Digital Foundry: Wolfenstein II on Switch

joylevel11 · Jun 30, 2018

eh i think this is fine. you want to play games on the go then you need to sacrifice some things such as resolution + framerate.

i think the switch is the best that nintendo could do. any more powerful hardware and the battery life will be even worse than it already is. the system gets quite hot playing zelda/mario and you could fry an egg on it while playing fortnite.

Sqrt · Jun 30, 2018

Keith Stat said:
While I hope this sells well, I just find it fascinating that there is a significant enough audience for games like this on the Switch. This game was released 8 months ago and can be commonly found for half the price on other platforms that target 60fps and have significantly better resolution/effects than can be found on the Switch. Like, if games like Wolfenstein 2 appealed to you, FPS' and the like are much more abundant on every other platform and are routinely graphical showpieces and I would have thought someone would have purchased another platform that more satiates their taste in these types of games. I'm just interested in the ven diagram of gamers that only own a Switch and want FPS'. There definitely is some people that fall in to this group, just hope it is enough to make it worth it because it's extremely interesting seeing the sacrifices made to this game to make it run in an "acceptable" manner and it appears they did a great job of pulling it off.

I have a PS4 and a good gaming PC. I decided to buy this game on Switch since it fits my lifestyle better. The last PS4 game I bought was GoW and I have yet to play it since the time I have in front of Tv is spend in the WC atm, while I can play games on Switch while the football games get boring.

Rudiano said:
Nintendo should be ashamed for having such a weak system, 360p in 2018 is ridiuclous

Most powerful gaming handheld handheld at launch by quite a margin. Now bested by a $800 device.

tuxfool · Jun 30, 2018

Rudiano said:
Nintendo should be ashamed for having such a weak system, 360p in 2018 is ridiuclous

Eh.

I don't really fault them for having a handheld system like that. It is capable as a handheld.

I do find fault in these kinds of ports trying to shove a square peg in a round hole. Certainly it is impressive that they managed to hammer it in, but the peg is ruined in the process.

Jaded Alyx · Jun 30, 2018

Rudiano said:
Nintendo should be ashamed for having such a weak system, 360p in 2018 is ridiuclous

No they should use black magic and alter the laws of physics to have a handheld that plays all PS4 games at 1080p in 2018.

Fanuilos · Jun 30, 2018

Jaded Alyx said:
No they should use black magic and alter the laws of physics to have a handheld that plays all PS4 games at 1080p in 2018.

Na, better make it 4K and have it whisper sweet nothings into your ear while playing.

Deleted member 3335 · Jun 30, 2018

DeuceGamer said:
This doesn't make sense. So for PS4 games that run at a higher resolution should they be sold for more than X1 games?

Should games on Switch that have the same resolution and framerate be twice as expensive because they offer portability and home console versions?

Also, the entire discussion is about platforms and how the platforms differ from each other.

Last, what you deem u playable may be perfectly fine to others. It seems like more comments acting like this Port shouldn't exist because you deem it u playable.

There are Switch ports which are pretty close to the other consoles with mostly just a rather small resolution downgrade and there are ports which need to operate in low sub HD resolutions with not locked framerates.

Handwaving the problems of the later ports with it's a miracle that they run in the first place. I don't remember that DF ever did that with Xbox One ports which slower resolution and other downgrades was a result of the hardware like it is for the Switch.

Dark1x said:
We're not giving consumer advice. We're examining the efforts required to pull of the game.

The DF clearly makes subjective statements regarding to the quality of the port.

Rudiano · Jun 30, 2018

Jaded Alyx said:
No they should use black magic and alter the laws of physics to have a handheld that plays all PS4 games at 1080p in 2018.

Someone sounds a bit hurt lol if a game has to down to 360p then it shouldnt even be done. The game is a joke on Switch

Elfotografoalocado · Jun 30, 2018

Rudiano said:
Nintendo should be ashamed for having such a weak system, 360p in 2018 is ridiuclous

They should have made a 100W+ portable machine, yeah.

Grimminski · Jun 30, 2018

Linus815 said:
Did TNO run 60 fps on 360/PS3?

It does a decent job targeting 60, but spent most of its time @ subHD resolutions and with numerous visual features paired back.

Sqrt · Jun 30, 2018

Pmichael said:
There are Switch ports which are pretty close to the other consoles with mostly just a rather small resolution downgrade and there are ports which need to operate in low sub HD resolutions with not locked framerates.

Handwaving the problems of the later ports with it's a miracle that they run in the first place. I don't remember that DF ever did that with Xbox One ports which slower resolution and other downgrades was a result of the hardware like it is for the Switch.

XBOne is a system with the same profile as the PS4 and that retails at the same price (It was actually more expensive at launch). The Switch is a tablet that you can play during a flight. How is that hard to understand? Are people calling the XBOne S shit now that the X exist? Because its outselling its more expensive bother.

Rudiano said:
Someone sounds a bit hurt lol if a game has to down to 360p then it shouldnt even be done. The game is a joke on Switch

En enjoyable joke. Gyro aiming makes this my preferred console version.

Deleted member 8112 · Jun 30, 2018

InteractiveSoftwareUser · Jun 30, 2018

Rudiano said:
Nintendo should be ashamed for having such a weak system, 360p in 2018 is ridiuclous

Haha, you think Nintendo should be ashamed for making the most powerful gaming handheld of all time and the firdt true hybrid console... embarrassing comment.

Deleted member 3335 · Jun 30, 2018

Lonely1 said:
XBOne is a system with the same profile as the PS4 and that retails at the same price. The Switch is a tablet that you can play during a flight. How is that hard to understand? Are people calling the XBOne S shit now that the X exist? Because its outselling its more expensive bother.

That the Switch is using the mobile X1 chipset isn't relevant when the discussion moved to that people should be thankful that the game is running at sub HD resolutions and looks more than blurry at times just because the Switch is what it is.

Aktlys · Jun 30, 2018

Pretty sweet for a 9W device
I will be fun too see it on the New Switch since the resolution is dynamic.

Xaero Gravity · Jun 30, 2018

Ports like this make me wish either Nintendo hadn't gone with the whole hybrid thing and just focused on a home console, or that developers focused on original games over ports of XB1/PS4 games. But then again, I don't see the value or care about portability in the slightest, so maybe I'm not the target audience for these.

DeuceGamer · Jun 30, 2018

Pmichael said:
There are Switch ports which are pretty close to the other consoles with mostly just a rather small resolution downgrade and there are ports which need to operate in low sub HD resolutions with not locked framerates.

Handwaving the problems of the later ports with it's a miracle that they run in the first place. I don't remember that DF ever did that with Xbox One ports which slower resolution and other downgrades was a result of the hardware like it is for the Switch.

The DF clearly makes subjective statements regarding to the quality of the port.

The Xbox One is essentially the same machine and since those titles only have very minor differences it seems clear the reason is the hardware and doesn't merit a mention since they are the same form factors, pull close to the same power, and are the same archeticture. Totally different anyway.

Rudiano said:
Someone sounds a bit hurt lol if a game has to down to 360p then it shouldnt even be done. The game is a joke on Switch

If anything it sounds like some are upset that the port exists. Why does it seem some people are insulted that this version exists? If it's not up to your standards then please feel free to choose the other versions but there is no reason for you to get to choose what does and doesn't exist. Those that believe it's acceptable are happy that it does exist.

Sqrt · Jun 30, 2018

Pmichael said:
That the Switch is using the mobile X1 chipset isn't relevant when the discussion moved to that people should be thankful that the game is running at sub HD resolutions and looks more than blurry at times just because the Switch is what it is.

I am thankful that I can play this game on my flight next Monday. I would like for more games to do the same.

Fanuilos · Jun 30, 2018

Pmichael said:
That the Switch is using the mobile X1 chipset isn't relevant when the discussion moved to that people should be thankful that the game is running at sub HD resolutions and looks more than blurry at times just because the Switch is what it is.

Look, you can not be impressed with it. That's fine. It's also ok for people to be impressed with a tablet running the game on pretty minimal power consumption.

tuxfool · Jun 30, 2018

Xaero Gravity said:
, or that developers focused on original games over ports of XB1/PS4 games.

Most haven't though.

Deleted member 3335 · Jun 30, 2018

DeuceGamer said:
The Xbox One is essentially the same machine and since those titles only have very minor differences it seems clear the reason is the hardware and doesn't merit a mention since they are the same form factors, pull close to the same power, and are the same archeticture. Totally different anyway.

Only that DF had for good reasons no problems of just stating the differences between Xbox One and PS4. They had also problems comparing it to the PC version.

But now every technical aspect of a Switch port needs to mention that the hardware is using Nvidia's mobile X1 chip and everything is normally "impossible" and a miracle.

DeuceGamer · Jun 30, 2018

Pmichael said:
Only that DF had for good reasons no problems of just stating the differences between Xbox One and PS4. They had also problems comparing it to the PC version.

But now every technical aspect of a Switch port needs to mention that the hardware is using Nvidia's mobile X1 chip and every is normally "impossible" and a miracle.

It's a very important distinguish since we are talking about different form factors, different power draws, etc... they are explaining why those compromises had to be made for the game to work on Switch.

I also seem to remember them making mention of the difference in Xbox One and PS4 in some videos. A specific example would be how they utilize different RAM setups.

gcwy · Jun 30, 2018

So good to see they prioritised frame rate, in general, it seems like they put a lot of effort in this port. What Panic Button is doing is really commendable, and that goes for all their Switch port undertakings because I don't think any other studio would've been as good as them.

Deleted member 3335 · Jun 30, 2018

Lonely1 said:
I am thankful that I can play this game on my flight next Monday. I would like for more games to do the same.

Then the technical analysis is pointless for you in the first place. If you just want it on a mobile platform independently how it performs.

Effect · Jun 30, 2018

MouldyK said:
Gyro Controls made me play Doom Docked.

Same here and with Wolfenstein. How much of an issue the blurriness is really is exaggerated by some. After a while it's the last thing on your mind as you play. If this is patched again they might actually clear it up more the way they did DOOM.

I'm getting sick of some people acting as if these games only have merit as undocked games. They don't. The experience docked is fine if not significantly more enjoyable because the controls and motion aiming is better when you're not moving the screen.

The game also looks significantly better docked. Not as good as the other versions but that should be a given going into this situation. However the game does not look terrible. No game looks terrible anymore. The game is running on a fucking tablet. Understand what your playing on and judge the damn game from that. Understand many want to play other games on their system of choice and with that a good enough for the system thought is already at play.

Sqrt · Jun 30, 2018

Pmichael said:
Then the technical analysis is pointless for you in the first place. If you just want it on a mobile platform independently how it performs.

There's a gulf of difference between a mostly locked 30fps game with dynamic resolution with a floor of ~360p and something like RE:Rev2 and Borderlands Vita.

Simba1 · Jun 30, 2018

Its looks like solid port, but to bad lowest resolution is not little higher.

Dark1x · Jun 30, 2018

Pmichael said:
Handwaving the problems of the later ports with it's a miracle that they run in the first place. I don't remember that DF ever did that with Xbox One ports which slower resolution and other downgrades was a result of the hardware like it is for the Switch.

Guess what? DF today is not the same as it was in 2013. We have completely changed our approach to everything and my analysis of this game is absolutely inline with everything I've been doing for the last year or two. You don't get to decide what DF is.

If you're going to talk shit, you better have some examples (of content I've produced) so we can at least understand what you're talking about.

You cannot talk about ports of a game while ignoring the hardware in use.

These videos are designed to provide opinions based on our findings while trying to highlight where a game succeeds and fails technically. This is the worst version of Wolfenstein 2 but it also happens to be impressive - which is to say, I do not believe anyone could do a much better job. The issues with this port are due to limitations of the hardware. Any improvements from this point are likely to be very minor. They've pushed this platform really hard and it's super fascinating.

DF videos are not competitions and they are not buying advice. If you want to use them in that way, that's your prerogative, but that's not the intention behind them. If this were a competition, the PC would be crushing everything but that's just not interesting to me. I want to see great results achieved on limited, fixed hardware. I have no idea what it is that you're looking for other than to bash the Switch or any other platform just because.

It sounds like you want us to come out and say "the Switch version sucks!!" which is just an ignorant thing to do when you understand what the development team has to work with. Again, you cannot separate the platform from the work. Doing so is foolish, ignorant and disrespectful.

Elfotografoalocado · Jun 30, 2018

DeuceGamer said:
It's a very important distinguish since we are talking about different form factors, different power draws, etc... they are explaining why those compromises had to be made for the game to work on Switch.

I also seem to remember them making mention of the difference in Xbox One and PS4 in some videos. A specific example would be how they utilize different RAM setups.

I think the problem is with the insistence that it's a "miracle" of game development. It's not, it's simply good development. Many other ports have performed similarly, because the Switch packs some serious punch for its power usage. If anything, the existence of the Switch is the miracle imo, Nvidia and Nintendo don't receive as much praise as they deserve.
Panic Button didn't deliver a miracle, because the technical framework of the game is exactly the same as the other versions. They did a good job porting the code and made the right choices to preserve performance, and that's it. The game is running in its totality, as are many, many others, on the Switch. I fail to see the miracle in all this, or how this is a one-off thing.

dragonbane · Jun 30, 2018

Looks dreadfully blurry docked, but in handheld mode it should be a fun time it seems

McScroggz · Jun 30, 2018

Panic Button seems really talented at this stuff. Good on them.

Sqrt · Jun 30, 2018

Elfotografoalocado said:
I think the problem is with the insistence that it's a "miracle" of game development. It's not, it's simply good development. Many other ports have performed similarly, because the Switch packs some serious punch for its power usage. If anything, the existence of the Switch is the miracle imo, Nvidia and Nintendo don't receive as much praise as they deserve.
Panic Button didn't deliver a miracle, because the technical framework of the game is exactly the same as the other versions. They did a good job porting the code and made the right choices to preserve performance, and that's it. The game is running in its totality, as are many, many others, on the Switch. I fail to see the miracle in all this, or how this is a one-off thing.

Sure, miracle is hyperbolic, but this port seems better to me than their previous work with Doom.

Dreamboum · Jun 30, 2018

Panic Button has been doing some good work considering what they have to work with but I wonder how the people who blasted the 3DS for 240p resolution on a 240p screen can reconcile having games that can sometimes run as low as 360p on a 720p screen, which is arguably an worse proposition ? Maybe we'll get people to stop the 3DS bashing and care about the games before caring about resolution.

javac · Jun 30, 2018

Elfotografoalocado said:
I think the problem is with the insistence that it's a "miracle" of game development. It's not, it's simply good development. Many other ports have performed similarly, because the Switch packs some serious punch for its power usage. If anything, the existence of the Switch is the miracle imo, Nvidia and Nintendo don't receive as much praise as they deserve.
Panic Button didn't deliver a miracle, because the technical framework of the game is exactly the same as the other versions. They did a good job porting the code and made the right choices to preserve performance, and that's it. The game is running in its totality, as are many, many others, on the Switch. I fail to see the miracle in all this, or how this is a one-off thing.

The "miracle" is that this information is known only in hindsight, would you have expected this game to be running on the switch in it's current state, if at all, say 1 year ago? Like you said, the game is running on the switch, and it's not running on magic and wishes, so clearly the console is capable of playing the game and the game is capable of running on the machine, that still doesn't make the feat any less miraculous. In the end, people seem to have umbrage with the words being used rather than the sentiments, of course it's not an actual miracle, but the sentiment rings true, it's a tablet playing a AAA game and it's impressive. The glasses free 3D of the 3DS isn't magic, it's perfectly explainable, and still that didn't stop me from going wow when I first saw it.

Jaymageck · Jun 30, 2018

Amazing accomplishment. I'm tempted to buy this just to reward the effort.

Dark1x · Jun 30, 2018

Lonely1 said:
Sure, miracle is hyperbolic, but this port seems better to me than their previous work with Doom.

A little bit but...Wolf 2 is a much more demanding game than Doom. Doom has a lot of slowdown on Switch. Pre-release builds of Wolf 2 were dreadful on Switch - like, the simplest levels were in the mid-20s.

Things were shaping up to be a disaster in some ways but the final game? It's nearly a locked 30fps about 90% of the time. It's just a few specific scenes which struggle but it's otherwise very consistent and smoother than Doom overall despite being a more technically demanding game. It's a "miracle" in that same way that a three-point shot at the buzzer is - obviously it's hyperbolic wording but it's designed to highlight how much of a surprise the final package is when considering the shape it WAS in.

Pre-release software is usually shakier, obviously, but this was worse than usual - they came a long way in a short time. I think that's pretty impressive.

Imitatio · Jun 30, 2018

Yeah, this is an undocked only game to me. 360p on the Switch screen is actually still quite enjoyable imo, even though it already should be the absolute minimum in terms of resolution. But on TV? Nah. That's waaay too blurry.

This game cements my take on the Switch being an handheld first and foremost (for me, that is).

Amiibola · Jun 30, 2018

Dark1x said:
If this were a competition, the PC would be crushing everything but that's just not interesting to me. I want to see great results achieved on limited, fixed hardware.

This is where the real fun is, actually. It's what hooked me to Digital Foundry

You know, I've been thinking lately it would be nice to have some DFR centered on gba stuff. It has some very interesting things done with its hardware, from Doom to V-Rally 3, while at the same time is incapable to handle SNES ports 1:1.

I've been revisiting it since i installed a backlit screen on it and it can be very pretty

Heromanz · Jun 30, 2018

It's cool that they made it work but kind of no reason to buy it if you have a PS4 or xbone x

Amiibola · Jun 30, 2018

Heromanz said:
It's cool that they made it work but kind of no reason to buy it if you have a PS4 or xbone x

Portability and gyro aiming sound like pretty powerful reasons, but to each its own

javac · Jun 30, 2018

Heromanz said:
It's cool that they made it work but kind of no reason to buy it if you have a PS4 or xbone x

The PS4 and XBOX versions are kinda uselss if I want to play this away from my TV, so there's some reason to buy this version ;)

Sylmaron · Jun 30, 2018

Weird how it's both impressive and disappointing at the same time.

Phendrift · Jun 30, 2018

I assume this is about this thread lol

Kinggroin · Jun 30, 2018

I'm not buying it, but I'll be damned if I couldn't recognize the merit in having something like this, even with it's sacrifices, be portable.

Deleted member 3335 · Jun 30, 2018

Dark1x said:
Guess what? DF today is not the same as it was in 2013. We have completely changed our approach to everything and my analysis of this game is absolutely inline with everything I've been doing for the last year or two. You don't get to decide what DF is.

If you're going to talk shit, you better have some examples (of content I've produced) so we can at least understand what you're talking about.

You cannot talk about ports of a game while ignoring the hardware in use.

These videos are designed to provide opinions based on our findings while trying to highlight where a game succeeds and fails technically. This is the worst version of Wolfenstein 2 but it also happens to be impressive - which is to say, I do not believe anyone could do a much better job. The issues with this port are due to limitations of the hardware. Any improvements from this point are likely to be very minor. They've pushed this platform really hard and it's super fascinating.

DF videos are not competitions and they are not buying advice. If you want to use them in that way, that's your prerogative, but that's not the intention behind them. If this were a competition, the PC would be crushing everything but that's just not interesting to me. I want to see great results achieved on limited, fixed hardware. I have no idea what it is that you're looking for other than to bash the Switch or any other platform just because.

It sounds like you want us to come out and say "the Switch version sucks!!" which is just an ignorant thing to do when you understand what the development team has to work with. Again, you cannot separate the platform from the work. Doing so is foolish, ignorant and disrespectful.

Of course I can rate the Wolfenstein Switch version as subpar based on the facts written in the article. 360p, uneven framerates like seen in the video. It doesn't mean the devs didn't try their best and delivered a technical solid port based on the hardware they are working with. But sometimes a game can be too much for a system.

You named Doom SNES as a port which was a technical achievement but didn't play well

Jon Carter · Jun 30, 2018

I dislike jaggies more than a soft look personally, so blurriness doesn't bother me much. I think it looks really, really good. Panic Button is a crazy talented studio.

Braaier · Jun 30, 2018

Pmichael said:
Of course I can rate the Wolfenstein Switch version as subpar based on the facts written in the article. 360p, uneven framerates like seen in the video. It doesn't mean the devs didn't try their best and delivered a technical solid port based on the hardware they are working with. But sometimes a game can be too much for a system.

You named Doom SNES as a port which was a technical achievement but didn't play well

Why are you so upset that the game is on switch?

Deleted member 42686 · Jun 30, 2018

Dark1x said:
Pre-release software is usually shakier, obviously, but this was worse than usual - they came a long way in a short time. I think that's pretty impressive.

May I ask you about this blurry all over the game? From what I saw in your video, it kinda looks hard to play the game when everything looks pretty much like deph of the field all screen(like you said). I'm personally not a fan of this. When you played did you notice if this affects the gameplay side in any way?

Deleted member 3335 · Jun 30, 2018

Braaier said:
Why are you so upset that the game is on switch?

Nice take

Roldan · Jun 30, 2018

Pmichael said:
Handwaving the problems of the later ports with it's a miracle that they run in the first place. I don't remember that DF ever did that with Xbox One ports which slower resolution and other downgrades was a result of the hardware like it is for the Switch.

The DF clearly makes subjective statements regarding to the quality of the port.

I think it's a matter of context and expectations. It's a very ambitious port from a current gen console to a handheld, and it works very well.

It's all about what you can expect from Switch hardware. We should also take into consideration that the gap between AAA games on handheld and console usually were much bigger.

I mean, if you ask me, it seems to be a very blurry version of a game that I don't even like, so I'll probably never buy this. But I get why it's getting all the recognition -- it IS impressive because of what I said above.

~Fake · Jun 30, 2018

Dark1x said:
A little bit but...Wolf 2 is a much more demanding game than Doom. Doom has a lot of slowdown on Switch. Pre-release builds of Wolf 2 were dreadful on Switch - like, the simplest levels were in the mid-20s.

Things were shaping up to be a disaster in some ways but the final game? It's nearly a locked 30fps about 90% of the time. It's just a few specific scenes which struggle but it's otherwise very consistent and smoother than Doom overall despite being a more technically demanding game. It's a "miracle" in that same way that a three-point shot at the buzzer is - obviously it's hyperbolic wording but it's designed to highlight how much of a surprise the final package is when considering the shape it WAS in.

Pre-release software is usually shakier, obviously, but this was worse than usual - they came a long way in a short time. I think that's pretty impressive.

Excuse me, but Wolf2 have the same level of particles present in Doom? I always thought Doom 2016 smash Wolf in 'presentation' with particles effects.

Digital Foundry: Wolfenstein II on Switch

User requested account closure

User requested ban

Digital Foundry

Digital Foundry

Self-requested ban

User requested account closure

User requested permanent ban