[Official] The Witcher 3 on the Switch will run at 540p in handheld mode and 720p docked with dynamic resolution enabled.

Solid

Member
Oct 27, 2017
6,677
The Switch is more relatively powerful for its time to the Psvita.
And The Witcher 3 is a more demanding game, of a much larger scope, than the console versions of any of Vita's touted miracle ports. And yet it made it to Switch, with fewer compromises than less intensive games of smaller scope suffered in their transition to Vita.
I'm not trying to tear down the Vita, here, fwiw. I loved my own Vita to death, believe me. I'm just trying to point out how TW3 on Switch is an impressive and unprecedented thing, and that its visuals hold up quite well when context considered. Context for the completeness of this package relative to its scope and its status as a handheld game, as well as context for how handhelds have met the challenge of ambitious AAA/current-gen 3D ports before.

In the span of a generation we've gone from 14fps 2p co-op Borderlands 2 on handhelds, to this. As a fan of handheld gaming I think that should be celebrated, not dismissed or reduced to an unworthy effort. That's my MO, here.
 
Last edited:

Decarb

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,135

Razor Mom

Member
Jan 2, 2018
2,211
United Kingdom
LOL! You know you'll see that last type of post in the OT when the game launches.
"Sorry, no. You know I'm fine with you guys enjoying it, it's just, I wouldn't. I couldn't enjoy it like this, it's such an insult to the way it's supposed to be played. But you go ahead, I've got nothing against anyone enjoying it this way. I just personally wouldn't. You know. Because it's disgusting. Because what's the point. I mean you go ahead though. It just makes me want to throw up. Just personally. Disgusting."
 

iswasdoes

Member
Nov 13, 2017
1,782
Londinium
I've been a developer for 5 years, I just hope everyone knows what you're saying is nonsense. If you're talking about moving from a strong GPU to a weaker GPU by making cutbacks in that department, theoretically you could just remake the entire visual components of the game until it worked, sure. Eventually lods and texture downscaling might not be enough, and you'd end up basically remaking the game on a visual front (I guess there's a debate about whether or not this is a port or simply a remake). The moment you factor the CPU in there, you might have to sacrifice core systems of the game. Reducing AI counts or environment sizes might not be enough, if the game relies on any CPU heavy systems for it's core makeup (a physics heavy game, or the like). The same could really be said for any fundamental GPU-centric elements, like a reliance on real time lighting or dynamic shadows (splinter cell wouldn't have worked on an N64, sorry).

The fact of the matter is, this isn't a remake, it's using the absolute same fabric as the PS4/PC/XboxOne version, albeit heavily cut back. This is mighty impressive.

I should say, I'm actually a big advocate for the idea that things can be ported more often than people on ERA seem to think. But the idea that anything can be ported to anything is simply ludicrous. I guess you could try and make a DS game with the same spirit as RDR2, but you're sure as fuck not going to port that game to it lol.


You can theoretically downport RDR2 to Game Boy. What people are saying here is it's amazing that they were able to downport the game to run on Switch and it still be a sellable product. You know this, I'm sure. I guess you just feeling like arguing on your high horse?
There's a philosophical question here about at which point a "port" ceases to be the same game as its source material. You could probably get a vauge likeness of arthur morgan moving about on a graphic calculator but its not the game is it.

In this case, its clearly the same game, and that what makes it technically impressive as the switch is the size of a fuckin paperback book and costs $300. Anyone who says it isnt purposefully misrepresenting for some reason

Edty: also dunno if anyone has posted how the $600 gpd win 2 handles Wicther 3? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3OKdU7ARuDE
 
Oct 27, 2017
3,909
Spain
The 3 Stages of the Switch Port Lifecycle
-"It's not possible on the Switch."
-"It's going to be bad"
-"Stop enjoying it!"
HAHAHA that's so true. The resolution police. If it were for them, a SWAT team would jump into your house and snatch the Switch from your hands every time you dare enjoy a game that runs below 900p.
And The Witcher 3 is a more demanding game, of a much larger scope, than the console versions of any of Vita's touted miracle ports. And yet it made it to Switch, with fewer compromises than less intensive games of smaller scope suffered in their transition to Vita.
Besides, I'm not trying to tear down the Vita, here. I'm just trying to point out how TW3 on Switch is an impressive and unprecedented thing, and that its visuals hold up quite well when context considered. Context relating to the completeness of the package on Switch, and to how handhelds have met the challenge of comparable ports before.
I have nothing against what you are saying, I'm just clarifying, the Switch is kind of an unprecedented device, because it's purposefully designed to bridge the gap between portable and home console like arguably no other portable console has before, and it has design decisions with power usage and cooling that are unprecedented. It's closer to a laptop than it is to a traditional portable console in that regard.
 

Braaier

Member
Oct 29, 2017
11,780
"Sorry, no. You know I'm fine with you guys enjoying it, it's just, I wouldn't. I couldn't enjoy it like this, it's such an insult to the way it's supposed to be played. But you go ahead, I've got nothing against anyone enjoying it this way. I just personally wouldn't. You know. Because it's disgusting. Because what's the point. I mean you go ahead though. It just makes me want to throw up. Just personally. Disgusting."
Oh shit. Haha. This is obviously satire, but I couldn't help but laugh because these will be honest to goodness posts in the OT!

And don't forget, they'll also say something along the lines of "I understand if you're a Switch only gamer and have to resort to this port, but if you have somewhere else to play the game I highly recommend doing so. You're doing yourself a disservice by choosing the Switch version over any other way to play it."
 

Masterspeed

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,793
England
Well, I own Witcher 3 complete on PS4 and PC... I might as well get this. I don’t care if the graphics aren’t up to PS4, it’s portable version of one of the best games ever made.
 

khamakazee

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,471
I don't do portable either, my Switch has stayed in its dock 99% of the time. Hardware is never an issue for me, games are. Nothing has excited me for PS4/XB1 that I couldn't play on PC. I considered and XB1 for MCC but it will be released on PC.

1 game is enough to justify a system purchase for me and many others. And as the Switch has proven, being able to play your favorite game on the train to work or school is alluring despite the downgrades to hardware intensive games.
It's a good attitude to have and I respect that, I just know other than when I travel amybe once or twice a year I doubt i'd use it much for portability. I just don't like paying extra for soemthing I know I will never use. On the other hand you are right, it is the perfect complimentary system to have with a decent PC.
 

Puffy

Member
Dec 15, 2017
1,978
User Warned: Inflammatory Posting
"Sorry, no. You know I'm fine with you guys enjoying it, it's just, I wouldn't. I couldn't enjoy it like this, it's such an insult to the way it's supposed to be played. But you go ahead, I've got nothing against anyone enjoying it this way. I just personally wouldn't. You know. Because it's disgusting. Because what's the point. I mean you go ahead though. It just makes me want to throw up. Just personally. Disgusting."
You seem upset
 

Solid

Member
Oct 27, 2017
6,677
It is, indeed. Such negativity about there being a console that can play The Witcher 3 on the fucking go. When I was a kid, I wanted San Andreas on the go. Now that we can have an experience like that, people shit on it?
I don't know if you heard but Vice City Stories on PSP runs at half the resolution of Vice City with noticibly worse graphics and slightly reduced performance, less traffic on the streets, and low-bitrate audio.

That's why nobody ever considered those PSP games to be impressive. They just couldn't match the look of the PS2 version, even though that's a perfectly reasonable expectation to hold any handheld game dev to. And when you notice that the textures are lower-res, it's a real immersion breaker, because your mind becomes instantly consumed with dreams of what the console version might look like. Every time you see a pixelated chain link fence or a box-shaped jaw, it's a reminder that you made the wrong choice, and that you'll never be able to experience Vice City's true visual identity. Good luck having fun with the game after that.

So it's like, why would you want San Andreas on handheld, when Vice City Stories didn't even look as good as Vice City? Imagine how much better the Xbox version looks! So just buy an Xbox, and play it there. How your preferred mode of play conforms to your preferences and comforts and lifestyle... doesn't matter when the game looks better elsewhere

I mean think about it. If you played it on PSP, you'd just lose out on San Andreas' entire look and feel (most certainly), and for what? Can't think of a single thing you get out of it, personally.

/S
 
Last edited:

tuxfool

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,792
In this case, its clearly the same game, and that what makes it technically impressive as the switch is the size of a fuckin paperback book and costs $300. Anyone who says it isnt purposefully misrepresenting for some reason
I'm not sure anybody would disagree that it is technically impressive. They would just say that it seems like a bit of hollow enterprise given the results.

It is impressive that an ant can lift up to 10000 times their bodyweight but in the grand scheme of things it isn't much at all.
 

Simba1

Member
Dec 5, 2017
2,227
That's absolutely shocking and the game is over 4 years old now. I doubt the frame rate will hold up either.


So tell me, what exactly is shocking?

720p and 540p resolutions are not first time on Switch and definitely they are not last time.
Also point that game is over 4 years old dont means nothing when its still one of biggest and most complex games of hole generation.
 

HeroR

Member
Dec 10, 2017
4,730
I said it before and I will say it again.

This is the saltish I have seen gamers over a Nintendo game since Bayonatta 2. This thread is like a mixed of parody with some of the worst concern trolling I've seen. By the logic on this thread, no one should play any game outside of high end PC since playing 1080p on a console is borderline inhuman when you can play 4k on a PC at 60 FPS. Also, the people in Japan must not have good standards since they prefer portability over high-end PCs and consoles. Poor people, stuck in the Stone Age.
 
Last edited:

iswasdoes

Member
Nov 13, 2017
1,782
Londinium
I'm not sure anybody would disagree that it is technically impressive. They would just say that it seems like a bit of hollow enterprise given the results.

It is impressive that an ant can lift up to 10000 times their bodyweight but in the grand scheme of things it isn't much at all.
I think your analogy betrays you because the ant is impressive in the context of what an ant can do with its limitations

Without that context nothing is impressive. "Oh you can run 30mph? A car can so 200 so in the grand scheme of things it isnt much at all"

Youre saying its pointless to do because 30fps 540p is literally unplayable? Yeah fine I disagree
 

PrimeBeef

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
5,301
It is, indeed. Such negativity about there being a console that can play The Witcher 3 on the fucking go. When I was a kid, I wanted San Andreas on the go. Now that we can have an experience like that, people shit on it?
It really is ridiculous and screams of console/PC fanboyism/fear. Can't let little ole Nintendo fans have something good. We need to shit in their cereal because it doesn't have the bestest graphix.
 

Lwill

Member
Oct 28, 2017
850
The 3 Stages of the Switch Port Lifecycle
-"It's not possible on the Switch."
-"It's going to be bad"
-"Stop enjoying it!"
Lol.

The Switch undock has less than 1/5th the raw power of the base XB1. I’m personally amazed and excited that we are getting ports such as this.
 

PrimeBeef

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
5,301
I think your analogy betrays you because the ant is impressive in the context of what an ant can do with its limitations

Without that context nothing is impressive. "Oh you can run 30mph? A car can so 200 so in the grand scheme of things it isnt much at all"

Youre saying its pointless to do because 30fps 540p is literally unplayable? Yeah fine I disagree
graphic.. people lost their fucking minds when the Gameboy and GBA came out. Being able to have console-ish quality graphics on the go was mindblowing. Now we have people crying foul at W3 running on Switch.
 

adinsx

Member
Oct 30, 2017
138
To be honest, looks pretty good, if it has a nice framerate is a really nice way to play using that portability.
 

Mihai_

Banned
Sep 25, 2018
216
I've been a developer for 5 years, I just hope everyone knows what you're saying is nonsense. If you're talking about moving from a strong GPU to a weaker GPU by making cutbacks in that department, theoretically you could just remake the entire visual components of the game until it worked, sure. Eventually lods and texture downscaling might not be enough, and you'd end up basically remaking the game on a visual front (I guess there's a debate about whether or not this is a port or simply a remake). The moment you factor the CPU in there, you might have to sacrifice core systems of the game. Reducing AI counts or environment sizes might not be enough, if the game relies on any CPU heavy systems for it's core makeup (a physics heavy game, or the like). The same could really be said for any fundamental GPU-centric elements, like a reliance on real time lighting or dynamic shadows (splinter cell wouldn't have worked on an N64, sorry).

The fact of the matter is, this isn't a remake, it's using the absolute same fabric as the PS4/PC/XboxOne version, albeit heavily cut back. This is mighty impressive.

I should say, I'm actually a big advocate for the idea that things can be ported more often than people on ERA seem to think. But the idea that anything can be ported to anything is simply ludicrous. I guess you could try and make a DS game with the same spirit as RDR2, but you're sure as fuck not going to port that game to it lol.
What a terrible and disingenuous post.

What I'm saying is nonsesne because (and this is your argument): at some point a downport becomes a demake?
Call it whatever you want, but my point stands. Any game can be downported/demaked if you're willing to sacrifice image quality, assets quality and technical features (physx simulation as you mention).

Also, your own definition seems to be so vague that it makes me wonder if you even know where to draw the line between demake and downport.
Would you consider Dead Rising Wii a downport or a demake? Assets (from 3d models to texture work) have obviously been remade from the X360 version but mechancially the Wii Dead Rising is the same, albeit with reduced object(zombies) count and lower quality textures and resolution.
So is it a demake or a downport?

And for your information, assets have been remade in Withcer 3 Switch too, to be able to make it work on the Switch. If you take a good look you'll notice character models (and even object, such as the hanging tree, seem to be a different 3d model, with lower polys) have been remade.
Which complicates matters, according to your own nonsensical definition of what consitues a downport versus a demake.

In any case, you're terribly disingenuous about this.
Regardless of semantics, anything can be downported/demaked, though the quality will suffer, obviously. And yes, RDR2 can be brought to the Wii in a demake/downport capacity. It will absolutely look worse, but it will be the same game, just like Witcher 3.

Also lol at how you dropped 'I've been a dev for 5 years, trust me, I'm an expert'.
In what capacity did you work as a game dev for 5 years if you don't mind me asking?
 

Razor Mom

Member
Jan 2, 2018
2,211
United Kingdom
It really is ridiculous and screams of console/PC fanboyism/fear. Can't let little ole Nintendo fans have something good. We need to shit in their cereal because it doesn't have the bestest graphix.
Ah but this is the true irony of the situation - the people complaining don't seem to be owners of 4k 60fps graphics mod mega-rig PCs. This isn't about visuals or playing a version that's "true to the creators intent" or whatever. It's honestly just people sad that others will enjoy this on their switch.
 

pezzie

Member
Oct 27, 2017
847
I don't think it looks great, but I'll probably still get it. I already have the game on another system if I want to play the great looking version, I'll take a version I could bring on the go.
 

AGoodODST

Member
Oct 28, 2017
748
I'm not sure anybody would disagree that it is technically impressive. They would just say that it seems like a bit of hollow enterprise given the results.

It is impressive that an ant can lift up to 10000 times their bodyweight but in the grand scheme of things it isn't much at all.
lmao what.

This thread is comedy gold.
 

Razor Mom

Member
Jan 2, 2018
2,211
United Kingdom
What a terrible and disingenuous post.

What I'm saying is nonsesne because (and this is your argument): at some point a downport becomes a demake?
Call it whatever you want, but my point stands. Any game can be downported/demaked if you're willing to sacrifice image quality, assets quality and technical features (physx simulation as you mention).

Also, your own definition seems to be so vague that it makes me wonder if you even now where to draw the line between demake and downport.
Would you consider Dead Rising Wii a downport or a demake? Assets (from 3d models to texture work) have obviously been remade from the X360 version but mechancially the Wii Dead Rising is the same, albeit with reduced object(zombies) count and lower quality textures and resolution.
So is it a demake or a downport?

Also, for your information, assets have been remade in Withcer 3 Switch too, to be able to make it work on the Switch. If you take a good look you'll notice character models (and even object, such as the hanging tree, seem to be a different 3d model, with lower polys) have been remade.
Which complicates matters, according to your own nonsensical definition of what consitues a downport versus a demake.

In any case, you're terribly disingenuous about this.
Regardless of semantics, anything can be downported/demaked, though the quality will suffer, obviously. And yes, RDR2 can be brought to the Wii in a demake/downport capacity. It will absolutely look worse, but it will be the same game, just like Witcher 3.

Also lol at how you dropped 'I've been a dev for 5 years, trust me, I'm an expert'.
In what capacity did you work as a game dev for 5 years if you don't mind me asking?
In the capacity I've worked on various games using various engines. I mean there's nothing really left to say to you, I guess take whatever comfort you can in believing that red dead redemption 2 can be ported using it's original sourcecode to a DS, I guess. Also I think those lower poly assets might be lods, dude.

I mean you believe that other than graphics, there's nothing going on in Red Dead Redemption 2 that would prevent it from being ported to Wii. You're not a smart person, I'm sorry.
 

zakatana

Member
Jan 10, 2018
3,232
Tokyo
Dark souls on previous gen wasn't native 720p and looked good enough for people to praise it as the game of the generation. Having one of the most ambitious games released this gen running at dynamic 720p/540p on an hybrid device is perfectly fine, unless you discovered video games in 2013 or 14.
Not to mention that this port seems to be getting a lot of love and efforts by the dev (using a 32gb cart for example), so it's quite likely that performances will be further enhanced after release. Wolfenstein or more recently Hob were quite impressive in that regard (different developer, I know...).
 

Mihai_

Banned
Sep 25, 2018
216
In the capacity I've worked on various games using various engines. I mean there's nothing really left to say to you, I guess take whatever comfort you can in believing that red dead redemption 2 can be ported using it's original sourcecode to a DS, I guess.
And you're again disingenuous.

You know verywell that in the previous post I meant RDR2 can be ported to the Switch just as well as The Witcher 3.
But keep being stuck on that 'downport to DS' thing which can't be done without remaking the game.

You sure showed me, by being disingemous and being stuck on a semantics thing and cherry picking the things you reply to.

edit: also your answer is a non-answer. By what capacity, I meant if you were a programmer. You might have worked with different game engines as an artist and never wrote a function. But I guess you don't want to say what position you had on those projects.
 

HeroR

Member
Dec 10, 2017
4,730
Ah but this is the true irony of the situation - the people complaining don't seem to be owners of 4k 60fps graphics mod mega-rig PCs. This isn't about visuals or playing a version that's "true to the creators intent" or whatever. It's honestly just people sad that others will enjoy this on their switch.
I have to agree. While people like to joke about the 'PC Master Race', they're far more understanding and forgiving of Switch's ports and their shortcomings. Heck, a lot of them support Switch ports since it gives them the option to play their high end games on the go, especially if it has cross play or cross accounts, and find it more of a waste to buy console ports since it offers nothing that a PC can't give them with inferior graphics and paid online.
 

patientx

Member
Oct 26, 2017
448
So the game is appearently being ported by Saber Interactive. (source) How are their track record regarding switch ? Saw some games on wikipedia but played none of them actually.
 

Razor Mom

Member
Jan 2, 2018
2,211
United Kingdom
And you're again disingenuous.

You know verywell that in the previous post I meant RDR2 can be ported to the Switch just as well as The Witcher 3.
But keep being stuck on that 'downport to DS' thing which can't be done without remaking the game.

You sure showed me, by being disingemous and being stuck on a semantics thing and cherry picking the things you reply to.
Lol 3 minutes ago you said it could be ported to Wii?
 

PrimeBeef

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
5,301
Ah but this is the true irony of the situation - the people complaining don't seem to be owners of 4k 60fps graphics mod mega-rig PCs. This isn't about visuals or playing a version that's "true to the creators intent" or whatever. It's honestly just people sad that others will enjoy this on their switch.
Exactly. Frankly shit comments like that should be bannable.
 

LeoModesto

Member
Jun 28, 2018
7
well i just came here thinking we'd have a nice conversation about how cool is a game with the scope of the witcher on a system like the switch, guess i was wrong about that.
 

tuxfool

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,792
I think your analogy betrays you because the ant is impressive in the context of what an ant can do with its limitations

Without that context nothing is impressive. "Oh you can run 30mph? A car can so 200 so in the grand scheme of things it isnt much at all"

Youre saying its pointless to do because 30fps 540p is literally unplayable? Yeah fine I disagree
Sure.

Unfortunately, this isn't the only version of the game, so it is going to be compared to those other versions.

BOTW is superior playing it on CEMU in absolute terms, but I would argue the gulf in the experience isn't as significant as what is presented here.

Certainly the switch has portability, but then so does streaming the game to a phone and tablet.
 

Solid

Member
Oct 27, 2017
6,677
You could not possibly port RDR2 to the Nintendo Wii and retain the gameplay experience intact. The hardware is nowhere near capable of facilitating that.
 

Razor Mom

Member
Jan 2, 2018
2,211
United Kingdom
You could not possibly port RDR2 to the Nintendo Wii and retain the gameplay experience intact. The hardware is nowhere near capable of facilitating that.
I would just give up on him, I don't think he really understands what he's saying. Anything to prove that the Witcher 3 on switch isn't actually impressive at all, I mean not compared to the Sega Saturn port of Overwatch, anyways.
 

Mihai_

Banned
Sep 25, 2018
216
Lol 3 minutes ago you said it could be ported to Wii?
I meant Switch lol.... that's cuz I was talking about Dead Rising Wii in the previous paragraph.
A paragraph that had a querstion for you, which you conveniently ignored.... ;)

Also your answer is a non-answer. By what capacity, I meant if you were a programmer. You might have worked with different game engines as an artist and never wrote a function. But I guess you don't want to say what position you had on those projects.

edit:
I would just give up on him, I don't think he really understands what he's saying.
Hahaha says the one who's replying selectively and doesn't offer any honest reply, except vague statements.
If you say so... ;)