Yes, it’s the game devs fault for not optimizing a game that was released in 2022.
It definitely could not be Nintendo’s fault for releasing a console in 2025 that can’t play games from 2022.
Comment on Elden Ring on Switch 2 Is a Disaster in Handheld Mode - IGN
carotte@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 day ago
time for the switch 3!
…or time for developers to rediscover the long lost art of Optimization
CubitOom@infosec.pub 1 day ago
Ulrich@feddit.org 19 hours ago
There’s no reason it shouldn’t be able to. The hardware has proven to be very adequate, better than Steam Deck.
Zorque@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Optimization isn’t necessarily a global thing for software. Often you need to optimize it for different types of hardware. This is often especially necessary for consoles, as they are specific kinds of proprietary hardware that are relatively static. Optimization for the PC (or Steam Deck) is not necessarily optimization for a Switch 2, which may even require optimization between handheld and docked modes.
carotte@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 day ago
elden ring released on PS4 and xbox one, consoles which are (on paper) less powerful than the switch 2
the game ran fine there
sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 day ago
pcoptimizedsettings.com/best-elden-ring-steam-dec…
45 fps / 90 hz on a Steam Deck, seems reasonably well optimized to me.
carotte@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 day ago
well optimized for the steam deck (or for PCs, really)
kautau@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Yeah it’s just generally still way higher powered than the switch 2. But Nintendo has always sold underpowered hardware because of their monopoly on their properties
www.pcgamer.com/…/switch-2-versus-steam-deck/
Stovetop@lemmy.world 21 hours ago
The Switch 2 is actually decently beefy for what it is—give or take certain specs, it’s about comparable to the PS4, which Elden Ring launched on and ran fine on. But Elden Ring is simply a poorly optimized game overall. It ran like shit on PC after it launched, they eventually got it into a mostly good state years later (or maybe people just upgraded hardware to the point they could brute force it to be stable).
But I guess trying to port it from x86 to Tegra for Switch 2 is another thing entirely that they apparently weren’t prepared for. If all they did was shove it behind an emulation layer or something (yikes if so), I can see why it’d suck. But given just how held together by duct tape the game is in general, I wouldn’t be surprised if they simply lack the resources or expertise to really optimize for a different architecture.
sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 day ago
… The Switch is built out of roughly the same kind of computer components as a PC, as a Deck, as a laptop.
PCs tend to have a distinct CPU and GPU, more modern Consoles and the Deck and Switch tend to use basically an APU, where the CPU and GPU are the same physical thing, and they use a different kind of RAM than a PC, such that it can be shared by the CPU and GPU functions of the APU…
(PC or dedicated GPUs have their own, different kind of RAM)
…but its not like the Switch 2 is some magical kind of completely incomparable thing.
Like … AMD and Nvidia make GPUs for PCs.
The Switch 2 uses an Nvidia APU.
The Deck uses an AMD APU.
They… both use x86_64 architecture. They both use the same general category of LPDDR RAM.
Basically, what you are saying is, is that Elden Ring is poorly optimized for cheap, Nvidia APUs, which Nintendo contracted Nvidia to develop for them, to put into their Switch 2s.
Its… not like Nvidia drivers for Elden Ring have… not been a thing, for years.
People have been playing Elden Ring on all kinds of other devices for years as well.
To use PC terminology, the Switch 2 is what you’d call a potato: technically capable of running software… but just barely.
carotte@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 day ago
the switch 2 is ARM based, not x86. idk the intricacies of the switch 2 GPU when compared to mainstream nvidia graphics cards, but I’d guess there are major differences between a mobile APU and a big boy PC GPU
come on now.