• 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)

Reader mode
Tioc said:
i dont see how people are coming to this conclusion, shiver specializes in console ports, particularly switch ports

this conclusion would make sense if it was QLOC they were buying, or another studio known for pc releases
Click to expand...

I don't think the acquisition itself means anything regarding ports of games outside of Switch 2. I was just bringing up a previous point I had about people jumping over their own shadow to tell me how Nintendo will never ever ever under any circumstance port to other consoles/PC when they have billions of reasons to do so.

Cheetah6442 said:
I'm not sure if you're trolling or not here, but making dedicated Nintendo games for mobile devices is not the same as porting console/handheld games to mobile.
Click to expand...

You are right. Its easier.

HyruleanKnight said:
The mobile games are a different matter because they're not their mainline games but rather spin-offs that I think are geared more towards advertising their main line games. For example, I don't see a BoTW happening on any non-Nintendo platform, but a Zelda-themed puzzle game? Sure why not.

I guess I cornered myself by saying IP and not mainline games, so that's on me. But that is what I had meant initially.
Click to expand...

So...

They can't do the same on PC?
 
gonanzir said:
Wasn't the Switch version of Miitopia developed together with Nintendo headquarters?
Click to expand...
i imagine nintendo epd is credited because they developed the original 3ds version, but all signs point to grezzo wholly handling the switch version
 
Look over there said:
So Oldpuck's answered the main consideration. I'll tack on more to try to give a sense of scale.
Click to expand...
This is why we gotta have this guy around.
Look over there said:
And lastly, you mentioned power consumption. It's actually the opposite!
Click to expand...
This is a smart point. AMD was able to bring their power/performance ratio way down while staying on the same process node by aggressively implementing bigger caches.

HyruleanKnight said:
Unsure how relevant, but I've noticed a pattern between RDNA2 and Ampere's RT performance. In RT-heavy games like Control and Alan Wake 2, Ampere seems to always be roughly 50% faster than RDNA2 per unit of Raster performance. We're talking specifically RT only, because PT seems to tax RDNA2 even heavier. My RX 6800, for example, performs within 5% of the RTX 3070Ti but the latter is almost always 50% faster in RT. Ofcourse there are some lightly RT'd games where the difference is much smaller, such as F122 or Forza Horizon 5, but that is no excuse for RDNA2's short comings.
Click to expand...
Fully relevant. It's the easiest way to show how much stronger their implementation is. You can see it in benchmarks too.

RTX 3070, Control, 1440p RT off: 84 FPS
RX 6800, same: 86 FPS

Basically the same. Now turn RT effects on

RTX 3070, Control, 1440p RT on: 43 FPS
RX 6800, same: 32 FPS

Another way to look at it isn't FPS, but frame time. How long does each frame take to draw.

RTX 3070, Control, 1440p RT off: 11.9ms
RX 6800, same: 11.6ms
RTX 3070, Control, 1440p RT on: 23.25 FPS
RX 6800, same: 31.25 FPS

This can be interesting because we can actually subtract the raster frame time from the RT frame time to get how just the RT effects take.

RTX 3070, Control, 1440p RT cost: 11.35ms
RX 6800, same: 19.66ms

Which brings me to my ongoing point about both the good and the bad of RT. You can see that Nvidia's raw RT performance is nearly twice as fast as AMD's by itself, but it "only" translates to a 33% frame rate improvement overall. Hybrid rendering means that raw RT performance by itself isn't enough to make RT viable, but that Nvidia's solution really is that much faster than AMDs.
 
ComradeKoopa said:
The ambience and themes for the various channels on the Wii were amazing. I'd take a little wasted memory for some added character.
Click to expand...
None of that stuff was loaded in memory while in-game. Unless Switch 2 doesn't allow you to instantly switch between an in-game state and the main dashboard (which would be a step back from every current gen system and even the 3DS), it would be harder to do this without wasting a significant amount of memory that would be better used in games.
 
Last edited:
0
Shareholder Chad said:
I heard the same stuff before the mobile games were announced. I understand though, The people aren't ready for the truth yet.

"Itll undermine hardware sales"...

Iwata: laughs
Click to expand...
The truth being that they'll release less than half a dozen PC ports, promise a Zelda port and then quietly cancel it while also delisting their PC ports over time? Because that's basically been their mobile strategy.
 
SiG said:
So...why Shiver? Why not Panic Button and/or Saber?
Click to expand...
Saber Interactive recently bought itself back from Embracer.

As far as I know Panic Button isn't for sale.

Shiver is a company with a whopping 24 employees listed on LinkedIn. It's not generally like Nintendo to go around acquiring companies through hostile takeover or anything.
 
Jodast said:
The truth being that they'll release less than half a dozen PC ports, promise a Zelda port and then quietly cancel it while also delisting their PC ports over time? Because that's basically been their mobile strategy.
Click to expand...

Certainly hasn't been respectable, Ill give you that. My tinfoil hat theory is they are backed up on counting money after Fire Emblem Heroes

warlikeaffectionateantarcticfursealsize_restrictedOQUQn_display.gif
 
Shareholder Chad said:
I don't think the acquisition itself means anything regarding ports of games outside of Switch 2. I was just bringing up a previous point I had about people jumping over their own shadow to tell me how Nintendo will never ever ever under any circumstance port to other consoles/PC when they have billions of reasons to do so.



You are right. Its easier.



So...

They can't do the same on PC?
Click to expand...
Sure, any non-Nintendo platform is an option if advertising via small-scale, spin-off games is the intention. It doesn't have to be mobile only, though I can see how it could have a stronger effect in advertising than PC. Gacha games like FE: Heroes are a perfect example of an advertisement that also acts as a supplement to the mainline games and makes Nintendo a disgusting amount of extra money on the side. Zelda/Mario gacha, anyone?
 
Shareholder Chad said:
I don't think the acquisition itself means anything regarding ports of games outside of Switch 2. I was just bringing up a previous point I had about people jumping over their own shadow to tell me how Nintendo will never ever ever under any circumstance port to other consoles/PC when they have billions of reasons to do so.



You are right. Its easier.



So...

They can't do the same on PC?
Click to expand...
frankly, there can be a billion and one reasons to port stuff to pc and all that matters is the one reason to not: their ips are so insanely strong that nearly all of their consoles are sold through their exclusives

nothing else to say about it really
 
oldpuck said:
This is why we gotta have this guy around.

This is a smart point. AMD was able to bring their power/performance ratio way down while staying on the same process node by aggressively implementing bigger caches.


Fully relevant. It's the easiest way to show how much stronger their implementation is. You can see it in benchmarks too.

RTX 3070, Control, 1440p RT off: 84 FPS
RX 6800, same: 86 FPS

Basically the same. Now turn RT effects on

RTX 3070, Control, 1440p RT on: 43 FPS
RX 6800, same: 32 FPS

Another way to look at it isn't FPS, but frame time. How long does each frame take to draw.

RTX 3070, Control, 1440p RT off: 11.9ms
RX 6800, same: 11.6ms
RTX 3070, Control, 1440p RT on: 23.25 FPS
RX 6800, same: 31.25 FPS

This can be interesting because we can actually subtract the raster frame time from the RT frame time to get how just the RT effects take.

RTX 3070, Control, 1440p RT cost: 11.35ms
RX 6800, same: 19.66ms

Which brings me to my ongoing point about both the good and the bad of RT. You can see that Nvidia's raw RT performance is nearly twice as fast as AMD's by itself, but it "only" translates to a 33% frame rate improvement overall. Hybrid rendering means that raw RT performance by itself isn't enough to make RT viable, but that Nvidia's solution really is that much faster than AMDs.
Click to expand...
Nicely explained, that gives me a lot of confidence for RT on Switch. Never thought I'd see Nintendo pull one over MS and Sony.
 
Shareholder Chad said:
I heard the same stuff before the mobile games were announced. I understand though, The people aren't ready for the truth yet.

"Itll undermine hardware sales"...

Iwata: laughs
Click to expand...
I don't think the mobile initiative that Nintendo quietly let die as soon as it was clear Switch was durable successful makes as strong a point as you think it does.
Atlus said:
Considering how barebones the Switch is. 2GB doesn’t sound like too much especially if they decide to add some actual themes, background music, VC, or even have some kind of miiverse, streetpass or spotpass.
Click to expand...
A lot of that stuff doesn't actually require more RAM.
 
Adulfzen said:
I think much like the way current Nintendo operates with their post launch support there won't necessarily be a standard way as to how games are patched or not, some studios like Monolith Soft may offer free patches for their Switch titles with higher resolutions/framerates while other titles are completely ignored because the devs themselves have moved on such as Grezzo with Link's Awakening (and also I'd assume going back to older games would mean getting a new contract and budget even for a "small" update for third party partners).

I would hope if a studio is currently working on a new game, that part of the budget/contract could include specifically update support for previous title as a way to also prep for Switch 2 hardware.
Click to expand...
Yeah I get that. Shame we never got the switch pro as I felt that would’ve for sure got updates. I guess it’s just a shame to see many titles like the Xenoblade games and three houses that are so incredible but super ugly graphically due to the constraints of the switch.
 
This is veering very off topic, But games like Tetris 99 and F-Zero 99 are value adds for the NSO service. I don't believe that Nintendo would port that sort of thing to PC or other consoles.

I actually see PC ports continuing to be unlikely because many times over Nintendo developers have stated how important it is to control well... the controls of a game. Hell, most of their games don't even allow remapping buttons. PC input is keyboard and mouse or trackpad, with optional controllers.

I don't think they would port a platformer or something like that nature, because they wouldn't be able to assume that you had a controller. It's the same reason they said that they're uninterested in porting old NES games to mobile. The default control scheme on a cell phone is a touch screen.

I could see them creating brand new experiences for PC at some point in the future, based around a mouse/trackpad and keyboard. Maybe some sort of strategy title like Advance Wars...
 
Atlus said:
Considering how barebones the Switch is. 2GB doesn’t sound like too much especially if they decide to add some actual themes, background music, VC, or even have some kind of miiverse, streetpass or spotpass.
Click to expand...
We're talking about a delta of 1.3GB here, going from 700MB to 2GB.

It would take quite some work to fill that space up with assets.
 
Tioc said:
frankly, there can be a billion and one reasons to port stuff to pc and all that matters is the one reason to not: their ips are so insanely strong that nearly all of their consoles are sold through their exclusives

nothing else to say about it really
Click to expand...

But what if....

Stick with me here. This is gonna be crazy.

But what if....

The sales profit they make on extra copies sold that otherwise wouldn't have been sold is MORE than what they would lose on people who would've bought the Switch 2 or Switch 3 but didnt because they made ports on PC.

Hypothetical scenario. Impossible to gauge one way or the other for sure but these are the questions big companies pay a lot of money to be answered. Opportunity cost friends.
 
Dakhil said:
Panic Button probably has to make the acquisition request directly to Nintendo if Next Level Games is any indication. And I don't know if Panic Button wants to stop being a completely independent company, considering Panic Button's latest project is porting Star Wars Jedi: Fallen Order to Xbox Series X|S and PlayStation 5.
Click to expand...
That port is pretty old btw. That was like early to mid 2021. Who knows what they're doing now. Maybe extended support for Apex on Switch but otherwise... 🤷
 
0
Shareholder Chad said:
But what if....

Stick with me here. This is gonna be crazy.

But what if....

The sales profit they make on extra copies sold that otherwise wouldn't have been sold is MORE than what they would lose on people who would've bought the Switch 2 or Switch 3 but didnt because they made ports on PC.

Hypothetical scenario. Impossible to gauge one way or the other for sure but these are the questions big companies pay a lot of money to be answered. Opportunity cost friends.
Click to expand...
Spoken like a former shareholder!
 
Current Switch:

811 MB (0.79 GB) OS
+ 96 MB optional video capture buffer donated by the game
= 907 MB (0.89 GB) max

Switch 2's OS memory usage will not be higher than about 1 GB. If they tack on an enormous video capture buffer, the maximum memory usage could be about 1.5 GB. That's the upper limit.
 
redmutineer75 said:
Anime gacha games are just about the single easiest type of game to make money on.
Click to expand...

Indeed. So..

Xenoblade heroes when?

TamazonX said:
Spoken like a former shareholder!
Click to expand...

Someone PM'd me the other day and said I was a washed up shareholder due to my comments on the 3DS. Can you believe that shit?

I replied - "Don't make me go full shareholder. You wouldn't like that."



Edit: Alright im done shitposting for tonight.
 
LiC said:
Current Switch:

811 MB (0.79 GB) OS
+ 96 MB optional video capture buffer donated by the game
= 907 MB (0.89 GB) max

Switch 2's OS memory usage will not be higher than about 1 GB. If they tack on an enormous video capture buffer, the maximum memory usage could be about 1.5 GB. That's the upper limit.
Click to expand...
Yes, people also overestimate how much Themes, wallpaper and background music would use up more RAM, the 3DS has all of this in an OS with a few dozen MB to use.
 
NineTailSage said:
Panic Button would be a great get for Nintendo.
They were one of the major porting houses during the Switch's life and they would be in Austin Texas along with Retro Studios...
Click to expand...
I think Panic Button's output for Switch was pretty underwhelming tbh... Their philosophy is to pretty much slap on a heavy handed DRS system, strip the graphics, and call it a day. I find that the output of other porting houses like Saber are of higher quality.
 
0
Shareholder Chad said:
But what if....

Stick with me here. This is gonna be crazy.

But what if....

The sales profit they make on extra copies sold that otherwise wouldn't have been sold is MORE than what they would lose on people who would've bought the Switch 2 or Switch 3 but didnt because they made ports on PC.

Hypothetical scenario. Impossible to gauge one way or the other for sure but these are the questions big companies pay a lot of money to be answered. Opportunity cost friends.
Click to expand...
That is a plausible hypothesis. But if that is the case, I can also see them abandoning their hardware business entirely and becoming a full-time publisher, because there will be nothing left to move those hardware units.

But then again, there are some problems.

Nintendo likes making tailored, unique experiences, and by going multi-platform they are effectively limiting themselves in terms of, say, gameplay. Take the Joy Cons, for example. They wouldn't be able to make games like Arms on PC because, as a developer intending their game to reach as many people as possible, they would have to conform to keyboard/mouse or a traditional gamepad for input. Them doubling down on those Joy Cons is proof that they would rather have specialized controls that give them a lot of creative freedom than cornering themselves into the same control scheme that every other multi-platform game has to adhere to.

Everything is an opportunity cost if you think hard enough. Nintendo could make yet another box that just runs games so third party support will be just as strong as the competition. Or they could ditch the hardware business entirely, saving them billions in R&D and manufacturing, and make money exclusively from the mountain of IPs they're sitting on.

Thus, opportunity cost aside we also need to factor in how Nintendo views gaming in general, their core values and their mission statement with each new generation of console they release.
 
"why Shiver, why not [Panic Button/Saber Interactive/Feral Interactive]?" Because those studios are financially healthy and will keep making rocking Switch ports no matter who owns them. Shiver was a perfectly solid port studio that was almost definitely going to go under purely because of the Embracer meltdown. They were bought by Saber less than three years ago, got sucked into Embracer, then sold away from Embracer to Beacon Interactive.

This studio was about to be shut down. The work it does would just vanish from the market if Nintendo stepped in. The press release says that they'll continue to work on other consoles, meaning Nintendo is just going to absorb their existing revenue and not immediately change their ability to pursue existing business. That screams of Nintendo simply stepping in to make sure they didn't exit the market, not because they were looking specifically for an acquisition. This happened quickly enough that their website says they're still part of Embracer, which was two acquisitions ago.

Nintendo now has the ability to offer third parties an in-house porting studio, that not only has familiarity with Switch - which would be a given simply because they can call EPD any time of day or night - but has strong familiarity with PC and PlayStation and Xbox. This team developed the last Scribblenauts game solo for all platforms. They have worked heavily with Unreal Engine 4. This would be a team you would trust not just to know the platform you're porting to, but to understand the platform you're porting from, which reduces the cost of the port to the original studio - it reduces how much support they need to provide the porting team up front.

I can't speak to the quality of their work. Great work is always a sign that a team knows what they're doing. Mediocre work can be a team of low paid monkeys, a team of competent workfolk, or absolute geniuses working on a shoestring. But whatever happens, I don't think this represents a short- to medium-term strategy change for Nintendo. This is just Nintendo stepping in to spend a likely tiny amount of cash to make sure an external studio that has been useful to them doesn't go away.
 
LiC said:
Current Switch:

811 MB (0.79 GB) OS
+ 96 MB optional video capture buffer donated by the game
= 907 MB (0.89 GB) max

Switch 2's OS memory usage will not be higher than about 1 GB. If they tack on an enormous video capture buffer, the maximum memory usage could be about 1.5 GB. That's the upper limit.
Click to expand...
current switch captures 720p 30 fps video at a considerably low bitrate

now that you mention it, if nintendo wants to not only bump the capture to 1080p60 (or even 1080p30) + a reasonably decent bitrate, i wonder what would be a "massive video capture buffer" and the memory requirements for 1080p60 capture

what about streaming? what about capturing video for ~30min-1hour?
 
oldpuck said:
"why Shiver, why not [Panic Button/Saber Interactive/Feral Interactive]?" Because those studios are financially healthy and will keep making rocking Switch ports no matter who owns them. Shiver was a perfectly solid port studio that was almost definitely going to go under purely because of the Embracer meltdown. They were bought by Saber less than three years ago, got sucked into Embracer, then sold away from Embracer to Beacon Interactive.

This studio was about to be shut down. The work it does would just vanish from the market if Nintendo stepped in. The press release says that they'll continue to work on other consoles, meaning Nintendo is just going to absorb their existing revenue and not immediately change their ability to pursue existing business. That screams of Nintendo simply stepping in to make sure they didn't exit the market, not because they were looking specifically for an acquisition. This happened quickly enough that their website says they're still part of Embracer, which was two acquisitions ago.

Nintendo now has the ability to offer third parties an in-house porting studio, that not only has familiarity with Switch - which would be a given simply because they can call EPD any time of day or night - but has strong familiarity with PC and PlayStation and Xbox. This team developed the last Scribblenauts game solo for all platforms. They have worked heavily with Unreal Engine 4. This would be a team you would trust not just to know the platform you're porting to, but to understand the platform you're porting from, which reduces the cost of the port to the original studio - it reduces how much support they need to provide the porting team up front.

I can't speak to the quality of their work. Great work is always a sign that a team knows what they're doing. Mediocre work can be a team of low paid monkeys, a team of competent workfolk, or absolute geniuses working on a shoestring. But whatever happens, I don't think this represents a short- to medium-term strategy change for Nintendo. This is just Nintendo stepping in to spend a likely tiny amount of cash to make sure an external studio that has been useful to them doesn't go away.
Click to expand...
According to this, Embracer retained Shiver when Beacon Interactive bought Saber.

www.ign.com

Saber Interactive Splits From Embracer, Taking 38 Video Game Projects With It - IGN

Saber Interactive has split from Embracer, with 38 ongoing game development projects among the divested assets. However, a number of key studios remain.
www.ign.com www.ign.com
 
kasparov77 said:
current switch captures 720p 30 fps video at a considerably low bitrate

now that you mention it, if nintendo wants to not only bump the capture to 1080p60 (or even 1080p30) + a reasonably decent bitrate, i wonder what would be a "massive video capture buffer" and the memory requirements for 1080p60 capture

what about streaming? what about capturing video for ~30min-1hour?
Click to expand...
I imagine that anyone who wants to stream and/or capture over an hour of footage from the console would already have a capture card.
 
kasparov77 said:
what about streaming? what about capturing video for ~30min-1hour?
Click to expand...
Why though? At that point I would just stream and then record that stream outside Switch itself. Or buy a good capture card/device, record the output there.

Why bog down Switch 2 with features that the majority will never use, and increase the cost of the unit as well?
 
I don’t mind captures being 30 seconds long on switch the issue is that the bitrate is constrained just so they can almost guarantee it’ll hold 100 videos at once (1,000 if you’re saving to a microSD card) instead of coding for quality/scene changes using a less efficient codec on top of that
 
kasparov77 said:
current switch captures 720p 30 fps video at a considerably low bitrate

now that you mention it, if nintendo wants to not only bump the capture to 1080p60 (or even 1080p30) + a reasonably decent bitrate, i wonder what would be a "massive video capture buffer" and the memory requirements for 1080p60 capture

what about streaming? what about capturing video for ~30min-1hour?
Click to expand...
They might be able to get some form of streaming working if they really wanted to, but extended recording would put a lot of strain on memory and/or storage. External solutions (i.e. capture cards) are likely more practical.

I could maybe see them bumping the length up to like a minute or so.
 
Reader mode
You must log in or register to reply here.
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