Wolfenstein 2 Deserves Better Than the Nintendo Switch’s Weak Hardware

Gadgets 360 says: " However, it also brings to light one of Nintendo’s core failings with the Switch — it’s simply too underpowered to run newer AAA games. Unlike Sony’s and Microsoft’s consoles that run on AMD hardware, Nintendo opted to go for an Nvidia Tegra X1 chip whose performance is comparable to the PS3 and Xbox 360, which were cutting edge more than a decade ago. Throw in storage restrictions of the cartridge format and an online infrastructure that’s far behind what the competition have to offer, and Wolfenstein 2 on the Switch feels like it’s being held back by Nintendo’s technical choices."

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
Neonridr932d ago

holy geez.. this sounds like it is coming from a real salty fanboy who is upset that Nintendo got this game in the first place. Who the hell cares? Let Switch owners enjoy this game. The whole thing is there. The fact that it runs and looks quite decent shows you how far we have come with tech.

Do you think when games released on the Gameboy or DS people complained and said that the handhelds shouldn't have the games because they don't look as good or were stripped down versions? And those games were huge downgrades from the console brethren. Here you have a game that looks good and has all the content from the other bigger boxes, yet you can take it wherever you want. To me that is a godsend. If I purchase it for my PS4 I am doing it so I can enjoy it on my 4K TV or play with my friends. If I purchase it for my Switch it's so I can take it with me and play wherever I want (including my TV if I wish). Sure it won't look as good, but do you think I really care about the tiniest of details when I am looking at a 5.5" screen? I'm playing Wolfenstein on the go here!

ShottyatLaw932d ago

I'm about 80% in agreement with you, and the author does come across as a bit salty, but there's some fair points made here.

I want every game on the Switch because of portability. It is fantastic, but the limitations are there. Personally, I would be more excited if 3rd party focused on porting last-gen stuff. For example, Fallout 3 & New Vegas would be great on Switch.

I do agree with the author on some issues, though. Portability does not make up for releasing 9 months later, with none of the dlc, lower graphics, and at a $60 price tag.

I'm glad it's on the Switch, and Switch only players get a great addition to the library. Something has to give, however, for the rest of us who have the option of grabbing the same game at a better price and with better performance.

Neonridr932d ago (Edited 932d ago )

that's the point, the Switch is not worse off having this title. There are plenty of one console owners on this site, not everyone is as keen or has the capacity to own multiple hardware, so playing this game on a PS4/XB1/PC might not be an option for many.

ShottyatLaw932d ago

But is this situation what we should encourage? Games releasing later, with lower performance, no extra content, and a full price tag?

If it released same day at the same price, I'd say, OK. If it comes later, at a reduced price or with extra content, I would say OK. But to me, this is sort of taking advantage of the Switch only players, while not enticing multiplatform owners to buy it on Switch.

Granted, that is well beyond the click bait in this article, but that is a small issue within the article that I think is worth discussing IMO.

Shiken932d ago (Edited 932d ago )

I am heavily debating getting it on my pro, or getting it on my Switch for portability...cannot make up my mind.

With that in mind, if the game can run, why shouldn't it come to Switch? There is no reason for a game not to other than fanboys of other consoles wanting to see the Switch get less 3rd party support than it already is.

Whatever, while they whine, I play games. Whatever makes them happy I guess.

mikeslemonade932d ago

yep the switch doesn't deserve this game. Stick to nintendo first party games.

wonderfulmonkeyman931d ago

Expecting better graphics when the system, and thus the tech, is much smaller, is a bit of an unfair expectation.

ShottyatLaw931d ago (Edited 931d ago )

I don't think anyone expects better performance from these 3rd party games (not referring to you WWE2k18), but Switch owners shouldn't get the shaft on other features.

I don't think it's excusable to ignore that this game released months later, without the dlc, and at a full price. I have the same issue with timed exclusives on PS, XB, or PC doing the same thing.

Add in the performance hit, and I don't think praise should be thrown at these companies just for getting a game running on Switch. I would hope that Switch gamers would demand better treatment than: "oh well, at least it was ported."

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 931d ago
paintedgamer1984932d ago (Edited 932d ago )

Its clearly an issue when on the hardest mode running and gunning it dips below 480p very frequently all the while not keeping a solid 30 fps. How is it the ps3 from 2006 ran games in mostly a locked 720p 30... and if there was a hitch it wasnt as blatant as in this game very similiar to when your wifi goes out on netflix. I guess we will blame the devs


Ok... a game by 2006 hardware standards runs better at 720 30 than a game in 2018... why cant a game in 2018 on switch run at 720 30 12 years later? We are talking 2018 standards...

Shiken932d ago

One the game runs at a pretty solid 30fps.

Two, games on the PS360 were not as graphically advanced nor did they use the same caliber of special effects. This is why all ports of previous gen games run and look better on Switch. Stop reaching, it is pathetic.

Shiken932d ago

2018 standards? Sure, how me the other fully portable version of a current gen console game. Show me how much better the graphics are and show me how far behind it Switch is.

It's ok...I will wait

932d ago
Neonridr932d ago

this is a handheld that is 1/20th the size of the PS4. And here you are, griping about performance. Show me your 480p analysis you did to back up your claims. Also PS3 games @ 720 were far less detailed and involved than games of nowadays.

deafdani932d ago

Last I checked, Wolfenstein II isn't on the PS3. Where are you drawing your comparisons from?

And lol at your resolution claims. Many PS3 and Xbox 360 games were sub-720p. And very few of them attained a locked 30fps frame rate, let alone 60 fps.

The Switch absolutelyoutperforms the PS3 on a technical level, and it's maybe 1/8th of its size.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 932d ago
cyber_daemonx931d ago

Ah so its a handheld now. Though it was supposed to be a hybrid or home console that happens to be portable. Seems to change based on the agenda of its fanbase.

wonderfulmonkeyman931d ago

No, it IS a hybrid.
A SMALL hybrid.
There's no agenda change other than the flip-flopping the haters do to criticize its tech aspects in relation to consoles twice its size, but when PC comes up to shine a glaring light on their elitist standards they all tuck tail and run.

DeadSilence932d ago

The fact it runs on Switch is a miracle, if you don't like the compromises don't play it.

2pacalypsenow932d ago

Miracle? it's 2018 technology has advanced...

madforaday932d ago

Exactly! Now you can play Wolfenstein 2 where ever you want! The power of technology!

LucasRuinedChildhood932d ago

I wouldn't say that it's a miracle. The New Order ran alright on PS3 and the 360 after all.

OpenGL932d ago

It was 60fps unlike the New Colossus on the Switch. They should have ported that instead.

--Onilink--932d ago

PS3 and 360 dont run on 8watts

LucasRuinedChildhood932d ago

@--Onilink-- The Switch came out a whole decade after those platforms. I think we sometimes forgot how old they are due to their long lifespans.

StonieWylder932d ago

New order wasn't built with only one console generation in mind, W2 was built solely for next gen consoles which likely would not have ran at all on PS3/360 due to the underpowered hardware and severe lack of ram.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 932d ago
Muzikguy932d ago

I’m just now playing this game on PS4 and it’s pretty good. I can see why the Switch would have trouble.

932d ago
darthv72931d ago

I remember when people were saying the same about Doom 3 on the xbox. How it ran on only 64mb of shared memory and a 733 cpu was unheard of at the time. Fast forward nearly 20 years and we get a much more graphical demanding game that is running on a glorified tablet.

Creative minds find a way

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 931d ago
ninsigma932d ago

But it has better on pc, ps4 and xbox one, so I don't see the issue with it being on switch. The more the better!

wonderfulmonkeyman932d ago (Edited 932d ago )

It having higher resolution/framerate counterparts means those that don't like it on Switch have their own options.
Whining like an entitled brat about it being on a smaller system with naturally smaller hardware, as if it doesn't deserve to be "subjected" to the Switch, is really really sad.

Eidolon932d ago

I don't have a Switch, but my friend has one and Doom and says with the small screen, it actually looks really good, only issue is the joysticks for a really good FPS experience. This game will probably be the same.

PhantomTommy932d ago

That title doesn't actually appear on the article itself. "Wolfenstein 2 on Nintendo Switch Makes Us Wish for a Nintendo Switch Pro" is the actual headline, which is completely fair but who's gonna click that amiright?? Get them lads screaming at each other in the comments instead.

wonderfulmonkeyman932d ago (Edited 932d ago )

This sounds like it's coming from one of the same anti-Nintendo people who were bashing Nintendo for NOT having these kinds of games on the Wii U, and who thought the Switch COULD NOT run games like this AT ALL when it was first announced.

I can basically tell you the before-and-after of this kind of person's mind-set.

"Oh, Nintendo's new Switch console is gonna fail if they don't get modern AAA third party titles! Even just a few would help but they aren't gonna get it because tech reasons!"

[Switch gets a few AAA games and shows that many more are planned, on top of some devs even making dedicated Switch teams to get games onto the system.]


Bloody hypocrites. They need to decide whether you do or don't want Nintendo to have third party games, and then stick to it.
This kind of flip-flopping is just annoying and childish.

gangsta_red932d ago

Going to have to agree with you.

Unfortunately Switch is in a position where it's damned if you do, damned if you don't.

I think it's great that devs are at least trying to get their games on Switch and I welcome more.