Switch vs ps4 Pro, 20yrs ago.

[Celine]

To reinforce my point above, of course PS4 Pro and Xbox X are much stronger than Switch with better visuals but the starting points for handheld consoles and home consoles were quite different back in 1999.
Take for reference the FPS genre, it was basically absent on handheld consoles just like were absent polygonal based games (or for the most part any kind of 3D game).
The closest thing is maybe Faceball 2000.

Meanwhile here how Quake 3 Arena looked on Dreamcast:

Now Wolfenstein 2 The New Colossus looks much better on Xbox X and PS4 Pro than Switch yet the mere fact that a comparable handheld version run on Switch would be considered pure witchcraft with the mindset that there was back in 1999.

EDIT:
On the smaller Switch screen the differences would be less noticeable than the blow out screenshot above:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wOmNxgzRs1g

 

[KalBalboa]

this is not even fair

Click to shrink...

Yeah, I thought about Spiderman and God of War.

 

[N.47H.4N]

Pro,not even close,the base consoles of 2013,PS4 and Xbox One still more impressive than Switch.

 

[beetlebum]

I think my 1999 mind, accustomed to the graphics of the era, would think games in both systems look pretty similar. Current differences in resolution, frame rate, and other more technical aspects would seem positively minuscule for someone playing stuff like Mario 64 or Metal Gear Solid.

The seamless "at home or on the go" concept of the Switch would definitely blow my mind, though.

 

[Nameless]

Let's ignore the allure of 4k visuals and photo realism. Imagine seeing what Dreams can do in 1999, or grappling with the scope of No Man's Sky. Experiencing the wonder of The Last Guardian — specifically Trico's incredible AI and animations. I'm in my 30s and Astro Bot still manages to turn me into a child, just the idea of playing that when I was one..

It's why I brought up Prey(2017) earlier. 1999 was only a year before Deus EX changed how I viewed video games. Getting to experience those design philosophies refined & evolved over two decades while leveraging vastly superior tech, I can't put into words how insane that would be.

 

[mutantmagnet]

I would probably like the Switch way more back then and it wouldn't be due to the portability being as important when I gamed stationary more often.

I probably would be put off by how clunky modern gaming as standardized by playstation would feel.

 

[Anthony Hopkins]

You're not the first user to say both and yet oddly its not an option on the poll.

Click to shrink...

It's not an option on the polls because it would eliminate the point of this thread.

 

[Viale]

Switch is definitely impressive, but it's mostly limited to just the portable nature. Software wise, there are fun games for sure, but nothing has really blown me away like some of the stuff in Sony's catalogue. nothing had really made me stop and go "wow"

Seeing something like UC4, GoW, or TLoU2 I think would be something I would find more impressive personally.

 

[Fisty]

If I had a Switch in my hand 20 years ago? "Wow imagine what a console from this time period could do"

I used to drool over FF7's cutscenes, hoping games would look that amazing in gameplay one day

 

[KINGOFSHIBUYA Ltd.]

After seing the PS4, I would expect the handheld to look good as well, but PS4 games look a lot nicer than the CG and prerendered stuff that was blowing my mind 20 years ago, so definitely PS4.

Handheld tech has never impressed me more than consoles and desktop PCs.

You can have shit battery life, make your portable huge, and good graphics on a portable. It's what Nintendo's competitors always did, and now they do it too.

So it'd really be just what looked better. An OLED would be crazy looking in 1999, as well.

Maybe the OLED alone wins.

 

[el_galvon]

I truly can't decide if my 10yr who loved to play Drive on PS1 would be more impressed with R* games like GTA V and RDR 2, or with the last Pokemon trailer showing the "Wild Area", only because it's Pokemon.

Probably the former, since things like leaving the car in Driver 2 already blew my mind at the time.

 

[Deleted member 4093]

1999? I'd probably be confused why the PS4 isn't the same kind of the thing the switch is.

 

[MP!]

tough choice... being able to carry it around I'd likely go with switch...
Both of them would be mind blowingly good I doubt I'd be able to really say that the difference in graphics between switch and PS4 would be that apparent when you're coming off PS1 and N64

Imean imagine seeing pokemon and FFVII is on switch ... I'd likely do that... it's about the games

 

[MrMattatee]

So this is before smart phones. I think the switch would blow be away more, just as the GameCube still blows me away. The wireless joycon concept along with the HD rumble, the TouchPad screen, the undocking, and the processing power would have been complete magic to a pre-iphone me. The ps4 doesn't show off the world changing technology of the past 20 years like the switch does.

 

[Cth]

I don't have a Switch (although my step daughter does). It depends on if the PS4Pro is one of the noisy ones or not I suppose.

Leaning towards the Switch at the moment.

 

[GaimeGuy]

20 years ago we were still playing on a GameBoy and Gameboy colors. The GBA wasn't a thing yet.

Switch. No question.

 

[TheOne]

Yeah I'm gonna go with the PS4 Pro on that one. Those graphics coupled with my younger age would have blown me away.

Plus imagine if you also had access to the PSVR with Astro Bot. No brainer. Outside of being portable, the Switch, with its lower spec, would not have impressed me nearly as much. I nean, I was a graphic whore back then lol.

 

[The Last One]

PS4 PRO and it's not even close.

Imagine seeing this in the 90's:



I would think this trailer is 100% top quality CGI.

 

[Manmademan]

Yeah I'm gonna go with the PS4 Pro on that one. Those graphics coupled with my younger age would have blown me away.

Plus imagine if you also had access to the PSVR with Astro Bot. No brainer. Outside of being portable, the Switch, with its lower spec, would not have impressed me nearly as much. I nean, I was a graphic whore back then lol.

Click to shrink...

the "your eyes wouldn't be able to tell! all games from the future look the same!!" posts are hilarious.

THIS SHIT

was 2001. Promo shots and video of it had been rolling around the internet years beforehand. We knew what realistic CGI looked like at that point, you just couldn't get it in real time.

Telling a PS4 and a freaking switch apart would be trivial even 20 years ago. There is nothing REMOTELY resembling Detroit, GoW, or Horizon running on a PS4 Pro on the switch, the gap is massive and obvious. It's not like "eyes" weren't invented until 2015.

 

[DongBeetle]

Sworch


For sure the PS4 is physically much bigger than the Switch. Still perfectly fine size for my spot below my plasma. I'd happily take a Switch just as big if the graphics were close to the PS4.

Click to shrink...

Sure, but understand what is more impressive. Hell, an iPhone 5S might be more impressive than a PS4 Pro back then. Portables are always infinitely more impressive

 

[Anthony Hopkins]

the "your eyes wouldn't be able to tell! all games from the future look the same!!" posts are hilarious.

THIS SHIT

was 2001. Promo shots and video of it had been rolling around the internet years beforehand. We knew what realistic CGI looked like at that point, you just couldn't get it in real time.

Telling a PS4 and a freaking switch apart would be trivial even 20 years ago. It's not like "eyes" weren't invented until 2015.

Click to shrink...

It is a few yrs later, but The switch is arguably a smaller graphical difference with the ps4 pro then the PS2 was with the OG Xbox, because the OG Xbox was a generation ahead of the PS2 in shader technology.
Thats what would fuck with people, back then the vast majority were not as bothered with resolution.

 

[Manmademan]

It is a few yrs later, but The switch is arguably a smaller graphical difference with the ps4 pro then the PS2 was with the OG Xbox,

Click to shrink...

it really, really isn't.

because the OG Xbox was a generation ahead of the PS2 in shader technology.
Thats what would fuck with people, back then the vast majority were not as bothered with resolution.

Click to shrink...

The Pro is a solid generation ahead of the switch in literally everything.

 

[Deleted member 437]

Dude, the 4k OLED ALONE would blow their fucking minds, lol.

Imagine going from a 27" CRT at 240p to a 65" 4k OLED in 1 sitting?

Then put in TLOU2 and its fucking game over.

 

[Anthony Hopkins]

it really, really isn't.



The Pro is a solid generation ahead of the switch in literally everything.

Click to shrink...

Not in shader model it is not. That's one of the reasons why the switch can get ps4 multiplats.
If Nintendo went with an older dx9 level GPU it would be near impossible to get ps4 multiplats on switch.

 

[IronicSonic]

Switch with Breath of the Wild

Click to shrink...

This was amazing even in 2017. I was in awe

 

[motherless]

Sure, but understand what is more impressive. Hell, an iPhone 5S might be more impressive than a PS4 Pro back then. Portables are always infinitely more impressive

Click to shrink...

Not to me. I far prefer playing on my big screen. I have a Switch, had a gameboy, gamegear, PC Engine, Turbo Express. The large delta in graphical performance to me isn't worth the trade off. I would much rather be playing my Switch games with PS4 level graphics.

 

[Manmademan]

Not in shader model it is not. That's one of the reasons why the switch can get ps4 multiplats.
If Nintendo went with an older dx9 level GPU it would be near impossible to get ps4 multiplats on switch.

Click to shrink...

Nintendo has resorted to streaming multiplats to the switch because there are some games (AC Odyssey, RE7) it flat out can't run that were designed for the PS4/XB1. And those games were designed for the base consoles, not the Pro (there is nothing designed to run on the Pro).

https://www.polygon.com/2018/9/16/17866542/assassins-creed-odyssey-nintendo-switch-streaming-japan

https://www.extremetech.com/gaming/...sh-games-to-switch-that-it-otherwise-cant-run

Anything ACTUALLY DESIGNED to run only on the Pro would be a solid generation past the switch in every respect, and flat out impossible to run on nintendo's hardware.

 

[Haint]

You guys are being stupid. '99 was prime time Dreamcast era with shit like Crazy Taxi and Hydro Thunder big in the arcades. HD remasters (not remakes) of many of those titles wouldn't look entirely out of place on Switch today. What's more, the Nomad (a literal '95 era Switch) was already ancient tech and PSP was right around the corner. Switch would have barely impressed as a 5 or 10 year promise (PSP was less than 5), never mind 20. Seeing stuff like Uncharted 4, GoW, and Spiderman that absolutely trounced the highest end CGI of the time running in 4K HDR on an OLED would have been the 8th wonder of the world in '99.

 

[Machine Law]

So this is before smart phones. I think the switch would blow be away more, just as the GameCube still blows me away. The wireless joycon concept along with the HD rumble, the TouchPad screen, the undocking, and the processing power would have been complete magic to a pre-iphone me. The ps4 doesn't show off the world changing technology of the past 20 years like the switch does.

Click to shrink...

Exactly, I would immediately think it's some kind of witchcraft.

 

[Vitor]

I think the PS4 would be impressive, but it would be what I expected... the Switch would blow my mind.

this is not even fair

Click to shrink...

Yeah, but portables weren't even 3D... the jump is way bigger.

 

[Alienous]

It would probably be the Switch, thinking about it. The touchscreen would be mindblowing despite the DS4 touchpad, and seeing DOOM running on the Switch would probably leave me less impressed at what a bigger stationary console can do.

 

[Deleted member 41651]

I chose the Switch because just the Neo Geo Pocket Color, GBA and the Wonderswan (never got to own that one) were mind-blowing to me at the time. Seeing what the PS4 or PC can do now would've been like staring into an abyss of too much knowledge thus rendering me insane, though.

 

[Deleted member 224]

Nintendo has resorted to streaming multiplats to the switch because there are some games (AC Odyssey, RE7) it flat out can't run that were designed for the PS4/XB1. And those games were designed for the base consoles, not the Pro (there is nothing designed to run on the Pro).

https://www.polygon.com/2018/9/16/17866542/assassins-creed-odyssey-nintendo-switch-streaming-japan

https://www.extremetech.com/gaming/...sh-games-to-switch-that-it-otherwise-cant-run

Anything ACTUALLY DESIGNED to run only on the Pro would be a solid generation past the switch in every respect, and flat out impossible to run on nintendo's hardware.

Click to shrink...

That's jumping to conclusions that Nintendo hasn't put out there. After seeing Witcher 3 get ported to the Switch, I don't think there's much on the PS4/xb1 that couldn't get there with enough optimizations.

 

[thebishop]

Easily PS4 Pro. Handheld systems have always had the *potential* to do TV out. PSP actually had support for it, and it always felt like a cop-out that Vita didn't just have a mini-hdmi port. Meanwhile, games like Spiderman and God of War make my eyes water. If you showed MGS Ground Zeroes running on a high-end PC to somebody around the time the first MGS came out, it would be mindboggling.

 

[DevilMayGuy]

The switch for sure, simply because its small form factor. That said, now that it's 20 years later, I have no use for a portable system, so I seldom use mine despite the wow factor.

 

[Dark1x]

It's 1st of July 1999 and You are happily playing, driver, Mario bros deluxe, beetle adventure racing, FF8 or other games of that era, and a time traveller shows up and has a PS4 Pro hooked to a 4k OLED with its best games, she also has a switch docked and undocked with all its best games.

Which do you think you would be more impressed by, and why?

Edit: time traveller Kelly didn't bring the PSVR or switch cardboard VR. She wanted this to be a 2d screen comparison.

Click to shrink...

Both would be impressive but, honestly, seeing a large 4K OLED screen in 1999 would blow me away far more than the Switch. Combine that with PS4 Pro level visuals and, yeah, that would definitely win for me.

 

[DongBeetle]

Not to me. I far prefer playing on my big screen. I have a Switch, had a gameboy, gamegear, PC Engine, Turbo Express. The large delta in graphical performance to me isn't worth the trade off. I would much rather be playing my Switch games with PS4 level graphics.

Click to shrink...

Try to look past what YOU prefer as someone with more advanced technology and try and think objectively about the state of handhelds back then. I doubt very few people would choose the PS4

 

[Manmademan]

That's jumping to conclusions that Nintendo hasn't put out there. After seeing Witcher 3 get ported to the Switch, I don't think there's much on the PS4/xb1 that couldn't get there with enough optimizations.

Click to shrink...

Witcher 3 is a game from 2015. RE7 Biohazard was released 2 full years later in 2017.

And these are multiplats. There's no level of optimization in the world that would get Death Stranding, GoW, Horizon, or the Sony first party stuff running on a switch.

 

[Deleted member 224]

Witcher 3 is a game from 2015. RE7 Biohazard was developed 2 full years later in 2017.

Click to shrink...

Witcher 3 is considered by many to be one of the most technically impressive games of the generation. I believe it still struggles to run at a solid 30fps on PS4/xb1. Before E3 a port of the game was seen by many on this site (including myself) to be impossible.

 

[Manmademan]

Witcher 3 is considered by many to be one of the most technically impressive games of the generation.

Click to shrink...

It's nowhere close at this point. Stuff like Horizon or Death Stranding is so far past Witcher 3 it's not in the same discussion.
I own the game. It's a fun game for what it is, but it's not pushing a Ps4 pro to any meaningful extent.

 

[Fafalada]

It is a few yrs later, but The switch is arguably a smaller graphical difference with the ps4 pro then the PS2 was with the OG Xbox, because the OG Xbox was a generation ahead of the PS2 in shader technology.

Click to shrink...

Yea that one I'll disagree with.
If you allow PS2 to run 8x lower resolution AND half the framerate - you could not only replicate every shader-path from XBox - you could improve on it.

If Nintendo went with an older dx9 level GPU it would be near impossible to get ps4 multiplats on switch.

Click to shrink...

Nah - PSP received a ton of 360/PS3 multiplats, where there's sales, there'll be ports, tech limitations must be truly absurd (something like 360-GBA) for ports not to happen.

 

[motherless]

Try to look past what YOU prefer as someone with more advanced technology and try and think objectively about the state of handhelds back then. I doubt very few people would choose the PS4

Click to shrink...

The poll is about me, not about what I think somebody else thinks "Which do you think you would be more impressed by, and why? "

I have simply always preferred playing on tv with a big display versus handheld.

You might prefer portable and willing to trade off a massive delta in performance to have a game on the go and voted Switch, that's fine.

My thoughts are objective. I prefer the vastly superior visuals of the PS4 over the Switch.

 

[Deleted member 224]

It's nowhere close at this point. Stuff like Horizon or RDR2 is so far past Witcher 3 it's not in the same discussion.
I own the game. It's a fun game for what it is, but it's not pushing a Ps4 pro to any meaningful extent.

Click to shrink...

That's not true though. The PS4 Pro has difficulty running the game at 30fps in certain enviornments.

 

[henlo_birb]

I think a lot of people are underestimating the impression something as small as the switch with detachable joycon and a capacitive touch screen would have on people that viewed palm pilots as cutting-edge. And the instantaneous switch from TV to handlheld would impress me. You can always imagine better graphics. You can't always imagine the direction technology will take. In a world without tablets and smartphones, I think the Switch would be more impressive. Today, I don't find it to be anything special, really. But then, I think it would have been mind-blowing.

 

[Shoichi]

It's nowhere close at this point. Stuff like Horizon or RDR2 is so far past Witcher 3 it's not in the same discussion.
I own the game. It's a fun game for what it is, but it's not pushing a Ps4 pro to any meaningful extent.

Click to shrink...

Witcher 3 definitely pushed the PS4 Pro. CDPR is good at optimizing. The game does not run at max settings on the Pro, especially when you compare to how it runs on X or a decent gaming rig.

 

[SuperFakerBros]

They'd both be very impressive to me but I'd honestly be more blown away by the Switch. Going from, what, the GBC, with Pokemon Red and SMB Deluxe, to the Switch with games like BotW and Smash Ultimate. It's a complete radical change to the sort of games you'd expect on handhelds. Plus, you'd be able to dock it and use it with no hassle like a console, unlike other later handhelds

Witcher 3 is a game from 2015. RE7 Biohazard was released 2 full years later in 2017.

Click to shrink...

But The Witcher 3 is the more demanding game by far, seeing as it doesn't run at 1080p @ 60 FPS on the XB1, below that and at 30 FPS actually, whereas Resident Evil 7 does. That and two years on the same generation isn't exactly that big of a deal

 

[Deleted member 37917]

Switch and it's not even close. I was 16 in 1999 and I doubt that I would have seen much difference between Doom switch and ps4; same as a non gamer today would probably see them as very close visually. Even nowadays with a trained eye, both look great to me.
And the fact that a portable device could play the same games as a tethered one, even some of the most ambitious ones, would have blown my mind.
The ps4 the other hand, is exactly what I would have expected from a roughly linear evolution of visuals in games.

 

[chrisypoo]

Very easily Switch.

 

[thebishop]

Try to look past what YOU prefer as someone with more advanced technology and try and think objectively about the state of handhelds back then. I doubt very few people would choose the PS4

Click to shrink...

It's kind of funny because Nintendo handhelds have never been bleeding edge hardware for their time, and neither is Switch. Somebody mentioned that PSP launched 15 years ago, which was a technical marvel in 2004. Once you have that, Switch doesn't seem like such a leap. But since it worked out that there was no bleeding-edge equivalent circa-1998 (i.e. between the Sega Nomad and the PSP), this exact time window of 20 years benefits the Switch. Not enough to win imo, but enough to make it an argument.

 

[Cbrun44]

I would have been 17 at that time so I'm sure I was a moody, edgy teen. Therefore I imagine the PS4 would have been my top choice. Anytime before or after those years, I likely would have been more impressed by the Switch. That being said, both would have blown all of our minds. At the time we thought PS1 graphics looked great. How far we have come!