• 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)

I will say we are so technology-spoiled to fill so many pages full of paranoia about the possibility of the tech used in the screen of the next Nintendo machine that is not to their preference....

Guys.

It's not that heavy.
7voml1ufz4pz.jpg


/s 😘
 
I asked this in the chaos, but if we assume this is the Sharp display reported on last year, they explicitly mentioned being involved during R&D for the product for some time.

Osaka-based Sharp Corp. last year said it was supplying LCD panels and working closely with the maker of an upcoming console that was then at the R&D stage. Sharp, which is owned by Foxconn Technology Group, has worked with Nintendo in the past and served as a Switch assembler during the pandemic.

Is there anything that can be gleaned about Sharp being involved at the R&D stage?

Would other companies have been able to state the same thing about their involvement with Switch (1)? eg. Japan Display Inc, Innolux, etc.
 
In my opinion, I am convinced that the PS Portal display is made by BOE.
The part number for the PS Portal display is "80FHM6613".
ZfKinYy.jpg


Generally, the first two digits of the display part number are the manufacturer's code.
However, in the PS Portal, that digit is hidden.
w8wSZWe.jpg


So what do the other digits in the part number mean?
Naturally, the following interpretations are possible
80: 8 inch
FHM: Full-HD Module
6613: Unique code

If you look up "FHM" in this section, only the BOE uses it.
In other words, we can determine that the PS Portal display is made by BOE.
Nice find. I found some examples of BOE displays where the official model number is something like TV080WXM, but the internal label starts with 80WXM instead, like the Portal, and it has a similar QR code. The only thing that doesn't match is the 6613 code instead of ending with something like -NS1, but that could be because it's a custom part. 6613 could be their company code for Sony too, as (from what I've seen in shipping data) that seems like a common thing among suppliers like this.
 
Not jumping at either of you, just adding some context. If you factor in "Pro" style revisions, yes, this happens all the time.

Xbox One: 1.3 TFLOPS
Xbox One X: 6 TFLOPS
Xbox Series S: 4 TFLOPS

PS4: 500GB storage
PS4 Pro: 1TB storage
PS5: 825 GB of storage

DS: 3" TFT screen
DSi XL: 4.2" IPS screen
3DS: 3.53" TN screen*

The era of "Pro" revisions is arguably pretty short, but "successor is better than the old base model, but behind relative to the Pro revision" is pretty common?

It makes sense, unfortunately. A "Pro" revision keeps the base technology the same, it has to. That base technology will have become cheaper over the lifetime of the console. That offers a chance to offer "more of the same".

A successor console uses newer technology as a base, which is more costly than the now quite aged tech in the Pro. The Series S is a smaller GPU than the One X, but it's got RT and mesh shaders and other RDNA2 goodies. The PS5 has less storage than PS4 Pro, but it's an SSD. The 3DS offers higher resolution and glasses free 3D, but on a smaller, shittier LCD screen than the DSi XL.

I want an OLED as much as the next person**, but a larger, higher resolution, higher pixel density LCD would be just about par for the course.

*occasional IPS screens in the lottery
**or more, honestly, considering how quickly I pounced on a Steam Deck the instant they offered an OLED model.

I honestly have issues with all these comparisons.

X1X was $499, XSS is $299, so downgrades are expected - I highly doubt the Switch 2 will be cheaper than the OLED Model. If it actually was then I'd understand.

The PS4 Pro to PS5 comparison has a problem - the PS5 SSD isn't just "an SSD". It has that lower storage because it's insanely fast and cutting-edge for a 2020 SSD. For the Switch 2's 2024 LCD to be equivalent it would need to be a HDR2000 QLED screen, if not microLED. The Switch 2 using LCD feels more like if the XSX had also had 825GB of storage but with the much slower speed it currently has.

The screen size decrease from DSi XL to 3DS isn't actually a downgrade - it's what happens when you make a handheld console smaller and more portable, which for many is an upgrade. It's kind of like how the Switch Lite screen isn't "downgraded" from the regular Switch's.

The OLED a lot of people want isn't something crazy, it's just a screen type that's been in gaming handhelds for 13 years now. I'll be buying the Switch 2 either way, and my hope is that it'll be decent quality (it really has no excuse not to at least match the PS Portal screen), but it's still a shame. It'll be funny if they really do pop up with 2 SKUs and all this worrying was for nothing.
 
I honestly have issues with all these comparisons.

X1X was $499, XSS is $299, so downgrades are expected - I highly doubt the Switch 2 will be cheaper than the OLED Model. If it actually was then I'd understand.

The PS4 Pro to PS5 comparison has a problem - the PS5 SSD isn't just "an SSD". It has that lower storage because it's insanely fast and cutting-edge for a 2020 SSD. For the Switch 2's 2024 LCD to be equivalent it would need to be a HDR2000 QLED screen, if not microLED. The Switch 2 using LCD feels more like if the XSX had also had 825GB of storage but with the much slower speed it currently has.

The screen size decrease from DSi XL to 3DS isn't actually a downgrade - it's what happens when you make a handheld console smaller and more portable, which for many is an upgrade. It's kind of like how the Switch Lite screen isn't "downgraded" from the regular Switch's.

The OLED a lot of people want isn't something crazy, it's just a screen type that's been in gaming handhelds for 13 years now. I'll be buying the Switch 2 either way, and my hope is that it'll be decent quality (it really has no excuse not to at least match the PS Portal screen), but it's still a shame. It'll be funny if they really do pop up with 2 SKUs and all this worrying was for nothing.
In this case, I think the smartphone market gives a good idea of how this things operate. There are a lot of smartphones with a base model a Pro model (Redmi Note, Xiaomi, Oneplus, iPhone, Samsung Galaxy S...the exception is almost not having one). It's pretty common to find that the "Insert mobile name" 10 is worse than the "Insert mobile name" 9 Pro in some aspects. That's because the 10 is a succesor to the 9, not to the more premiun 9 Pro.
 
So does the fact that it's a much larger screen make it a higher possibility that it's made on 8 nm?
Haven't we been over this?

Short answer, no.

Long answer, maybe the opposite? Larger screen means more battery consumption for the screen, so to maintain battery life at commonly available battery densities you'll need an efficient processor, so smaller node, not larger.
 
So, if Omdia analyst Hiroshi Hayase is to believed, then I assume the Korean articles are wrong about Nintendo requesting Samsung to supply OLED panels. Tho it doesn't specifically say for a handheld device. Seems to be referring to just IT devices in general

Following Valve, which is an American video game company mass-producing and selling the portable gaming device ‘Steam Deck’, Japanese multinational video game company Nintendo is reportedly in talks with Samsung Display to supply next-generation OLED(Organic Light-Emitting Diodes) panels for various IT devices.
On Dec. 1, 2023, Nintendo reportedly asked Samsung Display to supply OLED panels.
 
Not the NVDEC/NVENC from the RTX 40 GPUs? I thought we knew the T234 (Orin) had support for AV1 decode/encode, which encode on the desktop side only began with the RTX 40 line.
Nvidia mentions in the Ada Lovelace whitepaper that Ada Lovelace GPUs use the same NVDEC as consumer Ampere GPUs (p. 25).
So as far as decoders and encoders are concerned for T234/T239, only the encoder is backported from the RTX 40 GPUs since the RTX 30 GPUs don't support AV1 encode.

Anyway, since Hartmann's investigation implies a higher possibility of Nintendo using a custom display from Sharp based on Sharp mentioning working with a company on a video game console during the R&D phase, assuming the rumour based on old information of Nintendo using 7.91" 1080p LCD displays from Innolux and Tianma was referring to devkits, I wonder if the 7.91" 1080p LCD displays from Innolux and Tianma have features (e.g. VRR, 120 Hz, etc.)? I do know the Asus ROG Ally uses a LCD display from Tianma, which supports 1080p and VRR.
Edit: The rumour about the 7.91" 1080p LCD displays from Innolux and Tianma being used was likely for devkits.
 
Last edited:
I don't need your mockery, I can do it myself ;)


Yes, thank you. I can never remember which one scales to which. Swap the games listed, then. I don't actually care about non-integer scaling of pixel art personally, it doesn't bother me, but I recognize that the artifacts are real and measurable, and to some people, very visible.

I get this way with movies, though. I see the wrong aspect ratio on something, and I'm livid. My partner will be watching Batman in 16:9, and I'll be seething in the bathroom I'm so angry. "Haha you're missing your favorite part, with the handshake and the buzzer. And I know you really respect Michael Keaton's performance in this, truly the forerunner of bringing character acting to leading man parts... do you wanna come out. Babe?"

Meanwhile I'm panting and running the water so I can pretend I can't hear her, while what I really want to do is scream "2.35:1 IS THE ONLY ASPECT RATIO APPROVED BY GOD AND JOHN FORD 16:9 IS THE DEVIL'S WIDESCREEN AND CROPPING THINGS TO FIT IT IS THE 9TH FUCKING CIRCLE OF HELL."

So when I say I don't care about integer scaling, I want it made clear that I'm sympathetic.

No mockery tho lol. I legit have learned a ton from your posts. I think it’s absolutely amazing to see mental artisans from many different backgrounds all coming together to discuss Nintendo stuff. From tech support to retail ground floor, Birdman Nate, and researcher sleuths.
 
No, that was also asked earlier. No because bigger screen means more power draw thus needing a smaller node process like 4N
Larger screen means larger battery.
iPhone 15 Pro Max has a much better battery life compared to iPhone 15 Pro
 
So, if Omdia analyst Hiroshi Hayase is to believed, then I assume the Korean articles are wrong about Nintendo requesting Samsung to supply OLED panels. Tho it doesn't specifically say for a handheld device. Seems to be referring to just IT devices in general
The "IT devices" thing is likely a sort of translation error. I think the original was more like "with OLED being adopted in more IT devices, Valve and Nintendo have asked..." And "IT" more likely means "consumer electronics." It's not like Nintendo is sourcing panels for DIYing their own internal IT tools or something, or that we'd ever get reporting on that. The report, whether accurate or not, has to be about their upcoming console for it to be relevant to report on and use to discuss the tariff/lawsuit issue.

But yeah, it's entirely possible for that report to be wrong. Personally I don't think the question of the screen is settled yet, because there's still conflicting info about who exactly is making it, but I don't think this report was highly credible to begin with.
 
Is there anything that can be gleaned about Sharp being involved at the R&D stage?
I'd been long convinced the Sharp display thing was the Portal, as @Dakhil was, so I only investigated Sharp display tech in depth today since @Hartmann convinced me otherwise. I haven't found anything interesting yet, except that none of their off-the-shelf modules are a good match

Would other companies have been able to state the same thing about their involvement with Switch (1)? eg. Japan Display Inc, Innolux, etc.
JDI, probably? Just guessing, but I would bet that JDI was involved in the initial development of the screen, including pixel density, size, powerdraw, connector configuration, and touchpanel integration. Then Innolux had to simply match the spec developed at JDI, at least on formfactor.


I honestly have issues with all these comparisons.
The question I was responding to "has there ever been such a downgrade in console history?" The reason for such a downgrade wasn't the point

X1X was $499, XSS is $299, so downgrades are expected - I highly doubt the Switch 2 will be cheaper than the OLED Model. If it actually was then I'd understand.
Yes, this is my exact point. If you go from the Xbox One to it's successors - either the Series S or the Series X - it is across the board an upgrade, no matter what. Adding the Pro models confuses the matter.

Why these downgrades happen is a separate issue, which is why I made a separate post about. One of the things I said in that post is that we don't know the price, or the complete feature set of the device, so I have no way of telling if the package is a good value or not.

By saying "I doubt the Switch 2 will be cheap enough for LCD to make sense" you are literally saying "I have chosen a price in my head that doesn't make sense." You are welcome to do that, but I'm going to say that getting upset about it is silly.

The PS4 Pro to PS5 comparison has a problem - the PS5 SSD isn't just "an SSD". It has that lower storage because it's insanely fast and cutting-edge for a 2020 SSD.
Yes, it has lower storage because it is more expensive per gigabyte than HDD. That was my only point. The degree is kind of irrelevant. Obviously Sony and Microsoft sell their consoles at a loss and so price to performance has less to do with how much the parts cost and more to do with how vicious the competition is between the two at the moment in time.

For the Switch 2's 2024 LCD to be equivalent it would need to be a HDR2000 QLED screen, if not microLED. The Switch 2 using LCD feels more like if the XSX had also had 825GB of storage but with the much slower speed it currently has.
If it were possible to make QLED screens as cost effectively now as an LCD from 7 years ago, then Samsung, the premier manufacturer of Android phones and premier screen manufacturer would have put a QLED screen in a phone. There isn't a QLED screen manufactured by anyone with a pixel density even approaching that of a Switch screen.

Comparing that to Sony's "off the shelf but with custom firmware" SSD is silly and inaccurate.

The OLED a lot of people want isn't something crazy, it's just a screen type that's been in gaming handhelds for 13 years now. I'll be buying the Switch 2 either way, and my hope is that it'll be decent quality (it really has no excuse not to at least match the PS Portal screen), but it's still a shame.
I didn't say it was crazy! I agree that it's a shame! You don't have to argue with me on things we agree on. My points, as bullets
  • A 1080p OLED screen in Switch 2 probably costs more than the 720p LCD in Switch 1
  • If we hadn't gotten an OLED Switch, a 1080p HDR VRR LCD wouldn't be percieved as a downgrade
  • Pro consoles can't upgrade the things that a successor can
  • Successors will generally prioritize the unique things that can only be changed during the launch of a next gen system
  • We don't know the price of the Switch 2
  • We don't know the Switch 2 feature set
  • I would personally pay more money for an OLED
  • I would personally sacrifice lots of storage for an OLED
  • I would prefer to keep shitty drifting sticks if it meant I got my OLED
  • I would would take OLED over better battery life
  • I would take an OLED over a camera
  • Or microphones
  • Or in Joy-Con speakers
  • Or two screen streaming
  • or or or
  • But I'm not sure that is the best choice for Nintendo's launch product
  • And I might take a good combination of those things together over OLED by itself
Additional points I'll add to that
  • Sony and Microsoft lose money on their hardware
  • They also spend giant AAA budgets on their games
  • Which mean those games have to be mass appeal 20 million selling "core gamer" titles
  • I like Kirby. And Another Code. And Wario Ware. And Advance Wars. And Metroid. And Clubhouse Games. And...
  • Those games are only possible when the games themselves aren't carrying the burden of making the hardware profitable.
  • The moment MS believed they had won the war, they put out the shittiest hardware imaginable, the Xbone
  • Watch Sony do the same as MS removes themselves from the console wars.
 
  • Watch Sony do the same as MS removes themselves from the console wars.
I don't think they will get cocky. I think they will take Nintendo more seriously. I am not trying to bash Xbox, but Sony mopped the floor with them. They continued to do so with aggressive third-party exclusive.

I can see them not letting up on Nintendo. Don't get me wrong I know they don't "recognize" Nintendo as completion. It just that Nintendo has a very strong presence.
 
0
Can someone remind me if the Switch itself is Nintendo gonna Nintendo or not, I'm not up to speed
-worse online than the predecessor
-abhorrent method of voice chat in game via a mobile app no one wants
-worse at classic games than the wiiu AND wii (until maybe very recently?)
-no mid gen refresh despite being horribly underpowered
-incomplete console UI that's not only less interesting than the WiiU but the 3ds as well
-eshop is still trash for some reason
-no ethernet port until OLED

yup, that's a Nintendo Moment™ from me
 
-worse online than the predecessor
-abhorrent method of voice chat in game via a mobile app no one wants
-worse at classic games than the wiiu AND wii (until maybe very recently?)
-no mid gen refresh despite being horribly underpowered
-incomplete console UI that's not only less interesting than the WiiU but the 3ds as well
-eshop is still trash for some reason
-no ethernet port until OLED

yup, that's a Nintendo Moment™ from me
Only some of this is true, and some parts are entirely untrue.

horribly underpowered

It was a handheld released in 2017 with 0.75TF of compute (per Microsoft, equivalent, compared to Xbox One's 1.4)

Let's not rewrite history. Nintendo Switch was powerful at launch and remained one of the highest performance per watt devices on the market for several years.

It was a handheld released in 2017 that runs No Man's Sky and The Witcher 3. That's not exactly any definition of underpowered. It can run the Outer Worlds. Doom Eternal.

How can you say it was a downgrade based on any of that? It was a handheld exceeding the performance of that company's previous HOME console.
 
Last edited:
I don't get how the UI being minimal is a bad thing. It was a conscious intentional decision to make it fast and snappy and it delivered on that front.
 
Only some of this is true, and some parts are entirely untrue.



It was a handheld released in 2017 with 0.75TF of compute (per Microsoft, equivalent, compared to Xbox One's 1.4)

Let's not rewrite history. Nintendo Switch was powerful at launch and remained one of the highest performance per way devices on the market for several years.

It was a handheld released in 2017 that runs No Man's Sky and The Witcher 3. That's not exactly any definition of underpowered. It can run the Outer Worlds. Doom Eternal.

How can you say it was a downgrade based on any of that? It was a handheld exceeding the performance of that company's previous HOME console.
Because switch serves as their home system as well as their hybrid, thus I will judge it based on both factors. It was fine in 2017 but not fine when 2021 came along. Third parties are one thing, but first party games struggling to run is another.

not sure what else would be deemed untrue

I don't get how the UI being minimal is a bad thing. It was a conscious intentional decision to make it fast and snappy and it delivered on that front.
Maybe UI was the wrong word to use but folders took forever to implement (biggest problem, something the 3ds had) with there still not being any themes. if having even simple themes (custom or download) would slow down the system then this just supports my previous view.
 
I’m kinda absolutely don’t agree with any comments that Switch 2 will be the last of hybrid family, beacuse hybrid console and what Nintendo did is perfect in market and unique, it will continue with further gens
 
Ok. To be honest, I thought "Nintendo gonna Nintendo" meant something more specific besides "here's a bunch of things I don't like about this console".
 
"NIntendo gonna nintendo" isn't just an issue of hardware it's also an issue of nintendo being more than a decade behind when it comes to online functionality. Even subscription free online infrastures like Steam have more functionality than NSO.

I get why, it's that nintendo can't afford to take any major short term net loss on video games the way that Sony and MS can, but it doesn't change the fact that it leads to nintendo being lacking at times.

-worse online than the predecessor
-abhorrent method of voice chat in game via a mobile app no one wants
-worse at classic games than the wiiu AND wii (until maybe very recently?)
-no mid gen refresh despite being horribly underpowered
-incomplete console UI that's not only less interesting than the WiiU but the 3ds as well
-eshop is still trash for some reason
-no ethernet port until OLED

yup, that's a Nintendo Moment™ from me
The switch hardware itself is actually the exception. PS3.5 level hardware is about what people were expecting for a $300 2017 handheld and the control layout was much more "normal" compared to stuff like the gamecube and wii controllers.
 
-worse online than the predecessor
-abhorrent method of voice chat in game via a mobile app no one wants
-worse at classic games than the wiiu AND wii (until maybe very recently?)
-eshop is still trash for some reason
-no ethernet port until OLED
These ones in particular are valid complaints, I'd add worse at classic games than the 3ds just based on the release model that they picked ditching the virtual console.
Hopefully they'll revamp the Home UI and make the eShop an actual app (instead of a glorified webpage) for "Switch 2".
 
"NIntendo gonna nintendo" isn't just an issue of hardware it's also an issue of nintendo being more than a decade behind when it comes to online functionality. Even subscription free online infrastures like Steam have more functionality than NSO.

I get why, it's that nintendo can't afford to take any major short term net loss on video games the way that Sony and MS can, but it doesn't change the fact that it leads to nintendo being lacking at times.


The switch hardware itself is actually the exception. PS3.5 level hardware is about what people were expecting for a $300 2017 handheld and the control layout was much more "normal" compared to stuff like the gamecube and wii controllers.
I think Nintendo being behind with respect to online has less to do with Nintendo wanting a profit margin on hardware in comparison to Sony and Microsoft, and more to do with Nintendo's priorities with respect to online (e.g. Nintendo Switch's chat headset, etc.).
 
How is it a downgrade when it’s a larger (most likely brighter and better colors as well) screen and it’s 1080p? It‘s an upgrade all around, esp over the OG Switch.

LCD vs. OLED is such a non-issue to me. It would be if Nintendo were to launch the same 720p LCD screen with the same quality in 2024, but it’s clearly not. LCD was chosen as a trade-off to keep the price down (I assume), but the technology behind it here is still superior to the OG Switch.
 
Last edited:
Lots of people are guessing we are gonna get news the week of February 7th but does anyone think we'll get some more juicy info next week? I am also curious what made Nate's next video get delayed.
There's some precedent for them talking new hardware at a quarterly investor meeting, and maybe they could do an initial announcement right before that in the week or days before.

That said, with it not releasing until late in the year, there's not much onus on them to talk until April/May when it gets time for their FY briefing. So I wouldn't exactly be surprised if they don't do anything until then.
 
0
-worse online than the predecessor
-abhorrent method of voice chat in game via a mobile app no one wants
-worse at classic games than the wiiu AND wii (until maybe very recently?)
-no mid gen refresh despite being horribly underpowered
-incomplete console UI that's not only less interesting than the WiiU but the 3ds as well
-eshop is still trash for some reason
-no ethernet port until OLED

yup, that's a Nintendo Moment™ from me
Honestly, I think Nintendo didn't had a strong grasp on where they were going with NSO. They just know they wanted people to pay. I think moving forward they will try to Improve on it even further. Sames goes for the UI, Nintendo UI look nice but we're sluggish. From what I hear from hear some games had to take some ram from the OS. So I am thinking they will have enough ram for devs and enough to have a smooth UI/OS.
"NIntendo gonna nintendo" isn't just an issue of hardware it's also an issue of nintendo being more than a decade behind when it comes to online functionality.
I wonder what happened? From what I have read, Nintendo always seemed Gung-ho about online functionalities dating back to the Famicom. Then around the GameCube era they said that no one wants to play online? Was it because the 64DD was so bad?
 
When running a game in BC, Drake would have a ton of overhead. They could theoretically run some kind of scaling in compatibility mode. It woudnt be DLSS.
There's a big difference between temporal upsamplers like DLSS and spatial upsamplers like FSR 1. Only the latter can be done without explicit support from the game and is of decidedly lower quality than temporal ones.
 
The question I was responding to "has there ever been such a downgrade in console history?" The reason for such a downgrade wasn't the point

That is fair - I suppose my issue is that I do think the degree is relevant to these comparisons. But you're right that if we're talking specifically about the existence of downgrades across generations, then there's certainly a long history of them.

Yes, this is my exact point. If you go from the Xbox One to it's successors - either the Series S or the Series X - it is across the board an upgrade, no matter what. Adding the Pro models confuses the matter.

Why these downgrades happen is a separate issue, which is why I made a separate post about. One of the things I said in that post is that we don't know the price, or the complete feature set of the device, so I have no way of telling if the package is a good value or not.

By saying "I doubt the Switch 2 will be cheap enough for LCD to make sense" you are literally saying "I have chosen a price in my head that doesn't make sense." You are welcome to do that, but I'm going to say that getting upset about it is silly.

Not knowing the price is a problem, but I think at this point we can say for an absolute certainty that the Switch 2 is not going to be cheaper than the "premium" OLED Model, at least not to the same degree that the XSS is to the X1X. Personally I thought we had all largely agreed that it's going to be about $399, but if not, fair enough. I think my issue is that I don't see the XSS as equivalent to the Switch 2, same as how I don't see it as equivalent to the PS5. It's not the base model to me, it's explicitly a cheaper, downgraded machine compared to the "base" XSX.

Also, technically the XSS is a downgrade from the Xbox One! It doesn't take discs! 4K Blu-ray forever!

Yes, it has lower storage because it is more expensive per gigabyte than HDD. That was my only point. The degree is kind of irrelevant. Obviously Sony and Microsoft sell their consoles at a loss and so price to performance has less to do with how much the parts cost and more to do with how vicious the competition is between the two at the moment in time. If it were possible to make QLED screens as cost effectively now as an LCD from 7 years ago, then Samsung, the premier manufacturer of Android phones and premier screen manufacturer would have put a QLED screen in a phone. There isn't a QLED screen manufactured by anyone with a pixel density even approaching that of a Switch screen. Comparing that to Sony's "off the shelf but with custom firmware" SSD is silly and inaccurate.

I don't see how the launch PS5 SSD was "off-the-shelf with custom firmware". It was a completely custom setup soldered to the mobo, where they had to use 12 flash chips that could only come in 825 or 1650GB, because their 5GB/s target speed wasn't actually achievable with any normal SSD at the time. Since then we've gotten regular PCIe4 SSDs that can go above and beyond it, but when the PS5 was being worked on it was the only option. It was as cutting-edge as any consumer SSD could get (AFAIK), so that's why I compared it to the most cutting-edge LCDs.

Though now I'm wondering if an 8" 1080p QLED is possible and nobody's tried.

I didn't say it was crazy! I agree that it's a shame! You don't have to argue with me on things we agree on. My points, as bullets
  • A 1080p OLED screen in Switch 2 probably costs more than the 720p LCD in Switch 1
  • If we hadn't gotten an OLED Switch, a 1080p HDR VRR LCD wouldn't be percieved as a downgrade
  • Pro consoles can't upgrade the things that a successor can
  • Successors will generally prioritize the unique things that can only be changed during the launch of a next gen system
  • We don't know the price of the Switch 2
  • We don't know the Switch 2 feature set
  • I would personally pay more money for an OLED
  • I would personally sacrifice lots of storage for an OLED
  • I would prefer to keep shitty drifting sticks if it meant I got my OLED
  • I would would take OLED over better battery life
  • I would take an OLED over a camera
  • Or microphones
  • Or in Joy-Con speakers
  • Or two screen streaming
  • or or or
  • But I'm not sure that is the best choice for Nintendo's launch product
  • And I might take a good combination of those things together over OLED by itself
Additional points I'll add to that
  • Sony and Microsoft lose money on their hardware
  • They also spend giant AAA budgets on their games
  • Which mean those games have to be mass appeal 20 million selling "core gamer" titles
  • I like Kirby. And Another Code. And Wario Ware. And Advance Wars. And Metroid. And Clubhouse Games. And...
  • Those games are only possible when the games themselves aren't carrying the burden of making the hardware profitable.
  • The moment MS believed they had won the war, they put out the shittiest hardware imaginable, the Xbone
  • Watch Sony do the same as MS removes themselves from the console wars.

Yeah, that's all fair (well, except for the stick drift part, I swear to god Nintendo needs to fix that immediately). Personally I do wish Nintendo would start selling their consoles at a loss with the tremendous success they've had, but wishes don't mean much.
 
My primary gripes with NSO are the inability to purchase individual games, lack of per emulator button mapping, stupid borders, and the N64 emulation not being up to snuff (F-Zero X still dropped frames when I last tried), though I'm aware it has had significant improvements since launch. I otherwise enjoy the subscription model as a way of discovering games I would have never ever tried like Kuru Kuru Kururin.

As for the actual quality of emulation - the NES, SNES, GB/C and GBA emulators are all great. No more dark filter like the Wii / U for NES/N64/GBA, no more blurry filter like the WIi, proper horizontal interpolation for non-integer scaling to avoid shimmering, good display filter options especially for the GB/C/A, proper color correction for GB/C/A, and rewind. And apparently, reduced input lag for N64 since recent updates, which was apparently notoriously poor on the Wii U.
 
if we assume that sharp rumor is correct, and they were working with nintendo during r&d, i gotta wonder.. just what is so special about an 8 inch 1080p lcd to require that?
 
My primary gripes with NSO are the inability to purchase individual games, lack of per emulator button mapping, stupid borders, and the N64 emulation not being up to snuff (F-Zero X still dropped frames when I last tried), though I'm aware it has had significant improvements since launch. I otherwise enjoy the subscription model as a way of discovering games I would have never ever tried like Kuru Kuru Kururin.
Do you think we will get Dreamcast, GC, and Wii added to the library or wee will get mainly remaster?
 
0
if we assume that sharp rumor is correct, and they were working with nintendo during r&d, i gotta wonder.. just what is so special about an 8 inch 1080p lcd to require that?
I could be wrong, but my feeling is that it's just a way of highlighting their involvement beyond just being one of several vendors, probably because they have an agreement to produce all the screens for the console, like Samsung did with the OLED. It can be a custom product made to spec and the sole provider for the console, which is a significant thing to announce on your earnings call, without the panel itself really being special.
 
I think offering a "pixel perfect" BC mode, off by default, would be a pretty reasonable move. But I can imagine Nintendo being afraid of folks turning it on by accident and wondering why all of their games only take up two thirds of the screen.

I worked phone tech support for years, and the most common calls were "I accidentally turned on a useful accessibility feature, and now I think your service is broken." Well, second most, this was the early 2000s so "grandma has a thousand viruses from porn her grandson looked at" ranked higher, but the accessibility thing was a decent second.
The 3DS already offers a mode like that when playing DS games. You hold START or SELECT while booting up the game and it will boot in its original resolution. I think it's likely they would take the same route during the "Nintendo Switch" logo black screen and you can hold +/-.

Edit: You can even do it for virtual console games and it implements a Gameboy border around the screen. So they could conceivably even have some kind of "OG Switch border" that emulates the bezel of the Switch as an option if desired.
JmKnPILlRQlqLYv7YAleA0QvDulXCtwcKr06HLnO1Zs.jpg


IMG_20160228_142226.jpg
414187_1140x516.jpg

 
Last edited:
I actually prefer NSO over VC, as I don't have any interest in buying most of those games again. Plus I think most forget how slow VC was in terms of releases and just how much Nintendo leaned on it as a crutch. The only downside of NSO imo is the lack of third party games but I don't think that's something Nintendo has control over.

Also in regards to the 8in screen, I hope the og joycons still work. I'd imagine they should as all that's important to the rail on the side of the system is the connection point at the bottom, there would just be some overhang on the top.
 
How is it a downgrade when it’s a larger (most likely brighter and better colors as well) screen and it’s 1080p? It‘s an upgrade all around, esp over the OG Switch.

LCD vs. OLED is such a non-issue to me. It would be if Nintendo were to launch the same 720p LCD screen with the same quality in 2024, but it’s clearly not. LCD was chosen as a trade-off to keep the price down (I assume), but the technology behind it here is still superior to the OG Switch.
I forgot to add that I’m actually more concerned about the size of the device than whatever screen it’ll have. Really hope it’s not too big. I’m still really skeptical about the 8-inch screen because of that reason. I can’t see Nintendo making a clunky device like that.
 
I forgot to add that I’m actually more concerned about the size of the device than whatever screen it’ll have. Really hope it’s not too big. I’m still really skeptical about the 8-inch screen because of that reason. I can’t see Nintendo making a clunky device like that.

Someone here mentioned that there was a rumor of a “7.8” or so screen, that the 8 inch number is rounded up.

I have a slight feeling it could be a near bezel-less screen on a device that is the same size as the current switch, if not just a tiny bit bigger.

Something like this?

I think this mock-up screen would be 7.5” if the glass footprint on the current switch was all screen.

Daj2Ztf.jpg


This would probably be closer to that 7.8” number if they decreased the size of the plastic bezel in the next design.

trNiginqLPktz8GRivGExB-1200-80.jpg
s?
 
Last edited:
Someone here mentioned that there was a rumor of a “7.8” or so screen, that the 8 inch number is rounded up.

I have a slight feeling it could be a near bezel-less screen on a device that is the same size as the current switch, if not just a tiny bit bigger.

Something like this?

trNiginqLPktz8GRivGExB-1200-80.jpg


Daj2Ztf.jpg
s?
The rumor was a 7.91“ screen and I don‘t think the rounded number means anything for the bezels, even through bezels‘ll probably be a bit smaller than the bezels of OLED Switch.
 
Please read this new, consolidated staff post before posting.

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


Back
Top Bottom