URGH. The reason why it’s frustrating when the XB1/PS4 and their Pro/X variants are touted as something “impressive for Nintendo” for a console releasing in 2024 and beyond is because of the general tendency to overshoot PS/XBox hardware while lowballing Nintendo hardware and grossly overstating the differences between them - It’s not impressive at all, and I’ve been saying for ages that it would be wholly unfit for a generational purpose and susceptible to a Wii U fate. That is to say they’re correct at Reddit, but for the wrong reasons. I feel that this isn’t fully understood over here, too, and the narrative about being a generation behind is also false and easy to dispel.
So, Why do I say PS4-tier is unimpressive? When we talk about the XB1/PS4, we are actually talking about decade-old systems with even older parts, No RT, No DLSS, very old architecture, a poor CPU which bottlenecks its GPU, which won’t keep up once the cross-gen period has expired, worse lithography processes, and all of these are true for their Pro/X variants. So, they’re also unimpressive for a console releasing in 2024 and beyond, portable or not. Drake has more going for it than all of these, so, that’s the starting point. It has to be better than the Steam Deck when portable (it will), and close to, greater than, or equal to the XSS when docked (It will).
It also underestimates how much mobile tech has advanced - Mobile CPUs have had XB1(X)/PS4 Pro CPUs beaten for years. We saw Apple’s M1 chip load 4K files faster than a high-end i9 desktop in 2020. Samsung/AMD brought the first ray-tracing mobile GPU to the S22 line of phones in 2022. Neural units have existed in phones, while Nvidia has it for DLSS. We have a bunch of numbers from the leaks. But people still talk about 2013 systems, ignorant of the fact that the current Switch has many games from their libraries already, and ignorant of the fact that Nintendo has games which hold their own, in some cases do more than revered titles on those systems, as if they would be “impressive”, as if they’re still to catch up with that. There is also the history lesson of the Wii U and 3DS. After SM64DS, The 3DS coasted on “more N64 ports” 7 years later, and barely managed half the sales of its predecessor, while with the Wii U, saying “it’s enough to be HD” didn’t work for them - While it was the most powerful system on the market when it launched, and considerably more so than the PS360 consoles, the endeavour wasn’t there for most developers. The games it did have were largely unoptimised, but there were very few - they didn’t even get all of the cross-gen or PS360 ports!! Moral of both stories? They have to aim higher, or get left behind again. I’m sure some of you lived through the Wii U era, and it was painful to see every announcement skip it. Also, with the 3DS, it meant Nintendo could no longer afford to run its portable line several generations behind its home line - It was beaten by the iPhone 4, iPad and 4th Gen iPod Touch on release, as well as a series of Android phones. That is to say, they were providing a dated portable gaming experience. That’s why they went with industry-leading chips on the Switch. Anything less than the definitive portable gaming experience will make them susceptible to failure. It can’t settle for “more XB1/PS4 ports”, not that there are any more of note, which can move the needle in meaningful ways. It has to be able to receive PS5/XS ports.
So, saying “PS4-tier is impressive for Nintendo in 2024 and beyond” is a failure to learn from this. It’s astonishing that the more “enthusiast” circles haven’t grasped this yet, but thankfully, Nintendo and Nvidia understand these points.
