-
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
i was excited to play the game on switch, but i mostly play in handheld mode and 480p sounds rough.
the fact that they weren't able to run it at 60fps on x/pro makes it seem like it's a much more demanding game than what it looks like
the fact that they weren't able to run it at 60fps on x/pro makes it seem like it's a much more demanding game than what it looks like
I'm not sure putting a YouTube video in 480p from PS4 footage is a good indicator ?
OP
OP
Gamersyde has some Switch footage up.
https://www.gamersyde.com/news_our_switch_videos_of_crash_bandicoot-20227_en.html
https://www.gamersyde.com/news_our_switch_videos_of_crash_bandicoot-20227_en.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L6gkt6S_paw
looks good to me in motion, personally I only notice how "bad" the crash model looks on stills
I'm looking forward to hear how it sold between the PC, Xbox One and Switch version. We'll finally know how viable AAA third party releases are on the Switch.
It's really not bad in handheld, halfway through Crash 2 now and it honestly looks really nice.
I'm so shocked about it not being able to hit 60, I watched a video of it running on Pc at 4k/60 and an 8700k was being utilised at about 10% on average.
The visuals are pretty good and advanced, so as far as the rendering tech goes you could say it is.
If you really believe something it may feel true. Or something, I think.
I wasn't bugged by the switch res, also
The engine has been on switch since launch, or has everyone forgotten imaginators
Graphics only improve when you go from wii u to switch but it's hard to tell the difference between switch and X1X when you're on the go.
480p on Switch doesn't sound too bad on portable.
But fur reduction, reflections, textures, shadows, less stable framerate, AND 2.25x less resolution than base xbone sound a bit much. Base xbone is only 2-3x GPU, 2x CPU, 2x the ram and something like 4x bandwidth. I'm guessing there could be a a bandwidth bottleneck that could prevent switch from going closer to 900p on Switch, and maybe less of RAM for higher textures as well. This game doesn't seem to be too CPU intensive though. GPU is more easily scalable than the other two. Could they have done more? Who knows
Even though base PS4 and Xbone are running at the same resolution, I wonder if they have any slight fidelity and framerate differences
What engine is being used for crash anyway?
But fur reduction, reflections, textures, shadows, less stable framerate, AND 2.25x less resolution than base xbone sound a bit much. Base xbone is only 2-3x GPU, 2x CPU, 2x the ram and something like 4x bandwidth. I'm guessing there could be a a bandwidth bottleneck that could prevent switch from going closer to 900p on Switch, and maybe less of RAM for higher textures as well. This game doesn't seem to be too CPU intensive though. GPU is more easily scalable than the other two. Could they have done more? Who knows
Even though base PS4 and Xbone are running at the same resolution, I wonder if they have any slight fidelity and framerate differences
What engine is being used for crash anyway?
It's got 50% more GPU, Ram, and bandwidth over the pro I believe. CPU is a little better too. But the difference between xbone and x vs PS4 vs pro is a lot wider for the former. 4.5x GPU, 2-3x more bandwidth, 50% more RAM and much faster type.
PS4 vs PS4 Pro is only a 2.2x difference in GPU, and modest boost in CPU and bandwidth.
Yeah, I've played a handful of docked and a handful of handheld mode and if you told me it was 480p I woulda thought you were crazy. I was thinking something like 540-600p based on how it looked. They must be employing some good AA and the simpme art must help cause it looked pretty damb good to me.
Dude what is your problem? The same people post the same shit in the opposite direction in Switch DF threads and you never ride them? Why are you out here picking fights for no reason?
The game is pretty good on Switch, despite these numbers it's still a looker, imo.
Take that as you will, but it's the case for many Switch games.
Take that as you will, but it's the case for many Switch games.
Not having a 60fps option on the enhanced consoles is just shoddy given all the games that offer a choice between performance and resolution these days.
There is some weird banding going on on the metal walls in the future levels. The docked mode ran well for me bar one of the bike levels in 3. The game has a good AA solution too. I'm pretty happy with how it looks honestly.
Yeah I'm also surprised. But it is what it is. If all the sub res games looked like this I would be down.
Its technically higher than 480p. Thr horizontal resolution is higher than 640.
Its about 33% more pixels. But yeah surprising. The game looks a bit soft but the news is surprising. The menu elements displaying at 720p docked was super noticeable to me though where as it looked better in handheld mode. DF will be cool to see.
Playing the game on PC, it's really light on the CPU and both Pro/X look like they could at least handle 1080p/60
I'd be interested to know why they didn't offer that option (or what the bottleneck is if there is one)
no, the game use the same original design, gameplay and IA encounters... it's the same game with only superficial changes, it's a remaster like the box correctly implies.
activision and microsoft use the same correct standards to classify this, see halo anniversary, gears UE and fable anniversary, all them are graphical remade but are promoted with the term remaster, you really think that giant corporations in this industry are wrong? cmon...
one topic really simple and people still trying to confuse every time.
remake = Final fantasy VII R for obvious reasons.
It's possible that the consoles just couldn't run them for one reason or another. Don't forget that even by the time they released they were using outdated parts, CPU especially.
It looks really good for only being 480p on switch undocked. I thought it was 600p.
And for anyone on the fence about this - it doesn't look anywhere near as bad as Xenoblade 2 in handheld, not even close. I can assure you it's not going to make you go "WTF" as soon as you turn it on.
And for anyone on the fence about this - it doesn't look anywhere near as bad as Xenoblade 2 in handheld, not even close. I can assure you it's not going to make you go "WTF" as soon as you turn it on.
It's a remaster of a PS1 linear platformer series with no wide open spaces.
The issue is there needs to be another term in between remasters and remakes to describe these types of titles, because there's a vast difference between this Crash Trilogy and the recent Dark Souls yet they're both called Remasters.
Well I'll pick it up on PC for that 4K/60 when it goes on sale.
The spec breakdown across platforms is pretty spot on based on the respective hardware.
The spec breakdown across platforms is pretty spot on based on the respective hardware.
I have a really hard time believing the Pro and X can't run this game at 60. I think some devs just don't want to complicate things by making a separate mode for the other platforms, or they think it might somehow make the game look less desirable to the lower end console customer (the large majority). Maybe they are worried it will mess with speed running or time attack related matters.
I just don't buy it being a technical matter. Nothing on screen would suggest it is.
So bizarre that none of the console versions are 60fps.
Even God of War offers a 60fps mode. Granted it doesnt hit that 60 very often, but still.
Even God of War offers a 60fps mode. Granted it doesnt hit that 60 very often, but still.
I've been working on this as well and it seems like a great port. As VG Tech is showing, though, the performance numbers are super boring for this game - which I suppose is good for the end user. The Switch version feels a little wobbly at times but it's not bad.
It's really a shame there wasn't an attempt at 60fps at least on something like Xbox One X.
It's really a shame there wasn't an attempt at 60fps at least on something like Xbox One X.
Yes? The gaming industry doesn't get to change the definition of decades worth of remastering work in both the film industry and the music recording industry, just because they say so. Crash is a flat-out remake, while MS's anniversary titles are a combination of a remake and a remaster, since they're running both simultaneously.
A remake never has to require big changes beyond not being the original product.
Both FF7r and Crash are NOT using the original assets or "masters" and thus there is ZERO difference between associating both as remakes. One is just embracing a creative template to mirror the original inspiration as closely as possible by rebuilding it from scratch, while the other is taking more creative liberties. Activision marketing is choosing to utilize the 'remaster' word improperly, leading to conflated misrepresentations as to what the term actually means.
Also if you want to get technical, the physics and hit detection in the Crash remake are not consistent with that of the original. Something a remaster would not suffer due to it updating and adhering to the original code.
When a music producer 'remasters' an old album, they don't get the band back in the recording booth to re-record the entire songlist. No, they are taking the old master recordings and using modern technology to improve the clarity and expand the soundscape. Yet, by your definition, literally re-recording the entire album from scratch would be a remaster which is nonsense.
An in-house engine from Vicarious, it was also used in the Marvel Alliance games.
Surprised the XBO is 1080p considering this was designed with the PS4 in mind. Judging by some of the drops, it's a shame they didn't implement a dynamic resolution. I'm sure that port was a lower priority though.
Something about this engine definitely doesn't like the Switch hardware either. It's crazy that it drops frames even after cutting effects and rendering at a low resolution. Maybe the CPU is the bottleneck on that system?
To be fair, the Pro likely could do better than 1440p. I was actually surprised it was that low, surely with more optimization, they could have hit at least 1600p.
Something about this engine definitely doesn't like the Switch hardware either. It's crazy that it drops frames even after cutting effects and rendering at a low resolution. Maybe the CPU is the bottleneck on that system?
To be fair, the Pro likely could do better than 1440p. I was actually surprised it was that low, surely with more optimization, they could have hit at least 1600p.
The numbers make it seem worse than it is, IMO. Actually looks pretty decent played on the Switch screen.
no one is surprised it doesn't run like the other PConsole, is just sand how earth and heaven apart this thread (direct footage and DF) are just cause DF provides a value and all the threads is just Doomposting about said value.
That's overly simplistic, the correct would say framerate is about where the bottleneck lies, in this particular generation it's often the cpu as consoles have a comparatively much stronger gpus, but even so there are plenty of cases where the gpu would hold the framerate back.
For example every game that achieved 60fps, but at lower resolutions than 1080p.
you're wrong, the game logic can be equal to original using diferent code, one thing dont invalidate other.
same design, same gameplay, same IA, little discrepances dont change that... we can make 1:1 gameplay comparisons because that, it's obviously the old game design running behind new assets, you liking or not it's not an full remake like Final fantasy VII R and because that this game ( and many other examples ) are correctly classified for your publishers like remasters.
and dont put in this topic the term used in other industry ok, this dont make sense, im clearly speaking about gaming, it's much more than audio work.
i fully agree with you... its simple not right put one partial remake in the same level of an full remake, crash and sotc require much less work than FF VII R.
This would've been 60fps on all platforms on another engine than Vicarious meh inhouse 30fps engine for linear game not displaying much demanding scenes
There have been times where the system provides a better than expected port. This certainly is not one of them.
Once again, video games don't get to use the term differently just because. A shot-for-shot, line-for-line remake of a film like Psycho or Funny Games isn't called a remaster of the original film; the remastered version of the original film is the remaster of the original film.
Outlast 2 has been the only one genuinely impressive to me. But I'm just a nobody.
Anyway I'm thinking if XB1X can get 4K/30, my PC (580, 4670k) can hopefully get 4K/60. Wish I didn't get the PS4 Pro version a year ago now -_-
Native, as in, it's not dynamic. Most Switch games use dynamic res so they felt the need to state native.