• 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!)

Too late, to the guillotine!
9O3nkIE.gif


That would be weirdly long even for Nintendo standards.

Well, you know, you didn't answer my question

Jerry_Riendo.png
 
Don't kill me, I'm just genuinely curious: are you guys ready for a 2024 release? No 'smartphone model', just a traditional next-gen hardware with BC, in 2024. If that happens, are you all ready for it or is this place going crazy?

Not asking if a 2024 makes sense or not, just if you have considered it and won't have a stroke if that end happening
I would be ready for a 2024 release if it was the successor, I have previously stated on here that I believed the Switch Pro would release in 2023 and the Switch 2 would release in 2025. I only guessed this because it seems every two years since the launch of the switch, we have been getting a new model of the switch.

If Nintendo decided to just wait for the successor and skip the heavily rumored Pro model, I wouldn't mind waiting until 2024.
 
Would be disappointed if Xeno 2 doesn't get a patch, it needs it more than Xeno 3 does. Without a patch it'd be capped at sub 720p in handheld mode which would stink.

If Nintendo reprinted these games, continued to sell them at full price but marketed them with Drake patches, they could breath a second life into them.

Its also why I hope Drake comes out before TotK, I want some time to play with a BotW 4K patch before (sky)diving head first into that game.
 
I would be ready for a 2024 release if it was the successor, I have previously stated on here that I believed the Switch Pro would release in 2023 and the Switch 2 would release in 2025. I only guessed this because it seems every two years since the launch of the switch, we have been getting a new model of the switch.

If Nintendo decided to just wait for the successor and skip the heavily rumored Pro model, I wouldn't mind waiting until 2024.
The ‘heavily rumored’ Pro model is a successor in everything but name. It’s vastly more powerful than the current Switch by every metric, and represents a generational leap in hardware.
 
The games that have waves of DLC attached to them that they end at some extremely long date later on, are most likely the titles Nintendo will patch and use as the show piece titles for the next system whenever that releases. The update for that can just be rolled into that patch.


By this I am also saying that do not expect every title to receive a patch to function with any of the new feature sets or exceed their limitations already present on the switch. Hell I’m already expecting Fire Emblem Engage to have a long wave of the DLC that stretches into 2024.

And it’s not just a coincidental because some titles have had a long wave, it’s that they are all around the same time have long waves of post release support to them. Mario Kart especially had a support way later than it originally released on the switch, and it’s just a port of the mobile game for the most part.

If anyone has a list of the games right now, you can probably identify which ones are the titles that Nintendo specifically wants to showcase for the new system.
The games with DLC are certainly the ones most likely to receive a patch, but I wouldn't assume those are the only ones. Nintendo has been known to just go back and patch games to add stuff sometimes (such as the labo updates, adding a new language to Xenoblade 2, or when they put a whole new control scheme in Pikmin 3 on Wii U), and a new hardware launch would certainly be a worthy motivating factor for doing that.
 
Don't kill me, I'm just genuinely curious: are you guys ready for a 2024 release? No 'smartphone model', just a traditional next-gen hardware with BC, in 2024. If that happens, are you all ready for it or is this place going crazy?

Not asking if a 2024 makes sense or not, just if you have considered it and won't have a stroke if that end happening
I'm psychologically ready :) But yes, if that happens, I think this thread goes beserk, though not just because of the regulars, but the wave of drive by posters who come to troll, and the regulars posting 500 pages of analysis.

Like I've said, this is a fun game for me, reading the tea leaves, independent of any Nintendo fandom. A release in 2024 would be a "loss" but I've already "lost" the game a couple times - before the release of the OLED model I was betting on an overclocked Mariko + no DLSS as the "pro" model, and 4k coming later. This community has taught me a lot about the underlying technology and that's a win regardless of how it shakes out.
 
Would be disappointed if Xeno 2 doesn't get a patch, it needs it more than Xeno 3 does. Without a patch it'd be capped at sub 720p in handheld mode which would stink.

If Nintendo reprinted these games, continued to sell them at full price but marketed them with Drake patches, they could breath a second life into them.

Its also why I hope Drake comes out before TotK, I want some time to play with a BotW 4K patch before (sky)diving head first into that game.
Maybe a max resolution patch, but XC2 is already halfway into its 10 years anniversary, they are probably better saving bigger efforts for a XC2DE in 2027+.
 
0


There isn't a strong performance comparison here between XeSS and DLSS, which isn't surprising since it's hard to find an apples-to-apples comparison, but XeSS does very well on the quality benchmarks.

Of note: on lower resolutions how often Alex says things like "better than native" for both upscaling techniques. FSR at launch was "good and runs everywhere, but behind DLSS in almost all cases." XeSS is a much stronger opening, though I suspect it looks much worse on non-Intel cards, and in that case it's an open question how much Nvidia may consider it a competitor. My hope is that Nvidia responds aggressively and that we all benefit from the three of these solutions duking it out.

Looking at the latest versions of DLSS/FSR the current fight seems to be "how do we deal with limited/no motion vector data"
 
The ‘heavily rumored’ Pro model is a successor in everything but name. It’s vastly more powerful than the current Switch by every metric, and represents a generational leap in hardware.
It might even be a successor in name. We don’t really know how they’re going to market it, only that it seems like it will be somewhat higher priced and sold alongside some existing Switch hardware.
 
The games that have waves of DLC attached to them that they end at some extremely long date later on, are most likely the titles Nintendo will patch and use as the show piece titles for the next system whenever that releases. The update for that can just be rolled into that patch.


By this I am also saying that do not expect every title to receive a patch to function with any of the new feature sets or exceed their limitations already present on the switch. Hell I’m already expecting Fire Emblem Engage to have a long wave of the DLC that stretches into 2024.

And it’s not just a coincidental because some titles have had a long wave, it’s that they are all around the same time have long waves of post release support to them. Mario Kart especially had a support way later than it originally released on the switch, and it’s just a port of the mobile game for the most part.

If anyone has a list of the games right now, you can probably identify which ones are the titles that Nintendo specifically wants to showcase for the new system.
I hadn't thought of this. I like this theory
 
0
I'm psychologically ready :) But yes, if that happens, I think this thread goes beserk, though not just because of the regulars, but the wave of drive by posters who come to troll, and the regulars posting 500 pages of analysis.

Yeah, that's what I have thought
1

But it's good you're ready for whatever happens. I'm psychologically, mentally, emotionally, and financially ready too. My ready is body.
 
0
I mean I understand maybe being prepared for a modest power improvement vs what’s being rumored because “the Nintendo tradition”. But to deduct something like this from cloud releases is simply being a pessimist especially given they just released a “slight revision”.
If dev kits have been in the hands of developers (including Zynga) and Capcom couldn't wait 6-8 months to release these games in working condition (vs Cloud), then that's a ridiculous move by Capcom.

If what I wrote was interpreted as pessimistic, then I'll suggest that basing expectations on message boards, and ignoring what is actually happening in real-time, is foolishly idealistic.
 
Disclaimer: I am not a hardware guy, so the answer to this might simply be "no, you absolute fool" and that's totally fine

Wouldn't the large, new-generation-sized gap simply be the result of Drake being released the usual equivalent of a full console generation after the Switch? PS4 Pro and XB1X were modest upgrades because they released only 3 years after their original counterparts, compared to approximately 6 for the Drake. We should expect a comparatively larger power increase.

In terms of Pro vs succ; my assumption is that new console generations are usually more distinct because they change architecture, possibly OS, possibly software input format, but not because they inherently need to do any of that. Of course, even if all of the above were kept the same and we were purely talking about computational power increase, there are good reasons for why developers might not want to continue to support old hardware. Unlike with PCs, you can't just have minimum/recommended specs and trust users to understand that if they're barely making the minimum specs they may struggle to reach playable framerates even at low settings.

Anyway, kinda lost my train of thought there and I'm not actually sure whether I was leading to any specific point, so I'll stop now lol
 
I finally got over wanting hardware only for Pikmin 4 to be announced and become desperate for it to be cross-gen

please don't miss the 4K boat, Pikmin
You know, this had me thinking. Back in an interview with 4Gamer Miyamoto had explained that Pikmin largely benefits from a higher resolution and even posited that Pikmin would be a better showcase for 4K than Zelda (translation provided by KameDaniRyuu):
“When it comes to games, I don’t see the need for Zelda in 4K but for Pikmin, making it 4K compatible could possibly further show more small detailed Pikmin moving around, show things from an even further perspective, and being able to see more may make a more fun game.”
I don't think the prospect of Pikmin 4 missing 4k capability is all that likely, in all honesty.
 
I wish Brainchild still doing the technical analysis video, cause I very much want to see wtf happened with FE: Engage, cause it looks too clean and crisp compared to 3 Houses... It makes me keep thinking of Switch Pro/2.
 
I finally got over wanting hardware only for Pikmin 4 to be announced and become desperate for it to be cross-gen

please don't miss the 4K boat, Pikmin

Oh it won't miss 4k...what you (and all the hyped people in general) should pleading for is for it not to miss 2023. Just saying, an announcement and a super impressive yet super limited trailer with no game action is exciting but doesn't give me much confidence about how close to completion it is.
 
You know, this had me thinking. Back in an interview with 4Gamer Miyamoto had explained that Pikmin largely benefits from a higher resolution and even posited that Pikmin would be a better showcase for 4K than Zelda (translation provided by KameDaniRyuu):

I don't think the prospect of Pikmin 4 missing 4k capability is all that likely, in all honesty.
This is the main reason why I'm thinking it could be a surprise launch game
 
0
Disclaimer: I am not a hardware guy, so the answer to this might simply be "no, you absolute fool" and that's totally fine

Wouldn't the large, new-generation-sized gap simply be the result of Drake being released the usual equivalent of a full console generation after the Switch? PS4 Pro and XB1X were modest upgrades because they released only 3 years after their original counterparts, compared to approximately 6 for the Drake. We should expect a comparatively larger power increase.

In terms of Pro vs succ; my assumption is that new console generations are usually more distinct because they change architecture, possibly OS, possibly software input format, but not because they inherently need to do any of that. Of course, even if all of the above were kept the same and we were purely talking about computational power increase, there are good reasons for why developers might not want to continue to support old hardware. Unlike with PCs, you can't just have minimum/recommended specs and trust users to understand that if they're barely making the minimum specs they may struggle to reach playable framerates even at low settings.

Anyway, kinda lost my train of thought there and I'm not actually sure whether I was leading to any specific point, so I'll stop now lol
Time is certainly an enabling factor, but it alone doesn't guarantee the sort of difference we're expecting. Nintendo most likely had the option of commissioning a chip that's more in line with a PS4 Pro/Xbox One X sort of upgrade, where it's mostly just faster or beefier, but they chose to go for the full architectural upgrade. The change in architecture is not just a choice that's made, but it's a significant source of the performance improvements in the first place.

To give some concrete examples, you have systems like the Game Boy Color and the Wii. The former is a revision Nintendo used to keep the Game Boy alive while they reworked Project Atlantis into what we know as the GBA, while the latter is a successor that staked its identity mostly on being a philosophical departure from its predecessor, rather than a technical one. Both have plenty of time between them and the system they're based on, but they both play things very close to the original version, and make very minimal architectural changes, so they're not actually much more powerful.
 
Disclaimer: I am not a hardware guy, so the answer to this might simply be "no, you absolute fool" and that's totally fine

Wouldn't the large, new-generation-sized gap simply be the result of Drake being released the usual equivalent of a full console generation after the Switch? PS4 Pro and XB1X were modest upgrades because they released only 3 years after their original counterparts, compared to approximately 6 for the Drake. We should expect a comparatively larger power increase.
Roughly, I think this is where a lot of us are at. 18 months ago, when rumors of a "Pro" went from fan speculation to "Bloomberg article" a lot of us were unsure where to position it in terms of power.

Now that we're talking about 6 years after the Switch's release, it seems perfectly reasonable to expect this device to roughly track Nintendo's vague strategy of getting within spitting distance of the last gen's power, rather than tracking with Sony/Microsoft's last gen strategy of using a die shrink to extend the generation. The NVN2 hack confirms that it's a new arch.

I've been relentless in keeping my expectations in check, just to act as a balance to the hype. I still expect the bare minimum out of Next Switch, but I've become increasingly convinced that the "bare minimum" is bigger than I thought.

I thought it was possible but not likely that Drake was Switch 2, and that the pro would be a separate device. That no longer makes sense from a timing perspective.

I thought it was likely that Drake was 8nm because Occam's razor, but a day spent with Nvidia's Orin documentation doesn't seem to leave room for even the most pathetic clocks with the NVN2 specs. TSMC 7nm vastly increases what's possible at Switch power draws, which leaves room for a significant CPU upgrade.

I thought 8GB was a generous RAM allocation, but looking at components that Nintendo can actually purchase and, again, the NVN2 leak, and it seems like 12GB is more sensible.

Similarly, the economics on OLED panels continue to trend towards 1080p displays, and this level of power seems to make 1080p handheld mode to no longer be a non-starter, especially since 20 TOPS in handheld mode seems completely plausible. I still expect a 720p screen, but if you told me it was 1080p I would neither be surprised nor upset. Similarly if it matched the battery life of the revised Switch rather than the OG or worse. I expect at least 6 cores for the CPU but 8 seems likely. A78s but A78Cs seem likely.

Taking all these conservative-but-informed assumptions gives you a very nice device at the bottom end and a very, very nice device at a not-unreasonable top end.
 
0
The games with DLC are certainly the ones most likely to receive a patch, but I wouldn't assume those are the only ones. Nintendo has been known to just go back and patch games to add stuff sometimes (such as the labo updates, adding a new language to Xenoblade 2, or when they put a whole new control scheme in Pikmin 3 on Wii U), and a new hardware launch would certainly be a worthy motivating factor for doing that.
I’m not excluding it per se, but I’d think that those games getting updated who aren’t of the first test batch that they deem the most crucial to update, would be more of a response to the first wave of titles that gets an update.


If Xenoblade, Zelda, Mario Kart, Mario Strikers, etc receive a positive response then I’d imagine they’ll go and update the other ones with at least framerate patches and resolution patches.


But I think these games with tons of waves are the ones that will be used for the DLSS patch with perhaps RT added to some degree. But not a guarantee of all that. At least these wave games will likely be the target showcase titles. Res + FR patch too.


Other titles? Not DLSS or RT, but just a res and FR patch maybe.
 
0
Time is certainly an enabling factor, but it alone doesn't guarantee the sort of difference we're expecting. Nintendo most likely had the option of commissioning a chip that's more in line with a PS4 Pro/Xbox One X sort of upgrade, where it's mostly just faster or beefier, but they chose to go for the full architectural upgrade. The change in architecture is not just a choice that's made, but it's a significant source of the performance improvements in the first place.

To give some concrete examples, you have systems like the Game Boy Color and the Wii. The former is a revision Nintendo used to keep the Game Boy alive while they reworked Project Atlantis into what we know as the GBA, while the latter is a successor that staked its identity mostly on being a philosophical departure from its predecessor, rather than a technical one. Both have plenty of time between them and the system they're based on, but they both play things very close to the original version, and make very minimal architectural changes, so they're not actually much more powerful.
Thanks for the explanation. I do still feel that a PS4 Pro or XB1X style upgrade could (and probably) would have come much earlier, though. They certainly didn't need to go for an architectural change, it's true, but a ~6 year gap would still allow a fairly dramatic power jump (assuming 'increased power' was their primary reason for the revision, which - as you point out in the GBC example, but also with Mariko - is by no means a guarantee with Nintendo)
 
Thanks for the explanation. I do still feel that a PS4 Pro or XB1X style upgrade could (and probably) would have come much earlier, though. They certainly didn't need to go for an architectural change, it's true, but a ~6 year gap would still allow a fairly dramatic power jump (assuming 'increased power' was their primary reason for the revision, which - as you point out in the GBC example, but also with Mariko - is by no means a guarantee with Nintendo)
I kinda suspect they did originally want to run Mariko at higher clocks, but backed out for some reason and fell back on just a battery life upgrade. The red box Switch model number doesn't follow their usual convention for significant, but unnamed, revisions.
 
I kinda suspect they did originally want to run Mariko at higher clocks, but backed out for some reason and fell back on just a battery life upgrade. The red box Switch model number doesn't follow their usual convention for significant, but unnamed, revisions.
Wasn't there a rumor about them not getting the performance they wanted out of higher clocked Mariko?
 
Oh it won't miss 4k...what you (and all the hyped people in general) should pleading for is for it not to miss 2023. Just saying, an announcement and a super impressive yet super limited trailer with no game action is exciting but doesn't give me much confidence about how close to completion it is.
Trailer was "super limited" because it's a launch title, and showpiece for Drake. They were limited to only showing old switch version, so they kept it very simple.

The real trailer for it will be at the reveal.

Opens with a photorealistic scene inside a sandbox with little pikmin carrying a little plastic shovel, camera pulls out to reveal this scene on the Drake-Switch, camera keeps pulling to reveal happy model playing while sitting outside on the edge of a similar looking sandbox. Repeat this same setup 3 times (different pikmin scenes, transposed to people in similar environments playing it on the handheld drake-switch) before switching to some breathtaking 4k footage of TotK showing off something new and unexpected, then camera pulls out to show its on the living room TV, keeps pulling and shows new dock and Drake-Switch. Name of console and release date comes on screen.

(^ speculation)
 
Thanks for the explanation. I do still feel that a PS4 Pro or XB1X style upgrade could (and probably) would have come much earlier, though. They certainly didn't need to go for an architectural change, it's true, but a ~6 year gap would still allow a fairly dramatic power jump (assuming 'increased power' was their primary reason for the revision, which - as you point out in the GBC example, but also with Mariko - is by no means a guarantee with Nintendo)
they could have always used newer architecture and nodes for a small jump via a configuration like 4 cpu cores, and 4 SM. wouldn't be worth the development, probably, but it's doable
 
0
I think anyone getting hung up on May not being "early" is being really fuckin' picky. May 12 is 36% through the year.


The only way to "solve" this would be to have no base Switch games look better on the new hardware. As an end user I would very much hate this.
I agree, it's still in the first half of the year and the start of May is still within the first third of the year. May is also pretty early in the fiscal year too.
"Early next year" when applied to business plans is always pretty flexible anyway. Especially when not tied to any official announcement. Nintendo loves to bide their time.
All things considered I don't think May speculation is incongruent with prior rumors.

Thinking back to the Switch timeline:
  • The first true reveal (and proper name) didn't come until October 2016 when it got its own dedicated trailer.
  • The big blowout came in January 2017 when they gave a live hour-long presentation in Japan.
  • It was then released 2 months later in March 2017.
So time between reveal and release was 5 months, with a blowout presentation in between. It got dedicated events/videos rather than utilizing Directs.

Now taking into account the New Nintendo 3DS timeline:
  • The original 3DS was revealed in June 2010. It released in Feb/Mar 2011 (depending on region).
  • The New 3DS was revealed in a Nintendo Direct three and a half years later in late August 2014.
  • It got a dedicated preview video in January 2015 (before US/EU release, after JP release).
  • It was released in October 2014 in Japan, February 2015 in US/EU.
So that one was released 2 months after reveal (plus 4 more months for other regions), and was initially revealed in a Direct.

The February Direct announce to May release timeline seems possible, 3 months. That's sort of in the middle of what they did for Switch and the New 3DS. And the SUCC has been said to be something like a Game Boy Color or New Nintendo 3DS, both a revision and a successor, new but still part of a console family. So an announce/release timeline somewhere in the middle might make sense based on patterns history.
But its entirely possible that an announcement won't be tied to any regularly scheduled Direct whatsoever, I feel no reason to expect anything from the Feb Direct.

tl;dr i know nothing and anything is possible
 
0
@NateDrake I’m sorry to bother you with something like this, but I haven’t seen this but want a clarification.


When you said H1 as a window, were your sources referring to CY (January to June)? Or FY (April to September)?
 
@NateDrake I’m sorry to bother you with something like this, but I haven’t seen this but want a clarification.


When you said H1 as a window, were your sources referring to CY (January to June)? Or FY (April to September)?

I operate with the info as it is relayed to me. Some contacts interchange early for first half.

The Nikkei article seems to have some uncertainty as to where the claim is coming from: Nintendo or outlet opinion citing the challenge to secure resources.

I agree with their belief that 2022 is out of play, especially when pairing the article alongside the Hishiden forecast revision. Supply has been an issue for Nintendo and I'd remove late 2022 from the equation at this point. Given it is August and production has not yet begun, such a release is unlikely for this CY.
 
0
You folks keep speculating, and I'll just keep throwing $10 a month into my Amazon account to prepare for whatever happens whenever it happens, if I need it to run the latest cool and hot games.
$70 down, $?? to go!
 
If dev kits have been in the hands of developers (including Zynga) and Capcom couldn't wait 6-8 months to release these games in working condition (vs Cloud), then that's a ridiculous move by Capcom.
It's Capcom betting on the power of the 120 million userbase. Feels like a waste of time to me, but a cloud release isn't exactly a development hog.
But I mean, think about it, does it really sound that far-fetched for them to do a September release?
With no context, no month seems unlikely. Since we've repeatedly heard early/first-half, September seems not a match. If what we've heard is not at all accurate, then maybe 2029.
 
Look, we all agree that Nate said the system would release in High Spring, but was he referring to Taurus season, or the harvest cycle in Nintendo's EU headquarters in Frankfurt?
 
If you could pick only one previously released Nintendo Switch game to receive a 4K/HDR patch for the new console, which would you choose and why?

It's tough for me, but I'd probably go with BOTW or Xenoblade Chronicles 3.
I'd totally replayed Origami King again if they spiffed it up
 
If dev kits have been in the hands of developers (including Zynga) and Capcom couldn't wait 6-8 months to release these games in working condition (vs Cloud), then that's a ridiculous move by Capcom.

If what I wrote was interpreted as pessimistic, then I'll suggest that basing expectations on message boards, and ignoring what is actually happening in real-time, is foolishly idealistic.
Given that this hardware is expected to be iterative, wouldn’t it make sense to give OG Switch owners some way to experience those games on their console rather than doing a hard cut off as soon as it releases? Just like the PS5 and Series X, introducing fully exclusive software will likely be a gradual process.

Also, there’s literally nothing concrete that has happened in “real time” that one could ignore in favor of message board rumors. Even the supposed developers you stated that have had devkits is a rumor. That Bloomberg report was from over a year ago and was completely denied by Zynga.

So for you to throw out a perceived worst case scenario, with nothing to reference that would give credence to it, that’s the definition of pessimism.

I personally haven’t chosen a hard stance for anything that’s been stated, only temporarily given harmless commentary to harmless rumors. I understand that this hardware could still be anything at this point.
 
2027

TEN YEAR NINTENDO SWITCH DYNASTY
If the Drake is indeed launching next year as a Pro model and we are not getting succesor in 2024 this could really mean a "Nintendo Switch brand" is here till 2026/7, which would mean that after it's all done the Nintendo Switch will be the best selling video game system in the world.
 
If you could pick only one previously released Nintendo Switch game to receive a 4K/HDR patch for the new console, which would you choose and why?

It's tough for me, but I'd probably go with BOTW or Xenoblade Chronicles 3.
I would go for Xenoblade Chronicles 2, it needs it much more than 3 with its great rendering solution. I need to see Uraya in 4K.
 
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