• 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

It's so funny.

The Switch is slightly larger than the average Smartphone nowadays and people expect games with 4k60 on it.

Be happy you can play AAA games on it. Despite the lower resolution and lower framerate.
 

nOoblet16

Member
Borderlands 2 on Vita is a technological feat too but also a terrible game to play. Luckily, this looks quite a bit more playable than that but I'll agree I'm not feeling the need to double dip.
Borderlands 2 barely ever hits 30FPS on Vita. This one does, and 30FPS happens to be the most common framerate for consoles and a framerate that's atleast playable.
 
Some of Gaf's reaction in the first couple pages is.... Something...

DF said they're impressed on how the game looks in handheld and at 30 FPS and... yeah...

I'm not saying that anyone should be over the moon about the info coming our way. It just surprises me that some users touts about how inferior the Switch is spec wise to the other consoles then seems to act surprised when a game (in this case DOOM) was scaled back so that it can run on the Switch. I believe DF said that this was a handheld mode impression so let's wait for more info to come out because we still need to know how it runs docked. This is like one conversation I had years ago where some dude expected the Vita to run a console version of Call of Duty locked at 30 FPS.
 
I don't want 4k60fps on the Switch,I do want/expect 720p 60fps.
Won't get this running at 30fps, I'd gladly take a visual downgrade for 60fps, but that just me.
 
Some of Gaf's reaction in the first couple pages is.... Something...

DF said they're impressed on how the game looks in handheld and at 30 FPS with 540 Res (I believe it was 540) and... yeah...

I'm not saying that anyone should be over the moon about the info coming our way. It just surprises me that some users touts about how inferior the Switch is spec wise to the other consoles then seems to act surprised when a game (in this case DOOM) was scaled back so that it can run on the Switch. I believe DF said that this was a handheld mode impression so let's wait for more info to come out because we still need to know how it runs docked. This is like one conversation I had years ago where some dude expected the Vita to run a console version of Call of Duty locked at 30 FPS.
540? I hope it's not 540. Non native res games on vita were terrible. That would bring back bad memories.
 

OnPoint

Member
While I agree that 60 is nice, the fact that they got this running and at a rock solid 30 is enough for me.

If you care about 60 fps you weren't playing this on the Switch anyway. It's not for you.
 
So experimenting with the PC version a bit, you can find out quickly that the size of Bokeh shapes is correlated with the internal resolution the game is running at.

So Digtal Foundry running at 960X540:

Switch running at ??????:

My PC running at 640X360:

So that makes me think that either the internal resolution of Bokeh Depth of field has been quartered or halfed or whatever, or the game is much lower resolution than 960X540 in undocked mode.
 

Apocryphon

Member
If this is the standard what isn't a technical marvel? Any game that runs on any console would then be a tech marvel.

Don't be a clown. It's a handheld with specs roughly equivalent to last gen consoles and it's running id Tech 6 at what looks like a stable framerate without losing all of the nice post processing effects. This is like Doom 3 on Xbox where you have a game that looks like it shouldn't be able to run on the hardware at all, and this is portable.
 

Thraktor

Member
The problem isn't going to be how it looks, but how it plays. A fast-paced shooter like Doom needs extremely responsive controls. People bleat on about the temporal resolution that 60fps provides, but the increased controller responsiveness is far more important. As someone who has primarily played games entirely on a PC for a good number of years now, going back to 30fps feels horrible. Even something as simple as panning the camera in a third person game feels so sluggish. I find it very unpleasant to play action-oriented games like that now. For something like a JRPG, it's less of an issue.

This is a completely valid factor to take into account, but if responsiveness is your main goal, it's worth also considering the fact that the Switch's screen has much lower latency than the average TV that a PS4/XBO user is playing on. A well-implemented game running at 30fps on Switch in portable mode could actually be more responsive than the same game running at 60fps on a TV, just because of all that extra latency most modern TVs add. A PC with a decent monitor is of course a different matter, but if we're purely comparing Doom on Switch in portable mode (which I have to imagine is why the vast majority of people would buy it on Switch) to other consoles, then the Switch version may well end up giving a more responsive experience.
 

Teletraan1

Member
I had a feeling that this might be 30fps when it was never mentioned what the fps was in the initial info and subsequent coverage of the game. I wasn't interested in the game as a Switch owner already with reservations about the fidelity and price of a late port I could play elsewhere but this would firmly put the game into the nope category for me.
 

Fliesen

Member
hmmm, any word on the input lag?

The glixel video looks a BIT off, like 3 frames of input lag



slowed down



or is the joycon's deadzone that big. (i'd say the 3rd frame of the video - which is recorded in 30 fps too - is when the stick is definitely pushed sufficiently far)
It's really hard to tell. But input lag would be a much bigger issue to me than 30fps.
 
So experimenting with the PC version a bit, you can find out quickly that the size of Bokeh shapes is correlated with the internal resolution the game is running at.

So Digtal Foundry running at 960X540:


Switch running at ??????:


My PC running at 640X360:


So that makes me think that either the internal resolution of Bokeh Depth of field has been quartered or halfed or whatever, or the game is much lower resolution than 960X540 in undocked mode.

They've already stated it's not a 1:1 port, meaning it's not a simple reduction of effects and resolutions. I don't know how useful such an experiment is
 

Irminsul

Member
Now that the video is back online, I have to say GAF is really horrible at describing DF videos. No, I'm not talking about whether you agree with Rich's take on DOOM on Switch, I'm just talking about what he actually said.

And while yes, the "Switch PC" may seem a bit silly, now that I've watched the video, I do get the intention behind that. Still odd DF didn't have any off-screen footage, though.
 

KingSnake

The Birthday Skeleton
Shit, I got that from a couple Gaffers. I'll edit that part out. Sorry.

It's in the DF video. They say that the footage they're using shows that the resolution goes to 540p and below. Now the issue is that they are using the trailer from the Direct, so it's pretty useless.
 

jett

D-Member
DF's comparison screens fullsize. (PS4)












Funny how one of those comparisons show that there's in fact no full-body model of the Doom marine in the game. :p

DOOM not having all that high quality textures (due to the nature of megatexturing) is definitely advantageous to the Switch. I think it's really impressive how close they got.
 

coughlanio

Member
It's in the DF video. They say that the footage they're using shows that the resolution goes to 540p and below. Now the issue is that they are using the trailer from the Direct, so it's pretty useless.

Isn't it also a guess on their part? Not taking into consideration that there may be dynamic resolution scaling at play?
 
30fps for this game is an absolute waste.

So much of what makes it great is the fluid movement and extremely fast gameplay.

Do yourself a favor and play it on another console or on PC.

This port is not worth it.
 

10k

Banned
60fps is vital for Doom. I'm sad. I won't be picking this version up. I already own it on PC and PS4 anyways but I would have gladly triple dipped for 60fps Doom on the go.
 
The Nintendo Switch is the first Nintendo machine that I've had anything to with for a very long time, I absolutely loved the Gamecube but they've not really done anything for since then and the Switch has turned that around for me even though there aren't that many games that are for me on it.

I don't know Nintendo's recent form with games like Doom, what made me suggest that it could have been Nintendo's doing was that the same thing didn't happen with the announcement on any other formats. There was simply that few seconds of footage which has now been superseded by footage that shows otherwise. I didn't know if that was still Nintendo's way of dealing with this stuff, as I said.

None of the hardware formats are perfect and none of the companies that produce that hardware is perfect and I will pick up on good bad things from all of them but I don't know what the hell has happened to Nintendo threads lately as soon as anything negative is mentioned.

I'd maybe understand if there was somebody who intentionally went into one of the three formats threads and kept posting really obnoxious and negative things about one of them but I don't have any history of that at all, anywhere on here. I know that happens on here and I understand that it's frustrating when it does happen.

Again, I'm not attacking anybody, I'm not attacking a piece of hardware or a company but if I do pick up on something concerning any of the formats, whether it's positive or negative, people shouldn't feel that it's any more than what I say it is. It's not a personal attack on anyone or anything.

Fortunately, what I first noticed has been shown as incorrect, not that it would have been a major issue if that wasn't so but that doesn't mean that I didn't believe that it was worth mentioning.

Fair enough, and if I came across as too harsh I apologize. Honestly, it can be hard to tell when there's genuine inquiry vs the "concern troll" type posts.

And yeah you're right. There is a vocal defense force of Nintendo fan with any sort of criticism of which I'm really not one of. They deserve a lot of their criticism though the conceit that they somehow still are imposing some sort of violence/gore censorship is one assumption I think still gets thrown around way too much and is inherently wrong. And though there is clearly a defense force for Nintendo, it's easy to see that Nintendo does bring out emotions on the other side for non-fans; this goes beyond apathy and goes into pure disdain. It's something I don't really understand TBH.
 
Wow this look good undocked. And yet people are still in the fence that the hardware is close to last gen when it's keeping these effects with the gpu underclocked.
 

King_Moc

Banned
hmmm, any word on the input lag?

The glixel video looks a BIT off, like 3 frames of input lag



slowed down



or is the joycon's deadzone that big. (i'd say the 3rd frame of the video - which is recorded in 30 fps too - is when the stick is definitely pushed sufficiently far)
It's really hard to tell. But input lag would be a much bigger issue to me than 30fps.

Doom has a massive analogue stick deadzone on PS4 from what I recall, so I guess it'd be the same here.
 
They've already stated it's not a 1:1 port, meaning it's not a simple reduction of effects and resolutions. I don't know how useful such an experiment is

IMO, looking at the resolved detail... it kinda really does look like it is running at 50-60% scaling from 720p (the switch screen anyway). I just realised my screen has really obvious aliasing where the bokeh meets geometric edges, that is because I have DOF anti-aliasing set to off. So Switch, seemingly has that on.
 
hmmm, any word on the input lag?

The glixel video looks a BIT off, like 3 frames of input lag


slowed down


or is the joycon's deadzone that big. (i'd say the 3rd frame of the video - which is recorded in 30 fps too - is when the stick is definitely pushed sufficiently far)
It's really hard to tell. But input lag would be a much bigger issue to me than 30fps.
Isn't off screen a bad way to judge latency?
 
Anyone who was expecting 60 FPS, especially in handheld mode, was kidding themselves. There’s a reason people were so shocked when this was announced along with Wolfenstein - the fact that the games are operating on the hardware properly at all is incredibly impressive.

The Switch isn’t some modern miracle of technology, it’s a beefy handheld with a dock for TV play. Concessions have to be made to get things running.
 

jett

D-Member
hmmm, any word on the input lag?

The glixel video looks a BIT off, like 3 frames of input lag



slowed down



or is the joycon's deadzone that big. (i'd say the 3rd frame of the video - which is recorded in 30 fps too - is when the stick is definitely pushed sufficiently far)
It's really hard to tell. But input lag would be a much bigger issue to me than 30fps.

All games have a degree of input lag. Even high paced games like fighters have multiple frames of input lag. Were you not around for the Great SFV 8 Frames Debacle?
 

Peterthumpa

Member
30fps for this game is an absolute waste.

So much of what makes it great is the fluid movement and extremely fast gameplay.

Do yourself a favor and play it on another console or on PC.

This port is not worth it.
What is this.

I have Doom for PC and PS4 and I'm buying this version to play it again out and about and to support the third party effort. Looks amazing and I'm sure I'll have fun, 60 fps or not.
 

Gestault

Member
I'm not sure how the overall aesthetic will come across at full-screen in docked mode, but the higher-quality motion blur really will help with the impression 30 fps can give (since apparently the underlying input responsivenenss is handled well). Handheld for this is going to be neat. DF is pleased with this, and they've had consistently worthwhile impressions and technical insight, candid or otherwise. I think those poo-pooing what we're hearing about the port may need their expectations checked, re: the hardware.
 

Fliesen

Member
Isn't off screen a bad way to judge latency?

Is it?

We have a perfect side-by-side shot of the controller and the screen that is directly connected to the console hardware, no HDMI / TV / GameMode shenanigans in between.

but i don't wanna do some armchair DF here, the glixel video just looked a bit ... weird.
Smooth, but ... weird.
All games have a degree of input lag. Even high paced games like fighters have multiple frames of input lag. Were you not around for the Great SFV 8 Frames Debacle?

i mean, yeah, no shit. But up to 4 frames in a 30fps game would be around 100-130ms input lag, which i'd call noticeable and which i would consider much more detrimental to the gameplay than 30fps or any visual downgrades.

but again, there's certainly people at those hands-ons who would've noticed input lag, if there were any.
 

gtj1092

Member
The switch is essentially a tablet with slightly higher specs. This is very impressive.

That's not to knock the Switch for BEING more akin to a tablet, that's obviously what Nintendo intended for in the first place

The logic then follows that you can say that about any game on any console.

I mean the FPS is halved and it's not even native screen resolution apparently. What's amazing about that? Competent port? Yes. Technical marvel? I don't think so.
 

FinalAres

Member
I don't think people would be anywhere near as disappointed in this if we didn't have as many people claiming the Switch was only a little less powerful than the Xbox One.

This is impressive, this is a technical marvel. In fact the Switch is a technical marvel. It is also a tablet, set your expectations realistically. At least this shows we can get some AAA ports, which is more than I expected.
 
What is this.

I have Doom for PC and PS4 and I'm buying this version to play it again out and about and to support the third party effort. Looks amazing and I'm sure I'll have fun, 60 fps or not.

I don't believe in supporting inferior ports.

Especially when I also own it on console and PC.

If they could get it to 60fps, I could live with awful textures and extremely low resolution.

This game was designed to run at a minimum 60fps. That's why the console versions were 60fps. It's only running at 30fps on the switch because it's on the switch.

No thanks.
 

Beegeous

Member
I know I'm about a million pages too late but will GAF just wait and see what journos say about how the game plays before jumping to conclusions?
 
I don't think people would be anywhere near as disappointed in this if we didn't have as many people claiming the Switch was only a little less powerful than the Xbox One.

This is impressive, this is a technical marvel. In fact the Switch is a technical marvel. It is also a tablet, set your expectations realistically. At least this shows we can get some AAA ports, which is more than I expected.

Been my issue lately with forums; negativity prevails and people are quick to bandwagon and tear things down. Overall anything has a prevailing negativity and it's exhausting to read anything that could be celebrated, with critiques be savagely decimated by opinion. People find things far harder when being positive and less...critical.

In this case, is the game 60 FPS, no. Is it a bummer? Sure.

Go hold a Switch system against your PS4, marvel at the size difference and this game existing intact, looking stellar on a console a fraction of the size and made by Nintendo (not typically in their systems lane of games).

I'm double dipping, loved the game and this looks dazzling.

Poopoo haters.
 

jett

D-Member
Is it?

We have a perfect side-by-side shot of the controller and the screen that is directly connected to the console hardware, no HDMI / TV / GameMode shenanigans in between.

but i don't wanna do some armchair DF here, the glixel video just looked a bit ... weird.
Smooth, but ... weird.


i mean, yeah, no shit. But up to 4 frames in a 30fps game would be around 100-130ms input lag, which i'd call noticeable and which i would consider much more detrimental to the gameplay than 30fps or any visual downgrades.

but again, there's certainly people at those hands-ons who would've noticed input lag, if there were any.

That's about the best you can expect out of a 30fps game.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2017-console-fps-input-lag-tested

Doom has 86ms of input lag, at 60fps.
 
Original DOOM was capped at 35fps, and it was a lot faster, in terms of gameplay, than the new DOOM.

60fps would feel nice and fluid, and be amazing, but 30fps is not going to get in the way of ripping a demon apart with a chainsaw. The game is frantic, but it has never been a game about pinpoint precision.

I didn't know that about the original DOOM, that's interesting.

I would still argue that 60fps would be the main focus here. It's not about pinpoint precision yes, but DOOM 2016's movement is quite a bit more updated than the original's, and 60fps is what makes that movement feel so nice and responsive and accurate. I don't think 30fps will do it justice.

That said though, maybe I'll get a chance to play it on Switch someday and prove myself wrong. I don't own a Switch so I don't really have a horse in this race. I just feel that DOOM 2016 should be played at 60fps if at all possible.

I should probably add in that I rarely think shooters need to be 60fps. Halo was and still is my favorite shooter franchise and I played many of those games at 30fps with absolutely no issues. DOOM is a rare exception to me. I would love to be proved wrong about it, because I really do think that the port itself is pretty impressive, and I want as many people to play DOOM 2016 as possible because it really is one of the greatest shooters of the past decade. Wolfenstein too.
 

PantsuJo

Member
All games have a degree of input lag. Even high paced games like fighters have multiple frames of input lag. Were you not around for the Great SFV 8 Frames Debacle?

Tekken 7 too had (or still has?) high input lag, if I remember right.
 
DF's comparison screens fullsize. (PS4)












Worth remembering that those screens are taken from the Japanese Direct stream, since DF weren't allowed to have raw footage to compare.

That said, I do think it's sub-HD in handheld mode at least, based on the video previews we're seeing.
 

Rizific

Member
Having played doom on my pc at high fps, my interest in this was already low. Fps games with analog sticks are already terrible, and I can't even imagine what playing this with the switch sticks would feel like, but 30fps just cements this game into the ground. Great game, but no interest in playing it like this
 

jett

D-Member
I don't think people would be anywhere near as disappointed in this if we didn't have as many people claiming the Switch was only a little less powerful than the Xbox One.

This is impressive, this is a technical marvel. In fact the Switch is a technical marvel. It is also a tablet, set your expectations realistically. At least this shows we can get some AAA ports, which is more than I expected.

Too many people, sadly, still believe this.

Before Bethesda's announcement nobody would've thought this port would even be possible. And now we got people acting disappointed because it's not 60fps. I look at this shit and I'm amazed how close it looks like Doom.
 
Top Bottom