Dancrane212

Member
Oct 25, 2017
13,989


Based on pre-launch PR, The Outer Worlds was mooted as running at 1080p while docked and 720p in mobile mode. However, our findings suggest a typical 720p resolution while connected to your screen, with dynamic resolution dropping this lower on occasion. Meanwhile, 540p is typical and 384p seems to be the low point for portable play. There is none of the clarity and crispness you'd expect from the native resolution metrics suggested pre-launch, that's for sure.

This brings us to our next problem - pop-in. It's severe and it's constant. Textures and models alike are often slow to pop into existence to the point where it can take upwards of 10 seconds or more at points. When in its low detail state, it almost feels like you're running around Google Earth in Street View with partially loaded map detail. I also noticed instances where the entire game would pause to load, where the streaming system seemingly can't keep up.

Here's the thing, though. When you first boot up the game, these issues aren't too severe. At a cursory glance, initial play seems OK. However, the longer you play, the more you dig in, the worse it gets. It reminds me of the classic Rimlag issue on the PlayStation 3 version of Skyrim - the difference being it manifests a lot sooner. To ensure that this wasn't a hardware issue on my part, I tested the game on all four of my Switch consoles - using both SD card and internal NAND (which is typically a touch faster). The game behaved identically in all cases, so I'd expect the same experience elsewhere.

However, on top of the cuts, you do need to be prepared for dodgy performance. The game targets 30 frames per second, just like the other console versions, and while performance seems solid enough at first, the more you play, the more it falls apart. Basic traversal seems generally fine, as long as there isn't anything overly complex on-screen. However, combat - and especially combat in detailed environments - sees frame-rates drop to the low 20s or even to sub-20fps levels. This leads to basic playability problems and a general level of dissatisfaction with the experience. Only in the game's 'dungeon' style environments does performance hold up. Portable mode plays out much the same as docked, perhaps suggesting that The Outer Worlds has profound CPU-based limitations.
 

Stacey

Banned
Feb 8, 2020
4,610
384p/22fps low points are definitely in the realm of "we shouldn't have really bothered"
 

Wil348

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,213
Is Outer Worlds supposed to be more demanding than, say The Witcher 3 out of curiosity? I'm just wondering if a studio like Saber or Panic Button would have done a better job.
 

Raide

Banned
Oct 31, 2017
16,596
A shame. Switch just ain't powerful enough to push open world games with lots of clustered details. Way too many compromises to get this on Switch.
 

Jagernaut

Member
Oct 27, 2017
758
The Switch version looks bad, but why compare it to the Xbox One X version and not the base Xbox One or base PS4 versions?
 

zombiejames

Member
Oct 25, 2017
12,108
Why would anyone release a game in this state? Like the video says, we put up with a lot of this shit last-gen but we've moved on. This looks horrible.
 

Matemático

Banned
Mar 22, 2019
332
Brazil
Despite i'm loving to play this game on my Xbox One S, there is many texture pop up and streaming problems. Can't imagine this running well on Switch.
 

lost7

Member
Feb 20, 2018
2,750
Honestly what's the point of theee ports if they don't put any effort into them? There's no way Outer Worlds is more demanding that a game like the Witcher 3, so it's no excuse to put out such a poor product
 

Delusibeta

Prophet of Truth
Banned
Oct 26, 2017
5,648
Ultimately, these are the inevitable consequences of downporting console games to a handheld. The Outer Worlds seems to be a particularly poor port, but unfortunately I don't think the Switch has the horsepower to keep up with current gen consoles without severe graphical and performance compromises in general. Don't expect any Switch ports of next gen only titles.
 

Zedelima

▲ Legend ▲
Member
Oct 25, 2017
7,809
A shame. Switch just ain't powerful enough to push open world games with lots of clustered details. Way too many compromises to get this on Switch.
Witcher 3 is way more demanding than this, and looks way better
So...maybe is engine fault or even limited dev time
 

9-Volt

Member
Oct 27, 2017
12,952
384p/22fps low points are definitely in the realm of "we shouldn't have really bothered"

3DS is a really good example of what would happen if the studios didn't "bother". The system was too weak, nobody even wasted their time and resources porting PS2 era games to it and in the end it had one of the worst third party libraries in any system. Yes, there are many sacrifices in this port but it's not unplayable and fills the Switch library nicely. I'm pretty sure there will be further optimizations now that Virtuos offices reopened.

Despite i'm loving to play this game on my Xbox One S, there is many texture pop up and streaming problems. Can't imagine this running well on Switch.

Yeah, I have noticed too. It even has that mid game loading thing on base Xbox. It seems this game made with PC in mind, as Obsidian has always been a PC first studio.
 

Raide

Banned
Oct 31, 2017
16,596
Witcher 3 is way more demanding than this, and looks way better
So...maybe is engine fault or even limited dev time
It seems from the video, the game has some long draw distance stuff and lots of large objects covered in textures. Maybe if they cut down more of the building density. Even with lower polygon version, the Switch version still looks rough.

Maybe some patches for this will sort out the underlying issues but I am not sure it will.
 

BassForever

One Winged Slayer
Member
Oct 25, 2017
30,171
CT
Ultimately, these are the inevitable consequences of downporting console games to a handheld. The Outer Worlds seems to be a particularly poor port, but unfortunately I don't think the Switch has the horsepower to keep up with current gen consoles without severe graphical and performance compromises in general. Don't expect any Switch ports of next gen only titles.

In theory the question should be "graphically this game looks like booty, but it still maintains the great gameplay at a steady fps and resolution, is that trade worth it for portability/switch access?" I imagine for a lot of Switch owners that answer would be yes. This port ignoring the graphics doesn't play well between it's bad frame rate and massive pop in of npcs and monsters. Heck even with those there will be people who put up with it just because the core mechanics of TOW are fun enough that they don't care how poorly it runs.
 

KillerMan91

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,393
Honestly what's the point of theee ports if they don't put any effort into them? There's no way Outer Worlds is more demanding that a game like the Witcher 3, so it's no excuse to put out such a poor product

This is like saying every PS4 game should look like Last of Us II or they are poor products. One demanding port looking nice on the Switch doesn't mean it's easy or even possible for all developers to do similar job with other ports.
 

Lobster Roll

signature-less, now and forever™
Member
Sep 24, 2019
34,911
This looks so bad that I think (without exaggeration) they should just make the game free to download. This port isn't worth any amount of money.
 

Deleted member 19533

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
3,873
Witcher 3 is way more demanding than this, and looks way better
So...maybe is engine fault or even limited dev time
It's a lot of the same people that made Fallout, right? If so, the fact people thought quality in performance and visuals was an option is what's shocking here. Not the fact that it doesn't have those things.
 

dedge

Member
Sep 15, 2019
2,438
I'm super interested to see how Doom Eternal looks when the Switch version is revealed. I think there is still a space for these ports, even if they aren't always technically sound. For Nintendo only players, having some access with still feature complete games is better than going generations without any support at all. And for others, sometimes a portable version is just more appealing for a number of reasons.
 
Oct 27, 2017
6,142
It's a fascinating port. Great video.

I'm a big proponent of these impossible ports. I think making sacrifices to get a game running on Switch is worth the effort for the portability but this game seems to have pushed too far. I love playing Doom on Switch.

The Witcher 3 was already a very optimised game thanks to the plethora of patches the code base had received over the years on PC and console. The team then spent another year optimising specifically for the Switch. Even with all that time, the Switch port is rough. I was hoping Outer Worlds would be of a similar quality but it looks like it has missed the mark.
 

Midgarian

Alt Account
Banned
Apr 16, 2020
2,619
Midgar
That random stopping to load so often reminds me of the PS3 Orange Box.
At the time that was my most comfortable way to play Portal, but by God did it feel like a hackjob. Similar to the HL2 port on PS2.

The Portal 2 port was excellent though, felt as smooth as a natively built game.

I'm a big proponent of these impossible ports. I think making sacrifices to get a game running on Switch is worth the effort for the portability but this game seems to have pushed too far. I love playing Doom on Switch.
I exclusively use these ports as holiday games. Either to replay a game I like, or to play a game from my backlog I haven't got around to yet.
 

EDebs1916

Banned
Oct 28, 2017
483
Damn. I have this on PS4 but stopped relatively early when I heard about the switch port as it's easier for me to get time in on switch games in our one TV household. But it doesn't seem worth it.
 

DongBeetle

Member
Oct 25, 2017
8,434
Yeah no wonder they didn't show footage before

I gotta say this game doesn't look massively more demanding than any of these other "impossible ports"
 

Duffking

Member
Oct 27, 2017
5,810
Incidentally, the video title of "ambitious but ultimately not good enough" happens to be a good way to describe The Outer Worlds in general.
 

Aprikurt

▲ Legend ▲
Member
Oct 29, 2017
18,834
Jesus. I'm the first one to defend Switch port efforts (actually managed to finish Witcher 3 on Switch after owning the game on PS4 for years), but this is giving me "Borderlands 2 Vita" vibes.

As in, you could, and you did, but maybe you shouldn't have.
 
May 19, 2020
4,828
Not everything needs a port to the Switch. This whole "portability is everything" argument is a bunch of garbage when some of these games can barely run on the system.
 

scitek

Member
Oct 27, 2017
10,244
I'm super interested to see how Doom Eternal looks when the Switch version is revealed. I think there is still a space for these ports, even if they aren't always technically sound. For Nintendo only players, having some access with still feature complete games is better than going generations without any support at all. And for others, sometimes a portable version is just more appealing for a number of reasons.

Doom Eternal still targets 60fps on consoles, so being able to get away with halving the frame rate will already be a huge help.
 

HylianSeven

Shin Megami TC - Community Resetter
Member
Oct 25, 2017
19,487
Shame, but I figured this was a possibility when they announced this port.

I'll still just play the PC version.
 

9-Volt

Member
Oct 27, 2017
12,952
Not everything needs a port to the Switch. This whole "portability is everything" argument is a bunch of garbage when some of these games can barely run on the system.

For me portability IS everything. It's the only possible way for me to game. Ok maybe The Outer Worlds is not the best example, but I do want Switch get as many games as possible.