-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Crash Bandicoot N. Sane Trilogy PS4/Pro vs Xbox One/X vs Switch Resolution/Frame Rate Comparison
- Thread starter Theorry
- Start date
Native 4K on X, nice nice. Should look really crisp then.
And even though I have a Switch too, there's no way I'm buying that version. Not when I barely care about portable gaming and when I'm all about the big screen gaming. End of the day it all comes down to what your uses are.
And even though I have a Switch too, there's no way I'm buying that version. Not when I barely care about portable gaming and when I'm all about the big screen gaming. End of the day it all comes down to what your uses are.
Sure, but how in gods name does this game demand a lot of CPU power? This is a game that originally ran on the PSOne CPU! I know a lot has been updated, but what the hell got changed that suddenly made it a CPU hog of a game? I'll probably go to my grave not understanding this.
I was under the impression that this was limited to 60 FPS. I guess it's not? That's great news.
"I wonder how it looks at 480"
"sets video quality at 480"
Even counting in bitrate and given the size of the display in non theather mode (approach Switch screen), Game still looks really good while playing.
Not saying other version dont look better or people can not chose em, but some of the dismissive comments based on it being 480 read more like complaining based on a given numeral value that straight playing the game and seeing a problem with the visuals itself in that case.
"sets video quality at 480"
Even counting in bitrate and given the size of the display in non theather mode (approach Switch screen), Game still looks really good while playing.
Not saying other version dont look better or people can not chose em, but some of the dismissive comments based on it being 480 read more like complaining based on a given numeral value that straight playing the game and seeing a problem with the visuals itself in that case.
You have to create a profile in the Nvidia control panel and disable vsync there. In the games menu it will still say 30/60 or different combinations depending on the refresh of the monitor.. but yea it runs unlocked and feels much more responsive.
It's not "officially" supported.. however.
The funny thing is before this information was made available I mostly only saw praise for the port and how it was a good port. Now that people have a number put on it some will change that narrative despite not having an issue with it originally.
At this point you should probably just make a template for your posts in threads like this, to save time.
Yeah PRO and X not having an 60fps option is quite disappointing. The game runs like a dream even on not so powerful PC's and also it's not a cpu heavy.
Seems to be either DemonWare State Engine or Havok (or both)
wut?
Yeah I meant that as in, it's not even 60 fps on any other platform, not that it's "only 60" on PC but that it's "only on PC" over 30, lol. It doesn't look particularly detailed or complex in geometry or any other way and as a game it's so simplistic and nearly on-rails with the way levels and gameplay are designed with often next to nothing in view, I don't see how it couldn't have been a 60fps game on every platform (and unlocked on PC).
Yep, for sure. I'm also running a 6700K at 4.7GHz. I'm curious as to how high a 8700K would go?
Here's a 1080p screen and a 5K screen:
You post the same complainy comment in any thread where people express unhappiness with Switch resolutions.
Vicarious Visions used their proprietary engine Alchemy.
weird cause is the 1st time I make it, so please be kind enough to find me another copy of my "template" comment and show it to me.
k thanks
I 100% completed the first Crash game exclusively in handheld mode and I can say the game looks really *really* good, even at 480p.
Models, texture, etc perfectly scale to the small Switch screen.
My only real complaint would be the complete lack of AA. IQ suffers a lot of jaggies and they're pretty evident (even if you try to ignore them)
Other than that it's an amazing port.
Models, texture, etc perfectly scale to the small Switch screen.
My only real complaint would be the complete lack of AA. IQ suffers a lot of jaggies and they're pretty evident (even if you try to ignore them)
Other than that it's an amazing port.
Alchemy, Vicarious Visions' in-house engine.
I remember when devs thought this couldn't run on Switch. That little console is so impressive. The big dips in the cutscenes are whatever, as long as gameplay is smooth. But they really should've locked the framerate at 30fps on Switch. I saw it go up to 31 a few times and even up to 32. Dips to 27 for a second is fine.
I'll buy it. Nice port.
I'll buy it. Nice port.
Is it that weird? The Switch is a tablet, the PS4 is a large console. Games made from the ground up for PS4 will have sacrafices when brought to Switch.
You posted a whole bunch of similar comments in the Wolfenstein thread. Just saying it would save some time using a template.
sorry I never posted anything even close to watching a resized video to the proper size on gimped on youtube resolution as mode of comparison, are you sure you are not living a Dejavu?
You can remake something from scratch and still have it be the exact same as the original version you know that right?
This may be using the exact same levels and code or whatever but the assets are all remade from scratch to PS4's level. That is why people call it a remake. Same with Shadow of the Colossus.
That's fine. I never said other people couldn't call it that.
You are here again complaining as well as in vthe Wolfenstein 2 thread.
It was one guy at Vicarious Visision who ported the first level over to the Switch in a weekend i think, to show that it was feasable to get the game up and running on the Switch. Then Toys for Bob made the port happened, and probably had some help from Vicarious Visions as well. Its a solid effort with many months of work behind it.
maybe is the bit-rate of youtube, is could do make things looks worst-ish that face to face
A) that post was not to you
B) You are missing the point
C) I can go to whatever thread I feel like, objections?
Yeah would have been nice. Especially with the kind of game it is. But native 4K is pretty cool
Wow, 480p on Switch? Played through the entirety of the first game handheld and it felt more like 600p with on obvious increase to 720p when docked.
Numbers don't always mean everything, just remember that. Going to get the PC version later down the line just to experience that sweet 60fps though.
Numbers don't always mean everything, just remember that. Going to get the PC version later down the line just to experience that sweet 60fps though.
Last edited:
Why are you pretending to be confused?
You were in the Wolfenstein thread complaining about the people who were unhappy with the resolution on Switch. Now you're in the Crash Bandicoot thread complaining about the exact same thing.
Probably because "remake" has slightly more negative connotations attached to it.
Because this is totally a remake.
1) so you were stretching it about a template thing, uh?
2) so you are surprised the same type of inane comments get a similar (yet differently framed, worded, exampled, extended) type of response?
maybe next thread I shall go and price said type of comments not to create a "template" so you might not feel bad about it?
BTW: I stand by my point, Direct feed footage threads runs fairly smooth, some complains here and there were you actually see deeps or blur but people is most happy about it, come into DF threads, and now that people have concrete numbers to "complain" about, the threads runs in 180 Direction.
The only assets they got from Naughty Dog/Sony was the level geometry, so even the claims there's code from the originals in there is false.
Activision are just stupid and throw the word remaster around way too much (also see: Modern Warfare Remastered, which was also a remake).
really? I always thought remake were more acceptable as "said Game plot and mechanic are back on a new game build from ground up for new generations"
People expecting the same resolutions on Switch vs Xbox and Ps4 are idiots. I like that these comparisons happen just to see but the thing is a mobile device at 300 dollars against consoles at 300 dollars. Some kind of downgrade is going to happen and resolution/framerate are the immediately easy things to scale down. I often wonder how many whiners actually own the damn system.
Here's a tip, try playing Crash on your Xbox on the go and see how well that works.
The Cover says it's a remaster.
Because it's exactly the same as the original games. AFAIK, nothing is from the old code. They didn't even have access to the original game code.
Remakes typically mean reimagining. That's why they stuck with "remastered"
I would think that remaster has worse connotations with how many subpar ones we've had. Not that there haven't been some bad remakes over the years, but they're not nearly as voluminous due to the fact that they are new games by any definition and as a result can't be as plentiful. Meanwhile, it was a real crapshoot last gen to get an HD collection that was up to the standards of even a basic but top-to-bottom solid one like the first God of War Collection.
Yeah that's what I was gonna bring up but didn't want to go into it too much, even the people making the boxart can be wrong about it being a remake or a remaster. Activision need to sort that out internally.
A) and C) I can reply to whatever I like
No, I think people get your point quite good
Oh, yeesh. With this and Wolfenstein 2, I see a trend of many switch ports that barely reach HD resolutions, or even SD. Maybe we'll see some games that have changes like lower model quality and such, changes that take more effort but can have a better impact on performance. What's the point of having high quality assets if you can't see any of the detail?
To be honest, he's not really wrong. The majority of people were praising the port as good/solid during pre-release demo's, reviews, and shortly after release. Once a number is placed on it then people focus on the numbers and some will use that as ammo to use for/against a console.
Unfortunately, it's not just a Switch issue and we saw similar things early this gen with X1/PS4 comparisons and even last gen when comparing X360/PS3 or in technical discussions involving the Vita.
What? You can see the high quality assets with any resolution that isn't PS1 era resolution.
