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

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

I hope that we get Richard Leadbetter's DF video on potential performance of T239 today. It would be great to get some solid and easily digestible expectations settings on performance of the new hardware. I don't expect any new insights for people deeply immersed in this thread. But I hope that it will serve as a good reference point and place to point people towards instead of going in circles in this thread going forward.
 
I hope that we get Richard Leadbetter's DF video on potential performance of T239 today. It would be great to get some solid and easily digestible expectations settings on performance of the new hardware. I don't expect any new insights for people deeply immersed in this thread. But I hope that it will serve as a good reference point and place to point people towards instead of going in circles in this thread going forward.
I should mention right now that, from what I've seen of the 2050 Laptop GPU, it's pretty decent for what it is. It can run modern games at medium settings 60fps fairly well, and that's with the device running on windows which is an OS that takes more to handle than the Switch OS. I can't wait to see DF's video on it, but i'm still fairly confident in the T239's power.
 
We know the colored buttons are not a coincidence because:
a) The odds of various companies (incluiding Nintendo) releasing games with the exact same color scheme for the buttons in the same timeframe (and some of them with previous entries in Switch which do not present colored buttons) are pretty low.

b) The most important: Necrolipe confirmed that it was a guideline provided by Nintendo.

If it is related or not to the new console is up to you. At this point, the simplest explanation is that it is in fact related. But what is clear is that it is not some kind of strange coincidence.
 
I don't know much about hardware, but can the performance of the Switch2 approach that of the Xbox series S?
The running theory is that the Switch 2 will be better than the PS4 but the jury is still out on how close it is to the Series S. Worth reminding folks that the Switch 2 will be a native 1080p machine in all likelyhood. It doesn't need to have the power for 1440p games and it doesn't have a requirement of parity like the Series S. DLSS will fill in the blanks and make the device run at higher resolutions.

Granted, that doesn't matter much outside of third-party support. Nintendo systems are more-so defined by the first-party support, and there's a case to be made that a lot of the Switch line-up is already sitting side-by-side with the efforts of the PS4. If we have a system that sits halfway between the PS4 Pro and Series S, we've got a damn fine system on our hands.
 
Waiting for an official statement


I recommend taking what Tech_Reve posts with a healthy grain of salt, since Tech_Reve did posted rumours with factually incorrect and likely incorrect information. I've put a couple of examples below.

And T234's used for AGX Orin (here and here), Orin NX, and Orin Nano.

Tech_Reves 100% doesn't know shit.

Except Nvidia explicitly said Orin was fabricated using Samsung's 8 nm* process node during Hot Chips 34.
(I mention this, because there's a false rumour that Orin's fabricated using Samsung's 7LPH process node as shown below. And by the way, Samsung's 7LPH process node doesn't officially exist.)

* → a marketing nomenclature used by all foundry companies

Also, the same person that said T239's fabricated using Samsung's 7LPH (8LPH+) process node also said that the RTX 30 GPUs were fabricated using Samsung's 8LPH process node. (And by the way, Samsung's 8LPH process node doesn't officially exist.)


Well, there are rumblings that MS and Sony might look into switching SoC providers for their next (or next next) gen. Dunno how legit.
One of the slides from the Microsoft leaks explicitly mentioned co-designing the GPU with AMD or licencing the Navi 5x GPU IP from AMD.
XBOX-SERIES-NEXT-GEN-SPEC-1200x671.jpg

And considering AMD mentioned being able to design Arm based SoCs for AMD's customers, and AMD rumoured to design Arm based SoCs for PCs, the rumours are probably not accurate with respect to Microsoft.
 
The running theory is that the Switch 2 will be better than the PS4 but the jury is still out on how close it is to the Series S. Worth reminding folks that the Switch 2 will be a native 1080p machine in all likelyhood. It doesn't need to have the power for 1440p games and it doesn't have a requirement of parity like the Series S. DLSS will fill in the blanks and make the device run at higher resolutions.

Granted, that doesn't matter much outside of third-party support. Nintendo systems are more-so defined by the first-party support, and there's a case to be made that a lot of the Switch line-up is already sitting side-by-side with the efforts of the PS4. If we have a system that sits halfway between the PS4 Pro and Series S, we've got a damn fine system on our hands.
Thank you for explaining this.
I am not really interested in 4K or ray tracing, but if I could play games like Elden Ring and Nintendo's own games on one hardware at 1080p60fps, I would be happy if that happened because it would be very revolutionary.
 
I'm a strong believer in the colour button theory - while there is a possibility of coincidences across many games around the same time, new non-public guidelines or ideas about upcoming design choices are much more plausible imho.

That being said, it's also a low-stakes just-for-fun feature, so it won't be anywhere near the end of the world if it turns out to be a coincidence.
 
Thank you for explaining this.
I am not really interested in 4K or ray tracing, but if I could play games like Elden Ring and Nintendo's own games on one hardware at 1080p60fps, I would be happy if that happened because it would be very revolutionary.
I'll have to wait and see if other, smarter people make comments on my stance to see if I got everything correct, but I'm optimistic that this device is going to be a reasonable, stealth powerhouse of a system. Nintendo has a good history of making some of the more impressive games for any given system "generation". Hell, Metroid Prime Remastered looks like a PS5 middle-shelf game, and that's a Gamecube remaster running on 7th gen hardware capabilities.

For me personally? Give Monolith Soft 8th Gen hardware and we'll see Game of the Year 2025.
 
MW3 (2023) is...

checks notes

235GB? What in the flying MS now owns ActiBllizz fuck? With a huge part of the FTC hearings being about NG getting a comparable CoD port. How is that going to go down? Is there some magical compression tech they can use for NG? Do we have any updates or new rumors about the card format being used for NG? I do not see why these games take up so much space.

Thank goodness I don't care about CoD but I want to see NG prosper with as many games possible.
I don't expect this to be a problem at all. Pretty much every multiplat that came to Switch was much smaller in file size compared to other console versions. There will be multiple ways in which they can bring size down.

But ultimately, even if it's still not enough to fit on a cartridge (which it probably won't be) they will just release single player on cartridge and have the rest be downloadable. A bunch of Switch multiplats already do stuff like this, and a bunch of them are even just physical boxes that have a download code in them, no cartridge at all. So in the worst case, they'll just make it a digital only release, I don't think it's big deal, the industry is going that way already. A big chunk of software sales on Switch are already digital. So long as Switch 2 has a decent amount of internal storage, which it is indeed rumoured to have, a digital only release of CoD would be perfectly fine :) but it would be nice to get the campaign on a cartridge, just for the novelty of a modern CoD campaign being on a cartridge!
 
I don't know much about hardware, but can the performance of the Switch2 approach that of the Xbox series S?
Not really, no. Though, you can get image or content quality that is played or executed correctly where it fools the eye for most people that it looks almost identical or the same, but when scrutinized it is actually below it or not up to that level.

Like an optical illusion of sort. Does take a specific finesse in artistic execution and talent to achieve such a thing however, and that depends on who delivers it. And the final would be in the eye of the beholder.


There’s also diminishing returns at play and less people notice differences as time goes on and on.
 
I don't expect this to be a problem at all. Pretty much every multiplat that came to Switch was much smaller in file size compared to other console versions. There will be multiple ways in which they can bring size down.
Tbh, I always forget this. It's actually impressive how much the file size shrinks by.
Just for an example, NieR:Automata The End of YoRHa Edition is only 11GB on Switch. That is insanely small for a PS4 game. Then you look at the file size on Steam (40GB) and you start to cry.
 
MW3 (2023) is...

checks notes

235GB? What in the flying MS now owns ActiBllizz fuck? With a huge part of the FTC hearings being about NG getting a comparable CoD port. How is that going to go down? Is there some magical compression tech they can use for NG? Do we have any updates or new rumors about the card format being used for NG? I do not see why these games take up so much space.

Thank goodness I don't care about CoD but I want to see NG prosper with as many games possible.
Working with one set of textures, having dedicated decompression hardware, and an incentive to actually... Compress things on NG Switch should help.

The rumour is that COD's file sizes are intentionally large so people are discouraged from installing other games they might play instead of COD. Even then, it still has to FIT on NG Switch, so either they slim down the file or NG Switch has 512GB of internal storage.
 
Compression is a lost art in today's dev world.

Which is strange, because unless i'm wrong, both MS and PS current machines offer a nice variety of tools for compression and decrompression.
Bad habits from Gen8 and PC still hanging around. Unfortunately dedicated decompression hasn't really hit PC in the way it's hit consoles, so it's the lowest common denominator in terms of drive speed and compression.
 
0
I haven't seen this subject pop up in this thread thus far, the Legion Go's screen sports no VRR despite its refresh rate of 144 Hz and I find increasingly unlikely that the Switch will have the option.

Honestly for me, it's a bit of a bummer. I know that Nintendo probably saw the figures in the TV space and thought it wouldn't be worth it to implement the feature in handheld mode but I would have loved it nonetheless.

Either way, this is all just speculation.

But still.
 
Compression is a lost art in today's dev world.

Which is strange, because unless i'm wrong, both MS and PS current machines offer a nice variety of tools for compression and decrompression.
It's not. This is the result of working with mechanical drives and shit cpus for so long. More compression means more loading and slower games. It's not a coincidence that all new systems have dedicated decompression and fast storage.

Also CoD has a lot of bespoke assets and is still designed for HDDs. Bespoke assets means everything needs their own texture sheet. Aiming for 60fps means environmental textures are baked down into high resolution atlases per level. So a reused barrel asset might have its texture duplicated as many times as there are levels the barrel appears in.
 
Compression is a lost art in today's dev world.

Which is strange, because unless i'm wrong, both MS and PS current machines offer a nice variety of tools for compression and decrompression.
Compression is generally at it's worst with third-parties. Not because all the games are 100gb Monoliths, but rather because there's no consistency at all with how large games are.

I decided to look through my Steam library and find general examples of how weird it is. I look at games like Deathloop which take 31GB of space, which is pretty reasonable, before looking at Dishonored 2 which takes 42GB total... before looking at Prey which comes at 18GB and you just think that there's no consistency at all.

Resident Evil 2 Remake and Resident Evil 7 Biohazard take up 22GB and 30GB respectively, then suddenly Resident Evil 4 Remake takes 68GB.

GTAV and RDR2 on PC take up nearly the same amount of space, with RDR2 only taking 10GB more... GTAV was released in 2013 and received constant updates but never got a filesize reduction. There's a similar case to be made with Team Fortress 2 and Counter-Strike 2, but at least TF2 has the excuse of having more hats than a City State at this point.

And then there's the Bioshock Trilogy, which makes me angry the more I think about it. Bioshock 1 and 2 take up 6 and 14GB respectively but then the remasters of both games, despite looking hardly any better, take 21GB each. How the fuck did Bioshock 1 suddenly take up 3.5x the space but Bioshock 2 doesn't even increase by 1.5x? And then there's Infinite, which takes up more than the space of Bioshock 1 and 2 combined. Oh, sorry, small correction, Bioshock 1 REMASTERED and Bioshock 2 REMASTERED combined!! How in the fuck?

I'll be completely fair about all of the above that there's many reasons that go into each game and their sizes, especially considering they came out in different years, released on PC which means they accommodate for a variety of computers and have different amounts of content and texture resolutions, but some consistency would be nice.
 
Iirc, from the FTC x Microsoft leak, slides for Microsoft's 2028 "next-gen" system would be using it's own upscaling tech developed in-house. I believe the same will happen with PS. FSR is... functional, it's fine, but it's not the most quality upscaler in the world. Having a better-made upscaler developed with the console in-mind would probably be more beneficial for the console makers.
Microsoft actually has DirectML Super Sampling and they demoed Forza Horizon using this solution back in early 2020's. I wonder why we haven't heard more about since then
I hope that we get Richard Leadbetter's DF video on potential performance of T239 today. It would be great to get some solid and easily digestible expectations settings on performance of the new hardware. I don't expect any new insights for people deeply immersed in this thread. But I hope that it will serve as a good reference point and place to point people towards instead of going in circles in this thread going forward.
You and me both. I'm really looking foward to it as I'm very interested in the power data and the performance at the custom clocks Rich was able to test it.
I should mention right now that, from what I've seen of the 2050 Laptop GPU, it's pretty decent for what it is. It can run modern games at medium settings 60fps fairly well, and that's with the device running on windows which is an OS that takes more to handle than the Switch OS. I can't wait to see DF's video on it, but i'm still fairly confident in the T239's power.
2050 is a really powerful GPU, yes. Basically same performance as the 3050 Mobile, despite the limited memory bus. Would have been an awesome cheap dGPU for Desktop had Nvidia released there.
 
It's not. This is the result of working with mechanical drives and shit cpus for so long. More compression means more loading and slower games. It's not a coincidence that all new systems have dedicated decompression and fast storage.

Also CoD has a lot of bespoke assets and is still designed for HDDs. Bespoke assets means everything needs their own texture sheet. Aiming for 60fps means environmental textures are baked down into high resolution atlases per level. So a reused barrel asset might have its texture duplicated as many times as there are levels the barrel appears in.

I mean, that latter paragraph reads so damn inefficient that it does still surprise me that devs were like "This is okay" instead of looking for better solutions sometime after HD games became a thing and assets and stuff started to blow up in size and complexity.

But to be fair, i'm or rather was guilty of the PC reasoning, back when i still played PC games. Doing so on a shit ass old Laptop with a snail of a HDD.
 
But to be fair, i'm or rather was guilty of the PC reasoning, back when i still played PC games. Doing so on a shit ass old Laptop with a snail of a HDD.
ONE OF THE BOYS!!!

Tbf, one of my laptops that I'm using still uses a 1tb HDD (that 1050ti one I mentioned last page). Laptop isn't great, but it's alright. Still, I'd rather take longer load times if it meant not having to clear space every 5 minutes because of a game with the file size of 10 Borderlands 2's taking over.

Back to Switch 2 discussion though, with the Switch 2 likely using a modern SSD as a storage solution, the excuse doesn't really work with consoles anymore. Hell, it doesn't apply right now. The Series S, X and PS5 all use SSDs. Taking a quarter of the SSD is inexcusable for current-gen systems.
 
I mean, that latter paragraph reads so damn inefficient that it does still surprise me that devs were like "This is okay" instead of looking for better solutions sometime after HD games became a thing and assets and stuff started to blow up in size and complexity.

But to be fair, i'm or rather was guilty of the PC reasoning, back when i still played PC games. Doing so on a shit ass old Laptop with a snail of a HDD.
It made sense in the days of HDDs and duplicate assets, I guess. Better to look for one texture atlas rather than hundreds of small textures scattered who the fuck knows where on the hdd.

XBO and PS4 still have to be supported, I hope that changes for 2024. Could allow for a paradigm shift in how they handle assets. Also, these assets have to work on mobile now, since the main games, warzone, and warzone mobile share assets, though not exactly maps. They're trending towards efficiency at least
 
The solution is for critics to start putting more of a mention of file sizes in their game reviews. I don't want to go so far as to say "critics should dock points", because I imagine most critics will feel unqualified to judge whether a game justifies its size or not, because its a highly technical problem. But at least making mention of file size in reviews, and pointing out outliers and cases of extreme file sizes, compared to the industry average, would be a good step in the right direction of pressuring publishers to care.
 
I remember last year people saying the new switch was going to launch this year because 2023 was completly empty outside of zelda and pikmin, and look at that, the new console never release and we have a lof of games throught the year.

So i cant put a lack of announcements as indication that reveal of the new console could be soon, it could happen tho but not exactly because Nintendo dont have announcments left for the year
a indie World Showcase could happen in this month or dezembre, filling the void
 
0
ONE OF THE BOYS!!!

Tbf, one of my laptops that I'm using still uses a 1tb HDD (that 1050ti one I mentioned last page). Laptop isn't great, but it's alright. Still, I'd rather take longer load times if it meant not having to clear space every 5 minutes because of a game with the file size of 10 Borderlands 2's taking over.

Back to Switch 2 discussion though, with the Switch 2 likely using a modern SSD as a storage solution, the excuse doesn't really work with consoles anymore. Hell, it doesn't apply right now. The Series S, X and PS5 all use SSDs. Taking a quarter of the SSD is inexcusable for current-gen systems.

For some reason, i'm actually pretty relaxed about the speed of ReDraketed's built-in storage. And i actually think devs will be satisfied with it, too.

Real issue will end up being the size/amount, so yeah, back to the talking point of "please don't use your own fancy shit" for expandable storage options. ^^

It made sense in the days of HDDs and duplicate assets, I guess. Better to look for one texture atlas rather than hundreds of small textures scattered who the fuck knows where on the hdd.

XBO and PS4 still have to be supported, I hope that changes for 2024. Could allow for a paradigm shift in how they handle assets. Also, these assets have to work on mobile now, since the main games, warzone, and warzone mobile share assets, though not exactly maps. They're trending towards efficiency at least

Yay, progress!
 
The solution is for critics to start putting more of a mention of file sizes in their game reviews. I don't want to go so far as to say "critics should dock points", because I imagine most critics will feel unqualified to judge whether a game justifies its size or not, because its a highly technical problem. But at least making mention of file size in reviews, and pointing out outliers and cases of extreme file sizes, compared to the industry average, would be a good step in the right direction of pressuring publishers to care.
Making mention of it probably won't solve the problem outright, but at least it'll start a small movement.

Also, should probably get better reviews if it runs on lower end systems. I'm going to start complimenting Hi-Fi Rush again because that game rules, but that game's system requirements and file-size should be observed as one of the most pro-consumer parts of any modern game. It's super-well optimised for older systems (allowing you to run the game at a decent framerate even on a 1050, 8gb of ram, 6th gen i5 processor) but also has a lot of respect for the hard drive, listing the space required at 20GB but actually amounting to around 16GB total. Those system requirements are also very generous. Again, 1050ti laptop using FSR to run the game at 60fps, 1080p at Medium settings. Actual miracle game.

Is it a hottake to say that Hi-Fi Rush is the most "Nintendo game that definitely isn't a Nintendo game"? Eh, who cares, that game slaps. Hopefully Microsoft allows Tango to port it to the Switch 2 at some point.
 
For some reason, i'm actually pretty relaxed about the speed of ReDraketed's built-in storage. And i actually think devs will be satisfied with it, too.

Real issue will end up being the size/amount, so yeah, back to the talking point of "please don't use your own fancy shit" for expandable storage options. ^^
My take is that it'll be 300MB/s, targeting 1GB after decompression (a big ask but not impossible), because going above that you start looking at forcing installs to internal memory. MicroSD and Game Card can both theoretically hit 300MB/s, for instance. As for volume, I think either 256 or 512 is pretty reasonable, and with the cost of storage being what it is, I really hope they go with 512.

I also REALLY hope that they launch with a single storage SKU for a BUNCH of reasons.
 
I just found out something super interesting. In screenshot for the upcoming switch version Legend of Heroes: Kuro No Kiseki you can see the button have color correspond to the color of the Snes/SF buttons just like the TTYD remake coming next year which is also when this game comes out.
field.webp
03.webp

Though the kicker is that this game have a released date of Feb 2024 meaning that not only is there a chance that the theory that the switch having colored buttons might actually be true but we could see some kind of announcement/first look for it before this year end.
 
The Occam's Razor explanation is that it's a coincidence. Certainly that's a simpler explanation than Nintendo telling studios, including Nihon Falcom way back before they announced Ys X in February, to use a button scheme in games for a system that doesn't have colored buttons, because they plan to launch a different system a year or two later that does.


But there aren't any such guidelines.


So in your opinion, if it weren't for upcoming SFC-colored hardware, the developers would have been okay with the TTYD button colors being "red, green, gray, and gray?" Because I think they obviously thought they needed to add color to X and Y, and at that point you aren't using GameCube colors anyway, so you might as well choose something meaningful (that also isn't Xbox colors).
this is for easy readbility, is much easier if you say press the red A button to jump, istead of press the A button to jump, if you associate a color with a specific action, is much easier to tell players
 
0
I just found out something super interesting. In screenshot for the upcoming switch version Legend of Heroes: Kuro No Kiseki you can see the button have color correspond to the color of the Snes/SF buttons just like the TTYD remake coming next year which is also when this game comes out.
field.webp
03.webp

Though the kicker is that this game have a released date of Feb 2024 meaning that not only is there a chance that the theory that the switch having colored buttons might actually be true but we could see some kind of announcement/first look for it before this year end.
I believe the Legend of Heroes' coloured buttons was already mentioned, but the "Feb 2024" theory sounds pretty plausible. Kinda adds to the "We're getting an announcement between now and the end of January" theories, but we'll have to see.
 
My take is that it'll be 300MB/s, targeting 1GB after decompression (a big ask but not impossible), because going above that you start looking at forcing installs to internal memory. MicroSD and Game Card can both theoretically hit 300MB/s, for instance. As for volume, I think either 256 or 512 is pretty reasonable, and with the cost of storage being what it is, I really hope they go with 512.

I also REALLY hope that they launch with a single storage SKU for a BUNCH of reasons.
Nintendo would probably opt for 256gb just for cost reasons, but I do hope and pray it's 512gb. The Switch benefits the most from being a digital console, so you can kinda understand why it'd be a good move to have such a large space for games. Hell, if those rumours about a digital-only SKU are true, 512gb might be the option for that SKU.

Also Nintendo likely won't go for a proprietary storage type like the VITA/PSP's joke SD cards. That'd be business suicide, especially since they've already got a good thing going with SD Card manufacturers.
 
I haven't seen this subject pop up in this thread thus far, the Legion Go's screen sports no VRR despite its refresh rate of 144 Hz and I find increasingly unlikely that the Switch will have the option.

Honestly for me, it's a bit of a bummer. I know that Nintendo probably saw the figures in the TV space and thought it wouldn't be worth it to implement the feature in handheld mode but I would have loved it nonetheless.

Either way, this is all just speculation.

But still.
I think that is Legion Go more than the screen itself in this case.
 
0
Nintendo would probably opt for 256gb just for cost reasons, but I do hope and pray it's 512gb. The Switch benefits the most from being a digital console, so you can kinda understand why it'd be a good move to have such a large space for games. Hell, if those rumours about a digital-only SKU are true, 512gb might be the option for that SKU.

Also Nintendo likely won't go for a proprietary storage type like the VITA/PSP's joke SD cards. That'd be business suicide, especially since they've already got a good thing going with SD Card manufacturers.
A digital only SKU would benefit first and foremost from being cheaper, which is incompatible with it being the high storage option, really.

I don't believe a digital SKU at launch is happening at all, all the so-called rumours around it have been laughable.

I think 512 is relatively likely because UFS targeting a minimum of 300MB/s is pretty cheap, while more digital engagement benefits Nintendo. The increase in price at the wholesale level from 256GB of UFS to 512GB is not nearly as significant as the increase you see between a 256GB Samsung and a 512GB unit.
 
A digital only SKU would benefit first and foremost from being cheaper, which is incompatible with it being the high storage option, really.
True ig. The Black Series S sku kinda works on paper, but it wouldn't work for the Switch 2 if the difference in price is around 50 bucks.
I don't believe a digital SKU at launch is happening at all, all the so-called rumours around it have been laughable.
I haven't seen many of such rumours, but the one I do remember is the one where I posted it. Even as a serious conversation point, I kinda agree? It depends on how many notes Nintendo is taking from Xbox and Playstation.
I think 512 is relatively likely because UFS targeting a minimum of 300MB/s is pretty cheap, while more digital engagement benefits Nintendo. The increase in price at the wholesale level from 256GB of UFS to 512GB is not nearly as significant as the increase you see between a 256GB Samsung and a 512GB unit.
SSDs have gotten cheaper very quickly from what I've seen. Hell, I managed to buy an 1TB external SSD for 2.70 pounds once from Lenovo's store (long story, not relevant). 512gb is likely and Nintendo seems to understand the value of internal storage now, but it's still something I've got concerns over.
 
Call of Duty has a fine level of compression and has tried to do as much as possible to reduce the file size without reducing the amount of assets.

It’s just the game has a ton of unique and high quality assets. They would need to cut down on the amount of assets in the game to compress it much more and that would both degrade visual quality and take a huge amount of time.
 
If I remember correctly, that demo was a video upscale, not a real-time game upscale. And it was Nvidia's library ported to DirectML, rather than a creation of Microsoft
Ah! That explains why we haven't seen it since. Meh, I was really expecting MS to develop a IHV agnostic ML Upsampling solution baked into DirectX. But I guess that's too much to ask for.
 
0
I hope that we get Richard Leadbetter's DF video on potential performance of T239 today. It would be great to get some solid and easily digestible expectations settings on performance of the new hardware. I don't expect any new insights for people deeply immersed in this thread. But I hope that it will serve as a good reference point and place to point people towards instead of going in circles in this thread going forward.
Was this video announced or something?
 
The running theory is that the Switch 2 will be better than the PS4 but the jury is still out on how close it is to the Series S. Worth reminding folks that the Switch 2 will be a native 1080p machine in all likelyhood. It doesn't need to have the power for 1440p games and it doesn't have a requirement of parity like the Series S. DLSS will fill in the blanks and make the device run at higher resolutions.

Granted, that doesn't matter much outside of third-party support. Nintendo systems are more-so defined by the first-party support, and there's a case to be made that a lot of the Switch line-up is already sitting side-by-side with the efforts of the PS4. If we have a system that sits halfway between the PS4 Pro and Series S, we've got a damn fine system on our hands.

As I've said before, the closer to PS4 Pro when docked in raw hardware, the better. We don't want another situation where nearer the end of life the system starts struggling. Halfway ain't good enough IMO. Dream bigger.
 
A digital only SKU would benefit first and foremost from being cheaper, which is incompatible with it being the high storage option, really.
Not necessarily. Physical get better discounts anyway, so those who are price councious will likely not fall for a $50 discount when they save a lot more in the long run. Only people who are already 100% digital would get that in masses. But if it's a trade off (physical vs more storage), people mostly digital may be more willing to go 100%.

And in Nintendo case, it makes a lot of sense. There's no much saving for them from removing the card reader and there's no install, so physical owners don't need nearly as much space. You can have dozens of physical games before you need a micro SD, but you couldn't even fit BotW + Smash in the OG 32GB. And that gets even worse if external storage becomes expensive.

I really doubt we're going to have a digital only SKU at launch or anytime soon, but if we ever get one, I think it will be more like the Series X leaked new model (digital only but twice the storage).
 
I'll have to wait and see if other, smarter people make comments on my stance to see if I got everything correct, but I'm optimistic that this device is going to be a reasonable, stealth powerhouse of a system. Nintendo has a good history of making some of the more impressive games for any given system "generation". Hell, Metroid Prime Remastered looks like a PS5 middle-shelf game, and that's a Gamecube remaster running on 7th gen hardware capabilities.

For me personally? Give Monolith Soft 8th Gen hardware and we'll see Game of the Year 2025.

You're giving MPR far too much credit there, come on now. It looks good but it's not THAT good.
 
Not necessarily. Physical get better discounts anyway, so those who are price councious will likely not fall for a $50 discount when they save a lot more in the long run. Only people who are already 100% digital would get that in masses. But if it's a trade off (physical vs more storage), people mostly digital may be more willing to go 100%.

And in Nintendo case, it makes a lot of sense. There's no much saving for them from removing the card reader and there's no install, so physical owners don't need nearly as much space. You can have dozens of physical games before you need a micro SD, but you couldn't even fit BotW + Smash in the OG 32GB. And that gets even worse if external storage becomes expensive.

I really doubt we're going to have a digital only SKU at launch or anytime soon, but if we ever get one, I think it will be more like the Series X leaked new model (digital only but twice the storage).
That's a bit contradictory; the new Series X is NOT cheaper, it's the same price. Meanwhile, digital and physical price differences are becoming less and less relevant. A cheaper, higher storage, digital only SKU sold alongside the existing one makes no sense, there's a reason Microsoft and Sony haven't don't that despite many chances to do so.
 
You're giving MPR far too much credit there, come on now. It looks good but it's not THAT good.
It does look good though right? Yeah I was exaggerating, but it's definitely impressive for the hardware and doesn't seem like something that'd be on the Switch.
As I've said before, the closer to PS4 Pro when docked in raw hardware, the better. We don't want another situation where nearer the end of life the system starts struggling. Halfway ain't good enough IMO. Dream bigger.
I feel like that's a problem that won't happen as much with the Switch 2. A lot, and I mean a lot, of Gen 9 games are running on PS4 hardware and a lot of current gen exclusives feel like, with a little bit of elbow grease, could run on 8th gen hardware. Gonna refer to my argument of "The power of the hardware is no longer proportional to the amount of effort you can expect to be put into a game". The main innovations are primarily through optimisation of software solutions, such as Ray-reconstruction, Frame Generation and upscaling, the innovations through software solutions are slowly coming down to "making it easier to implement" such as ray-tracing.

Granted, I agree that the hardware should be more power, especially since it'll allow the Nintendo powerhouses such as EPD, Monolith Soft and Retro Studios to make games on much larger scales and push hardware more, but the third-party problems we had with the Switch 1 won't be nearly as big or egregious. Hell, we were lucky to get current-gen games at all with the Switch 1, noone expected to get games like Witcher 3 or Doom Eternal. The fact we're talking about current gen games running on the Switch 2 already says a lot about the differences between the Switch 1 and 2.
 
That's a bit contradictory; the new Series X is NOT cheaper, it's the same price. Meanwhile, digital and physical price differences are becoming less and less relevant. A cheaper, higher storage, digital only SKU sold alongside the existing one makes no sense, there's a reason Microsoft and Sony haven't don't that despite many chances to do so.
Oh, your first post meant that "it could be cheaper or have more storage, but not both"? If so, my bad I agree.

I understood that to be along the lines of "for digital-only, being cheaper is fundamental, so it won't have more storage" and I was particularly arguing that it doesn't have to be cheaper, that more storage would "convert" more people to 100% digital than a $50 discount would.
 
0
Please read this staff post before posting.

Furthermore, according to this follow-up post, all off-topic chat will be moderated.
Last edited:


Back
Top Bottom