You're not taking into account engine or game overhead. There are VERY few 60fps UE4 games on Switch - and those that do exist were crafted exclusively for Switch likely with larger budgets and teams focused on optimization and, even then, they run at resolutions lower than Bloodstained.
Optimization is expensive and Switch isn't exactly blazing fast for UE4 games like this.
I feel like too many people judge games solely by how they perceive them to look. You can't say what is or is not demanding just based on that.
Sure you can... you just replied to people that did. 😆
I don't wanna point and laugh, but we have an expert on the matter here and even then, they still plug their ears and say "WHY NOT 60FPS?!" It's not conducive to the discussion at all.
Great work as always, John!
Also: I think I may be the luckiest of all. I have physical Switch waiting at home, but I bought digitally on PS4. Played about 10 hours on Pro, 25 on base for the plat. Never a single crash. Amazing game, nipping at RE2's heels for GotY.
Edit: to extrapolate on my point without sounding like appeal to authority, think about the Switch version's development. Firstly, ArtPlay was developing three versions internally: PC, PS4, X1. The Wii U and Vita versions were going to be outsourced to another developer to help smooth out development. When those were canceled, the Switch version was introduced. This was about two years or so into development.
Not only that, but the Switch version was going to be handled internally too. So we have a sudden entrance of a console that was both never originally planned AND adding more time and taking more of the budget from the main dev team. On top of that, we know the Switch has been missing key UE4 features for a while by this point (remember, Square said they were waiting on UE4 updates to finish the Switch version of DQXI). So we have a console version that was unplanned, with work split between it and three other platforms, that showed up on the workbench two years later than the other versions... all from an indie studio and for a partially Kickstarter-funded game. I'm honestly shocked it even runs like it does, to be honest, and the loading and input latency will be addressed per 505 themselves.
But the fact of the matter is that UE4 is stupidly resource-intensive on consoles. Nothing can change that. The other versions of the game run at 60fps through brute force. The Switch simply does not have the muscle to do so. Now, looking at John's video, it seems to have a fair bit of overhead since it maintains 30fps about 99% of the time. With a safe overhead for locked framerate being about 10fps, you're looking at a ~40fps (variable, of course) game, which is so much more of an eyesore than 30fps. I love RE Revelations 2 on PC and on Switch, and I can play it despite its unlocked framerate which is usually 45fps on Switch. I play it
despite that, though, as it's really annoying.
Sidetracked there for a sec, but long story short: UE4 is power hungry, and the Switch, while an impressive hybrid console, needs intense,
intense optimization to even get 60fps, and that's not without severe cuts to certain effects or resolutions. That adds countless work hours and budget dollars that an indie studio that's already working on three other versions of the game simply did not have at the time.
P.S. Yes, I think the game looks beautiful. Great art style.