I’ll repeat/paraphrase what I’ve said in other threads, specifically the speculation thread, because as a community, I feel it’s necessary to move on.
Decade-old system with even older parts. Much older architecture, older than the current Switch, even. A system without ray tracing capabilities. A system with no SSD. A system without a neural unit/DLSS. A terrible, bottlenecking CPU. A system which developers have moved on from after ten years of support. BTW, Microsoft also killed off the XBox One and its X variant, too. Both have the same problems I’ve listed here.
Let the record show- I have always been "reveal 2024 / user afternoon delight will buy in 2025".
Let the record show- I have always been "reveal 2024 / user afternoon delight will buy in 2025".
A prospective successor CAN actually achieve this. It isn’t being “carried away”. “PS5-performance” in this context is nothing to to with raw power, grunt and performance. It could be a game at native 720p, BUT through DLSS, a higher-end resolution and performance is possible. So, theoretically, it could get a similar performance via different means. It might be cosmetic, but ultimately, it’s about the end result. In some cases, a prospective successor might even be able to better it. I’ve said this elsewhere, too. It’s better to think less about the paper specs and more about the real world performance terms and possibilities - Smarter engineering, NOT raw power, will ultimately prevail here. The successor already has hardware-specific advantages over the AMD-powered consoles, in that it has a more modern architecture, AND it’s more versatile. Developers who relish the challenge will have a lot of fun working with this, and might even surprise people.
I’ll repeat/paraphrase what I’ve said in other threads, specifically the speculation thread, because as a community, I feel it’s necessary to move on.
PS4, be it the Vanilla 2013 Edition or the Pro variant, is so sub-par industry standards and unimpressive in 2024 it’s unreal. There is a tendency to overshoot the capacities of PS hardware and lowball Nintendo hardware, and it continues to rear its ugly head now. The current Switch is, for all intents and purposes, a portable PS4. It can have any non-exclusive game in its library in some capacity. The SoC was pitched to Nintendo as such - “XB1/PS4-esque performance at a tenth of the power consumption and up to 1TF with mixed precision”. So, if, after all these years, all Nvidia, the leading graphics processing company in the world, can come up with is “PS4 performance”, then we might as well get our collective shovels and dig a grave for them because that would be pathetic. That isn’t at all hyperbolic. I’m saying that pretending it’s “good enough for Nintendo” would leave them susceptible to a worse than Wii U fate.
When I say that PS4 performance is garbage and unimpressive to everybody in 2024, from the 70%+ Switch owners who have one of XB1/PS4, to the developers who have moved on, I use that word both deliberately and provocatively. For further clarity, this is actually what we’re talking about when one mentions “PS4 (Pro) performance”:
We can dare to expect better and more from a prospective Switch successor because it won’t have the issues listed above. There is leaked information from the horse’s mouth to back this up, too. I don’t speak from an antagonistic place. It’s important that as a community, we all understand fully what this means, and move on. Developers are doing this, but enthusiast circles stand still, or pretend that this is somehow impressive “for Nintendo”. I know that there are some who feel burned by WUST threads of the past, but ultimately, we’re all adults here - the onus is on the individual to get a grip of their own emotions, rather than police others and demand they WOO-HAH and keep their expectations in check. I see a lot of that elsewhere, and it’s pissing-in-somebody’s-cornflakes energy. There is taking a more conservative view, and that’s very fine and well, but there’s a line between that and pessimism for pessimism’s sake, to the point of denying easily verifiable facts. I’m not saying this is you, but the sentiment of “impressive for Nintendo” stinks of Wii-era condescension. It suits a “behind the times” narrative, and it fails to understand where Nintendo actually are. It’s also a failure to learn the lessons of the Wii U and 3DS, and with no portable division to help them weather another such storm, there is no room for complacency.
Most want to play? Gimme Persona 3 Reload.
this. gimme that super crisp Mario Odyssey upgrade.
It really is. It’s pissing in cornflakes energy. It needn’t be unthinkable that a game on the successor can look like a PS5 one. This thing will get PS5 games, after all. It’s not at all far removed from Dragon Quest 11, NieR: Automata, or Witcher 3 on the Switch and PS4, for example. But let’s say it’s even better than what some people expected… Why is it such an affront to them, if others say that? I, for one, will be DELIGHTED for the day that Nintendo fans don’t feel a need to pay a $499 SPIT Charge (Secondary Platform Inconvenience Tax) for non-exclusive content from third parties.
i want Metroid Prime 4 too look so good, everyone will question if this game can run on Switch, you play it and got impressed by the tech wizardy,Retro Studios did to make Switch run this game, basically Retro Studios will make Metroid Prime 4 look like a PS4/PS5 game on Switch.
Baulder’s Gate 3. Bonus points if it ends up easier to port than the Xbox version.
No hostilities intended!!
I do mostly agree though!
I write, and have a certain way with my expression. Hope the rest of your day will be as kind to you as possible. 
$500/600 dolars at minumum with a 2h battery life
I think it might happen if Larian can wrangle the CPU issues in Act 3.
Anything from Capcom, notably Resident Evil. I can probably resist getting a PS5 entirely, or at least most of this generation. It always starts with, “Damn, I really want to play the new Resident Evil,” then I buy other games because I already have whatever PlayStation.
Possible but all the leaks so far confirm the speculation. So you would need to add an alternate branch where leaks confirm the speculation rather than contradicting it.
Running PS5 level games at lower settings then upscaling them with DLSS does not indicate a miracle machine, unless you consider DLSS itself a miracle. The Switch can run PS4 level games, at lower res and settings. Modern games are scalable and a lot of GPU resources on these consoles are spent pushing more pixels to fill a 4K canvas. The Switch 2 has dedicated tensor cores to upscale the image, so the GPU can render these games at something like 720p-1080p or even lower, saving resources. One could expect games to run at lower settings than the Series S version, but possibly at a higher resolution with upscaling.
Could be, the game supports DLSS 2
It is largely CPU-bound, performance-wise.Could be, the game supports DLSS 2
NVIDIA DLSS & GeForce RTX: List Of All Games, Engines And Applications Featuring GeForce RTX-Powered Technology And Features
See which games, engines and applications support NVIDIA DLSS 2, NVIDIA DLSS 3, NVIDIA DLSS 3.5, Ray Tracing, Frame Generation, Ray Reconstruction, and AI technologies and features when you have a GeForce RTX graphics card, GPU, or laptop.www.nvidia.com
I’m more looking forward to the widely impractical fake “leaks” that everyone will believe anyways no matter how dumb the design is.
On the flip side,
You should realize that the default performance profile of Handheld Switch, will probably be 240p or 360p, upscaled into 1080p. Those types of performance gains via DLSS, will be a massive boost to battery life. And the artifacts of running Ultra DLSS at that low of resolution will not be noticeable on an 8 inch screen.
Yeah, that's fair. But I expect we'll at least get a glimpse of one of those big games during the reveal trailer, like they did with Skyrim for the Switch.
why? there's no guarantee prime 5 will even be a thing
