They are not going to beat out PS5/ Series X on OS allocation.No reason why they can’t go with 16GB and have 4GB for OS + high quality video capture out does that eat into bandwidth too much?
They are not going to beat out PS5/ Series X on OS allocation.No reason why they can’t go with 16GB and have 4GB for OS + high quality video capture out does that eat into bandwidth too much?
I believe its 7,5 gv total ram (for games). Or maybe slightly more after they increased it by "severeal hundred megabyte"That just seems a little expensive for not a ton of benefit, but maybe.
The Series S only has 8 GBs of VRAM (at bandwidth expected to be 2.5x larger than the Switch 2) so I'm not sure how they should position their VRAM size relatively.
if he trips and falls, the reveal button goes off.A sweaty Furukawa has been walking nervous in circles in front of the big reveal button for a few weeks.
A Late February/early March reveal to an April release. It seems hasty but it can be done.People seem to be treating this as a standard console launch. With months of marketing etc. I really think they’re going the smartphone route. Announcement and launch shortly after. Aggressive marketing throughout the year and leading up to holiday period for a second launch essentially. Worked wonderfully for the OG Switch. Don’t see why they would do it any different. Other than announcing it closer to launch.
Personally, I just use the dock charger as my regular USB-C charger for my phone and stuff.My only question in this is essentially the dock power adapter can be used independently from the dock to charge the device, unlike any other Nintendo home console before it. So would the hybrid multifunction factors need to be met since people are likely to pack up and take their Switch's somewhere and possibly use the dock power adapter to charge all electronic devices...
Also the Switch being able to dock is what makes it a hybrid device, but technically since it has an internal battery power supply (that it runs off of all the time) can they get away from it being called a mobile device?
A Late February/early March reveal to an April release. It seems hasty but it can be done.
Furakawa is as cautious as Iwata was idealistic.Nintendo themselves if my memory serves have spent a bit of coin in R&D for AI-based upscaling techniques over the years, I think going as far back as the early 2010s. It is possible then when Nvidia came on board, Nintendo felt they could work together to devise a custom DLSS version made just for the Switch 2. I'd be curious if like having a low-level API like NVN, something similar could be implemented for DLSS, at the minimum, NVN2 includes that specific version of DLSS.
I honestly do believe the DLSS we will get for Switch 2 won't be the off-the-shelf version, but instead designed around the limitations, and low-power output of the hardware.
It's possible though I'd argue it made more sense back then because the Switch was previously announced, and known to the public. Nintendo haven't even acknowledged the damn thing is in existence. We know more about Metroid Prime 4 than we do about the Switch 2, at least officially.
While I still believe 1080p is the target for a screen, there is something that tells me they may end up just recycling the 720p OLED screen into the Switch 2. Yes, there is that report about a 7.91" 1080p LCD panel, but are we definitive at this point that was not referring to the PS Portal's screen? All the reviews say it's 8", but is it really? Or is it rounded up to 8"?
I'm listening to their latest episode right now (maybe 20 min left when I paused it), and I think you've already said it. It may simply be a case of "We don't want to hurt holiday sales." We're saying to ourselves that it must be more than that, but speaking from a business sense, I think that is really want it comes to. Maybe it doesn't have to be more than that, though I am not a business owner of a major publicly-traded corporation, so I don't know shit when it comes to running a business. I only know to keep my own financials in order in my personal life.
But we have two new Mario titles, one of which is brand new, new OLED bundle, and I think one or two more things in store for this holiday season. And didn't the projected sales for the remainder of this FY has Nintendo still on track to sell 15 million units? Maybe Nintendo really are just playing it safe, and on cruise control this holiday season. Again, I think we can say that Nintendo are as of right now focused on the holiday season rather than acknowledging the existence of Switch 2, for better or worse.
I mean. . . Sega did it with the Saturn, but yeah that was a bad idea.It could, it’s just never been done and has no upside, lol.
….you don’t need 4GB for all that.No reason why they can’t go with 16GB and have 4GB for OS + high quality video capture out does that eat into bandwidth too much?
they only did this with North America. in Japan, it had a traditional reveal/release timing. not that it did muchI mean. . . Sega did it with the Saturn, but yeah that was a bad idea.
Yeah I don’t think we need the os to take up more than 1.5gb (and possibly allow devs to make the os only use 512mb like the original switch by disabling certain features)….you don’t need 4GB for all that.
They can easily do it with 2GB.
Unless you want to record for idk, 5-10minutes??
Who even needs that.
Even Nate and MVG seemed perplexed that Nintendo hasn't just announced their next console already. Just a short statement by Furukawa about the next hardware coming out some time in 2024 would have been enough.
Everybody who even has so much as dipped their toes in gaming at one point knows that having a console approach its eighth year on the market without a successor being announced is something highly unusual, if not straight up odd. There must be a reason for the hesitation, beyond the usual "Nintendo doesn't want to hurt its holiday sales" talk. Now, what that hesitation is about, we might never know for sure.
This is Furukawa's first system fully launched under his watch, so he likely wants full control of the narrative. That plus, as you said, he probably doesn't want to endanger Switch 1 holiday sales by having an official acknowledgement of the Switch 2 make headlines (because trust me, it'd be everywhere) before the Switch 1 hits their 15 million target for the fiscal year.Even Nate and MVG seemed perplexed that Nintendo hasn't just announced their next console already. Just a short statement by Furukawa about the next hardware coming out some time in 2024 would have been enough.
Everybody who even has so much as dipped their toes in gaming at one point knows that having a console approach its eighth year on the market without a successor being announced is something highly unusual, if not straight up odd. There must be a reason for the hesitation, beyond the usual "Nintendo doesn't want to hurt its holiday sales" talk. Now, what that hesitation is about, we might never know for sure.
People seem to be treating this as a standard console launch. With months of marketing etc. I really think they’re going the smartphone route. Announcement and launch shortly after. Aggressive marketing throughout the year and leading up to holiday period for a second launch essentially. Worked wonderfully for the OG Switch. Don’t see why they would do it any different. Other than announcing it closer to launch.
Smartphones don't have an entire launch window of software to promote, so applying that same style of aggressive marketing to the Switch 2 wouldn't really go over well.A Late February/early March reveal to an April release. It seems hasty but it can be done.
I think long recording/streaming would be a nice extra feature for the system.….you don’t need 4GB for all that.
They can easily do it with 2GB.
Unless you want to record for idk, 5-10minutes??
Who even needs that.
4GB on the Switch Switch sucessor menu, will allow features we resquest since the Switch launch, to be implemented on Nintendo next hardware such as folders/themes, a better eShop, and maybe a option to stream a game for the console itself.….you don’t need 4GB for all that.
They can easily do it with 2GB.
Unless you want to record for idk, 5-10minutes??
Who even needs that.
Problem is 90% of users wouldn't have any use for it. Anyone seriously invested in video production or streaming would already have a capture card.I think long recording/streaming would be a nice extra feature for the system.
But that was 28 years ago. No instant global social media news that spread faster than wildfire. We live in very different times that see new iPhones and iPads revealed and released within a week with record breaking sales.I mean. . . Sega did it with the Saturn, but yeah that was a bad idea.
They just need enough memory and enough spare CPU cycles to cache the recording and start saving to storage (microSD or internal) as the recording continues so it could allow recording to go until you run out of storage space.….you don’t need 4GB for all that.
They can easily do it with 2GB.
Unless you want to record for idk, 5-10minutes??
Who even needs that.
That's because people expect a new iPhone every single year. The launch of a game console is much rarer, and thus you need a longer marketing cycle to make people aware of it and build hype. They don't have the luxury of that inherent expectation.But that was 28 years ago. No instant global social media news that spread faster than wildfire. We live in very different times that see new iPhones and iPads revealed and released within a week with record breaking sales.
We had folders and themes on a 128MB device... The 3DS.4GB on the Switch Switch sucessor menu, will allow features we resquest since the Switch launch, to be implemented on Nintendo next hardware such as folders/themes, a better eShop, and maybe a option to stream a game for the console itself.
Sony says PS3 pushed about a billion software, but your PS3 number accounts for less than a quarter of that (maybe far less, I'm a bit uncertain how to read that first paragraph). Is it really the case that the vast majority of PS3's software sales came from games under a million? Or what am I missing?From it's 1 million+ sellers, the PS3+360 sold ~150 million first party games. The PS4+Xbone sold ~135 million first party games. Those users are buying the same number of games.
But the 360 sold 200 million 3rd party units compared to the PS3 getting 85 million, despite being basically equal install bases. These games represent zero risk profit for the platform holder,who has no development investment.
...
Looking at the million plus sellers alone, Nintendo sold more first party units, than the last generation sold in total, third and first party combined.
Why wouldn't these just become part of the off-the-shelf version for simplicity? Unless Nintendo somehow is beating NVIDIA at their own game?Nintendo themselves if my memory serves have spent a bit of coin in R&D for AI-based upscaling techniques over the years, I think going as far back as the early 2010s. It is possible then when Nvidia came on board, Nintendo felt they could work together to devise a custom DLSS version made just for the Switch 2. I'd be curious if like having a low-level API like NVN, something similar could be implemented for DLSS, at the minimum, NVN2 includes that specific version of DLSS.
I honestly do believe the DLSS we will get for Switch 2 won't be the off-the-shelf version, but instead designed around the limitations, and low-power output of the hardware.
Geez, as much as LCD haters have worried about a downgrade, "Here, buy our amazing new system... with the same screen from four years ago!" would fall really flat to me.While I still believe 1080p is the target for a screen, there is something that tells me they may end up just recycling the 720p OLED screen into the Switch 2. Yes, there is that report about a 7.91" 1080p LCD panel, but are we definitive at this point that was not referring to the PS Portal's screen? All the reviews say it's 8", but is it really? Or is it rounded up to 8"?
The shortest announcement to release in console history is the Xbox One at 6 months.
I guess it's possible, but I'm not sure how beneficial it would be.
16 GBs of slowish VRAM with potentially very fast internal storage feels like kind of a weird setup.
they only did this with North America. in Japan, it had a traditional reveal/release timing. not that it did much
I thought this was reported some time ago especially pertaining to EU laws of why Switch 2 will most likely see a revamp on power delivery and could support higher output when docked.
I feel like you're looking at this a little backwards.My only question in this is essentially the dock power adapter can be used independently from the dock to charge the device, unlike any other Nintendo home console before it. So would the hybrid multifunction factors need to be met since people are likely to pack up and take their Switch's somewhere and possibly use the dock power adapter to charge all electronic devices...
Also the Switch being able to dock is what makes it a hybrid device, but technically since it has an internal battery power supply (that it runs off of all the time) can they get away from it being called a mobile device?
GB/s feels like the wrong way to measure VRAM bandwidth at this point.
MB/ms feels more appropriate for thinking about RAM bandwidth. It’s the same number, but it helps clarify thinking imo.
How so? 1GB/s is the same as 1000MB/s, its the same measurement. $100K is the same dollar amount at $100,000. Not sure what your trying to say.
The next round of Vietnamese data should come early December which won’t be for another couple of weeks.I think we can expect very little new information this year unless there is an update on shipping information. The next generation of consoles will probably depend on the software lineup for 2024 at the Nintendo Direct around February next year.
Americans make 50% or more of the playerbase or something? As a European, I don’t give a damn about Super Bowl. If anything, the reveal would happen before, and Super Bowl would just receive some additional ad after
Honestly I feel like it was obvious this whole time that those buttons were only colored that way because they were just trying to pay homage to the old famicom controller.So about button color theory. I just bought Mario RPG, about 10 minutes in and...
The button prompts aren't consistent? Whenever they're mentioned via text they're just white. The settings menus and tutorials all have them as white too. If Nintendo were really trying to future-proof for the Switch 2, wouldn't they also want to make the text color match? What would be the point of colored buttons if the text was white, you'd still need to look at the symbols themselves anyways. Just thought it was interesting how only the overworld UI had colored buttons but nothing else does.
...well, those have the vram right on it for their own use.High res textures are often brought up when discussing memory bandwidth, but they are not the bandwidth hogs people thing they are. Most graphics cards, even something like the RTX2050 with its limited bandwidth can use high res textures so long as they have the required VRAM capacity.
I feel like you're looking at this a little backwards.
Nintendo supporting PD doesn't mean they have to support higher power draw. It just means things have to work with PD-compliant chargers. They can still limit system draw to what it currently is while being PD-compliant. Additionally, their power targets will determine the power supply they use, not the other way around. They wouldn't look at a need for a new charger as an excuse to bump up the power spec; the power spec will determine how powerful of a charger they use, whether they need to build a new one or not.
Regardless - the law mandates support for USB PD, not use of it, if that makes sense. Apple won't have to alter the MacBook Pro to meet the requirements for laptops in 2026, because they can charge over either USB-C (with USB PD) or MagSafe. The important thing is that the support is there.
With that in mind, let's look at the Switch successor (referred to as just the Switch for the rest of this post, for simplicity) on its own. The Switch is 100% a mobile device with a battery that charges within the 100W range required to mandate support of USB PD to be sold in the EU. Therefore, it's a given that it'll support USB PD, and that you'll be able to use whatever USB PD charger you want... to quick charge it, and nothing more.
The dock successor (also referred to as just the dock for the rest of this post) does not meet these requirements, at least to our knowledge. Nintendo treats it as its own device, which is technically correct. Therefore, it should not have to support USB PD. Even though one of its primary functions is to power a device that will support USB PD, if Nintendo feels it benefits them not to use USB PD, they don't have to use it to transfer power. That may seem silly to us, but as long as it saves them money to do so, it wouldn't be silly to them. And because the Switch itself still supports USB PD, nothing is being violated. You can still use a common charger if you want to directly with the Switch.
As for the charger itself, the thing that makes this whole law click is that the manufacturer doesn't have to include a charger, cutting back on e-waste (in fact - chargerless SKUs will be mandatory as an option going forward, since people shouldn't need a charger for every device they own if they all use the same chargers). Nintendo, therefore, doesn't have to include a USB PD compliant charger with the Switch. However, they should be able to include a power supply for their exclusively-externally powered dock, and since it doesn't meet the classifications of a portable device, they should be able to include whatever power supply they want - including their current, non-compliant one. It just so happens that the Switch is able to charge off of it - but that's a convenient coincidence (in the eyes of the law, anyway) for Nintendo, not a violation of the common charger law.
This all hinges on our interpretation of the dock as a non-portable device holds up, of course. I don't really see why it wouldn't, as much as it seems like a loophole.
A UFS 2.x and 720p screen both feel incredibly outdated in 2024. We're talking about 8-10 year old tech.Why are we talking about eUFS 3.x (or even eUFS 4.0) when eUFS 2.x is cheaper and may be fit for purpose? I get "higher speed = better", but what's enough speed?
Ultimately, I see it as an opportunity to keep software sales for Switch titles at similar levels by encouraging Switch 2 owners to purchase them until the new game is released. Like, MK8DX didn’t get bought by Wii U owners for visual enhancements, after all, it got bought because it was a better product to play and did something "new" (the return of purpose-built arena battle mode). So long as the next MK and Smash do something that excites the player base, they'll be on board, so visual updates to keep Switch games sales-relevant from day one of new hardware until the next iteration of software sounds like a smart play to me. That IS where the money's made, after all, and I'm sure they'd want, for example, SMBW to have the longest possible tail without being cut off at the knees, and such a proposal of a visual update basically lets it keep any sales momentum it'll have when the time comes. Rather like DLC that way, keeps momentum.
4 most expensive parts are SoC, RAM, screen and battery, typically in that order (though RAM and screen can change positions, depending on configurations of either). Storage is #5 and is entirely dependent on capacity/speed of it.
Same thing for the "1080p OR DIE" folks. A 720p screen is not only cheaper, but gives opportunities for s smaller battery by reducing TDP when in handheld, which in turn might allot more space in the chassis, for instance.
The size, pixel density and type of screen can have big ramifications to the overall industrial design and cascades cost savings to the rest of the device. Whatever screen they believe offers the most favourable trade-offs for the overall product is the one they'll choose.
Specifically, the eShop problem is that it is loading the entirety of the shop as a web app, rather than it being a native app making API calls to the eShop to fill in data for each listing that presents more uniformly and loads more quickly. This will likely require re-building the entire eShop backend, which they should definitely do! And should absolutely be achievable with a modest bump in OS RAM usage.We had folders and themes on a 128MB device... The 3DS.
And eshop's responsiveness is merely a matter of optimization (or lack thereof).
eUFS 2.1 is basically taking eMMC’s place as the low-end NAND option.my thought is: hows ufs 2.x standing in 5 years in regards to production, but thats probably for nintendo to decide in contract negotiations.
Eh...not quite. It was mk8...but portable. I don't even see many people talking about arenas, and the DLC ignored it as a whole.
It not being on Wii U (a ton of people bought MK8 because they did not have a Wii U) was the bigger selling point.
Now whats the benefit? it being prettier? eh. new features? for a game that you already have to pay full price? meh.
Portable? the switch is that already.
The ports they did from wii u will not work the same way here. And while you're right,
with enough changes they could get enough engagement from people for their ports, its also a scenario i really really dread...
just the thought of having Smash not be a new one, but ultimate++ where they add some single player mode and 5 characters
for a game that i already have and pays for 120+€.....
They could shock us all and leapfrog to 1TB of eUFS2.1. Especially if it costs less than 512GB of eUFS3.xNintendo were rumoured to be considering up to 512GB of storage, and UFS 2.x is only manufactured in capacities up to 256GB. So, if the rumour is accurate (maybe it isn't), they would have to be using at least UFS 3.
The power savings are mostly limited to when it can engage in Deep Sleep mode, which takes eUFS 2.1’s near-zero power usage in idle to almost absolutely zero. It’s not nothing, but it’s an improvement on something that was insanely power-efficient already.
The "strong" version of the color button theory never made sense. It's more the sort of thing where the uptick in usage of the SFC button colors could mean that various devs are aware that the new hardware will have those, and are choosing using those colors in their UI to match.So about button color theory. I just bought Mario RPG, about 10 minutes in and...
The button prompts aren't consistent? Whenever they're mentioned via text they're just white. The settings menus and tutorials all have them as white too. If Nintendo were really trying to future-proof for the Switch 2, wouldn't they also want to make the text color match? What would be the point of colored buttons if the text was white, you'd still need to look at the symbols themselves anyways. Just thought it was interesting how only the overworld UI had colored buttons but nothing else does.
Edit: Another photo -
This time the colors aren't even used on the overworld. I don't think color theory means much anymore.
There is a complex design question here, and we have an interesting example of a platform holder blowing it.Fair enough. I don't think the two modes would have to be radically different, though - the docked mode is now targeting quadruple the resolution instead of double, so I was thinking the extra power could help with that.
Same as if it would be better to use a 1080p TV with a PS5 because not all games will hit 4K.Could it be better in the long run to have a 720p screen and have games that are capable of internally running at 1080p to be super sampled, because a good amount of current gen games ported to Switch 2 might not be capable of 1080p DLSS? Perhaps. We will see.
I disagree.I think it's pretty unlikely they'll go with separate storage and RAM modules. I bet they'll dual source a UFS 3.1 128GB + LPDDR5 12GB uMCP from Samsung and Micron.
this reminded me of somethingThe S's RT performance is so poor that what should be the generation's defining innovation is often turned off.
I'd assume there's some code in the game that would automatically switch to colored button text prompts should it find a flag in the OS to do so?So about button color theory. I just bought Mario RPG, about 10 minutes in and...
The button prompts aren't consistent? Whenever they're mentioned via text they're just white. The settings menus and tutorials all have them as white too. If Nintendo were really trying to future-proof for the Switch 2, wouldn't they also want to make the text color match? What would be the point of colored buttons if the text was white, you'd still need to look at the symbols themselves anyways. Just thought it was interesting how only the overworld UI had colored buttons but nothing else does.
Edit: Another photo -
This time the colors aren't even used on the overworld. I don't think color theory means much anymore.
I'm not sure about that. If SMRPGRE has any connection to the coloured button theory, what's going on here is that standard prompts and reminders conveyed via text are done using letters. While anything that requires quick thinking or reaction, like prompts in the overworld or during battle, use the colours. This makes sense... If the buttons are those colours, so the brain immediately associates a colour to a button. But they aren't on the current Switch.I'd assume there's some code in the game that would automatically switch to colored button text prompts should it find a flag in the OS to do so?
Just one detail that I find interesting. But the hardware leap is not just in the GPU, but in the CPU too. But when we think about a game running at 4K, this will have almost no impact on the CPU. In other words, as the CPU is stronger, the time spent by the CPU on each frame is shorter, opening up more time available for the GPU to do its work, so, because of these extra ms you wouldn't necessarily need 6x more power to run the BotW in 4K.There is a complex design question here, and we have an interesting example of a platform holder blowing it.
Nintendo obviously wants a system that looks good on modern 4K TVs. But their launch Switch game ran at 900p. 4K is 6 times as many pixels. That’s a whole generational upgrade spent just on uprezzing.
Nintendo will support full 4K output. But while designing the console, I think the software devs are going to look at how much power the hardware folks have to offer and settle on 1440p as the default “next gen” target. It still looks good on modern screens, and it leaves plenty of room to make all those pixels look good, too.
1440p means instead of a 4x gap, we can do a 2x gap with handheld. Which is much easier to manage than 4x. Because you don’t want to just throw power at the problem, ideally you want to match the two. The best possible handheld mode + best possible docked mode doesn’t equal the best system.
Which brings us to the platform holder who screwed all this up, Microsoft.
The Series X is the most powerful console on the market. The S, which loses Microsoft twice as much money per unit, really probably is the most powerful device that MS could offer at an entry-level price point. They smartly target 4K and 1440p, respectively.
So why do they suck so bad?
Well, lots of reasons, but at least part if it is because the two consoles don't support each other. The S is supposed to hit half the resolution of the X, but only has a third of the power. The S has too little RAM, and terrible memory bandwidth, leaving the two machines to require different sets of optimizations. The S's RT performance is so poor that what should be the generation's defining innovation is often turned off. Meanwhile, the X's extra power is mostly wasted, with exclusives needing to scale down to the S, and mulitplats getting "good enough" at the PS5's level of performance.
Nintendo wants to dodge all these mistakes. That means, ideally, matching performance to the target resolutions, so that, as much as possible it’s one port not two. That also means avoiding things like one mode having drastically different bandwidth capabilities.
Which brings me to T239 itself. It’s worth remembering that T239 is fully custom, not off the shelf. So if there are limitations, they’re either baked into the tech, or something Nintendo actively chose. I would be wary of any thinking that only works if T239 is pushed past the design’s natural limits.
I think we're hungrier than iphoners. It's been so long people will gobble it up quick.That's because people expect a new iPhone every single year. The launch of a game console is much rarer, and thus you need a longer marketing cycle to make people aware of it and build hype. They don't have the luxury of that inherent expectation.