-
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| (New Staff Post, Please read)
- Thread starter Dakhil
- Start date
OP
OP
Going by what Thraktor said here and here, and assuming Nintendo opts to switch from using USB 3.2 Gen 2 signals to DisplayPort 1.4a signals when in TV mode ("4kdp_preferred_over_usb30"), there should theoretically be enough bandwidth for 4K 60 Hz with a 4:4:4/RGB chroma and 10-bit colour, since DisplayPort 1.4a has a maximum bandwidth of 32.4 Gbps.
LiC
Member
Are these numbers assuming an alpha channel, as @Discostew mentioned?Going by what Thraktor said here and here, and assuming Nintendo opts to switch from using USB 3.2 Gen 2 signals to DisplayPort 1.4a signals when in TV mode ("4kdp_preferred_over_usb30"), there should theoretically be enough bandwidth for 4K 60 Hz with a 4:4:4/RGB chroma and 10-bit colour, since DisplayPort 1.4a has a maximum bandwidth of 32.4 Gbps.
I know only a little about video signal transmission, but just doing the math, 10-bit HDR uses 30 bits per pixel, and 4K resolution is 3840 x 2160 = 8,294,400 pixels, and we need to send that 60 times per second. 4:4:4 chroma means there's no subsampling and thus all 30 bits per pixel need to be sent. 8,294,400 x 30 x 60 = 149,299,200,00 bits sent per second, or a speed of 14.93 Gbps.
This is lower than the number from Wikipedia (and doing the calculation with 40 bpp for an alpha channel gives 19.91 Gbps instead of the 20.05 Gpbs in your table), so maybe there's some additional information or metadata in there, but the numbers without an alpha channel are what would be relevant to Nintendo's video output.
When the DisplayPort Alt Mode is enabled, it takes over the high-speed data lanes (2 or 4 lanes) of your USB cable. Like in a cop show, DP shows up with a badge (Alt Mode) and commandeers your car (USB cable), therefore the USB version is not a gating factor of your video capacity. All you need to look at is the DP version supported by your source and sink.
Based on the Nvidia Linux codes, T239 supports DP 1.4 data rates. With 4 data lanes, DP 1.4 is capable of 4K@120Hz w/o HDR, or 4K@60Hz w/ HDR. If Display Stream Compression (DSC; a “visually lossless” algorithm) is used, it can support 4K@120Hz w/ HDR, or 8K@60Hz w/ HDR. Chroma subsampling is not required for any of the above.
Based on the Nvidia Linux codes, T239 supports DP 1.4 data rates. With 4 data lanes, DP 1.4 is capable of 4K@120Hz w/o HDR, or 4K@60Hz w/ HDR. If Display Stream Compression (DSC; a “visually lossless” algorithm) is used, it can support 4K@120Hz w/ HDR, or 8K@60Hz w/ HDR. Chroma subsampling is not required for any of the above.
snorkellingfish
Cappy
- Pronouns
- she
It's not about specifically 3D Mario titles, as opposed to a Mario title that shows off the latest and greatest of what the console can offer.
In that context, launch titles included:
Famicom/NES: Donkey Kong (in Japan) and Super Mario Bros (in the US)
Gameboy: Super Mario Land
Super Famicom/SNES: Super Mario World
N64: Super Mario 64
Gameboy Advance: Super Mario Advance
GameCube: Luigi's Mansion
DS: Super Mario 64 DS
Wii: Zelda Twilight Princess; Wii Sports
3DS: Uh, Nintendogs + Cats? Pilot Wings 3D?
Wii U: Nintendo Land; New Super Mario Bros U
Switch: Zelda BotW
Bolded are launches that included a game featuring one or both of the Mario brothers. I've included both consoles and handhelds, since a hybrid console is a bit like both, and because they show a similar pattern: Nintendo like to release with a game that shows off the marketable premises of the new hardware.
For both consoles and handhelds (apart from the Wii), in addition to any "gimmicks", that typically involves a game that can show off the advantage of the extra power of the hardware. For consoles, that game is a new game built for the new hardware; for handhelds, that game can be a console port that shows off how the system can play increasingly complex console releases.
The Switch's launch was a lot like a handheld launch in that regard - it showed off that it could play the latest and greatest console Zelda on the go, and do it just as well as the Wii U. In contrast, the Switch 2's launch can't be like a handheld launch, because there are no first party titles to port from a comparably powerful system. If Nintendo want to show off what it's capable of, they'll need an exclusive. That exclusive doesn't have to be a 3D Mario, but it's hard to think of a better candidate.
Jimkulus
Rattata
I don't see why they couldn't make it more of an option like they did for Labo VR support in BotW/Mario Odyssey. Personally, playing a game like Metroid Prime 4 and seeing through the visor, or playing as Link and being able to physically swing my sword/draw my bow would be absolutely incredible. I think VR is a great way of playing certain games, and I think Nintendo stepping into the industry with an add-on for the Switch 2 could fix the problem of there not being many big titles for the medium.
ertaboy356b
Resident Troll
Agree, in my programming career, the biggest issue with threading so far are contested resources. Using locks and other similar kinds had performance impacts. The possibility of a race condition is also there.
Last edited:
I believe there's been grave miscommunication here.
Look at the comments quoted below.
Their post was re-read to double check the concerns raised:
Point being:
It's quite apparent that @Phenom08 is not reading their comments in the same way as many others are doing in this thread.
There's a slight hint of sincerity I'm picking up and no obvious "troll" behavior, so I'm willing to bet there's something else at play here.
There could be several factors as to why people are perceiving the messages posted here differently:
To be fair, Phenom08 did start off their first post by mainly focusing on their arguments, albeit in a difficult-to-read format and with a somewhat perceived "high-and-mighty" attitude, but their "wall of text" instead became a point of soft ridicule at first:
I understand it might be propelled by the perceived condescending attitude, and poking fun at such things is always fun, but to a relatively new user with ~20 posts (before the long chain of back-n-forth started), who's possibly coming from a different background than most, I believe that we as a community should strive for a warmer welcoming and have a positive mentality where we read in the best meanings until the opposite is proven
@Phenom08: Now, allow me to attempt to explain quite candidly why the miscommunication was happening
You didn't say anything wrong per se or come with faulty data. It was just the wording you used; the words you chose, the straightforward phrases, and not holding back on describing things as directly as possible that was not so very well received by some members. You may have had good intentions, but it made others think you were looking down on them and that you were somehow better than everyone else, almost like a king. You didn't say it, but that's how you appeared to some.
No one likes an arrogant person. It's when someone who thinks they're better than everyone else. Even if they are, no one likes it that they proudly say they are better than everyone else. Being humble is a praiseworthy quality, and that means not praising oneself too directly, but saying it lowkey, like "I am glad that my speculation turned out to be true", instead of directly saying "I always knew it, and you all were wrong!".
Take your first post. I've highlighted the parts that make you appear "arrogant":
I understand that you may be upset that people might take any small hint and get their hopes up (which actually happened a lot right before the OLED model was announced), but the way you're saying it "people take any announcement and spin it as much as possible to fit their desires (but I certainly don't do it)" and "Like seriously (what is wrong with you??), stop bending reality to fit your desires (stop it, don't do it, I'm commanding you)" makes it appear aggressive and sounds like you somehow know better telling people that they're doing something wrong. In certain cases it's okay if what you're about to say makes a ton of sense, but I think your large text was lost on a lot of people, so most only read your first (arrogantly-sounding) sentence, didn't read the rest, and formed an opinio about your post and its tone.
The last two sentences here appear really condescending. "You don't run Nintendo (so what do you know, you incompetent fool? I run Nintendo, so I know), so your rule is completely irrelevant (but my rules are valid, because I said so, and I'm not giving your rules a chance). Relying on leaks for confirmation is foolish (and so you you must be foolish for following such a rule), how you still haven't learned that is something else (because I have learned that and I know they can't be trusted, so I'm better than you for having learnt that!)".
Yeah, you didn't really give the other person a chance here and disregarded their point just because of your own rule: that leaks cannot be trusted. You might be right, but the financial data you pulled from Nintendo is just raw data. You still have to interpret it and give it meaning and speculate on what the future holds from that data. So really, you're two posts actually appear as you saying: "Personally, I only believe that public Nintendo financial data can be used to predict what the company will do in the future. Anyone who believes differently is wrong! If someone hears news about Nintendo releasing new bundles, then they cannot predict Nintendo's future because you can only do that with public Nintendo financial data. If anyone hears about leaks, they're never correct because I personally believe they're never correct, so the only way to know about Nintendo's future is through their financial public data. That's my personal belief, but I still believe it's the only way, and everyone has to follow this rule".
I don't know if you intended it this way, but that's how it appeared :/ It doesn't seem like you were giving the other person's point of view a chance. A better way would have been to acknowledge their point of view and then explaining why it doesn't make sense to you to listen to leaks. Something like this: "Thanks for your input. I dont believe leaks can be used to accurately predict the future of Nintendo, so I'm careful of them. The reason being that a lot of leaks have been posted throughout the years and almost none of them have been accurate. We can use them carefully as hints, but never as confirmation, which is why I choose to rely on the publicly available data."
I think explaining this with a picture will be better:
This one sounds really condescending. "You say some goofy mess" sounds very negative and very straightforward (like going to someone and telling them they're ugly), and these parts: "your made up speculation" (you're saying that was they're saying is false just because they're speculating, and it makes you sound arrogant because you're also speculating but somehow are judging others' speculation to be false), "My favorite part is how you suggest..." (it's like you're publicly shaming someone and this is the nail in the coffin, as in, it's their "worst" point according to you, you who possess more knowledge), "me speculating on their financial state will allow me to be more accurate than your speculation based out of thin air and insiders" (it sounds like you're competing with other people and that you already think you're the winner. People speculating for fun without wanting to be right aren't here for a competition, but it sounds like you are attending a championship and doing whatever it takes to win), and the constant use of "lol" which sounds like you are somehow better and "laughing" at others' speculation (while sitting on your horse and looking down). I'm not saying this is how you intended it to be, but you're "directness" can really make it appear so.
Also, you seem to keep bringing up how speculating on Nintendo's financial state is more accurate than any other method, "me speculating on their financial state will allow me to be more accurate than your speculation based out of thin air and insiders". If we forget the directness of your comment, when you say something like that, you generally need to also bring proof of why you think one method is better than another. Otherwise, it makes it appear arrogant, like your theory is better just because you say it is. It would be better to say: "I understand your point, but there's not enough conclusive data to support it. An event can indicate so many different things, so narrowing it down to mean Switch 2 announcement is a bit of a leap in my opinion. Personally, I believe looking at the financial data gives us a much safer prediction of Nintendo's future actions, because they're obliged to publicly share and cannot fake the data, and it gives us insight into what decisions they have in store for the fiscal year. Leaks often tend to be wrong and it's hard to distinguish an accurate leak from a fake one. And reading into the significance of events isn't reliable.". You're essentially saying the same thing, but you're also respecting the human being who posted their speculation at the same time
This is the post that riled people up. Upon reading it carefully, I believe what you're saying is that people here should have more confidence in their own speculation, just like you have so much confidence in yours, and not to be easily wavered by other people's speculation (like yours). That's a positive message, to be honest. But the way it's presented makes it seem like everything else :/
Instead, at a glance, it sounds like you're 100% certain that your theory is the correct one and everyone who's reacted to your posts has only done it because they know your theory is the correct one, and they're too afraid to admit that you're right. And the way you say it with such certainty makes it look like you're pretending to be an angel high above human beings, when you're just another human being like everyone else. And that's what bothered a lot of people here. You seem to have missed that point as you thought people were having a hard time accepting your theory, but it was the "pretentious demeanor" (thinking you're an angel among humans) that many users reacted to here, EVEN IF YOU DIDN'T MEAN IT THAT WAY -- that's how it appeared to many.
Like I said earlier, nobody likes someone who thinks they're better than everyone else. Especially if they believe them to be equal. The general expectation is that all human beings are equal, so someone appearing as they're superior than others will not be tolerated. There are exceptions, but this is the general "rule". And even if you didn't mean to appear superior, some people perceived you as thinking you were superior (better than everyone else).
It really seems like you're, again, saying that your theory is better, and that everyone else speculating on anything else is weak and just wishful thinking. That may be correct, but it's not respectful, and not giving respect to other people will never bring about healthy conversations A much better approach would be to demonstrate why you think your theory is more solid instead of "criticizing" other people's speculation (this is where you're needlessly criticizing: "I'll rather point to the actual data instead of hopes, dreams and wishful thinking", the "hopes, dreamd and wishful thinking" sounds condescending, because it seems like you're saying their speculation is inferior to yours and that they're just blindly hoping for things, which isn't nice to say directly even if it were true).
That admission was great
You are also speculating, you admit that you don't have enough data. But seemingly putting down others' speculations harshly isn't the way to go. Present your data, present your speculation, and then discuss on that. If you believe others' speculation is a bit of a stretch, then engage in a discussion, present your counter-arguments (in a nice manner) and ask them for their counter-arguments as well.
DO NOT: "I can't believe you people are so dumb that you're blindly believing that announcement of Switch bundles says that Switch 2 is coming H1 2024. That's just wishful thinking, dreams and hopes and so, so stupid. Looking at financial data like me is much better!" (directly calling people dumb, calling their ideas stupid, and saying your idea is better)
DO: "I believe concluding that Switch 2 is coming H1 2024 simply based on announcement of Switch bundles is a bit of a stretch. It may hint at something, or it may be nothing at all. It most likely is nothing. We shouldn't irresponsibly get our hopes up when bundles are a normal yearly occurrence. Personally, I believe looking at the financial data provides better insight to the business decisions Nintendo are going to make in the future." (no name-calling anyone directly, just generally criticizing the idea, and explaining why you think your theory is a better indicator without praising yourself too much)
^ This is generally the sentiment some users were perceiving from your posts here.
You're actually very right when you said that. You made a post about your theory and people were indeed free to ignore your post or move on, but instead you were met with some meme-ing and teasing. Like I said at the beginning, any community should be more welcoming towards new members, so there's definitely an area of improvement there.
But it really was some of the blunt statements and the way you said stuff in your posts that didn't sit well with some people, and so they felt the need to call you out on it because your posts could appear to be condescending, disrespectful towards others and this community, and make it seem like you were full of yourself (aka arrogant). I hope your intentions weren't so, and you should've been met with more understanding and been given the benefit of the doubt, in my personal opinion, but I'm glad at least some people replied to your arguments and entertained your ideas
However, if your intention was indeed to look down on people and make yourself and your theory appear to be superior, then I can understand the replies you received. But I hope I'm wrong about that.
Maybe it's just the over-zealousness of speculating and trying to be right? I know I've been there when it comes to predicting Smash characters, and I may have gotten a bit over my head
but you need to remember that sharing one's speculations with others is a form of validation seeking. We're really seeking validation from others about our ideas and wanting to show off to others that we were right, as a form of seeking approval or praise. So one needs to keep oneself in check before reality hits one in the head
Yeah, there's no way around that one. That sounds extremely condescending and disrespectful. Even if there might be some truth to your statement, telling other people directly to their face that something is their fault is very bad manners. It's like going up to a girl who's crying because no boys want to date her and saying "It's your fault that you're ugly". That's extremely hurtful, disrespecting and completely disregarding the feelings and dignity of the other person you're talking to.
Your comments would actually work really well on Reddit as these types of snarky and straightforward stuff is popular there. But hopefully people are trying to have a civil and respectful conversation here, and no one's going to tolerate a respected person (Nate Drake) being disrespected like that, because you're blaming them for deluding people into believing anything. Even if that were true, if the person you are talking to is being respectful and having respectful conversations, you should also engage them with respect. The way you said it will never lead to any product conversation at all :/
Sorry for this long post. I just sensed that perhaps you really are being genuine about not getting why people were riling up about your post and reacting like they did, because it's not by your theory. And I really hope your intentions were pure and that what you really wanted to convey was something different than what was perceived. I really believe we shouldn't be too quick to judge people and always give people a chance, especially new ones to a community. So hopefully you can clarify so we can have proper understanding instead of people talking over each other God bless 
Look at the comments quoted below.
Their post was re-read to double check the concerns raised:
The part that was admitted to be condescending:
The beginning statement that's "direct":
Note: these posts will read differently to you depending on how you're imagining this person. If it's an annoying person, then they'll appear disingenious. If it's an honest person, then they'll appear genuine.
Point being:
It's quite apparent that @Phenom08 is not reading their comments in the same way as many others are doing in this thread.
There's a slight hint of sincerity I'm picking up and no obvious "troll" behavior, so I'm willing to bet there's something else at play here.
There could be several factors as to why people are perceiving the messages posted here differently:
- Language barrier: for a lot of people English isn't their first language, so a lot of undertones, metaphors/idioms, regional differences and phrases could be lost on someone coming from a different part of the globe. This can also lead to their way of speaking being perceived as "rude" when in their mind -- with their cultural background and mother tongue -- it's intended differently. This is very important to keep in mind as not everyone is from the US.
- Frame of mind: it's hard to detect sarcasm, undertones, and the intended way a post online should read, so jumping to conclusions based on what circles one engages in, what assocations/expectations one has for the setting (e.g. Reddit comments and Famiboards comments are based on entirely different merits!), and how one is feeling on a particular day, are all factors that go into how one interprets something online (it's really easy to be cynical online)
- Lack of Self-awareness: for whatever reason, some people may not have developed full introspection and haven't critically analysed their words and actions. This could be due to age, experience, or things like psychological traits:
- Psychological wiring: not everyone perceives or experiences the world in the same way, and this is very important to be aware of. For instance, people with ADHD might feel the need to blurt out everything unfiltered, might struggle with being interested in "boring" conversation, might have a hard time doing simple stuff like looking up facts/links/videos, and may have poor organizational skills (e.g. properly formatting their raw, unfiltered wall of text).
And then there are people on the spectrum who may view the world very differently, who may say things in a direct manner with good intention that may not be received so warmly, who may have a hard time reading the tones of conversations, who may lack the awareness of others perceiving their blunt remarks as rude, and who may deem it difficult to see things from others' point of view.
To be fair, Phenom08 did start off their first post by mainly focusing on their arguments, albeit in a difficult-to-read format and with a somewhat perceived "high-and-mighty" attitude, but their "wall of text" instead became a point of soft ridicule at first:
I understand it might be propelled by the perceived condescending attitude, and poking fun at such things is always fun, but to a relatively new user with ~20 posts (before the long chain of back-n-forth started), who's possibly coming from a different background than most, I believe that we as a community should strive for a warmer welcoming and have a positive mentality where we read in the best meanings until the opposite is proven
@Phenom08: Now, allow me to attempt to explain quite candidly why the miscommunication was happening
You didn't say anything wrong per se or come with faulty data. It was just the wording you used; the words you chose, the straightforward phrases, and not holding back on describing things as directly as possible that was not so very well received by some members. You may have had good intentions, but it made others think you were looking down on them and that you were somehow better than everyone else, almost like a king. You didn't say it, but that's how you appeared to some.
No one likes an arrogant person. It's when someone who thinks they're better than everyone else. Even if they are, no one likes it that they proudly say they are better than everyone else. Being humble is a praiseworthy quality, and that means not praising oneself too directly, but saying it lowkey, like "I am glad that my speculation turned out to be true", instead of directly saying "I always knew it, and you all were wrong!".
Take your first post. I've highlighted the parts that make you appear "arrogant":
I understand that you may be upset that people might take any small hint and get their hopes up (which actually happened a lot right before the OLED model was announced), but the way you're saying it "people take any announcement and spin it as much as possible to fit their desires (but I certainly don't do it)" and "Like seriously (what is wrong with you??), stop bending reality to fit your desires (stop it, don't do it, I'm commanding you)" makes it appear aggressive and sounds like you somehow know better telling people that they're doing something wrong. In certain cases it's okay if what you're about to say makes a ton of sense, but I think your large text was lost on a lot of people, so most only read your first (arrogantly-sounding) sentence, didn't read the rest, and formed an opinio about your post and its tone.
The last two sentences here appear really condescending. "You don't run Nintendo (so what do you know, you incompetent fool? I run Nintendo, so I know), so your rule is completely irrelevant (but my rules are valid, because I said so, and I'm not giving your rules a chance). Relying on leaks for confirmation is foolish (and so you you must be foolish for following such a rule), how you still haven't learned that is something else (because I have learned that and I know they can't be trusted, so I'm better than you for having learnt that!)".
Yeah, you didn't really give the other person a chance here and disregarded their point just because of your own rule: that leaks cannot be trusted. You might be right, but the financial data you pulled from Nintendo is just raw data. You still have to interpret it and give it meaning and speculate on what the future holds from that data. So really, you're two posts actually appear as you saying: "Personally, I only believe that public Nintendo financial data can be used to predict what the company will do in the future. Anyone who believes differently is wrong! If someone hears news about Nintendo releasing new bundles, then they cannot predict Nintendo's future because you can only do that with public Nintendo financial data. If anyone hears about leaks, they're never correct because I personally believe they're never correct, so the only way to know about Nintendo's future is through their financial public data. That's my personal belief, but I still believe it's the only way, and everyone has to follow this rule".
I don't know if you intended it this way, but that's how it appeared :/ It doesn't seem like you were giving the other person's point of view a chance. A better way would have been to acknowledge their point of view and then explaining why it doesn't make sense to you to listen to leaks. Something like this: "Thanks for your input. I dont believe leaks can be used to accurately predict the future of Nintendo, so I'm careful of them. The reason being that a lot of leaks have been posted throughout the years and almost none of them have been accurate. We can use them carefully as hints, but never as confirmation, which is why I choose to rely on the publicly available data."
I think explaining this with a picture will be better:
This one sounds really condescending. "You say some goofy mess" sounds very negative and very straightforward (like going to someone and telling them they're ugly), and these parts: "your made up speculation" (you're saying that was they're saying is false just because they're speculating, and it makes you sound arrogant because you're also speculating but somehow are judging others' speculation to be false), "My favorite part is how you suggest..." (it's like you're publicly shaming someone and this is the nail in the coffin, as in, it's their "worst" point according to you, you who possess more knowledge), "me speculating on their financial state will allow me to be more accurate than your speculation based out of thin air and insiders" (it sounds like you're competing with other people and that you already think you're the winner. People speculating for fun without wanting to be right aren't here for a competition, but it sounds like you are attending a championship and doing whatever it takes to win), and the constant use of "lol" which sounds like you are somehow better and "laughing" at others' speculation (while sitting on your horse and looking down). I'm not saying this is how you intended it to be, but you're "directness" can really make it appear so.
Also, you seem to keep bringing up how speculating on Nintendo's financial state is more accurate than any other method, "me speculating on their financial state will allow me to be more accurate than your speculation based out of thin air and insiders". If we forget the directness of your comment, when you say something like that, you generally need to also bring proof of why you think one method is better than another. Otherwise, it makes it appear arrogant, like your theory is better just because you say it is. It would be better to say: "I understand your point, but there's not enough conclusive data to support it. An event can indicate so many different things, so narrowing it down to mean Switch 2 announcement is a bit of a leap in my opinion. Personally, I believe looking at the financial data gives us a much safer prediction of Nintendo's future actions, because they're obliged to publicly share and cannot fake the data, and it gives us insight into what decisions they have in store for the fiscal year. Leaks often tend to be wrong and it's hard to distinguish an accurate leak from a fake one. And reading into the significance of events isn't reliable.". You're essentially saying the same thing, but you're also respecting the human being who posted their speculation at the same time
This is the post that riled people up. Upon reading it carefully, I believe what you're saying is that people here should have more confidence in their own speculation, just like you have so much confidence in yours, and not to be easily wavered by other people's speculation (like yours). That's a positive message, to be honest. But the way it's presented makes it seem like everything else :/
Instead, at a glance, it sounds like you're 100% certain that your theory is the correct one and everyone who's reacted to your posts has only done it because they know your theory is the correct one, and they're too afraid to admit that you're right. And the way you say it with such certainty makes it look like you're pretending to be an angel high above human beings, when you're just another human being like everyone else. And that's what bothered a lot of people here. You seem to have missed that point as you thought people were having a hard time accepting your theory, but it was the "pretentious demeanor" (thinking you're an angel among humans) that many users reacted to here, EVEN IF YOU DIDN'T MEAN IT THAT WAY -- that's how it appeared to many.
Like I said earlier, nobody likes someone who thinks they're better than everyone else. Especially if they believe them to be equal. The general expectation is that all human beings are equal, so someone appearing as they're superior than others will not be tolerated. There are exceptions, but this is the general "rule". And even if you didn't mean to appear superior, some people perceived you as thinking you were superior (better than everyone else).
It really seems like you're, again, saying that your theory is better, and that everyone else speculating on anything else is weak and just wishful thinking. That may be correct, but it's not respectful, and not giving respect to other people will never bring about healthy conversations
A much better approach would be to demonstrate why you think your theory is more solid instead of "criticizing" other people's speculation (this is where you're needlessly criticizing: "I'll rather point to the actual data instead of hopes, dreams and wishful thinking", the "hopes, dreamd and wishful thinking" sounds condescending, because it seems like you're saying their speculation is inferior to yours and that they're just blindly hoping for things, which isn't nice to say directly even if it were true).That admission was great
You are also speculating, you admit that you don't have enough data. But seemingly putting down others' speculations harshly isn't the way to go. Present your data, present your speculation, and then discuss on that. If you believe others' speculation is a bit of a stretch, then engage in a discussion, present your counter-arguments (in a nice manner) and ask them for their counter-arguments as well. DO NOT: "I can't believe you people are so dumb that you're blindly believing that announcement of Switch bundles says that Switch 2 is coming H1 2024. That's just wishful thinking, dreams and hopes and so, so stupid. Looking at financial data like me is much better!" (directly calling people dumb, calling their ideas stupid, and saying your idea is better) DO: "I believe concluding that Switch 2 is coming H1 2024 simply based on announcement of Switch bundles is a bit of a stretch. It may hint at something, or it may be nothing at all. It most likely is nothing. We shouldn't irresponsibly get our hopes up when bundles are a normal yearly occurrence. Personally, I believe looking at the financial data provides better insight to the business decisions Nintendo are going to make in the future." (no name-calling anyone directly, just generally criticizing the idea, and explaining why you think your theory is a better indicator without praising yourself too much)^ This is generally the sentiment some users were perceiving from your posts here.
You're actually very right when you said that. You made a post about your theory and people were indeed free to ignore your post or move on, but instead you were met with some meme-ing and teasing. Like I said at the beginning, any community should be more welcoming towards new members, so there's definitely an area of improvement there.
But it really was some of the blunt statements and the way you said stuff in your posts that didn't sit well with some people, and so they felt the need to call you out on it because your posts could appear to be condescending, disrespectful towards others and this community, and make it seem like you were full of yourself (aka arrogant). I hope your intentions weren't so, and you should've been met with more understanding and been given the benefit of the doubt, in my personal opinion, but I'm glad at least some people replied to your arguments and entertained your ideas
However, if your intention was indeed to look down on people and make yourself and your theory appear to be superior, then I can understand the replies you received. But I hope I'm wrong about that.
Maybe it's just the over-zealousness of speculating and trying to be right? I know I've been there when it comes to predicting Smash characters, and I may have gotten a bit over my head
but you need to remember that sharing one's speculations with others is a form of validation seeking. We're really seeking validation from others about our ideas and wanting to show off to others that we were right, as a form of seeking approval or praise. So one needs to keep oneself in check before reality hits one in the head I mean to be fair, insiders are the reason so many people are duled into believing anything because they (insiders) said so. So really, its kind of your fault.
Yeah, there's no way around that one. That sounds extremely condescending and disrespectful. Even if there might be some truth to your statement, telling other people directly to their face that something is their fault is very bad manners. It's like going up to a girl who's crying because no boys want to date her and saying "It's your fault that you're ugly". That's extremely hurtful, disrespecting and completely disregarding the feelings and dignity of the other person you're talking to.
Your comments would actually work really well on Reddit as these types of snarky and straightforward stuff is popular there. But hopefully people are trying to have a civil and respectful conversation here, and no one's going to tolerate a respected person (Nate Drake) being disrespected like that, because you're blaming them for deluding people into believing anything. Even if that were true, if the person you are talking to is being respectful and having respectful conversations, you should also engage them with respect. The way you said it will never lead to any product conversation at all :/
Sorry for this long post. I just sensed that perhaps you really are being genuine about not getting why people were riling up about your post and reacting like they did, because it's not by your theory. And I really hope your intentions were pure and that what you really wanted to convey was something different than what was perceived. I really believe we shouldn't be too quick to judge people and always give people a chance, especially new ones to a community. So hopefully you can clarify so we can have proper understanding instead of people talking over each other
God bless
D
Deleted member 2
Guest
The comment about insiders, and the demeaning assertion that we are letting ourselves be taken advantage of simply because we play in their space, eliminated all benefit of the doubt I was willing to give to that person and gave me all the context I needed for their comments up to that point.
I think they were completely deserving of that ban and would be happy to never be subjected to their condescension again.
eye0h
"aggressively persue a multiplatform strategy"
- Pronouns
- He/Him
You're a better person than me
- Pronouns
- He/Him
LuigiBlood
Mage Robot
Just saying: Nintendo is not allowed to announce prices in Europe.
Remember the Nintendo Switch Presentation before launch in 2017 when they basically just said the prices in Japan, Americas and then Europe they just go "please check with your local retailer".
Noleth
xenoblade brainrot
Absolutely a game from the Xenoblade series. Or all of them.
YugamiSekai
T239 vs. Picross 4K
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Evil Lucario
Star Successor
Hyrule Warriors: Age of Calamity and Fire Emblem Warriors: Three Hopes. Unless Monolith Soft specifically patches the Xenoblade games to have higher resolution and framerate, those two games would be #1 priority to see how they hold up.
Split-screen in both games would especially be interesting to see.
SoldierDelta
Designated Xenoblade Loremaster
- Pronouns
- he/him
Every Xenoblade game under the sun. By default the trilogy should run better on the Switch 2 just due to better specs, even if nothing is really changed, but goddamn those games would look outstanding at a smooth 60fps 1080p or higher. I'd also like to see if they could improve the textures a bit for the Xenoblade games, but that's not a huge issue.
BreakAtmo
Bob-omb
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Well, hopefully having the dedicated cores in a console for the first time has some surprising uses. If not, it'll be nice if RT actually gets widespread use.
Definitely the Xenoblade games.
BreakAtmo
Bob-omb
- Pronouns
- He/Him
There's a reason I haven't played Bayonetta 3 yet.
thesillyfellaelde
Xeno FREAK!!!!!!!!!!!!
- Pronouns
- Them
Here's something I'm wondering, could switch games that already run with FSR that can get potential enhancements for the Switch 2 like Tears of the Kingdom and Xenoblade 3 be updated to use DLSS? Or would they even just scrap the FSR completely since the games would probably be running flawlessly without it, so no need to have the FSR when playing it on the Switch 2.
- Pronouns
- He/Him
The PS3/PS4 change was a bit different. What was happening there was that Japanese publishers were refusing to make the jump to PS4-only development because they were unwilling to let go of the meagre PS3 install base and did not have faith that PS4 was going to be any better at launch than the last go-round, but Sony twisted their arms and told them that they needed to give up on their domestic market if they had any hope of making money in the West. Don't take my word for it, read it coming directly out of Sony's own mouth (complete with the obvious subtext).
Fast-forward to today, and while that may have been true in the short-term, none of that ended up being true in the long term. Switch proved there was a more-than-viable domestic market for software beyond what PlayStation could offer to publishers after they had completely wedded themselves to PS4 as per Sony's suggestion. And the software successes of Switch were worldwide instead of it being only disproportionately successful in Japan from a software sales perspective. Meanwhile, what software sales one could get from PS4 dried up in Japan by 2019, and a mere year after PS5's launch, PS4 software only made up about 10-20% of sales in the West for any given cross-gen game. Add to this words from developers like Yoshi-P saying that PS4 versions add dev time to projects (in his case, up to 1-2 additional years was estimated).
So if it's not for Japanese sales, and it's not for sales outside of Japan and cross-gen is adding unnecessary time and expense to each project, who are these PS4 releases of games all the way into the 4th year of PS5 even for, exactly? When you think on that, an easy answer comes to mind: they're hedging bets and keeping their projects in scope for PS4 for a reason, and they're doing it because they can get away with it and not see a downturn in consumer interest.
Also, not buying this notion that PS5-only development only started a year after the console's release. Every hardware release under the sun has seen dev kits in some form issued to developers as much as 2 years in advance, never mind the more vague hardware spec targets they're given even before that (even this new Nintendo hardware shows that, with devs seeing final hardware and others being issued final or near-final dev kits back in July, never mind what they may have received prior to that), so if they were genuinely on board with PS5/XBS, they would have had plenty of time to abandon cross-gen before 2024, but the release calendar for exclusives is nearly bone-dry.
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Using both FSR AND DLSS would be a mess, they're competing methods to upscale/upsample a game that likely would not play nice together, so if the titles are to be enhanced for new hardware, they are going to pick the more capable means of doing so, so that's going to be DLSS every single time.
casualreader
Octorok
You are very nice to write such a long, argumented and informative post, but I think you might as well pee in a fan.I believe there's been grave miscommunication here.
Look at the comments quoted below.
Their post was re-read to double check the concerns raised:
The part that was admitted to be condescending:
The beginning statement that's "direct":
Note: these posts will read differently to you depending on how you're imagining this person. If it's an annoying person, then they'll appear disingenious. If it's an honest person, then they'll appear genuine.
Point being:
It's quite apparent that @Phenom08 is not reading their comments in the same way as many others are doing in this thread.
There's a slight hint of sincerity I'm picking up and no obvious "troll" behavior, so I'm willing to bet there's something else at play here.
There could be several factors as to why people are perceiving the messages posted here differently:
Whatever the case, Phenom08 seems to be a new user (registered 2 months ago, 32 posts) and this being one of their first activity in this thread, I believe cutting some slack and giving the benefit of the doubt is in order and might go a long way at welcoming new users who may not (immediately) conform to the expectations of this forum, and especially this thread
- Language barrier: for a lot of people English isn't their first language, so a lot of undertones, metaphors/idioms, regional differences and phrases could be lost on someone coming from a different part of the globe. This can also lead to their way of speaking being perceived as "rude" when in their mind -- with their cultural background and mother tongue -- it's intended differently. This is very important to keep in mind as not everyone is from the US.
- Frame of mind: it's hard to detect sarcasm, undertones, and the intended way a post online should read, so jumping to conclusions based on what circles one engages in, what assocations/expectations one has for the setting (e.g. Reddit comments and Famiboards comments are based on entirely different merits!), and how one is feeling on a particular day, are all factors that go into how one interprets something online (it's really easy to be cynical online)
- Lack of Self-awareness: for whatever reason, some people may not have developed full introspection and haven't critically analysed their words and actions. This could be due to age, experience, or things like psychological traits:
- Psychological wiring: not everyone perceives or experiences the world in the same way, and this is very important to be aware of. For instance, people with ADHD might feel the need to blurt out everything unfiltered, might struggle with being interested in "boring" conversation, might have a hard time doing simple stuff like looking up facts/links/videos, and may have poor organizational skills (e.g. properly formatting their raw, unfiltered wall of text).
And then there are people on the spectrum who may view the world very differently, who may say things in a direct manner with good intention that may not be received so warmly, who may have a hard time reading the tones of conversations, who may lack the awareness of others perceiving their blunt remarks as rude, and who may deem it difficult to see things from others' point of view.
To be fair, Phenom08 did start off their first post by mainly focusing on their arguments, albeit in a difficult-to-read format and with a somewhat perceived "high-and-mighty" attitude, but their "wall of text" instead became a point of soft ridicule at first:
I understand it might be propelled by the perceived condescending attitude, and poking fun at such things is always fun, but to a relatively new user with ~20 posts (before the long chain of back-n-forth started), who's possibly coming from a different background than most, I believe that we as a community should strive for a warmer welcoming and have a positive mentality where we read in the best meanings until the opposite is proven
@Phenom08: Now, allow me to attempt to explain quite candidly why the miscommunication was happening
You didn't say anything wrong per se or come with faulty data. It was just the wording you used; the words you chose, the straightforward phrases, and not holding back on describing things as directly as possible that was not so very well received by some members. You may have had good intentions, but it made others think you were looking down on them and that you were somehow better than everyone else, almost like a king. You didn't say it, but that's how you appeared to some.
No one likes an arrogant person. It's when someone who thinks they're better than everyone else. Even if they are, no one likes it that they proudly say they are better than everyone else. Being humble is a praiseworthy quality, and that means not praising oneself too directly, but saying it lowkey, like "I am glad that my speculation turned out to be true", instead of directly saying "I always knew it, and you all were wrong!".
Take your first post. I've highlighted the parts that make you appear "arrogant":
I understand that you may be upset that people might take any small hint and get their hopes up (which actually happened a lot right before the OLED model was announced), but the way you're saying it "people take any announcement and spin it as much as possible to fit their desires (but I certainly don't do it)" and "Like seriously (what is wrong with you??), stop bending reality to fit your desires (stop it, don't do it, I'm commanding you)" makes it appear aggressive and sounds like you somehow know better telling people that they're doing something wrong. In certain cases it's okay if what you're about to say makes a ton of sense, but I think your large text was lost on a lot of people, so most only read your first (arrogantly-sounding) sentence, didn't read the rest, and formed an opinio about your post and its tone.
The last two sentences here appear really condescending. "You don't run Nintendo (so what do you know, you incompetent fool? I run Nintendo, so I know), so your rule is completely irrelevant (but my rules are valid, because I said so, and I'm not giving your rules a chance). Relying on leaks for confirmation is foolish (and so you you must be foolish for following such a rule), how you still haven't learned that is something else (because I have learned that and I know they can't be trusted, so I'm better than you for having learnt that!)".
Yeah, you didn't really give the other person a chance here and disregarded their point just because of your own rule: that leaks cannot be trusted. You might be right, but the financial data you pulled from Nintendo is just raw data. You still have to interpret it and give it meaning and speculate on what the future holds from that data. So really, you're two posts actually appear as you saying: "Personally, I only believe that public Nintendo financial data can be used to predict what the company will do in the future. Anyone who believes differently is wrong! If someone hears news about Nintendo releasing new bundles, then they cannot predict Nintendo's future because you can only do that with public Nintendo financial data. If anyone hears about leaks, they're never correct because I personally believe they're never correct, so the only way to know about Nintendo's future is through their financial public data. That's my personal belief, but I still believe it's the only way, and everyone has to follow this rule".
I don't know if you intended it this way, but that's how it appeared :/ It doesn't seem like you were giving the other person's point of view a chance. A better way would have been to acknowledge their point of view and then explaining why it doesn't make sense to you to listen to leaks. Something like this: "Thanks for your input. I dont believe leaks can be used to accurately predict the future of Nintendo, so I'm careful of them. The reason being that a lot of leaks have been posted throughout the years and almost none of them have been accurate. We can use them carefully as hints, but never as confirmation, which is why I choose to rely on the publicly available data."
I think explaining this with a picture will be better:
This one sounds really condescending. "You say some goofy mess" sounds very negative and very straightforward (like going to someone and telling them they're ugly), and these parts: "your made up speculation" (you're saying that was they're saying is false just because they're speculating, and it makes you sound arrogant because you're also speculating but somehow are judging others' speculation to be false), "My favorite part is how you suggest..." (it's like you're publicly shaming someone and this is the nail in the coffin, as in, it's their "worst" point according to you, you who possess more knowledge), "me speculating on their financial state will allow me to be more accurate than your speculation based out of thin air and insiders" (it sounds like you're competing with other people and that you already think you're the winner. People speculating for fun without wanting to be right aren't here for a competition, but it sounds like you are attending a championship and doing whatever it takes to win), and the constant use of "lol" which sounds like you are somehow better and "laughing" at others' speculation (while sitting on your horse and looking down). I'm not saying this is how you intended it to be, but you're "directness" can really make it appear so.
Also, you seem to keep bringing up how speculating on Nintendo's financial state is more accurate than any other method, "me speculating on their financial state will allow me to be more accurate than your speculation based out of thin air and insiders". If we forget the directness of your comment, when you say something like that, you generally need to also bring proof of why you think one method is better than another. Otherwise, it makes it appear arrogant, like your theory is better just because you say it is. It would be better to say: "I understand your point, but there's not enough conclusive data to support it. An event can indicate so many different things, so narrowing it down to mean Switch 2 announcement is a bit of a leap in my opinion. Personally, I believe looking at the financial data gives us a much safer prediction of Nintendo's future actions, because they're obliged to publicly share and cannot fake the data, and it gives us insight into what decisions they have in store for the fiscal year. Leaks often tend to be wrong and it's hard to distinguish an accurate leak from a fake one. And reading into the significance of events isn't reliable.". You're essentially saying the same thing, but you're also respecting the human being who posted their speculation at the same time
This is the post that riled people up. Upon reading it carefully, I believe what you're saying is that people here should have more confidence in their own speculation, just like you have so much confidence in yours, and not to be easily wavered by other people's speculation (like yours). That's a positive message, to be honest. But the way it's presented makes it seem like everything else :/
Instead, at a glance, it sounds like you're 100% certain that your theory is the correct one and everyone who's reacted to your posts has only done it because they know your theory is the correct one, and they're too afraid to admit that you're right. And the way you say it with such certainty makes it look like you're pretending to be an angel high above human beings, when you're just another human being like everyone else. And that's what bothered a lot of people here. You seem to have missed that point as you thought people were having a hard time accepting your theory, but it was the "pretentious demeanor" (thinking you're an angel among humans) that many users reacted to here, EVEN IF YOU DIDN'T MEAN IT THAT WAY -- that's how it appeared to many.
Like I said earlier, nobody likes someone who thinks they're better than everyone else. Especially if they believe them to be equal. The general expectation is that all human beings are equal, so someone appearing as they're superior than others will not be tolerated. There are exceptions, but this is the general "rule". And even if you didn't mean to appear superior, some people perceived you as thinking you were superior (better than everyone else).
It really seems like you're, again, saying that your theory is better, and that everyone else speculating on anything else is weak and just wishful thinking. That may be correct, but it's not respectful, and not giving respect to other people will never bring about healthy conversations
That admission was great
^ This is generally the sentiment some users were perceiving from your posts here.
You're actually very right when you said that. You made a post about your theory and people were indeed free to ignore your post or move on, but instead you were met with some meme-ing and teasing. Like I said at the beginning, any community should be more welcoming towards new members, so there's definitely an area of improvement there.
But it really was some of the blunt statements and the way you said stuff in your posts that didn't sit well with some people, and so they felt the need to call you out on it because your posts could appear to be condescending, disrespectful towards others and this community, and make it seem like you were full of yourself (aka arrogant). I hope your intentions weren't so, and you should've been met with more understanding and been given the benefit of the doubt, in my personal opinion, but I'm glad at least some people replied to your arguments and entertained your ideas
However, if your intention was indeed to look down on people and make yourself and your theory appear to be superior, then I can understand the replies you received. But I hope I'm wrong about that.
Maybe it's just the over-zealousness of speculating and trying to be right? I know I've been there when it comes to predicting Smash characters, and I may have gotten a bit over my head
Yeah, there's no way around that one. That sounds extremely condescending and disrespectful. Even if there might be some truth to your statement, telling other people directly to their face that something is their fault is very bad manners. It's like going up to a girl who's crying because no boys want to date her and saying "It's your fault that you're ugly". That's extremely hurtful, disrespecting and completely disregarding the feelings and dignity of the other person you're talking to.
Your comments would actually work really well on Reddit as these types of snarky and straightforward stuff is popular there. But hopefully people are trying to have a civil and respectful conversation here, and no one's going to tolerate a respected person (Nate Drake) being disrespected like that, because you're blaming them for deluding people into believing anything. Even if that were true, if the person you are talking to is being respectful and having respectful conversations, you should also engage them with respect. The way you said it will never lead to any product conversation at all :/
Sorry for this long post. I just sensed that perhaps you really are being genuine about not getting why people were riling up about your post and reacting like they did, because it's not by your theory. And I really hope your intentions were pure and that what you really wanted to convey was something different than what was perceived. I really believe we shouldn't be too quick to judge people and always give people a chance, especially new ones to a community. So hopefully you can clarify so we can have proper understanding instead of people talking over each other
Some people were educated with the idea that you need to own the world and belittle others to feel alive. Think this is just one of these cases, where policy enforcement should just go with something like: "I don't really care if you understand that the way you write things is wrong. Either you stop bullying others, or you are out".
Would not want somebody with the insight of the century to be scared off posting because one person here decided to ridicule whatever anyone is going to say. Only way there can be a debate is you don't get contradicted constantly with no argument other than: "you're stupid, I m the authority".
Either way, good day all. Need to start my day and fight with the same kinds of people at work.
Cheers
- Pronouns
- He/Him
.
Xenoblade Chronicles 3.
I’m going to get shit for this but I’ve had it since launch and just haven’t played it yet due to hopelessly waiting for better hardware. I know it’s a much better experience than Xenoblade Chronicles 2 visually, but I’ve always had something else to play as a good reason to keep pushing it out. So yeah that.
Xenoblade Chronicles 3.
I’m going to get shit for this but I’ve had it since launch and just haven’t played it yet due to hopelessly waiting for better hardware. I know it’s a much better experience than Xenoblade Chronicles 2 visually, but I’ve always had something else to play as a good reason to keep pushing it out. So yeah that.
ReyVGM
Game Endings Master
Did Phenom08 write that for you? Because it reads like you're saying Phenom08 is right and everyone else (including the mods) are wrong.
Saturnman789
Hello Earthlings! XD
- Pronouns
- He/Him
That's not what I said. What i stated is that a lot of next gen games (hence the "most", didn't say "all") would have started around that time or 2020 because
They would still be mostly working on ps4/xbox one games around the time, and wrapping up development with them. Even if the studio does have a dev kit at 2018-2019, they could still be majorly occupied with working on last gen stuff that they wouldn't be fiddling with it too much until they have to opportunity to do so. They aren't suddenly gonna move on from projects because sony took a shiny new dump on their lawn.
If more games started dev for next gen when they first got dev kits we would've seen much more exlusives than we have now. Which we know isn't the case looking the ps5's very low amount of current exclusives.
Considering that games are larger and take longer to develop than ever now, the most you're gonna see in a 2-3 year timespan is ports and cross gens of last gen games. (Which is exactly what we're seeing now)
A larger increase in current gen exlusives starting with 2024 just makes sense.
Apologies if it sounds like I'm coming across as aggressive or anything. just wanted to correct a misinterpretation
Last edited:
ertaboy356b
Resident Troll
I'd play SMT V (NG+) and Xenoblade 3 because I have been pending these games till a more performant switch comes along. I still have quite a backlog and my physical collection is only increasing thanks to all the crazy announcements this year.
Molybdenum
Rattata
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Most switch games that use FSR use FSR1.0, which is just a spacial upscaler, while DLSS 2.x and FSR 2.x use temporal data from previous frames. So far, No Man's Sky is the only switch game using FSR2, but in theory any game using temporal AA should be able to use DLSS with relatively little trouble.
P4bl0
Project Oz H2 2024
thesillyfellaelde
Xeno FREAK!!!!!!!!!!!!
- Pronouns
- Them
What I mean is, are they going to disable FSR for when you play these games on the Switch 2 because they'd run fine on the more powerful hardware, or are they gonna remove FSR and replace it with DLSS to easily get the games running in 4k.
So say you boot up Zelda TOTK on the Switch 2, natively it uses FSR but when you put it into the Switch 2, is it gonna keep the same FSR as the Switch 1 used for it, disable it and repalce it with DLSS, or just disable it fully and not worry about using any form of image reconstruction because it could just render the games nativly in 4k without breaking a sweat anyways, or are they gonna be silly and just keep the games running 900p/720p without updating it to run at a higher resolution when being played on the Switch 2. Imagine Switch 1 games still being 580p with dynamic resolution in Switch 2 portable mode
So yeah, what kind of upgrades would the standard Switch title being played on the Switch 2 see, how many of them are gonna get a DLSS update, and so on.
Advator
Cappy
Well Nintendo created labo vr.
The creator of Niantic also showed their vr/ar glasses: https://www.standard.co.uk/tech/pokemon-go-augmented-reality-headset-ar-vr-b1040566.html
Also Nintendo has a few patents on this.
I also remember an article years ago thst they said we are looking into it, but it's not yet the time to do this. Also if you think a separate headset like the wiiu tabled that streams the game without a delay. They can do this too for vr and ar. Just have to sell the headset separately, the joycons already doing the job for movement
It's not unrealistic in my view.
- Pronouns
- He/Him
You folks, always doing the naughty stuff when i'm away.
I'm unsure if it means you don't want me to join the fun, or if you want to protect precious old me.
;]
As i approach my 40th birthday with fast and long steps, this post gave me the shivers.
I'm unsure if it means you don't want me to join the fun, or if you want to protect precious old me.
;]
As i approach my 40th birthday with fast and long steps, this post gave me the shivers.
ShadowFox08
Paratroopa
Holy.. we moved 6-7 pages since I last checked on early morning Tuesday. Can someone recap what happened?
thesillyfellaelde
Xeno FREAK!!!!!!!!!!!!
- Pronouns
- Them
Unfortunately nothing too exciting, mostly just an asshole that popped up and was being rude to a lot of people : P I woke up this morning and thought some leak might've happened lol, nope, just someone who was really obnoxious too others making the pages go by lol
thegodsend
Tektite
- Pronouns
- he/him
Nothing.
necrolipe
Universo Nintendo Owner
- Pronouns
- he/him
I'm not saying that Nintendo isn't capable of... but the microLED is very expensive, this is enough to the company avoid doing anything related
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Dunno why there's so many AR/VR rumors appearing. If anything, the current batch of VR headsets including PSVR2 show again that this tech is still a good 10 years and quite some QoL improvements away from a point of refinement where Nintendo might actively think about having a customer-tier product for it.
I'm not saying they're not playing around with this already, but reality is simply ... it's no viable yet.
Well ... at least that's my 2 cents.
I'm not saying they're not playing around with this already, but reality is simply ... it's no viable yet.
Well ... at least that's my 2 cents.
TechnicalTip6578
Tektite
- Pronouns
- He/Him
watch Monolith do a massive next gen patch for the xenoblade trilogy on SW2, only to push the console to its limits already
UE5 and the Ubisoft Massive duo all but guarantees RT will get widespread use. Question will be how well will Drake cope with it. When games start to become 1080p/30fps on console (ps5, series x), where will Drake and Series S fall?
Stefan51278
Piranha Plant
- Pronouns
- he/him
Drake will have the advantage of dedicated cores, which the AMD-GPUs don't have to this day. The impact of subtle RT on the performance will always be bigger on PS5/Series XS, because the more RT you do the less GPU-Cores are available for the other render-tasks. Titles released later in the generation will need more developer-hours to work smoothly on a mobile chipset like Drake, it's the same procedure we already had with the original Switch and the Tegra X1.
AMD does have dedicates RT cores. They also have significantly more power on tap too.
RTGI has the most effect on visuals and is also the most scalable due to techniques. But because it's still heavy, devs use an extremely low sample count, which could hurt Drake.
Νεφέλωμα
Switch 3 enthusiast
- Pronouns
- He
Changes in graphics (resolution, dlss,..) and master mode.
Stefan51278
Piranha Plant
- Pronouns
- he/him
Dedicated RT Cores in RDNA2? Are you sure about this? I'm not sure about RDNA3, but so far I believe they are still sharing the texturing-units to save die space.
BreakAtmo
Bob-omb
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Honestly I'd want DLSS on such games regardless, as it's top-tier when it comes to quality AA. In portable mode, it could also improve battery life. Say the Switch Double has a 1080p screen and TOTK runs at a native 1080p60 on it. A mode that changes the resolution to 1080p DLSS Quality Mode would still look great and likely would not push the chip as hard, leading to less heat and battery drain.
To be clear, I meant "widespread use on the Switch XL". Those next-gen games will be very rough, though - I foresee low settings and internal 360p resolutions carried by DLSS, if the games come to the system at all.
It would be pretty sweet if the extra optimisation forced by Switch 2 has a knock-on effect of improving optimisation and performance on the home consoles.
Last edited by a moderator:
