Digital Foundry - Bayonetta 2 on Switch - First Look

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2018-bayonetta-2-switch-is-a-turbocharged-wii-u-port

We might have hoped for a higher resolution when docked, but the fact is that Bayonetta 2 delivers Wii U-grade 720p in both modes. First impressions also suggest that the visual presentation is identical in each configuration too, which begs the question: with GPU clocks cut in half, where do the compromises kick in for mobile gamers?

Perhaps inevitably, it's in performance, but even here, Bayonetta 2 delivers a great experience. In the title's most demanding areas, the docked Switch offers anything up to a 10-20fps advantage over the Wii U, giving us a much closer lock to the target 60fps, allowing for much smoother, more responsive action than the original release. This is important: the original Bayonetta's performance deficiencies were eventually overcome on other platforms: PC and Xbox One X, for example. Bayonetta 2 is a Nintendo-exclusive, meaning that the Switch version is our best route forward to a better port.

While the game more closely hits its performance target, there are still issues. The Tegra X1's modest bandwidth - shared between CPU and GPU - seems to be the major bottleneck here, with larger, more explosive transparent pyrotechnics causing obvious slowdown. These issues are amplified in mobile mode, but based on the initial tests we carried out, Bayonetta 2 on Switch still manages to outperform the Wii U original. The native 720p presentation also shines on the handheld screen. Whichever way you look at it, this port is a win-win: improved performance and the ability to take a classic Wii U title with you, where you can play it wherever you want.

What a shame.

Not 4k on a 7" screen, literally unplayable.

Looks like a huge upgrade. Nice port.... will have to scoop it up.

So it looks the same, the framerate is a bit better, but still inconsistent. Not the best port ever, in other words.

I'm fine with the better performance, bring it on!

I have expressed my opinion that Switch may not be stronger than Wii U. I stand by that opinion, I will probably end up getting these ports for collection purposes at some point and to play it on the go. However, I am not disappointed by this news as I expected not much in graphical boost if the performance really did get the type of boost that media has reported. At best, I thought they may try for 900p but I was honestly being very hopeful for that.

But you get to pay full price.

In docked mode Nintendo Switch GPU (384 GFlops) is somewhat more powerful than the Wii U GPU (176 GFlops)

In handheld mode (153 GFlops) Switch is somewhat less powerful than Wii U (again, 176 GFlops).

Based on single precision (fp32) floating point.

Graphics feature-set, Nvidia's largely off-the-shelf (but lower clocked) Tegra X1 which is 2014-2015 Maxwell-based (using Shader Model 5.x) vs AMD's semi-custom "Latte" GPU for WiiU, which was based on the Radeon 4000 series (Rv7xx) from 2008. Shader Model 4.1 (and a low-end version at that).

To be fair, same with the Wii U version, especially if you hunt for the dual pack.

In my honest opinion, if you make a game intended to be played in 60 FPS, and the game consistently goes below that, you are a shitty developer. You're a shitty developer who isn't able to make the game work as intended, and you are a shitty developer who didn't decide to go with graphics that do work on the hardware you make it for. Want 60 fps? Go with graphics that can handle it perhaps? You want pretty graphics, but can't hold 60 FPS with said graphics? Make it 30 FPS. It's not rocket science and Platinum still manage to fail.

This problem persisting + asking for full price for an old game = **** you, Platinum.

Sounds good enough for me. Will be buying this.

Make some new games, this looks horrible.

It's bandwidth bound.... that's Switch's problem and is the reason why the gap isn't as big as the specs would make you believe.

Wii U was better balanced in that regard.

I wouldn't go that far off putting Platinum a shitty developer to say the least, the bandwidth issue is it's own, thing. This means, if you try to measure Switch and Wii U head to head, using raw numbers and not taking into account the design and context of the console is a futile effort. Plus, it wasn't Platinum games fault on making it full price, that comes from Nintendo themselves.

That does not prove Switch is more powerful at all. I have said over and over, no matter how you design a Wii U title, some of the assets are going to be used up by the second screen. Even when the second screen is not being used, the assets are designated for it. If games could be developed with none of the assets going to the second screen, then we would have a more fair comparison. We will not truly ever know exactly how powerful Wii U was to know if Switch is a true step forward. It looks like Switch is a sidestep to Wii U which is not a bad thing at all. Switch is a handheld (it's really a console despite being handheld is a bonus feature) and what it shows off for handheld technology is extremely impressive. There is no way two years ago you could convince me that a handheld could do the things Switch is doing.

@scatteh316: Yeah, I notice that after I posted my response.

my pc can already play this at 4k/60

I wasn't expecting much of an upgrade. Not enough there to make me want to double dip.

Lets just admit that the Switch is the fully realized WiiU and that you are stuck with last gen hardware at a cost that is greater than current gen. The focus for the Switch should be next gen 3DS games.

720p docked and no AA? Yeah no thanks.

It's a shame they couldn't use Tegra Parker in Switch. It's not only Pascal-based, but has like twice the bandwidth of Tegra X1.

50 GB/sec vs 25 GB/sec on the X1.

Tegra Parker just wasn't ready for mass production in a consumer product at the time Switch launched.

@freedomfreak: indeed my friend, indeed.

Nintendo: "Lets make a portable hybrid console so gamer's have a choice on how and where to play!"

Gamers: "Lets judge Switch graphics of a port"......

Bayo 2, really?

Edit: Oh yeah, of course, through emulation.

Well, your opinion is objectively wrong, but you do you.

It does struggle a bit with memory bandwidth though because it doesn't have a fast pool like Wii U does, which cause it to have some trouble with high resolutions. It's definitively faster in every other way, but that's why Wii U ports can struggle to reach higher resolutions than Wii U if time isn't spent optimizing them properly. With that said, I'm willing to bet that you completely ignore any ports or facts that dispute your opinion.

Yup will be double dipping.. :)

aren't they being sued for lying about a games performance?

Good enough for me, I only planned on playing in portable mode anyways.

Looks like ass...lol

I'm with Richard on this one.

Bayonetta 2 on Switch is a Win-Win regardless how you look at it; Improved performance and the ability to take a truly amazing Wii U classic with you and play it wherever you want. That's more than enough for me.

And for those of you chiming in about the price, I'd like to point out that paying full price gets you both games (Bayonetta 1 and 2).

@freedomfreak: @ShepardCommandr: @2mrw: @Heil68:

lol all the playstation tears.....

fact is the texture filtering is better which makes it look sharper. also this actually delivers a 60fps experience that platinum tried to achieve on wiiU.

plus...

in handheld mode it keeps the enhanced texture filtering and 720P resolution plus still has better framerate than wiiU!

good job platinum games. take my money!

@KBFloYd: It's not 60FPS. It has an average of about 15FPS more. There's been a little improvement in texture filtering, which you hardly notice, and that's it. They're still charging 60 bucks for it. Which makes the WiiU even funnier. As if it was a beta they charged a lot of money for. Including the games.

It's how Monster Hunter was, visually, stuck on Nintendo systems, but once it was released on systems that were with the times, it showed how much better it could be.

Bayonetta 3 720P/hardly 60FPS. It's gonna be like playing Bayonetta on the Xbox360.

Definitely not double dipping now if they weren’t even half assed enough to make it an upgrade from the Wii U version.

I’ll wait for Bayo 3.

this.

i can only imagine how it will look scaled to my 4k tv. ew

What would they upgrade? The Switch is only slightly more powerful than the Wii U. It gets 10-15 more fps, which is pretty significant.

Resolution bump while docked is the most obvious improvement they could and should have made. Just look at MK8 Deluxe.
I realise it's just a port, but I would have been persuaded to double dip if they had made improvements to the graphical fidelity. Switch has double the RAM Wii U had.

It’s still strange to me that a game with such poor performance scored so many 10’s. 20-30fps drops should count for something. I seem to remember bad performance being a bullet point in the Homefront The Revolution, Bloodborne and Nier Automata reviews to name a few. And Nintendo has a track record of solid performing titles. So why did their worst performing title ever get a pass?

Already purchased and waiting to be played on switch. Yatzee!

This is the one thing that has me scared to purchase this right now. It is going to look like total shit upscaled on a 4K TV. I want to play it again, but damn this sucks. I may just end up waiting for it to go on sale now.

Will be playing this in handheld mode only, just like most of my Switch games.

It probably reviewed well because it's one of the best action games ever created and easily the best game on the WiiU. And for performance, it's still one of the better performing console games. Most 60fps console games aren't truly 60 fps at all aside from fighting games and some racers. By console standards, Bayonetta 2 performs well. 60 being a best case scenario, with around 45-50 being the average. Dips below that are very rare.

Bloodborne (which also scored very well) had terrible frame pacing issues on top of only being a max 30fps with tons of dips. Not really the same thing as Bayonetta 2 at its worst still performs much better than Bloodborne at its best.

As for the part in bold, Bayonetta is not a Nintendo developed game. Even so, Nintendo has put out games that do perform much worse. Breath of the Wild for example, and that's one of the highest scoring games of all time.

Interesting. Do you consider Nintendo to be a shitty developer as well?

Lol. That is a good question more I think about it.

@KBFloYd said:

@freedomfreak: @ShepardCommandr: @2mrw: @Heil68:

lol all the playstation tears.....

fact is the texture filtering is better which makes it look sharper. also this actually delivers a 60fps experience that platinum tried to achieve on wiiU.

plus...

in handheld mode it keeps the enhanced texture filtering and 720P resolution plus still has better framerate than wiiU!

good job platinum games. take my money!

lolz, like how Nintendo dropped Wiiu

SONY wins again..awww yeahhh

Looks like a lazy port to me. :(

it's not locked 60 fps but still you get a pretty much 60fps experience most of the time. only in demanding parts are slight drops. compared to wiiU dropping frames even you running around the hub area.
the texture filtering is noticeable while playing. youll see...or maybe you won't since you are not buying it right?

they are charging 60$ for 2 games(good deal). it is actually 50$ solo. sony is charging 50$ for a PS2 remaster. why not bitch about the price there?...SOTC actually 40$ now but was 50$ during preorders.

actually monster hunter was released on PC before nintendo and no one gave a shit. i guess graphics have come along way since then. also capcom advertised this game heavily on every sony conference because they had nothing to show for a whole year. also the only thing better about the game is graphics.

bayo 3 on switch? isnt that how playing bloodborne and dark souls and nioh on ps4 is like? like playing it on 360? japanese games are not known for graphics. bayonetta isnt assassins creed, mass effect, or battlefront. it would look prety much the same.

@KBFloYd: I paid 40 bucks for Shadow of the Colossus, which is a full blown remake with a little extra content. This new Bayonetta collection, which is pretty much the same as the WiiU version, is priced at a full 60 dollars(again). Not to mention the first Bayonetta comes as a download code.

It honestly doesn't matter which version of Bayonetta 2 you get. Switch or WiiU, because you're gonna end up having to buy a pro controller to not make the game a complete chore to play.

Bayonetta on a proper console would run and look better. Bayonetta 3 will run at about the same settings as the first Bayonetta on 360 does. I don't like it when games are being held back.

that's the thing it's not held back. look at nioh bloodborne dark souls, neir automata. they all look like shit even on your wimpstation 4.
that's the choice from the developers of these kinds of games.

capcom is the exeption to the rule. they always try to use good graphics in their games. Street fighter 4, monster hunter world, resident evil 5 or 7. they always try to be cutting edge.

actually konami also goes for graphics. with kojima anyway... so that's two companies.

also the game is 50$...10$ more than that PS2 game that is a remake of a remake.

Choice of the developers? Absolutely, although in this case, Platinum doesn't have much choice. They're working with Xbox360-tier hardware. I don't blame them, completely. It's Nintendo's fault for forcing weak hardware upon them.

Platinum has made games that look and run better than a remaster of Bayonetta 2. And Capcom isn't the exception to the rule. Fact: Bayonetta 2 would've looked and run better on a Ps4 or Xbox One (X). And I would be more inclined to buy it, since I wouldn't be buying the same WiiU game again.

It's 60 bucks here. 20 bucks more than SotC. SotC offers a fresher experience for a lot less money. That wins.

60 bucks there? what do you live in thailand?

also i disagree bayo 2 and 3 would just be neir automata all over again on ps4.