• 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.

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

Reader mode
MP! said:
I fully expect an ad during the previews
Click to expand...
Given how much movies love to have ads in the movie itself, I would expect some background character in the movie, somewhere, playing with a Switch/Switch 2 or whatever the Mushroom Kingdom version would be. Something like the Sheikah Slate from BOTW.
 
0
So what kind of things will be required for Nintendo to meet these new EU standards precisely?
arsen said:

LG Display to start producing mid-size WOLED panels as demand for TVs declines | OLED Info

According to reports, LG Display will start producing mid-sized W-OLED panels, as it is concerned that demand for TV panels is on the decline.LGD will start producing 27-inch WOLED panels as early as by the end of October, targeting small TVs and gaming monitors. LGE will be LGD's first...
www.oled-info.com www.oled-info.com

Hopefully that means we're getting 27-32" OLED monitors with gaming features soon (hopefully before Drake), always wanted one but the gaming monitor industry seems to endlessly milk those LCD panels. :p
Click to expand...
Good that Nintendo might have another OLED supplier to pick from.
Simba1 said:
I dont, but you underestimating raise of costs last two years,
costs were failing after launch, but last two years costs began to raise, and thats goes from gas to every piece of component, everything is now more expensive compared to two years ago, that especially goes for tech hardware (I mean look at prices of mobile phones).
Also Inflation, $300 in 2017. and in $300 in 2022/2023. are totally different values ($300 today worth around 25% less than $300 did in 2017.),
inflation in other currents (for instance euro) is even worse.
Nintendo said that that with OLED they have minimal profit, that means that even V2 profit is not much better because they are not that different even if Oled model has $50 higher price point, that would probably mean if they cut V2 version to $249 they will probably not sell at profit, and Nintendo dont like that.

Nintendo goal is always to sell hardware with profit, they dont selling it with profit only if they are in trouble (3DS after price cut and Wii U),
so they will not cut down price for Switch models and than sell them without profit.

And that doesnt go only for Nintendo, 2 years after launch Sony raises price point of PS5 in Europe,
while before this was actually time frame after launch when we could expect price cut not price hike.


Price cut in this situation is unlikely, maybe something like $279 or $179, but price cut to $249 and $149 is very unlikely.
Click to expand...
Actually, what Nintendo said was that the $50 cost difference from OLED to the OG Switch covered the cost of the new parts, preserving the expected hardware margin at the time of its release. With people in the press estimating part costs and it adding up to only $10 and generously accounting for the possibility that they were wrong by double and those parts were actually $20, that’s $30 to cover expense increases on all other parts and logistics. And make no mistake, OLED is sold for more than minimal profit.
Switch in 2017 cost an estimated $257 in parts alone. They possessed enough margin to air freight inventory after launch to meet high demand at a cost of an extra $40+ per unit, which erased their margin compared to sea freight but did not create a crippling per-unit loss. Combined with:
  • a die shrink to the SoC, a substantial cost reduction that in bygone days almost always resulted in "slim" models for other hardware and a lower price to boot
  • packaging shrinkage, allowing more units per container to reduce logistics costs (with more packaging shrinkage on the way, likely to alleviate other cost increases)
  • overall economies of scale for all parts and operational costs (which are no small reduction in costs from launch)
… across 5 years and no amount of inflation could destroy their margins.
By this stage in the hardware cycle, past hardware at similar pricepoints would have already seen an average drop in console price of $150 with some profit margin preservation, and the same economies of scale that facilitated that in past cycles for reasonably popular hardware with mature components (which describes Switch almost to the letter) still exists today. While inflation and the semiconductor shortage has no doubt caused a substantial hit to their profit margin, it feels pretty clear to me that their margins were more than robust enough to sustain that hit since there has been no price drop since launch. So while a price drop of $150 is most assuredly off the table, saying $50 is off the table is suggesting that any and all gains made from massive cost reductions across 5 years were completely wiped out and a Switch costs nearly the same now to produce and ship as it did in 2017. Were inflation and the semiconductor shortage able to see explosive cost increases of that severity, we'd be seeing SIE raise the price of a PlayStation (which has always historically been priced on the razor's edge or at a loss at the best of times) by FAR more than it has, and the US wouldn't be spared from that price increase as it is right now.
 
.I'm not convinced Nintendo would abandon Switch OLED over v2 red box Switch , while also refusing to drop the prices of the existing models next year when Drake/Switch 2 comes out, just so we can have a noticable $150 price differences between each model, as an attempt to maximize profit. Not saying it won't happen, but it's not gonna work out for them in the long run.

I do think Nintendo would want to make Drake more affordable than current gen cisioed, and that they do anticipate a significant sales decrease of existing switch models next year when Drake comes out, so they could combat it with price cuts and/or bundles with games.

I think a price cut of Switch Lite, and hybrid models are more likely, while eventually likely phasing out v2 red box for Switch OLED (which is a direct improvement over red box switch).

$170 Switch Lite, $300 Switch OLED and $400-450 Drake/Switch 2 is not impossible by end of next year. Price cuts are needed to keep Switch's install base from dropping too much. I do expect $400 minimum, if it falls within the 400 range. 2 skus with $400 having less storage space is doable also, and $450 with twice as much storage space. That's my 2 cents.
 
Last edited:
Terrell said:
I see no mention of exclusivity in that reporting, and this is apparently at least 2 years from now.
Click to expand...
That's what I said "seems", especially since I haven't heard any other company besides Apple currently using mobile OLED displays from LG Display. (I'm aware LG Display did provide mobile OLED displays for the Google Pixel 2 XL, Google Pixel 3, and Google Pixel 4. But that was in the past.)

And for the reasons I've mentioned in the past (here and here), I don't see Nintendo going to any company other than Samsung for mobile OLED displays in the foreseeable future. (Keep in mind how many times I said "seems".)
 
Terrell said:
So what kind of things will be required for Nintendo to meet these new EU standards precisely?

Good that Nintendo might have another OLED supplier to pick from.

Actually, what Nintendo said was that the $50 cost difference from OLED to the OG Switch covered the cost of the new parts, preserving the expected hardware margin at the time of its release. With people in the press estimating part costs and it adding up to only $10 and generously accounting for the possibility that they were wrong by double and those parts were actually $20, that’s $30 to cover expense increases on all other parts and logistics. And make no mistake, OLED is sold for more than minimal profit.
Switch in 2017 cost an estimated $257 in parts alone. They possessed enough margin to air freight inventory after launch to meet high demand at a cost of an extra $40+ per unit, which erased their margin compared to sea freight but did not create a crippling per-unit loss. Combined with:
  • a die shrink to the SoC, a substantial cost reduction that in bygone days almost always resulted in "slim" models for other hardware and a lower price to boot
  • packaging shrinkage, allowing more units per container to reduce logistics costs (with more packaging shrinkage on the way, likely to alleviate other cost increases)
  • overall economies of scale for all parts and operational costs (which are no small reduction in costs from launch)
… across 5 years and no amount of inflation could destroy their margins.
By this stage in the hardware cycle, past hardware at similar pricepoints would have already seen an average drop in console price of $150 with some profit margin preservation, and the same economies of scale that facilitated that in past cycles for reasonably popular hardware with mature components (which describes Switch almost to the letter) still exists today. While inflation and the semiconductor shortage has no doubt caused a substantial hit to their profit margin, it feels pretty clear to me that their margins were more than robust enough to sustain that hit since there has been no price drop since launch. So while a price drop of $150 is most assuredly off the table, saying $50 is off the table is suggesting that any and all gains made from massive cost reductions across 5 years were completely wiped out and a Switch costs nearly the same now to produce and ship as it did in 2017. Were inflation and the semiconductor shortage able to see explosive cost increases of that severity, we'd be seeing SIE raise the price of a PlayStation (which has always historically been priced on the razor's edge or at a loss at the best of times) by FAR more than it has, and the US wouldn't be spared from that price increase as it is right now.
Click to expand...

I was thinking that Nintendo have higher profit with OLED revision because there is few inexpensive changes (OLED and double memory are biggest) which all combined should be cost much less than $50 difference compared to V2 Switch.
But Nintendo said that they have minimal profit with OLED revision, and it sounded like they have lower profit margin compared to V2 version, which is strange.

I didnt said that 5 years of inflation "destroyed" their margins, just that they now (because raise costs of everything and big inflation) have less profit than they had for instance 2 years ago. So they currently they dont have big profit with currents models, at least not big enough for $50 price cut for any model if they want keep selling them with profit.

One of reasons why US didn't had PS5 price increase compared to Europe is because inflation in Europe is stronger than in US,
US dollar stayed stronger than euro especially from start of Ukraine conflict, currently US dollar is stronger than Euro, while before Euro was always stronger than US dollar.
www.cnbc.com

Euro trades at two-decade low against the dollar. And some think it could slide much further

The euro fell to a two-decade low of 0.9903 against the U.S. dollar and strategists predict further euro depreciation in the coming months.
www.cnbc.com www.cnbc.com
 
ShadowFox08 said:
I think the idea that Nintendo would abandon OLED over regular red box V2 switch as an an attempt to maximize profit margins and have notable price differences over 3 models (including Drake) is wild. Not impossible, but it doesn't make sense to me to remove the "improved switch hybrid version in every way" that is barely a year old, because it's more expensive than red box V2.. And that Nintendo wouldn't give price cuts for existing models when Drake comes out. Surely price cuts are possible, if not kinda expected when a new console releases in the calibur of Drake (pretty much next gen in architecture and power) and switch sales will stert to decline a bit more.

Someone is going to mention 2DS XL, but
1.that came out after new 3ds and new 3DS XL
2. the new 3ds and new 3ds XL did not cease production when 2DS XL
3. 2DS XL came out the same year as the Switch(in July) and it targeted the younger audience, and that's also when sales were declining quite a bit.

I get that OLED is more expensive, but it's a direct upgrade for the handheld part(screen)., as well as more storage and better sound Switch OLED to me just seems like the model to stay and replace red box switch eventually as the default switch 1 hybrid. I can see a $50 price cut to OLED Switch and V2 red box next year and/or game bundles and see v2 red box switch bring phased out. I also see the lite model getting a discount, perhaps down to $170.

So $170 Switch Lite, $300 Switch OLED, and $400-450 Switch 2/Drake is not unreasonable next year. It's not definite of course. Nintendo would be crazy not to discount them.

I say $400-450, because I believe $400 is more likely than $450, is there is just ome SKUnst launch. A base model with smaller storage space at $400 And another SKU at $450 with twice the storage.
Click to expand...
If any reason is the most likely for pulling SWOLED out of the lineup, it'd be because of a shortage of OLED panels and associated motherboard parts to support them, especially if there is seemingly only one supplier option for OLED as is being suggested with BOE and LG out of contention. (and to think, we're worried about a theorized monopoly with Microsoft, while a de facto monopoly is happening in the consumer electronics business...)
Simba1 said:
I was thinking that Nintendo have higher profit with OLED revision because there is few inexpensive changes (OLED and double memory are biggest) which all combined should be cost much less than $50 difference compared to V2 Switch.
But Nintendo said that they have minimal profit with OLED revision, and it sounded like they have lower profit margin compared to V2 version, which is strange.

I didnt said that 5 years of inflation "destroyed" their margins, just that they now (because raise costs of everything and big inflation) have less profit than they had for instance 2 years ago. So they currently they dont have big profit with currents models, at least not big enough for $50 price cut for any model if they want keep selling them with profit.

One of reasons why US didn't had PS5 price increase compared to Europe is because inflation in Europe is stronger than in US,
US dollar stayed stronger than euro especially from start of Ukraine conflict, currently US dollar is stronger than Euro, while before Euro was always stronger than US dollar.
www.cnbc.com

Euro trades at two-decade low against the dollar. And some think it could slide much further

The euro fell to a two-decade low of 0.9903 against the U.S. dollar and strategists predict further euro depreciation in the coming months.
www.cnbc.com www.cnbc.com
Click to expand...
I need a source on "minimal profit" for OLED. Like I said, the only thing I've heard on the subject is that the $50 price difference was entirely to preserve the expected margin found among the 2 other models.

And yeah, saying they can't afford a $50 price cut is exactly saying that the cost per unit has reverted to what it was for a Switch in 2017, because the parts costs at launch are a known variable and not being able to afford a $50 price cut puts them right back to launch margin... which would mean that, with the increased cost of logistics, they're making practically nothing on hardware sold. Sounds like, if I take your supposition that a $50 price cut can't be afforded, the margins to be expected of hardware in its 5th year without price drops (which are $100-150, as I outlined) are well and thoroughly gone to me.

Also, Canada saw a PS5 price hike and the CAD is pretty near even where it was in 2020 when PS5 got its MSRP, so the currency explanation falls flat for me.
 
Terrell said:
I need a source on "minimal profit" for OLED. Like I said, the only thing I've heard on the subject is that the $50 price difference was entirely to preserve the expected margin found among the 2 other models.

And yeah, saying they can't afford a $50 price cut is exactly saying that the cost per unit has reverted to what it was for a Switch in 2017, because the parts costs at launch are a known variable and not being able to afford a $50 price cut puts them right back to launch margin... which would mean that, with the increased cost of logistics, they're making practically nothing on hardware sold. Sounds like, if I take your supposition that a $50 price cut can't be afforded, the margins to be expected of hardware in its 5th year without price drops (which are $100-150, as I outlined) are well and thoroughly gone to me.

Also, Canada saw a PS5 price hike and the CAD is pretty near even where it was in 2020 when PS5 got its MSRP, so the currency explanation falls flat for me.
Click to expand...

If I remember it was in one of FY meetings.
EDIT, you have link about OLED being less profitable down
asia.nikkei.com

Nintendo Switch price isn't going up, despite higher costs: president

Shuntaro Furukawa sees big game releases like Pokemon boosting sales
asia.nikkei.com asia.nikkei.com

First, you dont know how exactly big profit was back in 2017. or if shipping by planes also meant they were selling them with profit.
I think that with rise of general Switch costs (parts, production, shipping costs..) and inflation last two years (especially last 6 months), $50 price cut would most likely mean they wouldnt sold hardware at profit.
Also, I didnt said they cant afford not selling Switch hardware at zero or loss, just that they at this point they wouldn't do that (selling hardware without profit).

You are wrong, CAD dollar this years inflation is around 7% until now, while in 2021. was around 3%, so until now this year inflation is more than double compared to last year, normal CAD inflation in past years was around 2-3%.
In any case Sony itself said they rising prices on selected markets due to "global economic environment, including high inflation rates"
blog.playstation.com

PS5 price to increase in select markets due to global economic environment, including high inflation rates

New recommended retail price coming to select markets in the EMEA, APAC, and LATAM regions, plus Canada.
blog.playstation.com blog.playstation.com
 
Last edited:
Kise Ryota said:
Personally I can't see Nintendo not having big profits with such old hardware.
Click to expand...

What exactly is big profit?

It doesn't really matter if its old hardware if price components for that hardware, general production costs and shipping costs are higher and rising.
 
Last edited:
Dakhil said:
Well so far, the OLED model's dock still only supports the fixed source voltage of 15 V (but with the fixed source current increased to 2.6 A), which is a violation of USB PD specifications since the USB PD specifications require that all relevant fixed source voltages be supported, which is 5 V, 9 V, and 15 V for the OLED model's dock.

And the AC adapter, which I believe has been unchanged since the Nintendo Switch first launched in March 2017, only supports the fixed source voltages of 5 V (with the fixed source current of 1.5 A) and 15 V (with the fixed source current of 2.6 A), which is again a violation of USB PD specifications.

Considering that non-compliance with USB PD specifications can cause Nintendo Switch consoles to be bricked, and the EU mentioning that medium-sized devices that support the USB PD standard at up to 100 W being under the EU's purview, I can see the dock's compliance with USB PD specifications potentially being scrutinised by the EU, especially if the EU considers the dock to be a medium-sized device that supports the USB PD standard at up to 100 W.
Click to expand...
Depends on the definition of "support". If the EU mandate is just about charging then the dock technically still works for charging with lower voltages for that I think. Ultimately if it still requires higher wattages and certain profiles/power rules, the EU stuff won't change that to make companies magically make higher power stuff work at full capability with lower power chargers.

Actual USB-PD compliance is kind of a separate issue, relative to the general EU mandate of trying to standardize on USB-C ports and chargers. The specifics of actual USB spec compliance is basically just some minutiae that's going to fly under the radar, if it's even part of the whole thing in the first place.
Terrell said:
So what kind of things will be required for Nintendo to meet these new EU standards precisely?
Click to expand...
Probably not much. Docked mode already works with standard chargers that support the 15V profile with 2.6-3A, otherwise it'll still charge at lower levels with whatever chargers.

Ideally the main change would at least be better USB-PD spec compliance (which involves a bunch of technical details about the handshaking between the device and power supply and such) which would hopefully make it a bit more robust in terms of shitting itself with random chargers.

(Super ideally would be something like using standard display output for docked mode so you can use whatever docks/video out adapters...but that's totally outside the scope of the new rules)
Kise Ryota said:
AFAIK, what Furukawa said was that the OLED model was less profitable than the other models (that was said in an interview to nikkei Asia)



Personally I can't see Nintendo not having big profits with such old hardware.
Click to expand...
Specs might be old but manufacturing cost wise it's new in a lot of ways (and accounting wise that kind of stuff is amortized over years, like over the lifetime sales of the device), on top of all the inflated pricing of everything these days.
 
0
Kise Ryota said:
I think the opposite. But this made me wonder about what is the cost difference between an LCD nintendo would use today VS oled. Does anyone have an estimate of the price difference?
Click to expand...

Price difference between LCD and OLED on 6-7" size should be few dollars, less than $5 in any case.
 
Kise Ryota said:
At least $100 for the V2
Click to expand...
Oh wow, i see people still completely overestimate the amount of profit Nintendo makes per unit sold as well as the level of which production/shipment costs would have to decline over the years for this to be possible.

Where do you think the production costs saving are coming from that would make a 2022 v2 Switch that much cheaper than a 2017 Switch ? The SoC was relatively cheap back, then which is one of the reason Nintendo went with nVidia to begin with.
 
Since Nintendo established Nintendo pictures, releasing the Mario movie next year and such, do anyone think that Nintendo will focus on streaming apps and content for the Switch like Dolby vision and such?
 
DXB-KNIGHT said:
Since Nintendo established Nintendo pictures, releasing the Mario movie next year and such, do anyone think that Nintendo will focus on streaming apps and content for the Switch like Dolby vision and such?
Click to expand...
It would be nice. It’s a real missed opportunity for them not to treat the Switch like a proper portable streaming setup.
 
0
ertaboy356b said:
Assuming Lite is $200 and TV-Only is $150, why not just buy a regular switch instead? That's like saying a Dex only Samsung, then marketing it like you can sync what you do on your Samsung Phone vice versa.
Click to expand...
I'd buy a theoretical TV only Switch as a gift or an extra device, I already own a hybrid Switch.

It's all hypothetical, disregarding the low probability of it happening.
 
0
DXB-KNIGHT said:
Since Nintendo established Nintendo pictures, releasing the Mario movie next year and such, do anyone think that Nintendo will focus on streaming apps and content for the Switch like Dolby vision and such?
Click to expand...
Maybe?

I could imagine Nintendo wanting to do things like the Pikmin shorts for their less popular series and trying to increase interest in IP's like Pikmin, Star Fox, Metroid, etc.

The Pikmin shorts on the Nintendo of America YouTube page have almost 34 million views combined, I can see Nintendo wanting that kind of exposure for their other series.
 
Alovon11 said:
So if Nintendo was intending to keep that paradigm the same for Drake, they will have to release it in 2023 otherwise be forced to delay and refactor the system to make it (and it's accessories) USB-PD compliant
Click to expand...
Wouldn't releasing it in 2023 without proper USB-PD compliance still end up in conflict with the EU anyways?
I mean, the upcoming 2023 iPhones are rumored to ship with USB-C because apparently, 2022 was the last year apple was able to get away with lightning.
Correct me if I'm wrong but iirc, even the cheapest iPad is getting USB-C.
 
Quoted by: em
1
niconiconick64 said:
Wouldn't releasing it in 2023 without proper USB-PD compliance still end up in conflict with the EU anyways?
I mean, the upcoming 2023 iPhones are rumored to ship with USB-C because apparently, 2022 was the last year apple was able to get away with lightning.
Correct me if I'm wrong but iirc, even the cheapest iPad is getting USB-C.
Click to expand...
The mandate only affects products launched in or after 2024. Existing products launched in 2023 or earlier are exempt.
 
0
ertaboy356b said:
Assuming Lite is $200 and TV-Only is $150, why not just buy a regular switch instead? That's like saying a Dex only Samsung, then marketing it like you can sync what you do on your Samsung Phone vice versa.
Click to expand...
I don't expect Nintendo to do it, specially not before the supply is trending to greatly surpass demand for other models, but there are advantages over just a regular Switch:

  • 2 persons can play simultaneously (beyond same game, same room, local multiplayer game).
  • People short on money or who just don't want invest so much upfront can get their preferred mode and buy the other one later instead of worrying about regretting later.
  • Those who prefer the Lite design/size can have it with the TV out functionality for $100+ less.
 
0
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the jump from the switch v2 to the OLED model's dock a 18W to 39W in output power?
(with the only caveat being that the OLED doesn't draw that extra power and is limited to the v2 switch's range)
Can we use this as an indicator for drake power draw? or is it negligeable and you guys don't feel like nintendo can/will reuse the current switch charger and dock components that handle PD?
 
niconiconick64 said:
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the jump from the switch v2 to the OLED model's dock a 18W to 39W in output power?
(with the only caveat being that the OLED doesn't draw that extra power and is limited to the v2 switch's range)
Can we use this as an indicator for drake power draw? or is it negligeable and you guys don't feel like nintendo can/will reuse the current switch charger and dock components that handle PD?
Click to expand...
We can’t use it as an indicator for Drake power draw in docked mode. IIRC the higher power draw is enabled by shutting down the USB ports.

Assuming that the Ethernet dock is the Drake dock it seems highly unlikely that Nintendo will make Drake a downgrade (not able to use USB peripherals) and they certainly won’t spend money on a USB controller that their hardware can’t use.
 
Dakhil said:
Well so far, the OLED model's dock still only supports the fixed source voltage of 15 V (but with the fixed source current increased to 2.6 A), which is a violation of USB PD specifications since the USB PD specifications require that all relevant fixed source voltages be supported, which is 5 V, 9 V, and 15 V for the OLED model's dock.

And the AC adapter, which I believe has been unchanged since the Nintendo Switch first launched in March 2017, only supports the fixed source voltages of 5 V (with the fixed source current of 1.5 A) and 15 V (with the fixed source current of 2.6 A), which is again a violation of USB PD specifications.

Considering that non-compliance with USB PD specifications can cause Nintendo Switch consoles to be bricked, and the EU mentioning that medium-sized devices that support the USB PD standard at up to 100 W being under the EU's purview, I can see the dock's compliance with USB PD specifications potentially being scrutinised by the EU, especially if the EU considers the dock to be a medium-sized device that supports the USB PD standard at up to 100 W.
Click to expand...

Alovon11 said:
Yep, so no real way you slice it, Switch as it is is uncompliant for USB-PD
Whether it be the dock only accepting certain voltages, the AC adapter's voltages, or even the Switch itself

(I assume when it thinks it's docked it only expects that [email protected]/3A input, thus why even when some third-party docks are fully USB-PD compliant and is using an actual USB-PD compliant charger/battery bank, the Switch can still get bricked. Thus why third party dock companies insist you use the official AC adapter otherwise risk bricking your switch despite the dock working fine)

So if Nintendo was intending to keep that paradigm the same for Drake, they will have to release it in 2023 otherwise be forced to delay and refactor the system to make it (and it's accessories) USB-PD compliant
Click to expand...

The dock won't be covered by the legislation. It's not a portable device, and it's not a charger in and of itself, it just passes power through from an external power supply. The power supply at this point is out of spec as it doesn't support a 9V mode, but again this was a charger released in 2017, which was basically a wild west of USB-C chargers, where you still had things like the older version of Qualcomm quick-charge which was a competing standard which was incompatible with USB-PD (I think it was starting in version 4 they just switched quick-charge to match the USB-PD spec). If Nintendo source a new charger for a new model, anything available from suppliers these days will be in spec.

LiC said:
Your explicit point was that the Switch Lite in some way went back on the USP or branding of the Switch. But it didn't, because the Switch brand is for a handheld system that plays home console games "anytime, anywhere" and the Switch Lite is also exactly that. "Switch TV" isn't, and is never happening.
Click to expand...

I don't think they'll release a Switch TV, but I don't think it has anything to do with branding or USP of the existing models, it's just about whether it expands their market. The Switch Lite exists because there are a non-trivial number of customers who have bought it who wouldn't have bought the standard model, which gives them a bigger market to sell software to. My guess is that they've done the research and found that the number of people who want a Switch TV but won't buy a regular Switch is too small to warrant making such a device.
 
The 2 reasons I don't see a Switch TV are:

1) Nintendo makes 40-50% of its revenue through hardware sales. I don't see much reason to reduxe the retail price of the Switch family with a TV only variant.

2) It is already proven people are willing to buy stationary consoles at a premium. Why launch this product for cheap when the regular Switch already proves that even if players only use it docked, they are willing to pay the premium? The Switch is long in the tooth now but it held up more than fine as a stationary console for most users (ie not enthusiasts who post on forums)

I dunno. Seems like a pointless product based on Nintendo's business model.
 
Thraktor said:
I don't think they'll release a Switch TV, but I don't think it has anything to do with branding or USP of the existing models, it's just about whether it expands their market. The Switch Lite exists because there are a non-trivial number of customers who have bought it who wouldn't have bought the standard model, which gives them a bigger market to sell software to. My guess is that they've done the research and found that the number of people who want a Switch TV but won't buy a regular Switch is too small to warrant making such a device.
Click to expand...
I dunno. This is kind of like saying "they won't release a 3DS with just one screen, but it's not because of the USP or branding." When people think of the Switch family of systems they're thinking of a single conceptual type of system, with the Switch Lite differing because it lacks certain features (docking, detachable controllers), but it's still the same kind of system.

I agree that Nintendo also has no reason to do it regardless of all that, though.
 
Last edited:
Who is a TV only Switch for? I ask genuinely, it gets brought up here occasionally by users who presumably want one - why do you?

The most common context I see it is the idea that a TV only Switch - or TV only Drake - might be unbound by the handheld's power/thermal requirements, but as long as they share a chip, that won't be the case*. Is there another reason? Cost?

The Lite is arguably in some ways a better handheld device. It's more durable, it's lighter. Is there a way a TV only device could be better at being a TV console while still sharing the constraints of being built on hybrid internals? The best I can think of is that, without DisplayPort, an ethernet connection to the device doesn't have to share bandwidth with the HDMI data. Anything else? Shipping with a Pro controller?

I don't believe the market for the device exists in a way that makes it profitable to target, but I am curious about what those folks want and what it might offer.

*The Lite actually does get away with this, as it doesn't have to run at docked speeds ever, it can use a small cooling system than the other models.
 
oldpuck said:
Who is a TV only Switch for? I ask genuinely, it gets brought up here occasionally by users who presumably want one - why do you?
Click to expand...

Literally just a cheap set top box to connect to an extra display. It can run at docked mode clocks. I'd have it hooked up to a 720p TV I have in my room while the main Switch is downstairs or in use. Possibly buy one as a gift for grandparents, who are unlikely to use tablet mode.

I get that Nintendo would just want someone to buy another Switch, I'm just explaining my own use case, if such a device exists. Right now I use multiple docks.
 
Alovon11 said:
Yep, so no real way you slice it, Switch as it is is uncompliant for USB-PD
Whether it be the dock only accepting certain voltages, the AC adapter's voltages, or even the Switch itself

(I assume when it thinks it's docked it only expects that [email protected]/3A input, thus why even when some third-party docks are fully USB-PD compliant and is using an actual USB-PD compliant charger/battery bank, the Switch can still get bricked. Thus why third party dock companies insist you use the official AC adapter otherwise risk bricking your switch despite the dock working fine)

So if Nintendo was intending to keep that paradigm the same for Drake, they will have to release it in 2023 otherwise be forced to delay and refactor the system to make it (and it's accessories) USB-PD compliant
Click to expand...

The idea is that you can charge any small device with any charger. The Switch uses 5V whenever connected to another charger. Check.
The Switch power adapter charges any device as well, either with 5 or 15V. Check.
The bricking issue was that cheap PD controllers or custom chips applied too much voltage on the communication channel of the PD controller in the Switch. In particular the infamous Niko dock. (Source, Genki and Jumpgate developers).

People mixing the 5V for signals and the 5V for charging up. Adding all fixed voltages would make the charger bigger.

The 15V are needed that the Switch outputs the video signal. Again cheap 3rd party docks might only jump to 9V due to the power draw which then don’t works with the TV out. Using the official charger fixes this issue since there’s only the 15V for higher power modes.

The Switch charger had several revisions, the OLED charger even has a different part number.
 
0
Simba1 said:
I was thinking that Nintendo have higher profit with OLED revision because there is few inexpensive changes (OLED and double memory are biggest) which all combined should be cost much less than $50 difference compared to V2 Switch.
But Nintendo said that they have minimal profit with OLED revision, and it sounded like they have lower profit margin compared to V2 version, which is strange.

I didnt said that 5 years of inflation "destroyed" their margins, just that they now (because raise costs of everything and big inflation) have less profit than they had for instance 2 years ago. So they currently they dont have big profit with currents models, at least not big enough for $50 price cut for any model if they want keep selling them with profit.
Click to expand...

Nintendo also calculates the R&D costs into their price calculation. The parts most likely weren’t that much more expensive. But new motherboard, fan, heatsink, stand, speaker… all efforts spent is also money they want to get back.
 


I honestly expected Intel was gonna blow this after the weird launch strategy, but between the expectation management, the price, and the actual hardware, they seem to have pulled it off.

Intel would be in an excellent position to make a console, actually, as the disadvantages Arc has are mitigated there. There being a third viable competitor in the market is good for everyone, and that Intel has gone all in on a "modern from the ground up" strategy seems to be paying off. I doubt MS or Sony (or Nintendo) leave their current tech partners in the next 5 years, but the fact that they could is a win.
 
There's only one way I can see Nintendo releasing a TV only switch and this is very unlikely imo regardless.

This is in the instance that a future Drake die shrink allows a TV Dongle style device and only if Nintendo brings popular streaming platforms to the switch also such as Netflix, Amazon, Disney etc. They could even launch their own entertainment service as part of NSO hosting their own movies and series, eg the Mario movie.

For this to happen, current Drake would have to be on nvidia 4nm now and use modest clocks and cooling and then be shrunk even further in 2-3 years time. The reason I say this is because the shrink from erista to Mariko wasn't enough for nvidia to launch a TV Dongle so we have the nvidia shield tube. If Thraktor is right that a TSMC 4N Drake would be 66mm^2 then maybe a further shrink and a very well engineered motherboard could make it happen in a TV stick format. It would also have to be even cheaper than the Lite.

I could see this being a potentially compelling option, a premium 4k TV stick that happens to act as a digital only Nintendo console. But I don't think even this is likely. It would require more digital content outside of games from Nintendo and would be competing with the likes of apple TV and the firestick 4k devices.

Second option that I see as even more unlikely is they do use an advanced node for Drake, clock it high and manage to create an ugly looking, cheap, digital only TV box that is designed to compete with the series S at its price point. The reason I don't think this is likely is because the series S isn't that compelling of a device in the first place vs the series x and PS5 so Nintendo would be putting in considerable effort to compete in an already small market.

I think Nintendo is more likely to create new compelling accessories that enhance the experience, such as my idea for a wireless streaming Dock with AR/VR for an off screen, docked quality experience.
 
0
oldpuck said:
Who is a TV only Switch for? I ask genuinely, it gets brought up here occasionally by users who presumably want one - why do you?

The most common context I see it is the idea that a TV only Switch - or TV only Drake - might be unbound by the handheld's power/thermal requirements, but as long as they share a chip, that won't be the case*. Is there another reason? Cost?

The Lite is arguably in some ways a better handheld device. It's more durable, it's lighter. Is there a way a TV only device could be better at being a TV console while still sharing the constraints of being built on hybrid internals? The best I can think of is that, without DisplayPort, an ethernet connection to the device doesn't have to share bandwidth with the HDMI data. Anything else? Shipping with a Pro controller?

I don't believe the market for the device exists in a way that makes it profitable to target, but I am curious about what those folks want and what it might offer.

*The Lite actually does get away with this, as it doesn't have to run at docked speeds ever, it can use a small cooling system than the other models.
Click to expand...
To your first point, they would absolutely not need a tv only model to unlock performance. They could have done it in 2019 with Mariko on all models.

Personally imo, the only reason a tv model has to exist is if it’s ultra cheap like maximum 100$ bundled with a pro controller.

We know at least that Nintendo has experimented with a digital only tv version, from firmware evidence.
 
oldpuck said:
We can’t use it as an indicator for Drake power draw in docked mode. IIRC the higher power draw is enabled by shutting down the USB ports.

Assuming that the Ethernet dock is the Drake dock it seems highly unlikely that Nintendo will make Drake a downgrade (not able to use USB peripherals) and they certainly won’t spend money on a USB controller that their hardware can’t use.
Click to expand...

Another issue I have with the notion of the new Switch using the OLED dock and drawing 39W, is how is it going to dissipate all that heat? Even if it's let's say 29W of power consumption, with the other 10W to charge while in use, that's still a lot of power to be dissipated from a device that would have to be the same thickness as the OLED model. The Steam Deck APU runs up to 15W (plus RAM and other components maybe pushes that close to 20W), and that's in a larger body than Switch, with noticeable fan noise.

LiC said:
I dunno. This is kind of like saying "they won't release a 3DS with just one screen, but it's not because of the USP or branding." When people think of the Switch family of systems they're thinking of a single conceptual type of system, with the Switch Lite differing because it lacks certain features (docking, detachable controllers), but it's still the same kind of system.

I agree that Nintendo also has no reason to do it regardless of all that, though.
Click to expand...

I don't think a one-screen 3DS is really a fair comparison, as 3DS games are all designed around two screens, so if you drop one of them it's going to break pretty much all 3DS games. Or you could split the two screens across one larger screen, which is exactly what they did with the 2DS (they just added a plastic bezel on top). Almost every Switch game is designed to work on a TV, and every game (either physical or digital) lists the modes they support, which would put it in pretty much the same situation as the Switch Lite.
 
Hermii said:
To your first point, they would absolutely not need a tv only model to unlock performance. They could have done it in 2019 with Mariko on all models.
Click to expand...
I may have been unclear - people who bring up TV only models have often done so in response to discussions about TDP caps for Drake. I'm not sure there is a world where a TV only model runs better than the hybrid model that it shares innards and games with.

Hermii said:
Personally imo, the only reason a tv model has to exist is if it’s ultra cheap like maximum 100$ bundled with a pro controller.

We know at least that Nintendo has experimented with a digital only tv version, from firmware evidence.
Click to expand...
Wasn't there evidence the TV only model in the firmware was built for QA? Or was that just speculation?
 
I‘m on the same page as others who don’t get the appeal of a TV only console. Since I was a little kid console quality on the go was what I wanted. First I didn’t had my own TV, then my own TVs were used for other stuff then games… but then I also got rid of my PS4 when the Switch had a good library. Because I didn’t touch it while the Switch got all the playtime (mostly not in front of the TV).
 
0
I'm going to throw my hat in the ring and say that the most likely unit to disappear is actually the V2. The OLED Model IS the Slim revision of the Nintendo Switch internally, with a smaller motherboard, less complexity, fewer overall parts, etc.

Nintendo Switch - OLED Model IS a cost reduced version made possible in part by the die shrink. Its internal complexity compared to the V2/1 is demonstrably less. They even moved to simple press - fit connections for internal connections.

They just also chose, at the same time, to improve some key aspects of the console.

Nintendo is unwilling to reduce prices for Switch, that much is clear, but with OLED Model they can have their cake and eat it too. Keep the price point of the "lowest end" Switch that can connect to a TV at 300 dollars, while "reducing" the price of the OLED for it to be in that market position.

Thus I think the most likely pricing this time next year to be:

Lite - $199.99
OLED Model - $299.99
Super Nintendo Switch - $399.99

(While I think they would be reluctant to have 4+ units on sale at once, I could possibly see a Nintendo Switch TV coming in at $99.99 or $149.99 launching holiday season 2023 to squeeze the last life out of the X1.)
 
Thraktor said:
Another issue I have with the notion of the new Switch using the OLED dock and drawing 39W, is how is it going to dissipate all that heat? Even if it's let's say 29W of power consumption, with the other 10W to charge while in use, that's still a lot of power to be dissipated from a device that would have to be the same thickness as the OLED model. The Steam Deck APU runs up to 15W (plus RAM and other components maybe pushes that close to 20W), and that's in a larger body than Switch, with noticeable fan noise.
Click to expand...

Could a different type of heatsink be considered?
Or does the size of the console, the cost or efficiency of a fan make other alternatives impossible?
 
0
Thraktor said:
My guess is that they've done the research and found that the number of people who want a Switch TV but won't buy a regular Switch is too small to warrant making such a device.
Click to expand...
Yes...I don't think anyone would want such a device unless it dropped the portable limitations to the hardware... such as low clockspeeds and smaller portable gpu.
If all it entails is just a box with the same hardware I'd have to say you're right.
 
Last edited:
Thraktor said:
Another issue I have with the notion of the new Switch using the OLED dock and drawing 39W, is how is it going to dissipate all that heat? Even if it's let's say 29W of power consumption, with the other 10W to charge while in use, that's still a lot of power to be dissipated from a device that would have to be the same thickness as the OLED model. The Steam Deck APU runs up to 15W (plus RAM and other components maybe pushes that close to 20W), and that's in a larger body than Switch, with noticeable fan noise.
Click to expand...
Yup, I totally forgot that issue. My laptop for instance, draws up to a total of 38-42W on full load and when it reaches that point, not only temperatures get to the upper 80C, but also the fan goes into jet engine mode.

I think maybe even mid-upper 20W might be too much for a device like a switch.
 
0
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