Attack on Titan 2 dev says Switch visuals more comparable to the first game's PS3 version - Nintendo Everything

Submit a news tip



Attack on Titan 2 dev says Switch visuals more comparable to the first game’s PS3 version

Posted on November 12, 2017 by (@NE_Brian) in News, Switch

At Paris Games Week, Koei Tecmo president / COO Hisashi Koinuma as well as Omega Force manager Hideo Suzuki were on hand to show off Attack on Titan 2. The two also commented specifically on the Switch version.

Koinuma noted that, as an anime game, they wanted Attack on Titan 2 to connect with as many fans as possible. Koei Tecmo looked into the platforms on the market that were available within the target audience and made an effort to reach the broadest userbase they could. This is how Koei Tecmo ultimately decided on the platforms for Attack on Titan 2, which includes Switch.

Attack on Titan 2 is already running on Switch. In terms of what we can expect from the graphics on Nintendo’s console, Suzuki said it’s “more comparable to the PS3 version” of the original Attack on Titan.

Before you get concerned, Suzuki wasn’t exactly saying that Attack on Titan 2 for Switch will look exactly the same as the original did on the PS3. After all, they’re different games on different consoles. It seems Suzuki said what he did in order to give fans some sort of idea about the fidelity of the visuals on Switch.

Source

Leave a Reply

  • amak11

    It still looks pretty good on PS3… At least the Switch should be able to output it at 1080p… PS3 barely did anything at 720p

  • ShadowX

    source: “In order to get a better sense of what the Switch port will look like (since no footage has been shown so far), we asked whether it’ll be closer to the PS4 version or the PS Vita version visually. In response, we received a curveball from Suzuki-san, who explained that the game on Nintendo Switch is “more comparable to the PS3 version” of the original Attack on Titan.”

    • MoYeung

      That’s why they decided on PS4, Xbox One, Steam, and Switch (and PS Vita only for Japan).

  • Pepperkeet

    Basically what FIFA 18 is… a ps3 port
    Didn’t work out too well for them now did it…

    • KnickKnackMyWack

      To be fair, EA is a skeevy publisher. I’m curious to see what a more self-respecting developer might do with such limitations.

    • Paddy Alfan

      It s doing much better than nba2k18

      • Vive

        no.

        NBA2K18 didn’t have a great start but they are fixing all the bugs, and the game is the same as the other versions.

    • Padre

      But the game is really good, and it looks better than PS3 version still.

    • Jaxon Holden

      I know it’s popular to bash FIFA 18, but I actually bought and played it, and it put the PS3 version to shame. Full 1080p/60fps, better visuals and lighting, FUT and Women’s League, single Joycon multiplayer… in no way was the game “PS3 level”. More like FIFA 16 PS4 level.

      But keep in mind, Switch is portable. It’s just as comparable to a PS3 as it is a PS4. So having games similar to PS3 versions should not surprise anyone. Even a straight PS3 game on a handheld is crazy impressive.

    • Tide

      Im pretty sure graphics wasnt that problem with FIFA 18 on Switch, Almost certain ppl were upset about the cut content and sloppy multiplayer.

  • MoYeung

    I said it before… PS3 quality mobile tablet is Nintendo Switch.

    • zelgadis greywords

      the switch is more powerfull than the wiiu and that console was already more powerfull than the ps3. If a game is equivalent of a ps3 game then the fault is for the developers

      • BSWISR

        Let’s not be delusional. The Wii U wasn’t that much more powerful than the PS3 and the Switch has to support portable mode which is basically Wii U mode.

        The Wii U’s CPU was clocked 2Ghz less than the PS3, the GPU was marginal better and it had a little bit more RAM (1GB for games vs 256/256MB split for PS3) and the Switch’s GPU in portable mode is only like 180-200Gflops, pretty much a Wii U/PS3.

        The Switch is more modern, GPU is better when docked and it has more RAM but we can’t ignore that portable mode demands sacrifices. For example, DOOM goes as low as 360p in some scenarios. Still amazing that it runs, its not much more powerful than Wii U undocked.

        • Nhat Anh Hoang

          1 Tegra Gflops = 30% 1 ARM Gflops

  • Tlink7

    The Switch is much more powerful than the PS3, so if the Switch version looks like PS3 one, that’s on the devs, not on the machine

  • Locky Mavo

    Better have a decent framerate then.

  • nemo37

    It is an understandable statement. The Switch in portable mode (which is the minimum spec most devs have to start developing at) has raw compute power comperable to the PS3 albeit on much more modern hardware similar to PS4 (it has much newer compute units on the GPU, a newer processor architecture). In docked mode it is about 3X faster than PS3 in terms of raw compute power, but it is still closer to PS3 than PS4 but again it has much more modern hardware comparable PS4.

    Whether a games ends up looking more like a PS4 or PS3 games will really depend on the game and what the developer is trying to accomplish. The NBA 2K18 versus FIFA 18 situation is pretty much a good example to look at. NBA 2K18 placed a greater emphasis on visual fidelity but at the cost of performance (so they brought over the XONE/PS4 version with a few graphical compromises and running at half the frame rate but visually the game is closer to the XONE and PS4). FIFA 18 placed a greater emphasis on performance over visual fidelity (so they brought over the X360/PS3 version running at a higher resolution and higher frame rate and making some use of newer graphical effects on Switch).

    • Joao Batista

      The Switch does not have the same computing power as the PS3, it is more powerful, the Wii U itself was more powerful than the PS3, and the Switch is 2x or 3x more powerful than the Wii U. Dev is doing it because it wants do so, not by the power of the console and is not the first time that dev does this, creates the same game for the PS4 version and Switch and leaves the lower Switch version as with DQH 1 & 2 (I smell Sony’s finger on that in wanting ridicule the Switch). We have as example Doom that shows how the Switch can behave very well. PS3 could never run Doom, we have as example the Doom 3 that came out horrible on PS3. And you dare say that the Switch has the same computational power as PS3? You need to study some more mate.

      • Gamingfan

        this may be the most confusing comment I have ever read.

      • nemo37

        By compute power I am referring specially to the compute performance of the GPU, which is calculated in GFLOPS (floating point operations). PS3 exhibits 228 GFLOPS, Switch (undocked) is 157 GFLOPS, and Wii U is 176 GFLOPS, and Switch (docked) is 393. Despite the lower theoretical performance for Switch versus PS3 and Wii U while undocked, there is no doubt in my mind that Switch can perform better in real life because of a much less limiting architecture (For example memory bandwidth is much higher than PS3 and Wii U, GPU is more modern and flexible, and CPU as well which is important for integer and some SIMD operations that have not been relegated to GPU is also better than both Wii U and PS3) but in terms of compute it is still closer to PS3 and Wii U particularly when undocked; but even when docked it is closer to PS3 and Wii U (albeit above them) than PS4 and XONE (both of which are around 1840 GFLOPS and 1311 GFLOPS respectively). Now compute is not everything, as the overall architecture for Switch is much more modern (much more so than PS3 and Wii U, and even slightly more modern than PS4 and XONE). But the point in my comment remains, compute performance for Switch is similar to PS3 and even Wii U compared to PS4 and XONE, in terms of graphical functionality it is closer to PS4 and XONE.

        You are correct BTW that PS3 cannot run the new Doom game or anything IDTech 6 related, because those games use newer features (newer shader model, etc) not available on PS3 but available on Switch, PS4, and XONE. However, graphical functionality is not the same as compute performance. I can take a card (or more realistically a cluster of cards) from 2009 that have compute performance similar to or more than what the PS4 and XONE have but will be unable to run many of the games made for those systems because the lack the necessary graphical features.

        • cendrizzi

          I know the focus is on gflops but the bifurcated and limited ram (512 with some used by the os vs 4gb and 1gb used by the switch os) ensures the gulf will be far more pronounced than what gflops says about the performance when comparing the two. Just worth mentioning.

    • Michael C

      NBA 2K was in no way close to the X1/PS4, dont let the camera angle and distance fool you…fps,resolution,effects….half the fps is actually huge.

      • nemo37

        It is close in that it is using the same engine and assets as the XONE and PS4 versions. The XONE version is also of lower quality when you compare it to the PS4 and PC versions, that does not mean it is totally different.

        How about you go back to spreading your lies and Xbox fanboyism on another site (it’s been a while since i’ve seen you on DualShockers claiming there is a pro Sony and Nintendo conspiracy in the media against Microsoft)

    • Nhat Anh Hoang

      1 Gflops Tegra is 30% faster than 1 Gflops ARM

  • Michael C

    The switch deniers will come out and justify the game being compared visually to a ps3 game…….just like they do with 30fps, washed out graphics, and all sacrifices made to put a game on the switch.
    No wonder games dont sell or chart unless they are nintendo games, or have nintendo characters attached.

    • Radish

      Feeling lonely lately?

      • Tlink7

        Just put that troll on ignore, he’s just a waste of your time

    • Flying Carpet

      calm down,I know your 4th xbox one x is broken yet again

    • Jaxon Holden

      Now you’re just being ignorant.

      Different consoles offer different experiences. And for 30 years handheld systems have not offered full parity with home consoles. Yet the best selling system of all the time was a handheld. People like playing games on the go. And people understand a handheld will not offer the same level of visual fidelity as a home console. But it doesn’t matter because they want to play video games anywhere.

      The vast majority of games are 30 frames per second. It’s never been a problem, it’s just been used as marketing fodder for the gullible (such as yourself). The problem is when games have bad frame pacing and dips below that. And in case you haven’t been keeping up with the news, practically every third-party game on switch has exceeded sales expectations. USFII over half a million sold, MHXX (a port of a 6 month old game which was already an expansion of a 2 year old game, on a system with just 2 million JP users) already reached 350,000 and that’s physical only. Marvelous happy with Fate Extella, Bandai Namco happy with DB Xenoverse 2 which at 400,000 has already exceeded X1 sales, KT happy with sales, TakeTwo happy with NBA 2K18 sales, indie games left and right outselling all other versions combined. And all of them ramping up Switch support.

      I suggest you grow up. Fanboy console war nonsense is for children.

      • Force

        And yet you’re the biggest fanboy around, Jaxon. The Switch is a hybrid, right? It should, by matter of the dock lending it’s power to the Switch, be better when docked, run better, look better, but it isn’t. Devs hardly optimize for docked gameplay, because it’s the mode that hardly matters.

        Nintendo has sold this as a home-console, and so people may criticize it as such, no matter what you or anyone else says on the matter.

    • nemo37

      LOL…talk about hypocrisy. You spent the past four years defending XONE getting inferior games, and that was a stationary system competing with another stationary system and PC. Now you rave and rant about how a portable system consuming 1/10th the power of its stationary counterparts does not offer the same performance as those systems.

  • Radish

    I don’t see how Hideo Suzuki saying this game is more like the PS3 version graphically is a good way of marketing it. Or maybe he realizes that most people don’t think graphics are the most important part of a game, given the success of Switch. In which case he didn’t have to say anything, especially this early on.

    • Jaxon Holden

      I don’t see the problem. The Switch is a portable system and is not, is NOT on par with a PS4. Why people keep expecting games to look like PS4 versions is beyond me.

      Think he’s just being realistic. This portable 8th gen system basically offers games a little beyond PS3. Either the same visuals but improved framerate and resolution, or improved visuals and the same framerate and resolution. Like LA Noire. Same visuals, but 1080p. On the flip side, it can offer PS4 versions of games with comparable visuals but lower framerate and res. Like RE Revelations 2. Same game graphically, still 1080p, but framerate cut in half to 30.

      That’s just the reality of technology and where we’re at today with portable gaming. It’s nice to see somebody be honest about it for a change instead of trying to sell pipe dreams to gamers. Cause Switch is no PS4. It’s just not.

      • Radish

        I understand your point and I fully agree with it. My only quibble is why bother advertising the graphics of the game if we know it’s not going to look the same? I understand why the people at Microsoft want to push Xbox One X as a graphical powerhouse and mention graphics in every game that comes to that platform. But since it isn’t a strength of the Switch, I find it odd to even mention it, especially from the company trying to sell the game. I think the portability and the convenience to use it however you’d like to is a much higher selling point from a marketing perspective for the Switch version.

        • Aline Piroutek

          Yeah, it’s pretty bad to advertisse the game like this.
          It is the same if Nintendo said the new Smash Bros. for Switch will be more like the 3DS version than the WiiU one.

      • Force

        “I don’t see the problem. The Switch is a portable system and is not, is NOT on par with a PS4. Why people keep expecting games to look like PS4 versions is beyond me.”

        Home-console. Switch is marketed as such, and so is the PS4/Xbox One. Stop being a D and accept that. If Nintendo marketed this as a handheld, sure. But they didn’t, and so comparisons are absolutely valid. Don’t try to put it in it’s own neat little corner.