Zelda: Breath of the Wild runs better on Switch than on Wii U, might output in 900p in docked mode
Faster load times, higher resolution, and better sound quality, according to producer Eiji Aonuma.
Long-time Zelda producer Eiji Aonuma told IGN that Breath of the Wild runs better on Nintendo Switch than on Wii U.
"I think I mentioned this during E3, but the gameplay is completely the same experience on Wii U and the Nintendo Switch," Aonuma said. "The game controls for the two are pretty much identical. However, when you play in TV mode, the resolution of the screen and the sound quality go up."
Despite a difference in resolution, Zelda: Breath of the Wild's framerate holds steady on both the Switch and Wii U. "When I said earlier that the gameplay and game experience is the same, I meant the framerate is the same as well," Aonuma went on.
Legendary designer Shigeru Miyamoto chimed in. "The world in Breath of the Wild is all seamless. There’s a lot of processing when [the game] needs to recreate the landscape, so that’s a little bit of challenge. But while you’re playing it there’s no difference whatsoever between the two."
When asked if Switch owners would see any other performance gains, Aonuma said that Zelda loads faster on Switch than on Wii U since data loads faster from game cards than optical media.
One particular of Zelda's performance on Switch has caused a good deal of chatter over the last two days. A report made by Switch showcase attendee Oscar Yasser—founder of press outlet Atomix and currently a "tech entrepreneur"—claims that a Nintendo rep told him during his hands-on Switch demo that Breath of the Wild outputs at 900p in TV (or "docked") mode.
Nintendo has confirmed that Zelda runs at 720p on Switch when played on the portable.
Yasser's report has been referenced by other outlets including IGN and Eurogamer. Nintendo has confirmed that Switch games running in docked mode can output at up to 1080p, leaving room for speculation that more resource-intensive titles might come in under the resolution ceiling.
Meanwhile, Eurogamer reported that a Nintendo rep told them that they're shooting to hit a steady 1080p/60fps on Breath of the Wild for Switch, although the outlet also alludes to Yasser's report.
Zelda will launch on March 3, day and date with the Switch. Assuming Yasser's report pans out, it's possible that Breath of the Wild does output at 900p right now, and that Nintendo is still nailing optimization, although it would be cutting things close given the logistics involved in pressing game cards and discs and packaging them in time to ship out for release.
-
Shacknews
replyDavid Craddock posted a new article, Zelda: Breath of the Wild runs better on Switch than on Wii U, might output in 900p in docked mode
-
Despite a difference in framerate, Zelda: Breath of the Wild's framerate holds steady on both the Switch and Wii U. "When I said earlier that the gameplay and game experience is the same, I meant the framerate is the same as well," Aonuma went on.
Wait, huh?-
That should say resolution. I'm pretty tired from the last two days of news! Should be fixed.
-
-
-
Curious why the audio would be different. Nvidia has built-in audio, does it? Why would there be a different? I assume it's a different mix rate, but I wouldn't think the processing difference would be that large to make a difference in power consumption.
I'm sure some YT blogers will give us the dets in 7 weeks.-
Probably stereo vs 5.1 output over HDMI??
-
-
-
-
It's not going to be 60fps. That has to be a typo. All consoles Zeldas since Ocarina of Time have been 30fps.
-
It's not a typo. Eurogamer said in their video that Nintendo wanted to hit 1080/60.
-
-
https://youtu.be/4liEfuFvIqE but followed up with Regarding the resolution, we were told the game will aim for 1080/60 in docked mode by one of the Nintendo reps at today's event, although reports suggest it might actually be 900/30. in the comments later
-
-
-
-
This is a pretty confusing article, David. Can somebody just make a summary table listing resolution and framerate for Wii U, Switch portable, and Switch docked? Or do we simply not know the real Wii U specs yet?
-
DF just put up a video/analysis thing and they say it's 720p and "almost" locked 30 fps in handheld mode, and 900p and "almost" locked 30 fps in docked mode. "Almost" apparently means one of their players saw one frame drop in ~20 minutes of playing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ktFlmH_0CI-
Yeah Giant Bomb said the demo was ”pretty framey" at times. And the trailer they showed reflected that. Since they need to be gold pretty soon for physical copies I'm very curious to see how this turns out.
-
If you watch the DF video they explain it well, the drops seem to only rarely happen. It is noticeable but the game is overall pretty smooth, not pretty framey.
Granted they could be worse or better in the final game, they were limited in the demo where you could go and stuff like that.
-
-
-
-
tldr: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cJXpZLLebLg
wiiu looked pretty meh during the wake up sequence but the outside shots were fine. -
Zelda's resolution has been confirmed (see posts below), but I was just going to say that this topic is inherently confusing because resolution and frame rate seem to fluctuate--not only between docked and portable modes, but game to game.
Switch renders at up to 1080p when docked, 720p in portable mode. Mario Kart 8 Deluxe runs at 1080p/60 docked (confirmed by Nintendo), whereas Zelda apparently caps at 900p when docked. But that could change since there's still a short window of time to optimize the game before release.-
Er, see posts above, I mean. Man I am tired and sore today.
-
Mario Kart looked so smooth in the footage
-
Mario Kart DX is one example of a Switch title that will run at 1080/60. That's direct info from Nintendo. It will remain at 60fps foe up to players; at three or more the frame rate drops to 30 but holds steady.
-
-
-
I don't care. It is fun and I wish I was playing it right now.
-
Agreed!
-
[deleted]
-
Agreed. Caring about hardware specs with a Nintendo system is pointless.
-
I think touting console hardware specs is laughable in general because PC master race and whatnot. At least Nintendo is not afraid to do something different.
-
-
It's not really what I want, though. I already have a PC that beats everything else. Nintendo offers something different.
In the prior generation, I had every system. PS3, 360, Wii and then Wii U.
Neither the PS4 or Xbone have anything compelling when my PC can game like it does.
Nintendo offers something else.-
-
-
-
1) They could have thought better than to try to Frankenstein their handheld and home lines into one, resulting in a new system for $200.
2) They could have cut out all the useless tech inside the joycons and resulted in a system for $200.
3) They could deliver a *competitive* console and put it out at whatever price point they so choose.
---
Several options, none of which were "put out the worst of both worlds and price it too high to gain traction"
-
-
-
-
-
You really want to be in Microsoft's corner when it comes to hardware? Okay.
Sony makes fine products from time to time and the PS4 had been a solid one, but it is just silly to act like these things are better than the average Shacker's PC.
Nintendo has had quite a bit of work experience when it comes to making successful handhelds, with 3DS selling 60 million units as a recent example.
I am not here to argue, but man you are touting Microsoft hardware. LOL. The Xbox One S exists because they failed to do exactly what you said. They didn't deliver what people wanted with the original Xbox One.-
-
There are more than 60 Shackers? Woo hoo!
-
-
-
-
Nah, let's act like consoles are cutting edge...
-
There are 60 million Xbones and ps4's out there. That's just about the same as conan's number of Windows 10 users. And I'd be skeptical that all those windows 10 users have graphics cards equivalent to this console generation.
Furthermore, don't think I ever claimed either the ps4 or Xbone was "cutting edge" or anything of the sort (please fact check me if you want). First of all, those are what, four year old systems? The next iteration of both systems certainly approaches "cutting edge," but I'm a PC master race guy myself so it's not like I'm naive here.
In any case, the Switch is waaaay behind, and that's what we're talking about here. Briefcase you and I both agree the thing is overpriced. I just happen to believe the problems run deeper than that.-
-
-
"There are 60 million Xbones and ps4's out there."
So the solution for Nintendo is to release a third shitty PC into a market that is already saturated, all while tossing away a handheld market that they dominate? That makes no sense.
And before people throw out iPhones and Android phones as a counterpoint, the best selling game of the holidays and the fastest in Nintendo's history was on their handheld. I keep saying this but not addressing such an important part of their audience is bonkers.-
Whether it's saturated or not is a matter of pure speculation. Put out something that makes people go wow, and I think Nintendo could sell 30 or 40 million units. Maybe not enough to beat Sony *this* generation, but enough to start solidifying third party relationships and a larger, devoted fan base.
The Wii u sold, what? 15 million. I could see the switch selling 20 or 25, but that's of course cannibalizing any current or future mobile console sales they might have had.
And to consolidate with a post of yours below: I don't think Nintendo considers going head to head with Sony "playing it safe." I think they are desperate for a hit and if they could just play it safe they would. I believe they *don't* think they can compete with Sony (and MS) and so they keep trying to attack the problem from the side. Why they have so little confidence in themselves in a head-to-head fight is strange, but it's a peculiar characteristic and I think speaks to the leadership problems inside the company.-
Again, you are missing the reasons and potential for the device. Consolidating development teams on one platform instead of two means that past software release droughts on one system or the others are gone because everyone is targeting one machine.
More importantly, an inexpensive hybrid also makes it so that it is supported by Nintendo's massive handheld audience. Whenever Pokemon comes out it will almost certainly be accompanied by either a price drop or a stripped down package. Either way, their handheld audience is on lockdown and not addressing it doesn't even seem like its a choice.
"Why they have so little confidence in themselves in a head-to-head fight is strange"
Nobody wins or disrupts a market by taking on the market leader head-to-head. Apple didn't become the most valuable computer company in the world by trying to win the desktop. -
its gonna sell at least 50 million in its lifetime. those portable kids eat up monster hunter and pokemon
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
I am completely agnostic when it comes to Microsoft's hardware decisions. I've never owned a MS console (nor a Sony, for that matter). However, I do think that those two companies know what they're doing in the console space a whole lot better than Nintendo does.
I'm a lifelong Nintendo devotee, but my lover jilted with me with the Wii and has doubled (and now tripled) down on it since.-
The Wii U was partially a pivot back to core gaming from the Wii with games like SM3DW, Splatoon, Donkey Kong Country Tropical Freeze, Bayonetta 2, and Xenoblade Chronicles X. The Switch is going farther with the first sandbox Mario game in fifteen years.
Comparing their systems with the Wii when the main franchise games have gotten more focused and more hardcore makes zero sense, especially if you don't have a PlayStation or Xbox.
Until this point I figured you were a PlayStation or Xbox only dude. Not having a PC and being able to afford only one console is literally the only legit excuse for your argument. The games aren't the problem, not with the path they've taken in the last five years.-
Serp, the games on the Wii u were stellar from everything I've heard, you're exactly right.
But the thing was a dud from the presentation. Everyone knew that tablet/controller was a bad decision. And it meant the Wii u was $100 overpriced and dead before it arrived. They're walking down the same path again...
Real innovation? Bring it. I'd pay $1000 for a bleeding edge Nintendo VR console. Reheated motion gimmicks that were played out 8 years ago? Don't try to sell me that. I don't love Mario that much.
-
-
-
-
"Why have two shitty PCs on the market when we can have three?"
The idea that MIcrosoft is all companies is innovative in the console arena is ridiculous. The only innovative thing they're doing right now is rolling Windows 10 into their publishing business. Too bad they cancel anything not Gears or Halo.
Sony got to the position they're in is by playing things absolutely safe. I can't fault them though, they've executed well and even after lots of scaling back and layoffs they still have a few studios doing interesting work.
Comparing the bold moves, risks, and true innovation of Nintendo against those other companies makes no sense. If you want to say that they play things very safe and expected, sure, absolutely.-
Remember when Xbox One took over the living room with the power of Television? Such innovative! Very Courage!
-
-
I am not saying you said that. I am making fun of Microsoft. Kinda my M O. I am gonna go to bed now. My eyeballs are throbbing and I am coughing up some yellow stuff.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Ahh the 900p generation.
Looks fine on my 1080 TV, but when I hook 900p games up to my monitor and play closer, it is really obvious it isn't native 1080p -
-
They could make the carts at the current(ish) specification, and then have patch for a optimizations later.
-
That's true. That might have to be their plan at this point. Launch is 6-7 weeks out; they've gotta be close to hitting certification.
-
-
