Wolfenstein 2 Deserves Better Than the Nintendo Switch’s Weak Hardware

Gadgets 360 says: " However, it also brings to light one of Nintendo’s core failings with the Switch — it’s simply too underpowered to run newer AAA games. Unlike Sony’s and Microsoft’s consoles that run on AMD hardware, Nintendo opted to go for an Nvidia Tegra X1 chip whose performance is comparable to the PS3 and Xbox 360, which were cutting edge more than a decade ago. Throw in storage restrictions of the cartridge format and an online infrastructure that’s far behind what the competition have to offer, and Wolfenstein 2 on the Switch feels like it’s being held back by Nintendo’s technical choices."

[Neonridr]

holy geez.. this sounds like it is coming from a real salty fanboy who is upset that Nintendo got this game in the first place. Who the hell cares? Let Switch owners enjoy this game. The whole thing is there. The fact that it runs and looks quite decent shows you how far we have come with tech.

Do you think when games released on the Gameboy or DS people complained and said that the handhelds shouldn't have the games because they don't look as good or were stripped down versions? And those games were huge downgrades from the console brethren. Here you have a game that looks good and has all the content from the other bigger boxes, yet you can take it wherever you want. To me that is a godsend. If I purchase it for my PS4 I am doing it so I can enjoy it on my 4K TV or play with my friends. If I purchase it for my Switch it's so I can take it with me and play wherever I want (including my TV if I wish). Sure it won't look as good, but do you think I really care about the tiniest of details when I am looking at a 5.5" screen? I'm playing Wolfenstein on the go here!

[ShottyatLaw]

I'm about 80% in agreement with you, and the author does come across as a bit salty, but there's some fair points made here.

I want every game on the Switch because of portability. It is fantastic, but the limitations are there. Personally, I would be more excited if 3rd party focused on porting last-gen stuff. For example, Fallout 3 & New Vegas would be great on Switch.

I do agree with the author on some issues, though. Portability does not make up for releasing 9 months later, with none of the dlc, lower graphics, and at a $60 price tag.

I'm glad it's on the Switch, and Switch only players get a great addition to the library. Something has to give, however, for the rest of us who have the option of grabbing the same game at a better price and with better performance.

[Neonridr]

that's the point, the Switch is not worse off having this title. There are plenty of one console owners on this site, not everyone is as keen or has the capacity to own multiple hardware, so playing this game on a PS4/XB1/PC might not be an option for many.

[ShottyatLaw]

But is this situation what we should encourage? Games releasing later, with lower performance, no extra content, and a full price tag?

If it released same day at the same price, I'd say, OK. If it comes later, at a reduced price or with extra content, I would say OK. But to me, this is sort of taking advantage of the Switch only players, while not enticing multiplatform owners to buy it on Switch.

Granted, that is well beyond the click bait in this article, but that is a small issue within the article that I think is worth discussing IMO.

[Shiken]

I am heavily debating getting it on my pro, or getting it on my Switch for portability...cannot make up my mind.

With that in mind, if the game can run, why shouldn't it come to Switch? There is no reason for a game not to other than fanboys of other consoles wanting to see the Switch get less 3rd party support than it already is.

Whatever, while they whine, I play games. Whatever makes them happy I guess.

[mikeslemonade]

yep the switch doesn't deserve this game. Stick to nintendo first party games.

[wonderfulmonkeyman]

Expecting better graphics when the system, and thus the tech, is much smaller, is a bit of an unfair expectation.

[ShottyatLaw]

I don't think anyone expects better performance from these 3rd party games (not referring to you WWE2k18), but Switch owners shouldn't get the shaft on other features.

I don't think it's excusable to ignore that this game released months later, without the dlc, and at a full price. I have the same issue with timed exclusives on PS, XB, or PC doing the same thing.

Add in the performance hit, and I don't think praise should be thrown at these companies just for getting a game running on Switch. I would hope that Switch gamers would demand better treatment than: "oh well, at least it was ported."

[paintedgamer1984]

Its clearly an issue when on the hardest mode running and gunning it dips below 480p very frequently all the while not keeping a solid 30 fps. How is it the ps3 from 2006 ran games in mostly a locked 720p 30... and if there was a hitch it wasnt as blatant as in this game very similiar to when your wifi goes out on netflix. I guess we will blame the devs

Shiken:

Ok... a game by 2006 hardware standards runs better at 720 30 than a game in 2018... why cant a game in 2018 on switch run at 720 30 12 years later? We are talking 2018 standards...

[Shiken]

One the game runs at a pretty solid 30fps.

Two, games on the PS360 were not as graphically advanced nor did they use the same caliber of special effects. This is why all ports of previous gen games run and look better on Switch. Stop reaching, it is pathetic.

[Shiken]

2018 standards? Sure, how me the other fully portable version of a current gen console game. Show me how much better the graphics are and show me how far behind it Switch is.

It's ok...I will wait

[Neonridr]

this is a handheld that is 1/20th the size of the PS4. And here you are, griping about performance. Show me your 480p analysis you did to back up your claims. Also PS3 games @ 720 were far less detailed and involved than games of nowadays.

[deafdani]

Last I checked, Wolfenstein II isn't on the PS3. Where are you drawing your comparisons from?

And lol at your resolution claims. Many PS3 and Xbox 360 games were sub-720p. And very few of them attained a locked 30fps frame rate, let alone 60 fps.

The Switch absolutelyoutperforms the PS3 on a technical level, and it's maybe 1/8th of its size.

[cyber_daemonx]

Ah so its a handheld now. Though it was supposed to be a hybrid or home console that happens to be portable. Seems to change based on the agenda of its fanbase.

[wonderfulmonkeyman]

No, it IS a hybrid.
A SMALL hybrid.
There's no agenda change other than the flip-flopping the haters do to criticize its tech aspects in relation to consoles twice its size, but when PC comes up to shine a glaring light on their elitist standards they all tuck tail and run.

[DeadSilence]

The fact it runs on Switch is a miracle, if you don't like the compromises don't play it.

[2pacalypsenow]

Miracle? it's 2018 technology has advanced...

[madforaday]

Exactly! Now you can play Wolfenstein 2 where ever you want! The power of technology!

[2pacalypsenow]

@madforaday

Exactly.

[LucasRuinedChildhood]

I wouldn't say that it's a miracle. The New Order ran alright on PS3 and the 360 after all.

[OpenGL]

It was 60fps unlike the New Colossus on the Switch. They should have ported that instead.

[--Onilink--]

PS3 and 360 dont run on 8watts

[LucasRuinedChildhood]

@--Onilink-- The Switch came out a whole decade after those platforms. I think we sometimes forgot how old they are due to their long lifespans.

[DankSinatra]

New order wasn't built with only one console generation in mind, W2 was built solely for next gen consoles which likely would not have ran at all on PS3/360 due to the underpowered hardware and severe lack of ram.

[Muzikguy]

I’m just now playing this game on PS4 and it’s pretty good. I can see why the Switch would have trouble.

[darthv72]

I remember when people were saying the same about Doom 3 on the xbox. How it ran on only 64mb of shared memory and a 733 cpu was unheard of at the time. Fast forward nearly 20 years and we get a much more graphical demanding game that is running on a glorified tablet.

Creative minds find a way

[ninsigma]

But it has better on pc, ps4 and xbox one, so I don't see the issue with it being on switch. The more the better!

[wonderfulmonkeyman]

Exactly.
It having higher resolution/framerate counterparts means those that don't like it on Switch have their own options.
Whining like an entitled brat about it being on a smaller system with naturally smaller hardware, as if it doesn't deserve to be "subjected" to the Switch, is really really sad.

[Eidolon]

I don't have a Switch, but my friend has one and Doom and says with the small screen, it actually looks really good, only issue is the joysticks for a really good FPS experience. This game will probably be the same.

[Hylian10]

that title tho...wow

[PhantomTommy]

That title doesn't actually appear on the article itself. "Wolfenstein 2 on Nintendo Switch Makes Us Wish for a Nintendo Switch Pro" is the actual headline, which is completely fair but who's gonna click that amiright?? Get them lads screaming at each other in the comments instead.

[wonderfulmonkeyman]

This sounds like it's coming from one of the same anti-Nintendo people who were bashing Nintendo for NOT having these kinds of games on the Wii U, and who thought the Switch COULD NOT run games like this AT ALL when it was first announced.

I can basically tell you the before-and-after of this kind of person's mind-set.

"Oh, Nintendo's new Switch console is gonna fail if they don't get modern AAA third party titles! Even just a few would help but they aren't gonna get it because tech reasons!"

[Switch gets a few AAA games and shows that many more are planned, on top of some devs even making dedicated Switch teams to get games onto the system.]

"OMG THESE GAMES ARE TOO GOOD FOR SWITCH! KEEP THEM OFF SWITCH! THE SWITCH DOESN'T DESERVE THEM! THEY DESERVE BETTER THAN SWITCH!"

Bloody hypocrites. They need to decide whether you do or don't want Nintendo to have third party games, and then stick to it.
This kind of flip-flopping is just annoying and childish.

[gangsta_red]

Going to have to agree with you.

Unfortunately Switch is in a position where it's damned if you do, damned if you don't.

I think it's great that devs are at least trying to get their games on Switch and I welcome more.

[ccgr]

Tried it on Xbox First but I can't play an FPS on anything but keyboard and mouse.

[strayanalog]

This is pure clickbait.

[Cobra951]

The Switch is the only way to play Wolf 2 on a handheld. Take your elitism somewhere else. Games can be coded and optimized to run on just about anything that provides enough commercial incentive.

[-volt-]

Your consoles have weak hardware too.

[DrierofLeaves]

Man, Gadgets 360 has a real agenda against the Switch, doesn't it? First the Fortnite news, now this.
Why does it bother you that this "inferior version" exists for the Switch? Just ignore it and play it on your PC or PS4 or Xbox One.

[edeprez]

I don't agree with the article itself, but it is their job to cover things like this.

[Anzil]

Yeah, no! These “opinions” pieces are drivel at best and over saturated to fuk. They’re terrible at thier job.

[XentaJones]

Its does its also on XBO, PS4 and PC

[Apex13]

What an idiot! How can you say this when it's been out on PC, ps4 and Xbox? So it's had "better and now it's even more so as it's portable ans home docked. GTFOH

[soulrebel]

Good job it's out on three other, more powerful platforms then. Nothing to read here.

[FlyingFoxy]

Another reason why i ignore many game/movie review scores mostly, only their opinion matters.

[Pancit_Canton]

The problem is, they have the nerve to charged a full retial price for this inferior port. It's a pretty disgusting business practice imo.

[wonderfulmonkeyman]

I'm not happy with the price either, but calling it inferior in that fashion is the same as saying that they intentionally tried to make it worse, when that's not the case at all.
They fit it as best they could onto a system 1/4th the size of its cousins. A few areas where it cannot match up to bigger consoles isn't an issue of purposeful inferiority, it's a result of scaling a game to fit the hardware.

If we're going to be upset about something regarding this port, it shouldn't be the graphics.
It should be the fact that they're charging full price when the DLC isn't included. [AFAIK]

[OpenGL]

I only buy Nintendo games for the Switch, it is not suited for games like this.

[Segata]

API is broken on your posts.

[paintedgamer1984]

All AAA 3rd party switch ports games deserve better...

Nintendo dudes would have been happy with whatever nintendo gave them and defended it no matter what...

Top 5 excuses

1. Its portable, how powerful did you expect it to be
2. An x2 chipset would have cost too much moneys
3. Nintendo has never been about power
4. Gameplay over Graphics
5. The battery life would have been crap on better hardware

1. The nvidia shield used the same tech years earlier...

2. Digital foundry (leading tech experts) even claimed the switch could have had the x2 at launch and still priced between 349-399

3. Nintendo has only not been about power with the wii and switch. Almost every other console was more powerful than others

4. Im pretty sure a solid frame rate and resolution would make for better gameplay... just saying...

5. The x2 would have had better performance graphics/battery life (shocking i know).

[corroios]

Agree, with x2 Nintendo would have a much more powerfull portable hybrid

[paintedgamer1984]

Thank you... somebody gets it 😁

[Prince_TFK]

Except that the X2 was made for automobiles and not for electronic device. Therefore, in term of battery, it would not be as optimized as the X1 which was made for tablet right out of the box.

Also, the Nvidia Shield is not portable. The Shield tablet on the other hand uses the K1 processor, not X1.

As for the price, some of you already claim that $300 is too much. So if it was priced at $400 what would happen? I’m glad they didn’t do that to appease people like you while practically sinking their company.

“Im pretty sure a solid frame rate and resolution would make for better gameplay... just saying...”

Then play on PC. No console ever have rock solid framerates in demanding games. I had said it before and I will say it again, it is a miracle that the Switch, as small as it is, can run games like Wolfenstein 2.

[wonderfulmonkeyman]

GTFOOH with this bullshit.XD
You were one of the same people that were railing against Nintendo not having AAA third parties not too long ago, and now that some are appearing on the Switch you're making up bullshit left and right, while trying to tout specs you understand nothing about, and slam the Switch for not being more powerful and therefore "not deserving" of these kinds of games.
Bro, all it takes is one proper PC-only player to put that tech elitism in check; all consoles are underpowered in comparison, and you've got no soap box to stand on in terms of putting the Switch down.

The Shield is nowhere near being the same case as the Switch, btw.
If it were, people would have paid much more attention to it.XD

[Segata]

I finished it yesterday. Great game. My only real issue was that glitch when reading stuff occasionally the game would lock up but that's to be expected in a Bethesda game.

[ZeekQuattro]

Tell me about it. It happens at least once every-time I play. Nice you can save anywhere though its still annoying when you go to read something and can't exit the file.

[DankSinatra]

Huh, I haven't ran into this glitch yet, hope an update will fix it.

[CDbiggen]

Tbh I thought the game was shit anyway. The New Order was better.

[TallonIV]

Article clearly written by a fanboy. When the Wii U was around you same people would complain it had no games. Now the Switch is getting these third party games you're now saying it doesn't deserve to be on the Switch? WTF LOL!

[AgeInTheCage]

"All these 3rd party games" all i see is indies and shovel ware, they had to pare wolfstein and doom to 360p and 30fps ffs, Both games arent that demanding since they are enclosed corridor type games. Hell ogxboxone and base ps4 have no problem running them games at 60fps.

[Prince_TFK]

Can you take the OG PS4/X1 on the go?

[wonderfulmonkeyman]

"All I see is indies and shovelware"
#1 Those two shouldn't constantly be related to one-another; there are many great indies that even XBox and PS owners love that run just as well, and are rated just as highly, on Switch as anywhere else, and are thus just as worth buying there if you own a Switch and know about which games are worth having.

#2 If that's all you see, then you're either acting blind, or you're one of those people that only cares about the minority of popular mainstream third party titles and gives little to no credit to anything else.

"Both of these games aren't that demanding"
For systems twice the size of the Switch.
It's a small hybrid device.
You're reaching for excuses to bash its specs.
If you really want to play "the best version" of these games, then get off of consoles entirely and stick to PC, otherwise you've got no soap box to stand on when trying to use tech as leverage for tech elitism.

[CrimsonWing69]

It does though... PC, PS4 Pro, and Xbox One X. Look, I think the Switch is a terrible platform for current gen games like this but at least they’re giving poor Schmucks who only own a Switch a chance to check it out and I’m sure on the tiny handheld screen it looks just fine...

Yeesh... even I feel bad seeing this article.

[blawren4]

Not everyone is a multiconsole owner and it doesn't make you a better gamer or person if you are. Who cares if it runs better on more powerful systems? Comparing to a version I'll never play has zero bearing on whether I'll purchase or enjoy a game on my Switch. Back in Genesis vs SNES days. I had a Genesis. I didn't care about the SNES because I had a Genesis. Did I care if one had a multiplat version that was better? Not at all, I made a choice and that was that. Don't buy games that don't play or are flawed, but If it is playable and runs well enough, I'm down to support it. How many times do we see positive statements about a Nintendo game, but as soon as we learn what the resolution and framerate are or occasionally dip to, the game is suddenly bad. This is what people like to do all the time, which is lament on what isn't there to begin with. If you own multiple consoles, more power to you, you have that choice to get the "best" version, based on whatever you deem to the best to be. If you only own one, be it an XBone, and PS4, or a Switch, support the games you are getting by playing them on your system. Not buying a game on your system because it is downgraded from another console is a terrible reason not to buy a game. People did this earlyon when games were 1080p on PS4 and 900p on XBone, when it had zero bearing on the game itself. Support is everything if you want more games to come in the future to your system.

[Ck1x]

Very weird how people think that the Tegra x2 is so much more powerful than the x1. There's just a marginal difference people and one chip was readily available for production.

[joab777]

Uh...it had the Pro and X1X. And now it’s a bonafide AAA mobile game. How entitled are we now?

[Apex13]

I could have paid £15 for this game on the Ps or Xbox but went with Switch because I can take it on the go. End of

[AK91]

Agreed on the poor hardware of the Switch but the fact that more people get to experience a game is always a plus.

[Segata]

How is it poor hardware? It's insanely powerful for something its size. It has good dev tools and a good API. Wii U was poor hardware.

[CBaoth]

if nintendo wants to label it as a hybrid console, then suck it up buttercup. It's a console that took over 8 months to get a port, full pricetag, no DLC, and runs like crap. As a console the Switch is a POS. Nintendo makes great 1st party games and that's it. Everything else is completely substandard.

I wouldn't have an issue if Nintendo marketed the Switch as the "world's most powerful handheld" but we all know why they didn't; too many loyal fans to fleece.

[bigmalky]

Half of the journalists these days are entitled wankers with no sense of logic.

Wolfenstein 2 deserves more than Nintendo's weak hardware... It has. It's been on PC, PS4 and Xbox One.

Petty idiot.

[RosweeSon]

Like it already had from PS4/PC and even Xbox so what’s the big deal you don’t like the Switch version get over it other people will and if they hadn’t done it youd prob be first to moan they didn’t release it otherwise you prob busy banging the Sony are devils crossplay drum.... gamers getting seriously stale round here can’t think outside the box and blinded sided by pure fanboyism... not for me ✌🏻

[TorpeAlex]

Imagine PC players complaining that the newest games still support weaker builds than what they have. This is a really strange editorial.

[Prince_TFK]

This is like something a typical N4G regular would write.

[kopp3rbug]

It does deserve better. That's why it came to the ps4 and xbox one and obviously playable on the pro the x and PC. We all know the story at how the switch is underpowered, but compared to what? The switch is in competition with itself and no one else. If anything the switch and developers should be getting praises one for having such a versatile machine and two for being able to port such a gem of a game to the switch.

[paintedgamer1984]

Its as if nintendo fans are incapable of saying anything bad about nintendo consoles. Are you guys really unable to look at the nintendo switch with constructive criticizim? It will be ok... i swear. Id love to hear from a die hard nintendo guy what could make the switch better... besides more games... thats a given. Or what is bad about it. I can say plenty of things i dont like about the xbox and playstation.

On topic:

The port isnt horrid but its almost like whats the point when the game came out 7 months ago and most people thag wanted to play this have and most of those gamers arent going to pay full price to play this version

[wonderfulmonkeyman]

"Its as if nintendo fans are incapable of saying anything bad about nintendo consoles"

Please, don't even start trying to say that as if it's only true of Nintendo fans, when that's true of literally every other fanbase as well.

We can all read between your lines; you're only looking to hear negativity because it would help you feel justified in your negative views of the Switch.

You don't actually care about "constructive criticism", and you know it.
Anything constructive towards it, even the ones discussing how its tech "flaws" were necessary to the overall plan of getting a hybrid like this to sell well at a reasonable price, would just be construed, by you, as "the Nintendo defense force acting up".

Heck, you're already doing that in earlier posts, by trying to place blame on Nintendo for not going with the X2 chip, when you KNOW that there would have been several problems with having done that, not the least of which would have been the price increase, which would have made it harder to market without selling at a loss.
[No matter how much you don't want to agree and insist that it wouldn't have made a noticable difference, $299.99 is easier to market than $349.99, when putting a label on a retail product. That small gap makes a big difference in advertisement strength.]

But guess what; I'm willing to play your little game and say something that the Switch should have changed pre-production.
They should have found a way to make a proper D-pad for the left Joycon on their own.
I get why they didn't. They wanted it to work as its own controller just like the right one, but a D-pad doesn't work as well as buttons for that sort of thing and would have been awkward.
But that doesn't change that those who play games that predominantly require both joycons, would have preferred a proper D-pad on the left one, over buttons.

Work with that for your constructive criticism demands.

As to the topic: The "point", is that these games are apparently, by the words of naysayers prior to the Switch launching; "needed in order for the Switch to succeed."

One of the biggest complaints against the Wii U is that it wasn't getting these sorts of games.
The Switch IS getting some of them, now.
And people are buying them. They're selling well despite their issues and release timing being off, because people WANT THE GAMES ON SWITCH.

The "point", is that it's better to HAVE these games, than to NOT have these games, because unless the naysayers are flip-flopping on their own words, IT IS EXPECTED by this point, if the system is to be deemed a success, for the Switch to have AT LEAST SOME games from these big-name third party developers.

No one expects them ALL to show up, unless they're being ridiculously unfair, but expecting SOME is fair.
And it's getting some.

And it's working.

Not long ago, in fact, Square-Enix were so impressed by how well the Switch is doing that they saw fit to make a team exclusively dedicated to making games for the console.

So in all honesty, this article is trash, from someone who doesn't want the Switch to get any third party games going forward that might help it sell even better than it already has been.
And the article should be disregarded, alongside anyone who agrees with its premise/suggestion/belief that the Switch isn't worthy of getting third party AAA attention.

[riibhu]

At this point if you think Switch version of any AAA third party games will be on par with either of the consoles version you're just being ignorant. Just accept the switch as it is. You most probably knew what you were getting when you bought one. Deal with it.

[michellelynn0976]

Seems like a salty fan who don't want to admit they were wrong about the Switch being able to run Wolfenstein 2. It is a great port, better than the Doom port. Panic Button rocks.

[paintedgamer1984]

Great port? I guess considering the hardware limitations but have you even played the base home consoles from 2013 versions? Its an ok port at best and then docked more points for being full price and then more points for being 7 months later. If this game was even 30$ id say its a decent port for the price but when you factor in the other 2 things... forget its a mediocre game at best. Im noticing a lot of nintendo fans take offense to ANYTHING negative someone said about the games or hardware of the nintendo switch. Virtually anything negative and the other person is salty or trolling... its quite amazing. New game price, late launch, and janky graphical fidelity does not equal great port. Ive played on the hardest setting and it drops down to 480p very frequently... its very sad

[wonderfulmonkeyman]

The late launch was because it wasn't originally going to be on the Switch; they had to hand it over to Panic Button to do, and optimizing a port takes time.

The graphical fidelity complaints, too, are absolutely unfair and ridiculous.
It's running amazingly well on a system 1/4th the size of others, and that's an impressive technical feat. Even Digital Foundry said as much, despite their complaints with the Switch hardware.
And it does not drop down to 480p very frequently. There are occasional drops, but by and large, the game runs smooth considering the tech being used to run it.
Expecting a mini-PS4's performance out of the Switch is just stupid at this point.

If there's a single fair complaint, it's that it shouldn't be full price when the DLC isn't available.
That's the one area the devs messed up on when marketing this game to the Switch crowd; they got greedy because a new audience means a bigger opportunity to recoup costs, and they shouldn't have done that.

But this is still a far better case than Mass Effect 3 on the Wii U was.
At least this is a brand new current-gen AAA game.

[michellelynn0976]

It is a great port. Stop telling me what is great and what isn't. The gyro controls really put it over the other console versions.

[michellelynn0976]

Controls over graphics. Shallow gamers go by resolution and frame rate. Real gamers don't.

[paintedgamer1984]

So youre telling me... gyro controls make it a better version than...

Half the price
Better resolution
Better frame rates???

Whatever you say

[mochachino]

This article is nonsense.

[paintedgamer1984]

This port is nonsense... esp at 59.99

[WickedLester]

Vote with your wallet.

[superchiller]

Yep, don't give Nintendo money for cheap hardware and substandard games.

[paintedgamer1984]

Agreed

[superchiller]

This is EXACTLY why the Switch is going to have a very limited lifespan. By opting for a weak handheld device, Nintendo assured that current generation games would not be able to run well on the system. I give the Switch another year or two before it fizzles out, just doesn't have the legs to go long term.

[Psychosious]

Wait, I thought it was thriving on the switch? Hrmmm, musta been fake news.

[Einhander1971]

Great to see switch getting the love it deserves, its amazing how much power this little system has. Playing Bayonetta 2 the other day looks stunning on my 4K tv regardless of power ratio.

[Elda]

Especially being 9 months old & charging $60.

[DJ_Professor_K]

Huh? Lol I’f the switch was my only console I would be happy to have the option to playing

[SR38813]

Too much Ninty hate

[fathertime4464]

Wolfenstein 2 really deserves a better article than this

[BLKxSEPTEMBER]

The title suggests that there’s no other versions that are superior to the switch version. The Author has this title wrong what it should say is Wolfenstein deserves a better sequel than it got. W2 is horrible compared to the first. It feels like a twitch shooter now with all that fast movement.

[hiawa23]

Oh, come on, the game is enhanced on the X1X, PS4 Pro, and PC. If you want a enhanced version get one of the those, I love the X1X version. I am sure they made the best game the Switch's hardware would allow. Who could be mad at that? The game deserves to be on as many platforms as possible. They have done that. That is a good thing in my book.