Why would you want to play games in 540p 30 fps or less on Switch when you can play them in 4K 120 fps elsewhere?

>Playing non-exclusives on a Nintendo console

Attached: 1466899028525.png (576x259, 102K)

but the ds version is better?

It's the best way to get a definitive answer. If the gameplay itself holds up without the bells and whistles well you have a good game on your hands don't you.
If not then it was always just trash.

I would truthfully, honestly rather not play a game than play a shitty version of it. It's like the difference between watching 2001: A Space Odyssey in a home theater with great speakers and streaming it on a 2012 android tablet at 360p and dingy headphones.

>RPG
>>on a handheld
Literally the best place to play them because you can get comfy, relax and get lost in it for a few hours

Attached: 1494190775701.jpg (1920x1080, 61K)

yeah but sometimes it's tic tac toe on a napkin vs a whiteboard
one is objectively better but it's still the same shit
as long as the game can lock a framerate, if it's really not worth playing to you because of the way it looks, evaluate whether or not you like it for the gameplay.

why have you never had sex?

I barely keep a stable 60 fps with my 2080 on 4. where can you play it in 4k 120 fps? 3 2080 ti's?

>Playing an objectively shitty version of a game is no way to assess it.
If it's objectively shitty just because the graphics are worse then it was always a bad game from the start.

Man, Nincels jusy tickle me. Why not grow up and buy a PS4 with real games?

Had an argument with a co-worker over this--at what point do you say a game isn't worth playing because of the sheer limitations of the hardware. Witcher 3 can barely chug along on the PS4 and Xbone. I can only what it would look like on fucking tablet-tier hardware? I thought Black Flag was bad enough.

This ignores the fact that graphics and sound (both elements of Switch ports that are usually sub-par) can have a transformative effect on the game experience as a whole. And at any rate, why would you shell out $60 for a game you're not sure you'll like? At best you enjoy a poor version of it and at worst you hate it and still give the company who made it money.

I have a ps4.
Shit only has baby games like GoW.

Why would you ever play games on a console when they have shit graphics, res and FPS? Why is OP a sony nigger yet thinks he is somehow better than nintendo fanboys?

>a sony nigger
I'm literally advocating playing on PC you fucking retard.

>can have a transformative effect on the game experience as a whole
Yeah no. This is what I meant by bells and whistles, they may improve the overall atmosphere but that's only skin deep. If the gameplay mechanics are dull without it then that's that.

>and still give the company who made it money.
Did you forget that piracy exists?

The witcher was already downgraded for the shitty ps4 so sony niggers have no right complaining

PS4 can't 4k lol

I grew up watching little blocks go beep boop. I'm convinced anyone complaining about this is just desperate to shitpost or a zoomer.

You're playing your part wrong then if he can tell you're a sonyfag.

>Playing a multiplat on anything but PC
Why would someone do that? Specially Witcher
Is it the mythical power of "muh Nintendo"

Attached: 1561554537733.png (928x616, 409K)

Sorry but graphics are like the 3rd most important aspect of a game. The witcher is an open world game. Compromising the world is not what you should so they are already running at 540p which is lower resolution than the PSP lol

>540p
>lower than 480 x 272
no, it's not lower than the PSP, goober.

I'm a tranny therefore I have to play on my switch :)

>4K 120 fps
i need to know your specs, and if you could also share your access key to the nasa supercomputers i'd love it

Why do you hate video games so much you don’t want as many people to play the good ones as possible?

>This is what I meant by bells and whistles, they may improve the overall atmosphere but that's only skin deep
It isn't though. Imagine taking a game like Panzer Dragoon and stripping away its art-style, graphics, and music. What you're left with is a fairly competent rail shooter, but really nothing you haven't seen before. Graphics and sound can endear you to an game, and push an otherwise average game into greatness.

>According to Nintendo games have only doubled in resolution since 2005.
Why do you know the PSPs screen specs off the top of your head. Do you not like go outside or something?

>Why do you hate video games so much you don’t want as many people to play the good ones as possible?
Because I want people OUT of this hobby to stop driving up prices and ensuring that trash like Fifa, COD, and Fortnite are the only things that sell. I want LESS people in vidya.

Is the underlying game good or not? This doesn’t fundamentally change. Why are you so bothered about what other people spend their time and/or money on?

see

Witcher 3 is not an RPG. You can't roleplay. You have to be Geralt and do stuff Geralt does.

The stat building is about as deep as your average open world game nowadays. Even Doom has comparable customization options.

The prices are driven up by the development costs for bigger and more expensive hardware and the expectations that come with it. Microsoft and Sony are more to blame for that. Go and look at the development time/teams for the assassin’s creed series from 1 to origins.

I knew that it was lower than 540p. so I Googled it because I don't like being a dumbass. Lo and behold, I was correct, so I shared that with you.

>this
Literally fuck all fake gamers. You can't even say nigger on consoles anymore. I hate twitch and esport culture. Doom is like chess whereas Spiderman is a fucking movie game made for big gulp drinking fluoride staring drooling retards. It will never again be 4 bros with 4 controllers on a couch playing games since that's too toxic

>Sorry but graphics are like the 3rd most important aspect of a game
Sure if you were reared on modern games where that's their only strong point but the reality is that graphics are the second least important aspect of a game.

That’s not addressing my question nor is it comparable to a heavily story focused game. If you turned the Witcher into a choose-your-own-aventure book it would STILL have an entertaining structure.

Haven’t heard anything quite as childish as this in a while. Genuinely impressive.

...

I often play switch 4 player with my wife, tyrone and their kid and he DOES get to say the n-word. :-)

Just get with the times user! You can still play 4-player splitscreen if you get enough good boy points. ;-)

>Is the underlying game good or not
Not really no. Combat itself is fairly mashy and the dialogue goes on and on.

If I wanted to play ""real"" games I'd use my PC actually.

Another top quality response. Really glad you stick around.

Then I ask again: why the fuck are you chiming I’m on a topic you have zero interest in?

Bullshit. They are pocketing that money. Crysis is a 9gb game and maxed out no console has yet to touch it. What right does any game have being 100gbs if it's shit when new hitman is only like 60 and that's the game of the gen right there. Bungie was using top of the line tech and hardware to make Halo 3, they didn't have 500 million like Halo infinite. I don't know how they are spending more money when games look pretty because of the engine (like everything is Unreal) and games have less intelligent AI than ever and are all streamlined.

The world is also impossible to navigate without quest markers becauee it's so generic and NPCs never give you directions.

For every decent side quest there's 10 "go there and collect 10 drowner foreskins" copypaste shit.

I don’t think a scrap of what you just typed out made any sense. How the fuck does a switch port of the Witcher raise the prices of video games? They’re set by the publishers themselves You monumental cretin. If you absolutely have to get the flavour of the month game at full price on day 1 then that’s on you.

>why the fuck are you chiming I’m on a topic you have zero interest in?
Do you expect us all just to praise Witcher 3 unconditionally?

Hey retard don't you remember the Bit Wars. All people have been talking about forever is how good games look. Games have the expectation that they will be fun otherwise why make it. Anthem is probably very pretty but it's bad so why play it VS something like Deus Ex an old game that is very fun on it's own but gets modded to support modern day resolution and with that comes graphical improvements. You can always make a good game better with improved visuals but a polished turd will always still stink.

You should ask Tyrone for the Nword pass my friend andre gave it to me for 500$ and I've been legally saying nigger since!

Where are you getting your sample of “number of people who have a PC that can run W3 at 4K but have waited years to play it just so they can get the switch version” ? Otherwise your fucking question is loaded bait, you worthless fucking retard.

Cope. Witcher has been going downhill every sequel in terms of roleplaying depth and choice, while production values have gone up.

It's a nice bit of media. It's not an amazing or innovative game.

It would be better without the open world, which you can barely interact with anyways.

That’s not even what the thread is about you illiterate faggot. Start at the first post and work downwards. Best advice o can give you, you moron.

If you don't have the hardware to enjoy video games at their finest audio/visual fidelity you do not belong in this hobby. You are the cancer that is killing gaming.

The development time and money spent on graphics is why we're still playing the same game archetypes we had 10 years ago. If your game costs 100 millions, you need to cater to the most casual audience.

Graphics have killed games.

How the fuck is that of any concern to you, you fat cunt?

Relevant 3D games playable on a handheld is an extremely appealing concept and if you can't deal with that, there's not a single person who matters in this world who will give a fuck about you. I can't make it any clearer than that, OP.

Attached: faggot.gif (150x130, 567K)

Because it's fun to bully Nintendorks

What I said is perfectly logical, improved console tech hasn't changed shit since making games is easier than ever. If games actually costed more to make any dev worth their own weight in salt would outsource to china or Korea. They are pocketing this money, probably a ploy to make games seem higher quality since they have "big budgets" I'm sure the marvel movies cost alot to make (cause those actors ain't cheap) but the Avengers didn't raise the price of movie productions or bluray prices.

I never said games need to be photo realistic movies, rather they should always be played and experienced in the best quality possible.

Because your actions supporting dogshit hardware like the Switch ensure the industry only gets shittier.

>Please fuck my asshole I don't know anything at all
Games were better when hardware limitations forced devs to be creative.

>Relevant 3D games playable on a handheld is an extremely appealing concept and if you can't deal with that, there's not a single person who matters in this world who will give a fuck about you. I can't make it any clearer than that, OP.

I dont get this, If i play handheld, i want to play handheld games, games built for handheld, with "shorter" sessions in mind, not big AAA home console games gimped just because they're handheld

That is true, poor fags ruin every hobby. Piss ants trying to explain to me why their Prius is a good car because it gets you from point a to b, and that I overpaided for my Corvette that will get me there faster because they both have 4 wheels and you don't NEED Almost 500 Horsepower to drive.

>Games were better when hardware limitations forced devs to be creative.
Please list 10 games whose hardware limitations "enhanced" them somehow.

>corvette

Attached: 1560190313389.gif (382x308, 1.47M)

I've considered buying a ps4 because it's only $200 on black Friday but there are so few games I would be interested in I just can't justify it. It's basically just monster Hunter and bloodborne and I'm willing to wait for a switch monster Hunter. I'm a gameplay purist so I have zero interest in story focused games.

No they didn't games on PC still look and play great. You just have to leave your comfort zone of Ubisoft games. What killed gaming was people letting shitty companies get away with blatant anti-consumerism instead of actually boycotting shit like I did. How many crappy youtubers spent months talking about how bad F76 was gonna be? Many. How many of then were streaming F76 day 1? Too many of them.

Just compare cinematic pseudo-RPGs like Witcher 3, Mass Effect, or Fallout 4 to any Infinity Engine game or the original Fallouts. DOS and Pathfinder are only able to be as deep as they are because their graphics are deeper.

>look and play great.
They look great sure but that's about it. Outside of indies which don't go for graphics anyway gameplay has stagnated and devolved.

Me either, who has time to play a game like the witcher on their way to school or work? Like your games will be waiting for you at home. I preferred actual fun games designed around the handhelds gimmick. How many ports were fundamentally changed to use the second screen on the DS vs now where the Devs just make a Lowspecgamer config and send to it the publishers. Sad!

You might as well just invest in a PC.

Being poor

i actually bought a switch in 2018 and i feel like a retard

Yeah I might as well drop 1k on video game hardware, nah.

Insurgency Sandstorm looks and plays like a dream. Only lazy indies make ugly, sorry "retro" like games. If my clown ass can download unreal 4 theres no excuse for any dev to not have a game that looks on par with the Mario 64 Unreal remake.

540p, oof, that's almost the max resolution youtube had ten years ago.

You're not going anywhere

Spend 600$ on the PC. You've already spent more than 500$ on that switch.

>You are the cancer that is killing gaming.
Pretty sure the "cancer killing gaming" are graphic whores demamding high fidelity graphics which not only take an extremely long time to make but more often than not end up taking resources from other areas of the dev team to complete.
On top of that these same people no longer research games and only buy them because of the afotmrntioned graphics and if the game has an extremely large marketing campaign behind it forcing them to waste money on that.

A GTX 1050 ti + mid to low tier i7 computer won't cost you much more than $500 and will provide vastly superior performance to any console on the market and has the added benefit of emulating every video game from the last 40 years and doing productive work to boot.

Rpgs on handheld are thing since almost the first handhelds moron

see >I never said games need to be photo realistic movies, rather they should always be played and experienced in the best quality possible.

Ever hear of saving money?
Plus why would you drop 200 on a system that only has one exclusive you want?

>Insurgency Sandstorm looks and plays like a dream
Wrong on both accounts.
In terms of looks it certainly doesn't hit the level of the modern gen as for how it plays its your basic shooter, hard to fuck that up.

>4K 120 fps elsewhere?
>elsewhere
Lol, weird way to say "PC"

The "people" you are talking about buy 300$ PS4s. Anyone who's an actual graphics whore like me hasn't bought a "big budget" game in years. I blame humble for even giving 3 dollars to Activision for my undownload copy of black ops 4. I'll put it back around to Crysis. Game looked great didn't cost 500 million. It's not my fault it's people like your faults for not wanting games to look and play their best. I spent lots of money on my PC I want to have fun on it. If I game isn't good I refund it. This is how you fix gaming literally make fun of people with shit taste or they will be shitting on your plate next

>rather they should always be played and experienced in the best quality possible.
Which doesn't change anything I've said because that's still referring to visuals. Try and keep up kiddo, maybe you'll learn something.

Talk about poor reading comprehension.

>literally make fun of people with shit taste
Why do you think we insult you graphics whores?
Answer this, what have high fidelity graphics done to improve the actual gameplay?

>average
Yeah I'd say it's an average looking game, looks great as the bar is high. Graphics aren't all textures fool. World size and factors like max draw distance, player count are the bread and butter of good games.

I didn't even say average in my post so I don't know who you're quoting.
>World size and factors like max draw distance, player count
See this, this is an aspect of GAMEPLAY, not graphics. They're things that directly affect your interaction with the game while graphics don't.

The visuals in a 20 year old game and a brand new one are still visuals you dumb retard. It's the reason why it's advisable to play the PlayStation 1 version of WipeOut instead of the Saturn version. Why you should play the PC version of MDK instead of the PlayStation 1 version. Why you should play the Dreamcast version of Soul Caliber instead of the Arcade version.

When people talk about "graphics" they're not necessarily referring to ultra high-resolution photo-realistic textures mapped onto highly intricate geometry. Just look at Breath of the Wild, it's a far better experience on PC where it can run at 4K @ 60fps which enhances the art-style it already has.

>4K 120 fps
Nobody is playing games like this

Draw distance, actaul grass to use as cover, destructible environments. Improved models and Bigger Maps. Hell render in actaul rain puddles. Theres no excuse why some games suck dick besides the fact devs don't have to try anymore. CPUs have improved so theres literally no excuse why every game doesn't have Red Faction Guerrilla levels of destruction yet. The fact every old game automatically looks better at 2160p is proof that new graphics cards have a worthwhile existence. You people are no different than the people who stuck with 360 to play black ops 3. You literally want to hold back games with your shit hardware because you're not smart enough to avoid games with an EA logo

>Graphics aren't all textures fool.
Not him but graphics literally have nothing to do with gameplay outside of framerate which straddles the line depending on the genre.
Everything you listed there has nothing to do with graphics though given you can have comparable world sizes, player counts and draw distances with a game that uses wire frame player models and n64 textures.

>good graphics don't improve good gameplay
Did you get away from wrangler?

Okay so a GPU is only useful for drawing textures okay. Yep

>necessarily referring to ultra high-resolution photo-realistic textures mapped onto highly intricate geometry. Just look at Breath of the Wild, it's a far better experience on PC where it can run at 4K @ 60fps which enhances the art-style it already has
And you're calling other people retards, the point that user and the other people here are trying to make is that's superficial. You're still getting the same game whether you're playing it on Switch or pc.

>he actually plays games under a tree or in public
Dude go to the bar, find some friends or something. This is the most pathetic shit I've ever seen.

Go on then, tell us how it does.

Wow, you certainly do like putting words in people's mouths don't you.

>You're still getting the same game whether you're playing it on Switch or pc.
And MY point is that compromised graphics, sound, and performance can and do adversely affect the gameplay experience as a whole, potentially harming one's opinion of a game.

Who knows what goes through nintendork's brains

>can and do adversely affect the gameplay experience as a whole,
Well you've done a bang up job defending that point because you haven't don't shit except show us that you can't separate graphics and gameplay.

I sorta agree with you but Halo 3 was using Halo 2's engine as a baseline, they were NOT using top of the line anything with that.

>can and do adversely affect the gameplay experience
How?
That's the one thing you've been unable to answer without throwing up aspects of gameplay instead.

No you're not, you're losing things like framerate and the quality of the world which are essential to the game. The game isn't running at low settings it's running at the lowest settings. If someone had a shit PC and had to mod then witcher 3 down to switch levels they would and would they enjoy the game still? Proabably then if they get a new PC they can crank the settings up and enjoy their favorite slut with makeup on now. Playing games on then switch is like fucking a fat chick it's just not worth it when skinny ugly bitches still can have a great body. Taking a good game and lowering it's settings is fine because the product has higher expectations of itself that's why they post recommended specs where as the switch version is clearly compromised in many aspects. Hell I bet the switch version even sounds bad.

Because youd have to play siting on your couch or desk. With the switch you can literally play anywhere else.

Going outside and playing video games is such an enlightening experience, you realize that having friends is judt a thing for normies, and that you have superior experiences overall. Combining the experience of gaming with the natural high of being outside is incomparable.

How is playing a game at 20 fps not detrimental to the experience as a whole?

>How
It makes the game less fluid and therefore less enjoyable and satisfying to play, especially since graphics and sound do so much to elevate games.

I might get this for the same reason I'd get Skyrim and Dark Souls when I finally get a Switch. I like the idea of being able to wrap up in bed or sit by the fire and go on long adventures when it's really cold and dark outside.

See In this entire post you've said absolutely fuck all except
>IT CAN BECAUSE I SAID SO
Hell botw isn't even a game where framerate is important, if you had mentioned a fighter or something like MH then you would have had a point because it can affect inputs and timing.

>>RPG
>>on a handheld
Yes? The best system for RPGs last generation was the 3DS.

Tell me do you like vanilla New Vegas? I do, it's much better at 4K with Mods tho. If the switch had a version of New Vegas that looked worse than the 360 version I'd tell people to avoid the switch port and instead get it for PC. It's perfectly sound. Theres no reason to play the worst version of any game I remember they made Doom for the SNES, it was shitty (not counting that sweet music) People didn't make up some shit like "graphics don't matter, it's all about the gameplay" when we would tell them that literally any other version PC, 32X, Jaguar looked better. Literally if the game has ugly stick Marks avoid it

>especially since graphics and sound do so much to elevate games.
There you go again, you're supposed to be saying HOW it does that.

Fair enough but the game still looks decent 12 years later and I remember the Vidocs, they made shit like water physics and snow prints on 512mb of ram theres no excuse why Halo 3 has better snow prints than GoW a game that gets to use 8gbs of ram. When GoW most definitely had a bigger budget

Bitch put a TV on your deck then. Literally the only thing I think of when I see a grown ass adult playing a switch in public is the next punchline, same goes for people playing shit on their cellphones

>framerate
Framerate isn't the only aspect of ports that is affected by porting over to Switch, textures, audio, resolution, and input latency all see downgrades and can contribute directly to harming the gameplay itself, especially in the controls department. There is no universe where you can spin that as not mattering.

It does that by pleasing your ears and dazzling your eyes all while playing well at the same time thus making the experience of physically playing the game more enjoyable. It's what separates games like Tempest 2000 from its contemporaneous 90s arcade revival attempts. I mean this is self-fucking evident. By your logic, why don't we just play 10 fps flatshaded polygon games with no audio of any kind if graphic and sound are meaningless?

Yea Forums forever seething at Switch's popularity

Every game being at or above 60 is a first priority. Why would I want to play a game at movie framerates. I used to get headaches from the poor framerate of Deal or No Deal the DVD game. Never again will sub 45 be acceptable and 45 would be pushing it too low for me.

Hell if graphics and sound don't matter why don't we just play board games.

I play tabletop rpgs and wargames all the time lol

litterally only 60p more than what we had in the 90's

Maybe if you like girly RPGs

No I'm glad it's successful children deserve to have fun bing bing wahooing I'd be a hypocrite if I didn't want kids to have fun with Nintendo. I'm also glad Nintendo is beating Sony in Japan. This is a board for videogame enthusiasts tho. Playing on a tablet has already been established as pleb teir. Nintendo's tablet doesn't get a pass

On this point who the fuck plays virtual card games I have 1000s of MTG cards and have only played the fake versions a handful of times. It's no fun being locked to a small handful of the cards and even worse not actually keeping that motherfuckin thang on me for when actual humans want to duel.