• 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)

The Nintendo 3DS launch had several factors against it:
• 3D gimmick that died out fast
• Launch Software lineup was poor

The Switch 2 launch will most certainly be different. Buy I personally view the pricing as follows:
• Optimistic = $399.99
• Realistic = $449.99
This speculation is based on a vacuum spherical chicken, the 3ds initial software was not only not lacking compared to the wiiu it was arguably luxurious enough, MK7 and Mario 3d Land both came to the 3ds in 2011, however it was exactly two things that kept the 3ds sales career at 70 million, the smartphone onslaught and the initial poor pricing, and you're close to eliminating all of the unfavorable factors of switch2 only retaining the unfavorable factor of price which is too optimistic.We don't know if Nintendo will make the same mistakes they made with the wiiu in the early days of switch2.
 
there's been comparison between a iPhone 15 Pro and the OG Switch from Digital Foundry. A Switch 2 will very likely outperform the iPhone 15 Pro at least by a decent bit.

The iPhone 15 Pro suffers from lack of internal active cooling. As well as the device isn't made to support gaming as its primary feature.


The Switch is holding up surprisingly well all things considered.

However, Apple really has a lot of potential when it comes to games. And it's getting very compelling. If they can find a way to improve their thermals and continue to push for high-end games, they could break through very quickly, given the installed base.

I remember during the WiiU era, people were chuckling when Nintendo saw Apple as the main threat. This is slowly but surely taking place.
 
This speculation is based on a vacuum spherical chicken, the 3ds initial software was not only not lacking compared to the wiiu it was arguably luxurious enough, MK7 and Mario 3d Land both came to the 3ds in 2011, however it was exactly two things that kept the 3ds sales career at 70 million, the smartphone onslaught and the initial poor pricing, and you're close to eliminating all of the unfavorable factors of switch2 only retaining the unfavorable factor of price which is too optimistic.We don't know if Nintendo will make the same mistakes they made with the wiiu in the early days of switch2.
Yeah 3DLand came in the same year of 3DS release but ill say, I was day 1 for 3DS and remember being bored after the first week. There were a lot of games released but none were must plays. Pilot wings and Steel diver didn't do it for me and the 3rd party stuff while nice didn't hold me. I think they need a big adventure or rpg game that is a technical showpiece to anchor the launch

And yes pricing was an issue
 
Yeah 3DLand came in the same year of 3DS release but ill say, I was day 1 for 3DS and remember being bored after the first week. There were a lot of games released but none were must plays. Pilot wings and Steel diver didn't do it for me and the 3rd party stuff while nice didn't hold me. I think they need a big adventure or rpg game that is a technical showpiece to anchor the launch

And yes pricing was an issue
They don't need a so-called "big adventure game" because 3d Mario itself is the second biggest Nintendo EPD project after 3d Zelda, and the tech demo is unnecessary because it has nothing to do with any gameplay or playability.Pricing was the key factor that caused the 3ds to lose its appeal.
 
The main difference is that the Wii U GamePad is an integral part of the system, but the hypothetical remote play feature I speculated is more akin to PS5 Portal, which is completely optional. It may not even be something that Nintendo would heavily promote.


Thanks for the reminder. I thought about it, but the custom Wi-Fi/BT chip is only this thread’s educated guess. The shipment data doesn’t really say that. So it may not need hiding.

So this concept you're mentioning reminds me of Steam Remote play via the Steam Deck. Your Desktop PC is the host (Switch 2), and the Deck is used for remote play (Switch 1). Admittedly, I have yet to try remote play myself, but it's cool it's at least an option.

I personally would not be disappointed in this, though the other part of me would ask, "But why?" On the one hand, it helps continue the service life of the Switch 1 as it gets phased out, plus I could also see a scenario where if you're playing the newest Mario Kart 9, one player could be playing it in docked, or handheld mode (doesn't matter in this case), and a friend who only has a Switch 1 can remotely connect to the Switch 2 via remote play, and the both of you can still game without the friend having to buy a Switch 2.

On the flip side, why not just playing couch co-op on the one system then? Maybe each player wants their own screen, and like anything else, it's an additional feature that simply gives players options to play multiplayer. Like you said, doubt it'd be heavily promoted by Nintendo anyway, and it'd be the fans who make videos with titles like, "OMG! SWITCH 2's NEW AWESOME FEATURE FOR MULTIPLAYER!!! OMGWTFBBQ!!!!! t3h m3gat0n!!!!!!"
 
Please check the price of the 3ds at the beginning and Nintendo's history of hastily lowering the price later on, $450 will undoubtedly reduce the competitiveness of the switch2 altogether, $399 is more than enough to make a profit on every unit sold, I don't see the point or motivation for them to sell it for $450?

And there’s the Switch where they competed at similar price and not need to reduce price outside of bundle for 7 years. Not saying that they will sell it a 450. I’m also expecting 400. Just that 450 can be competitive.
 
I remember during the WiiU era, people were chuckling when Nintendo saw Apple as the main threat. This is slowly but surely taking place.
Apple sees gaming as an afterthought and all video games present are surely moneyhatted by them.

Granted, Nintendo viewing Apple as a threat is valid, especially if Apple ever decides to make a portable console running on an OS of their own (GameOS?).

If Apple keeps moneyhatting publishers and making their porting easier and easier, Nintendo could be in a world of hurt

The plus side is, Apple could put then in a position to be much more competitive
 
However, Apple really has a lot of potential when it comes to games. And it's getting very compelling. If they can find a way to improve their thermals and continue to push for high-end games, they could break through very quickly, given the installed base.
What threat? Apple for almost near two decades had a very good processor in their chip never really cared to heavily market gaming as an attraction until iPhone 15. They don't care about gaming, they are out of ideas of what to sell. The only reason why they marketing gaming this year was there are only so many times you can say "with a new camera!" and people will eat it up. Apple isn't a threat if they think Gaming is a joke.
 
I don't think Nintendo will just be utilizing a one-and-done version of the DLSS version. Likewise, I could see them implementing a system level update for DLSS versioning, which no doubt will be rigorously tested to see if any newer versions negatively affect older games (they probably would run a suite of tests to make sure it passes scrutiny).
This is a known quantity from the Nvidia hack. DLSS is part of NVN, which (along with the majority of the GPU driver) is built into games, not the OS. DLSS will be updated presumably the same way NVN is now. Developers gets a new version of the SDK, and then integrate it into their build process. Periodically, Nintendo may increase the minimum SDK version to submit to the eShop.

The decision of what DLSS preset to us is at least partially artistic - which tradeoff between image quality and image stability makes sense for pace of camera movements in your game. So I'm not sure there is any amount of testing possible that would let Nintendo make the decision for developers. The only reasonable move, if DLSS were system wide, would be to test every single game in the eShop, and make sure they are visually identical. At which point, you're not seeing any quality improvements from DLSS being update in the background
 
The Switch is holding up surprisingly well all things considered.

However, Apple really has a lot of potential when it comes to games. And it's getting very compelling. If they can find a way to improve their thermals and continue to push for high-end games, they could break through very quickly, given the installed base.

I remember during the WiiU era, people were chuckling when Nintendo saw Apple as the main threat. This is slowly but surely taking place.
Even Phil Spencer has said he sees Apple as their main rival not Sony when it comes to gaming.
 
They don't need a so-called "big adventure game" because 3d Mario itself is the second biggest Nintendo EPD project after 3d Zelda, and the tech demo is unnecessary because it has nothing to do with any gameplay or playability.Pricing was the key factor that caused the 3ds to lose its appeal.
Mario came at the end of the year after the price drop. And we didn't know about it yet at release. You have the benefit of hindsight but I'm telling you it's not a fake narrative to say the launch was bad and price while a big part of it wasn't the only issue. Software avaiable at launch was uninteresting and the new NSMB game was a bit stale already; iirc People who worked at Nintendo said the same thing so I know I'm not imagining things
 
Last edited:
3DS suffered from a combination of issues that caused its slow start. At least 2/3 was referenced by Iwata as reasons why. The price alone did not cause the 3DS to falter at the beginning.

The issue with Redacted is being seen as an appealing product within its price bracket to outside audiences. They are not gonna try to his some arbitrary amount under Sony to remain “competitive.”
 
3DS suffered from a combination of issues that caused its slow start. At least 2/3 was referenced by Iwata as reasons why. The price alone did not cause the 3DS to falter at the beginning.

The issue with Redacted is being seen as an appealing product within its price bracket to outside audiences. They are not gonna try to his some arbitrary amount under Sony to remain “competitive.”
The huge initial competitiveness of the switch itself was accomplished through a $100 lower average MSRP than the ps4 + a large and attractive first year first party lineup, and I should warn that with the yen starting to weaken in April, higher pricing will severely diminish the attractiveness of the switch2 Japan , so please don't look at North America only.
 
That '3' in the '399.99 USD' will be a crucial bit of psychological pricing to make the device seem less expensive than it is.
 
The Switch is holding up surprisingly well all things considered.

However, Apple really has a lot of potential when it comes to games. And it's getting very compelling. If they can find a way to improve their thermals and continue to push for high-end games, they could break through very quickly, given the installed base.

I remember during the WiiU era, people were chuckling when Nintendo saw Apple as the main threat. This is slowly but surely taking place.
No matter valve/google/apple or other potential company join game industry, it will effect all console manufacturer, MS/Sony/Nintendo, all of them. That's why keep your company unique is important.
 
The huge initial competitiveness of the switch itself was accomplished through a $100 lower average MSRP than the ps4
PS4 was price dropped to $299 in 2016, with the Slim release. Same for the 1S. There likely wasn't a single moment the hybrid was cheaper than the PS4S, which went as low as $199 plus a game.

In fact, the argument you're making is the exact same argument used to say Switch was DOA in 2017 when the price was revealed.

Meanwhile, the Switch hybrid models (so, not including the $199 Lite) already outsould PS4+Pro with almost no price drop (there was a 30 euros drop IIRC).
 
The huge initial competitiveness of the switch itself was accomplished through a $100 lower average MSRP than the ps4 + a large and attractive first year first party lineup, and I should warn that with the yen starting to weaken in April, higher pricing will severely diminish the attractiveness of the switch2 Japan , so please don't look at North America only.
Who said I was only looking at NA only? That’s a large assumption to make for someone who frequents weekly Japanese sales threads. What made the Switch competitive was being a good value at that price point; not necessarily being 100$ under PS4. If PS5 had been 300-350$, Nintendo is not gonna drop 100$ arbitrarily to be seen as “competitive.”

In JP it is gonna be expensive regardless due to the yen situation. And still will probably be cheaper than the PS5 due to the original price + increase. And they still have the IP that JP wants so the diminishment is lessened to a degree.
 
PS4 was price dropped to $299 in 2016, with the Slim release. Same for the 1S. There likely wasn't a single moment the hybrid was cheaper than the PS4S, which went as low as $199 plus a game.

In fact, the argument you're making is the exact same argument used to say Switch was DOA in 2017 when the price was revealed.

Meanwhile, the Switch hybrid models (so, not including the $199 Lite) already outsould PS4+Pro with almost no price drop (there was a 30 euros drop IIRC).
Since you know that your standard of comparison is the slim and not the original ps4, then again my suggestion would be to use the price of the ps5 digital version as a comparison, and you'll see that the switch2's $399 is the most reasonable asking price.
 
The Switch is holding up surprisingly well all things considered.

However, Apple really has a lot of potential when it comes to games. And it's getting very compelling. If they can find a way to improve their thermals and continue to push for high-end games, they could break through very quickly, given the installed base.

I remember during the WiiU era, people were chuckling when Nintendo saw Apple as the main threat. This is slowly but surely taking place.
Yeah, while the tech is impressive, don't forget it's locked behind a 1.500 € paywall.
 
Since you know that your standard of comparison is the slim and not the original ps4, then again my suggestion would be to use the price of the ps5 digital version as a comparison,
The PS5 Digital is $450 now. Yes, they increased the price.

and you'll see that the switch2's $399 is the most reasonable asking price.
The point wasn't what is the best price. I do think it's going to be $399.

It's the argument that it has to be cheaper than PS which is flawed.

Sony saw a stagnant userbase and decided to grow how much they earn per user.

Nintendo has been looking long term since the 00s. They're constantly reaching out to new generations and non-gamers. So, affordability is of higher priority for them.
 
You really can't assume that most of the switch2 games will utilize the dlss3.7 dll.
You really can. Switch 2 isn't out yet, doesn't have a release date. It seems reasonable that the majority of Switch 2 games, if not 100% of them, will use a version more recent than the one that is already out. You think Nintendo won't update the SDK anytime in the next year?

I find this reaction from you slightly strange. You convinced yourself that DLSS looked like native, without testing, just by consuming this thread. You use an older version of DLSS to test, and get results you don't like. You ask the thread "is my test valid?" and someone tells you "no, actually, you're looking at version of DLSS that causes extra blurriness". Now you decide that you know the limits of DLSS and upgrading the software isn't worth it.

I can say unequivocally that once the difference between the rendering resolution and the output resolution is too large, the final rendering will be very unstable and blurry, which completely outweighs the benefits.
I think you misunderstand the problem. The output resolution is fixed. It will always be a 4k TV or a 1080p handheld screen. You will always be upscaling that far. The question isn't "should we upscale" but "what combination of technologies do you upscale with?" DLSS? Bilinear interpolation? Nearest neighbor? Some combination?

The blurriness doesn't come from the upscale, it comes from the low resolution of the input. Only DLSS upscaling resolves sub-pixel detail. Sometimes DLSS gets that wrong, and adds detail that shouldn't be there - that's artifacting. It attempts to keep the detail consistent across frames. That requires smoothing.

Spatial upscaling (nearest neighbor, bilinear interp) can't resolve sub-pixel detail, so you get aliasing. It can only smooth out this detail inside a frame, not across frames. So you experience crunchy edges and popping and fizzing in motion.

You've played Tears of the Kingdom - you know how, when falling from the sky, all the lights on the surface twinkle like a Christmas tree? That's a spatial upscaling artifact. Is that more or less important than blurring close up? Is Breath of the Wild, a game with an identical art style and game world, but different game play, going to make the same choice of upscaling?
Are you considering that the input resolution is probably also fixed? You're playing with DLSS, which is cool, but you have a giant-PC where you can pick any input and output resolution you want. If a game can only hit 720p native, have you looked at the problem from "what combination of upscalers makes this 720p image look the best" not "when targeting 1080p, what's the best DLSS mode?" Start with a fixed input resolution, and start adding DLSS upscaling to higher and higher resolutions and ask yourself "at what point does this stop improving the 720p image?"

Are you considering that graphical settings are not fixed? You're comparing DLSS's various modes at the same settings, presumably. Which is a useful way to isolate how DLSS works, but doesn't reflect the way developers will use it. Consider the difference between "Balanced mode with low settings" and "Performance mode with high settings". Which will be blurrier? Which will look better? Is there a single, objective answer that tells you what combination of settings is correct for all games?

I'll continue testing the dlss effect on some games tomorrow, and if the same image blurring in performance mode as in death stranding exists, I'll be outright against the idea of using performance mode in docking mode.
There are a lot of games that you're going to be outright against on Switch 2, I'm afraid. Some people simply cannot stand the look of TAA. But don't worry there is a subreddit just for you.
 
I find this reaction from you slightly strange. You convinced yourself that DLSS looked like native, without testing, just by consuming this thread. You use an older version of DLSS to test, and get results you don't like. You ask the thread "is my test valid?" and someone tells you "no, actually, you're looking at version of DLSS that causes extra blurriness". Now you decide that you know the limits of DLSS and upgrading the software isn't worth it.
I've already stated that my drivers are always upgraded and the dlss version is up to date, there is no such thing as an "old version" of dlss, unless Death Stranding support for dlss is limited to older versions.I'm just stating that the tests I've done have really let me down

The other core issue is that I did guess that the blur comes from the low resolution, but I always thought that dlss would be able to use some kind of "magic" to make the blur almost imperceptible to the player's eyes, but the fact is that I went into the test with that expectation and got lower than expected emmmmmmmmmmmmmm. well I think I've got a better idea of what I'm looking for. I'm in a mixed state of mind right now, maybe I can't continue to discuss dlss objectively for a while, or maybe my eyes are just too demanding and I've been feeling like my opinion on the effects of the dlss upgrade doesn't agree with a lot of people in this thread.
 
Last edited:
I've already stated that my drivers are always upgraded and the dlss version is up to date, there is no such thing as an "old version" of dlss, unless Death Stranding support for dlss is limited to older versions.I'm just stating that the tests I've done have really let me down
you can't update DLSS through drivers. and yes, there are old versions of DLSS, that's the point of the version numbering. you need to manually change the DLL on a per-game basis. what version of DLSS are you using for Death Stranding?
 
I can only imagine how the /r/fuckTAA subreddit would feel about the Switch 2/Duo, a console where DLSS is built in and most developers would most likely opt to use it.

Thing is I agree that TAA is blurrier than I would prefer (though it effectively removes all shimmering), but the commenters on that subreddit seem averse to any kind of temporal based upscaling even when the end result looks just fine.
 
Adjusting for inflation, $300 in 2017 is $383.75. Throw in some tax and it's very likely the Switch 2 will be priced at $400.
Unfortunately that's making some assumptions, like that the next device won't use more materials and will be more or less equivalent in features, just newer. Usually as inflation rises, technology gets cheaper due to other factors, so even when there's inflation, console prices can fall over time. This time, the opposite has happened. It seems that component prices have EXCEEDED inflation, with consoles instead going UP in price this generation.

Between this and the likely scenario where the successor is not merely equivalent aside from performance, but better in several ways, with a larger screen, better controllers, more features, and so consumes more materials, I think $400 seems optimistic.

Microsoft's Series X refresh is $599.99, it's around $700 equivalent in Europe and Microsoft is known to take a loss on console pricing. Four years of prices not falling and that extra 1TB of storage is costing the consumer up to the equivalent of $200.

With that in mind I currently very much expect $449.99/€499.99/¥59,980 for the successor.

I don't think Nintendo wants to put $499.99/¥64980 on the box, but I really don't think the economics work out to let them price it much lower.

I don't think they worry as much about the price in Europe as, despite the differing economic situations, it's an apparently price unconscious region; OLED Model launched at the equivalent of over $400 and flew off the shelves. I think €499.99 (inc. tax) is really the ceiling to be taken seriously though, since even that would be overshooting the PS5 Digital Edition by €50.
 
5000 series leak is interesting. It doesn't look like anything outside of the 5090 will be that big a leap which is fine for me but sucks for those wanting to upgrade from much older cards (although it would still be a hell of a leap for them). The 5060 will probably be a rip-off price wise too... I remember when that 60 meant something.

With MS saying they're well into working on next-gen this past week, and us still being well into cross-gen (BO6 one of the biggest games this yr)... I don't know if I am shooting the gun but I am no longer concerned about the Switch 2's power getting in the way of as many ports. I think MS will launch the next Xbox about a year before the PS6 just like they did the 360... They don't have much a reason to wait anymore if their goal isn't selling more boxes than Sony.

A lot of these games seem to be scaling for ecosystems so that means broad reach across high-end and low end platforms. When the next Xbox is out, I don't think that suddenly means it's time to pull the plug on the Series S which is their best-selling unit IIRC. With Rebirth falling below SE's expectations, I don't expect a wide range of AAA games to only target the high-end unless they're exclusive or just impossible on Switch 2. It's just too much money going into production and not enough returns to hit their internal marks. Switch 2 probably isn't going to drop sell 140 million in less than a decade but it will do well enough to warrant support.

Feel free to tap me on the shoulder and techsplain me if I am getting too ahead of myself.
 
I can only imagine how the /r/fuckTAA subreddit would feel about the Switch 2/Duo, a console where DLSS is built in and most developers would most likely opt to use it.

Thing is I agree that TAA is blurrier than I would prefer (though it effectively removes all shimmering), but the commenters on that subreddit seem averse to any kind of temporal based upscaling even when the end result looks just fine.
It's been a while since I've been on that sub, but generally people on there were pretty positive about DLSS and DLAA in particular. They'd obviously prefer to not have it, but anything temporal is kinda a necessary evil with modern rendering and optimization tricks, and DLSS/DLAA is kinda the best of the bunch.
 
0
What if the Switch 2 isn't called a Switch and is actually closer to a Steam Deck LCD form factor?

What if it comes with a dock that has a simple built-in UI and internet connectivity such that both the new device and OG Switches could connect to it? It would be both the next generation and an expansion of the OG Switch line. Makes the transition "between" generations a thing of the past, exactly like Nintendo has been telling us to expect, while keeping the OG Switch alive for a few more years to come as the entry point.

It would also be an easier sell for folks invested in joy-con peripherals because that entire ecosystem would fold right into the new device the same way Wii-motes worked for Wii U.
This is why I suspect that Nintendo might introduce new system features that can incorporate Switch 1 and 2 ecosystems. As some may recall, Nintendo at one point considered enabling 3DS as extra Wii U controllers. Would they do something like that to prolong the Switch 1 lifecycle? I’m going to look for hints in some Nintendo patents below, putting it in a spoiler tag to reduce the length.

However, knowing that Nintendo toyed with the idea of using 3DS as a Wii U controller, it puts the patent in a different light. If 100_1 is a Switch 2 in tabletop mode and 200_1 is a Switch Lite functioning as a wireless controller, the ability to network with another Switch 2 without losing connection with the Lite is actually necessary.

But, the Joy-Cons! You are probably thinking. That is true but each console only has two. Allowing other Switches to be used as controllers will give the user more options, and support more players in a co-op game. Take the wireless play of MK8D for example, the upper limit is 8 racers (4 consoles w/ 2 users each); a direct network as illustrated above may be able to facilitate a much larger number of participants.
I suggested this way back in December, but because I made the fatal error of also suggesting Nintendo could do away with joy-cons on this device, the whole idea was picked apart and mocked.

Having all OG Switch owners immediately capable of streaming all of the latest Switch 2 titles/demos/multiplayer in a DS Download Play-esque feature sounds unreal.
 
Ok, I'll test doom eternal's dlss now and by the way check if the dlss version is up to date.
You’ll have to use DLSS Swapper to check which version of the DLL you have.

If it’s not up-to-date, the app can automatically download the latest DLL version and swap it out. It auto-detects your game installation directory so you don’t have to fuss which file to “replace”.
 
I feel like inflation adjustments aren’t very useful when you take into consideration that parts and pieces are individually priced, and not procured and bought as a whole
 
This speculation is based on a vacuum spherical chicken, the 3ds initial software was not only not lacking compared to the wiiu it was arguably luxurious enough, MK7 and Mario 3d Land both came to the 3ds in 2011, however it was exactly two things that kept the 3ds sales career at 70 million, the smartphone onslaught and the initial poor pricing, and you're close to eliminating all of the unfavorable factors of switch2 only retaining the unfavorable factor of price which is too optimistic.We don't know if Nintendo will make the same mistakes they made with the wiiu in the early days of switch2.
As someone who bought the 3DS as soon as it came out, I can tell you that the first year of the 3DS was actually very bad. Without the price reduction and the game launch event at the end of the year, the 3DS would probably have been doomed.
 
It's amazing how doom eternal's dlss performance mode is basically indistinguishable from native resolution regardless of that output resolution condition, at least I can't tell at all.
 
Well, I tried to pick a fight so I put my face and eyes to the screen to see if I could tell the difference between performance mode dlss and native at 1440p, but it's really basically impossible to tell to be honest.

But the death stranding blur is something I can see at a glance.
 
Well, I tried to pick a fight so I put my face and eyes to the screen to see if I could tell the difference between performance mode dlss and native at 1440p, but it's really basically impossible to tell to be honest.

But the death stranding blur is something I can see at a glance.
Is that because of Death Stranding using an older DLSS version?

Part of the reason why I'm so hyped about Switch 2 using DLSS is because of how much it can improve without the need of new hardware. Its gonna be crazy comparing late life Switch 2 games to early life Switch 2 games
 
Is that because of Death Stranding using an older DLSS version?

Part of the reason why I'm so hyped about Switch 2 using DLSS is because of how much it can improve without the need of new hardware. Its gonna be crazy comparing late life Switch 2 games to early life Switch 2 games
That's what puzzles me, unless death stranding is very poorly adapted to dlss or there are other factors, I do marvel at the different levels of effect that dlss presents on doom eternal and death stranding.

Also I have ray tracing turned on and all graphics options set to high.
 
That's what puzzles me, unless death stranding is very poorly adapted to dlss or there are other factors, I do marvel at the different levels of effect that dlss presents on doom eternal and death stranding.

Also I have ray tracing turned on and all graphics options set to high.
I feel like Death Stranding has a pretty notoriously poor implementation of DLSS, at least as far as image quality is concerned. Best not to use it as a benchmark for the technology.
 
I feel like Death Stranding has a pretty notoriously poor implementation of DLSS, at least as far as image quality is concerned. Best not to use it as a benchmark for the technology.
Death Stranding's dlss performance mode results can only be described as falling short of what I expected in my mind, but definitely not bad, but doom eternal's results were exactly what I expected.(And I also set all graphics options to high and turned on ray tracing)
 
5000 series leak is interesting. It doesn't look like anything outside of the 5090 will be that big a leap which is fine for me but sucks for those wanting to upgrade from much older cards (although it would still be a hell of a leap for them). The 5060 will probably be a rip-off price wise too... I remember when that 60 meant something.

With MS saying they're well into working on next-gen this past week, and us still being well into cross-gen (BO6 one of the biggest games this yr)... I don't know if I am shooting the gun but I am no longer concerned about the Switch 2's power getting in the way of as many ports. I think MS will launch the next Xbox about a year before the PS6 just like they did the 360... They don't have much a reason to wait anymore if their goal isn't selling more boxes than Sony.

A lot of these games seem to be scaling for ecosystems so that means broad reach across high-end and low end platforms. When the next Xbox is out, I don't think that suddenly means it's time to pull the plug on the Series S which is their best-selling unit IIRC. With Rebirth falling below SE's expectations, I don't expect a wide range of AAA games to only target the high-end unless they're exclusive or just impossible on Switch 2. It's just too much money going into production and not enough returns to hit their internal marks. Switch 2 probably isn't going to drop sell 140 million in less than a decade but it will do well enough to warrant support.

Feel free to tap me on the shoulder and techsplain me if I am getting too ahead of myself.

Nah, you're good. Ultimately, however "underpowered" the OG Switch has been hasn't gotten in the way of it becoming the 3rd best selling game console of all time. Give it another 2 years and I'm sure it'll take the crown.

Brain-vomit: The Switch 2 will be a true generational leap and have a degree of future-proofing via the DLSS and upscaling -- games will look and play better overtime thanks to continued firmware updates Nvidia puts out. Practically every 8th gen game that never made it to the Switch 1 is up for grabs and I'm confident the lion's share of 9th gen stuff will also be put on there --- regardless of what some devs say about how only the PS5 can handle it. So yes, that means I expect to see FF7 Remake, FF16, and even FF7 Rebirth on it. Cloud Strife might lose a few polygons, but most people won't care. Except Aerith because she's picky like that.

I also might be getting ahead of myself, but tech feels like it's slowing down a lot. Everything is getting more expensive, devs are realizing that exclusivity is a dead man's game, and the PS5 is going to look just as beautiful 10 years from now as it is today as much as the PS4 is. I can agree that the PS5 is going to probably be the big console of the 10th generation because things will be cheaper at that point and a lot of players still don't even have it! I don't want to say we're reaching an end game when it comes to visuals in gaming, but....sort-of, kind-of? it's more about budget and a creator's vision as opposed to technological limitations.

In any case, there's plenty of incentive to change strategies for devs who haven't figured it out yet: they can stick with making AAA games with 5+ year development times and astronomical budgets, and keep up with the console wars if they really want too, but they have to ease off a bit. That means embracing Day 1 multiplatform release, tailoring their games for a broader end of consoles because NOT selling on Nintendo's money-making hybrid means leaving money on the table, and maybe -- just, maybe - recognizing that spending silly amounts of time and money on a few exclusives for expensive consoles most people don't have is a bit fruitless.

If I had a crystal ball: I'd say that the console wars will be totally dead in the near future as it finally sinks. People want convenience, affordability, and not waiting 5+ years for a new game to come out. Exclusivity is totally dead and games are now tailored for both the high-end (PS5 and Microsoft's new Xbox console) and low-end (Series S and Switch 2). The Series S remains Microsoft's most popular console and the Switch 2 is doing just fine. The PS5 has a long life-span and becomes the "Series S" of Sony. They may eventually do a PS6, but given how good it already looks as is, most people opt to finally pick up a PS5 as things eventually become cheaper. Sony keeps up with their big AAA games now that it's bit easier and cheaper to do so, but they thankfully have taken a page from Nintendo's book and try to make more smaller-budgeted and creative AA games. They come out quicker and sell cheaper and they turn out to be more successful than God of War Final Fantasy Last of Us Part 13.

Except GTA6. That thing sells like hotcakes and there's a downported version on Switch 2. The PC version is the most popular version of it to play the game on and the Switch 2 is the second most popular.

Whatever downports the Switch 2 gets or doesn't get, they continue churning out first-party games on the regular and they look amazing. The console has a very healthy lifespan until early/mid 2030's.

This is my headcanon, don't @ me lol.
 
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