I'm going to be an uber pessimist and say it misses E3 , despite leaks galore, and gets its own presentation after E3. Assuming it's a 2022 release.
I don't rule out missing E3, but Nintendo needs to be prepared for a deluge of leaks. devs had kits for a long time by then and they'd be eager to talk now that they know many more have kits as well
You can't just...Delay a hardware launch with partnerships with big box stores and major advertising firms.
I hope you are right. I've been wanting a stronger Switch for along time, but my hopes keep getting dashed.
I mean they did just that with the original switch.
I would assume then that if it targets 2022 but in the situation of a delay, gets put to 2023 Q1
tftcentral.co.uk
How likely are they to resolve low resolution ray tracing? I wonder if it's just something of a stretch goal on their chip design.
The same way they didn’t need to reveal the 3DS so soon when the DS still had a few more years left to it, or Sony “needed” a PS3 when the PS2 was selling so well.
because you don't need to align software and hardware so closely anymore. just have a high framerate and resolution mode for those games and they're "future proof". it's not like the old days where you had hard start/stop points. gaming consoles are finally doing what phones and especially PCs have been doing for a long time
it's definitely something Nvidia is working on. in their DLSS documentation, they include some ray tracing data to assist in the upscaling process, which could resolve some low rpp errors (my assumption anyway).
the issue with using the pandemic and chip shortage as a gauge is that you can't accurately predict what will happen. those that can are already advising companies like Nintendo and chip manufactures. given the process of chip ordering and fabrication, you have to wait until your turn for manufacturing. if Nintendo waits too long (like for signs of the pandemic slowing) then they're so far down the list, they won't make their desired date.
The switch 2 and pro are the same thing hardware wise.
To be clear: a dev looking to have a game done in H2 2022 doesn't have to equal a late 2022 launch. Example: Sony wanted most PS5 launch software submitted for certification by September.
To make it interesting of a perspective, let’s assume Nintendo delays it from a hypothetical year of 2023 to 2025. This would mean the Nintendo filed the contracts for the fab in 2020 ish/2021-ish, for a 2023 release and pushed it back two more years till 2025. So now Nintendo is taking up space that other companies would also like to get on, but they already paid upfront. If they delay their products they’re not gonna maintain that spot for two more years, they’re going to be pushed to the back of the line because the other companies collectively would be above what Nintendo would pay as a whole, and Samsung gains nothing by taking one customer who pays one amount versus several customers who pay a much higher amount collectively.
)
March 2023 is also a possibility.
I don't think Nintendo's the one that makes contracts with foundry companies, but rather Nvidia. But the point probably still stands with Nvidia.To make it interesting of a perspective, let’s assume Nintendo delays it from a hypothetical year of 2023 to 2025. This would mean the Nintendo filed the contracts for the fab in 2020 ish/2021-ish, for a 2023 release and pushed it back two more years till 2025. So now Nintendo is taking up space that other companies would also like to get on, but they already paid upfront. If they delay their products they’re not gonna maintain that spot for two more years, they’re going to be pushed to the back of the line because the other companies collectively would be above what Nintendo would pay as a whole, and Samsung gains nothing by taking one customer who pays one amount versus several customers who pay a much higher amount collectively.
Nintendo is not like Apple who makes up a large chunk of a semiconductor business’ customer, mind you Apple does not go with Samsung, but the point is that Nintendo is insignificant compared to other companies as a whole and in semiconductor it is a lot more competitive to get a spot not only from the semiconductor customers but from the semiconductor companies themselves. On top of this, Nintendo would be for a game console while nvidia does more than just for a game console, they are also in the automotive industry and the AI industry as well as the GPU industry, so if Nintendo takes up spots for two whole years they’re going to take up the space of other nvidia products that collectively can bring in more revenue than what a Nintendo switch does in its lifetime. Potentially.
NVidia is their vendor and Nintendo is their customer, and again this is assuming a 2023 release but it gets delayed to their new projected 2025. If they project 2025 they likely wouldn’t get it until 2026/27 and pay again for what they already paid for but didn’t use.
(And cause some ill will for wasting someone’s time
My bad, I was meaning that BOTW2 getting pushed to 2023 occurring in the first week of January 2022 being an example of how early in 2022 BOTW2 would need to be pushed out into 2023 for Switch 2/Pro/Dane to be pushed into 2023 as well.
Probably should read the major thread marks then, as there is a lot of stuff that indicates Late 2022/Early 2023 as the prime release window.
2 is easy to answer. They will pull an "Xbox Series" strategy where they have a year or 2 of cross gen. Same OS, same digital store, tweaked joy cons, enhanced bc.
Yeah but in an indirect way, since Nintendo pays nVidia who pays Samsung, by the power of transitive property, Nintendo pays Samsung
.I don’t think they would do a cross gen that short with the way games are these days.
Coast too long on something popular, you can end up with a Wii -> Wii U transition. DS was the hottest thing ever, peaked 4-5 years after launch, had its successor ready by 6.5 years after launch. The only times Nintendo hardware has gone longer than 6.5 years without a successor are the original Famicom and Game Boy.
Your talking like putting a console out is cheap, it's a multi billion $ investment. PS4 peaked in 2016 and was not replaced until 2020.
HDMI 2.1a Certification Announced Including New Source-Based Tone Mapping (SBTM) Feature - TFTCentral
Share this contentThe HDMI Licensing Administrator (HDMI LA) has this week announced in a pre-CES 2022 virtual press briefing an update to the HDMI certification scheme that is coming soon,....[click link for more]
I think the problem with 3DS was they had to split their resources with ramping up with the Wii U , hopefully they could avoid that this time.
Not if you count the pro?
Are you saying that the next switch will come out in 2025?
Nintendo and Sony also operate in very different ways with very different revenue models.
Sony is the market leader? That's news to me.
Sony was the market leader. Nintendo has been the market leader for the last three years.
Hell, in Japan they ARE the market.
Then it's a good thing Nintendo is a multi-billion dollar corporation, making over $10 billion in operating profit from their current hardware, which is calculated after the R&D expenses they've likely already incurred for this new hardware.
but we're talking about Nintendo here
That doesn't mean anything.
While they do like to charge a premium for updated versions of already-released software, I think the Dane upgrades present a unique marketing opportunity. A lot of people have invested in a Switch and a game library, and charging for upgrades could lead to customers being either upset because they don't want to pay for this stuff all over again, or indifferent about the Dane because they already have a Switch that plays their games just fine and they don't need a new system with newer, flashier games yet (similar to what happened with the horribly-marketed WiiU, the "oh we already have a Wii at home, we don't need one with a tablet" problem).
I am assuming by revenue , Sony's FY 2021 revenue ending March 2021 was around $24.4 billion and Nintendo's was $16.5 billion and that's with a massive increase on Nintendo's side from $12 billion the year prior.
That was not ever an intentional strategy. Their original plan was to launch it in 2016 but they had to delay it so more software was ready.
