• 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!)

I’ve seen some people talking about the idea of Nintendo releasing upgrade patches of OG Switch games for the Switch 2.

That just seems very unNintendo.

They don’t typically do extra work unless they can make extra money. I don’t see them doing anything like that unless the Switch 2 sells real poorly and they want to make customers happy.

I think they’ll either they won’t do anything and you can just play through backwards compatibility (maybe with a bit of a boost mode).

Or they’ll upgrade it, but sell you the game again.

I really doubt they’ll just give free upgrade patches. Sony doesn’t really do that and I doubt Nintendo would…
With all due respect, have you been paying attention to Nintendo at all for the past couple generations? Free updates are a core part of the post-release strategy for many of their games, now. Enhancement patches would serve most the same purposes as those free updates, with the added benefit of also adding to the value proposition of the hardware itself. For a game that they're already adding new content to anyway, adding native support for new hardware is a fairly cheap way to sweeten the deal a bit.

While Sony has generally made poor decisions around the PS4 to PS5 upgrade path, to my recollection, they actually did update several of their active PS4 games with additional modes targeting PS5 around when that console released. They can't make the games fully native without doing a separate release, but that's their fault for setting things up that way.
 
I really doubt they’ll just give free upgrade patches. Sony doesn’t really do that and I doubt Nintendo would…

I mean... this can easily be the reason behind the 70 dol games like Zelda TOTK appearing on Switch and not it's sucessor
 
0
If Nintendo were to announce the new console this year for release early next year, they could always pull the trigger on a Switch price drop to squeeze some last holiday sales out of people. Those that wouldn’t mind picking one up with a Mario game for young kid who has zero interest in the latest tech and just wants a gaming Mario device. A big price drop would also be better in the current financial climate with the cost of living being out of whack, a cheaper system might be good for those that can’t really afford an expensive system but would still like something.
 
If Nintendo were to announce the new console this year for release early next year, they could always pull the trigger on a Switch price drop to squeeze some last holiday sales out of people. Those that wouldn’t mind picking one up with a Mario game for young kid who has zero interest in the latest tech and just wants a gaming Mario device. A big price drop would also be better in the current financial climate with the cost of living being out of whack, a cheaper system might be good for those that can’t really afford an expensive system but would still like something.
They are known to release a cheaper model before or after the successor is released too. NES top loader, SNES Jr, Gameboy Micro, Wii mini, and New 2DS XL. A Switch Mini for $149, and bringing the standard redbox model to $249 (the Mario bundle is $300 with a mario game), ending life on Lite and OLED models, and introducing a Drake powered "Switch 2" for $399 is my expectation.
 
Apologies that this isn’t really speculation, but I currently have a preorder for the ZOLED Switch and I’m so undecided whether or not to keep it, especially as I’ve been lurking round here for the last month or so.

I’m sure I’m not the only one in this position!
 
Apologies that this isn’t really speculation, but I currently have a preorder for the ZOLED Switch and I’m so undecided whether or not to keep it, especially as I’ve been lurking round here for the last month or so.

I’m sure I’m not the only one in this position!
If you can afford it, get both
 
0
I'm sorry is there any way you can toggle off this Sega boards thing? Not that I hate Sega, the design is just giving me a headache
I mean it is April 3 now.
 
I'm sorry is there any way you can toggle off this Sega boards thing? Not that I hate Sega, the design is just giving me a headache
I mean it is April 3 now.

Click on your Avatar at the top of the page > Preferences

It’s under the Style drop-down.
 
They are known to release a cheaper model before or after the successor is released too. NES top loader, SNES Jr, Gameboy Micro, Wii mini, and New 2DS XL. A Switch Mini for $149, and bringing the standard redbox model to $249 (the Mario bundle is $300 with a mario game), ending life on Lite and OLED models, and introducing a Drake powered "Switch 2" for $399 is my expectation.
I wonder if the Switch mini will be a clamshell, with handheld and tabletop modes.
 
I’m playing the Resident Evil 4 remake on PS4 Pro in performance mode, and you know what? Despite this now being ‘last gen’ and despite there being a PS5 version, it still looks absolutely brilliant to me. If the new Switch can run such a game at a similar level then I’ll be beyond satisfied.
 
I’ve seen some people talking about the idea of Nintendo releasing upgrade patches of OG Switch games for the Switch 2.

That just seems very unNintendo.

They don’t typically do extra work unless they can make extra money. I don’t see them doing anything like that unless the Switch 2 sells real poorly and they want to make customers happy.

I think they’ll either they won’t do anything and you can just play through backwards compatibility (maybe with a bit of a boost mode).

Or they’ll upgrade it, but sell you the game again.

I really doubt they’ll just give free upgrade patches. Sony doesn’t really do that and I doubt Nintendo would…
Nintendo has done tons of free updates for almost all of their games. Including games like BOTW and Mario Odyssey, years later. Remember they added VR modes for free.

Feels like you might not actually be paying any attention to what they do.
 
Given that opinions in the thread range anywhere between Holiday 2023 and Holiday 2025, that sounds pretty ominous.
Well, he said exactly. I don't think anyone has predicted February 29th yet, so maybe that's it.

Edit: Actually, I'd unironically say that the 29th of February would be a pretty good launch date if they are planning on Q1 2024, now that I think of it. It's only a few days off the original Switch launch date, it's definitely memorable, and although it's not the usual Friday launch, it is a Thursday, so close enough.
 
Last edited:
Apologies that this isn’t really speculation, but I currently have a preorder for the ZOLED Switch and I’m so undecided whether or not to keep it, especially as I’ve been lurking round here for the last month or so.

I’m sure I’m not the only one in this position!

You could probably sell it even when Switch 2 gets announced and get quite a bit back on the ZOLED
 
0
They are known to release a cheaper model before or after the successor is released too. NES top loader, SNES Jr, Gameboy Micro, Wii mini, and New 2DS XL. A Switch Mini for $149, and bringing the standard redbox model to $249 (the Mario bundle is $300 with a mario game), ending life on Lite and OLED models, and introducing a Drake powered "Switch 2" for $399 is my expectation.
Just want to separate it out: Game Boy Micro was more expensive than other GBAs ($100 vs $80 SP at the time), an attempt at sucking some premium dollars that just didn't make a big splash. SP's price drop to 80 wasn't long before DS arrived, though.
 
On the subject of whether Nintendo's current release schedule (or lack thereof) is unprecedented, we can look at it from a data driven perspective. Specifically, Nintendo currently has four announced, but not yet released, titles for the Switch. Is that an unusually low number?

Because it's a Sunday and have nothing better to do, I've taken a list of physical Switch games published by Nintendo (specifically this one) and quickly tallied up the announcement date and release date of each one. I should stress that I wasn't thoroughly validating every date I used, it was mostly just "whatever Wikipedia says", so it's entirely possible that some dates are wrong, but being off by a few days here or there shouldn't really matter in this analysis.

Because of inevitable disagreements over what constitutes a "Nintendo game", I've broken the list up into two sets. The first one consists only of games published exclusively by Nintendo. This excludes games which are published by Nintendo only in some regions, and Pokemon games, which are co-published between Nintendo and Pokemon Co. The second set includes all games, including those published by Nintendo only in certain regions or co-published.

With the data, I can calculate, for a given date, how many titles have been announced, but not yet released. I've done this for the first day of every month since February 2017. Here's the table for the strict sub-set of games exclusively published by Nintendo:

Code:
        Jan    Feb    Mar    Apr    May    Jun    Jul    Aug    Sep    Oct    Nov    Dec
2017           8      8      6      5      5      7      6      6      7      6      4
2018    6      11     10     11     9      8      7      7      7      8      7      7
2019    7      6      9      9      8      8      8      7      6      11     9      9
2020    8      8      8      7      7      7      7      6      7      9      8      8
2021    8      6      11     11     10     8      9      8      8      9      7      7
2022    6      6      9      8      7      7      6      5      5      7      6      6
2023    7      6      5      4

As we can see there's some seasonality to it (unsurprisingly), and the start of April is usually the peak, although we're now entering April with the lowest number of unreleased Nintendo published titles we've ever been aware of. The number did hit 4 before, in December 2017, although quite a large number of games were announced in the following January. With Advance Wars releasing this month, and ToTK releasing in May, the number is due to hit 2 by the start of June, unless Nintendo announces any new titles in April or May (which historically they don't typically do).

The table for games which Nintendo has had any involvement in publishing is below. I'd argue that this is the more relevant one, as although Nintendo doesn't unilaterally choose when to announce or release these games, they are involved in the process, and they're titles that Nintendo makes space for both in their announcement and release schedule. This includes Pokemon games, Hyrule/Fire Emblem Warriors games, and games like SMT:V and Octopath Traveller.

Code:
        Jan    Feb    Mar    Apr    May    Jun    Jul    Aug    Sep    Oct    Nov    Dec
2017           12     12     10     9      9      14     13     13     13     12     10
2018    12     18     16     17     15     17     18     16     16     16     15     13
2019    11     10     13     14     13     13     12     11     10     13     11     10
2020    10     10     10     9      9      9      9      8      9      13     12     11
2021    10     8      15     15     14     12     14     13     13     14     12     10
2022    9      8      14     12     11     11     9      7      7      9      7      6
2023    7      6      5      4

The drop off here is even more stark. There are currently only a third as many announced titles as there were at the same time last year, and less than half as many as even the quietest period of 2020. Again, this number is due to drop to 2 titles by the start of June, unless Nintendo announce any new titles in the meantime.

So, is this unprecedented? I'd argue so. Even if we want to be strict about what we count as Nintendo-published games, we currently know about fewer games in April 2023 than we have at the same time in any previous year, by a good margin. If we also include games which Nintendo wasn't the sole published for, the drop off is more dramatic, down by two thirds year on year and down by more than half compared to the pandemic-influenced drop in 2020.

Can Nintendo announce their 2H23 games in June? Absolutely, and they've typically announced several games each June for release the same year. If they wait until June, though, they will be going into the month with only two unreleased games on their roster. One releasing the following month, and another that Nintendo has barely mentioned since rebooting development over four years ago. That would absolutely be unprecedented.

Incidentally, as a point of comparison, at the start of April 2016, when Wii U was on its last legs prior to the announcement of the Switch, Nintendo had exactly four games announced for the Wii U as well, plus a much larger number for the 3DS. In terms of announced titles, we probably have less insight now into what Nintendo's working on than at any point since perhaps the NES.
Patience is a super power. It's a shame so few are born with it.
 
Just want to separate it out: Game Boy Micro was more expensive than other GBAs ($100 vs $80 SP at the time), an attempt at sucking some premium dollars that just didn't make a big splash. SP's price drop to 80 wasn't long before DS arrived, though.
New 2DS XL also cost more ($149) vs the 2DS ($129 or $99 at the time), GBm was also one of the weirder devices out of Nintendo, it almost tried to change what it meant to be a gameboy, something that hung off your keychain. I think if they had went with internal storage, and set up a shop, they could have actually made it a pretty compelling product for 2006. I just think Nintendo plans to pull a New 2DS XL with a Switch mini that is $149-$179 and possibly with an OLED screen, if it were about the same size as the Vita, I think it could be much more successful than the Switch Lite and keep the Switch relevant for another 2 years.
 
New 2DS XL also cost more ($149) vs the 2DS ($129 or $99 at the time), GBm was also one of the weirder devices out of Nintendo, it almost tried to change what it meant to be a gameboy, something that hung off your keychain. I think if they had went with internal storage, and set up a shop, they could have actually made it a pretty compelling product for 2006. I just think Nintendo plans to pull a New 2DS XL with a Switch mini that is $149-$179 and possibly with an OLED screen, if it were about the same size as the Vita, I think it could be much more successful than the Switch Lite and keep the Switch relevant for another 2 years.

I honestly don’t think there’s much cost benefit going from Switch Lite size to Vita Size. The Lite is already stripped down to the barebones from a production standpoint. The mass market trend is also for bigger devices and screens to be where further models go. Apple for example seem to have give up with the iPhone Mini line due to disappointing sales. In terms of target audience, who would it be aimed at? The Lite will be super cheap and kids are used to using tablets now so a device even smaller than the Lite might not be as appealing or cost saving as you think. It also gets to the point with 3D games especially where they become hard to play on smaller screen sizes. I can’t imagine playing Metroid Prime on a screen size smaller than the Lite’s for example.
 
I honestly don’t think there’s much cost benefit going from Switch Lite size to Vita Size. The Lite is already stripped down to the barebones from a production standpoint. The mass market trend is also for bigger devices and screens to be where further models go. Apple for example seem to have give up with the iPhone Mini line due to disappointing sales. In terms of target audience, who would it be aimed at? The Lite will be super cheap and kids are used to using tablets now so a device even smaller than the Lite might not be as appealing or cost saving as you think. It also gets to the point with 3D games especially where they become hard to play on smaller screen sizes. I can’t imagine playing Metroid Prime on a screen size smaller than the Lite’s for example.
Yeah, I agree that I can't imagine playing Switch games on a screen much smaller than the Lite's. Text and interface size just doesn't scale.
 
Nintendo has done tons of free updates for almost all of their games. Including games like BOTW and Mario Odyssey, years later. Remember they added VR modes for free.

Feels like you might not actually be paying any attention to what they do.

There’s a difference between tech updates like making a game run at high res and a content update like new tracks and modes.

I don’t think tech updates do much to move the needle and I stand by Nintendo won’t do them for free. They’ll probably treat those games as backward compact old games and not upgrade them.

People cited Sony, but they only did free upgrades to mid-gen refresh of the PS4Pro. They charged for any significant PS5 upgraded versions.

Nintendo, as far as I know, didn’t do any kind of upgrades for New 3DS games.

I have been paying attention, but based on the industry evidence and thinking about Nintendo being the shrewd company they are, I would be surprised if they provided free 4K updates or something to old games with the Switch 2.

Hey, I’m just speculating and having fun too.

I hope they do free tech updates. It’s be neat.
 
There’s a difference between tech updates like making a game run at high res and a content update like new tracks and modes.

I don’t think tech updates do much to move the needle and I stand by Nintendo won’t do them for free. They’ll probably treat those games as backward compact old games and not upgrade them.

People cited Sony, but they only did free upgrades to mid-gen refresh of the PS4Pro. They charged for any significant PS5 upgraded versions.

Nintendo, as far as I know, didn’t do any kind of upgrades for New 3DS games.

I have been paying attention, but based on the industry evidence and thinking about Nintendo being the shrewd company they are, I would be surprised if they provided free 4K updates or something to old games with the Switch 2.

Hey, I’m just speculating and having fun too.

I hope they do free tech updates. It’s be neat.
They also did tech updates for BOTW and Mario Odyssey. They patched the games to make them run better and also implemented an entirely new clock mode boosting the CPU clocks heavily during loading to help reduce loading times.
 
Your first point is a big piece of this puzzle and that would lend itself to any launch period. Be it Holiday 23, Spring 24, Fall 24, etc. We just don't have that information unfortunately. I keep close tabs on Nvidia, TSMC, Samsung, Intel, and other Semiconductor production companies and supply seems to be getting progressively better. Its also possible that the US chips act passed last year will affect this with Intel, Micron, and Samsung all building new fabs here in the US. I need to check but I think one or two of those fabs are coming online in late 2023/early 2024 (Adds to your point about launching 2024) . Your second and third point however can happen regardless of launch period. You can have full marketing cycles and niche releases among them even during a holiday 2023 launch.

I'd be surprised if current semiconductor price fluctuations will have a major impact on Nintendo's timing with the new hardware. Not that Nintendo's immune to it by any means, but the most expensive new component is a custom SoC, which has a long enough lead time that they presumably don't have as much flexibility on hardware timing as they have with off-the-shelf components.

If they do delay from whatever their planned launch window is, my guess is it would be software driven. They presumably started working on games for the launch window at around the same time they started working on hardware, and if they're not ready, then they're likely better off delaying a few months than launching without their flagship titles. This appears to be what happened with the original Switch launch, moving from late 2016 to March 2017 to make sure their launch lineup (ie BoTW) was in good shape, and in retrospect it was the right decision.
 
Last edited:
[REDACTED] is most likely to be fully BC and have a shared eShop with the Switch.

Nintendo is usually averse to price cuts, but they're about to be in a situation where Mario Odyssey directly competes against Mario [REDACTED] a game presumably made for the new hardware. And unlike the Switch launch they don't have 5 years worth of high quality games no one played stockpiled in the back.

Nintendo could:
  • Discount their catalogue
  • Delist/Relist their catalogue
  • Patch their catalogue
  • Leave the games full price, untouched.
  • Some combination of the above
Combinations might include
  • Cutting prices, patching, charging for patches
  • Leave price the same, patch, make an event of it
  • Delist game for vague "BC reasons" relaunch patched version at full price later
  • "Rotating selection of classic Switch games" on NSO
Considering how robustly Nintendo has chosen to support the Switch into year seven, I think the smartest move for them is to make sure a decent chunk of the currently active catalogue - Splatoon 3, Mario Kart, Tears of the Kingdom, Pikmin 4 - receives some kind of free patch at launch, even if it's nothing more than a simple uprez.

If the "proper" launch title is cross-gen then having five-ten newish Switch games "play better on redacted" is the best way to get users to upgrade.
 
[REDACTED] is most likely to be fully BC and have a shared eShop with the Switch.

Nintendo is usually averse to price cuts, but they're about to be in a situation where Mario Odyssey directly competes against Mario [REDACTED] a game presumably made for the new hardware. And unlike the Switch launch they don't have 5 years worth of high quality games no one played stockpiled in the back.

Nintendo could:
  • Discount their catalogue
  • Delist/Relist their catalogue
  • Patch their catalogue
  • Leave the games full price, untouched.
  • Some combination of the above
Combinations might include
  • Cutting prices, patching, charging for patches
  • Leave price the same, patch, make an event of it
  • Delist game for vague "BC reasons" relaunch patched version at full price later
  • "Rotating selection of classic Switch games" on NSO
Considering how robustly Nintendo has chosen to support the Switch into year seven, I think the smartest move for them is to make sure a decent chunk of the currently active catalogue - Splatoon 3, Mario Kart, Tears of the Kingdom, Pikmin 4 - receives some kind of free patch at launch, even if it's nothing more than a simple uprez.

If the "proper" launch title is cross-gen then having five-ten newish Switch games "play better on redacted" is the best way to get users to upgrade.
I'm pretty certain their [REDACTED] AAA releases will be $70. So they probably don't really need a price cut on their Switch releases. they can then sell a $10 upgrade for SMO to 4k with [REDACTED] enhancements and resell the full [REDACTED] SMO at $70 if they wish.

But I can see them just as likely doing a price drop.
 
They also did tech updates for BOTW and Mario Odyssey. They patched the games to make them run better and also implemented an entirely new clock mode boosting the CPU clocks heavily during loading to help reduce loading times.
Oh come on, do you know there’s a difference between patching a game to take advantage of superior power for hardware and tightening up a game to fix bugs and run a little more efficiently. BotW and Mario Odyssey patches are not what we are talking about in regard to upgrades for Switch 2. There’s a big difference from when they patched Bloodborne to have quicker loading times and run smoother for base PS4 VS when they upgraded Spider-man/God of War 2018 to have checkerboard 4K for PS4Pro. But when Spider-Man got a big upgrade for PS5 they ended up charging for that.
 
If other people can charge for remasters Nintendo will charge for remasters lol.

"A simple upres to 4K" is easier to justify a charge $10 or more for than a patch come on
 
0
Oh come on, do you know there’s a difference between patching a game to take advantage of superior power for hardware and tightening up a game to fix bugs and run a little more efficiently. BotW and Mario Odyssey patches are not what we are talking about in regard to upgrades for Switch 2. There’s a big difference from when they patched Bloodborne to have quicker loading times and run smoother for base PS4 VS when they upgraded Spider-man/God of War 2018 to have checkerboard 4K for PS4Pro. But when Spider-Man got a big upgrade for PS5 they ended up charging for that.
Would patching a game to render at a higher resolution really be all that different from patching a game to run more efficiently?
 
Is it technically possible to change the resolution and frame rate as a built-in feature of the [REDACTED] OS without providing a new update to the Switch game? (Like an unofficial patch for homebrew and yuzu emulator).
 
They are known to release a cheaper model before or after the successor is released too. NES top loader, SNES Jr, Gameboy Micro, Wii mini, and New 2DS XL. A Switch Mini for $149, and bringing the standard redbox model to $249 (the Mario bundle is $300 with a mario game), ending life on Lite and OLED models, and introducing a Drake powered "Switch 2" for $399 is my expectation.

There is little question that at least one SKU for the Switch will be eliminated once Switch Redacted is released. I know the Switch Lite is the least popular model, but its also the least expensive and could easily drop to $149 to keep a low cost entry to the Switch library of games for years to come. Its a toss up on which SKU gets axed, V2 is less popular than the OLED, but Nintendo may want to have a larger price gap between the OG Switch and Redacted perhaps discontinuing the "Premium" model makes sense since Redacted will become the new premium model. Regardless, Switch Lite serves the most purpose in a post Redacted world, giving parents a low cost option for their kids with a tremendous established library of games to choose from. The V2/OLED are simply to close in cost to what Redacted will be priced at to remain popular, even if V2 were dropped to $249, I think most consumers would choose to pay the extra $150 and get Redacted. Switch Lite by comparison at $150 would be less than half the cost of Redacted, positioning it to target a very different market.
 
0
Is it technically possible to change the resolution and frame rate as a built-in feature of the [REDACTED] OS without providing a new update to the Switch game? (Like an unofficial patch for homebrew and yuzu emulator).
I think only for Nintendo Switch games running at dynamic resolutions and/or unlocked frame rates.
 
Last edited:
Nintendo charging $70 for Zelda should tell you they are going to look for whatever they can get. If they feel like their market can bear paying for upgrades, then they absolutely will charge for them. Particularly when they can use them as calendar fillers.

That said I'm not super convinced Nintendo will go big on next gen upgrades with the Switch 2. Probably more of a mixed bag? It made more sense to me a couple years ago as the crux of a "Pro" console. Maybe for some prestige and single player games, but I'd imagine they want to move people onto new releases of their multiplayer franchises, so doing a bunch of upgrades there would be kind of counterintuitive.
 
There’s a difference between tech updates like making a game run at high res and a content update like new tracks and modes.

I don’t think tech updates do much to move the needle and I stand by Nintendo won’t do them for free. They’ll probably treat those games as backward compact old games and not upgrade them.

People cited Sony, but they only did free upgrades to mid-gen refresh of the PS4Pro. They charged for any significant PS5 upgraded versions.

Nintendo, as far as I know, didn’t do any kind of upgrades for New 3DS games.

I have been paying attention, but based on the industry evidence and thinking about Nintendo being the shrewd company they are, I would be surprised if they provided free 4K updates or something to old games with the Switch 2.

Hey, I’m just speculating and having fun too.

I hope they do free tech updates. It’s be neat.
I do agree that doing such a thing for next Switch is a bigger deal than for PS4 Pro at least, since even if it is still ARM/NVIDIA it still basically means porting the game to a new system rather than revising settings for a more powerful version. But I think they'll probably find it worthwhile for at least some games like TOTK, when the alternative is losing evergreen sales to people who won't be as interested in a ~900p game while waiting for a major Redacted Zelda to sell in 2028 or later. I wouldn't be totally surprised if they charged for it, but as is the case on PS5 it'll help to make the first party seem like fuddy duddies fighting over nickels when third parties are mostly doing it for free.
Would patching a game to render at a higher resolution really be all that different from patching a game to run more efficiently?
When it involves porting to a new system first, yes. Can't just change an INI file on a Switch game and have it take full advantage of Redacted hardware.
 
Oh come on, do you know there’s a difference between patching a game to take advantage of superior power for hardware and tightening up a game to fix bugs and run a little more efficiently. BotW and Mario Odyssey patches are not what we are talking about in regard to upgrades for Switch 2. There’s a big difference from when they patched Bloodborne to have quicker loading times and run smoother for base PS4 VS when they upgraded Spider-man/God of War 2018 to have checkerboard 4K for PS4Pro. But when Spider-Man got a big upgrade for PS5 they ended up charging for that.
The CPU boost mode (which is how those patches improved loading times, they were actually using a new mode where they had additional CPU power to work with) wasn't the headline feature of those patches. They were actually for supporting new hardware, specifically Labo VR.

PS5 is a poor comparison, because Sony designed it in a way that forces separate releases to fully take advantage of the new hardware, which has justifiably been a much maligned aspect of the system. That said, Sony did patch their current PS4 games to take advantage of the PS5 hardware when it launched, they were just limited to only changing settings due to their own, self imposed limitations.

Is it technically possible to change the resolution and frame rate as a built-in feature of the [REDACTED] OS without providing a new update to the Switch game? (Like an unofficial patch for homebrew and yuzu emulator).
Short version: in theory: maybe, in practice: no
 
I wonder if the Switch mini will be a clamshell, with handheld and tabletop modes.
I'd love clamshell format for the Switch, I would definitely buy that. I'm imagining something with a base layout like a Pro controller, and a screen the same size as the Lite's but OLED, with tighter bezels.

I just think Nintendo plans to pull a New 2DS XL with a Switch mini
Would there be any mileage in another die-shrink for the TX1, e.g. down to TSMCs 12nm node (which I think shares the same fab as 16nm)?
 
Would patching a game to render at a higher resolution really be all that different from patching a game to run more efficiently?
Depends entirely on how similar NVN 2 is where it overlaps with the current NVN, and how much code there is that's dependant enough on the particularities of the current GPU that it has to change.

That said, depending on the exact details of how the BC system shakes out, there may be a middle ground scenario where a game can run inside the compatibility layer, but otherwise with no limits. A game running this way would not perform as well as a properly native one, but this would avoid the need for any complicated changes beyond what's needed to just change the settings.
 
Last edited:
Okay but.. are we assuming now that Switch games aren't going to run natively on Drake and will need to be ported..?
Difficult question. They can't run natively in the same sense as they do on Switch, but theoretically they should be able to run through a system-level GPU translation layer without requiring any sort of porting process.

However, if they did want to improve max framerate and resolution they would need to fully port it. Running it semi-natively through this theoretical BC would only allow it to hit its framerate and resolution cap, not increase that cap or any other effects.
 
[REDACTED] is most likely to be fully BC and have a shared eShop with the Switch.

Nintendo is usually averse to price cuts, but they're about to be in a situation where Mario Odyssey directly competes against Mario [REDACTED] a game presumably made for the new hardware. And unlike the Switch launch they don't have 5 years worth of high quality games no one played stockpiled in the back.

Nintendo could:
  • Discount their catalogue
  • Delist/Relist their catalogue
  • Patch their catalogue
  • Leave the games full price, untouched.
  • Some combination of the above
Combinations might include
  • Cutting prices, patching, charging for patches
  • Leave price the same, patch, make an event of it
  • Delist game for vague "BC reasons" relaunch patched version at full price later
  • "Rotating selection of classic Switch games" on NSO
Considering how robustly Nintendo has chosen to support the Switch into year seven, I think the smartest move for them is to make sure a decent chunk of the currently active catalogue - Splatoon 3, Mario Kart, Tears of the Kingdom, Pikmin 4 - receives some kind of free patch at launch, even if it's nothing more than a simple uprez.

If the "proper" launch title is cross-gen then having five-ten newish Switch games "play better on redacted" is the best way to get users to upgrade.
There's also the TPHD route. Wait until games are around 10yo, bundle improved graphics, QoLs and extra content and sell it as a new release rather than DLC, despite the system being BC with the original game.

Not much different than the Wii U library DX treatment, but that was mainly aimed at people who didn't have a Wii U, while the remaster would be more aimed at double dippers, so you need a longer gap (like 10 years) for more nostalgia, desire to replay and feeling more outdated, to maximize sales.

If they go this route, I expect them to just delist the original from the eShop and maybe offer a upgrade route.

With that said, I think it's going to be a case by case basis. For example: games still being worked on receiving a big lift on launch, games from 2017~2018 with a newer entry getting a remaster down the road. Small lift for most evergreens and price drops for non-evergreens they don't plan to patch/remaster.
 
0
[REDACTED] is most likely to be fully BC and have a shared eShop with the Switch.

Nintendo is usually averse to price cuts, but they're about to be in a situation where Mario Odyssey directly competes against Mario [REDACTED] a game presumably made for the new hardware. And unlike the Switch launch they don't have 5 years worth of high quality games no one played stockpiled in the back.

Nintendo could:
  • Discount their catalogue
  • Delist/Relist their catalogue
  • Patch their catalogue
  • Leave the games full price, untouched.
  • Some combination of the above
Combinations might include
  • Cutting prices, patching, charging for patches
  • Leave price the same, patch, make an event of it
  • Delist game for vague "BC reasons" relaunch patched version at full price later
  • "Rotating selection of classic Switch games" on NSO
Considering how robustly Nintendo has chosen to support the Switch into year seven, I think the smartest move for them is to make sure a decent chunk of the currently active catalogue - Splatoon 3, Mario Kart, Tears of the Kingdom, Pikmin 4 - receives some kind of free patch at launch, even if it's nothing more than a simple uprez.

If the "proper" launch title is cross-gen then having five-ten newish Switch games "play better on redacted" is the best way to get users to upgrade.
Play the advanced version of The Legend of Zelda: Tears of the Kingdom on Nintendo Switch Advance, this holiday! Featuring 4k visuals, 60fps, and new content.
 
Difficult question. They can't run natively in the same sense as they do on Switch, but theoretically they should be able to run through a system-level GPU translation layer without requiring any sort of porting process.

However, if they did want to improve max framerate and resolution they would need to fully port it. Running it semi-natively through this theoretical BC would only allow it to hit its framerate and resolution cap, not increase that cap or any other effects.
Running in BC mode and changing the settings aren't actually mutually exclusive. Games can theoretically be made aware they are running on more powerful hardware, even if they aren't running natively. I'm pretty sure Xbox has an API for checking when a Xbox One game is running on Xbox Series.
 
I was thinking... imagine if Nintendo put a Swith 2 as a easter egg in the Mario Movie. How many days until someone find it?
If it was actually referencing the device itself, it probably would be so obscure that it couldn't be confirmed as a direct link to Switch 2 until after it was officially revealed. Sitting in plain sight for so long that it only makes sense after the fact haha

Truthfully I think too fine a point on hinting at Switch 2 in the movie would only be to the film's detriment; there are more than enough easter eggs pointing to Nintendo and Mario's history rather than the future, and nostalgia is the name of the game
 
If it was actually referencing the device itself, it probably would be so obscure that it couldn't be confirmed as a direct link to Switch 2 until after it was officially revealed. Sitting in plain sight for so long that it only makes sense after the fact haha

Truthfully I think too fine a point on hinting at Switch 2 in the movie would only be to the film's detriment; there are more than enough easter eggs pointing to Nintendo and Mario's history rather than the future, and nostalgia is the name of the game
I fully agree, if only for the fact that advertising in a movie is just kinda... illogical?
Nintendo's best move for the Mario Movie is to make a genuinely fun movie to gauge potential ideas for future Nintendo-property movies. There's a limited chance that average movie-goers will care enough about a game system. Alternatively, there's no real reason to advertise-bait gamers into watching a movie outside of making a Mario movie.

Additionally, according to copious theories on this board, why would you tease a new console now? You've got around 6-12 months until launch, why would you release information about it now?
 
[REDACTED] is most likely to be fully BC and have a shared eShop with the Switch.

Nintendo is usually averse to price cuts, but they're about to be in a situation where Mario Odyssey directly competes against Mario [REDACTED] a game presumably made for the new hardware. And unlike the Switch launch they don't have 5 years worth of high quality games no one played stockpiled in the back.

Nintendo could:
  • Discount their catalogue
  • Delist/Relist their catalogue
  • Patch their catalogue
  • Leave the games full price, untouched.
  • Some combination of the above
Combinations might include
  • Cutting prices, patching, charging for patches
  • Leave price the same, patch, make an event of it
  • Delist game for vague "BC reasons" relaunch patched version at full price later
  • "Rotating selection of classic Switch games" on NSO
Considering how robustly Nintendo has chosen to support the Switch into year seven, I think the smartest move for them is to make sure a decent chunk of the currently active catalogue - Splatoon 3, Mario Kart, Tears of the Kingdom, Pikmin 4 - receives some kind of free patch at launch, even if it's nothing more than a simple uprez.

If the "proper" launch title is cross-gen then having five-ten newish Switch games "play better on redacted" is the best way to get users to upgrade.

I don't think having Mario Odyssey "compete" against a new 3D Mario is necessarily a big deal for Nintendo. They frequently have multiple games in the same series co-existing on the same console without cannibalising each others sales, and actually have Odyssey and 3D World already "competing" on Switch right now. If anything I would imagine they're hoping that some people who play the new 3D Mario will then consider going back and buying Odyssey and/or 3D World if they're itching for more Mario.

Also, I saw you Yeah!'d my post. I'm taking that as confirmation that Oldpuck's Official Next Nintendo Console Release Date Prediction™️ is 29th of February 2024. No backing out now!

Depends entirely on how similar NVN 2 is where it overlaps with the current NVN, and how much code there is that's dependant enough on the particularities of the current GPU that it has to change.

That said, depending on the exact details of how the BC system shakes out, there may be a middle ground scenario where a game can run inside the compatibility layer, but otherwise with no limits. A game running this way would not perform as well as a properly native one, but this would avoid the need for any complicated changes beyond what's needed to just change the settings.

I've considered this. A compatibility mode where the game can act as if it's got a TX1 with 8 CPU cores and a 12 SM GPU would make things easier, and would be somewhat similar to how some PS4 games are enhanced for PS5 (although in that case it's much simpler, as the PS5 has an identical number of CPU cores and GPU CUs to the PS4 Pro). I wonder if they would prefer native upgrades, though. Having a few small teams update existing games to run on T239/NVN2 would be a good quick way of getting internal feedback on the updated API and tools, and could identify issues before bigger projects do.

I'd say it also depends on how distribution of cross-gen games works. If they're treated completely separately (a la PS5), then having a BC+ compatibility mode may be the lower-friction option, whereas if they've got something closer to MS's smart delivery, then proper NVN2 patches might be the way to go.

Okay but.. are we assuming now that Switch games aren't going to run natively on Drake and will need to be ported..?

The point was that a Switch game running on [redacted] in BC mode will only be programmed to use 3 CPU cores and 2 SMs on the GPU. For a Switch game to benefit properly from the new hardware, it would need to be updated to use the new hardware and API, which is basically equivalent to porting. There's a mid-way case mentioned by @Pokemaniac above where they add a special compatibility mode to make the game think it's running on a bigger version of the TX1, but even in that case the developers would need to update the game to properly utilise the extra CPU and GPU resources.
 
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