• 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.
  • Furukawa Speaks! We discuss the announcement of the Nintendo Switch Successor and our June Direct Predictions on the new episode of the Famiboards Discussion Club! Check it out here!

StarTopic Future Nintendo Hardware & Technology Speculation & Discussion |ST| (New Staff Post, Please read)

Are people now expecting physical media to go with the other consoles approach of installing straight to internal storage rather than having the run straight from the cart?
Like, surely the cost of producing the carts will be considerably higher than the Switch's if it's fast enough to run straight off the cart?
 
Going back to df's introduction to switch in 2016, they already called it insufficient performance at that time, I think it is unfair, after all, if only counted as portable consoles, switch performance is much stronger than psv.
 
About RAM

12 gigs of RAM is good, 120gb/s bandwidth is even better, but remember that there is never too much RAM.

Maybe for Nintendo exclusives it's enough, but in a few years AAA developers will have a harder time porting to Drake (Series S flashbacks). Keep in mind that they are starting to ask for +16Gb of RAM in the minimum requirements of a PC game (32 recommended). And you have to remember that those games can also rely on the exclusive GDDR memory of the graphics card, its true that we dont need that much because of 720p-1080p resolution + DLSS but still.

Isn't that just true for any console launch? I think if the Nintendo Snap (what I'm calling it because the magnetic Joycons snap on) gets its predicted install base I think it'll be fine.

Although saying that I would genuinely like to see a "Pro" version of the console this time, say in 2030? Up the RAM up to 24GB and improve the chipset to support the latest version of DLSS, whatever version that'll be by 2030.
 
0
Since Switch 2 is March 2025, im wonder if BO6 will release on Switch 2 or BO2 direct sequel will be the first COD on Switch 2,history might come full circle because BO2 was the first COD on WII U
 
Welll, prepare to be surprised.

I’d be surprised if we saw any greater 3rd party Switch support the next 6 years than we saw the last 6 years.

Nothing suggests we should. Publishers have a bunch of criteria on what platforms to focus ports on and rarely is the deciding factor specs.

There is every indication that the Switch 2 will have improved third party support over the Switch 1. From Activision fully admitting they missed an opportunity on the Switch 1 to Nintendo signing that CoD deal. The general willingness of Western third parties to try to port challenging PS4/Xbox One Games like Arkham Knight and Hogwarts Legacy.

If the hardare is capable of supporting the vision without significant reworking, many third parties will deem this worth the investment. The Switch was a new concept that many publishers didn't put faith in from the start. The third partt support significantly improved over its life. There is no reason to believe that publishers will turn their head away from a platform that is proven and can support their development pipeline.

As long as this platform is clocked adequately on the CPU (1.4-1.5GHz) and GPU side (460MHz/920MHz) it should not have any issue seeing improved support.

This is just the normal doom and glooming.
 
Since Switch 2 is March 2025, im wonder if BO6 will release on Switch 2 or BO2 direct sequel will be the first COD on Switch 2,history might come full circle because BO2 was the first COD on WII U
Somehow you’ll only have 40GB left after downloading cod on Switch 2, like why are these games so porly optimised with storage.
 
There is every indication that the Switch 2 will have improved third party support over the Switch 1. From Activision fully admitting they missed an opportunity on the Switch 1 to Nintendo signing that CoD deal. The general willingness of Western third parties to try to port challenging PS4/Xbox One Games like Arkham Knight and Hogwarts Legacy.

If the hardare is capable of supporting the vision without significant reworking, many third parties will deem this worth the investment. The Switch was a new concept that many publishers didn't put faith in from the start. The third partt support significantly improved over its life. There is no reason to believe that publishers will turn their head away from a platform that is proven and can support their development pipeline.

As long as this platform is clocked adequately on the CPU (1.4-1.5GHz) and GPU side (460MHz/920MHz) it should not have any issue seeing improved support.

This is just the normal doom and glooming.
We saw studio who supported the Switch in its early and mid life be heavily rewarded.

Capcom, square enix and Ubisoft all made bank on the Switch, especially Capcom with their exclusive MH game, that sold about 8M copies only on the Switch.

I think those same party’s will support the Switch 2, especially, since the early year of a console is the profitable:
 
Just saw GVGs video speculating on the specs. If they actually dedicate a big chunk of the ram to social features and voice chat I will be mad. Much rather have that extra heft given to making games better rather than the cutting edge 2008 experience of having strangers yell homophobic slurs at me. Everybody has a million ways and platforms to talk to their friends in 2024, we don't need another way built into the console.
 
There is every indication that the Switch 2 will have improved third party support over the Switch 1. From Activision fully admitting they missed an opportunity on the Switch 1 to Nintendo signing that CoD deal. The general willingness of Western third parties to try to port challenging PS4/Xbox One Games like Arkham Knight and Hogwarts Legacy.

If the hardare is capable of supporting the vision without significant reworking, many third parties will deem this worth the investment. The Switch was a new concept that many publishers didn't put faith in from the start. The third partt support significantly improved over its life. There is no reason to believe that publishers will turn their head away from a platform that is proven and can support their development pipeline.

As long as this platform is clocked adequately on the CPU (1.4-1.5GHz) and GPU side (460MHz/920MHz) it should not have any issue seeing improved support.

This is just the normal doom and glooming.
It will have much higher clocks than that
 
Are people now expecting physical media to go with the other consoles approach of installing straight to internal storage rather than having the run straight from the cart?
Like, surely the cost of producing the carts will be considerably higher than the Switch's if it's fast enough to run straight off the cart?

I don't think it'll be much more expensive than current carts. Flash storage is usually bottlenecked by write speeds, which requires more processing power than reading - that's not an issue in carts, that are mostly read-only
 
I don't know if you have seen this. I haven't been able to read everything you've commented since yesterday, but Scires claims that the codename is different and Muji has been used to avoid leaks.



He even suggests a way to find It?



I'm not saying that those of you who knew the name are wrong. But, what if Nintendo has "fooled" us all?
 
Man.. Imagine they made Mario Galaxy 3 for Switch 2..

james-mcavoy-sweating.gif
 
Just saw GVGs video speculating on the specs. If they actually dedicate a big chunk of the ram to social features and voice chat I will be mad. Much rather have that extra heft given to making games better rather than the cutting edge 2008 experience of having strangers yell homophobic slurs at me. Everybody has a million ways and platforms to talk to their friends in 2024, we don't need another way built into the console.

Unless you expect everybody to have (good) multipoint Bluetooth devices, having voice chat and game audio at the same time is an issue without a native solution. Even with a multipoint device it’s a hassle - that’s how I managed chats with Splatoon 3 and Pokemon Unite. It was either that or using the console speakers with one earbud connected to my phone.

And not wanting strangers yelling at you is not a valid reason to skip the feature. I never engage with strangers on Xbox. Most games allow turning off any in game voice chat, and you can stick with a private / friend only chat.

I really want Discord support natively on the successor. That and cross platform play have been a really outstanding combo in recent years.
 
Last edited:
Unless you expect everybody to have (good) multipoint Bluetooth devices, having voice chat and game audio at the same time is an issue without a native solution. Even with one it’s a hassle - that’s how I managed chats with Splatoon 3 and Pokemon Unite. It was either that or using the console speakers with one earbud connected to my phone.

And not wanting strangers yelling at you is not a valid reason to skip the feature. I never engage with strangers on Xbox. Most games allow turning off any in game voice chat, and you can stick with a private / friend only chat.

I really want Discord support natively on the successor. That and cross platform play have been a really outstanding combo in recent years.
RAM capacity is very limited, and using a lot of RAM on a social system would be putting the cart before the horse.
 
Just saw GVGs video speculating on the specs. If they actually dedicate a big chunk of the ram to social features and voice chat I will be mad. Much rather have that extra heft given to making games better rather than the cutting edge 2008 experience of having strangers yell homophobic slurs at me. Everybody has a million ways and platforms to talk to their friends in 2024, we don't need another way built into the console.

I don't expect them to implement system level chat but having a headphone jack in the controller and supporting voice chat via blutooth would be preferable. Nintendo didn't provide implementation/codecs for VC until later in the Switch's life for third parties but it is important for multiplayer games to have ways of communication while blending in game audio. If you don't want VC just don't use it. There is no reason they should still be making it difficult to have in game chatting.

A system level chat would be preferable but I am pretty sure it is just against Nintendo's principles so I don't expect it to happen.
 
Just saw GVGs video speculating on the specs. If they actually dedicate a big chunk of the ram to social features and voice chat I will be mad. Much rather have that extra heft given to making games better rather than the cutting edge 2008 experience of having strangers yell homophobic slurs at me. Everybody has a million ways and platforms to talk to their friends in 2024, we don't need another way built into the console.
I feel the same way. I don‘t think Nintendo will do what they’re saying here (THANK GOD). Yeah, we don’t need 3GB reserved for the OS 💀. They’re not going to bloat the OS. They will keep everything as basic and light as possible. Voice Chat will be a game to game basis just like what it is right now.
 
Last edited:
realistically the OS can use 1gb of RAM which allows for more functionality and and still reserve 11gb for games. win-win really, there's plenty of room to add features without it becoming large or bloated.
 
Voice chat and a party system are not going to bloat the OS. it’s been pointed out that the 360 had more full featured voice chat than Switch and the entire system had 512MB RAM.

Discord as a Windows desktop application might take up 200-250MB, but it’s a full featured app. On consoles it’s surely much lighter weight than that given how stripped down it is (only joining existing chats and channels).
 
Last edited:
Nintendo is an absolute master when it comes to making crazily compact, lightweight OSes. The 3DS had 128MB of RAM and that thing had a whole system running with an entire home-pause menu with multiple other little menus inside of it. Wizardry indeed.

Also, remember when more intensive games used to reboot the entire system into some kind of expanded memory (that's what people used to call it, don't think it's a completely tech accurate term) OS so games could use more RAM juice? EDIT: i think this only happened on the old models, by the way. the new ones didn't have this afaik
 
Just saw GVGs video speculating on the specs. If they actually dedicate a big chunk of the ram to social features and voice chat I will be mad. Much rather have that extra heft given to making games better rather than the cutting edge 2008 experience of having strangers yell homophobic slurs at me. Everybody has a million ways and platforms to talk to their friends in 2024, we don't need another way built into the console.

Why would Nintendo suddenly sets priority on voice chat and social features. They recently removed the ability in Switch OS to make twitter posts for Switch screenshots/vids. Switch will eventually be the best selling console ever, and it reached this goal without proper voice chat and social features.
 
Hermii, would you or anyone consider list the chip parts and explain their relevance? I think a lot of people would appreciate the design of Drake more if they were given explanations in layman terms.
The file decompression engine is pretty self explanatory. It's dedicated hardware to unpack files from storage and send them to ram. Prior to ps5 and Series, and now Drake, the cpu pulls up the file it needs from storage to ram and decompressed it. This takes cpu power that could be used for games in some way. On Switch this is worse because there are only 3 usable cores. Pretty terrible for modern open world games with asset streaming
 
Obviously a compact OS should be high priority, but I do miss stuff like Streetpass. If that could be incorporated somehow without utilizing too much RAM I'd be thrilled.
I don't see Streetpass happening on the NSS simply because its large form factor is more hindrance than help, if anything Streetpass makes more sense on your cellphone along with the Nintendo app.
 
Switch being outdated in early 2017 is some of the most revisionist shit ever. People were gushing over it back then

It reminds me of Sega comparing the Genesis to the NES
I agree that it's revisionist, though I'm not really sure how Sega comparing the Genesis and the NES is related to this.

And not wanting strangers yelling at you is not a valid reason to skip the feature. I never engage with strangers on Xbox. Most games allow turning off any in game voice chat, and you can stick with a private / friend only chat.
The issue I have with the "you can just turn it off" line of thinking is that building the functionality into the console sets the expectation that turning on the mic will be the norm, which would breed resentment towards those who turn off the mic when playing something like Splatoon.
I did come across someone suggesting that the console could stream the game audio to the phone, which would act as a volume mixer, though I'm not sure how feasible that is from a technical perspective.
 
0
About RAM

12 gigs of RAM is good, 120gb/s bandwidth is even better, but remember that there is never too much RAM.

Maybe for Nintendo exclusives it's enough, but in a few years AAA developers will have a harder time porting to Drake (Series S flashbacks). Keep in mind that they are starting to ask for +16Gb of RAM in the minimum requirements of a PC game (32 recommended). And you have to remember that those games can also rely on the exclusive GDDR memory of the graphics card, its true that we dont need that much because of 720p-1080p resolution + DLSS but still.
PC needs a lot of RAM because Windows eats a good chunk of that it makes no sense to compare this with consoles.

Even on PS5 and XBox the OS needs multiple GB of memory (around 3.5 GB). The Switch OS was very lightweight (around 800MB), the Switch2 OS will probably be the same so in reality PS5/XBox have only 1-1.2 GB more RAM available for games than Switch2. if Switch games run at 1440 (or even lower + DLSS) instead of 4k the difference in RAM will be negligible.
 
Kakarot was a PS4/Xbox One game, Sparking Zero is a PS5/Xbox Series game. Sparking Zero is also doing a lot more graphically, has more going on with destruction and since it’s UE5 it might potentially be using Lumen and/or nanite. That’s not to say a Switch port is impossible, but I think it’s fairly unlikely compared to a Switch 2 port.

Ah true I forgot the UE5 angle, although MK was ported to the switch (in a rough state at launch :p ) and I imagine bandai will likely develop a version for the Switch 2, so a even more downscaled version for the Switch might also be in order. It makes sense to use that cross-gen period for a while, but you’re right, the destruction and physics might not make it feasible, especially when looking at the gameplay showcase, it looks amazing.
When can we expect to find out about the process

As far as I understand it, when the system is out, because like the PS5 Pro, there's only rumours out there with respect to the process node. Through a die-shot experts would be able to analyze what node process the chip was made with.
Unless there's a mention by NVIDIA that their chip in the latest Nintendo handheld is made on X architecture or made with Y node process.
 
the codename is Pound in reference to them trying and failing to keep nvidia's stupid enormous chip cool in a system that weighs under one
 
About RAM

12 gigs of RAM is good, 120gb/s bandwidth is even better, but remember that there is never too much RAM.

Maybe for Nintendo exclusives it's enough, but in a few years AAA developers will have a harder time porting to Drake (Series S flashbacks). Keep in mind that they are starting to ask for +16Gb of RAM in the minimum requirements of a PC game (32 recommended). And you have to remember that those games can also rely on the exclusive GDDR memory of the graphics card, its true that we dont need that much because of 720p-1080p resolution + DLSS but still.

I don't think they will worry about receiving ports as much as you believe...
Again as long as Nvidia and AMD are putting only 8GB of RAM into their entry level cards, I expect Switch 2 will be okay on that front.

Even if they dedicated 2GB of RAM on Switch 2 for the OS, that would leave 10GB for games.
Which is much closer to PS5's 12.5GB and Series X's 13.5GB for games versus Series S having only 8GB.
(This article talks about how Series S is facing the same issues that 8GB desktop cards are).
 
PC needs a lot of RAM because Windows eats a good chunk of that it makes no sense to compare this with consoles.

Even on PS5 and XBox the OS needs multiple GB of memory (around 3.5 GB). The Switch OS was very lightweight (around 800MB), the Switch2 OS will probably be the same so in reality PS5/XBox have only 1-1.2 GB more RAM available for games than Switch2. if Switch games run at 1440 (or even lower + DLSS) instead of 4k the difference in RAM will be negligible.
I don't think they will worry about receiving ports as much as you believe...
Again as long as Nvidia and AMD are putting only 8GB of RAM into their entry level cards, I expect Switch 2 will be okay on that front.

Even if they dedicated 2GB of RAM on Switch 2 for the OS, that would leave 10GB for games.
Which is much closer to PS5's 12.5GB and Series X's 13.5GB for games versus Series S having only 8GB.
(This article talks about how Series S is facing the same issues that 8GB desktop cards are).
The thing is that in 2-3 years (from today, not Drake release) you are getting PS6 and Xbox Next which will probably double the RAM.
 
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