Megawarrior
Member
I guess I don't feel too bad playing the wii u version first.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
DF on Zelda Switch: Docked has major frame drops, portable doesn't (no score talk)
- Thread starter Theorry
- Start date
RoadHazard
Gold Member
No, it doesn't. That would mean no game could ever get 10/10, because no game is flawless. It simply means it's as good as your can expect a game to get at this point. It can still have issues, but the rest of the game is so good that those issues don't warrant dropping the score to 9/10.
You're talking about review scores having objective, universally understood meanings while calling someone else obtuse.
BLAUcopter
Gold Member
I know man, that's why I said I'll never understand the review system.
SomedayTheFire
Member
Very few reviewers score like that.
And that's why most places have moved away from such a system: reviews should not be based on a checklist. It should be based on the overall feelings of the reviewer.
SinCityAssassin
Member
Yeah I'm not sure what you're rambling on about.
tkscz
Member
No, no it isn't. For crying out loud the Wii U can't even run the UE4 engine while the Switch can do a damn good job of running it. This is just a rushed up port. Nintendo started porting it to switch less than a year ago.
CharminUltra
Member
Ballout 4?
I don't like getting into review discussions, because it seems rather banal, but I've seen this mentioned quite a few times and it's pretty amusing when you consider how many review sites over the years have gone out their way to explain that when they score a game a 10 it doesn't not mean it is flawless or perfect. It's not a checklist of items to average out.
It's a small update and the game went gold recently. Seems to only contain a few minor bug fixes and network capability for DLC. I will update it later tonight.
OrbitalBeard
Member
So? Ever heard of something being greater than the sum (or average lol) of its parts?
People also assign different value to things. Super Mario Galaxy 2 has a shit story and I'd argue its presentation is a decent step down from its predecessor. Yet the game is a masterpiece.
This kind of performance issues really impacts the experience for me, but that's just me. I'm ok with the scores the game got, even though I find it hard to give a perfect score to a game with performance issues.
There are some defending the performance. Like it's ok to run like this since the game is so good.
Yeah, I completely agree with you.
This thread has to be the most fun I've had in a while.
hardcastlemccormick
Banned
That's because the review score is a random number that the reviewer decided to associate with their overall feelings about the game, not an average or even a weighted average.
The official system for determining review scores: "I pull a number out of my ass. The review's text justifies it."
You may ask yourself: What's the point of review scores, if they're all made up? That's a very good question, one that has never been answered. And yet folks argue about them on GAF to this day as if they matter.
Huge Succeeded
Banned
It was reflected in their overall assessment of the game's quality. You just refuse to believe that their overall assessment could be that the game has a solid enough backbone to disregard its technical issues as they didn't sufficiently impair the experience. Why, I don't know. I've got to wonder if any of you would even be showing up in a hypothetical GTA 6 thread, where GTA 6 ships running like GTA 4 and 5 did at launch.
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
yes but..
.. this is what i'm talking about, 20 FPS in combat with singular enemies or just exploring should not be just a 'nit pick', it should be a tangible factor in reviews. People have said later areas are even worse in terms of performance drops. No game is perfect, but a game with this bad performance shouldn't be labeled 'near perfect' either.
Like someone said earlier in the topic, I'll never figure out game reviews either.
At this point I'm far more interested in seeing a WiiU comparison.
This has to come down to memory bandwidth, right? If portable mode is identical and simply at a 720p, the clock increase when docked should be plenty to run at 900p and have identical performance.
I would say optimization issues from porting a game designed for Wii U, but MK8 goes from 720p on Wii U to 1080p on Switch, with a more stable framerate to boot.
Confusing.
I would say optimization issues from porting a game designed for Wii U, but MK8 goes from 720p on Wii U to 1080p on Switch, with a more stable framerate to boot.
Confusing.
All these things aren't weighted equally first of all.
Second, no reviewer these days uses averages.
LordOfChaos
Member
Furthermore, sometimes the framerate drops so low it visibly /stops/. See Easy Allies review.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ALdZyIGxux0
SomedayTheFire
Member
It doesn't matter to a lot of people. What's to figure out? They're subjective assessments of software, that's pretty much all there is to it.
Gotdatmoney
Member
It's just not a huge deal. Sometimes the performance just isnt bad enough for them to feel their enjoymemt of the game is dimnished. A lot of gamers have standards so much higher than the ordinary person clearly. I remember playing Zack and Wiki around when it came out and there were a few bosses where the frame rate went to shit. Yeah it's bad but the some of the parts is just such tha these instances didnt ruin it.
I dunno. Sometimes its just a shoulder shrug. Sometimes peoole take this shit so excessive. Who gives a shit about 98 on Metacritic?
OrbitalBeard
Member
The simple truth is the majority of game reviewers, like the average consumer, doesn't hold performance in as high regard as the average forum dweller.
it is because reviews are subjective. like if you were reviewing the game you would weight the frame rate issues higher than someone who feels differently.
for everyone saying they don't understand reviews...let me explain it for you
reviews are subjective and the numbers don't mean anything, thats all there is to get
Twilight Princess
Member
That doesn't even make sense. Of course the sum is going to be greater than the average. Should have been "something being greater than the sum of the average of its parts."
Lol
Huge Succeeded
Banned
Yeah, like every single one of the reviewers, for instance.
Going off what I've learned the last couple of day on GAF... I think that these reviewers, coming from all walks of life, are probably all just giant Zelda fanboys with rose tinted goggles... I mean, every single last one of them. They all must be Zelda fanboys who have such huge nostalgia for the Zelda franchise that this game was never going to secure less than a 10! That makes soooo much sense! (I don't live in a cartoon, I swear!)
That's so much more likely than it being a really, really good game that drew pretty much uniform accolade from critics on its own merits despite its performance issues
This is what we call an "Occam's razor".
Evidently, it wasn't enough of an issue to be a tangible factor in reviews.
a review is made by a human being. there's no formula.
I bet some of them are just looking for a reason to harp on Zelda getting such high scores. Some prob won't even play the game. I'm out of this thread. Too much stupid. I am constantly reminded why I avoid gaming side of GAF...
SinCityAssassin
Member
Mario kart is a lot different because as beautiful as Mario kart looked, it's using a lot less graphical effects and rendering than an Open world zelda game.
It's not like that though. The frame drop occurs in just a certain area, has nothing to do with combat. I have got into fights with multiple enemies and no framerate hitch, go to a certain area though and with nothing special happening the frame rate with drop.
Also the game is gob smackingly good so how gives a fuck about the frame rate dropping. Also looks very nice as well, the art is just superb.
lwilliams3
Member
It apparently doesn't happen all the time. Slowing down to 20 fps isn't really at an unplayable state for a lot of people anyway.
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
and that's what's bothering me the most. I understand the quality of the content must be extremely good but we shouldn't be OK with 20 FPS stretches in 2017, on new hardware, for a game that's essentially an up-port from a weaker console, with a first party title.
Ah well. That's just me though, I can understand everyone has their opinions and I respect that.
Or its just harder to render 900p than 720p
Yup, it's weird seeing so many reviewers acknowledge the performance issues but totally disregard it from the overall score. I mean, I know everyone perceives frame drops differently but when the game drops to 20fps during combat and even lower in mid/late-game areas you've got to at least deduct something. Combat and exploration are the two main pillars of this game and playing it like a slideshow definitely detracts from what is otherwise a fantastic game.
tkscz
Member
It is when it didn't hinder the gameplay and overall experience. I'm not saying that it will be the same for everyone, I understand well that a lot of people can be easily bothered and turned away by frame rate issues. At the same time, a lot of other people aren't bothered enough by them, even at 20fps at times, to let it hinder their experience. Every review I've read and seen has made complaints about the frame rates. No one defends them, no one says they are good, but most say they just aren't enough to bring down what they experienced. Thus far, after about 4 hours of the game (Wii U version) I've experienced the frame drops. They get annoying, but not enough for me to care about them.
it was mentioned in pretty much every single review
'tis not the reviewers living in a dream world
That's true, but it's still getting a really big bump on the Switch hardware. I'm starting to think that my idea of the team spending most of the porting process on optimizing it for the portable mode is more and more plausible. With any luck, they're already working on something for docked mode, but it's still unfortunate that they shipped it without the same level of care in that regard.
tomwhite2004
Member
Appologies, was incorrectly informed that the switch has a lower memory bandwidth than a standard tegra x1. Just looked into it a can see they are in fact the same.
However there is still clearly a mismatch between the boost in memory bandwitdth and gpu and how much they upclock relative to each other whilst in docked mode which accounts for the performance issues.
Personally i think its a shame that we have potentially reached the limits of what the device can achieve with its first big release, not due to any programming deficiency but rather bad hardware design.
However there is still clearly a mismatch between the boost in memory bandwitdth and gpu and how much they upclock relative to each other whilst in docked mode which accounts for the performance issues.
Personally i think its a shame that we have potentially reached the limits of what the device can achieve with its first big release, not due to any programming deficiency but rather bad hardware design.
RoadHazard
Gold Member
MK8 is clearly a much simpler game visually, with fewer bandwidth-hungry alpha effects and such.
Silent_Ocarina
Member
It's telling that the biggest problem people have with the frame rate drops is that reviewers didn't dock points for it instead of, you know, the frame rate drops negatively affecting their own experience with the game.
SinCityAssassin
Member
I mean I can continue espousing the same points I've been giving because I've played 10 hours into the game already but who gives a shit you saw the video, the fact that it drops at all proves reviewer experiences are meaningless and almost everyone is being paid and no one mentions framerates. It basically drops to 20 and stays there for all you assume.