[ad_1]
The launch this week on Nintendo eShop (and also physically available) is Xenon Racer, a speedfest arcade of 3DClouds with futuristic supercars burning around urban circuits. Earlier this week, we released news of the launch trailer with nice-looking gameplay that rather excited us. The Switch is not really endowed with an overabundance of leading runners, so we have high hopes for this promising example.
Or should we say that we had High hopes. Although we have not yet received a revision code and therefore can not make a decisive verdict, comparison videos have been published on the Internet, revealing that, frankly speaking, the Switch version does not compare favorably to Xbox One and PS4. versions of the game. One might think that there is nothing new, but the videos highlight a wide difference between what is advertised and the reality of the final product on Switch.
As you can see, there is a gap between the image levels, with Switch struggling to maintain 25 frames per second, not to mention the minimum of 30 frames per second we were hoping for. The details of the road texture, reflections on the bodywork and shadows, if present, are all significantly reduced on the Switch version, which also offers new levels of pop-in since the N64 days.
Disparities between platforms are nothing new, but this particular example highlights a problem on the front of the Nintendo digital store that needs to be corrected – The trailer and the associated screenshots installed on the online store simply do not reflect the actual product you get for $ 44.99.. They are obviously taken from the version of the game on Xbox, PS4 or (most likely).
Rightly, Switch players reacted angrily:
Unfortunately, misrepresentations are not uncommon on the Nintendo terminal. A quick tour in the eShop reveals various multiplatform titles that dishonestly use the multimedia resources of other versions of the game. The launch trailer of Xenon Racer on Nintendo's official YouTube channel contains an important old disclaimer at first, but the eShop trailer (identical to that found on the official website of the game) does not contain any warning of this type.
Here at Nintendo Life, we receive press kits containing resources for use by the media all the time, and the images provided are often the only visual media we need to work with. Some publishers take the time and effort to produce custom screenshots for Switch and we, the players, are very grateful. In an ideal world, we would only use our own screenshots. or materials that have been verified come from Switch, but unfortunately this is just not possible – at least not so much that we do not have the game in our hands (we try, if possible, to capture our own captures of screen for comments so that you have a clearer idea of what a game on Switch will look like).
A look at the eShop reveals that some publishers are doing well with Switch owners. The game pages for CONDEMN and Wolfenstein IIfor example, have screen shots that are genuinely muddy. Frankly, it's a marvel that these games are on the console all The shape and the ports, courtesy of Panic Button, resist perfectly, despite the dynamic resolution maneuvers. Other examples of specific advertising: Yooka-Laylee with accurate still and video images, and even Tests up. The Switch version of the latter may not be the best in comparison to its siblings on other platforms, but Ubisoft is not trying to fool you into Making you believe that you get the Xbox One X version when you browse the Nintendo Online Store.
Elsewhere, Ubisoft may be a little more liberal with the truth. Compare the two images of Mario + Rabbids Kingdom Battle bottom left, a photo of eShop and right, a screen shot by Alex Olney of Nintendo Life:
eShop against our capture. (click to enlarge)
We have enlarged the eShop 720p snapshot to the same size as our 1080p capture for easy comparison, but even with this disparity, the image of the Nintendo Shop is more detailed. True, it is not day and night, but there are many subtle differences in lighting and camera angle – enough to suggest that it could come from a version previous game, or it could be a press image rendered at a resolution much higher than that obtained with Switch. Of course, in the past, it was common for screen copies of the time to be screen copies: packaging materials often had to be sent to printers months before they were published. although Ubisoft can hardly use this excuse now.
Those are minor differences in the structure of things can easily be attributed to a PR person using assets from an old record rather than attempting to intentionally mislead potential clients; After taking a look at the resources of the game page, no one was disappointed by the visuals of Mario + Rabbids. Similarly, the trailer E3 on the Skyrim The game page shows sequences of 60 frames per second that are not included in the final version. Not a reason for getting out the forks, but it's worth noting.
Then we come to the most egregious examples. Watch Rocket LeagueFrom the page, the screenshots are beautifully sharp – far too strong, In reality. Panic Button (the same port house behind DOOM and Wolfenstein) did a great job of improving visual effects and switching performance with patches over time, but this was never considered. this well.
Glamor versus gameplay in 'Quality & # 39; (click to enlarge)
(click to enlarge)
We are sure that publishers would argue that the lack of HUD in "glamor" plans indicates that these are not intended to represent the actual gameplay, but there is no text to say otherwise and the Average bettor is likely to assume it. We often see small print disclaimers in images and trailers – probably for legal reasons – but they are applied inconsistently.
Somewhere else, Monster Energy Supercross – The Official Video Game 2 uses sharp-like shots that do not look like the actual game on Switch. It does not make us any pleasure to launch this next game while its game is down – its performance issues are well documented on Switch and many of them were tackled in a patch last year – but the advantages of the shop for Rhyme are blatantly from another version of the game:
Guess who comes from the Switch game. (click to enlarge)
We've picked a handful here, but the store is full of that kind of thing. As we have seen, the trailer and Xenon Racer's plans are not unique to the eShop, and this one too is supposed to receive a blessed "Day 1 patch" to solve some problems. Regardless of its effectiveness, we can safely assume that it is unlikely that the images on the eShop look like it.
Of course, it should be noted that it is not a "new" problem; those of you who are reading this article and who are old enough to remember the time of the 8 and 16-bit personal computers will probably remember seeing printed advertisements (YouTube n & # 39; 39, has not yet taken off in the 1980s, oddly enough), covered with beautiful screenshots. However, the difference in graphics power between the supported formats was often considerable, with the ZX Spectrum, Amstrad, and Commodore 64 versions often appearing absolutely terrible compared to the Atari ST and Amiga editions. Nevertheless, we think that well-meaning parents – when buying games for their beloved offspring – would have been fooled into thinking that the Speccy version was just as beautiful as the Amiga screen presented on the page, even though the most responsible publishers were sure to note somewhere on the advertisement where each screen came from. Given that the technological gap between Switch and PS4 / XB1 is so much smaller today, it is even easier to be fooled.
Who is responsible for ensuring that the resources used to advertise games match the experience that Switch owners will have? It is our opinion that the burden must be on publishers (and we highlight publishers because the developers themselves often have little choice as to marketing their game) to accurately describe the games of developers. Using screenshots and misleading trailers for bohemian gamers can be useful once, but with the proliferation of social networks and comparison videos, any business that wants to stay in business can only hurt its business. long-term reputation by engaging in such practices.
Is a developer Many times false representation of their games via screen captures and / or eShop trailers, it is then up to Nintendo to rectify the problem. Ultimately, the platform owner should assume his responsibilities and prevent persistent offenders from making false advertising. Of course, Nintendo can not control what developers and publishers do elsewhere, but the eShop is within the purview of Nintendo and there is no doubt that it must guarantee a level of transparency to guarantee the seal of quality of Nintendo.
Thanks to Daan Koopman for shooting Monster Energy Supercross – The official video game 2: Vaseline Edition. (click to enlarge)
We are not indifferent to the fact that controlling these things can be a challenge, but Nintendo knows its equipment better than anyone and you hope it will be able to smell something fishy – if we can do it, Nintendo can. At the very least, society should respond to these problems, as the community points out, as is the case with Xenon Racer. If the public relations managers of a game can not replace the resources with specific versions, we will say that it would be perfectly reasonable to remove all media from the game page.
The key point here is that players should not force their commando and ask them if the advertisement on eShop reflects the product they will play on Switch. We do not expect miracles on hardware – we understand that there will be reductions (sometimes drastic) compared to Xbox One / PS4 versions – but we expect honesty, especially when it has never been easier to discover the truth.
Have you ever seen Xenon Racer on Switch? What do you think of the performance? Is it up to your expectations? Let us know below.
[ad_2]
Source link