Cackletta5
Cappy
- Pronouns
- she/her
truePeople are really waiting for unconfirmed patches for games on an unconfirmed console. We are off the deep end LOL. Praying it’s real just for the health of people in this thread.
truePeople are really waiting for unconfirmed patches for games on an unconfirmed console. We are off the deep end LOL. Praying it’s real just for the health of people in this thread.
OLED did not receive exclusive first party games, was $350, is not the called the Switch 2 and is marketed as part of the Switch family of system. Yet it has secured adoption from the mass market.I have a question for this thread:
How does Nintendo plans to secure adoption of this device from the mass market(not enthusiasts) in its early years(I assume they would want as many people as possible buying it since they will release exclusives for it and third parties too) considering the following thoughts some have mentioned here:
- It will not receive exclusive first party games for at least a year and half
- It will be at least 400$, some say 450$(I actually think either one of those will be the price)
- It will not be called Switch 2(suggesting it is a clear successor) but another name which is ambiguous enough to sound like a more powerful hardware that can be counted as in the same family
- It will still be marketed as part of the Switch family of systems
- Some say it will reuse the OLED body
I'm sorry but I feel there is something off. I am fairly confident such a device as above wouldn't be enough to convince many random people in buying it over the Switch. Imagine: It cost 100-150$ more, has no first party exclusives, is not marketed as the next big thing, looks just like the Switch OLED... Infact it looks more like a revision than something Nintendo would want to last for at least six years. And if it is treated as a revision I'm afraid it will be perceived by the random mass market as such and do revision sales.
If they are perceived too close together despite the gap in performance or 4K patches/versions, the Switch will be its first competitor, stealing its sales which would have been much more beneficial to the new device long term. Some people(not the enthusiasts) who already have a Switch may not even feel the incentive to upgrade. I feel trying to be too ambiguous will just create a very weird situation for this device especially long term.
If this device succeeds to the Switch even if eventually, i'm guessing Nintendo would want to sell it as much as possible even from the get go. Will this device be able to sell 17million units(or close) like its predecessor in its first year? I guess time will tell but if it is goes by the ambiguous route I feel it will certainly not.
Hey.I have a question for this thread:
How does Nintendo plans to secure adoption of this device from the mass market(not enthusiasts) in its early years(I assume they would want as many people as possible buying it since they will release exclusives for it and third parties too) considering the following thoughts some have mentioned here:
- It will not receive exclusive first party games for at least a year and half
- It will be at least 400$, some say 450$(I actually think either one of those will be the price)
- It will not be called Switch 2(suggesting it is a clear successor) but another name which is ambiguous enough to sound like a more powerful hardware that can be counted as in the same family
- It will still be marketed as part of the Switch family of systems
- Some say it will reuse the OLED body
I'm sorry but I feel there is something off. I am fairly confident such a device as above wouldn't be enough to convince many random people in buying it over the Switch. Imagine: It cost 100-150$ more, has no first party exclusives, is not marketed as the next big thing, looks just like the Switch OLED... Infact it looks more like a revision than something Nintendo would want to last for at least six years. And if it is treated as a revision I'm afraid it will be perceived by the random mass market as such and do revision sales.
If they are perceived too close together despite the gap in performance or 4K patches/versions, the Switch will be its first competitor, stealing its sales which would have been much more beneficial to the new device long term. Some people(not the enthusiasts) who already have a Switch may not even feel the incentive to upgrade. I feel trying to be too ambiguous will just create a very weird situation for this device especially long term.
If this device succeeds to the Switch even if eventually, i'm guessing Nintendo would want to sell it as much as possible even from the get go. Will this device be able to sell 17million units(or close) like its predecessor in its first year? I guess time will tell but if it is goes by the ambiguous route I feel it will certainly not.
Okay. Replace quantum with ginormousNot to nitpick but isn't a quantum leap the smallest possible jump?
yeah except that teaser would cost them millions (some even 7 mil) for a 30 second ad time during the superbowlI don't think it'll be there, but it's not impossible. and the post in question was about a teaser. it'd be a fancier "mario behind the curtain" twitter post essentially
There's already smoke NOW, so I wouldn't say there's necessarily a cutoff point.if there's no smoke by February it'll be obvious it's not coming anytime soon, no need for any further 'confirmation'. best not to be attached to any particular outcomes, methinks. there's clearly a lot going on behind the scenes and plans can change. having said that the swell of Uncles looms and all it takes is a couple to break free in coming weeks to get things fired up again. there was someone who said March is still possible but that has to be totally out of the question by now. money is still on May and if that doesn't happen it's dissapointing on quite a few levels.
They did it in 2017, don't put it past them.yeah except that teaser would cost them millions (some even 7 mil) for a 30 second ad time during the superbowl
8 in a year would be pretty pathetic. For comparison Wii U after a year was about 5, Switch OLED 9.5, PS5 15, Wii/PS4/Switch about 17.3) I don’t think their manufacturing chain will allow for 17 million units of Drake in it’s first 12 months due to (apart from anything else) Nintendo having four different versions of Switch by that time to manufacture. I’m guessing closer to 8 million units for Drake in year one. It won’t be the largest selling Switch console until year two imo.
I agree that we don't really need a "smoke" cutoff point but I'd argue February is probably the cutoff month for when it would be announced, assuming a May release. Any later would really be pushing it for May and I don't see them releasing it after May unless it's coming in the holiday season, in which case they wouldn't announce it until the summer.There's already smoke NOW, so I wouldn't say there's necessarily a cutoff point.
Or Nintendo assassins went on a purge and killed off all suspected leakers after the Nvidia leak. You leak can’t leak if you ain’t breathing.Leaks on new hardware usually increase as the months go by. With Drake the opposite happens: we went from the end of 2020 / mid 2021 in which the announcement was considered imminent, to the current partial silence (and if there hadn't been the theft from Nvidia, the silence would be total)...
I could see a March reveal and May release, but I think January reveal and April release is more likely.I agree that we don't really need a "smoke" cutoff point but I'd argue February is probably the cutoff month for when it would be announced, assuming a May release. Any later would really be pushing it for May and I don't see them releasing it after May unless it's coming in the holiday season, in which case they wouldn't announce it until the summer.
This is kinda misrepresenting the facts though. Mid 2021 is when it was imminent because Bloomberg confused the OLED model for the Drake model. Late 2020 on the other hand had Nate saying it would come late 2022/early 2023 which is what he has stood by for two years.Leaks on new hardware usually increase as the months go by. With Drake the opposite happens: we went from the end of 2020 / mid 2021 in which the announcement was considered imminent, to the current partial silence (and if there hadn't been the theft from Nvidia, the silence would be total)...
1) This device is not aimed at the casual market (much like the OLED model) due to its initial selling point of playing Switch games at 4k / better framerates and it’s likely $400+ price point. It will initially be aimed at enthusiasts much like PS4 Pro and XBOX ONE X.
NES 7The Switch never existed, we were all playing the Vita 2 the whole time
It's not so different than Switch itself, which eschewed the weirdness of 3DS and Wii U to be a very straightforward gaming system with one screen and controls primarily from the late 1990s, and advertising it with NBA2K and Skyrim. That was Nintendo aiming at the core video game market. The difference between now and 2017 is they also already have successful machinery servicing the lower end for the time being.I can't wrap my head around this point. Nintendo is investing so much into R&D to tap into a market that they rarely ever target, a market that usually leads them into failure? Nintendo is the casual market
In mid-2020 there was talk of late 2021 / early 2022, then chaos ensued with the confusion created by Switch Oled. Then months passed and silence fell. Even Nate has stopped giving updates, and it would seem he has difficulty getting confirmations on alleged news ... And the latest hypotheses of him (now dating back to a year ago) spoke of the end of 2022 / beginning of 2023. The end of 2022 has arrived and we are still at the same points.This is kinda misrepresenting the facts though. Mid 2021 is when it was imminent because Bloomberg confused the OLED model for the Drake model. Late 2020 on the other hand had Nate saying it would come late 2022/early 2023 which is what he has stood by for two years.
Actual leaks around mid-2021 never happened. All we got were people saying dumb stuff like "wow this looks too good for switch, good thing the pro is coming soon". We had no actual leaks outside of Nate and Bloomberg until this year, when we got leaks from Nvidia, from several Chinese factories, and a public non-leak from Nvidia confirming the previous actual leak.
Leaks have accelerated, not slowed down.
1) i disagree that it will be positioned only as a switch pro. Re orientating the marketing after 1-2 years is pretty hard when you established what a console is, so it would be destructive in the long run, when people just assume its "just" an 4k switch. They will position it as the next step in the line (seen without outright calling it switch2), but will communicate that most games for the future will also be playable on switch, similar to Microsofts "generations are over" take.Hey.
1) This device is not aimed at the casual market (much like the OLED model) due to its initial selling point of playing Switch games at 4k / better framerates and it’s likely $400+ price point. It will initially be aimed at enthusiasts much like PS4 Pro and XBOX ONE X.
2) From what I know it uses the OLED form factor and dock.
3) I don’t think their manufacturing chain will allow for 17 million units of Drake in it’s first 12 months due to (apart from anything else) Nintendo having four different versions of Switch by that time to manufacture. I’m guessing closer to 8 million units for Drake in year one. It won’t be the largest selling Switch console until year two imo.
4) I think it will have exclusive first party games quicker than most people expect. I predict MK9 to be the first big name Drake exclusive from Nintendo in Summer 2024. This will seem like madness to some but after the first year of Zelda it will need an exclusive title to push it on and make it the new baseline main Nintendo console going forward.
There’s no better title than a new Mario Kart especially one that blows MK8D away in terms of visual fidelity as those assets will be by that time a decade old. It’s also a proven mass market hit aswell as being a core hit.
Also like Mr says developers don’t know the chip dimensions. I don’t have a reason why other than two people told me they just “don’t know”.
They didnt. They initially said 2022 before they delayed it. It was actually supposed to come earlier if you believed captain. Capt. hinted at it coming out in 2020 or 2021 not sure what year. Whether that's true or not im not sure but they announced the release date as 2022 initially.Tbf that game was bumped a lot due to COVID and game development trouble I don't think they originally plan a 2023 release.
yea, it's it's worth ityeah except that teaser would cost them millions (some even 7 mil) for a 30 second ad time during the superbowl
that explains all the hentai gamesThe Switch 2 doesn't exist
The Switch never existed, we were all playing the Vita 2 the whole time
more realistically, it's because of the holidays and everyone is being ran ragged to leak shitI mean, if the leaks have stopped it's clearly because there's nothing to leak and not the result of a concerted effort to stop leaks.
Isn't this what oldpuck found (I assume) in the linux commit? What else would "AMPERE_B" mean?
AMPERE_B is an internal name for all the consumer Ampere GPUs. AMPERE_A is the datacenter version, which was on TSMC 7nm, and didn't have ray tracing.Correct. Though I'm going off CUDA version which I believe is 0.1 version higher in T239(Drake) Vs T234(Orin).
Holidays? Leaks have been closed for several months. And if it weren't for the theft suffered by Nvidia, we would still be stuck with the leaks of a year and a half ago..yea, it's it's worth it
that explains all the hentai games
more realistically, it's because of the holidays and everyone is being ran ragged to leak shit
idk 7 mil for a teaser of the logo doesn't seem worth it to me. But i dont work in marketing so what do i knowyea, it's it's worth it
I believe the numbers in the table are reported for 20/10.5 vision. For 20/20 vision, you divide by the (20/10.5) factor, which does get you a lot closer to 720p.Responding to the last sentence: That contradicts the link you provided. It has a table showing "PPI to match avg. foveal cone density" at different distances from the eye. It doesn't show a distance of 12", but from the values there we can calculate that it would work out to 546 PPI. For a 7" screen, that would be about 3330x1872.
Trying to measure how I regularly hold my Switch portable (while being overly conscious of it), it's probably more like 16". For that distance, 410 PPI on a 7" screen would match the average cone density at about 2500x1406.
It is worth noting that individuals with 20/20 (6/6 m) vision, defined as the ability to discern a 5x5 pixel letter that has an angular size of 5 arc minutes, cannot see pixels smaller than 60 arc seconds. In order to resolve a pixel the size of 31.5 and 21.2 arc seconds, an individual would need 20/10.5 (6/3.1 m) and 20/7.1 (6/2.1 m) vision, respectively. To find the PPI values discernible at 20/20, simply divide the values in the above table by the visual acuity ratio (e.g. 96 PPI / (20/10.5 vision) = 50.4 PPI for 20/20 vision).
Driver files say that GA10X, GA10B, and GA10F have the same ISA version. The difference between SM versions 8.7 and 8.8 is supposedly the "hardware revision of the SM block."AMPERE_B is an internal name for all the consumer Ampere GPUs. AMPERE_A is the datacenter version, which was on TSMC 7nm, and didn't have ray tracing.
@Concernt is right about the CUDA version there. Open speculation to what that means. It could be something as simple as "hardware changed but no change in compatibility", or "updated instructions for BC"
Sounds like you heard some more stuff lately. You got clock speed? Process node? Memory speed?Okay. Replace quantum with ginormous
I agree I hope they will do that. But there are still differences, MS and Sony did not use the same body of their last console and are not claiming their new consoles are of the same family as the previous.there's not really any way to tell the node. that's not relevant information to developers
the same plan as MS and Sony are doing: stop advertising old systems, reduce production of old systems, tout the virtues of new systems. Nintendo also has the benefit of third party games likely being drake only rather than coming to Switch, simply through ease of portability.
this isn't an unknown situation and MS and Sony have just gone through it without any sort of problem
I don't think the next Switch goals in terms of sales are even close to that of the OLED. I assume with such an investment Nintendo would want much better sales than any kind of Switch revision. What I am saying is that I don't think Nintendo would be content with revision sales numbers for this device...I'm not saying it won't secure adoption but adoption of this device has to be much greater than any Switch revision (being even if eventually the successor to the Switch) for Nintendo and Nvidia R&D investments and for the exclusives that will come on itOLED did not receive exclusive first party games, was $350, is not the called the Switch 2 and is marketed as part of the Switch family of system. Yet it has secured adoption from the mess market.
Those should therefore not be barriers to the Switch 4K securing adoption of the mass market
Time shall tell us...Hey.
1) This device is not aimed at the casual market (much like the OLED model) due to its initial selling point of playing Switch games at 4k / better framerates and it’s likely $400+ price point. It will initially be aimed at enthusiasts much like PS4 Pro and XBOX ONE X.
If true, I'm dissappointed. Looking the exact same as your predecessor or an inferior model is a red flag in my book.2) From what I know it uses the OLED form factor and dock.
That is why I agree with what ILikeFeet said. Reducing the production of the other models to put Drake in front. And I personally assume they will discountinue the Red box Switch.3) I don’t think their manufacturing chain will allow for 17 million units of Drake in it’s first 12 months due to (apart from anything else) Nintendo having four different versions of Switch by that time to manufacture. I’m guessing closer to 8 million units for Drake in year one. It won’t be the largest selling Switch console until year two imo.
I agree and I hope so.4) I think it will have exclusive first party games quicker than most people expect. I predict MK9 to be the first big name Drake exclusive from Nintendo in Summer 2024. This will seem like madness to some but after the first year of Zelda it will need an exclusive title to push it on and make it the new baseline main Nintendo console going forward.
There’s no better title than a new Mario Kart especially one that blows MK8D away in terms of visual fidelity as those assets will be by that time a decade old. It’s also a proven mass market hit aswell as being a core hit.
Also like Mr says developers don’t know the chip dimensions. I don’t have a reason why other than two people told me they just “don’t know”.
At least the data breach shows there is progress and that the leaks described a real product, so it's not that there is nothing to leak, it's just that Nintendo probably strangled everyone after Mochizuki published their article and threatened to launch them into the sun according to the stipulations, new and old, of their NDAs.Holidays? Leaks have been closed for several months. And if it weren't for the theft suffered by Nvidia, we would still be stuck with the leaks of a year and a half ago..
1) i disagree that it will be positioned only as a switch pro. Re orientating the marketing after 1-2 years is pretty hard when you established what a console is, so it would be destructive in the long run, when people just assume its "just" an 4k switch. They will position it as the next step in the line (seen without outright calling it switch2), but will communicate that most games for the future will also be playable on switch, similar to Microsofts "generations are over" take.
It is the combination of the name and the other thoughts I mentioned which makes problem.I would say that most of the points you raised apply to the GBC and GBA. Backward compat shored up the library at launch, there were mostly "DX" versions of games in the initial launch window, while there was eventually more and more exclusive software over time. I would say Switch 2 will be closer to GBC, just because games are more expensive and take longer to develop. That doesn't mean there won't be third party exclusives, perhaps even Nintendo published, that make their way to the system.
As for the name...You could say the same of Super, Color, Advance, i, 360, ONE, Series, etc. At the end of the day, the name doesn't sell the hardware- the software does. Enthusiasts and newcomers will prefer the hot, best, new thing and slowly build up enough of an audience over time to where releasing an exclusive MK10 in say late 2024 or 2025 makes sense. I mean, hasn't OLED been the top selling model and selling like hotcakes? How do you think an actually internally upgraded Switch 2 with exclusive games would sell?
Yeah PS5/XBS have been selling great while also not claiming to be last gen. There is no ambiguity of their function apart from the games.Plus it just makes sense when you look at dev schedules. Pokemon gen 10 in 2025/2026? MK10 2024/2025? AC 2026? Splatoon 4 2026/2027? Botw 3 2028/2029?
What system do you think the above titles will release on? Dev times are several years long minimum these days, but you don't want to start from scratch with a new generation every time, as Iwata has said. And if you launch with killer software, like TotK, with exclusive benefits or upgrades...seems like it would sell just fine to me. PS5 and XBS have been selling great the past two years without much in the way of exclusive software after all.
Not at all. I just expect Drake to run Hogwarts at 4k DLSS/60fps versus the Switch version being 720p/20-30fps when docked. XBO will probably be 900p/30fps and PS4 1080p/30fps.Sounds like you heard some more stuff lately. You got clock speed? Process node? Memory speed?
I, of course, am in no way an expert in the matter, but I just would like point out that before the price reveal of the OG Switch, a lot of people were expecting $250, mostly due to how "weak" it was perceived as back then. And then they tagged it as $299, everyone screamed of impending doom for Nintendo, fast-foward 6 years, and here we are.If the Switch Lite can be discounted from $200 USD to even $150, is there a remote chance that Drake could be less than $450 at launch? For the record I do agree that V2 will have production stopped shortly before the new hardware announcement and be sold at retailers until it's all gone, but I'm still unsure how likely it is that the OLED Switch could be discounted less than $350 if it has a lower profit margin than the red box Switch
Indeed. The perception of this device especially in it's early years where like everything is built on is extremely important.1) i disagree that it will be positioned only as a switch pro. Re orientating the marketing after 1-2 years is pretty hard when you established what a console is, so it would be destructive in the long run, when people just assume its "just" an 4k switch. They will position it as the next step in the line (seen without outright calling it switch2), but will communicate that most games for the future will also be playable on switch, similar to Microsofts "generations are over" take.
3) 8M would be weak, and while having 4 switches to produce, i assume that the OLED and Switch2 are kinda overlapping? the ones that want the best (and those that double dipped) are gona tend to the top of the end. The regular one is clearly weaker then the OLED, and i feel like it will be slowly phased out and then replaced by an oled with (presumably) an price drop, since ....
2) ... going by this, it would be cheaper to manufacture 2 switches with comparable form factor to keeping the base switch in rotation, even for a price reduction of the OLED.
Also, is this based on your old info or recent? (maybe i missed something new)
4) oh yeah, for sure. but i really don't think it will be Mario Kart 9 since the DLC is rather fresh by then.
Im honestly curious how the next step for smash will be. I think they will have a big showcase game after a year, but i honestly don't know what it will be...
Exactly. The ambiguity may just unnecessarily hinder this next system.I strongly agree with this. If Nintendo tries to chase the pro and the new at the same time, I believe they'll end up getting nothing. We've already seen with the WiiU how detrimental it can be for a console to have an unclear positionning from the beginning. Considering the specs which are expected for this machine, and the release timeframe, I'm convinced that the next Switch will be a Switch 2 and will be directly presented as such.
What they can do however, is making it clear that the OG model will receive some level of support for a couple of years. Say until 2026, it the next switch releases in 2024.
This is kind of skipping over the period where Nate was saying he had info of a more powerful 'not Game Boy [advance] SP revision', a 4k 'Switch Pro' that would beannounced in 2021 and aiming to release in late 2021/early 2022, which would get some exclusives.This is kinda misrepresenting the facts though. Mid 2021 is when it was imminent because Bloomberg confused the OLED model for the Drake model. Late 2020 on the other hand had Nate saying it would come late 2022/early 2023 which is what he has stood by for two years.
I really hope $450 is the ceiling. That's $615 CAD with today's conversion rate, and with tax that boosts the price to $695.I, of course, am in no way an expert in the matter, but I just would like point out that before the price reveal of the OG Switch, a lot of people were expecting $250, mostly due to how "weak" it was perceived as back then. And then they tagged it as $299, everyone screamed of impending doom for Nintendo, fast-foward 6 years, and here we are.
Now, of course times have changed a lot since, especially for mobile technology and how much it has evolved, but I can't help but feel that they will push for $499 for similar reasons: it's a Switch that can play the latest games not available on the current Switch model; people will buy it. Here's hoping for "only" $450
Actually, a question for ya'll: with what we currently know and expect of Drake, can all that be crammed up in the Switch form factor and not be sold at a loss, if we assume a $450 price tag?
I just want to say that I own a Playstation Vita. As long as 100 MB/s micro sd cards will be supported I don't think there are problems.
As you also said, the cpu was the bottleneck on Switch so maybe they can still support them.
Except I wasn't wrong. UFS card has launched. And hasn't succeeded. It doesn't have economies of scale, or many manufacturing partners.
SDexpress doesn't have any of these issues, of course. It also uses PCIe, so, I/O for it isn't an issue. In applications where it has been adopted, it actually has been a success. Because it's basically the only viable option for such applications. eUFS has been a resounding success. UFS Card has not. It's not helpful to conflate the two. No more helpful than conflating the success of NVME, eMMC or SD (UHS-I) to SDe, which I think we both agree would be unfair. Those aren't SDe. eUFS is not UFS Card.
Professional gear is still very much a commercial success.
The last sentence should have "<2" in it, i.e. "I don't think it's going to be less than 2 lanes."
And yeah, looks like we're doing the thing again where we take other forums'/websites' speculation posts as leaks.
Its fair point that they will want good sales to get a return on their investment. I'm expecting this to have a long shelf life and be on the market for years and years so I think it will do that. When eventually the other 3 models of Switch get phased out (not that I'm expecting that any time soon) Drake can be kept around as the final Switch model.I don't think the next Switch goals in terms of sales are even close to that of the OLED. I assume with such an investment Nintendo would want much better sales than any kind of Switch revision. What I am saying is that I don't think Nintendo would be content with revision sales numbers for this device...I'm not saying it won't secure adoption but adoption of this device has to be much greater than any Switch revision (being even if eventually the successor to the Switch) for Nintendo and Nvidia R&D investments and for the exclusives that will come on it
The leaks did not stop. There were few actual leaks in 2021. All I can think of as sources for leaks in 2021 are Nate, Bloomberg, and Kopite. Everyone else was working from those leaks and commenting on factors assuming those leaks (mainly Bloomberg's) were accurate. Which of course they turned out not to be.In mid-2020 there was talk of late 2021 / early 2022, then chaos ensued with the confusion created by Switch Oled. Then months passed and silence fell. Even Nate has stopped giving updates, and it would seem he has difficulty getting confirmations on alleged news ... And the latest hypotheses of him (now dating back to a year ago) spoke of the end of 2022 / beginning of 2023. The end of 2022 has arrived and we are still at the same points.
Leaks didn't accelerated. They stopped.
I don't remember Nate ever giving 2021 a possibility. I thought that was purely from a few other unverified sources by that point, and Bloomberg a month or two later.This is kind of skipping over the period where Nate was saying he had info of a more powerful 'not Game Boy [advance] SP revision', a 4k 'Switch Pro' that would beannounced in 2021 and aiming to release in late 2021/early 2022, which would get some exclusives.
It was his speculation then that this would be more of a stop gap and there would be a Switch 2 following this around 2024.
This was 1 hour into the Jan 6, 2021 podcast fyi
I don't remember Nate ever giving 2021 a possibility. I thought that was purely from a few other unverified sources by that point, and Bloomberg a month or two later.
Was that info from Nate or just a prediction? He usually makes it clear when he's purely speculating/predicting about something versus when he has solid info.
You are correct. So if aiming specifically at 20/20 I guess for a 7" screen seen from a foot away they'd want about 1748x983. Among common screen resolutions one does come pretty close to that...I believe the numbers in the table are reported for 20/10.5 vision. For 20/20 vision, you divide by the (20/10.5) factor, which does get you a lot closer to 720p.