• Hey everyone, staff have documented a list of banned content and subject matter that we feel are not consistent with site values, and don't make sense to host discussion of on Famiboards. This list (and the relevant reasoning per item) is viewable here.

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

Reader mode
Mr Swine said:
Thanks for taking your time, sounds good that it has higher bandwidth than the other Ampere cards. The CPU should take a chunk of that, in guessing it will be similar to what’s reported on the PS4 CPU taking a chunk out of the GDDR5 bandwidth?
Click to expand...
Similar situation, but I don't have an off the top sense of how much it would actually be. But if you look at the premiere Snapdragon and Exynos SOCs, which run similar CPUs in 8 core configs - they have memory bandwidth ~34GB/s. You lop that off the top of T239's bandwidth, and then compare it to RTX 30, you still look okay. So I would think that [redacted] won't be bandwidth limited primarily.
 
0
Discostew said:
Got in late for the HOS discussion, but I don't think we're going to see them use the exact same HOS used by Switch. More like HOS 2.0, where the baseline for it involves its security. Even though Switch got hacked early on, it was because of the convenience of the entry point being well documented and public from the situation with the Shield TV. Hackers had said that if it wasn't for that point of entry, they would still be looking for another opening, perhaps even now, because they felt that HOS was that secure.

The way HOS works with memory is it partitions it into 4 sections - Application, Applet, System and System Unsafe. The latter two are, imo, the basic portions of the OS, which together allocate roughly 310MB. Application is for the games, taking ~3.2GB. The remaining 467MB is for Applet, which is everything else, like the Home Menu, Album, eShop, Settings, even the All Software list etc, and as you move into each part of the system, the prior stuff is emptied out and newer stuff is loaded in. Areas like the eShop and Album are loading in data as you scroll through them, but aren't retained because there's only a limited amount of memory to work with, so when you scroll back and forth, it's continually reloading. For the eShop, the data isn't located locally, so it has to continually download. While folks suggest that the reason Nintendo didn't include a fully loaded internet browser was to avoid a hacking situation, it could also be because of the limited amount of RAM that would have been available to it. Can't really compare it to the Wii U, because as time goes on, there's expectations from things like that, like using the latest software, and the available RAM likely couldn't cut it.

For the eShop, the CPU is used heavily, using the 3 game cores when a game isn't loaded, but is limited to the OS core when a game is loaded (the latter of these two scenarios brings the eShop to a crawl). Back to the point of the eShop redownloading data as you scroll, this is likely why the eShop uses a good amount of CPU. I think it's having to process this data, which may include decompression. Let's say it is having to decompress data for the eShop. With Switch 2, if they redesign the eShop, they could possibly make use of the FDE so the CPU isn't being pushed, which could make browsing the eShop much faster (besides having the stronger CPU).

What I'm getting at ultimately, is let's not think of Switch 2 using Switch's HOS "as-is", but as a baseline for the important things while also being expandable in content, features, and functionality.
Click to expand...
I wonder if Nintendo will expand RAM available to the OS at all. Carving off RAM that effectively sits idle most of the time is a waste of resources.

Taking advantage of new features like the FDE makes sense, but other than accounting for assets for a higher resolution screen (if Redacted has one) maybe they stick with roughly the same 800MB RAM reservation (maybe they up it to a round 1GB).

I'm curios if there are any features you think might get built in that would require a large expansion of RAM. I could see caching the eShop so content can load from disk instead over Wifi constantly.
 
Cybergatuno said:


Do we still think Nintendo must rush out a successor?
Click to expand...

Sorry to add onto the replies/quotes, just wanted to throw some numbers out there


A console that the Switch has already outsold, the PS4, had great sell-in numbers on the fiscal year (FY 2019) prior to the release of the PS5 (PS5 reveal was on June 2020 - FY 2020 Q1 and PS5 release was on November 2020 - FY 2020 Q3). It sold 13.5 million units which is eerily close to Nintendo's forecast for the Switch of 15 million units this fiscal year. I figured to share these numbers to make a point that the Switch continuing to sell well despite no announcement of a successor is good for Nintendo because it gives Nintendo a better cushion to transition into the Switch's successor like how PS4's continued success did for the transition to PS5.
 
1UpMango said:
Sorry to add onto the replies/quotes, just wanted to throw some numbers out there


A console that the Switch has already outsold, the PS4, had great sell-in numbers on the fiscal year (FY 2019) prior to the release of the PS5 (PS5 reveal was on June 2020 - FY 2020 Q1 and PS5 release was on November 2020 - FY 2020 Q3). It sold 13.5 million units which is eerily close to Nintendo's forecast for the Switch of 15 million units this fiscal year. I figured to share these numbers to make a point that the Switch continuing to sell well despite no announcement of a successor is good for Nintendo because it gives Nintendo a better cushion to transition into the Switch's successor like how PS4's continued success did for the transition to PS5.
Click to expand...

Yeah it's doing great I wonder if it will outsell the ps2 as well maybe not but it is somewhat close
 
ReddDreadtheLead said:
It’s Ampere with some aspects of Lovelace, but for all intents and purposes for gaming it is Ampere. Plus, at the size and the constraints that device would operate in, DLSS3 probably isn’t a good idea.


Idk, it seems pretty cut down.

Has reduced SM/CUDA Core count, has reduced CPU cores, has significantly reduced L2 cache, has PVA and DLA removed (Orin has 2), has reduced memory interface (128b vs 256b), has reduced tensor core performance and reduced FP16 performance for the Ampere CUDA cores, doing 1:1 instead of 1:2 performance. Does 48Warps instead of 64Warps, etc.

That’s already really cut down, T239 is focused for gaming of course, but it’s already really cut down in many area compared to ORIN.
Click to expand...
Reduced core count: By only 25%, less than expected.

Reduced L2 cache: True

PVA and DLA removed: those were always the first to go.

Reduced memory interface: Yea, that was always expected

Reduced tensor core performance: There could have been a potential setup where it had less SM, but kept Orins tensor cores for DLSS performance above its weight. But with this many SM, this cut probably makes sense.
reduced FP16 performance for the Ampere CUDA cores, doing 1:1 instead of 1:2 performance. Does 48Warps instead of 64Warps, etc: Now you'getting down to details above my level of understanding.

So yea, I agree there absolutely are significant cuts, but Orin also goes up to 70 Watts, made for cars. For a portable Nintendo console, that most people expected to be on 8nm before we had the leak, we expected them to be a lot more severe.
 
kvetcha said:
Lovelamp.
Click to expand...
1uHoqY3.jpg
 
Brag post.

I'm a teacher and I've been on summer break for a month and this is the first time this happened: I got my wife, my one year old, and my three year old all to go down for a nap at the same time and I get to sit outside in peace on a hot sunny day laying on a hammock under a big tree playing some Switch handheld whilst enjoying some cold brew coffee.

Edit: that lasted a whole 20 minutes...

Edit edit: sorry I could've sworn I posted this in the general discussion thread. I have this thread pinned up next to it :(
 
Last edited:
Z0m3le said:
Saw some power profile thing being passed around for the "devkit" all rumor, but 11w portable and 28w+ when docked... It's important to remember that devkits will have a higher CPU clock to run the debug software and just for general stability, Switch devkits for instance run at 1.2GHz. This could count for 1 or 2 watts, so retail units would draw 9 to 10 watts when portable if this rumor is correct.
Click to expand...
Light correction, Nintendo doesn't actually run their devkits at higher clocks by default, it's something application devs can explicitly opt into if they wish (on NX it's enabled by calling nn::oe::SetCpuOverclockEnabled(bool), which sets a 1785MHz overclock. The 1224MHz profiles are unused.)
So if real those would likely be the normal operating wattages.
 
Scrawnton said:
Brag post.

I'm a teacher and I've been on summer break for a month and this is the first time this happened: I got my wife, my one year old, and my three year old all to go down for a nap at the same time and I get to sit outside in peace on a hot sunny day laying on a hammock under a big tree playing some Switch handheld whilst enjoying some cold brew coffee.
Click to expand...

So that's what Michael Scott was doing after leaving Dunder Mifflin.
 
Hermii said:
Reduced core count: By only 25%, less than expected.

Reduced L2 cache: True

PVA and DLA removed: those were always the first to go.

Reduced memory interface: Yea, that was always expected

Reduced tensor core performance: There could have been a potential setup where it had less SM, but kept Orins tensor cores for DLSS performance above its weight. But with this many SM, this cut probably makes sense.
reduced FP16 performance for the Ampere CUDA cores, doing 1:1 instead of 1:2 performance. Does 48Warps instead of 64Warps, etc: Now you'getting down to details above my level of understanding.

So yea, I agree there absolutely are significant cuts, but Orin also goes up to 70 Watts, made for cars. For a portable Nintendo console, that most people expected to be on 8nm before we had the leak, we expected them to be a lot more severe.
Click to expand...
Sure, but all of this removed/reduced should result in over half of the SoC being gone for a console. The shift to 1 cluster instead of 2 should also reduce power and reduce size as well, more than 33% cut for the CPU. The 1 cluster is a smaller decrease though than removing 4 cores.



The SoC as a whole should be less than half of ORIN, but nowhere near the size of the Tegra X1 or X1+. Orin is 455mm^2 fwiw.
ZachyCatGames said:
Light correction, Nintendo doesn't actually run their devkits at higher clocks by default, it's something application devs can explicitly opt into if they wish (on NX it's enabled by calling nn::oe::SetCpuOverclockEnabled(bool), which sets a 1785MHz overclock. The 1224MHz profiles are unused.)
So if real those would likely be the normal operating wattages.
Click to expand...

Hey you! Welcome back to the discussion.
 
Relating to the launch of NX2 - something I've always wondered is... why don't companies make launch consoles more expensive to deter scalpers and make more money? I can't understand why they don't do this, but I'm sure there must be some reason.

For example, the Switch 2 will be sold out at launch. Barring a catastrophic development decision, we can pretty much guarantee this. Thus there will be scalpers, and an average selling price on the market above whatever the RRP is.

Why would Nintendo not sell the first 1m NX2's as "Launch editions", throw a commemorative coin and a poster in the box, print "x out of 1,000,000" on the back of the console and then mark it up $100? Then make another 2m "Early adopter editions" with just the poster (or whatever bit of tat you like) which are marked up $50 instead. And then from there just sell at the normal value. (All numbers can be adjusted as per their forecasts, obviously, I'm thinking of whatever they can sell in their first month)

This
a) Brings in another $200m (split between Nintendo and retail, of course, but still - that's 200 million dollars)
b) Discourages and reduces the profit margin of scalpers, who drive people mental with their BS
c) Gets your product into slightly wealthier hands earlier - as these are the fans who will be able to spend the most on software

When I saw the PS5 selling for an average price of $900 for an entire year with scalpers (10-15% of total sales, apparently) I couldn't help but think "Surely Sony must be raging at all this money they have left on the table?"

What is the argument against it? That social media blowback would be too severe? Social media has the memory of a goldfish. If the system and games are good it will sell. There are easily 3m Nintendo fans willing to pay another $50 or $100 imo.

Of course I expect this post to be about as welcome as a fart in a sauna.
 
Discostew said:
Got in late for the HOS discussion, but I don't think we're going to see them use the exact same HOS used by Switch. More like HOS 2.0, where the baseline for it involves its security. Even though Switch got hacked early on, it was because of the convenience of the entry point being well documented and public from the situation with the Shield TV. Hackers had said that if it wasn't for that point of entry, they would still be looking for another opening, perhaps even now, because they felt that HOS was that secure.

The way HOS works with memory is it partitions it into 4 sections - Application, Applet, System and System Unsafe. The latter two are, imo, the basic portions of the OS, which together allocate roughly 310MB. Application is for the games, taking ~3.2GB. The remaining 467MB is for Applet, which is everything else, like the Home Menu, Album, eShop, Settings, even the All Software list etc, and as you move into each part of the system, the prior stuff is emptied out and newer stuff is loaded in. Areas like the eShop and Album are loading in data as you scroll through them, but aren't retained because there's only a limited amount of memory to work with, so when you scroll back and forth, it's continually reloading. For the eShop, the data isn't located locally, so it has to continually download. While folks suggest that the reason Nintendo didn't include a fully loaded internet browser was to avoid a hacking situation, it could also be because of the limited amount of RAM that would have been available to it. Can't really compare it to the Wii U, because as time goes on, there's expectations from things like that, like using the latest software, and the available RAM likely couldn't cut it.

For the eShop, the CPU is used heavily, using the 3 game cores when a game isn't loaded, but is limited to the OS core when a game is loaded (the latter of these two scenarios brings the eShop to a crawl). Back to the point of the eShop redownloading data as you scroll, this is likely why the eShop uses a good amount of CPU. I think it's having to process this data, which may include decompression. Let's say it is having to decompress data for the eShop. With Switch 2, if they redesign the eShop, they could possibly make use of the FDE so the CPU isn't being pushed, which could make browsing the eShop much faster (besides having the stronger CPU).

What I'm getting at ultimately, is let's not think of Switch 2 using Switch's HOS "as-is", but as a baseline for the important things while also being expandable in content, features, and functionality.
Click to expand...
The core parts of Horizon will be more or less identical to what they currently ship on NX.
The entirety of libnnSdk and Horizon (when applicable) for all supported platforms is built from a single shared source repo Nintendo calls "siglo".
This is actually why we're still getting new major system updates on Switch, they can make all of these changes and apply them to both NX and next gen basically for free since they're both built from the same sources.
 
Makes perfect sense to extend the Switch lifespan based on how short and unprofitable the WiiU gen was. Top if off with the fact that the Switch is so successful that they probably don't need a long marketing cycle or reveal-to-launch period for the successor as they are still cashing big cheques.
 
Aether said:
You are 100% right... and also i think it makes 0 difference.

Even if games could be as big as the internal storage, i don't think they will be. Games will still be limited foremost by cartridge space,
and not a single developer wants to be the one that fills up the storage.

And since AAA games LAST generation already came close to 128 (with 50-60GB being "normal"), having to kompress and reduce assets for a port will still be as important.
Click to expand...

I don't think it makes zero difference. In section 7.69 of the CMA's final report on the Microsoft Activision acquisition, they state:

Activision’s internal documents note the technical limitations of the Nintendo Switch console. For example, one Activision document notes in an early-stage assessment that, to produce a CoD title on the Nintendo Switch, the CoD game would need [✄] (whereas most current CoD titles require from 125- 175GB of storage on console or PC).
Click to expand...

That's an Activision internal document citing storage as a limiting factor when determining the feasibility of a CoD port. I doubt they'd be particularly concerned about using a small game card and requiring a download, either, given the entire contents of the disc for the PS5 version of the game could almost fit on an N64 cartridge. There are some third parties which have released on small game cards with mandatory downloads bigger than will fit on the internal storage (the NBA 2K games are some examples), but I could certainly see some publishers not wanting to limit their audience by requiring players to have an SD card.
 
After reading this article Ampere has its shader array underutilize many of the times as SM occupancy is pretty low. It's worth mentioning that they're using the giant 3090 in the test, and smaller cards would have better shader utilization. Still I'm thinking about Drake and its rather big GPU (for its class) and wonder if Drake would be bottlenecked in the same way as I mentioned above, or devs would find a way to better fill all those hungry 12SMs, or maybe Nvidia and Nintendo has done some micro customization to the architecture that alleviates the problem. What are your insights on this @Thraktor @oldpuck as this is pretty much out of my realm of understanding since I'm not a game developers nor a hardware architect.

Also I'm going to Japan this month and I might visit Kyoto which has Nintendo Co. Ltd main headquarter lol
 
Hi, I'm new. Do you think Nintendo is waiting until the Switch outsells the PS2 to announce the next console? I think it's very tempting for them to own the best-selling console of all time, and I'm sure announcing the Switch2 now would send Switch sales plummeting.
 
Heron said:
Relating to the launch of NX2 - something I've always wondered is... why don't companies make launch consoles more expensive to deter scalpers and make more money? I can't understand why they don't do this, but I'm sure there must be some reason.

For example, the Switch 2 will be sold out at launch. Barring a catastrophic development decision, we can pretty much guarantee this. Thus there will be scalpers, and an average selling price on the market above whatever the RRP is.

Why would Nintendo not sell the first 1m NX2's as "Launch editions", throw a commemorative coin and a poster in the box, print "x out of 1,000,000" on the back of the console and then mark it up $100? Then make another 2m "Early adopter editions" with just the poster (or whatever bit of tat you like) which are marked up $50 instead. And then from there just sell at the normal value. (All numbers can be adjusted as per their forecasts, obviously, I'm thinking of whatever they can sell in their first month)

This
a) Brings in another $200m (split between Nintendo and retail, of course, but still - that's 200 million dollars)
b) Discourages and reduces the profit margin of scalpers, who drive people mental with their BS
c) Gets your product into slightly wealthier hands earlier - as these are the fans who will be able to spend the most on software

When I saw the PS5 selling for an average price of $900 for an entire year with scalpers (10-15% of total sales, apparently) I couldn't help but think "Surely Sony must be raging at all this money they have left on the table?"

What is the argument against it? That social media blowback would be too severe? Social media has the memory of a goldfish. If the system and games are good it will sell. There are easily 3m Nintendo fans willing to pay another $50 or $100 imo.

Of course I expect this post to be about as welcome as a fart in a sauna.
Click to expand...
Scalpers will always buy no matter the price increase as long as there is demand
 
SmolSam said:
Hi, I'm new. Do you think Nintendo is waiting until the Switch outsells the PS2 to announce the next console? I think it's very tempting for them to own the best-selling console of all time, and I'm sure announcing the Switch2 now would send Switch sales plummeting.
Click to expand...
no because they don't care for frivolous titles
 
Heron said:
Relating to the launch of NX2 - something I've always wondered is... why don't companies make launch consoles more expensive to deter scalpers and make more money? I can't understand why they don't do this, but I'm sure there must be some reason.

For example, the Switch 2 will be sold out at launch. Barring a catastrophic development decision, we can pretty much guarantee this. Thus there will be scalpers, and an average selling price on the market above whatever the RRP is.

Why would Nintendo not sell the first 1m NX2's as "Launch editions", throw a commemorative coin and a poster in the box, print "x out of 1,000,000" on the back of the console and then mark it up $100? Then make another 2m "Early adopter editions" with just the poster (or whatever bit of tat you like) which are marked up $50 instead. And then from there just sell at the normal value. (All numbers can be adjusted as per their forecasts, obviously, I'm thinking of whatever they can sell in their first month)

This
a) Brings in another $200m (split between Nintendo and retail, of course, but still - that's 200 million dollars)
b) Discourages and reduces the profit margin of scalpers, who drive people mental with their BS
c) Gets your product into slightly wealthier hands earlier - as these are the fans who will be able to spend the most on software

When I saw the PS5 selling for an average price of $900 for an entire year with scalpers (10-15% of total sales, apparently) I couldn't help but think "Surely Sony must be raging at all this money they have left on the table?"

What is the argument against it? That social media blowback would be too severe? Social media has the memory of a goldfish. If the system and games are good it will sell. There are easily 3m Nintendo fans willing to pay another $50 or $100 imo.

Of course I expect this post to be about as welcome as a fart in a sauna.
Click to expand...
The launches of both the Xbox One (related to always online/ game sharing) and PS3 (related to pricing) were sullied by bad PR and word of mouth before launch. The PS3 recovered by the end of the generation, but the Xbox One never really did.

I wouldn't underestimate the power of a pissed off consumer base. Potential early adopters should be the ones evangelizing for their system, not the ones rallying against it.
 
Last edited:
SmolSam said:
Hi, I'm new. Do you think Nintendo is waiting until the Switch outsells the PS2 to announce the next console? I think it's very tempting for them to own the best-selling console of all time, and I'm sure announcing the Switch2 now would send Switch sales plummeting.
Click to expand...

Hi Sam. It could go either way, but with projected sales I could see it over-taking.
 
I've been wondering if launching Redrakted NG in the Holiday is all that viable when it comes to stock. I still think a H1 release would be even less viable, because it would need to be announced before or shortly after the Holidays. Perhaps summer would be a good time for a release, as many people would on vacation and it could serve as a buffer before November. Personally, I see the best time to be August- September.
 
SmolSam said:
Hi, I'm new. Do you think Nintendo is waiting until the Switch outsells the PS2 to announce the next console? I think it's very tempting for them to own the best-selling console of all time, and I'm sure announcing the Switch2 now would send Switch sales plummeting.
Click to expand...

Welcome!

In my opinion, Nintendo will prioritize a smooth transition and successful launch for their new platform rather than risk it all for a title that maybe 5% of their customers would care about
 
Rokka said:
Scalpers will always buy no matter the price increase as long as there is demand
Click to expand...
Sure they will, but you're still taking money out of the scalpers hands.

Let's say the next Switch is $400, and the Launch Edition is $500.

Let's assume there's a particular level of demand for the console that means the scalping price settles at $600. Now, a scalper selling a Launch Edition for $600 is only making $100 profit rather than $200. Nintendo and retail have pocketed the difference.

Knowing the standard edition is on the way also makes going to a scalper much less appealing, and easier to wait for consumers.
Jamoman said:
The launches of both the Xbox One (related to always online/ game sharing) and PS3 (related to pricing) were sullied by bad PR and word of mouth before launch. The PS3 recovered by the end of the generation, but the Xbox One never really did.

I wouldn't underestimate the power of a pissed off consumer base. Potential early adopters will be the ones evangelizing for their system, not the ones rallying against it.
Click to expand...
XB1 launch was sullied by issues with the product itself. PS3 had an insane top-level price, end of story. $600 then is equal to $900 now. Imagine if the PS5 had launched at $900! Not comparable to a limited edition that'll last a month.
 
Scrawnton said:
Brag post.

I'm a teacher and I've been on summer break for a month and this is the first time this happened: I got my wife, my one year old, and my three year old all to go down for a nap at the same time and I get to sit outside in peace on a hot sunny day laying on a hammock under a big tree playing some Switch handheld whilst enjoying some cold brew coffee.

Edit: that lasted a whole 20 minutes...
Click to expand...
What if I told you that I do this every day during my summer break from teaching?

:p

It'll get better!
 
ZachyCatGames said:
Light correction, Nintendo doesn't actually run their devkits at higher clocks by default, it's something application devs can explicitly opt into if they wish (on NX it's enabled by calling nn::oe::SetCpuOverclockEnabled(bool), which sets a 1785MHz overclock. The 1224MHz profiles are unused.)
So if real those would likely be the normal operating wattages.
Click to expand...
So what kind of power levels we talking here if those are real?
 
Heron said:
Relating to the launch of NX2 - something I've always wondered is... why don't companies make launch consoles more expensive to deter scalpers and make more money? I can't understand why they don't do this, but I'm sure there must be some reason.

For example, the Switch 2 will be sold out at launch. Barring a catastrophic development decision, we can pretty much guarantee this. Thus there will be scalpers, and an average selling price on the market above whatever the RRP is.

Why would Nintendo not sell the first 1m NX2's as "Launch editions", throw a commemorative coin and a poster in the box, print "x out of 1,000,000" on the back of the console and then mark it up $100? Then make another 2m "Early adopter editions" with just the poster (or whatever bit of tat you like) which are marked up $50 instead. And then from there just sell at the normal value. (All numbers can be adjusted as per their forecasts, obviously, I'm thinking of whatever they can sell in their first month)

This
a) Brings in another $200m (split between Nintendo and retail, of course, but still - that's 200 million dollars)
b) Discourages and reduces the profit margin of scalpers, who drive people mental with their BS
c) Gets your product into slightly wealthier hands earlier - as these are the fans who will be able to spend the most on software

When I saw the PS5 selling for an average price of $900 for an entire year with scalpers (10-15% of total sales, apparently) I couldn't help but think "Surely Sony must be raging at all this money they have left on the table?"

What is the argument against it? That social media blowback would be too severe? Social media has the memory of a goldfish. If the system and games are good it will sell. There are easily 3m Nintendo fans willing to pay another $50 or $100 imo.

Of course I expect this post to be about as welcome as a fart in a sauna.
Click to expand...


Yeah, fart in the sauna is the problem. You think people HERE would react badly to that suggestion? How do you think the market at large would? Do you think "put the first three million units into wealthier hands" would go over well with the mass market? For one moment? At a time like this?

It would be disastrously tone deaf. Problem with scalpers? Just scalp first!

That isn't a viable business strategy.

Nintendo also KNOWS it isn't and has already announced their plan is to make more consoles.
 
Sabre said:
Hi Sam. It could go either way, but with projected sales I could see it over-taking.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I think the Mario movie + the new Mario games will make the Switch outsell the PS2 sooner than expected. People underestimate the millions of kids who watched the movie and asked their parents to buy them a Switch.
 
SmolSam said:
Hi, I'm new. Do you think Nintendo is waiting until the Switch outsells the PS2 to announce the next console? I think it's very tempting for them to own the best-selling console of all time, and I'm sure announcing the Switch2 now would send Switch sales plummeting.
Click to expand...
I think that Redrakted NG (my personal nickname for the successor, it's a long story) will be more than ready to be shown by then. Besides, it's probably best to unveil the successor before sales get too far down and I'd guess that it'd take the Switch about 2 years before it hits that mark. The common hypothesis in this thread is that based on everything we've gathered, the successor should be here in about 12-16 months. The Switch will probably be 15 million units shy of that mark by the time its successor is revealed.

Tldr: nah

Also, welcome aboard, friend!

Edit: I think that the Switch will still sell well even after Redrakted NG launches. Not everyone is gonna upgrade right away and there will probably be some kind of cross-gen period. I think people will start migrating en masse once Pokemon Gen 10 arrives.
 
SmolSam said:
Yeah, I think the Mario movie + the new Mario games will make the Switch outsell the PS2 sooner than expected. People underestimate the millions of kids who watched the movie and asked their parents to buy them a Switch.
Click to expand...
Last I checked, the ratio of Switch owners between age demographics had adults in their 20s-30s higher over kids and parents, so you might be on to something.
 
D36 said:
I think that Redrakted NG (my personal nickname for the successor, it's a long story) will be more than ready to be shown by then. Besides, it's probably best to unveil the successor before sales get too far down and I'd guess that it'd take the Switch about 2 years before it hits that mark. The common hypothesis in this thread is that based on everything we've gathered, the successor should be here in about 12-16 months. The Switch will probably be 15 million units shy of that mark by the time its successor is revealed.

Tldr: nah

Also, welcome aboard, friend!

Edit: I think that the Switch will still sell well even after Redrakted NG launches. Not everyone is gonna upgrade right away and there will probably be some kind of cross-gen period. I think people will start migrating en masse once Pokemon Gen 10 arrives.
Click to expand...
12+ months?

Not "common" not a "hypothesis".

It's a... Present piece of specualtion.

WITHIN 12-16 months? Now you have me on side, even if I do think I'd qualify that with a "well within", personally.
Heron said:
Sure they will, but you're still taking money out of the scalpers hands.

Let's say the next Switch is $400, and the Launch Edition is $500.

Let's assume there's a particular level of demand for the console that means the scalping price settles at $600. Now, a scalper selling a Launch Edition for $600 is only making $100 profit rather than $200. Nintendo and retail have pocketed the difference.

Knowing the standard edition is on the way also makes going to a scalper much less appealing, and easier to wait for consumers.

XB1 launch was sullied by issues with the product itself. PS3 had an insane top-level price, end of story. $600 then is equal to $900 now. Imagine if the PS5 had launched at $900! Not comparable to a limited edition that'll last a month.
Click to expand...
Please stop excusing farting in a sauna, even if it is metaphorical.
 
Concernt said:
12+ months?

Not "common" not a "hypothesis".

It's a... Present piece of specualti
Please stop excusing farting in a sauna, even if it is metaphorical.
Click to expand...
You're right. How could I have forgotten myself, my title 😔

However, a hypothesis is by nature, a type of speculation. It's an educated guess. I think it's safe to say that most of the regular participants in this thread agree with said hypothesis to some extent. Still think 2023's an option though. At least until the end of the month.

Edit: Typo. Sometimes, I wish I didn't have such massive hands.
 
Last edited:
D36 said:
Last I checked, the ratio of Switch owners between age demographics had adults in their 20s-30s higher over kids and parents, so you might be on to something.
Click to expand...
On second thought, that data might be a bit skewed towards kids lying about their age (we've all done it before).

The below image is from 2021.
20230706_150537.jpg
 
Heron said:
Relating to the launch of NX2 - something I've always wondered is... why don't companies make launch consoles more expensive to deter scalpers and make more money? I can't understand why they don't do this, but I'm sure there must be some reason.

For example, the Switch 2 will be sold out at launch. Barring a catastrophic development decision, we can pretty much guarantee this. Thus there will be scalpers, and an average selling price on the market above whatever the RRP is.

Why would Nintendo not sell the first 1m NX2's as "Launch editions", throw a commemorative coin and a poster in the box, print "x out of 1,000,000" on the back of the console and then mark it up $100? Then make another 2m "Early adopter editions" with just the poster (or whatever bit of tat you like) which are marked up $50 instead. And then from there just sell at the normal value. (All numbers can be adjusted as per their forecasts, obviously, I'm thinking of whatever they can sell in their first month)

This
a) Brings in another $200m (split between Nintendo and retail, of course, but still - that's 200 million dollars)
b) Discourages and reduces the profit margin of scalpers, who drive people mental with their BS
c) Gets your product into slightly wealthier hands earlier - as these are the fans who will be able to spend the most on software

When I saw the PS5 selling for an average price of $900 for an entire year with scalpers (10-15% of total sales, apparently) I couldn't help but think "Surely Sony must be raging at all this money they have left on the table?"

What is the argument against it? That social media blowback would be too severe? Social media has the memory of a goldfish. If the system and games are good it will sell. There are easily 3m Nintendo fans willing to pay another $50 or $100 imo.

Of course I expect this post to be about as welcome as a fart in a sauna.
Click to expand...

No.
 
0
Heron said:
Relating to the launch of NX2 - something I've always wondered is... why don't companies make launch consoles more expensive to deter scalpers and make more money? I can't understand why they don't do this, but I'm sure there must be some reason.

For example, the Switch 2 will be sold out at launch. Barring a catastrophic development decision, we can pretty much guarantee this. Thus there will be scalpers, and an average selling price on the market above whatever the RRP is.

Why would Nintendo not sell the first 1m NX2's as "Launch editions", throw a commemorative coin and a poster in the box, print "x out of 1,000,000" on the back of the console and then mark it up $100? Then make another 2m "Early adopter editions" with just the poster (or whatever bit of tat you like) which are marked up $50 instead. And then from there just sell at the normal value. (All numbers can be adjusted as per their forecasts, obviously, I'm thinking of whatever they can sell in their first month)

This
a) Brings in another $200m (split between Nintendo and retail, of course, but still - that's 200 million dollars)
b) Discourages and reduces the profit margin of scalpers, who drive people mental with their BS
c) Gets your product into slightly wealthier hands earlier - as these are the fans who will be able to spend the most on software

When I saw the PS5 selling for an average price of $900 for an entire year with scalpers (10-15% of total sales, apparently) I couldn't help but think "Surely Sony must be raging at all this money they have left on the table?"

What is the argument against it? That social media blowback would be too severe? Social media has the memory of a goldfish. If the system and games are good it will sell. There are easily 3m Nintendo fans willing to pay another $50 or $100 imo.

Of course I expect this post to be about as welcome as a fart in a sauna.
Click to expand...
If it didn't work with the PS5, it's not gonna work, even if the PS6 is $700. Come to think of it, were there any reports of the PS3 being scalped? That thing was $600 at launch!
 
Last edited:
D36 said:
On second thought, that data might be a bit skewed towards kids lying about their age (we've all done it before).

The below image is from 2021.
20230706_150537.jpg
Click to expand...

Yes, but that doesn't change the fact that the Mario movie was millions of kids' first exposure to Nintendo. There's no way that wouldn't increase Switch sales.
 
SmolSam said:
Yes, but that doesn't change the fact that the Mario movie was millions of kids' first exposure to Nintendo. There's no way that wouldn't increase Switch sales.
Click to expand...

Oh, you're definitely right. I was just making an addendum to my previous post. Those kids are definitely gonna be lying about their age, once they get their hands on the Switch, though 😂
 
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