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

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

Reader mode
hologram said:
What would you say is the most likely scenario?
Click to expand...
Just feeling-based, but I think that we are drawing too many connections that are very favorable to the current circumstances of this thread, rather than waiting for it to develop into something more tangible for us to give a proper opinion on. I think we should wait a bit for the circumstances to develop.
 
It's a fun bit of informed speculation, but I agree we can't draw any real conclusions from it.
 
0
ReddDreadtheLead said:
Just feeling-based, but I think that we are drawing too many connections that are very favorable to the current circumstances of this thread, rather than waiting for it to develop into something more tangible for us to give a proper opinion on. I think we should wait a bit for the circumstances to develop.
Click to expand...
Oh, I agree it's nowhere close to conclusive, but you said you think it's incorrect, which is a much stronger statement. I'm just curious what you think the most likely scenario is.
 
Serif said:
Yeah Mochizuki's response didn't help with the confusion over whether or not a "4K Switch" had been cancelled, along with the way the podcast had been paraded around as "DF confirms Switch Pro canned". Even though in that same episode (and one from 3 months ago) they discuss T239 as a possibility for the next Switch. And honestly, all I care about is T239.
Click to expand...
To be clear, this is my opinion not info from anyone but IF the console has been delayed until either late this year or at worst into next Spring then we should try to think about it in a positive light because -

1 - It could shift to a smaller node = more battery life.
2 - It could end up being more powerful in compute terms than it would have been had it launched in May this year.
3 - It could be far easier to obtain at launch because they will have had much more time to manufacture more.
4 - It could end up being ~$50 cheaper which means you get a launch game as a bonus for free for waiting.
5 - It could mean more older titles are patched with DLSS support for launch (4K SMO / BotW, 60fps Astral Chain, Link's Awakening without the stalls etc).
6 - It could end up having a far stronger line up of third party titles at launch (Hogwarts, Dead Space, Elden Ring, RDRII, Assassin's Creed Mirage etc).
7 - Because it will be 6.5-7 years after Switch it could end up with at least a couple of true exclusive launch games built around Drake's base specs and end up with a 3DS like 2011 of a new 3D Mario and Mario Kart in year one.

The only reason a Drake delay would really annoy me is because I'd crack and end up playing Tears of the Kingdom at dynamic 900p with drops into the mid 20's on the current Switch but if it bothers me that much I can just wait until later this year or Spring '24. Not as if there's a lack of quality PS5/SeriesX games in '23.

Also no one goes out drinking in January here because they're all skint from Xmas. Feb is the soonest I might hear something new but I'm guessing Nate will be the one with the latest info in his forthcoming podcast.
 
hologram said:
Oh, I agree it's nowhere close to conclusive, but you said you think it's incorrect, which is a much stronger statement. I'm just curious what you think the most likely scenario is.
Click to expand...
Oh, I misspoke. I meant it in that the jumping to conclusion is incorrect, but I worded it incorrectly.
 
Polygon said:
To be clear, this is my opinion not info from anyone but IF the console has been delayed until either late this year or at worst into next Spring then we should try to think about it in a positive light because -

1 - It could shift to a smaller node = more battery life.
2 - It could end up being more powerful in compute terms than it would have been had it launched in May this year.
3 - It could be far easier to obtain at launch because they will have had much more time to manufacture more.
4 - It could end up being ~$50 cheaper which means you get a launch game as a bonus for free for waiting.
5 - It could mean more older titles are patched with DLSS support for launch (4K SMO / BotW, 60fps Astral Chain, Link's Awakening without the stalls etc).
6 - It could end up having a far stronger line up of third party titles at launch (Hogwarts, Dead Space, Elden Ring, RDRII, Assassin's Creed Mirage etc).
7 - Because it will be 6.5-7 years after Switch it could end up with at least a couple of true exclusive launch games built around Drake's base specs and end up with a 3DS like 2011 of a new 3D Mario and Mario Kart in year one.

The only reason a Drake delay would really annoy me is because I'd crack and end up playing Tears of the Kingdom at dynamic 900p with drops into the mid 20's on the current Switch but if it bothers me that much I can just wait until later this year or Spring '24. Not as if there's a lack of quality PS5/SeriesX games in '23.

Also no one goes out drinking in January here because they're all skint from Xmas. Feb is the soonest I might hear something new but I'm guessing Nate will be the one with the latest info in his forthcoming podcast.
Click to expand...
Don't being too disappointed.
if nothing happen by mid february, Drake won't be there in may.
IF nothing happen by June, Drake won't there before end of Holiday 2023.

On my side.... still convinced for 2023 release.
 
Polygon said:
To be clear, this is my opinion not info from anyone but IF the console has been delayed until either late this year or at worst into next Spring then we should try to think about it in a positive light because -

1 - It could shift to a smaller node = more battery life.
Click to expand...
I don't think point #1 is very likely since securing process node capacity is not a process that can be done relatively quickly. (Nvidia mentioned having to secure process node capacity 1.5 years in advance.)
 
Polygon said:
To be clear, this is my opinion not info from anyone but IF the console has been delayed until either late this year or at worst into next Spring then we should try to think about it in a positive light because -

1 - It could shift to a smaller node = more battery life.
2 - It could end up being more powerful in compute terms than it would have been had it launched in May this year.
3 - It could be far easier to obtain at launch because they will have had much more time to manufacture more.
4 - It could end up being ~$50 cheaper which means you get a launch game as a bonus for free for waiting.
5 - It could mean more older titles are patched with DLSS support for launch (4K SMO / BotW, 60fps Astral Chain, Link's Awakening without the stalls etc).
6 - It could end up having a far stronger line up of third party titles at launch (Hogwarts, Dead Space, Elden Ring, RDRII, Assassin's Creed Mirage etc).
7 - Because it will be 6.5-7 years after Switch it could end up with at least a couple of true exclusive launch games built around Drake's base specs and end up with a 3DS like 2011 of a new 3D Mario and Mario Kart in year one.

The only reason a Drake delay would really annoy me is because I'd crack and end up playing Tears of the Kingdom at dynamic 900p with drops into the mid 20's on the current Switch but if it bothers me that much I can just wait until later this year or Spring '24. Not as if there's a lack of quality PS5/SeriesX games in '23.

Also no one goes out drinking in January here because they're all skint from Xmas. Feb is the soonest I might hear something new but I'm guessing Nate will be the one with the latest info in his forthcoming podcast.
Click to expand...
I do not think a delay would nescesarily mean a better or cheaper product.
 
I think we should wait for the full Famitsu article to come out before seeing if they truly know about new hardware. Is there a timeframe for the release of this Famitsu article?
 
0
As I mentioned, NVidia technically has worked with Nintendo in the past, before the switch, with the 3DS.


And that ultimately failed. It was really far along as a project too.
 
0
i’m surprised this famitsu thing isn’t being spoken about on gamingleaksandrumours usually they eat stuff like this up for breakfast
 
Polygon said:
1 - It could shift to a smaller node = more battery life.
2 - It could end up being more powerful in compute terms than it would have been had it launched in May this year.
Click to expand...
Not in that timeframe, no.

3 - It could be far easier to obtain at launch because they will have had much more time to manufacture more.
Click to expand...
Aren't manufacturing timelines tied to release timelines? If it's delayed by a year they're not going to produce systems as if it hadn't been delayed and sit on the inventory.

4 - It could end up being ~$50 cheaper which means you get a launch game as a bonus for free for waiting.
Click to expand...
Why would it be cheaper?

5 - It could mean more older titles are patched with DLSS support for launch (4K SMO / BotW, 60fps Astral Chain, Link's Awakening without the stalls etc).
6 - It could end up having a far stronger line up of third party titles at launch (Hogwarts, Dead Space, Elden Ring, RDRII, Assassin's Creed Mirage etc).
Click to expand...
We would be getting those patches and games regardless. We would just be unable to play other games in the meantime.

7 - Because it will be 6.5-7 years after Switch it could end up with at least a couple of true exclusive launch games built around Drake's base specs and end up with a 3DS like 2011 of a new 3D Mario and Mario Kart in year one.
Click to expand...
I mean, maybe it's better for Nintendo to launch the system with an exclusive that won't be ready in 1H 2023, but that exclusive is going to come out regardless and in the meantime I can't play any other games. Doesn't really benefit me as a consumer.
 
the article is intentionally vague, full of winks and nudges. but the context is still around hardware of some sort. but beyond that, there's nothing to really interesting draw from it
 
Given Famitu's reporting around the reveal of the Switch, if this is to do with Nintendo, big IF, that would imply to me the reveal is imminent. Which sounds about right, to me at least.
 
ILikeFeet said:
the article is intentionally vague, full of winks and nudges. but the context is still around hardware of some sort. but beyond that, there's nothing to really interesting draw from it
Click to expand...
I think all we can draw from it, is that Jensen have recently been to Japan. Who/what/why is anyone's guess.
 
0
Selarmor said:
Not in that timeframe, no.


Aren't manufacturing timelines tied to release timelines? If it's delayed by a year they're not going to produce systems as if it hadn't been delayed and sit on the inventory.


Why would it be cheaper?


We would be getting those patches and games regardless. We would just be unable to play other games in the meantime.


I mean, maybe it's better for Nintendo to launch the system with an exclusive that won't be ready in 1H 2023, but that exclusive is going to come out regardless and in the meantime I can't play any other games. Doesn't really benefit me as a consumer.
Click to expand...
The only true advantage of a 2024 launch window are more exclusives on release (given a die shrink is apparently impossible), which... We know nothing about, and could be delayed right now as far as we know. I'd forget about free patches, you're definitely getting a tax like Sony does.
 
Polygon said:
To be clear, this is my opinion not info from anyone but IF the console has been delayed until either late this year or at worst into next Spring then we should try to think about it in a positive light because -

1 - It could shift to a smaller node = more battery life.
2 - It could end up being more powerful in compute terms than it would have been had it launched in May this year.
3 - It could be far easier to obtain at launch because they will have had much more time to manufacture more.
4 - It could end up being ~$50 cheaper which means you get a launch game as a bonus for free for waiting.
5 - It could mean more older titles are patched with DLSS support for launch (4K SMO / BotW, 60fps Astral Chain, Link's Awakening without the stalls etc).
6 - It could end up having a far stronger line up of third party titles at launch (Hogwarts, Dead Space, Elden Ring, RDRII, Assassin's Creed Mirage etc).
7 - Because it will be 6.5-7 years after Switch it could end up with at least a couple of true exclusive launch games built around Drake's base specs and end up with a 3DS like 2011 of a new 3D Mario and Mario Kart in year one.

The only reason a Drake delay would really annoy me is because I'd crack and end up playing Tears of the Kingdom at dynamic 900p with drops into the mid 20's on the current Switch but if it bothers me that much I can just wait until later this year or Spring '24. Not as if there's a lack of quality PS5/SeriesX games in '23.

Also no one goes out drinking in January here because they're all skint from Xmas. Feb is the soonest I might hear something new but I'm guessing Nate will be the one with the latest info in his forthcoming podcast.
Click to expand...


But you are not backpedaling right now from your May 2023 step, right?
 
Lancelot said:
The only true advantage of a 2024 launch window are more exclusives on release (given a die shrink is apparently impossible), which... We know nothing about, and could be delayed right now as far as we know. I'd forget about free patches, you're definitely getting a tax like Sony does.
Click to expand...
I severely doubt the updates will cost anything unless they're substantial. Why apply a further tax to your most dedicated fans who have all these evergreen games they want to play in 4K and the newest device. It hasn't done Sony's PR any good, and unlike Sony, Nintendo doesn't tend to sell their consoles for a loss. It just doesn't track unless those upgrades are big - like new textures and content.

I expect a Microsoft approach, Nintendo's equivalent of Smart Delivery with the eShop downloading the best assets your device supports, and then leave third parties decide whether they want to charge customers for it and squeeze some more money out of existing players, or offer them for free and get new players buying the games because it "has a 4K patch".

Also more difficult to have seperate versions on Switch like Sony does because of cartridges which don't install anything. I expect BOTW to have a free 4K patch at launch that does almost nothing else- just image quality and AA imrpocments. I couldn't see them doing more than that with the sequel so close, and I can't see them charging for so little.
 
CypressFX said:
But you are not backpedaling right now from your May 2023 step, right?
Click to expand...
I think not, given the capital I, capital F "IF". Like him I also doubt it's been delayed. It would not help the third party support situation if they were told "Q2 at the latest" then get told "Sike! Q4". That would leave a bad taste in people's mouths. If they've been sampling the processor for a year, had dev kits out for 2+ years and told Devs to go gold for Q2, I don't see how they could delay it at this point. Especially if the rumours about manufacturing ramping up are true (which I'd tend to believe, what with the Zelda OLED being manufactured and ready so far in advanced, probably to make room for something else. Not much point in 5 months supply of ZOLEDs.)
 
Going to ask the most important question about this supposed Jensen visit to Nintendo.

Do you reckon Jensen hangs up his leather jacket in Nintendo's reception area or do you think he attends all the meetings with Nintendo execs in it?
 
ShaunSwitch said:
Going to ask the most important question about this supposed Jensen visit to Nintendo.

Do you reckon Jensen hangs up his leather jacket in Nintendo's reception area or do you think he attends all the meetings with Nintendo execs in it?
Click to expand...
Unironically: it's part of his business suit, it stays on. If it's too warm it goes on the back of his seat at the meeting.
 
Concernt said:
I severely doubt the updates will cost anything unless they're substantial. Why apply a further tax to your most dedicated fans who have all these evergreen games they want to play in 4K and the newest device. It hasn't done Sony's PR any good, and unlike Sony, Nintendo doesn't tend to sell their consoles for a loss. It just doesn't track unless those upgrades are big - like new textures and content.

I expect a Microsoft approach, Nintendo's equivalent of Smart Delivery with the eShop downloading the best assets your device supports, and then leave third parties decide whether they want to charge customers for it and squeeze some more money out of existing players, or offer them for free and get new players buying the games because it "has a 4K patch".

Also more difficult to have seperate versions on Switch like Sony does because of cartridges which don't install anything. I expect BOTW to have a free 4K patch at launch that does almost nothing else- just image quality and AA imrpocments. I couldn't see them doing more than that with the sequel so close, and I can't see them charging for so little.
Click to expand...
They definitely can apply a tax if they wanted to, just saying i'm accounting for the worse especially for the proper next gen versions we'll get for games like ToTK. By buying the original for Switch, you can still get to pay a tax easily if you want the substantial upgrades from Drake.
 
Lancelot said:
They definitely can apply a tax if they wanted to, just saying i'm accounting for the worse especially for the proper next gen versions we'll get for games like ToTK. By buying the original for Switch, you can still get to pay a tax easily.
Click to expand...
They CAN but I doubt they will.

Why would you charge people an extra fee on top of what is in Europe already a 70+€ game? I think 70€ is enough to include any future patches.

And looking at Nintendo's history, outside of re-releases, did Nintendo ever charge for patches on DSi or New 3DS? Most comparable, Smash Bros. 3DS which included New 3DS features before New 3DS came out. That was the New 3DS flagship, and it didn't cost a penny extra for it.

As I said, I expect the Microsoft approach. It just makes more sense.
 
Reading the article through translation, it just reads like a prediction for the year of 2023, and the word before it saying it’s irresponsible predictions for the year 2023 doesn’t lead me to believe this is much of anything of note.
 
Concernt said:
They CAN but I doubt they will.

Why would you charge people an extra fee on top of what is in Europe already a 70+€ game? I think 70€ is enough to include any future patches.

And looking at Nintendo's history, outside of re-releases, did Nintendo ever charge for patches on DSi or New 3DS? Most comparable, Smash Bros. 3DS which included New 3DS features before New 3DS came out. That was the New 3DS flagship, and it didn't cost a penny extra for it.

As I said, I expect the Microsoft approach. It just makes more sense.
Click to expand...
Those versions weren't even all that substantial, to be fair. New 3DS also didn't have actual patches for games except minor things like those you mentioned (and broken ports on the OG like Hyrule Warriors), a proper next gen upgrade to the Drake release is most certainly going to cost you money.
 
Lancelot said:
Those versions weren't even all that substantial, to be fair. New 3DS also didn't have actual patches for games except minor things like those you mentioned (and broken ports on the OG like Hyrule Warriors), a proper next gen upgrade to the Drake release is most certainly going to cost you money.
Click to expand...
Define "proper". 4K patches will be free, I'm almost certain of it. New releases with new lightning, models and textures might not be.

If Nintendo wants to push this device as a 4K Switch, and they do, people will expect the Switch games they already have to just update and work in 4K.

Nintendo would lose face, so to speak, by charging for them, as they've seen Sony lose face over it, while these patches at launch would be more about pushing the new hardware by offering better visuals in games people already own, rather than new "products" few people will buy. Again, see Xbox.

When I say "people" I don't mean people here who have an intimate knowledge of what goes into such a patch, but the type of consumer Nintendo wants to catch with the "Switch with 4K capabilities" marketing line. They want this thing to be DESIRABLE to consumers and making the patches smaller than full graphics packs, but free, is a much more effective way of doing that.
 
I tried putting the Ryokutya2089 article through a DeepL translation, and I was able to get a better idea of what Mr.Nishikawa was saying:

"From the latest issue of Famitsu
Mr. Zenji Nishikawa, Technical Journalist

What will happen in 2023? Here is a project that irresponsibly predicts the year 2023.

In my opinion, Nintendo will make some kind of move regarding the new hardware. "My personal opinion is that Nintendo will make some kind of move regarding the new hardware, even if it will not be released, but an announcement or a notice.
"I'll just say that the basis for that is "human movement.
"In fact, I happened to catch word that a VIP of a world-class semiconductor manufacturer in the U.S., who rarely comes to Japan, was in Japan on a personal visit.
The company has used the product in Nintendo's game consoles in the past.
"Moreover, the direction of his destination..."
The same thing happened in the past before the announcement of Nintendo's new game console, so I'm wondering if it might happen again... (laughter)
"There is a strong possibility that he came to Japan to talk about Rapidus.

There are many Switch titles that I wish had higher performance, but I also feel that there are titles that are doing a better job (Switch).
Until the new model comes out, we need to improve our development technology first."
 
Dakhil said:
After enabling DLSS, definitely a possibility. Before enabling DLSS, definitely not.
Click to expand...
since he asked if the Drake will be (closer) to Series S Compared to Switch and One S i expected to say definitely YES , i am sure that you know in this things better than me but what i know is even if nintendo go with Very Low Frequency for Drake , like 800 Mhz Dock for the GPU and 1200-1400 MHz for the CPU it will be like 70% of the Series S GPU and 50-60 % the CPU and IIRC the Switch in 2017 was Barely 25% the performance "on Papers" Compared to 2013 Xbox One .

please Correct me if i am wrong .
 
0
Yeah it feels like the famitsu article is meaningless as far as we're concerned. If it's referring to someone who's likely there to visit Rapidus it's probably an IBM exec and not Jensen.
 
Concernt said:
Define "proper". 4K patches will be free, I'm almost certain of it. New releases with new lightning, models and textures might not be.

If Nintendo wants to push this device as a 4K Switch, and they do, people will expect the Switch games they already have to just update and work in 4K.

Nintendo would lose face, so to speak, by charging for them, as they've seen Sony lose face over it, while these patches at launch would be more about pushing the new hardware by offering better visuals in games people already own, rather than new "products" few people will buy. Again, see Xbox.

When I say "people" I don't mean people here who have an intimate knowledge of what goes into such a patch, but the type of consumer Nintendo wants to catch with the "Switch with 4K capabilities" marketing line. They want this thing to be DESIRABLE to consumers and making the patches smaller than full graphics packs, but free, is a much more effective way of doing that.
Click to expand...
They don't care all that much about losing face, and Sony didn't either. Admittedly, just bare bones 4K patches without anything to them is a good way to keep them free. Now, once the short cross-gen period starts and you want to upgrade to the Drake versions... That's where we can begin to be worried, luckily it won't be too long.
 
Lancelot said:
They don't care all that much about losing face, and Sony didn't either. Admittedly, just bare bones 4K patches without anything to them is a good way to keep them free. Now, once the short cross-gen period starts and you want to upgrade to the Drake versions... That's where we can begin to be worried, luckily it won't be too long.
Click to expand...
They definitely care. They like marketing. 👽
 
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