StarTopic Future Nintendo Hardware & Technology Speculation & Discussion |ST| (New Staff Post, Please read)

[Aufhebung RPG]

This is absolutely, 100% false. I don't want to get into the middle of this argument because I think it's silly, but this is just factually not true. There is not a single graphics engineer on the planet who would agree with you.

Generations plural? Like, 360 era? You're telling me that Prime Remastered looks like Quake 4? You think that Breath of the Wild looks like Skyrim? An engine that delivers physically based rendering with subsurface scattering, screen space ambient occlusion, global illumination, volumetric lighting?

You'd be hard pressed to find a 360/PS3 game that implements one of these things, much less all of them. And yes, you are correct that Nintendo's hardware is closer to this generation in terms of horsepower. But doesn't that tell you something about the development team that they're delivering far more advanced graphics at higher resolutions than the 360 era?

In terms of "generations" every advanced technique from the PS4/Xbox One era is bog-fucking-standard in a Nintendo Switch game. You could perhaps say that Nintendo's games are one generation behind. But you know what, the Switch is a 7 year old console. It came out in the last generation, it should be surprising that it's got last generation rendering techniques.

Of course, what ultra modern rendering tech is missing? Ray tracing? Sure, I guess, but show me the lengthy list of ray tracing titles on the 4 TFLOP Series S, and then we can discuss why Nintendo might not implement it on their 0.4 TFLOP hardware.

But their shared engine from Switch Sports to Tears of the Kingdom uses radiosity and probe based GI, basically "set it up just like you would for ray tracing" lighting engines, very similar to Lumen. The idea that Nintendo is afraid of ray tracing is silly.

Whatever you think about what Nintendo's whole deal is, that's all on you, but this is an overblown statement that demonstrates no working knowledge of graphical technology. "I don't like how Switch games look" is a reasonable statement. "NIntendo's graphics stack is multiple generations behind" is patently false.

As you can see in the other thread this person is an unabashed realist, so there is no point in arguing with him.

 

[Dimensio]

For a portable in 2017 it was "ok" but since the Switch is marketed also as a home console,

What do you mean by "ok"? It was literally using the most powerful mobile chip at the time.

it's not even competing graphics wise with a PS4/One.

It's a Handheld, how could it ever compete against a home console? Like seriously what do you want them to do, pull out a magical chip that overcomes the laws of physics out of their ass?

It's laughable and yet we are in year eight of the Switch and Nintendo still won't even as much as acknowledge the successor.

In no way this indicates They are scared, if anything it shows They are confident.
The Switch was a colossal success that is still selling really well and there's no need to rush out the successor compromising the quality of it's software.
Also the PS4 and Xbone lasted exactly 7 years, and the PS5 and XboxSX are looking to last 8 years. We are well beyond the point of diminishing returns, 7-8 years life cycles are the norm now.

Anyways here is a good interview with a former Nintendo president in regards to graphics:

Interview: Hiroshi Yamauchi - IGN

If DS is unsuccessful, Nintendo will be crushed, says former NCL president.

www.ign.com

Nintendo has shifted focus from cutting edge visuals to gameplay and innovation. Not saying there is anything wrong with this.

Not sure what you're trying to prove with an interview from 20 years ago from someone that wasn't president at the time.
Again, all you need to do is simply take a look at their games and you can see that even when the console themselves were underpowered (Wii, Wii U) they always pushed the limits from a graphical and technical standpoint.
They absolutely do care about making their games look the absolute best They can even if it's not the main focus.

 

[Kevin]

Look I'm not going to further get into it. The point was that we are in year eight and there is no successor to the Switch. What are the reasons? Who knows. Honestly I don't think anyone knows at this point. Could be a number of things. Nintendo doesn't want to move on, issues with the hardware, next gen software isn't ready yet, etc etc. We don't know why Nintendo isn't moving on from Switch so many years later. It would be nice if they communicated more with consumers but they don't and so we just continue to wait.

My opinion was that Nintendo generally doesn't want to put fourth the money, time and resources toward big expensive visual stunning games and liked to maintain smaller budges using older graphics technologies and smaller scope projects (with a few exceptions like Zelda). I didn't think anything I said was too controversial but there is enough people in this thread that didn't agree with what I have to say so I'll just drop the matter altogether. I wasn't trying to ruffle any features.

The bottom line is that seemingly no one has any idea what we aren't getting a Switch successor so late in the Switch's lifecycle as of yet. I mean obviously something will eventually come out. I personally feel Nintendo wanted to hold off as long as possible and I also think the software isn't ready yet. Maybe they were targeting this year but the software just wasn't where it needed to be so they postponed the launch by six months or something. It's all speculation.

As far as graphics technology go, I mean Nintendo's graphics are nowhere near the tech we see on PS5/XSX/PC. Again never thought this was a controversial statement. Not saying Switch games are "ugly" but they aren't blowing anyone away in 2024 in terms of technology.

Maybe some minor points of mine were not worded well but I stand by most of what I said in the above posts. I still believe Nintendo wanted to prolong the Switch lifecycle as long as possible and that Nintendo is at least some what concerned with ever increasing budget sizes and scopes and that has always been why the Switch successor has yet to arrive. These were my key points and I stand by them based on the little information we are getting anymore. I also think software just isn't ready yet and Nintendo knows that their Switch successor software needs to come in really strong. Part of the trio of have amusement parks, movies and you need strong awesome games to keep consumers happy which will also in turn make them more excited for the amusement park stuff and films they are working on. Can't cheapen out on the games and expect consumers to be excited for the other pillars Nintendo is pushing for.

If I upset anyone here, sorry. Not like we have a lot to go on. I mean I was barely 30 when Switch came out and now I'm almost 40. Hell it was like 5-6 years ago that we started thinking a Pro was "around the corner" so this whole waiting thing has really gotten silly in my opinion.

Anyways I said how I feel on why we so far have yet to move on from Switch. I'm not going to keep pushing the matter. I think we all disagree and that's fine. I respect everyone's opinions and I'll just let it go.

 

[Dimensio]

Look I'm not going to further get into it. The point was that we are in year eight and there is no successor to the Switch. What are the reasons? Who knows. We don't know why Nintendo isn't moving on from Switch so many years later.

The reason why The Switch successor isn't out yet Is really, really simple: There is no need for it yet.
The switch is still super healthy and 8 years life cycles are normal now, this isn't a weird or bad thing.

My opinion was that Nintendo generally doesn't want to put fourth the money, time and resources toward big expensive visual stunning games and liked to maintain smaller budges using older graphics technologies and smaller scope projects (with a few exceptions like Zelda). I didn't think anything I said was too controversial but there is enough people in this thread that didn't agree with what I have to say so I'll just drop the matter altogether. I wasn't trying to ruffle any features.

But the idea that Nintendo uses older graphics technologies and isn't up to date is just factually false, this isn't something you can have an "opinion" on.

 

[Aufhebung RPG]

The reason why The Switch successor isn't out yet Is really, really simple: There is no need for it yet.
The switch is still super healthy and 8 years life cycles are normal now, this isn't a weird or bad thing.


But the idea that Nintendo uses older graphics technologies and isn't up to date is just factually false, this isn't something you can have an "opinion" on.

I think by "graphics technology" he just means polygon count and resolution. lol

 

[Truno]

Nintendo doesn't want to move on, issues with the hardware, next gen software isn't ready yet, etc etc. We don't know why Nintendo isn't moving on from Switch so many years later. It would be nice if they communicated more with consumers but they don't and so we just continue to wait.

Open up last week's Japan sales thread, should give you an idea.

As far as graphics technology go, I mean Nintendo's graphics are nowhere near the tech we see on PS5/XSX/PC. Again never thought this was a controversial statement. Not saying Switch games are "ugly" but they aren't blowing anyone away in 2024 in terms of technology.

Check out the reaction to Nintendo's GDC 2024 panel

Hell it was like 5-6 years ago that we started thinking a Pro was "around the corner" so this whole waiting thing has really gotten silly in my opinion.

Literally the only official word from Nintendo that we've received regarding the Switch's lifecycle is that they expect a 10-year lifecycle for the system and it was "mid-way" through its lifecycle during its 4-5th year. Anything else is just fan speculation

 

[redmutineer75]

Open up last week's Japan sales thread, should give you an idea.



Check out the reaction to Nintendo's GDC 2024 panel



Literally the only official word from Nintendo that we've received regarding the Switch's lifecycle is that they expect a 10-year lifecycle for the system and it was "mid-way" through its lifecycle during its 4-5th year. Anything else is just fan speculation

And the phrase "lifecycle" doesn't discount Switch sales after the Switch 2 launch. The 3DS was discontinued in September 2020, and the Wii Mini was discontinued in November 2017 (albeit the regular Wii was discontinued in October 2013). Nintendo loves to hedge its bets when a new product arrives, and the Switch should be no exception.

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

Are there any papers on denoising games with less complex geometry.

It’s not intuitively obvious whether lower environment detail will allow for cheaper denoising.

 

[Discostew]

I think by "graphics technology" he just means polygon count and resolution. lol

It is just silly to use graphics as the focal point for defining generations in general. The PS4/PS5/XB1/Series are stronger than Switch, but none of those could run in such a small package, have as low of a power draw, etc. Hell, the Switch reserves around 40% of its internal volume just for the battery, whereas none of these home consoles have such batteries at all for how big they are. And back in 2017, the Switch was pushing in portable mode beyond what PS3/360 could do at a time where no other portable device could really match it. Not even the smartphones and tablets at that time could because having such heavy loads would cause those device to throttle down. Having high specs doesn't mean much if it's for the purpose of short, intense bursts which games do not revolve around.

 

[Kevin]

I think by "graphics technology" he just means polygon count and resolution. lol

Or you know you could watch videos of Doom Eternal, Witcher 3 and every other third party port (with a few exceptions) and see how much of the actual graphical effects are missing, the piss poor framerates, the shit tier resolutions and character models that look like they took a bath in vaseline, missing textures, etc. You guys don't like my opinion, that's fine but it's absolutely silly to pretend that Switch games come anywhere close to the visuals of a PS4 let alone more modern consoles.

 

[SiG]

Or you know you could watch videos of Doom Eternal, Witcher 3 and every other third party port (with a few exceptions) and see how much of the actual graphical effects are missing, the piss poor framerates, the shit tier resolutions and character models that look like they took a bath in vaseline, missing textures, etc. You guys don't like my opinion, that's fine but it's absolutely silly to pretend that Switch games come anywhere close to the visuals of a PS4 let alone more modern consoles.

Alien: Isolation proves you could get quite close.

 

[Kevin]

Alien: Isolation proves you could get quite close.

and thus I wrote "with a few exceptions". Smaller scale games with more closed off environments. When the games get bigger with larger environments, the system begins to buckle.

 

[Aufhebung RPG]

Or you know you could watch videos of Doom Eternal, Witcher 3 and every other third party port (with a few exceptions) and see how much of the actual graphical effects are missing, the piss poor framerates, the shit tier resolutions and character models that look like they took a bath in vaseline, missing textures, etc. You guys don't like my opinion, that's fine but it's absolutely silly to pretend that Switch games come anywhere close to the visuals of a PS4 let alone more modern consoles.

So where you're being silly is in treating elements like polygon count and texture detail as the whole measure of graphics skill.

Your idea of measuring Nintendo's graphics technology by polygon count as well as resolution is completely unreliable, and your paranoid realist tendencies deepen that bias.

 

[Kevin]

So where you're being silly is in treating elements like polygon count and texture detail as the whole measure of graphics skill.

I was never commenting on art direction which I think every company on every system has greatly improved upon over the years. That's been on of the highlights of modern gaming and art teams. Amazing work from everyone really.

 

[Aufhebung RPG]

I was never commenting on art direction which I think every company on every system has greatly improved upon over the years. That's been on of the highlights of modern gaming and art teams. Amazing work from everyone really.

I think oldpuck has already answered your very paranoid views on the judgment of Nintendo's graphic technology, so I'm not going to argue with you because your views are completely stuck in the 2006-2011 time period.

 

[Kevin]

I think oldpuck has already answered your very paranoid views on the judgment of Nintendo's graphic technology, so I'm not going to argue with you because your views are completely stuck in the 2006-2011 time period.

Honestly not really sure why the hostility but yeah I agree. Time to move on!

 

[kasparov77]

FSR seems to make a whole lot difference when implemented correctly
that said, sub 60fps at 1440p for a game running on a 7900xt? damn...
is that really the weight of unreal engine 5 or just a game that needs more polish?

 

[Aufhebung RPG]

Honestly not really sure why the hostility but yeah I agree. Time to move on!

Other than that I'm curious how you feel about p3r's graphical techniques, it's a completely Japanese anime-esque style rendering, may I ask if it's worthless when placed under your realism metrics?

 

[JoshuaJSlone]

The Switch sold 2.74 millions in March 2017 alone. If the Switch 2 Launched at the beginning of March I would expect 2-3 millions units by the end of the month.
But if it launched on something like 28th It would be something like 300k-400k at best, huge difference.

You're figuring like in a launch month they'd be shipping a fixed number per day, but it's much more front-loaded since right away they'll be unleashing a large stockpiled amount. Check something like the Switch Japanese launch sales, where by March 5 (3 days) it had sold 331K, and by April 2 was only up to 557K, of a reported 600K shipment for the region that quarter.

I know dlss2 and 3 are better than fsr1 in terms of results but if the cost of frame time allows it, why not consider scaling to 1080p at 720p portable mode native resolution and scaling to 1440p at 900p for docking mode native resolution. these two options should be considered the most reasonable choices in my opinion.

Definitely it will depend on the game, but considering how many major devs prioritize throwing the graphical kitchen sink at an image rather than worrying about high frame rate or resolution, for at least games that go beyond PS4-level effects being able to natively render ~half as many pixels (and thus throw ~twice as much horsepower into each pixel) for fairly marginal image quality loss is probably going to seem pretty appealing.

From some comparisons I made with No Man's Sky ages ago, 1080p w/ TAA (A) vs 540p->1080p DLSS2 (B) vs 720p->1080p DLSS2 (C).
1A 1B 1C
2A 2B 2C
3A 3B 3C

 

[Kevin]

Other than that I'm curious how you feel about p3r's graphical techniques, it's a completely Japanese anime-esque style rendering, may I ask if it's worthless when placed under your realism metrics?

Maybe my wording for things haven't been too great or something. Most of my problems with switch are stuff like resolutions, framerates, poor textures, etc. This had nothing to do with artstyle choices. Persona 3 looks great and is a gorgeous game on PS5. A combination of the art direction, higher quality assets, resolution, etc really made it shrine.

For the most part I would have been at least some what satisfied to see current Switch games with higher resolutions and framerates. One thing to keep in mind is everyone's setup is different and some people don't care about visuals at all. So everyone is different. I use a 65 inch 4K OLED tv and sit pretty close to it as I like the immersion offered. Some people are happy with a small 32 inch 1080p tv. Everyone is going to be different here so any opinion I gave was just how something effects me and was not meant to upset anyone else here on the forums.

I played games like Xenoblade Chronicles 2, Monster Hunter Stories 2, etc and those were fantastic games but the resolution and framerates were really bad. I remember parts of Xenoblade Chronicles 2 got so bad the sound kept skipping and cutting out and in Monster Hunter Stories 2 some of the towns was like slow motion, just incredibly low framerates. Also little to no anti-aliasing leaves everything with like a lot of jaggies around everything.

Now granted having more modern effects or pushing the effects abilities on new hardware would also be great as well but at this point I would have settled for that Switch Pro that was rumored to have been canceled around the pandemic.

Some of my favorite games are the ones with a more artistic vision. Like I'm excited for Visions of Mana, but I would never want to play that on the Switch as it would likely be like 720p, blurry, reduced textures, draw distance, etc.

Anyways I hope this clears things up at least a little and if not, at least I tried to further explain my stance here.

 

[Aufhebung RPG]

Maybe my wording for things haven't been too great or something. Most of my problems with switch are stuff like resolutions, framerates, poor textures, etc. This had nothing to do with artstyle choices. Persona 3 looks great and is a gorgeous game on PS5. A combination of the art direction, higher quality assets, resolution, etc really made it shrine.

For the most part I would have been at least some what satisfied to see current Switch games with higher resolutions and framerates. One thing to keep in mind is everyone's setup is different and some people don't care about visuals at all. So everyone is different. I use a 65 inch 4K OLED tv and sit pretty close to it as I like the immersion offered. Some people are happy with a small 32 inch 1080p tv. Everyone is going to be different here so any opinion I gave was just how something effects me and was not meant to upset anyone else here on the forums.

I played games like Xenoblade Chronicles 2, Monster Hunter Stories 2, etc and those were fantastic games but the resolution and framerates were really bad. I remember parts of Xenoblade Chronicles 2 got so bad the sound kept skipping and cutting out and in Monster Hunter Stories 2 some of the towns was like slow motion, just incredibly low framerates. Also little to no anti-aliasing leaves everything with like a lot of jaggies around everything.

Now granted having more modern effects or pushing the effects abilities on new hardware would also be great as well but at this point I would have settled for that Switch Pro that was rumored to have been canceled around the pandemic.

Some of my favorite games are the ones with a more artistic vision. Like I'm excited for Visions of Mana, but I would never want to play that on the Switch as it would likely be like 720p, blurry, reduced textures, draw distance, etc.

Anyways I hope this clears things up at least a little and if not, at least I tried to further explain my stance here.

I recognize that switch is not doing a good job on these levels, but my objection is simply that you equate these metrics with "graphics technology".

 

[Kevin]

I recognize that switch is not doing a good job on these levels, but my objection is simply that you equate these metrics with "graphics technology".

I guess chalk it up to using wrong terminology then.

 

[MadMarvainy]

The best part about waiting for Switch 2 is you don't have to sit around and wait for Switch 2...

If you do that then you end up writing walls of hysteria about how Nintendo doesn't want to move on or something...

Turns out transitioning from one of the most successful consoles ever his hard and takes a lot of time and work.

 

[Pokemaniac]

The why is the golden question. Because when you lay it out logically it makes sense for Nintendo to start talking about the next generation. Lic is absolutely correct that Nintendo does not have to say anything about upcoming hardware if they don't want to. The real question is why would they be so secretive. I'm sure Nintendo has its reasons, but we may never know.

It's not exactly hard to guess. Nintendo's hardware has historically had many attempts to clone its unique selling points, and keeping the window between announcement and release as small as possible minimizes the effects of that. There's also probably a non-zero benefit to Switch sales in the meantime.

 

[kingman]

This is absolutely, 100% false. I don't want to get into the middle of this argument because I think it's silly, but this is just factually not true. There is not a single graphics engineer on the planet who would agree with you.

Generations plural? Like, 360 era? You're telling me that Prime Remastered looks like Quake 4? You think that Breath of the Wild looks like Skyrim? An engine that delivers physically based rendering with subsurface scattering, screen space ambient occlusion, global illumination, volumetric lighting?

Oh man. I'll admit that I myself am guilty of not giving the switch hardware enough credit a lot of the time, but sometimes you really need to see side by side videos of games on older hardware. Both Skyrim and Quake 4 look far worse than I remember. At least I can give Skyrim somewhat of a pass because its world is massive and that probably takes a lot of resources. But I'm surprised how bad Quake 4 looks. Did Id actually develop that? Frame rate is terrible!

 

[7hatDeadCat]

It's not exactly hard to guess. Nintendo's hardware has historically had many attempts to clone its unique selling points, and keeping the window between announcement and release as small as possible minimizes the effects of that. There's also probably a non-zero benefit to Switch sales in the meantime.

and with the recent talk of both sony and microsoft looking at the handheld space i bet nintendo has a high motivation to make sure they keep their cards close.

 

[Individualised]

Oh man. I'll admit that I myself am guilty of not giving the switch hardware enough credit a lot of the time, but sometimes you really need to see side by side videos of games on older hardware. Both Skyrim and Quake 4 look far worse than I remember. At least I can give Skyrim somewhat of a pass because its world is massive and that probably takes a lot of resources. But I'm surprised how bad Quake 4 looks. Did Id actually develop that? Frame rate is terrible!

Quake 4 was outsourced to Raven, but yeah it doesn't look great even for 2005 standards (also not a great game from what I've seen of it - full disclosure I haven't played it). Doom 3 (where the engine originates from) was also graphically lacking compared to Half-Life 2. I think the reason why those games don't look great is not necessarily a technical one but an artistic one. They seem to use a lot of hand drawn and pre-rendered textures while in comparison HL2 based many of its textures on real photos.

 

[SuperFakerBros]

For a portable in 2017 it was "ok" but since the Switch is marketed also as a home console, it's not even competing graphics wise with a PS4/One.

Yeah, it’s a portable device. It doesn’t matter how high end it is, it’s not gonna be as powerful as a console. That’s not being behind tho. The Wii U and Wii were behind because they straight up used old ass hardware. The Switch used up to date hardware. The fact that the Switch got somewhat respectable PS4/XB1 ports and the Switch 2 will do the same when it comes to PS5/XSX ports tells me that they’re not generations behind

EDIT: Although, seeing your newer posts, you more so have issues with resolutions, frame-rates, etc., which are fair. It’s rough on modern nice 4KTVs. Won’t even argue against that. But the successor is coming. It just needs to have everything ready. I’d rather it come out complete than half baked

 

[Wockio]

Throughout the years I've firmly been in the "Switch 2? We don't even need a pro" camp but ever since the year started, and specially right now, it's finally gotten to me. You have idea how much I'm yearning to see this thing. It's time Nintendo. We are ready.

 

[Akuji]

I'm hoping that the input lag situation dramatically improves with the next system. I don't know the technical reasons on what specifically is at fault on the Switch but it seems like input latency for plenty of Nintendo games got much worse, like Splatoon 1 to 2/3 or Smash 4 to Ultimate. Even some mostly straight Wii U ports like DK Tropical Freeze are still worse in that regard. No game should make me question if my TV was set in Game Mode properly like Ultimate made me do on day one, even with a Gamecube controller which is apparently the option with the least delay. I've also seen some tests on the Switch Pro Controller that show that it's actually more delayed in wired mode which is just baffling to me.

In a similar vein in regards to responsiveness, I'm still not expecting Nintendo to do something like dedicated servers for every game so at the very least I'd like to see some decent improvements to their netcode. I would be extremely happy if Nintendo looked into implementing rollback netcode into their bigger titles like Smash (maybe Mario Maker?) which so far if i recall only NERD has done with certain NSO emulators. Improving the low tick rates (or maybe even adding a sub-tick system like CS2?) in Splatoon would also make a big deal with how often the game spontaneously explodes players 5 seconds after killing someone.

I am interested in what sort of power the next system has but if this doesn't improve or somehow gets worse it'll really hurt my impressions with the system imo. If I understand correctly DLSS shouldn't affect input lag so that's good at least.

 

[Bigdog]

This is absolutely, 100% false. I don't want to get into the middle of this argument because I think it's silly, but this is just factually not true. There is not a single graphics engineer on the planet who would agree with you.

Generations plural? Like, 360 era? You're telling me that Prime Remastered looks like Quake 4? You think that Breath of the Wild looks like Skyrim? An engine that delivers physically based rendering with subsurface scattering, screen space ambient occlusion, global illumination, volumetric lighting?

You'd be hard pressed to find a 360/PS3 game that implements one of these things, much less all of them. And yes, you are correct that Nintendo's hardware is closer to this generation in terms of horsepower. But doesn't that tell you something about the development team that they're delivering far more advanced graphics at higher resolutions than the 360 era?

In terms of "generations" every advanced technique from the PS4/Xbox One era is bog-fucking-standard in a Nintendo Switch game. You could perhaps say that Nintendo's games are one generation behind. But you know what, the Switch is a 7 year old console. It came out in the last generation, it should be surprising that it's got last generation rendering techniques.

Of course, what ultra modern rendering tech is missing? Ray tracing? Sure, I guess, but show me the lengthy list of ray tracing titles on the 4 TFLOP Series S, and then we can discuss why Nintendo might not implement it on their 0.4 TFLOP hardware.

But their shared engine from Switch Sports to Tears of the Kingdom uses radiosity and probe based GI, basically "set it up just like you would for ray tracing" lighting engines, very similar to Lumen. The idea that Nintendo is afraid of ray tracing is silly.

Whatever you think about what Nintendo's whole deal is, that's all on you, but this is an overblown statement that demonstrates no working knowledge of graphical technology. "I don't like how Switch games look" is a reasonable statement. "NIntendo's graphics stack is multiple generations behind" is patently false.

DF covered the Alien Isolation Port which serves as a great visual example of what you're explaining.

The Switch port actually looks better than the PS4 port.

 

[LuigiBlood]

Despite knowing the foundation, there's so much we still don't know, like what type of battery it'll use, how much ram, since our biggest guess are 12-16 GB, Bandwith and lastly teraflops.

There's also

• How good will Ray tracing looks
• Will DLSS, play a huge or small role for Nintendo first party development
• The Switch 2 OS
• Eshop
• Storage
• How much of a improvement will load time be, since Botw is told to be Instant.
• Backward compatibility, will it have free patches or not

And much more

Like despite us knowing the Switch 2, at the end we still don't know that much about it.
Which is why i'm curios seeing how Nintendo first party games looks, since games like Mario Kart 8 deluxe, Animal crossing, Astral Chain, Mario odyssey, 3D kirby and Xenoblade 3 are all technical and visually impressive games

In reality it feels like, we finished the appetizer and are currently waiting for the Main course.

The OS will be the same as the Switch 1 (the Home Menu can be different, just saying). This much is actually expected. Too much smoke around the OS but nothing particularly telling about the Switch 2 hardware.

Also the OS itself shows to be very very secure that I find it to be waste if they didn't reuse it as is.

 

[Ojoloco]

DF covered the Alien Isolation Port which serves as a great visual example of what you're explaining.

The Switch port actually looks better than the PS4 port.

In fact, the Switch port of Kingdom Come deliverance implements more modern techniques and technical features that were present only in the PC version. Obviously, the resolution is not the same as the other versions, but it uses more advanced techniques and features than the other console versions.

 

[AxkilAvenger]

Throughout the years I've firmly been in the "Switch 2? We don't even need a pro" camp but ever since the year started, and specially right now, it's finally gotten to me. You have idea how much I'm yearning to see this thing. It's time Nintendo. We are ready.

Your prayer will go unanswered..
It is the way

 

[Darknut85]

Your prayer will go unanswered..
It is the way

The question is if Nintendo is doomed, we are doomed or…

 

[Shareholder Chad]

Maybe not the best place to post, but just seen a tweet from Austin John Plays that Nintendo’s stock has gone up just shy of 20% over night?(After-hours)

I know @Shareholder Chad has said in the past that the general base won’t know what is going on behind the scenes… but that is a HUGE increase. Could something finally be imminent?

I googled this guy and found the tweet. It looks photo shopped and does not represent price action on any of the brokers I use. Nintendo's stock (Not NTDOY but 7974 on TSE) has not gone up 20%. NTDOY mirrors 7974. So one scenario is a glitch, The second one is a complicated thing called "options trading". Think of it like buying a bet and going to watch a horse race. When those "expire" sometimes youll see price jump for a split second then go back to normal.

Nothing to see here.

 

[ShadowFox08]

Okay, I've never seen anyone acknowledge this and it kinda bugs me: AFAIK, the original Nikkei article never said that Tatsumi Kimishima wanted the Switch to have a ten year lifespan. The original article quoted him as saying "I want to continue selling more than 5～6 years." Nintendo Soup then suggested that this could mean 7-to-10 years when they translated that part of the article. Nintendo themselves never gave that exact range. For all we know, Kimishima could have just wanted an extra year or two out of the system, which is what we're currently getting, not an extra four.

Everytime this gets brought up, I just assume they mean it will have support for 10 years. What kind of support is vague on purpose, and depends how well the Switch is selling. Also, I don't think this implies the switch will last 10 years before a successor comes out. At the very least, I suspect online servers and buying games from the eshop will be supported until 2027. And I say at least, at this point in time, because I don't think Nintendo knew the switch would perform this well on its 7th year already.

 

[Rogue Agent]

I don't remember the interview but someone from Nintendo mentioned something to the effect that with the Switch, they wanted to focus on high performance at low power consumption and this lead to Nvidia (I'm not sure of the exact phrasing they used). So regardless of what anyone thinks of their games' polygons and framerate, it does make it clear that Nintendo does care about performance.

 

[Dakhil]

I don't remember the interview but someone from Nintendo mentioned something to the effect that with the Switch, they wanted to focus on high performance at low power consumption and this lead to Nvidia (I'm not sure of the exact phrasing they used). So regardless of what anyone thinks of their games' polygons and framerate, it does make it clear that Nintendo does care about performance.

https://www.nintendo.co.jp/ir/pdf/2017/170207e.pdf

⋮
Genyo Takeda (Director, Technology Fellow):
If I can sum up my impression in one short phrase, I would use "high performance but low power consumption" to describe Nintendo Switch. The PC has been a major gaming device, especially outside of Japan, and my top priority in the development of the Nintendo Switch hardware was to bring NVIDIA's GeForce, which has played a key role in realizing high-performance graphics for PC gaming, to our hardware with low power consumption. The term "crossover" is sometimes used to describe the unprecedented value that is realized when merging two different attractive things (such as, in this case, high performance and low power consumption, and playing both indoors and outdoors). I feel that Nintendo Switch is a new and unique crossover in its achievement of high performance, comparable to that of PC, both in front of your TV set and in your hands.

 

[Simbinha]

People acting like Nintendo is doomed because they're supposedly having (fictional) problems with next-gen hardware (even though they're partnering with a market leader for their chip) and the delay (of a product that was never announced in the first place) is going to cause financial problems for them (company which stocks just reached peak price in their entire century-plus-old history recently and is upsizing their sales forecast due to demand) is crazy to me.

Nintendo has the means to throw millions upon millions in R&D if they want to. There is no reason to believe they're having problems with next-gen because of an internal delay. Why would they ever rush a device out when you are forecasting you can sell 15+ million units of the one that's already on stores? They're taking time because well, they do have time. Of course releasing games utilizing the power of a decade old chip isn't going to do them the best, but it's gonna work for their stretch for now...

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

It's not exactly hard to guess. Nintendo's hardware has historically had many attempts to clone its unique selling points, and keeping the window between announcement and release as small as possible minimizes the effects of that. There's also probably a non-zero benefit to Switch sales in the meantime.

You can announce a system without revealing this, come on.

 

[Rogue Agent]

https://www.nintendo.co.jp/ir/pdf/2017/170207e.pdf

Thank you! That's exactly the interview I was referring to.

 

[ziggyrivers]

We’re back to the Dooming Phase of the discussion again huh

 

[Steve]

So… how we feeling about frame generation.

Since we still don’t know which HDMI cable the switch 2 will use for 120fps and 4k. Like, since I’m either expecting 2.0 or 2.1.

Just a silly question, since frame generation only works for 60fps+ and it’s the feature we’re expecting to be removed.

 

[Dakhil]

Meet QDEL, the backlight-less display tech that could replace OLED in premium TVs

Interested in gadgets with premium displays? QDEL should be on your radar.

arstechnica.com

⋮
David Hsieh, senior research director for displays at research firm Omdia, told me via email that when it comes to consumer gadgets, he expects QDEL will most impact TVs, PC displays, and the automotive industry. If commercialized and mass-produced, QDEL can have a cost-to-performance ratio better than that of OLED, but it would still struggle to compete with LCD-LED on a cost basis.
⋮

⋮
There's also hope that QDEL could eventually last longer than OLED, especially since QDEL doesn't rely on organic materials that can cause burn-in. Currently, though, researchers are still working on ensuring that blue and green quantum dot materials can last long enough to make a viable consumer gadget without using cadmium. As it stands, QDEL displays would become noticeably dimmer more quickly than today's OLED displays.

But optimists believe QDEL display lifetimes could one day be on par with LCD-LEDs and outlast OLEDs. Nanosys believes blue quantum dot materials can be developed to last longer than blue OLEDs due to challenges in achieving high efficiency and a long lifetime with blue OLED "at the correct wavelength or color," Yurek explained.

He continued:

Short wavelength light like blue is high-energy... The energy required to produce the deep, short-wavelength blue required by video standards like DCI-P3 is high enough to damage the material used to make the light. This is one of the key reasons that blue OLED lifetimes are shorter than the other colors.

Still, quantum dot emission layer lifetime is perhaps the main bottleneck in QDEL commercialization, Hsieh said, adding:

Cadmium-free blue QDs' lifetimes have historically been substantially too short to make commercially viable displays. Nanosys-reported data in 2021 was around 10,000 hours, at least two magnitudes (100x) less than minimally required. However, QD [emission layer] material lifetimes have been improving rapidly in recent years and some leading companies will announce 'breakthrough” results soon.

Yurek said that there should be announcements on related developments at the SID Display Week conference in May.
⋮

⋮
We're decently far from knowing what image quality will look like in actual QDEL products and how much tech brands will end up investing to bring QDEL to favorable products. But display experts I spoke with are expecting similar image quality to Micro LEDs, plus more colors. According to Eric Virey, principal displays analyst at Yole Intelligence, QDEL should also bring enhanced "color purity" compared to OLED.

Both Micro LED and QDEL consumer products should be brighter than OLEDs, but Virey thinks the brightness advantage will ultimately go to Micro LED products since they "can be driven very hard without damaging them."
⋮

⋮
OLED should continue to dominate smartphones, due to the need for high pixel density, which would be a challenge to achieve with QDEL because of its printing process, according to Virey. He added that this process is "good enough for TVs, possibly laptops and tablets, but it’s challenging to improve it to smartphone levels." Smartphones are "by far the most difficult application" for Micro LED due to cost restrictions, Virey said.
⋮

⋮
"We are targeting 2026 for commercial readiness on the materials side in our public roadmaps. When consumers get their hands on the technology depends on the brands and specific products they want to launch," Nanosys' Yurek told me.
⋮

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

So… how we feeling about frame generation.

Since we still don’t know which HDMI cable the switch 2 will use for 120fps and 4k. Like, since I’m either expecting 2.0 or 2.1.

Just a silly question, since frame generation only works for 60fps+ and it’s the feature we’re expecting to be removed.

FSR3.1 with frame generation is now available on consoles so Nintendo would just use that if they wanted to.

I'm guessing the frametime cost is too expensive for it to be viable on the Switch 2.

 

[redmutineer75]

So… how we feeling about frame generation.

Since we still don’t know which HDMI cable the switch 2 will use for 120fps and 4k. Like, since I’m either expecting 2.0 or 2.1.

Just a silly question, since frame generation only works for 60fps+ and it’s the feature we’re expecting to be removed.

I don't think they'll bother with 120 Hz, and FG wouldn't work for games that actually need the extra frames, so I think they'll just reuse the HDMI 2.0 cable from the OLED dock.

 

[Concernt]

I don't think they'll bother with 120 Hz, and FG wouldn't work for games that actually need the extra frames, so I think they'll just reuse the HDMI 2.0 cable from the OLED dock.

I still think they'll reuse the OLED Dock

 

[JoshuaJSlone]

So… how we feeling about frame generation.

Since we still don’t know which HDMI cable the switch 2 will use for 120fps and 4k. Like, since I’m either expecting 2.0 or 2.1.

Just a silly question, since frame generation only works for 60fps+ and it’s the feature we’re expecting to be removed.

It's not like there's anything really to remove, just that it seems way more impractical for this level of hardware than super resolution or ray reconstruction, even if the device is allowed to have 120fps output. A feature to look forward to on Switch 3.

Recently tried out some FSR3 frame generation on Deck. Got Starfield to go from 22fps to a 30fps that looked herky-jerky.

 

[Dakhil]

The only question I have (and I'm sure other people have as well) is how much Nintendo values VRR as a feature?

I believe how much Nintendo values VRR as a feature determines whether or not the Nintendo Switch's successor features HDMI 2.1 and a 120 Hz display.