-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Digital Foundry - Yoshi's Crafted World: Unreal Engine 4... On A Nintendo Game?
- Thread starter -shadow-
- Start date
What an asanine suggestion.
It's probably because there was workflow/development advantage to using UE4 rather than a WiiU engine. As someone pointed out, the WiiU engine dropped to 30fps in the main menu, so maybe in order to add more models and details and keep it at 60fps, UE4 was their best option.
The presentation has nothing to prove to me with this game. It looks great. I'm more concerned about the challenge/length and the music.
Oh yeah?
Well, I still think the suggestion they used UE4 because of some backroom deal with Epic in order to get the engine on Switch
Yeah when I played the demo in handheld mode I noticed how low resolution it looked. It's always really noticeable to me when games drop to such low resolution like this or Xenoblade. Hopefully the final version is a little better technically but I doubt it will be.
+ for being shocked that the resolution is so low. The game looks and performs beautifully, and I absolutely adore the arts & crafts art style. I look forward to seeing what else Nintendo can do with the tech.
3rd party engines seem to do surprisingly well on the Switch ( E.g Snowdrop). I this bodes well for 3rd party support.
3rd party engines seem to do surprisingly well on the Switch ( E.g Snowdrop). I this bodes well for 3rd party support.
Switch was already plenty powerful for them (at the time of release, compared to their previous system), if it was more powerful they would simply change the graphics and keep low resolution.
Wii U was already capable of running Yoshi Wooly World at 60 fps 720p and 480p gamepad, thats better than this, somethings off with optimization no matter how pretty the graphics are its all balance 376p is not good at all for an exclusive.
I believe so and it looked like this in case anyone forgot:
https://youtu.be/s4pH7Eik7B4
...which is why I'm a little disappointed in the new one to be honest. Wooly World looks and plays beautifully. If the Switch game looks better, it isn't that much better. 1080p 60 should be the target in docked.
I´ll be throwing my unprofessional opinion out and say that, once again, this proves that a good videogame is not about resolution and visual fidelity or whatnot.
I actually enjoy the simple approach. Just make your game look fine and run great, don´t care about IQ.
I´m aware an enthusiast forum like ERA disagrees with me here. Yet, that´s the way I as a casual feel I guess.
I actually enjoy the simple approach. Just make your game look fine and run great, don´t care about IQ.
I´m aware an enthusiast forum like ERA disagrees with me here. Yet, that´s the way I as a casual feel I guess.
Yoshis Wooly World is technicaly in no way comparable to Crafted World, though. Crafted uses way more modern effects and rendering pipelines.
Woolly Word looks really nice, but I think it's pretty obvious that the effects and lighting of Crafted World are quite a bit more advanced. Now obviously you can say that they didn't need to do more than that, but I think it's still pretty obvious that it's really not just a case of both games looking basically the same and thus solely UE4's "fault" that Crafted World's resolution is so low.
I had the feeling the level select was 30fps a la Splatoon 2
Lots of good developers in this thread from what I can see. I'm glad I'm able to post on the same forums as some of you experts knowing what the switch should be capable of ahead of Nintendo themselves. Who else will hold them accountable. Now; where did I put my pitchfork?
The comparison with Bug made me laugh. Come on DF... I own the game when I had a Saturn back in the day, whay a terrible game it was. It was very impressive vidually, but as soon as you start to play it... That was bad.
That is a fair point, but forcing a small(-ish) 2nd party developer to work on a game using that engine isn't really a solution nor something would really push the matter forward. Nor can you reasonably say it has done that, at least from what I've heard of Unreal's changes since I have last been involved in a project used to ship a game with the engine, as most clear work on the plaform has come from Fortnite or be general improvements affecting all platforms. Major contributions to the engine tend to come from different types of projects and developers (in this case Epic themselves and of course support by Nintendo's own hw/sw staff). It's an assumption that I can't really say fits the reality I have experience of (not that it's impossible, but unlikely), especially given that other developers in Japan have adopted the engine for the very reasons I posted.
A more plausible similar explanation is that Nintendo may have had a set release schedule that they would like the project to have, and Good-Feel may have made the research and decision that using UE4 for this title would mean higher chance of success.
That is quite an assumption, especially the "efficient to work with" - people have this misconception about a lot of engines based on the output which is not something you very reliably use as a reference. Of coures often performance/development efficiency are two somewhat conflicting matters (though the reality is that yes working with a 3rd party engine you take a performance hit for production improvements due to the nature of general purpose ethos of these engines and focus on productivity they put).
Secondly, Wii U is a different platform, so the work to get to a running build at all can be considerable (but not necessarily), and you have to adopt for new development tools and that work can affect the rest of the team and the outcome quite heavily if the studio isn't in a good state to do that.
Even the performance part is questionable; yes they did output a (but not this title) title running at better resolution before, but that is not comparable in terms of what rendering it does, so you can't say in anyway that the game could have hit a similar visual target with that engine with the same resources, or you have to start talking about what you would have traded off from other parts of the budget and end product.
Now that said, I can't say it was the right choice as I personally really like the look of Woolly World and some of the gameplay mechanics feel a bit gimmicky-ish compared to it (which again may be a result of them being able to experiment more with faster tools), but a technical comparison of whether this same game with the same visual would have performed and been as good as it is, is stretching and makes a ton of assumptions that in my expeirence aren't the reality of game development.
Last edited:
Better than sub 60 FPS, thats what most other games are (on Switch and other consoles).
I know but still, if their 'vision/ambition got the resolution that low maybe it wasn't the best choice with the resources they had available.a shame both kirby and yoshi struggled in their jump to the switch, tech wise
Or maybe they did decide it was worth the lowered resolution, like the Digital Foundry video seems to indicate. The game looks absolutely beautiful and runs incredibly smoothly for a UE4 game.
If they had to lower texture detail to raise the resolution a bit I'm not sure I'd want that particular tradeoff.
At least It will certainly be a showcase for the Switch pro
Yeah, I cannot imagine this game looking better. But then I don't notice the lower resolution on Mario Kart most of the time.
What lower resolution exactly?
it's native 1080p and 720p on TV and Switch screen respectively.
Game looks clean and crisp as hell. 🤔
It's a gorgeous game. Most users would have no idea it was below 720p if it hadn't been pointed out to them.
I really wish I liked the game itself though. I actually kind of hate everything about it from a gameplay perspective. It's easily the worst first party game I've purchased on the system.
Bold statement. If I hadn't noticed it from the blurriness, I'd have caught on by the headache that followed. Thought it seemed pretty obvious, but maybe that's just me.
ha! I did say "most".
I really do think the game looks gorgeous though.
UE4's temporal AA does indeed work wonders here. It's a very soft looking, but very clean game. The soft look also fits the aesthetic very well.
It's far from the best looking game on Switch though; that honour goes to Luigi's Mansion 3 and it's not even close. LM3 is absolute witchcraft!
It's far from the best looking game on Switch though; that honour goes to Luigi's Mansion 3 and it's not even close. LM3 is absolute witchcraft!
Eh, I hated the demo, but I like the full game. Helps that I got it for a buck with the target pricing deal. I enjoy playing a level before going to bed. Not difficult, just relaxing with the wonderful artstyle. Not going anywhere near 100% though, just in it for the scenery.
Haven't played that one yet...