portable vania. This doesn’t change a thing for me still going w switch
Dontero
Banned
Surely small indie team will have resources and know-how of first party dev teams being Nintendo exclusives... not.
Which goes into obvious answer. There is simply not enough power on system to quickly port game and still have nice res and frame-rate.
Secondly you should get used to 720p 30fps already. This is what Switch was made with in mind for portable mode.
Last edited:
ThatGamingDude
I am a virgin
That would make the cost for the Switch a bit more; Maxwell doesn't support adaptive sync, so instead of the Tegra X1 they would have to go with a Tegra X2 (Which is a minimal gain in performance), or higher.
nVidia doesn't list the prices on their chips, but even for like $30-40 that's still $300 mil for the X1 chips, if they produced 10mil units over its entire life span.
You would also have to figure in the cost for an adapative sync compatabile screen and phew, that'd be quite a pricey tablet.
Chozofication_
Banned
That's an indie game for ya. This is not a limitation of switch's hardware
ResurrectedContrarian
Suffers with mild autism
Fully expecting Mighty No. 10 at this point
93xfan
Banned
Plenty of games run at 60fps and a higher res on switch.
Last edited:
PocoJoe
Banned
Be indie dev with limited knowledge/recourses
Which is easier:
Code a game to run on 1.8Tflops console
Code a game to run on 0.38Tflops console
On ps4 they can "waste" ~70% of raw power by bad coding and have the same performance as switch
#Phonepunk#
Banned
I just watched a video on Days Gone which runs at 30fps and still has massive drops when played on PS4 Pro
It’s not like 30fps is an unheard of thing these days.
It’s not like 30fps is an unheard of thing these days.
Last edited:
TheDuskwalker
Member
Did you really just compare a decent looking indie 2.5D platformer to a graphically intense AAA open world game that renders hundreds of enemies at once?
Sadly true. I mean Wayforward have been co-developing the game since last year. It's pretty obvious they are having issues just making the game at all and should have enlisted help much sooner than they did. They did say "launch stats" so it might end up like a Dead Cells situation where it's eventually fixed, hopefully,
Still though, it's a fairly high profile multimillion kickstarter project, and the Switch is the most pre-ordered version, it's not going to be the best first impression for a lot of people. Made worse givin how crowdfunded games have been looked at since Mighty No. 9.
Last edited:
Kamina
Golden Boy
Sure, and plenty don't. But i still prefer the switch version.
Last edited:
Uh. That’s just silly. This is 2D platformer. It should be running at 60fps.
Dontero
Banned
Here is the quick math:
time to develop a port - time needed to get engine running well = profit made out of port
Switch doesn't have enough power for them to quickly port it with decent performance.
Stuart360
Member
Its Indie devs, and i'm guessing the game was probably designed on the PS4 first. There is only so much you can do with the Switch hardware, which only has about a quarter of the power of PS4.
People always point to Wolfenstein 2 as proof of what the Switch can do, and yes its a good looking game for Switch, but it also runs at half the framerate, half the resolution (less than half at times), lower rez textures, worse or missing lighting, worse or missing shadows, lower draw distance, and missing geomatry over the XB1/PS4 versions.
People always point to Wolfenstein 2 as proof of what the Switch can do, and yes its a good looking game for Switch, but it also runs at half the framerate, half the resolution (less than half at times), lower rez textures, worse or missing lighting, worse or missing shadows, lower draw distance, and missing geomatry over the XB1/PS4 versions.
The heck? Being a small indie means you're making smaller games with simpler graphics, that a system will be able to power through more easily. How many indie games on the Switch are 30fps?
No one's using advanced techniques to raise push graphical quality in a freaking 2.5d game (this gen, at least).
Not to mention, the flipping PSP emulator on Switch can run a lot of PSP games at 720p60.
720p at handheld, sure. But 30fps on a 2.5D game? What about Bloodstained do you even think is even remotely that graphically complex?
lyan
Member
Being 2.5d actually makes graphical optimization harder since a lot of the tricks are focused with FPS/TPS perspective in which you can afford to give less care on what is further away from the camera. Also being a UE4 game I assume things like physics are still done as 3d, in fact with some modding and hacking I would not be surprised if people actually manage to transform it into something like an over the shoulder hack and slash.
It gives you a very simple point at which you can stop rendering graphics, instead of dealing with LOD. What's on screen is also extremely simple, I can't imagine they'd have trouble showing large amounts of the level regardless.
I'd need to watch more video to tell if the physics are 2d or 3d, but all that should be so heavily optimized by now, and there's not exactly piles of rocks interacting with either other.
We're also talking about a game that made 5.5 million on Kickstarter, AND has investors, AND a publisher.
Last edited:
lyan
Member
the thing is in the discussion of basically a port (assuming their main target is ps4), everything is already LOD-ed appropriately by default due to the perspective when they initially budget the available processing power, they have less free flexibility in downscaling the visuals.
I only bring up the physics just to point out it is a 3d game technically, I don't think the framerate is cpu bounded as a result of game logic but things like lighting/shader instructions.
I do agree they have not made a good display on the use of their funding to the public.
Journey
Banned
And plenty of 2D sprite based games that can run at 1080p 60fps, but what does that have to do with the price of tea in China? This game wasn't originally meant for the Switch, it started its development on PS4 and Xbox One which are considerably more powerful hardware. Just be happy that you're getting the game if in fact you really are interested in it, rather than expect them to change the game design and dumb it down to fit the switch lesser hardware.
Last edited:
Coolio McAwesome
Member
This screams “low effort” to me.
cireza
Member
PS Vita was included from the very beginning. 30fps for Vita would have been perfectly understandable and acceptable. Switch is much more powerful.
It was also my platform choice back then. I cancelled my pledge after they cancelled the Vita version. Most disappointing Kickstarter I backed because of this. Can't even stick to their decisions til the end.
Last edited:
Dontero
Banned
720p30fps is majority of switch games.
iconmaster
Banned
Compared to Donkey Kong: Tropical Freeze, no.. they don't seem that detailed to me. They're okay.
I realize it's an indie developer porting from more powerful platforms. It's understandable. But some of you are greatly underestimating the Switch given its history of 60fps and even 1080p60 titles.
Someone like Panic Button could have had this running at full rez and frame rate no problem.
That's not true at all. Here's a list of Switch game resolutions. If you look at the Docked column, 720p is more the exception than the rule.
Out of 74 games, I count 17 with a vertical resolution of 720 or less in docked mode - less than a quarter. If we grant the additional 4 games with unknown resolutions as 720p or less, we get 28%.
I'll have to ask you to retract your claim.
Last edited:
JunkerWoland
Member
With the game being multi-platform and built on Unreal Engine 4, the Switch's specs aren't necessarily surprising. Even on the base PS4 and XB1, there are UE4 games that seem to unexpectedly push less frames and lower resolutions; and while I assume PS4 & XB1 will advertise Bloodstained at 60fps, I also won't be surprised if they, at times, demonstrate a decent amount of dropped frames on their weaker iterations.
TheDuskwalker
Member
There is definitely bigger Switch concerns they promise to fix.
As someone that has over 61 Switch games I also ask him to retract that statement.
Last edited:
ljubomir
Member
If a game like MK11 can pull off 60 there's no question this could've as well. Arguments that they started on PS4 and that Switch is late to the game are silly - they promised Vita and WiiU versions right from the start. Given the amount of time and money they had this is simply botched low effort job, no question about it.
Last edited: