• Hey everyone, staff have documented a list of banned content and subject matter that we feel are not consistent with site values, and don't make sense to host discussion of on Famiboards. This list (and the relevant reasoning per item) is viewable here.
  • Do you have audio editing experience and want to help out with the Famiboards Discussion Club Podcast? If so, we're looking for help and would love to have you on the team! Just let us know in the Podcast Thread if you are interested!

StarTopic Future Nintendo Hardware & Technology Speculation & Discussion |ST| (Read the staff posts before commenting!)

Reader mode
I'm totally ignorant here, but

I'd be MORE than ok with a Switch 4k released in March 2023, with patch-base BC, DLSS and a general computational power boost

Plus, many games.

LOL
 
ReddDreadtheLead said:
I find this part interesting, because of how it is phrased. They keep mentioning "100% compatibility", but don't allude to 50, 60, 80 or 95% compatibility. Not sure if that is intentional or not
Click to expand...
NateDrake did say he also believes that there's a possibility Nintendo could be talking to Nvidia when designing Dane to add Maxwell GPU driver support to Dane, which could possibly achieve 99.9% backwards compatibility support.
 
ILikeFeet said:
patch-based BC would ensure that most games aren't compatible. no one wants to go back and do that work
Click to expand...
Yeah, part of the reason I love the Switch is because of all the third party games I can play on it. No way in hell even close to all of those would get patches.
 
0
Hermii said:
How mvg say BC would somehow not be possible on a new Nvidia soc, when there are so many examples of other devices pulling it off.
Click to expand...

He doesn't say that. He lists multiple options for BC (all of which we've discussed here).
 
0
ILikeFeet said:
that's a waste, I think. especially when it's been said (by NateDrake or Bloomberg, I think) that devs are to prep their games for better hardware
Click to expand...
By Smart Delivery I meant just take the base Switch architecture and build up for newer tech so the old stuff is compatible.
 
lemonfresh said:
For people pissed at no BC were you also pissed when the Snes, N64 and the GC didnt have it? This isnt the first time it has happened.
Click to expand...
It’s 2021. It’s not the 1990s. Digital ecosystems are a thing now. If Switch 2 isn’t BC, it’ll be years after launch before I even consider purchasing one and the amount of software I’d buy for it would be counted on two hands (I currently own over 200 Switch titles). It would completely destroy consumer confidence in the eShop as a digital platform.

So yeah, Switch 2 will have BC. Nintendo and its partners will move mountains to make it happen.
 
Dakhil said:
NateDrake did say he also believes that there's a possibility Nintendo could be talking to Nvidia when designing Dane to add Maxwell GPU driver support to Dane, which could possibly achieve 99.9% backwards compatibility support.
Click to expand...
Yeah. I'm not doubting BC, I'm curious what their BC strategy means for the hardware. For example, if they go with a hardware solution like a Maxwell GPU on board, then I wouldn't expect Classic Switch games to be able to see any perf gains running on the new device (a thing we talked about a lot when a DLSS device was first rumored).

If it's onboard Maxwell, then I wonder if they'd open it up to devs. Mixed ISA dual GPUs would be hard to program for, but I can imagine using the Maxwell GPU for something like Physics acceleration would be an interesting strategy. If it only runs in Classic Compat mode, then you can imagine a NuSwitch Rev 2 that drops backwards compat along with a price cut, a few years after NuSwitch launch.

More and more I think that latter choice seems possible.
2022 the SwitchUltra launches. It's backwards compatible with onboard Maxwell, but games that support it get Better Graphixxx, and it has a few exclusives.

2023, SwitchU is positioned as the default, classic Switch is available only as a Lite (or possibly OLED Lite). Games developed for Switch Classic are like the end of the 3DS's life

2024, the "end" of the Switch's 7 year generation, the SwitchU gets a cheaper revision that drops the backwards compat hardware. Nintendo has essentially slow rolled a successor

2025, cross gen support dropped by Nintendo.
 
Yeah no BC seems iffy.

Talk about reading the market wrong - And with the massive Switch library.. why would they do this.
 
0
oldpuck said:
Yeah. I'm not doubting BC, I'm curious what their BC strategy means for the hardware. For example, if they go with a hardware solution like a Maxwell GPU on board, then I wouldn't expect Classic Switch games to be able to see any perf gains running on the new device (a thing we talked about a lot when a DLSS device was first rumored).

If it's onboard Maxwell, then I wonder if they'd open it up to devs. Mixed ISA dual GPUs would be hard to program for, but I can imagine using the Maxwell GPU for something like Physics acceleration would be an interesting strategy. If it only runs in Classic Compat mode, then you can imagine a NuSwitch Rev 2 that drops backwards compat along with a price cut, a few years after NuSwitch launch.

More and more I think that latter choice seems possible.
2022 the SwitchUltra launches. It's backwards compatible with onboard Maxwell, but games that support it get Better Graphixxx, and it has a few exclusives.

2023, SwitchU is positioned as the default, classic Switch is available only as a Lite (or possibly OLED Lite). Games developed for Switch Classic are like the end of the 3DS's life

2024, the "end" of the Switch's 7 year generation, the SwitchU gets a cheaper revision that drops the backwards compat hardware. Nintendo has essentially slow rolled a successor

2025, cross gen support dropped by Nintendo.
Click to expand...
a hardware accelerated software solution would be the best cost-effective solution. a hardware solution would waste precious board space
 
ILikeFeet said:
a hardware accelerated software solution would be the best cost-effective solution. a hardware solution would waste precious board space
Click to expand...
I agree, totally. My gut instinct is to assume that a GPU emulator (with all the shader JIT stutter that implies) gets 99% of games running with no patching, and most big games are patched and resubmitted to get almost-free perf benefit.

But if Switch!Next is positioned as a Highly Premium Device, then shoving extra hardware in there becomes cost viable. And if they do allow dev access to a secondary Maxwell GPU it's not wasted space, especially if Nintendo pushes engine adoption. I still think it's less likely than a software solution, but Nintendo did it for the GBA and the Wii, so it tantalizes me.
 
0
Re: Backwards Compatibility

I sincerely think that Nvidia can decompile and recompile shader binaries. This may be a boot-time process, or it might be just-in-time. The other option is that they do it in bulk at the store level, and include an update that only gets downloaded on Dane units and a driver shim replaces the code at execution time.

This is hacky, but it's not like HLE techniques do not exist, and given the nature of the Switch, these are all well known quantities.

I think we'll see strong compatibility (95%+) for the entire library quickly, and 100% compatibility for the top 100 games.
 
Very informative episode from Nate and MVG. I am interested in how Nintendo tackles the BC hurdle presented with the leap to a newer architecture. I think the likeliest solution will be that most games will need to be patched (which will result in only a portion being BC). They probably wouldn't stick an X1 in there as it would drive up costs and power usage, and they certainly wouldn't opt for no BC.
 
RailWays said:
Very informative episode from Nate and MVG. I am interested in how Nintendo tackles the BC hurdle presented with the leap to a newer architecture. I think the likeliest solution will be that most games will need to be patched (which will result in only a portion being BC). They probably wouldn't stick an X1 in there as it would drive up costs and power usage, and they certainly wouldn't opt for no BC.
Click to expand...
that's the least likely solution IMO. it's pointless since Nintendo knows most won't update their games. hell, not even Nintendo would
 
ILikeFeet said:
that's the least likely solution IMO. it's pointless since Nintendo knows most won't update their games. hell, not even Nintendo would
Click to expand...
Yeah, it would lead to only the most successful titles getting a compatibility patch. So not the ideal situation. I'd suspect the engineers will find a way to make it work without the dev patching hassle though.
 
Last edited:
0
Listening to the podcast. I like where MVG cites MS as the gold standard for backwards compatibility. 5 systems that run the same software in 7 years. Hot Damn.
 
bmfrosty said:
Listening to the podcast. I like where MVG cites MS as the gold standard for backwards compatibility. 5 systems that run the same software in 7 years. Hot Damn.
Click to expand...
Not sure if its cause xbox is water proof tight or “the community” overall has not spent as much time and power cracking it open like with Nintendo.
 
0
I'm a bit tired of the BC discourse, to be frank. The NX "concept" was announced in 2015, and the R&D most likely started before that. Am I supposed to think that Nintendo and Nvidia did not have a BC solution figured out in 6+ years? The discussion would've been more interesting around how they'd achieve BC, instead of if they would/could.
 
A few questions:

We’ve heard the rumors about devs being instructed by Nintendo to get their games “4K ready” but I had not heard that they also instructed to keep frame rates uncapped. Is there a source for that or a reason that’s speculated?

With regard to BC, could Nintendo and NVidia streamline the process for patching and deploying updates? Like, build a tool for devs where everything is recompiled for Dane and streamline the patch approval process? Because if Nintendo wants current games to have uncapped frame rates, they must be planning for Maxwell games to take advantage of the Dane hardware somehow. It can’t just be an onboard TX1.
 
fwd-bwd said:
I'm a bit tired of the BC discourse, to be frank. The NX "concept" was announced in 2015, and the R&D most likely started before that. Am I supposed to think that Nintendo and Nvidia did not have a BC solution figured out in 6+ years? The discussion would've been more interesting around how they'd achieve BC, instead of if they would/could.
Click to expand...
I agree.
 
0
Ghostsonplanets said:
3D glasses free screen was a novelty. The hardware also had 3 cameras, 3 screens, R&D expenses, etc. 3DS hardware wasn't bad and certainly was the best they could make within the constraints. Problem is that they couldn't launch in 2010. The mobile explosion in terms of hardware advacements also started around 2011, so it was quite an unfortunate timing.
Click to expand...
Didn't they also want to go with a Tegra chip, but Nvidia couldn't deliver on time and had to change vendors, which probably lead to further problems?
 
There's no chance this won't have BC lol, would be catastrophic if it didn't but I just can't imagine it won't.
 
TonyBaduy said:
Didn't they also want to go with a Tegra chip, but Nvidia couldn't deliver on time and had to change vendors, which probably lead to further problems?
Click to expand...
Yes. Eurogamer was the one with the scoop. I don't think it was delivery issue but power consumption one. Nintendo said the they explored with programmable shaders SoC but as LCD were the part with highest energy consumption and they were shipping a device with 3 screens, they needed to optimize and opted for a fixed-function hardware, which was more energy efficient.
 
Ghostsonplanets said:
Yes. Eurogamer was the one with the scoop. I don't think it was delivery issue but power consumption one. Nintendo said the they explored with programmable shaders SoC but as LCD were the part with highest energy consumption and they were shipping a device with 3 screens, they needed to optimize and opted for a fixed-function hardware, which was more energy efficient.
Click to expand...
Nvidia had it's way in the end with the Switch though, isn't that funny?
 
0
Klax0nKlax0ff said:
A few questions:

We’ve heard the rumors about devs being instructed by Nintendo to get their games “4K ready” but I had not heard that they also instructed to keep frame rates uncapped. Is there a source for that or a reason that’s speculated?
Click to expand...

That’s my speculation based on this article. I should’ve clarified as such, apologies.

www.bloomberg.com

Nintendo Boosts Switch Production by Another 20%

Nintendo Co. has asked its assembly partners to increase production of its Switch gaming console again, raising its goal to as much as 30 million units for this fiscal year, according to people familiar with its strategy.
www.bloomberg.com www.bloomberg.com

“Several outside game developers, speaking anonymously as the issue is private, said that Nintendo has asked them to make their games 4K-ready, suggesting a resolution upgrade is on its way.”
 
0
Klax0nKlax0ff said:
A few questions:

We’ve heard the rumors about devs being instructed by Nintendo to get their games “4K ready” but I had not heard that they also instructed to keep frame rates uncapped. Is there a source for that or a reason that’s speculated?

With regard to BC, could Nintendo and NVidia streamline the process for patching and deploying updates? Like, build a tool for devs where everything is recompiled for Dane and streamline the patch approval process? Because if Nintendo wants current games to have uncapped frame rates, they must be planning for Maxwell games to take advantage of the Dane hardware somehow. It can’t just be an onboard TX1.
Click to expand...
The unlocked framerates thing has been floating around, but is not as well sourced. In theory, it would allow games to take advantage of additional overhead without patching.
 
0
Dakhil said:

  • NateDrake believes Zynga's statement about not having a 4K devkit from Nintendo doesn't mean that Zynga didn't receive a 4K devkit from one of Zynga's publishing partners, who could have received a 4K devkit from Nintendo. Bigger publishing companies generally hire smaller companies as subcontractors and do send smaller companies devkits to work on games for certain platforms. But there's a possibility Zynga denied having a 4K devkit from Nintendo due to NDAs.
  • NateDrake thinks Nintendo's technically not lying to investors when saying Nintendo's not supplying tools for developing games for a Nintendo Switch model with 4K support, but Nintendo's also not telling the entire truth, especially since Nintendo won't simply call the model the Nintendo Switch, but rather add a moniker next to the Nintendo Switch name (e.g. Nintendo Switch 2, Nintendo Switch Pro, etc.).
  • NateDrake thinks Bloomberg was smart to obtain permission from a source in Zygna to name Zygna as the company that receive a 4K devkit, alongside mentioning that Bloomberg contacting 10 other third party developer companies, since Nintendo wouldn't be able to easily say Bloomberg's information is inaccurate.
  • NateDrake thinks that part of the denial from Nintendo comes down to the branding of the model.
  • NateDrake has heard from developer sources that the model's positioned as a revision, similar to the Game Boy Color and the New Nintendo 3DS.
  • NateDrake thinks the name Nintendo chooses for the model depends on if Nintendo wants the count the model as part of the Nintendo Switch family or as a separate platform when talking about hardware sales.
  • NateDrake believes that Nintendo is likely to have or will pressure Zynga to do an internal investigation, as well as Nintendo doing its own investigation, who's the source in Zynga who provided information to Bloomberg, which could damage Nintendo's relationship with Zynga.
  • MVG agrees with SciresM that backward compatibility with Nintendo Switch games is not possible with the Nintendo Switch 4K, assuming that the Nintendo Switch 4K uses a GPU not based on the Maxwell architecture, mentioning that every Nintendo Switch game contains custom versions of the Maxwell GPU driver embedded in the game, with all the shaders required pre-compiled, in one package. MVG also mentions that developers can't simply take that package and compile it on a GPU not based on the Maxwell architecture. Instead, developers would need to recompile every game and provide a patch, or not offer backwards compatibility at all.
  • MVG believes that the first possible solution is to provide patches for every game.
  • MVG thinks the second possible solution is to open up a specific tool for third party developers that streamlines the update process that allow developers to take the game package and repackage it as a native game package for the new SoC.
  • MVG believes the third possible solution is to add a Tegra X1 to the motherboard, citing the Nintendo Wii, the Nintendo 3DS, etc., as examples.
  • And MVG believes the fourth possible solution is that backwards compatibility is not offered at all, where Nintendo brands the Nintendo Switch 4K straight up as a next-gen console, and Nintendo wants third party developers to jump on board, although MVG thinks it seems far fetched that Nintendo would do so.
  • NateDrake believes that there's no way Nintendo won't provide backwards compatibility with Nintendo Switch games since it would send a message to consumers to not invest in digital games since Nintendo won't support consumers in the future.
  • NateDrake doesn't deny the possibility that Nintendo could add the Tegra X1 to the Nintendo Switch 4K's motherboard to achieve 100% backwards compatibility.
  • NateDrake also believes that there's a possibility Nintendo could be talking to Nvidia when designing Dane to add Maxwell GPU driver support to Dane, which could possibly achieve 99.9% backwards compatibility support.
  • MVG said that the second possibility NateDrake mentioned is possible.
  • NateDrake believes that not offering backwards compatibility with Nintendo Switch games would cause Nintendo to lose a large amount of consumers since there's only so much bad business practices consumers can tolerate from Nintendo; and not offering backwards compatibility with Nintendo Switch games would be seen as the biggest anti-consumer move.
  • NateDrake thinks there's a possibility that the Game Cards for the Nintendo Switch 4K could very well be the same as the Game Cards for the Nintendo Switch, with the highest capacity staying at 32 GB. NateDrake also thinks that the Game Cards for the Nintendo Switch 4K could be slightly different to the Game Cards for the Nintendo Switch, like with Game Cards for New Nintendo 3DS exclusive games, with the highest capacity possibly being 64 GB.
  • NateDrake thinks Nintendo would announce the Nintendo Switch 4K 6 months before release. NateDrake also thinks that Nintendo could announce the Nintendo Switch 4K on July 2022 with a release on October 2022, like with the OLED model, but it runs at a risk at angering consumers who bought the OLED model, which NateDrake mentioned Nintendo has done before.
  • NateDrake has heard from developer sources that development for games for the Nintendo Switch 4K are being targeted for completion on late 2022.
  • MVG thinks that the Nintendo Switch 4K is more likely to be realistically released on early 2023.
  • MVG think that Nintendo's using a DisplayPort 1.4 to HDMI 2.0b converter chip for the OLED model's dock due to economics, since the Mobility DisplayPort 1.2a to HDMI 1.4a converter chip used on the Nintendo Switch dock, as well as HDMI 1.4 cables, are becoming harder to source.
  • MVG's disappointed with the transfer speeds offered by the LAN port on the OLED model's dock.
  • NateDrake will no longer refer the model as the Nintendo Switch Pro, but rather as the Nintendo Switch 4K, since Nintendo's releasing new Nintendo Switch hardware, and it has 4K compatibility, which will be achieved with DLSS.
  • NateDrake doesn't know if the Nintendo Switch 4K is marketed a mid-gen refresh or a successor.
  • NateDrake has heard from developer sources that the release window for the Nintendo Switch 4K is targeted at late 2022 to early 2023.
  • NateDrake has heard a substantial amount of big third party developers received devkits in late 2020, and smaller third party developers received devkits on June 2021.
  • NateDrake has heard from developer sources that there are games that are exclusive to the Nintendo Switch 4K, and won't be released for the Nintendo Switch (and the Nintendo Switch Lite).
  • NateDrake has heard that developers are excited about the Nintendo Switch 4K.
  • NateDrake has also heard developers were confused when the OLED model was released since Nintendo didn't send out new devkits for the OLED model.
Click to expand...



He's heard from developer sources that it's being positioned as a revision, but says later he doesn't know if it's being positioned as a revision or a successor...? I'm confused by that part.

If it's a revision, it will have BC. If it's a successor, it should still absolutely have BC. Honestly the notion of this device not being backwards compatible with the Switch library is patently ridiculous. Which means it's exactly the kind of thing Nintendo would unfortunately do.

Isn't the Switch like the Xbox and PC? Meaning there's a thin software layer that interacts with the hardware, and the developers code on top of that software layer? Thereby ensuring compatibility regardless of subtle changes in the underlying hardware?
 
ILikeFeet said:
The good thing is that Nintendo doesn't have to do that much work for the same result
Click to expand...
Agreed. Assuming that shader programs are in their own library file, or at least well understood library files, that part should be able to be automated to a great extent. NV will make it possible, and I believe that Nintendo has a sense of the importance of it enough to prioritize it.
TonyBaduy said:
Didn't they also want to go with a Tegra chip, but Nvidia couldn't deliver on time and had to change vendors, which probably lead to further problems?
Click to expand...
I think it delayed the 3DS. I don't think it directly created problems.
 
bmfrosty said:
Agreed. Assuming that shader programs are in their own library file, or at least well understood library files, that part should be able to be automated to a great extent. NV will make it possible, and I believe that Nintendo has a sense of the importance of it enough to prioritize it.

I think it delayed the 3DS. I don't think it directly created problems.
Click to expand...
I imagine it affected what the performance of the final product would have, which may have caused a few issues with the games that were in development at the time. It may have affected costs too.
 
0
I kind of feel like the biggest piece of "evidence" towards BC in the Switch successor is the 2022 lineup. Lots of big games and even some genuine evergreens that would be completely crippled long-term by Switch 2 not allowing users to have access to them. Nintendo makes a lot of odd decisions, but ultimately, most of them are sound from a business perspective (especially during the Switch era). Foregoing BC is the definition of bad business in this current time.
 
Sol said:
He's heard from developer sources that it's being positioned as a revision, but says later he doesn't know if it's being positioned as a revision or a successor...? I'm confused by that part.

If it's a revision, it will have BC. If it's a successor, it should still absolutely have BC. Honestly the notion of this device not being backwards compatible with the Switch library is patently ridiculous. Which means it's exactly the kind of thing Nintendo would unfortunately do.

Isn't the Switch like the Xbox and PC? Meaning there's a thin software layer that interacts with the hardware, and the developers code on top of that software layer? Thereby ensuring compatibility regardless of subtle changes in the underlying hardware?
Click to expand...
It's all marketing whether it's a success or a mid-gen refresh. BC is a given. MS has a much more active operating system, while the Switch is more like task switching than multitasking. I'm pretty sure that up through the Wii U, the game took over everything, and anything that seemed system level multitasking was bundled in with the game. Remember in the Wii when the home menus for newer games looked different than the home menus for older games?

FWIW, I think the full multitasking hurts the experience on the XBOX platform. I get weird hiccups and freezes enough to assume that background tasks are taking up resources.
 
lemonfresh said:
For people pissed at no BC were you also pissed when the Snes, N64 and the GC didnt have it? This isnt the first time it has happened.
Click to expand...

It's not the 90s anymore.

Digital games are a thing. Smartphones and apps are a thing. People expect that when they buy software, it's going to work on their new device. People are becoming invested in ecosystems. You can't just hit the reset button every 5-6 years and make customers start over anymore.

And Nintendo even said back in like 2015 that "NX" was going to be modeled after smartphones with software extending across devices.
 
lemonfresh said:
For people pissed at no BC were you also pissed when the Snes, N64 and the GC didnt have it? This isnt the first time it has happened.
Click to expand...
People don't have to prove consistency for their feelings to be validated

Nintendo has invested a ton into porting their Wii U catalogue to the Switch, as well as previously released games. Moreso than with SNES, N64, and GC. No BC would also probably mean a reboot of NSO legacy content. All this makes being upset about no BC pretty justifiable.
 
Reader mode
You must log in or register to reply here.
Please read this staff post before posting.

Furthermore, according to this follow-up post, all off-topic chat will be moderated.
Last edited:


Back
Top Bottom