Poll: Are You Bothered By The Frame Rate For Paper Mario: TTYD On Switch?

I never even notice the difference 😭 can’t wait to laugh at all the 30 fps haters here:)
anyways, bet in twenty years people are gonna hate 60fps and think 120 is the way to go

I'm getting the game either way at a later date, but I'm willing to wait for a potential confirmation that the next console will indeed boost the performance of Switch games.

No way it runs at the same framerate as almost every modern Nintendo game! (joke)

This is a Full-on remake. This game uses really high resolution compared to the low-res original (GameCube had low resolution). The reflections, shadows, and overall lighting is beyond what most Switch games are capable of. This isn't the original game, and is pretty much a whole new game, so should accordingly be put on modern standards (Tears of the Kingdom, for instance, runs at the same framerate as new TTYD and it runs just fine).

Also I didn't see anyone complaining about framerate when the first trailer came out, guess no one noticed until someone told them!

30fps has never really bothered me. 60 is obviously ideal, though, and having a PC, I tend to play a lot of games at 120fps or more. But for a slower-paced RPG, it's not a huge deal.

I'm not bothered at all, I'm just glad we're getting the game.

Not sure if I'll get it at launch, but as far as it's 30 stable as a rock I'm totally fine with it. Not a game that you need pixel perfect action.

Unfortunate, but fine. Game could chug and stutter all it wants. Still won't stop me from getting the game I've been asking for ages.

I have never even noticed a difference; unless the game is switching between framerates, I don't notice and don't care.

I'm more concerned if Nintendo decides to censor certain parts of the game or messes with the balance of combat.

So this is Remaster/Remake or Demaster/Demake, because this is confusing cause downgrades, like lower FPS, are part of Demasters/Demakes, but it's sold as full price Remaster/Remake...

I am annoyed but I can survived.
I was more annoyed with tales of Symphonia downgrade

I recommend a lot of people here get their vision checked immediately.

Just so long as it’s stable I’m fine. BOTW runs at 30 FPS and loads of people love that game. They can survive.

Seems pretty unacceptable to me when something like Metroid Prime Remastered runs at 60fps and also practically looks like a new game.

Even a full-blown remake that was far more transformative, like Super Mario RPG, ran at 60fps with little issue.

That said, I'm actually not unhappy about this, since it means the re-release didn't fully devalue my GameCube copy of the game.

I am more bothered by the censored dialogues.

Not bothered by it as I have the original still. Great for those that haven’t played it.

It's a bit disappointing knowing that the remake is a lower FPS than the 20-year-old original.

That said...I was surprised to learn that the original even was 60 fps. I would've totally believed both versions were 30 fps based on my memory of the game.

I think 30 fps is totally fine for a game like this. I'll probably notice for a few seconds when I start up, but get used to it fairly quickly. It's a slow-paced, (mostly) 2D RPG. It'll be fine.

No. The whole frame rate discussion is exhausting. Gamers should try complaining less over inconsequential things and enjoying their hobby more.

@SViper lower fps, but everything else has been improved. Resolution, effects, textures.

It's a choice; focus more on fps or focus more on image quality.

@Rob3008 "Gamers should try complaining less over inconsequential things and enjoying their hobby more."

This is exactly why I'm finding myself engaging less and less in online gaming discourse.

People are free to feel disappointed / feel how they feel about anything relating to gaming (and tbh I've probably shared a fair bit of negativity myself!). But I'm having a much better time just enjoying my games over going online and seeing a bunch of people complaining about X, Y and Z.

@Rob3008

Different standards and different opinions on the matter does not equate complaining. The game looks fine, and I hope lots of people enjoy it.

I'm just not going to invest 60 dollars into a game when I have the gamecube original running at 60 fps, right there below my TV.

Nothing wrong with that. I bought Eiyuden Chronicle on PS5 instead. I'm enjoying it, and I can still play 1,000 Year Door if I want to. I might purchase 1,000 Year Door for my brother's family so they can enjoy it though.

I'm honestly just happy I don't have to sell an organ or two to get this game. Just over three weeks left!

Frankly, the FPS discussion is exhausting. For a game like this, as long as it's a mostly stable 30, it's fine. I understand why a higher frame rate is important in some genres (like FPS games, shmups, some RTS titles, etc.), but the timings can easily be adjusted to in a turn-based RPG. Also - and I'm not the only one to point this out - the GCN version is in SD. This version is in a HD engine and built almost from the ground up.

I don't really understand the downgrade in that regard, to he honest, specially considering it's a full priced game...
I will get It because I LOVE the original, but I'll get It in a sale somewhere.

In any case, Metroid Prime Remastered is the way to go, Nintendo!

I remember as a child playing Sonic R on a computer with a 100mhz processor at 5 seconds per frame (not frames per second) and still somehow having fun. This not having 60 is an annoyance, but I'll live.

As long as the game isn’t a stuttering mess then I am completely fine with 30fps. It’s not like an RPG needs 60fps anyways.

My general stance on framerates is stability over everything. I'll take a stable 30 over shooting for 60 that fluctuates between 33 and 57. I'm even less pressed about framerates in a game like this where unless you're living and dying by the superguard you'll be fine. I do wonder why it was lowered, but I'm not upset by it being lowered.

From a technical perspective, I don't understand why PMTTYD Remastered cannot run at 60FPS on the Switch? Did we get an explanation?

It's an RPG, why would 60 fps matter? Stability is what's important, and for the record, I simply do not believe anyone who says they would have noticed that the game was running at 30 instead of 60 FPS if no one had told them.

30 stable frames per second is fine for such a game.

id gladly rather take the original game 1:1 ported than a remake that compromises in any way. it looked fantastic before, and the idea that they couldnt make it look better without fully halving the framerate seems like total bs to me.

but that's just me. I like old games. 👍

I originally purchased and played through SMTV on the Switch in it's entirety; all 3 routes, all side quests done, over 100 hours. And outside of a few frustrations, I really enjoyed my time with it. It's a very pretty game, but it clearly dipped below 30 frequently, and it was more than just "noticeable" - it felt slow.

Then I saw a mod for Ryujinx that made the game run at 60FPS, and it just looked right. And then I tried it out; as it turns out, the game just feels better at 60FPS. It really makes the Switch version feel straight up bad.

All of that to say, I'm sure it'll be just fine at 30 FPS. But I'm also sure that it'd feel and look better at 60 FPS. And once the game is out and modders have a 60FPS patch, I'm sure that'll be even more evident.

With that being said, enjoy the game however! It's a fantastic experience either way. I recently replayed the GC version using an HD texture pack, so I'll probably pass on this version. Love it for all of those that are playing for the first time, though! You're definitely in for a treat.

@tektite_captain

half the frame rate is exceedingly easy to see. and even if you don't notice it consciously, it does make everything look and feel better, the entire time you are playing.

OTOH, If the original was 30 fps, I wouldnt complain at all about the remake being the same.

@beaus27 It is a full-remake. It's pretty much double resolution of the original, much more detail, shadows, overall lighting, and reflections. This put a major cost and therefore could not run stable 60fps (the original didn't anyway), therefore they capped it to 30 to make it look as good as possible and still stay stable.

I can play Overwatch at 240fps and this at 30. All about the genre and knowing the hardware limitations. Do I prefer 60+ in everything? Well, of course. Will it stop me from enjoying this game? Not in the slightest.

I'm a big believer that consistency is more important that peak framerate. I'll take a solid 30 over an inconsistent 60.

I still prefer 60 FPS.

if the original "didnt run at 60fps consistently anyway," as some have pointed out, then consistent 60fps wouldve been a better upgrade anyway. it was already an excellent looking game that needed no help from nintendo's current art department.

I still play starfox/wing to this day, 15 fps, and guess what its better and more playable than most 60 or120fps games! Take that nerdlinger!

@OctolingKing13 There are already people like that, and they are just as insufferable as you're imagining.

I won't pretend I don't notice the difference between 30 and 60 (I used to play BF and CoD back to back), but I guess I'm just happy to be getting a GameCube game whose remake isn't a huge disappointment.
Like Tales of Symphonia or Crystal Chronicles.

I'll always be happy to see a game run at 60fps, I think that's kinda the idea for performance outside of competitive stuff, but 30fps certainly doesn't hurt too much if the game itself is great. For this type of game it's probably a worthwhile sacrifice to have such gorgeous looking visuals.

(Plus we all know it'll get a 60fps patch once the new Switch is out, right???)

Are You Bothered By The Frame Rate For Paper Mario: TTYD On Switch?

The answer is yes. It's suppose to be better, not worst than the original. Remember it's not a modern game they're remaking, it's a 20 year old game.

It is more disappointing for me. It should be able to handle 60FPS, 60FPS really should be the standard again. Is it going to stop me from getting it? No.

@sanderev but original game runs at 60, so never heard game getting serious downgrade for Remaster/Remake aka at least some parts stick to same quality when Remastered/Remade but not downgraded!

Not in the slightest and I still think it's silly to make such a big deal out of it. The game will absolutely still play perfectly fine.

I mean, to each their own of course, but heck if I'm gonna let this bother me and stop me from playing this absolute gem of a remake.

This game has much more advanced lighting and reflection effects, having those and a stable frame rate on the switch's outdated hardware isn't possible

@tektite_captain I agree with you about stability being more important, but the difference between 30 and 60 fps is a noticeable one, especially in terms of how responsive a game feels.

I’m unbothered. I don’t notice anything off from the trailers. It still looks lovely to me. Stability is what really matters.

It’d be great if 60 was still possible, but apparently there had to be a tradeoff for making this look so stunning. This is an RPG and set in a paper world at that. I was never particularly wowed by the original’s performance anyway. This is absolutely not a dealbreaker in the slightest. I’m glad people won’t need to shell-out close to $100 just to get to play this fantastic game anymore.

@LexKitteh Yet it's possible in Metroid Prime Remastered. Maybe it's not that it's impossible, maybe it's laziness that's the issue.

I've pre-ordered it so it's seemingly not a deal-breaker for me! It's a bit disappointing but I think the more stylized world masks the lower framerate a bit and I'm still eager to see how they've remade one of my favourite games.

So long as it's mostly stable I don't care.

there Is no defending 30fps, 60fps is just better

It bothers me a lot. It's not a deal breaker, but it goes against what a remake should aim to achieve, which is to improve on the original, or at least match the original in every way. At the very least, the game went from a day one purchase for me, to a I'll wait until I have time and wrap up other games that are a higher priority now.

i think It's extremely Non-tendo to release a compromised game that causes people to argue that the hardware isnt up to the task as a defense of Nintendo.

the whole POINT is to work within the bounds of older, more stable, more affordable tech.

This whole argument is stupid, I just wanna play video games

People are blowing the frame rate debate of this game out of proportion. The haters believe that since the game came out on GC with 60 fps, the switch remake should be at 60 fps too. And that side has some valid points, like the super mario rpg remake being 60 fps and other more intensive games hitting 60 fps too.

The other side believes that 30 fps is fine, especially if it can't run at a stable 60 without compromises (links awakening remake and pennys big breakaway). Considering the visual improvements of the remake, this side is fine with sacrificing framerate for visuals.

Overall we don't know why Nintendo made the remake run at 30 fps. But the important thing is to not judge this "book" by its cover.

If you're a fan on the original and don't like how the switch remake runs, don't just toss it aside as bad, wait till people get their hands on it and see their views! It might encourage you to buy the remake and see that the lower framrate wasn't that bad.
If you're a fan of rpgs and want to play this game, don't let this discourse discourage you from giving this game a try. Framerate isn't a deal breaker for every game.

Also NL, PLEASE don't milk the Framerate discourse about this game. Thank you

Not really. 60 fps is a necessity, but there kind of wasn't much of a reason for the original game to use that, in my opinion.

If I can play through games like Doom 2016, Kirby Star Allies, Luigi's Mansion 3, and Animal Crossing: New Horizons just fine, then I don't see how Paper Mario: The Thousand-Year Door remake could be an exception for me.

I'm completely unbothered by it, mostly because I never played it originally. Now if we could just get Galaxy 2 before the year is over, that'd be great. 😁

Not too important, specially for a low paced RPG. But it is a Gamecube game remake that already ran at 60FPS. That bothers me, feels lazy like the Tales of Symphonia remake. Doesn't sound too difficult for a game like that to be 60fps. Like it should not not even be hard for an aged system like the Switch today.

i usualy crave for 60fps in the games, but if Nintendo or any companies managed to have a stable 30fps that good for me, what i dont like is unstable framerate(be it 30 or 60fps) i desire/want the smootly framerate they can provide

Doesn’t bother me at all.

Anyone with a modded Switch will have 60fps

I’m simply unable to play 30fps unless it’s like a chess game or something.

Yes 60 would be great, but I will not miss out on Paper Mario because of the framerate. 30 is totally playable.

I love it when a game runs smooth.

Yes. Because it affects gameplay. And some commands will be less precise due to the change.

This really doesn't help the "joke" that the Switch can barely run any game without framerate issues, even games from previous generations.

I normally don't care much, but when the original ran at 60 fps on much weaker hardware, it's a bit disappointing.

It's a slow game, I probably won't notice the difference. On the other hand, I do like the graphical update, it's well worth sacrificing framerate for...in this case.

As long as the game doesn't break or crash, I'm fine with 30FPS.

Not bothered in an RPG like this. If it were a remake of say Mario Galaxy and the frame rate was halved I’d be annoyed since I find smoother frame rates more important in games like 3D platformers but not for Paper Mario.

I don't think I've ever seen a game get this much backlash for having a perfectly stable 30 FPS framerate. Where were these complaints with every other first-party Nintendo game ever? Bowser's Fury is a phenomenal game, but have you seen the slowdown? Same with BotW. Kirby Star Allies was also only 30 FPS, among several other examples. Back on Wii U, Mario Kart 8 with 3-4 players was inexcusably choppy.

I think the people upset about it are just a very vocal minority, but it's upsetting and frustrating when Nintendo is beautifully remaking one of their most beloved games of all time after 20 years of fans begging for the franchise to go back to the series' roots. They're even adding completely unnecessary but very much appreciated features, like brand-new battle music renditions for each chapter and even areas within chapters. This should be a massive victory for most Nintendo fans.

That's not to say Nintendo should be infallible to criticism, but this really shouldn't be a bug controversy. This game warrants the $60 price tag much more than Skyward Sword, which had some control tweaks and other minor quality-of-life improvements like a less annoying Fi. But otherwise, it was mostly just a higher-resolution port.

I distinctly remember before the release of Origami King, people who were upset with the state of modern Paper Mario were told to "be grateful" and "Nintendo doesn't owe you anything." Now I imagine it's a lot of the same people who are losing their minds about this, when the character animations in Origami King and Color Splash were deliberately made to be like 2 FPS to create an ugly and off-putting stop motion effect.

I've seen side-by-side comparisons, and I literally can't tell a difference. If rumors are to be believed, we may be getting a new console soon that can retroactively bost performance anyways. This game should have been nothing but positive press and a token of good will toward the community, but it's getting negative PR anyways for what in my opinion is a pretty petty reason. If I were Nintendo, I would be throwing my hands up right now and saying, "Screw this--our fans suck."

I dont know why Nintendo can't do what the bigger consoles do and give us the option of a performance or quality mode.
Surely it wouldn't be difficult for them to tone down the resolution and visual effects to target a solid 60 fps for those that prefer it.
I won't be picking this up at launch, I'm going to wait to get a pre-owned copy as I'm not supporting 30fps in a 2024 remaster.

Would I prefer better? Sure. But as long as I can play without worrying about the game crashing, booting me off, or freezing I’m going to enjoy myself.

I am really bothered by the 30fps, since I find it ironic that the GameCube version ran at 60fps. But I will still buy the game.

Imagine Evangelion got re-released but with the framerate cut from 24 to 12fps. You'd see a lot fewer fans saying "but look, it's higher res now! Look at the new reflections!"

I don't understand this blindspot where people look past how animations look in a videogame. Playing Paper Mario 64 on NSO right now, it's 60fps, the character animations are simple and beautiful, Mario's hammer attack is like 3 frames with a smear even. I can't imagine sacrificing half those frames for "enhancements" the game never needed.

First off, I can barely even notice the framerate in this case. But more importantly, Origami King was 30fps and it's pretty obvious this remake is being built from the group up with that game's engine. They're not just porting a Gamecube game and downgrading the framerate, and I wholeheartedly believe IntSys will tweak the timing of the action commands to accomodate the new framerate.

It's definitely not a deal breaker, but damn is it pathetic

Not in the slightest. Bored of this whole obsession with 60fps and games not having it being "bad". Didn't even realise the original had it, not gonna notice any difference with this version.

Surely anybody who seriously cares about games running at or above 60fps wouldn't be playing games on Switch in the first place?

@Not_Soos You summed this up perfectly. Even though I don't like TTYD, I don't care about framerate. 30 FPS is perfectly manageable.

Pft, I don't see why it can't be 15fps just like Starfox on Ye Olde SNES. That's a PROPER frame rate.

(and to answer the article question : No)

I feel like this whole frame rate discussion is exposing one of those cases in human history where everybody thought we were having the same experience as one another but we weren’t.

I didn’t even know until recently that games in the past were running at 60fps. I thought they were the same as TV shows, and aren’t those 30fps? And movies have been 24 fps for like a century, and I’ve never thought they looked stuttering or whatever. I find them a completely convincing illusion of motion. So, no surprise, I can’t even see the difference between 30 and 60 fps. Even when shown side by side, it takes all my concentration to see the difference. I can’t imagine being cognizant of this while playing… and yet a few years ago I was watching a streamer play some open world game and everything seemed to going along fine and he was complaining the whole time about frame rate. “OMG this game is all over the place - it just dropped to like 40 fps” and so forth.

What is going on in the visual processing of a person who is not only able to perceive this but finds it so jarring that it leaps out at them even while playing a presumably engrossing game? Does some one like that find movies to just be like slideshows or something?

Not at all bothered — as long as it's a smooth, consistent framerate

I don't have bad eyes so I notice the fps difference.

For a game like this, it will make zero difference. And anyone who says they’d notice without being told is a big fibber.

Metroid prime was a much more impressive difference between versions (including lighting, by the way). Also, some people are saying that the game runs full 1080p, but it's only 900p.
Also, do any of the people people who are saying that prime remastered used the same code and this didn't have a source, because I can't find anything.
And no, calling one a remake and a remaster means nothing, those terms are really inconsistent.
@PikminMarioKirby that is incredibly redundant.

“60 frames per second?!

In my day we were lucky to get 60 frames per year , and any frames we did get we were damn grateful for! Why, I remember when young Norman couldn’t even find a bana—“

I know, most NTSC NES games were 60fps, but humour me for the sake of the joke! 😌

@PikminMarioKirby okay then, show the evidence.

I literally could not care less.
I'm not an elitist.

@Clammy This isn't a stock RPG. People will notice, especially those who have played a PC game before, if not the GameCube original.

On a separate note, why are so many Mario fans just dismissing the framerate, if not a certain obnoxious group mocking those who do care?

@OctolingKing13 120fps is the way to go for certain games, especially for shooters...but it's not that you see a difference between 120 and 60 (you can't really) - you FEEL the difference. I recently started playing Fortnite at 120, and one day the game settings got defaulted to 60 and when I was playing I was like "why does the game feel so slippery, is something wrong with the servers?" With more frame info you can absolutely feel a difference. As far as 30 vs 60 goes, my eyes really are sensitive to fps and the 60 goes a long way to eliminate blurring for me. Plus it helps with timing responsiveness like there is in TTYD battles. Though I will take a stable 30 over wildly fluctuating 60 fps anyway.

@PikminMarioKirby Just one note on your Metroid Prime geometrical comment, YES BUT they did rebuild from scratch quite a lot of models and assets throughout, not just smoothed them out.

@Dang_69 Yeah, I know! Metroid Prime Remastered was a great way to bring the game back, but saying it did a bigger job than TTYD isn't right, as it did most of the same things and more.

No 60 fps is a deal breaker for me. Not paying $50 for a game that can't run at 60.

I have the original on my Steam Deck OLED, upscaled to 720p, widescreen and a full 60 fps. I'll stick to that.

@Not_Soos Simply put, standards in gaming have changed industry wide. Consumers expect 60fps nowadays, especially for a 20-year-old game in TTYD's case, as you said yourself.

BotW came out 7 years ago, before this consumer shift happened. And "nobody" played Mario Kart 8 because it was stuck on the Wii U. And in Bowser's Fury's case, it was seen as a new side game that cam bundled in with a bigger one (that if memory served me right, ran at 60fps with speed boost)

@PikminMarioKirby The original did run at a stable 60fps the vast majority of the time. I don't know if it was 99.99% of the time, or 99.9999%, or whatever, but any dips were very rare. If you have evidence that there were frequent dips, then show us. Otherwise, please stop spreading this false claim.

I never played the original so I want to get it but I am disappointed to hear that it was 60 fps to 30 fps in this remake.

Now I am a person who will always want 60 over 30 but there are a few select games that are fine with 30. Like turn based game which this is.

Now if the original was 30 fps then I wouldn't be bothered to to be honest but knowing that it has a downgrade in fps does leave a bad taste though.

will prolly be upgraded on switch 2.0. that being said I dont care as much.
as for performance, specs, etc etc, I would appreciate more frequent hardware upgrades for the switch tho. a new fully backwards compatible switch every four years would be awesome.

@Chaotic_Neutral I think there is a very few select games that have this feature. If I am not mistaken I think Hyrule Warriors has this option.

@Not_Soos On the contrary, I imagine that many of the same people who said "be grateful" and "Nintendo doesn't owe you anything" regarding Origami King are the same ones saying "be grateful" and "Nintendo doesn't owe you anything" regarding TTYD.

Action based games then 60 is a must, in this sort of RPG then 30 is OK. Kind of weird it's lower than the original

@Samalik I think the shift happened before BotW by a few years...I think a lot of the time it has been an expectation of "what the game is/does" vs "it has to be 60." A giant open world game on Switch? 30fps seems fine. A sandbox 3d platform like Mario Odyssey? People were unhappy when some of the early trailers in 2017 seemed to run in 30 fps. Smash has been 60 since gamecube and people would have been upset if Ultimate was in 30. People are and have been more lenient with rpgs, but when the previous game had 60fps for TTYD and it has button timing mechanics, it makes sense why the expectation is different there. They did make the timing more forgiving in the new version supposedly.

Caring about frame rates is silly to me in a game with cartoon paper characters and (slow action command) turn based combat. As long as the game runs smooth and by all accounts it does, then I'm happy and especially after the glow up it got in the detail of the graphics.

FPS is such a silly thing to be so hung up on like some people are. I care more about the quality of the game like gameplay, story, or world building. Constantly wanting higher FPS is like thinking you've gotta have the latest phone and all it's latest tech, when in all honesty it's superfluous and I've seen it feed into major spending addictions for it. They're both gonna constantly generally improve over time, but decades from now after the FPS for all games this gen are outta date, what you're gonna remember is the game itself. As long as the game runs smooth that's all that matters.

Plus, it's the fricken TTYD. Hype!

@swoose Paper Mario 64 is already 30fps, so you should be fine with the TTYD remake- it won't be choppier than that!

I agree with the principle, though: halving the framerate is such a blow to gameplay and graphical quality that there's really no justifying it. In faster-paced games, especially (not TTYD!), all of the detail gained by graphical and resolution upgrades just disappears in a big blur as soon as anything starts to move! So what's the point?

This is one of my favourite Nintendo games so I’m just happy we’re getting it at all.

However I do find it odd that 20+ years later the frame rate is dropping. I get it looks nicer but even so personally I’d have preferred less graphic fidelity with 60fps.

Though like I said I’m grateful we’re going to be playing TTYD again on modern hardware!

@smoreon This is no false claim. In Flurrie's house, during curtain scenes I believe, and possibly during scenes where there's 100s of NPCS. I don't really remember because I didn't really care when I played it lol.

The original wasn't glitchy at all. It looked phenomenal. I'm just saying how can we expect the remake to be smooth 60 if the original wasn't completely. And the remake is very ahead of the Switch's standards and is one of the best looking games on the console, so if we combine these two things, it's near impossible to get a Switch version to. They preferred smooth 30 over unstable 60 which is what majority of people believe is the right move, especially considering these poll results and the fact that pretty much every casual fan will not care at all and will just enjoy the graphics as they are.

Trust me the original is pretty much my favorite game of all time (tied with a couple others). I'm a lover for the GameCube, and specifically TTYD. I just believe the Remake does so much justice to the original and doesn't deserve all the hate it's getting from some people online.

It just seems really ridiculous that an RPG that ran at 60FPS on the GameCube can’t run at 60FPS on modern hardware. Especially because we have games like Metroid Prime Remastered on Switch… whatever. At least we’re getting the Switch 2 next year, very likely this will run at 60FPS on that

@eaglebob345 When there isn't even a demo out, and the only way to see footage is through promo video, which naturally has a 24 frames per standard output, of course nobody notices! That doesn't change that it's still a big deal that the older game runs better than the newer version.

@PikminMarioKirby Thanks for clarifying- I'll see if I can verify that later.
I distinctly remember a slight stutter outside the train as well, but these are all incredibly tiny nitpicks that take up a few seconds of a what, 30-hour game? (Like 0.01% of playtime.) It just seems disingenuous to say its performance was unstable, if it's anywhere near as good as I'm remembering. (And we could very well see that the Switch version has just as many dips, if not more!)

@Samalik Don't be ludicrous, you know what I meant.

Again, as long as it has enough FPS to run smooth that's all that matters to me. This article asked our opinion and I gave it. No need for the sarcasm.

My opinion is the same for this as it was for Tales of Symphonia and Pikmin 1 and 2; releasing ”remasters” of 20 year old games, running at half the framerate of the original versions is totally unacceptable and an absolute dealbreaker for me.

It makes these releases feel like cheap cashgrabs with not enough love and work put into them.

I normally love remasters, it’s great for game preservation and to make modern adjustments to games that can sometimes feel a little outdated, but it need to be done properly.

@smoreon you remembered correct. The train bit was the only time it dropped frames. The rest was consistent 60fps. I replayed this 2 years ago.

I mean it's a design choice, and they went with pushing the visuals. I much prefer the fluidity of 60fps, but resolution also matters to me as I don't like blurry visuals.

Well first of all, we could do with less of this infantile talk of 'haters'.
If what you have to say about such views is valid it'll stand up on its own merits.

Secondly, the main issue is that this game was never a good candidate for a remake with updated graphics to begin with.
The issue with Thousand Year Door is the lack of availability, not its presentation.
It looked amazing on GameCube, and personally I think the original still looks better than the remake in some environments.
A simple port at a lower cost would more than have sufficed.
Paper Mario 64 is a far better candidate for a remake, charming though it is the graphics do look a tad dated.

In any case, as many have pointed out, Metroid Prime managed 60 fps with updated graphics. It is scarely believable that a first person shooter could attain this but not an RPG.

I'll get the game because I don't have another way to play it, and it'll probably be fine, but making a game run worse than the original from 20 years ago and charging full price is a bad look, it just is.
Not capable of making it run as well as the original from 20 years ago? Port it as is then, sell for under full price.

It's struggling on Switch hardware? Well then release the new hardware sooner, we didn't force Nintendo to milk the Switch dry.

To answer the question, yes it does bother me, not because I think it'll affect my enjoyment of the game that much, but because of the contempt it shows the customer base.

@N00BiSH
No-one is stopping you, you don't need to comment on the issue if it eats into your gaming time.

@PikminMarioKirby
Not about noticing the framerate, people are anticipating how it might effect the gameplay, in particular the action commands.

@Greatluigi
Breath of the Wild wasn't a remake; of course if a remake of a 20 year old game runs worse than the original, it's going to put that fact into sharp relief. And that isn't invalid.

Not bothered at all myself. As long as the framerate is stable and isn't an absolute jittery mess 95% of the time, I don't care. And this goes for any game honestly.

I'm just so over all the framerate talk. People will make a huge deal about PM running at 30fps and say it's "unplayable" but will happily play a 30fps game on Playstation.

@MSaturn

One of the reasons that people probably did not notice was A) Because of the TVs we had with those older systems, quality was not nearly as good as it is today and B) You were a lot younger and there was not much else to compare it to. I am not sure about you but I remember the N64 and PlayStation being quite different and more "jittery," Same when I played Star Fox for the SNES, it was quite obvious even though I was a teenager. With newer TVs, this is also something much easier to notice, especially when going from higher FPS to lower.

I can see some thing being slightly more annoying to do such as the counter action command as that was a lot more precise when you had to time the B button.

@BodkinDQ
But we had it at 60 FPS, and yes, there is action commands such as the counter which I can see possibly being affect slightly as the counter was very precise when to press and you did not get anything notifying you when to press it. Plus if memory serves me correctly, there were badges to make the action commands, including the counter command harder for a buff. You're also forgetting that games used to be 60 FPS, and a game like Paper Mario... really it should be. Especially when screens are getting better and better, the frame rates are getting much easier to notice than they did on your old flat screeds or CRTs.

It is not a deal breaker for me, I know I am still going to enjoy the game, probably as much as I did when I played the original but it is a disappointment that they decided to cut back on the frame rate.

Incredibly wild to see people talk about 30fps vs 60fps as if it was 900p vs 1080p. I can instantly tell whether a game is 30 or 60 when I play.
That said, it isn't a deal breaker, just a tad disappointing. Hopefully the next system will have PS5-style framerate upgrades, but I sincerely doubt it.

@ikki5 From what I've read from review(s), none of the action based commands have suffered from being 30 FPS. Playing devil's advocate, I don't play on an expensive TV like everyone else seems to, so I don't get to see the FPS differences to the extent maybe others do. I'm sure that makes a difference to some people who are better off than me.

Putting that to the side, I still stand by my reasoning. It's not a game that should require super high FPS, cos being turn based and cartoon paper shouldn't suffer from it. Again, I read that even the action based commands were smooth. Guess it's one of those we'll see when the game comes out.

Needs the "yes I want 60 but I'll pretend I don't care because I'm a blind loyalist" option.

My first Paper Mario game was Origami King, so never played this before, so am interested. Am sure the fact that it is 30fps won’t bother me. HOWEVER, I do find it a bit frustrating that a console from over 20 years ago could run it at 60fps but the switch can’t.
Before anyone comes at me and says ‘what about all the graphical bells and whistles etc’, to which I would say:- “Well, yes, fine I accept the graphics etc are negligibly better but so they should be. Considering the switch ought to be multiple times more powerful/competent than the GameCube, the fps should be at least on par with the gc version, along with the resolution etc boost”.
IMO.

It’s not that big of a deal for a game like this. But it is weird.

@BodkinDQ You're eyes may not notice, but the quality of your tv would not make a difference in it's ability to display 30 vs 60 for example (old tube CRT tvs in the 80s ran NES games at 60, like SMB). Though the quality of your tv and refresh and blah blah can effect input delay, and maybe the overall picture is lesser. Maybe like you, my girlfriend, for example, does not see a visual difference between 30 and 60, whether it's a game or a tv show or movie or whatever - doesn't really notice stutter either. But I do notice that she gets motion sick easier when a game is 30 and you're moving the camera around a lot (we play escape room games together and she'll get kind of sick, when it runs at 30, after awhile especially if the frame pacing is off). Like has to lay down for a second.

Normally my problem with low framerate is that it makes me motion sick, but it isn't that bad for this kind of game. That said, I think the visual differences between this and the original are mostly sidegrades instead of strict upgrades, at least ignoring the resolution which is easy to bump in Dolphin. With that in mind, it's kind of sad that a game which doesn't look much better to my eyes performs so dramatically worse.

On original hardware, I think I'd prefer the original on a CRT. Maybe I'd pick the Switch version if it gets an achievable 60 fps patch on Ryujinx, but I don't know. I'm not angry or anything, after all this was a pointless release given how well the original holds up, it's just sad seeing the Switch be treated like this in its twilight years. It's capable of quite a bit despite its restrictions, but here we get a GameCube game looking about as good as it ever did but chugging along barely above where the illusion of motion starts to work. We should've just gotten a port of the original release to make it more accessible.

It (30fps) bothered me until I saw Felix's comparison video. The glow up is substantial. I can understand where they lost the missing frames now.

@mswhom Weird I JUST posted above about my gf getting motion sick from 30 fps stuff when you have to move the camera around a bunch. For me, depending on the person perspective in the game, the modeling and effects and if the detail is dense, etc, 30 fps can make it harder for my eyes track certain stuff, especially if the frame pacing is off and or the resolution is lower (like the XBC 1 remaster, it doesn't make me motion sick but like makes it feel like my eyes are going in and out of focus and hurts my brain a bit).

@Dang_69 Ah, thanks for the clarification. Hadn't contemplated motion sickness myself. Guess I've just become apathetic over FPS and graphics over the years. I'm sure I would notice if I decided to really look, but it was never something I cared enough about to be bothered with unless it effected the permormance of course.

While I do appreciate say, good graphics and decent FPS, I came to the realization that games generally keep improving with those over time. That stuff will unfortunately date quick given the haste of modern tech growth, but man, good games (gameplay) or good stories stick with you for a life time, so that's where my mindset comes from.

well, HiFi rush was planned to have 120 fps on modern console but it was cut to be 60fps to keep consistency. Framerate is a bigger issue when you don't have constant framerate and it gets noticeable when it happens and can even affect gameplay

@OctolingKing13 Most PC players aim to 60FPS/1080P resolution, they know that's the best way to play games.

I've never cared about framerates, tbh.

@Tyranexx Same with Metroid Prime Remastered, built from the ground up, and that game runs at 60fps and costs 40 bucks.

and this is why I play all my switch games on a emulator. 60fps is a must nowadays imo 😒

@Dang_69 Yeah, it's odd. As far as I'm concerned, the option to tank the resolution and other graphical settings to whatever would be required to maintain a higher framerate should always be included when possible as a simple accessibility option. I don't want to get sick while playing my nintendo games! I'd gladly play at SD resolutions if it meant things were smooth.

I ended up primarily on pc for many reasons, but one of the big ones is that none of the consoles ever seemed to care about making things playable for me until very recently with things like the PS5's global performance mode option. Not that that's followed perfectly, but things have gotten a lot better over there recently. I'd like to see Nintendo follow suit, but I'm not holding my breath.

@Ralizah hok' up, are you actually saying the framerate is the reason your GC copy didn't devalue? lmao

I also find it odd how Nintendo fans tend to be part of the "gameplay over graphics" crowd when the visuals on their games are sacrificed, but when a Nintendo game makes the opposite choice and halves the smoothness of that gameplay for a little more shininess, the rest of us are made out as being ridiculous. Especially since you know if they chose to prioritize smoothness the same people would also say they don't see the difference between the current level of graphical fidelity and whatever it would have to be to hit the original framerate or that it was worth it because they're Nintendo fans and Nintendo prioritizes gameplay.

It seems to me a lot of people don't like discussion about the technical side of a game and will say whatever they have to to put down the people who do care. I think it's perfectly fine to prefer the game to look a little shinier rather than smoother, and it's perfectly fine not to care either way. I just don't get why people have to try and dunk on people to which this difference matters. If you're sick of hearing about it, go enjoy some games just like you suggest the people who complain don't do.

@mswhom what a fantastic comment - very well stated - feel the exact same way

couldn't care less about FPS nonsense as long as its stable

@mswhom great comment

@BeefSanta The existence of a remake has definitely devalued it, since that was the only way to play it before now.

That said, the GC original holding up better performance-wise is going to help matters a bit. After all, presumptive buyers are more than likely a highly informed niche of hardcore gamers who will take issues like that rather seriously (versus more casual gamers who don't care and will just buy a copy on the Switch, where it's more readily accessible).

Whereas, if the Switch remake was just flatly superior in all regards, it would command an even lower price on the secondary market.

usually can't imagine caring about 30 vs 60 except in super fast-paced games, but man, caring about 30 vs 60 for paper mario is... wooooooof.

to each their own, i guess.

@Uncle_Franklin 100% this.

It's also super interesting to look at the polling (as of the time I write this). There's a pretty even split here of how people feel on the subject. NL really saw value in opening this up further for discussion.

I've mentioned elsewhere, but I fall into the camp of "miffed at the downgrade". Clearly choices were made for this Remaster / Remake (definitions on such matters blur the line since Metroid Prime came out on Switch).

Clearly decisions were made in how this was going to be presented by the dev team and they opted to favour visual enhancements over performance (willing to bet this wasn't always the case and concessions were made throughout). But hey, it's their choice and it still looks gorgeous... I simply don't feel the game needed it and would have preferred a more simpler upscale in resolution, re-orchestrate the thing, go widescreen and keep it at 60FPS. But hey, that's not my call.

Where this hurts is because of titles like MP: Remastered. If we are to label TTYD a "Remake", then I'd still say MP did a better overall job with it's translation to HD to provide the same game for a new generation. Prime remastered had a substantial graphics overhaul with asset changes, brand new character and enemy models (which can be seen included with the new artwork from the remastered team), improved lighting FX, particle effects, the obvious bump in resolution alongside audio and sound upgrades - on top of this there are soooo many control options to cater to audience preference. Playing this title is like remembering how you think the original played. It did all this AND kept the 60FPS running smoothly as an action game.

PM: TTYD doesn't really have the excuse not to be able to keep up with this standard as a slower paced RPG. And the choices the dev team made in remaking the game is what has lead us to where we are.

I'm still going to play it, and when I do I'm fairly sure it won't bother me in the slightest either. I just wish things had been done differently. However - that's NOT to say that the end product is bad, or is in anyway poor, clearly the effort is here. It's just not what I would have preferred with this title.

In any case, hopefully "Switch 2" will be able to provide developers more options in the future for gamers to choose performance vs visuals with a toggle. Theres a couple of games out there that do this already, but it would be nice to see it as standard practise on the next console release.

If it wasn’t for the battle mechanics, the difference in framerate wouldn’t bug me as much. But since battles DO rely on timing, I think it’s safe to say especially those familiar with the original game will consider it a downgrade.

I'm not sure I can tell the difference.

Though it doesn't matter, as I need to save my money for more important games.

@RareFan Censored? Like what.

60 FPS for a game like Paper Mario is negligible at best, and besides, it already looks fantastic.

I'm not surprised casuals would be OK with 30fps.

Interlaced shows from the old days played at 60 fps on CRTs and deinterlaced to 60 fps on modern TVs, yet every streaming service I know of will carry streams deinterlaced to 30 fps, never seen people complain about that except for a rather small group.

@the_beaver Writing as someone who has played the entire Metroid Prime Trilogy, those are the type of game I would agree a frame rate at or around 60 is important. But a turn-based RPG? As long as the FPS is fairly stable and doesn't chug at a subpar 10 FPS or lower, I don't see the issue.

We ultimately don't know what's going on under the hood of either MP:R or TTYD, or how much effort or systems went into each. I am not a dev who works with or for Nintendo or their affiliates. The closest we may get from a third-party perspective is Digital Foundry, or even someone who cares enough to dissect both games by every pixel.

@Samalik : it's not a twitch 2d platformer/fps or racing game either. There would be ZERO people noticing the frame rate differences unless they were told about it or comparing side by side.

This is NOT a game where 60hz or 30hz would make ANY difference AT ALL. Heck, I played it originally in the uk on my gamecube at 50hz.

You WOULD notice if it was running at 60 and occasionally dropped to 30, which is why a 30 constant is better than doing that.

That said, the developers could've hit 60 on a game like this easily... If they were willing or able to do it, I'm guessing it's an inexperienced team - or they had a low budget to do it (which didnt have much money put aside for experienced programmers)... So yeah, it could've been done. But if it were my choice of spending more money on a niche game to hit 60 when no-one would notice (unless they were told), I know what I'd choose too...

Im far more annoyed at them charging full price for this thing. Especially as I know how short it is from the first time i played it.

At $20 i would've dipped my foot back into the water and played it again... But as per usual, nintendo is greedy when it comes to setting prices.

I just think it's such a bad look that Nintendo can't get a gamecube game to run at 60 fps.

But I found out about this after my preorder and this isn't enough of a big deal for me to cancel it.

@Clammy I’m unable to play games at 30. I prefer 60 with the occasional drop at least that way it’s mostly smooth and other times isnt rather than quick succession of images almost but never quite appearing as video. I notice with in 5 seconds if something is 30fps because everything looks like this in motion

https://www.nintendolife.com/forums/nintendo-switch/the_framerate_hill_am_willing_to_die_on

These are actual screenshots of a 30fps game which should have been 60. This is unplayable/unacceptable.

@eaglebob345 PC or you know, all my other games and consoles of the last 30 years.

@Sourcecode I'm still waiting on confirmation of the censorship. Was anything in the GameCube Japanese script changed in bad faith or no?

I did play the original short before the remake being announced on Switch. 30fps isn't a problem at all.

@Dang_69 I've heard from OLED TV owners that 30fps is especially unbearable on those screens, as the judder shows up very clearly without any LCD blur to mask it. I don't have a newfangled TV, but I can say that the gap between 30 and 60 is much wider on a CRT (with its crystal-clear 60fps and sharp, double-vision 30fps) than on any LCD.

Also, interesting to see that I'm not the only one who has more of an issue with detailed graphics at 30fps. When switching directly from N64 to Xbox 360 games via Rare Replay, I noticed that the newer games were somehow harder to look at by comparison.

The only time I notice the frame rate is when it’s below 30 or when it isn’t stable. 60fps 98% of the time but with drops during intense battles might be ok with some, just like a 30fps 100% of the time is fine for me.

As it is just a turn based RPG there is no real reason to be upset about it. Yes it would be better at 60fps but I would rather it be a solid 30fps than an uneven, unstable 60fps.
Hopefully on the Super Switch it will be updated to 60fps.

@Clammy Yes, they could have, but as you just said, no one would notice in a slow-moving RPG. Why would Nintendo want to spend even the slightest amount of effort on something that no one would notice?

Uggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh I hate arguing over stuff like this

Game like this, framerate doesn't bother me, but why did they have to censor cat calling part? Thought that added to the humour?

Couldn't vote as not getting it as I completed it on GC wasn't an option

Announce the Switch 2 already, fed up of remakes!

"given the significant leap in visual quality from the original to the remake, we can also understand why certain sacrifices had to be made"

That statement leaves out the fact that the hardware the original ran on is over two decades ago. I'm not debating the merits of the frames per second, but don't try and sugarcoat it. That just sounds ridiculous.

@TruthisRare Humor is being shadow banned. The only thing you CAN joke about is something nobody finds funny, and even that's probably offensive. They are just keeping with the times.

@ArchRex
Catcalling, insults, and some gender-specific words and pronouns.

Im seeing comments from people who equate games running at 60 the same as a camera recording motion at 60.. That's not the way it works.

A camera is recording motion, games dont add motion which isnt there.

Which is what convinces me the people complaining are really talking nonsense, total emperors clothing.

60fps often looks blurry to me, but it depends on the game. The Tomb Raider remaster looks great on Switch at 60, but is just a nice bit more luxurious at 90fps on OLED Deck.
I'd like a game company to release a console with a minimum frame rate of 60fps, no more maximum frame rates!

Thousand Year Door looks gorgeous on my Deck. I have no interest in giving money to a fiercely anti-emulation corporation for a half frame rate "remake".

I would like 120fps plz, nothing less will do.

...will be the trending criticism in 10 years or so. Not only is 30fps for TTYD, I actually prefer 30fps to 60fps in most cases, especially if it means prettier visuals.

Never been a frame rate snob, but the people that can’t tell 60 FPS from 30 FPS need to get their eyes checked.

@120frames-please hey they can be as anti-emulation as they want its not like its gonna stop me from emulating AND buying their stuff when its provided legally

@epicgamner Sure, enjoy gaming!

@120frames-please you too man, i can totally understand the frustration with the lack of 60 fps, it may not personally bother me but it sucks that it leaves fans like you high and dry

What would be awesome is if 1000 Year Door was being released in a new 90 , 120, or 144fps version. That would be amazing to play!

Having the GC orignal, I wasn't planning on double dipping.
I just don't understand why you wouldn't build the game with the 60 fps target from day one.

@JoakimZ Tales of Symphonia and Pikmin 1/2 were remasters, but TTYD is a remake. From a game development standpoint it's basically a new game.

@Clammy I am yet to meet someone where we are in the same room and I point out the ghosting effects of 30fps and they can see it. I dont want to personally offend your physical attributes but unless you need glasses or your brain is literally not fast enough to see it, I dont know what to say.

I'm a bit bummed out by it, to be honest. Here we are, 20 years later and the Remake can't even run at 60 FPS with more modern hardware. It won't stop me from getting the game, though.

Yes I'm really bothered by it, how can we get framerate downgrade for a 20 year old game remake? It's not like paper mario is a 3D powerhouse title back then, just upgrade the graphics a little and keep the framerate 60 fps on switch.

Unless nintendo switch 2 can play this game at 60 fps, or maybe nintendo will sells the game again on switch 2, I think I'll wait for the switch 2 version/upgrade patch before buying this.

@PtM A shame in that case, but no matter - just one of those things.

At least there is a trade off with the visuals (even if it’s not what I’d personally root for with this title).

Listen, Nintendo has been my sole platform of choice since the days of the Wii, so 30 fps is my standard, my default. And I can't even tell the difference in the side by side videos, anyway. I'm good.

I prefer stability.
If a game can give me a locked 60fps, great! But if unstable I'd much prefer a locked 30fps.

Any game that has any kind of movement just looks and feels better at 60fps. That’s just a fact and anyone saying otherwise is wrong.

Does it mean 30fps games are unplayable? Of course it doesn’t. But the exact same game at 60fps will always look and feel better than at 30fps, stop lying to yourselves.

@Not_Soos

"Where were these complaints with every other first-party Nintendo game ever? Bowser's Fury is a phenomenal game, but have you seen the slowdown? Same with BotW. Kirby Star Allies was also only 30 FPS, among several other examples. Back on Wii U, Mario Kart 8 with 3-4 players was inexcusably choppy."

none of those games you listed are remakes of older games, performing worse on 16 years newer hardware. but you knew that. 👍

@MSaturn

here's my take, to try to answer some of your comment in good faith 🙂

movies dont require a high frame rate because they are a linear, passive experience. IMO this really isnt an apt comparison.

if your life had a frame rate, i believe you would be unhappy at 30fps. think of it like a 4th dimensional resolution: things can only happen on the "grid" of 30 frames, no matter what.

im not a framerate bro, but I am even less a screen resolution or "modern graphics" bro. I remember when games like Tobal on playstation, or fzero X on 64 would use flat shaded polygons, less special fx and so on to achieve solid 60fps on that old hardware, and the result was glorious! and made a distinctive look and a game that simply "felt" more real, responsive, snappy, fast et al to play.

if you cant tell looking at or especially playing Tobal or fzero x that they are smoother, that's fine. perception is reality. ✌️

OTOH, I believe that substandard remakes like this are corrosive to Nintendo's reputation, and especially Switch's legacy. Any remake of an old classic should be definitive, or we are in Playstation territory here. Who is going to want to play a choppier version of a classic gamecube game in 5, 10 years, when the graphics don't even look "modern" any more?

@russell-marlow Long time since I played TTYD. What would they potentially censor nowadays?

@abe_hikura

"I prefer stability. If a game can give me a locked 60fps, great! But if unstable I'd much prefer a locked 30fps."

No reason at all that this remake shouldn't have a locked 60fps. They messed up and the usual apologetics are trying to make us feel weird for noticing or caring.

I would prefer a stable framerate to either 30 or 60 fps.

@MSaturn Huge difference between watching a videogame and PLAYING it, hence why lower frames don't bother people for movies and can actually be beneficial. 60 fps is just more responsive and feels better (more so in a 3d game where you pan the camera).

Personally, I'll still buy it since TTYD is one of my top 3 games of all time, but it's a significant downgrade and I don't understand why the devs can't just add an option for these things when the end users obviously want two different things
Does it look great and completely rebuilt, yes. Is there a complex physics engine, a massive amount of geometry, or underlying simulations to compute every second, no. Particularly in battles (basically the main reason I'm miffed about the 30fps) there's very little going on. The actual gap in power between the gc and switch is literally insane, we're not talking about just 2-4 times more powerful here.

I personally think they have to be incredibly inefficient to get this sort of tradeoff which is why I think it's such a big deal for most people and being discussed so much more than the regular 30 v 60 argument. The fact games like ToTK even run at 30 on the switch is incredible, but I'm supposed to lump TTYD in with those games and be blindly happy about it?!?

Hope everyone enjoys the game especially those whose first time it is (try to avoid guides!) but let's please stop pretending there isn't a readily noticeable difference between 30 and 60 (or even 40).

@smoreon Detailed graphics plus 30 fps PLUS 720p is a brain killer for me. It's why ive never finished a Xenoblade game on Switch despite loving them. I don't get motion sick but when I pan the camera it just makes me feel like eyes are going out of focus and will make my brain uncomfortable. I also in general shut off motion blur when that's an option, even though I hear from other people the blur helps for them when playing games. I play Fortnite on Series X at 120fps with no motion and my eyes and brain feel like they're on vacation, lol, compared to other games I'll play. Like right now Im trying to train my brain and eyes to be ok with Person 5 on Switch but I feel like it's not happening.

That NL video was embarrassing and disingenuous. Not a genuine discussion at all.

60fps is better, end of.

Played the original at 30fps on an emulator
I won't even notice, specially because this time it actually is made to be 30fps

I am not sure I know the difference.

I think what some people might be missing is the Nintendo user base at large experiencing a pronounced anxiety over TTYD being one of Nintendo's only major first-party releases for the whole half of the year.

Nintendo fans have Paper Mario, and Peach, and... Endless Ocean. I'm not even mentioning Mario Vs Donkey Kong because that game was much more low-budget and smaller-scale than what is relevant to this topic.

This is the one big game Switch fans have to tide them over for a very big chunk of 2024, so the pressure and expectations are unfairly high. It's really the timing of Nintendo's release schedule that is making people react strongly to TTYD's performance more than anything else, in my opinion.

30fps is playable, for sure. However, 60fps is a better experience, especially for people who suffer from increased motion sensitivity (myself included).

But the ultimate truth is that with every passing year, especially in an industry classified as luxury, people expect more options.

The car industry is a good example. Luxury car companies sell their vehicles not just off of badge envy, but also with a varied array of options and amenities: multiple trim levels, lots of different options, and above all, the ability to cater to a variety of interests.

Compared to the mobile gaming industry, which would be more akin to economy cars making up the bulk of total sales, core gaming could be considered the luxury segment of the gaming market. And consumers are increasingly aware of this distinction with the struggles and challenges that economies across the world present to people.

With that said, Nintendo needs to be aware of these transition in expectations and offer more options to the consumer. Give us the option to choose between prioritizing graphics or performance. NSO is the perfect example. I love having multiple color options to play with in the Game Boy app, to experience each game for a few minutes like it's the OG Game Boy or the Game Boy Color.

In the same way, I want more games to offer the option to choose between maximum visuals or maximum frame rate. I want the option to switch between maximum lighting and visual effects but 30fps, and a 60fps setting with downgraded visuals.

I don't expect the smaller games like Yoshi's Crafted World and Mario Vs Donkey Kong to include a bunch of options, but for Nintendo's largest tentpole game launches of the year, I do want them to offer more options to the user, to let us customize to some extent how we would prefer to experience the game.

I wouldn't have noticed either way. Looking forward to a first experience with this game after playing the original and Mario RPG remake.
Kudos to the crew who was tasked on remaking this game!

I don’t mind 30 fps at all, but the idea that it’s a sacrifice for the better graphics is kind of crazy. It’s 3 console generations removed from the original. The gain in console power should cover the graphical upgrade

Not a dealbreaker for me, but it's disappointing. You would expect a remake to be better in every conceivable way, especially in the technical department. If the hardware isn't there yet, this would have been better off as a launch title for the Switch 2. Still, I'm glad we're getting it.

@-wc-

Unrelated but I love the bewildered Jason Alexander profile pic.

crazy how 60fps was the norm during Gamecube's era and now we supposedly have more power and still can't reach that target.

@compressedjpeg

yes! thank you for recognizing that it isnt Costanza! ❤️✌️

You're kidding, right?
Let's be clear with this once for all. This remake really pushes the Switch's capabilities to make it look even glossier than The Origami King, which was already a big, photo-realistic game and ran at 30fps as a result.
By comparison, the visual quality of the original game was more leaing on a simplistic stylization than actually pushing the GameCube hardware, as such, it could easily run at 60fps.
Besides, this won't be a problem if the Switch 2 is backwards compatible. Tearaway Unfolded on PS4 ran at 60fps at least, that is a minimum close comparison point.

@Ironcore : There is NO ghosting effect for 30fps on a game. That is TOTAL nonsense. That's not how games work. You WILL get ghosting on a Live broadcast (for example) where the camera shutter speed is low. But not for a game.

It's physically impossible for a game to "add" blurring based on framerate, unless the game itself chooses to add the bluring for aesthetic purposes.

HOWEVER - If there is a ghosting effect on your TV, you have your TV set up wrong.. Your TV is adding blurring/etc. This is NOT the fault of the game or the console you're playing on.. This is YOU choosing to turn that effect on, on your tv.

That's not the games fault. Turn those features off on your tv.

Glad I finally understood the problem here.. User error.

@Clammy No, I have done pretty thorough research. I have used 3 switches, my own and 2 borrowed ones over the course of testing. I went to currys when pokemon sword and shield came out and tested; luigis mansion, pokemon shield and later ran tests on animal crossing.

In currys and later at my brothers house. He has multiple monitors including 250hz gaming monitors and all tvs and monitors showed ghosting, doubling of images etc. it was not just witnessed by me but by everyone I have shown in person.

Some images here
https://www.nintendolife.com/forums/nintendo-switch/the_framerate_hill_am_willing_to_die_on

And this was taken at the time of the original testing. This showed up from old 1080p monitors to 4k OLEDs to 250hz gaming monitors.

Character standing still - Looks sharp

Character movies - Blurs

Just to be sure I grabbed a fresh set of images taken right now.

Standing still

Moving

If this was not the case then why would there even be a discussion around 30 vs 60 fps?

That's not the case. Your tv is set up wrong for games and is ghosting the previous frame for smoothing purposes. Turn that feature off if you dont like it.

Games wont blur the image like that unless it was an artistic choice to do so.

The reason for 60 vs 30 discussion is due to the reaction time between your input and things happening on screen, and for smoother animation (double the amount of tweens), not blurring.

60hz + is very important in a "twitch" style game, like racing or shooting - where you want your interactions to happen immediately on the screen.

Actually, Im not going to bother explaining any further, as you're obviously thinking its something other than it is - and I cant be bothered to continue.. Fill your boots.. I'll just say you're correct and walk away - it's easier - 30fps somehow adds blur to a game.. LOL