StarTopic Future Nintendo Hardware & Technology Speculation & Discussion |ST| (New Staff Post, Please read)

[Shoulder]

It's a shocking amount of required data throughput

It is for sure.

You think about that 4K is 3840x2160, which is 8,294,400 pixels per FRAME. So imagine a Canon Digital SLR of the mid 2000s outputting an 8 megapixel image. That’s 4K for you in essence.

And then there’s 8K, which is 7680x4320, or 33,177,600 pixels per frame. Many Mirrorless Cameras today have sensors that’ll go 30-50 megapixels for a photo.

16k is 15360x8640, or 132,710,400 pixels per frame. There are only a handful of Digital Cameras today that go beyond 100 megapixels, and I believe all of them are Medium Format rather than standard 35mm.

Going back to 4K, multiply that by 60, and you have close to 500 million pixels per second (497,664,000 pixels to be exact). Now take that number, and multiple it by 4 for a 240hz display, and it’s over 1.9 BILLION pixels per second (1,990,656,000 pixels)

To put that into another perspective, 4k240 is the same pixels per second as 8k60, and 1080p960 as the 1080p equivalent.

And mind you, that’s just the frame buffer itself, and not the game as a whole. Say you have a 4K image at a 24-bit color depth, with some simple math, we can roughly estimate that you need about 25MB per frame to render the raw image. That’s about 1.5GB/second at 60fps, and that’s again, the raw image before anything the game wants to render.

I know folks a lot smarter than me can go more into details concerning framebuffer, and the VRAM requirements associated with it, plus other nuances such as image compression, and whatever else. I’m not well versed in that stuff.

 

[Gerald]

Btw guys do you think is likely that most AAA games will be day one on Switch 2? Since we know how powerful it is

 

[Concernt]

I know this is selfish- me having a 4K TV on my desk and sitting so close I can see the pixels- but I REALLY hope every developer, but especially Nintendo, TRIES to get a game outputting at 4K. Even if that means using Ultra Performance Mode or a partial DLSS and a second, spacial upscale. Even the most extreme examples, like 560p to 4K via 1080p DLSS performance mode + FSR 1.X, I think Devs should try and get as close to a 4K output as they can instead of giving in to the whims of the console's default upscaler, or the TV's. Even if it means using a "dumb" upscale.

That being said. With Deck having FSR at a system (OS) level, is there anything stopping Nintendo using FSR 1.0, or another good spacial upscaler as the "system" upscaler, like how Switch has a baked in upscaler to 1080p(but which isn't very good, even calling it a scaler is stretching it.)?

Surely it has to have it, but if it has one, why not give it some smarts, if the OS/System Reserve memory, CPU and GPU budget allows it? Perhaps they could use a similar system to the Nvidia Shield video upscaler, if latency doesn't arise.

A portion of this message has been removed upon a correction.

 

[Lancelot]

Going based on past Nintendo logic... honestly the Switch 1 having no more releases on launch day of the NG Switch is entirely possible.
That being said, I don't think it's wise for Nintendo to do it, especially if they've got BC in the Switch 2. Less demanding games running on the base Switch and the NG Switch would be a good move for them. What defines "less demanding" may be a bit vague, but i'm mostly operating out of hope here tbh.

Switch 1 will still have a couple of releases by then out of this backlog we don't have a clear picture of yet. Once this backlog runs out, however... (probably around 2024/2025) Switch 1's support is likely to wind down significantly, it stopping or not in its entirely is up to the remaining interest and how many scalable low-end titles Nintendo will even have on store by then. By the end of the year, we should have a cleaner picture of the situation.

 

[10k]

I have Switch 2 news to share this weekend, please stay tuned to my youtube channel.

 

[Concernt]

Btw guys do you think is likely that most AAA games will be day one on Switch 2? Since we know how powerful it is

I know plenty will vote "no", but I'm voting "yes".

Nintendo Switch repaired a LOT of third party bridges, even going so far as allowing third parties to bring their own networking in if Nintendo's isn't up to snuff (apparently a problem for some developers like EA and ABK, which now have their own networks.) including external accounts, like Fortnite and Xbox Live/Xbox Network.

Since developer relations and networking are, for the largest part, sorted, that really only leaves "ease of development". Do the games fit?

And for the most part, unless they fall flat on the RAM or god forbid the clock speeds, they will. If developers truly don't give a toss they could, provided the right tools, they could seriously skimp on optimisation by just allowing long loading screens and dropping the internal rez into the 500s range, and hope their upscaler of choice cleans it up to 1080p, then not bother with a second build for handheld mode.

It SHOULD have plenty of breathing room, even for games otherwise PS5 exclusive.

I'd also like to put a word in for not doing CPU tasks in time with framerate. Nintendo is somewhat used to this, with Splatoon 3 only doing certain calculations once every 16th of a second, which doesn't even line up with a frame and ends up being every forth or every third. Minecraft, also, famously uses a tickrate for logic ans not the framerate. IF (big IF) Nintendo or Nvidia provide tools to accommodate that it could be a considerable boon for ease of porting. Could be. So for instance games that are CPU bound could get a 60 or 30FPS presentation, and only updating some of the game logic 15 times a second.

The confidence is there. It's likely the market, power and tools are there too. Some developers realise they missed out on Switch. Many won't want to miss again.

 

[Concernt]

I have Switch 2 news to share this weekend, please stay tuned to my youtube channel.

Is this a joke about last week's "rumour" or?

 

[Foltzie]

the people I assume they're talking about aren't technically part of NoA and NoE. NERD, NST, and NTD all report to NCL rather than NoA/NoE. that said higher ups at the regional branches are involved as they need to give input on how marketing will be, focus testing, and acting as liaisons to other important developers

Well that's one me, I assumed NERD and NST reported org wise under NoE and NoA.

and yes, you nailed my core point. Maybe Doug Bowser and some of his direct reports knows the current name and target price, but not too many other folks at NoA would know until it's time to start preparing marketing materials and/or engaging the retail channel.

 

[Gerald]

I know plenty will vote "no", but I'm voting "yes".

Nintendo Switch repaired a LOT of third party bridges, even going so far as allowing third parties to bring their own networking in if Nintendo's isn't up to snuff (apparently a problem for some developers like EA and ABK, which now have their own networks.) including external accounts, like Fortnite and Xbox Live/Xbox Network.

Since developer relations and networking are, for the largest part, sorted, that really only leaves "ease of development". Do the games fit?

And for the most part, unless they fall flat on the RAM or god forbid the clock speeds, they will. If developers truly don't give a toss they could, provided the right tools, they could seriously skimp on optimisation by just allowing long loading screens and dropping the internal rez into the 500s range, and hope their upscaler of choice cleans it up to 1080p, then not bother with a second build for handheld mode.

It SHOULD have plenty of breathing room, even for games otherwise PS5 exclusive.

I'd also like to put a word in for not doing CPU tasks in time with framerate. Nintendo is somewhat used to this, with Splatoon 3 only doing certain calculations once every 16th of a second, which doesn't even line up with a frame and ends up being every forth or every third. Minecraft, also, famously uses a tickrate for logic ans not the framerate. IF (big IF) Nintendo or Nvidia provide tools to accommodate that it could be a considerable boon for ease of porting. Could be. So for instance games that are CPU bound could get a 60 or 30FPS presentation, and only updating some of the game logic 15 times a second.

The confidence is there. It's likely the market, power and tools are there too. Some developers realise they missed out on Switch. Many won't want to miss again.

I agree, and imo is not so big difference like it was in switch 1, CPU will be also more powerful than AMD Jaguar, and 12GB of Ram will doing job

 

[D36]

I have Switch 2 news to share this weekend, please stay tuned to my youtube channel.

Is this Prime's burner account?

 

[MP!]

wouldn't it be nice if the resolution goalposts stopped moving?
I legitimately think 4K is enough

 

[10k]

Is this a joke about last week's "rumour" or?

I don't have a youtube channel so....

 

[Concernt]

wouldn't it be nice if the resolution goalposts stopped moving?
I legitimately think 4K is enough

As far as the market is concerned, 4K IS enough. Consumer interest in 8K is muted at best. The percieved increase in image quality is very, very low even compared to the 1080p->4K jump, which wasn't a whole awful lot perceptually.

I'm a very specific case where I want LOTS of pixels AND a huge display, but even I wouldn't get an 8K display unless it was 100" diagonal AND affordable. Having a computer monitor literally be the size of the wall without sacrificing pixel density is an absolute dream to me. But to almost nobody else in the world!

Apparently MicroLED is making strides lately. Maybe the next gen equivalent of OLED Model will be the μLED Model?

 

[Skittzo]

You all just got 10k'd

 

[Derachi]

wouldn't it be nice if the resolution goalposts stopped moving?
I legitimately think 4K is enough

I think the only video game company that thinks 4K isn’t enough and that 8K is a viable target is Sony, if the PS5 Pro rumours are to be believed.

Also: Sony makes TVs and would like to sell them, so if they have a new selling point they can latch onto to convince folks their 4K set is outdated, they’re going to do it.

 

[Skittzo]

wouldn't it be nice if the resolution goalposts stopped moving?
I legitimately think 4K is enough

I'd prefer 10k

 

[Sol]

Apparently MicroLED is making strides lately. Maybe the next gen equivalent of OLED Model will be the μLED Model?

As close to a 0% chance as it gets. The tech just isn't there yet and it's insanely expensive.

Apple won't have microLED on its watches until 2026 at the earliest, and we'll be lucky before we see it on an iPhone before 2030. No way Nintendo delivers an 8" microLED Switch 2 in ~2027.

 

[Paul_Subsonic]

I know this is selfish- me having a 4K TV on my desk and sitting so close I can see the pixels- but I REALLY hope every developer, but especially Nintendo, TRIES to get a game outputting at 4K. Even if that means using Ultra Performance Mode or a partial DLSS and a second, spacial upscale. Even the most extreme examples, like 560p to 4K via 1080p DLSS performance mode + FSR 1.X or DLSS 1.9*, I think Devs should try and get as close to a 4K output as they can instead of giving in to the whims of the console's default upscaler, or the TV's. Even if it means using a "dumb" upscale.

That being said. With Deck having FSR at a system (OS) level, is there anything stopping Nintendo using DLSS 1.9*, FSR 1.0, or another good spacial upscaler as the "system" upscaler, like how Switch has a baked in upscaler to 1080p(but which isn't very good, even calling it a scaler is stretching it.)?

Surely it has to have it, but if it has one, why not give it some smarts, if the OS/System Reserve memory, CPU and GPU budget allows it? Perhaps they could use a similar system to the Nvidia Shield video upscaler, if latency doesn't arise.

*A term used to refer to a kind of spacial DLSS (1.0) that can run on CUDA cores rather than Tensor cores, but it's uncertain if it's actively in development and may not be available.

I'm almost sure DLSS 1.9 is not spatial but is temporal, and requires engine data.

DLSS 1.9 has been the name given to the original DLSS implementation of Control. It's basically a prototype DLSS 2 that runs on shader cores. It's deprecated since the arrival of 2, and is basically useless now. Unless Nvidia wanted to do some cross vendor version of DLSS which won't happen.

DLSS 1 proper also wouldn't work for a system upscaler, as the model requires per game training.

The only Nvidia solutions that could act as a system upscaler would be NIS (but it's basically "FSR 1 at home"), VSR (but tweaked because that's made to deal with compression artifacts which won't be a problem in this use case) or a completely new algorithm.

 

[YolkFolk]

I have Switch 2 news to share this weekend, please stay tuned to my youtube channel.

They’re making a separate more powerful home console on par with Series X?

 

[Armoured_Bear]

Btw guys do you think is likely that most AAA games will be day one on Switch 2? Since we know how powerful it is

a) we don't know how powerful it is and
b) No, many games from certain publishers will not be ported.

 

[Derachi]

I have Switch 2 news to share this weekend, please stay tuned to my youtube channel.

next week, in gaming magazines…

 

[Concernt]

next week, in gaming magazines…

NEXT TIME.

ON FAMIBOARDS.

 

[JoshuaJSlone]

Yeah. It’s pretty crazy how the jumps in resolution go.

8K for example is not a double in pixels, but a 4x increase over 4K. That means 8K is a 16x increase in pixels over 1080p.

And for shits and giggles, 16k resolution is 4x over 8K, which means it’s a 64x resolution increase over 1080p just to put things into perspective.

No 8K or 16K, but when I got a 4K TV I made these images to better visualize the jump from old content, with 12x9 N64 screens or whatever.

You can't have TotK on a mobile chipset in VR.

I think you could do it decently now. I think Quest 3 will be the first standalone VR with processing capabilities to go beyond base PS4 VR level. Handling TOTK at several times the resolution/frame rate should be doable.

 

[SiG]

Any new juicy rumors?

 

[TLZ]

I have Switch 2 news to share this weekend, please stay tuned to my youtube channel.

 

[My Tulpa]

I've just been thinking, I highly doubt Nintendo themselves will do much in the way of new ties that are cross-gen. They will want to get people off the system.

Why would they desperately need the current Switch userbase to move to the new model?

Here is my opposite take to yours, Nintendo won’t care if your are playing the new, big Nintendo release in 2027 on the new $450 Switch model or on the $200 OLED Switch.

Why would they care?

The whole point of this new ecosystem they built was to have ease of access and accessibility of game development and release across all their devices going forward. That includes making it accessible on older devices that still has engagement on it. Doesn’t matter how old. DLSS tech going forward allows them to develop for both at the same time.

The current Switch models will see greater, longer engagement than the ps4. And the ps4 mostly had “cross gen” support for 3 years. Nintendo should at least see value in the current models for 5 years after the new hardware launches.

The 3D Mario game going to be crossgen then?

Why wouldn’t it be?

Has ToTK selling extremely well and being so lauded despite being on extremely old hardware not proven anything?

It’s going to be exclusive. Nintendo didn’t hold out this long to make 3D Mario cross gen.

Ah yes…I remember this argument as to why Nintendo kept delaying BotW2. 3D Zelda NEEDS to be run on new hardware to sell better! The new hardware NEEDS 3D Zelda to launch with it to sell the new hardware better!

Neither is true. Same with 3D Mario.

At the end of the day the Switch 2 is their next system and they’ll need everyone to move over no matter how great the Switch is. It’ll be old hardware and history.

Why do they need everyone to move over? I can’t think of any good reason.

 

[My Tulpa]

Switch 2 is absolutely going to be a huge step up forward, admittedly the biggest we'll ever see from a console for a long time. The 6x figures that have been mentioned are strictly going by teraflops, not including the architectural efficiencies and the myriad of hardware features Switch 2 will bring to the table. It's not gonna be just for "enthusiasts", that's like saying nobody noticed the jump from PS3 from PS4.

It will be a step forward in terms of resolution, performance, IQ…but you won’t see that “SIX TIMES THE POWER!!” differ Nintendo game design output that they have been doing.

They are going to still make games that are playing on the 2019 Lite. It will just look and run better on the new hardware.

Doesn’t the ps5 have “6x the power” gpu wise over the OG ps4? As well as the much more modern cpu and architecture? We’re the exclusives the last 3 years really THAT big of a difference between the two beyond graphics and performance?

then they'll just label it 4K. same as all these "4K" games on PS5 and Series X.

Well that’s the “hook” then. Slap “For Switch 4k 60fps gaming!”*

*when hooked up to a 4k tv

 

[My Tulpa]

I don't think they're going to market DLSS, in the end it's just another optimization trick. A great one, but still.

It’s not a crazy idea though, AI now has a global, casual consumer mindshare now. Similar to VR mindshare exploding in the 90’s (Ahem, Virtual Boy)

I can actually see Nintendo possibly marketing it as a Switch that runs on AI tech.

For most games, they can say all Switch games look and run better because of the AI tech inside. And then they can make some 1-2 Switch type exclusive games that instead of using the tensor cores for upscaling, they use it for unique and interesting AI gameplay.

I can absolutely see a universe where that happens and that can be the “gimmick”. It will also give the model the exclusives, while all the “normal” Nintendo published games still play on all devices.

 

[Dakhil]

Arm Announces Public Filing of Registration Statement for Proposed Initial Public Offering

Arm today announced that it has publicly filed a registration statement on Form F-1 with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) relating to the proposed initial public offering of American depositary shares (“ADS”) representing its ordinary shares.

www.arm.com

 

[NintenDuvo]

Any new juicy rumors?

What couldve been something was killed by Nintendo Prime running his mouth about something he shouldnt have so the person who was going to share the rumor decided to clam up

 

[theguy]

I just bought a gaming laptop today, nothing too fancy, it has a 4050 inside. I downloaded Arkham Knight to see if it could run at 4k and it can at an average of 40 fps with everything set to high. I don’t think I can play around with DLSS in that game but I know the card in the laptop is capable of DLSS 3. Now my question is, how would this compare with the potential of what we think is in the Switch 2?

 

[LiC]

What couldve been something was killed by Nintendo Prime running his mouth about something he shouldnt have so the person who was going to share the rumor decided to clam up

It was a pointless and shitty move by Nintendo Prime, but I don't think that's what actually put the kibosh on the rumor, and either way, I'm pretty sure we didn't miss out on much.

(May 2021 Twitter post follows.)

 

[NintenDuvo]

It was a pointless and shitty move by Nintendo Prime, but I don't think that's what actually put the kibosh on the rumor, and either way, I'm pretty sure we didn't miss out on much.

(May 2021 Twitter post follows.)

If i remember correctly wasnt everyone during that time period getting their wires crossed and we ended up with the OLED

 

[LiC]

If i remember correctly wasnt everyone during that time period getting their wires crossed and we ended up with the OLED

Even if that was the case for some outlets, that's not a get out of jail free card for random rumors, particularly from someone who never showed any knowledge of the OLED either, posting an obviously wrong "Switch Pro" reveal date that didn't line up with the OLED any more than it did with the nonexistent Pro (and the bullshit "it keeps changing" line, as if he had been getting up-to-date info on Nintendo's marketing plans over a period of time!).

 

[TheRealWario]

Now that Drake is allegedly bigger, being a vr headset is more off the table

You aren't wrong. Even the Quest 2 is uncomfortable at 500 grams. Maybe someday.

 

[Shoulder]

Btw guys do you think is likely that most AAA games will be day one on Switch 2? Since we know how powerful it is

Absolutely. In fact, there will be dozens of AAA games available from day one via the use of Backwards Compatibility of all Switch 1 titles.

(yes, I’m cheating kind of)

I just bought a gaming laptop today, nothing too fancy, it has a 4050 inside. I downloaded Arkham Knight to see if it could run at 4k and it can at an average of 40 fps with everything set to high. I don’t think I can play around with DLSS in that game but I know the card in the laptop is capable of DLSS 3. Now my question is, how would this compare with the potential of what we think is in the Switch 2?

In terms of raw horsepower, the 4050 laptop GPU is more powerful than the GPUs in either the PS5, and Series X. But it also has the advantage of better efficiencies over the AMD GPUs in Sony, and MS's offerings, but that is no surprise given the hardware in them is 2018/2019 era.

So with that, in terms of raw specs, it’s maybe 6 or so times more powerful than what the Drake Chip is, maybe more? It’s difficult to nail down good comparisons given the differences between architectures, plus we’re dealing with ARM for Switch vs. x86 for the 4050 plus any additional overhead with Windows. That said, both do support Ray Tracing, and DLSS, though 4050 as you mentioned has DLSS 3.0, and the full Ada Lovelace architecture.

What's interesting about Arkham Knight is we will get an idea how it'll run on a regular Switch. We know 30fps will be the target, and it’s possible 720p could be the goal in docked mode rather than 900p or 1080p. Based on how Arkham Knight will run on Switch, we will have a better idea how it could run on say Switch 2 with Drake.

 

[Lancelot]

It will be a step forward in terms of resolution, performance, IQ…but you won’t see that “SIX TIMES THE POWER!!” differ Nintendo game design output that they have been doing.

They are going to still make games that are playing on the 2019 Lite. It will just look and run better on the new hardware.

Doesn’t the ps5 have “6x the power” gpu wise over the OG ps4? As well as the much more modern cpu and architecture? We’re the exclusives the last 3 years really THAT big of a difference between the two beyond graphics and performance?




Well that’s the “hook” then. Slap “For Switch 4k 60fps gaming!”*

*when hooked up to a 4k tv

I thought your takes were already addressed lots of pages ago, by multiple people in fact... First of all, you can't compare the upgrade from PS4 to PS5 to the upgrade from Switch 1 to Switch NG, that's irrelevant and disingenuous. PS4 was already a 1.8 TFLOPS machine capable of achieving outstanding visuals, good enough to the point most developers have proved unable to make better looking games due to a variety of factors, Switch is a 0.397 TFLOPS machine (when docked) that's already severely held back in both resolution and asset fidelity, therefore the jump for its successor is going to be infinitely more noticeable and much easier to achieve in a regular basis.

Second, game design being changed hasn't been the point of hardware upgrades since the PS3 era and won't ever be again. I don't get why you're so fixated on game design when anyone that's been around since 2006 knows the point of better hardware is to get better fidelity (and everything it encompasses), that may have been the point before the 7th generation but not anymore. That said, better fidelity will never be same to better IQ, asset quality is a thing as well and Nintendo's yet to reach the average of what can be achieved in a non-power constrained, modern environment regardless of resolution and performance. Let's get all this through before you keep dragging this strange take all over the ground.

Third, Nintendo is not going to keep making games for the original Switch since all of their major studios have clearly moved on, they always do. It's definitely going to keep getting what it should able to run, but the hardware jump is literally so huge anything targeting Switch 2 since the start is never going to run on the original, period. Regardless of how much of a jump the current PS5 exclusives may seem to you, many of those would never run on PS4 no matter what you do, either because of a CPU, GPU or storage bottleneck... Like it or not, those are next gen games by definition. You might call those "diminishing returns" in PS5's case, but a console leaving the X360 baseline to embrace PS4 Pro's is never going to suffer from such a thing. Arguing otherwise would mean you considered the 8th gen a minor jump over the 7th... Which, I don't see many agreeing with such a thing unless you're purposely using this arbitrary "game design" metric of yours.

 

[axlp]

I just had an idle thought about an old 'leak'

 

[uncleoptimus]

Why do they need everyone to move over? I can’t think of any good reason.

It will be a step forward in terms of resolution, performance, IQ…but you won’t see that “SIX TIMES THE POWER!!” differ Nintendo game design output that they have been doing.

There are a couple aspects to consider IMO:

a) We don't know what control features the final hardware might or might not be baking into it. It is conceivable some new innovation there compels games to be designed specifically for the new system.

b) Eventually they want to steadily migrate over the current massive user-base while hopefully capturing the attention of people who haven't bought the current model. This is not only to enable their teams to develop new games with less restrictions, but also to encourage third-party partners to green-light new projects. Launch-period bets aside, to do this over time, they must demonstrate to partners that the platform is growing steadily.

All that said, I hear your main point:

Why would Nintendo abandon their existing cash-cow install-base?

In a vacuum they mainly want to sell as much software as possible at highest margin possible. It would be irresponsible to not support the current model with a healthy slate of releases for at least a few more years. There will be 10s of millions of owners they would not be serving if they just cut off all support following Switch 2 release.

Its a delicate balancing act!

Some titles, IMO, must be exclusive to the new platform both for artistic reasons as well as the reality that you must give incentive for adoption and thus maintain your partner relationships.

I'm really curious how this will play out. Metroid Prime 4 would have made for a nice "showcase title" at or near launch, showing the full abilities of the new hardware. But they have already promised this game for the current Switch making it most likely a cross-gen title (gawd-speed, Retro).

However would they tout the next 3D Mario as the killer-app title at launch, exclusive to Switch 2?

Or how about Mario Kart 9, Nintendo's ultimate killer-app? If they make Mario Kart 9 exclusive to the new system, maybe it jeopardizes many millions of unit sales. But if they do not, what if 10s of millions of people decide "eh I dont' need the new system, I will just get it for my old Switch"?

 

[karmitt]

I just had an idle thought about an old 'leak'

* Hidden text: cannot be quoted. *

More like intrusive thought. I hope somebody comes in here and says why this is unlikely :[

 

[YugamiSekai]

I just had an idle thought about an old 'leak'

* Hidden text: cannot be quoted. *

 

[Smile]

I just had an idle thought about an old 'leak'

* Hidden text: cannot be quoted. *

ruh roh

 

[chocolate_supra]

I just had an idle thought about an old 'leak'

* Hidden text: cannot be quoted. *

 

[LiC]

Why the panic?

 

[ShadowFox08]

I know this is selfish- me having a 4K TV on my desk and sitting so close I can see the pixels- but I REALLY hope every developer, but especially Nintendo, TRIES to get a game outputting at 4K. Even if that means using Ultra Performance Mode or a partial DLSS and a second, spacial upscale. Even the most extreme examples, like 560p to 4K via 1080p DLSS performance mode + FSR 1.X, I think Devs should try and get as close to a 4K output as they can instead of giving in to the whims of the console's default upscaler, or the TV's. Even if it means using a "dumb" upscale.

That being said. With Deck having FSR at a system (OS) level, is there anything stopping Nintendo using FSR 1.0, or another good spacial upscaler as the "system" upscaler, like how Switch has a baked in upscaler to 1080p(but which isn't very good, even calling it a scaler is stretching it.)?

Surely it has to have it, but if it has one, why not give it some smarts, if the OS/System Reserve memory, CPU and GPU budget allows it? Perhaps they could use a similar system to the Nvidia Shield video upscaler, if latency doesn't arise.

A portion of this message has been removed upon a correction.

We'll get 4k games alright. For backwards compatible switch games and indies.

I suspect once PS4 and xbone are out of the picture, we'll see less native 4k games, and devs pushing 1080p-1440p on Series X and PS5 for more fidelity. Less 60fps games too outside shooters, sports, and some action games.

 

[Giancarlo]

Btw guys do you think is likely that most AAA games will be day one on Switch 2? Since we know how powerful it is

severals factors wil influence if theres big AAA third parties games for Switch sucessor, such as oompany X bought the rights to release said game on the game, if there games could run or not

 

[Giancarlo]

I know this is selfish- me having a 4K TV on my desk and sitting so close I can see the pixels- but I REALLY hope every developer, but especially Nintendo, TRIES to get a game outputting at 4K. Even if that means using Ultra Performance Mode or a partial DLSS and a second, spacial upscale. Even the most extreme examples, like 560p to 4K via 1080p DLSS performance mode + FSR 1.X, I think Devs should try and get as close to a 4K output as they can instead of giving in to the whims of the console's default upscaler, or the TV's. Even if it means using a "dumb" upscale.

That being said. With Deck having FSR at a system (OS) level, is there anything stopping Nintendo using FSR 1.0, or another good spacial upscaler as the "system" upscaler, like how Switch has a baked in upscaler to 1080p(but which isn't very good, even calling it a scaler is stretching it.)?

Surely it has to have it, but if it has one, why not give it some smarts, if the OS/System Reserve memory, CPU and GPU budget allows it? Perhaps they could use a similar system to the Nvidia Shield video upscaler, if latency doesn't arise.

A portion of this message has been removed upon a correction.

Sony/Microsoft could barely archive true 4K resolution on they consoles, 4K on Switch sucessor will be a upcaled 1080p resolution, not true 4K as many hope.

 

[Branduil]

I just had an idle thought about an old 'leak'

* Hidden text: cannot be quoted. *

I could see that, but if the 7-inch screen is true it will still need larger joycons. I mean I guess they could keep the same ones but it would look pretty ugly against a taller screen.

 

[eye0h]

I could see that, but if the 7-inch screen is true it will still need larger joycons. I mean I guess they could keep the same ones but it would look pretty ugly against a taller screen.

 

[Giancarlo]

Why would they desperately need the current Switch userbase to move to the new model?

Here is my opposite take to yours, Nintendo won’t care if your are playing the new, big Nintendo release in 2027 on the new $450 Switch model or on the $200 OLED Switch.

Why would they care?

The whole point of this new ecosystem they built was to have ease of access and accessibility of game development and release across all their devices going forward. That includes making it accessible on older devices that still has engagement on it. Doesn’t matter how old. DLSS tech going forward allows them to develop for both at the same time.

The current Switch models will see greater, longer engagement than the ps4. And the ps4 mostly had “cross gen” support for 3 years. Nintendo should at least see value in the current models for 5 years after the new hardware launches.



Why wouldn’t it be?

Has ToTK selling extremely well and being so lauded despite being on extremely old hardware not proven anything?



Ah yes…I remember this argument as to why Nintendo kept delaying BotW2. 3D Zelda NEEDS to be run on new hardware to sell better! The new hardware NEEDS 3D Zelda to launch with it to sell the new hardware better!

Neither is true. Same with 3D Mario.



Why do they need everyone to move over? I can’t think of any good reason.

maybe because the hardware is becoming outdated, making it hard for Nintendo own internal studios/third parties to work on them