Obviously we don't know how the final game will look, but this should give a pretty good idea. I mean, Doom is releasing this year, after all!
Looks like there's some loss to texture detail. The PS4 game clocks in at 43 GB+, so it's not a surprising place to cut back.
Isn't that because the PS4 version also includes the multiplayer on disc? The Switch version will have MP as a free optional download.
Saw that story below. I could still see the single player adding up to over 32 GB, which would mean stepping to a bigger Switch card size than 32 GB.
I'll be interested to see Switch game sizes compared to PS4/XBO since leaving assets uncompressed is running rampant on those platforms.
Although I can't forgive developers for forcing us to download extra data because they are too cheap to spring for a 32gb game card, it's definitely understandable in cases like this.
I'm double dipping on Doom so I can have it on Switch. Totally my 2016 GOTY... loads of replay value. If the loss of visual fidelity isn't so bad, I might just wait and go for the Switch version of Wolfenstein 2 as well.
Can't say about detail quality since those are youtube screenshots, but the ps4 has definitely better lighting
I prefer playing on the go than a few better effects/textures.
Anyway, the point is: the Switch can handle PS4-One level games. Doom and Wolfenstein 2 are proof that some 3rd parties just don't WANT to work with Nintendo. It's not a hardware issue. Now I'm laughing about EA's vague excuses about their FIFA title for the Switch.
My understanding was EAs frostbite engine was too much for the switch to handle without major modifications. And these games... Doom, and wolfenstien, i assume use unreal engine 4 which is easily available for all major consoles rn.
I imagine EA did a decent job bringing FIFA over to the switch, in a short amount of time. We will see if they customize that frostbite engine to play on the switch later if the switch version sells well.
They use an engine created by ID Software called ID Tech 6 (their own engine). This engine supports Open GL and Vulkan if I'm not mistaken, so probably they took the Vulkan route with the switch.
Either way, whatever engine they're using, they're porting the game and they're also bringing a new game to switch, so this only shows that the switch can run whatever games are out there (these titles are really demanding, graphically), developers just have to modify their engines to support the swtich and scale their titles. This only shows that EA doesn't want to put games on Switch with their wait and see approach, as well as other major developers. Bethesda hasn't even seen a single sale (Skyrim isn't even out), and they are already announcing these two great games for the console.
The graphical downgrade is not surprising! I wouldn't be surprised if it was 720p on TV too!
I'm just amazed how well the engine scales.
While it's impressive how well the engine scales, with the Switch version looking almost as good as the PS4 if these are any indication... I don't think I could bring myself to play this with analog sticks.
Unless of course they actually implement a proper wiimote-style motion control scheme... then I would be ecstatic. But of course they won't, good FPS controls on consoles died with the Wii.