Fans have taken to the likes of X (formerly Twitter) and TikTok to question NetherRealm’s decision to market Mortal Kombat 1 as a $70 Switch release. It has been called “robbery” and “disrespectful” to users.

  • @SnowdenHeroOfOurTime@unilem.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    -8
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I am just annoyed when people say the switch hardware is shit. It’s not shit, it’s just a completely different approach, that’s all. Also it’s annoying you’re using one of the shittiest ports ever to push this idea. They could have built this game from the ground up for switch and had something that looked and ran good. But that wasn’t their plan. The plan was a half assed port.

    • conciselyverbose
      link
      fedilink
      13
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      But it actually is obscenely underpowered, even for mobile, and the CPU is a massive limitation that keeps the vast majority of last gen games from being possible.

      It changed the space by showing low end open world games on handheld were possible, but it hit its ceiling extremely quickly. There’s a reason most AAA games didn’t support it, and it’s because it isn’t capable.

      • Who knew?
        link
        fedilink
        English
        71 year ago

        Yeah I am a switch owner and also play on my Mac and on Windows with virtual machines, and the majority of switch ports are just garbage and should not have been released. I paid for the outer worlds on switch and it was awful, just a loading screen simulator.

      • @ZOSTED@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -11 year ago

        I have a PC, PS5, and Switch, and never felt like the Switch was underpowered. Samewise, my phone doesn’t feel underpowered compared to my laptop, because I recognise they’re completely different devices.

        You don’t get a Switch to play the latest God of War, you get it to play Mario and Zelda games, and cute lo-fi indie games

      • @SnowdenHeroOfOurTime@unilem.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -3
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Yes in a world that expects hardware to always get better and software to always be written sloppily and/or assuming those constant improvements I guess it makes sense to be angry at one of the greatest game consoles ever created

        Remember when games used a few KB of memory and they did smart things to make that work? No you probably don’t because you’d be angered by that hardware’s existence

        • @clanginator@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          11
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Right which is why first-party titles, which are built for the stupidly underpowered hardware found in a switch, run and look pretty damn good for the hardware inside. They are building the entire game around a singular shitty-ass chip. It can be optimized perfectly for just that.

          But a developer creating a game for PC, Xbox, Playstation, potentially other platforms, AND Switch isn’t going to change the design of the entire game to accommodate the Switch’s dinky-ass hardware.

          And yes old consoles and games used clever tricks to run well on slower hardware and it was amazing. But I guarantee that every single title you could think of as an example was either a first-party title, or in the case of something like Crash Bandicoot, was exclusive to that console.

          You’re delusional if you think that third-party devs should be able to meet Nintendo’s level of polish on their console while creating graphically demanding games for current gen.

          And yes it makes sense to be angry at “one of the greatest game consoles ever made” (okay fanboy) when that console was underpowered when it launched 6 years ago, has TERRIBLE controllers (joy cons are literally the least enjoyable controllers I’ve used, ever, and have serious drift issues), and has held back game development and caused headaches like the situation at hand for devs - they’re essentially in a no-win situation here.

        • conciselyverbose
          link
          fedilink
          11 year ago

          Who’s angry? It’s not game developer’s fault that it has 10% of the power needed to run a modern game.

          There is no amount of optimization that could make most modern games run on the switch. It has nothing to do with laziness. If you were a first party making games built from the ground up to be comparable to other modern games, it could not be done.

          There’s a reason Nintendo leans hard into simple physics and extremely arcade style sports games, and it’s not just to be more accessible to casual fans. It’s because it’s literally all the hardware can do.

          • @Mr_Dr_Oink@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            11 year ago

            Yeah, the physics on botw and totk are so simple. It hurts my brain how basic those games are.

            Two of the highest rated games of all time.

            On switch

            The most underpowered console of our generation.

            But yeah mortal kombat couldn’t make the game look even slightly better because it can only be as good at totk. That really basic shitty looking extremely popular and highly rated game.

            • @clanginator@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              4
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Yeah, the physics on botw and totk are so simple. It hurts my brain how basic those games are.

              Half Life 2 had physics like that 20 years ago.

              Also totk is a stuttering mess when anything sufficiently complex happens unless you overclock the switch, which just proves the point of how underpowered the switch is.

              Also also, art style CARRIES those games’ graphics. Running those games at higher res (or just on a TV) really shows the constraints they had to work within to get the games to run.

              Two of the highest rated games of all time.

              Yeah, and I’m sure the loyal Zelda/Nintendo fanboys have nothing to do with that.

              Don’t get me wrong, they’re fantastic games, but I don’t think they’d be nearly as popular/well-received if they weren’t Zelda titles.

              If you need an example in the opposite direction, I don’t even need to look up which Pokemon game it was that looked like dogshit on the switch bc you know exactly what I’m talking about.

              • @Mr_Dr_Oink@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                01 year ago

                Your claim about half life 2 is bold and would need backing up. Im not going to just accept your assertion without proof. That’s not how this works.

                Totk has some frame rate issues here and there, but when you give playes the power to do whatever they want with a set of tools, you will always overload a game engine. Name any sandbox game that players haven’t been able to overload and cause frame rate drops.

                Also, there are AAA games that struggle with frame rate drops on PC, PS5, and Xbox series X. Which i guess just proves the point of how underpowered those are… obviously, the switch is the lower end of these. Im not deluded. But claiming some stuttering in totk when players have set up chaos means it proves the switch is underpowered is just incorrect. Any game that gives you a set of tools and the instructions ,“go” stutters when there’s too much going on.

                The switch is 6 years old, im not suprisdd its showing its age now. I am suprised its remained relevant and has games that are rated to highly.

                So art style carries the games? So what? Isn’t that just ingenuity? And dorsnt it prove the .ain point of this thread? That Mortal Kombat could have looked good with a tweaked art style for switch but was just a bad port? If the product looks bad on the switch, then dont release it on Switch, i guess.

                Ok, but if there are zelda/nintendo fan boys it follows that nintendo are consistently making great games and that zelda games are consistently great… you dont keep enough people gushing over your games by releasing trash game after trash game. Also fan boys wouldnt be enough alone to get a game that highly rated. Remeber that this game only released on switch, meaning it didnt have all the pa5 and xbox owners to help boost its numbers.

                So whilst im sure the fanboys had something to do with it, its likely that the fact that the game is good played a kuch bigger part.

                People bought a switch when these games came out just because they saw how good they were and wanted to play…

                Sorry i think i know what you mean but i dont play the pokemon games. Is it the one with the shit textures, was it online like an mmo, i seem to recall one like that. Didnt interest me because it looked shit compared to so many other games ive played on switch.

                • @clanginator@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  21 year ago

                  lmfao have you never heard of the source engine? Garry’s mod? HL2 was just the first game running Source that really showed some of the physics and creativity off.

                  While the physics on totk are cool, and the crafting system is impressive, especially for the hardware it’s running on, nothing it does is exactly revolutionary. Plenty of games have been doing similar stuff for a very long time, on much older hardware.

                  Not exactly the same, and they certainly deserve credit bc what totk has is impressive, but acting like totk was some revolution in videogame physic and one of the best games ever is a bit of a stretch IMO. It’s a fun, well-made, complete open-world game, that builds on the previous title’s map.

                  Also, there are AAA games that struggle with frame rate drops on PC, PS5, and Xbox series X

                  Yeah but their stuttering is dropping from 60FPS to 50FPS, or 180FPS to 100FPS, and because they’ve got actually capable hardware, they also support freesync, which greatly reduces how jarring FPS drops feel.

                  But claiming some stuttering in totk when players have set up chaos means it proves the switch is underpowered is just incorrect

                  Any game that can barely run at 30FPS (totk relies heavily on dynamic resolution scaling in denser areas, even without player contraptions) and drops to 20FPS when loaded with stuff built in game is a stuttering mess. Be it on PC, Xbox or Switch. Switch doesn’t get a break on a game being a stuttering mess because it’s weak.

                  That’s literally the whole reason ppl are criticizing the switch. It makes games like totk a stuttering mess, instead of allowing people to enjoy incredible games like that at a nice smooth 60 or 90FPS

                  My two-year-old phone can run games at beyond 1440P, 120FPS, with better graphics than a Switch.

                  Any game that gives you a set of tools and the instructions ,“go” stutters when there’s too much going on.

                  Yes every game is gonna have a limit to the physics it can crunch. TOTK’s limit before stuttering is pretty damn small, relatively speaking.

                  And dorsnt it prove the .ain point of this thread? That Mortal Kombat could have looked good with a tweaked art style for switch but was just a bad port?

                  No. Because that would have required the devs to literally create new textures for every single asset in the game, with new art style, which especially in a game that people are often very competitive in can cause massive headaches for the devs.

                  Ok, but if there are zelda/nintendo fan boys it follows that nintendo are consistently making great games

                  Andrew Tate is a good person bc he has a lot of fanboys, right? If that logic doesn’t follow, why would it follow for videogames? Fanboys are known for irrational support, not rational criticism.

                  fan boys wouldnt be enough alone to get a game that highly rated.

                  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_review-bombing_incidents

                  Remeber that this game only released on switch, meaning it didnt have all the pa5 and xbox owners to help boost its numbers.

                  Wow, REALLY?? Nintendo didn’t release Zelda on Xbox??? 🤪

                  So whilst im sure the fanboys had something to do with it, its likely that the fact that the game is good played a kuch bigger part.

                  I never said it wasn’t a good game. It’s a great game. Not my speed, but it’s great. I don’t think it’s anywhere close to top 10 tho, and the only reason it’s even in that discussion is because of fanboys who are okay with Zelda becoming just another open-world RPG with towers to climb and now crafting shit.

                  Is it the one with the shit textures

                  Yep, that’s the one.

            • conciselyverbose
              link
              fedilink
              1
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              They chose that hardware because Nvidia was offloading it dirt cheap, so they could make big margins on it.

              That’s the entire reason. There is no other. It’s certainly not that it’s capable of modern gaming, because it isn’t.

              • @SnowdenHeroOfOurTime@unilem.org
                link
                fedilink
                English
                01 year ago

                Who’s angry?

                Your moronic ass obviously is

                There’s a reason Nintendo leans hard into simple physics and extremely arcade style sports games, and it’s not just to be more accessible to casual fans. It’s because it’s literally all the hardware can do.

                Yeah when they chose the type of games they’d be known for in the 80’s, it sure was specifically because their crystal ball told them:

                They chose that hardware because Nvidia was offloading it dirt cheap, so they could make big margins on it.

                You’re too stupid to spend another moment on

                • @clanginator@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  21 year ago

                  Yeah when they chose the type of games they’d be known for in the 80’s, it sure was specifically because their crystal ball told them

                  Nintendo’s shift towards simpler games has absolutely coincided with their consoles being less powerful than the competition. And since we’re name-calling like children (bc some of us are fanboys who can’t accept valid criticism)… this has been apparent for the last 20 years, and I made the observation as a child during the Wii era, numbskull!

                  Nintendo is currently not known for their 80s catalog of titles beyond generally being associated with Mario and Co. - they are known for the games and systems that most people grew up with - and statistically, that’s overwhelmingly Wii/DS and newer.

                  During which time their hardware has consistently lagged behind other systems, and rather than focus on graphics, like Nintendo once did - when they were pushing the hardware envelope - with titles like Super Mario 64, Nintendo has shifted focus and decided to use commodity hardware for their consoles.

                  Now, as a shift in strategy, I’m not saying it’s necessarily wrong, but don’t try and deny what’s going on.

                  They absolutely chose the hardware for the switch because it was cheap. There isn’t anything particularly special about that Nvidia chip, it had been commercially available for two years by the time the switch came out, so yes it’s reasonable to assume Nvidia was offloading it cheaply.

                  Use your brain and maybe put away the Nintendo kneepads.