>>713073843
I mentioned switch 1 in the OP for a reason. I get that the whole destruction gimmick is probably very taxing on the hardware, but at the same time it feels loke theres more of an artstyle/postprocessing issue rather than a tech issue.
>>713074416
Either this is a counter falseflag or you are genuinely mindbroken. The game still looks fun, retard. I just want to discuss the graphics of what we've seen so far.
>>713073942
>His first thought is that the only alternative is unreal sloppa
Projecting much, buddy?
>>713073821
Literally every thread someone brings the graphics up black/white-eyed autists pop up saying "WHO CARES GAMEPLAY MEANS NO GRAPHICS LMAO". You can go and check it yourself.