I'm looking at a comparison video of this supposedly "dissapointing port", all the comments are bashing it for being "shameful" and "embarrassing", I'm looking at this on a big screen and there is BARELY a difference. Like… I guess in some shots there's a bit less shadows or detail? The hair is worse. In most of these shots though it's nearly identical. Yet it's a higher resolution and more consistent framerate (the 8th gen consoles don't even hold 60 very well in this game, the Xbox One targeted 30 originally even).
Meanwhile, I look at a PS3 vs PS4 comparison, and I do think there's a bigger difference, though… Honestly still not night and day, this is still a 7th gen game at heart.
And here's the thing. Yes this does technically look a bit worse on Switch 2, I can see this. I absolutely do belihleve they ported this down to Switch 1 and then back up to 2. I am not condoning this practice. I know the Switch 2 is stronger than the 8th gen consoles and should be outdoing them. But people are acting like this is some ugly, barely functioning port or something, when this is still how the game was originally designed at the end of the day. Looking at it by itself (and I booted it up and played some to see firsthand) I find this to be a very nice looking game, and the resolution is crisp and it runs flawlessly (things I, again, can't claim about the 8th gen versions either). Maybe it could've been a bit better, but with how it currently looks and runs, I sure as hell would never noticed there was anything wrong while actually playing this.
by skeltord