It looks like a pretty solid 30, but it does dip in bigger open areas from what I've seen in another technical review, but I think the larger issue is that it was originally a 60fps game on the PS2, Xbox and GameCube, over 20 years ago. I understand the need to upgrade and improve the game graphically, but this isn't Paper Mario TTYD where the action is limited to mostly timing during battle, this is a straight up action game and the lower frame rate has a noticably different feel from the original. I'm sure anybody can adjust, but it's still a loss that sucks. An option for 60fps would've been a nice inclusion, with the obvious downgrades necessary to pull it off.

@@stevemartin9396 Er, hi, I don't think it needs very speedy action. Besides, it was never actually demanding or even truly difficult, it's pretty simple to be satisfying at any framerate for me, anyway.

@@CLHSbandgeek you make a good point, but if there is a reason to be upset by the 30fps, it's that it's an action game and we had it back then. They didn't go nearly as far as TTYD remake did, so I can see why people would be bummed that it wasn't 60 on the Switch. I feel as though it's not that big of a deal, and I'm sure I'll enjoy it just fine at 30.

@@stevemartin9396 The PS2 and Xbox versions aren't 60 fps, only the Gamecube version reached 60 (some of the time). IIRC the re-release on Xbox 360 and PS3 ran at 60fps and 1080p though. Either way the Switch version being limited to 30 is unacceptable.

wow 30 fps for a 20y old game wow you really set low standards in your life

The original ran at 60

I'll try :O

Thing is had this been just a straight port of the 360/ps3 HD edition it would've been much easier to hit 60 on switch. However this new release contains a lot of overhauled textures, shadows, and a new lighting system. Not to mention some new shader effects. Maybe they could try a performance mode by dropping the resolution down from native to 720p or dynamic, with a few things like draw distance and shadows reduced. Its unfortunate but probably unavoidable given its ubisoft.

The frame drops are unacceptable in this game. The switch is more than capable of handling the load they just didn’t optimize it. Standing next to a waterfall dropped me below 15fps. The cutscene that happens after that boss fight (not shown here for some ungodly reason) is inexcusable. If the prime remaster can do it this sure could have.

@@KidLexDC 15? my goodness. Well I very much agree its unacceptable. Even with all these improvements it should still be able to hold a solid 30fps on NS. Hopefully they patch it sooner rather than later, and get it to a mostly steady 30 overall. In both docked & handheld.

You mean the prequel? It's still in development...

@@drnanard9605 it's going to be a prequel? And I hope it doesn't come out they haven't had a good game in years. It will probably suffer the same fate as skull and bones.

@@EcoSos3 same publisher, different devs tho. Skulls and Bones was made by Ubisoft Singapore, who had never made a game before. BG&E2 is developed by Ubisoft Montpellier, the original Michel Ancel studio, which made the first game, as well as most Rayman games, including Legends, and their last game, Prince of Persia : the Lost Crown, was met with universal praise.

@@drnanard9605 I'm still a bit skeptical but I'm happy to be proven wrong, will just have to wait and see.

It's more or less 100% solid 30fps on Switch. It doesn't even REALLY demand twitch actions or even high framerate; sometimes "play it elsewhere" feels more like just "play on another platform for only higher framerate or even as basic and lazy as simply convenience".