• 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)

A lot can happen in ten years and, as far as we know, Drake has the OFA.
Officially speaking, nobody knows the capabilities of T239's Optical Flow Accelerator (OFA).

The only possible information known is that T239 inherited the same OFA as T234.

Saying that, I do think T239's OFA isn't the same as the OFA on RTX 30 GPUs since optical flow does have automotive applications. And Drive Orin is designed for automotive vehicles.

But I also don't think that the T239's OFA is comparable to the OFA on RTX 40 GPUs.
 
I'm certainly aware that ray reconstruction works on both Turing and Ampere, but if NVIDIA needs to keep pushing it's high end graphics cards, it's basically a logically inevitable fact that older architectures will lose more new technology.

If you're referring to SR, I've already said many days ago that drake will definitely benefit from the improvements in SR that came after dlss4, even including the ray reconstruction follow-on (I'm not sure if dlss3.5 is a full version of this technology), I'm referring to the fact that more brand new technologies that were added only after dlss4 will most likely not be implemented on the Ampere anymore.

It just seems we are discussing a situation that hasn't yet presented itself as a problem...
Nvidia has shown in this RTX era that they are more than willing to update the software libraries that most RTX cards benefit from.
Frame Generation is an outlier at this point, but even if they do drop the oldest cards from support Ampere would likely receive updates for 4-6 years from now.

This isn't even considering that in a few years time, Switch 2 will likely be the best selling RTX capable gaming device on the market.
Surely Nvidia won't pass on any chances to further push their agenda more mainstream. It's more likely than not, Switch 2 will take over the current Switch's mantle in Japan (which many Japanese developers will probably consider Switch 2 as lead platform). Development costs will keep many developers wanting to make enhanced PS4 games vs chasing after blockbuster movie games...
 
It just seems we are discussing a situation that hasn't yet presented itself as a problem...
Nvidia has shown in this RTX era that they are more than willing to update the software libraries that most RTX cards benefit from.
Frame Generation is an outlier at this point, but even if they do drop the oldest cards from support Ampere would likely receive updates for 4-6 years from now.

This isn't even considering that in a few years time, Switch 2 will likely be the best selling RTX capable gaming device on the market.
Surely Nvidia won't pass on any chances to further push their agenda more mainstream. It's more likely than not, Switch 2 will take over the current Switch's mantle in Japan (which many Japanese developers will probably consider Switch 2 as lead platform). Development costs will keep many developers wanting to make enhanced PS4 games vs chasing after blockbuster movie games...
I'm not as optimistic as you are, but I wouldn't jump to the conclusion that the new technology will definitely not support Ampere either
 
0
It's more likely than not, Switch 2 will take over the current Switch's mantle in Japan (which many Japanese developers will probably consider Switch 2 as lead platform).
That is not quite true, Switch is the dominant platform in Japan but the vast majority of the projects from the Japanese third party are still specced for PS4 and PS5 respectively. Until further support, this doesn't seem likely to change in the short to medium term for Switch 2. As well, Nvidia has no obligation to keep supporting Switch 2 in any real way directly, they're providing the API and chip but it's not doing anything that the desktop Ampere architecture isn't already doing, if we didn't see frame gen due to the lack of an 40 series OFA, we likely won't see the rest of it (barring upscaler improvements which will arrive to all architectures regardless).
 
Another technical question from me. In the past, I've already asked how much effort it would take to integrate DLSS into a finished Switch game for the Switch 2. This effort would probably be greater than I thought. But what about AMD FSR? How much effort would this be for a game like Zelda BotW and what could be a theoretical result for the Switch 2 (resolution/frame rate)?

My point here is not which of the two methods (DLSS/FSR) is better. It's just about the technical effort for potential updates.
 
Another technical question from me. In the past, I've already asked how much effort it would take to integrate DLSS into a finished Switch game for the Switch 2. This effort would probably be greater than I thought. But what about AMD FSR? How much effort would this be for a game like Zelda BotW and what could be a theoretical result for the Switch 2 (resolution/frame rate)?

My point here is not which of the two methods (DLSS/FSR) is better. It's just about the technical effort for potential updates.
IMHO very few Swtich games would even need it. Talking about games made for Switch, not downports.

Drakes powerful enough to run these game's natively at a very decent res.
 
0
So you guys actually think Nvidia's going to keep offering improvements for dlss for S2 throughout it's lifecycle? I mean, can you even do that with just firmware updates?
 
0
We have just given you feedback for posting about a game on the Banned Content List, and this extends to screenshots or other media. We will action any further breaches with this in mind. - Zellia, MissingNo, Dardan Sandiego, Tangerine Cookie
Mod edit: Screenshot of banned game removed

This is what I got on a certain game with the graphics settings all the way to midrange, ray tracing also to midrange and ray reconstruction and dlss performance mode turned on, and I can say I'm more than happy with it. Especially the quality of the specular reflection on the entire water surface after ray reconstruction is surprisingly good.

I think this graphic setting could be representative of what running a particular game on the switch2 would actually look like, the difference being that it would be reduced to 30fps and output at 1440p resolution.
 
Uncharted4 is unquestionably behind the curve for 9th gen technical standards by any standard (especially considering it's a 2016 game), and the 3rd party benchmark target for switch2 should be the next gen version of Death Stranding and next gen version of some game that can't be mentioned, not Uncharted4.

By the time Nintendo started using Virtual Geometry and RT technology, the graphical caliber of a game like Uncharted 4, which was entirely an 8th generation game, no longer needed to be used as a reference. Please still focus on 9th gen games instead of 8th gen games.
At the end of the day, people will see the results on the screen rather than the tech behind it. Nintendo can have all the latest technology and still look like Uncharted 4 or Last of Us. That won't make the system any less impressive to people

Another technical question from me. In the past, I've already asked how much effort it would take to integrate DLSS into a finished Switch game for the Switch 2. This effort would probably be greater than I thought. But what about AMD FSR? How much effort would this be for a game like Zelda BotW and what could be a theoretical result for the Switch 2 (resolution/frame rate)?

My point here is not which of the two methods (DLSS/FSR) is better. It's just about the technical effort for potential updates.
The same amount of work as DLSS
 
Mod edit: Screenshot of banned game removed

This is what I got on a certain game with the graphics settings all the way to midrange, ray tracing also to midrange and ray reconstruction and dlss performance mode turned on, and I can say I'm more than happy with it. Especially the quality of the specular reflection on the entire water surface after ray reconstruction is surprisingly good.

I think this graphic setting could be representative of what running a particular game on the switch2 would actually look like, the difference being that it would be reduced to 30fps and output at 1440p resolution.
If that screenshot is not taking when in motion, then I suggest you take one when in motion. It's easy for DLSS to work on what amounts to a freeze-frame with its slightly jitter to accumulate good results. Also, the purpose of DLSS is to obtain a higher frame rate. As mentioned before, DLSS is a temporal upscaler, using the set of previous frames to construct the current frame. At lower frame rates, the changes between frames are larger, and results won't be as good. In the case you presented, if 1440p30 is obtained from 720p30, but 540p60 can be had, then use that instead, and upscale to 1440p60. It's certainly a bigger jump in resolution, but the changes between frames will be lessened, allowing the construction of the upscale to be more accurate.
 
If that screenshot is not taking when in motion, then I suggest you take one when in motion. It's easy for DLSS to work on what amounts to a freeze-frame with its slightly jitter to accumulate good results. Also, the purpose of DLSS is to obtain a higher frame rate. As mentioned before, DLSS is a temporal upscaler, using the set of previous frames to construct the current frame. At lower frame rates, the changes between frames are larger, and results won't be as good. In the case you presented, if 1440p30 is obtained from 720p30, but 540p60 can be had, then use that instead, and upscale to 1440p60. It's certainly a bigger jump in resolution, but the changes between frames will be lessened, allowing the construction of the upscale to be more accurate.
Works great, no artifacts or tearing visible when steering, you still see flickering mainly on some of the high frequency textures, nothing else is a problem.
 
At the end of the day, people will see the results on the screen rather than the tech behind it. Nintendo can have all the latest technology and still look like Uncharted 4 or Last of Us. That won't make the system any less impressive to people
I mean, neither Uncharted4 nor TLOU2 have ray tracing.But I personally believe that first party games on switch2 will indeed reach the amount of geometry found in TLOU2.
 
The Japanese version of the shareholders meeting Q&A has been posted. The English version may take a few more days.

Q: [...] また、Nintendo SwitchにおけるNVIDIA社との協業についても伺いたい。
A: [...] NVIDIA様とは、Nintendo Switchの心臓部にあたるSoC(System on a chip)と、SoCを動か すためのシステムソフトウェアの開発を一緒にすすめてきました。Nintendo Switchの発売後も、 NVIDIA様 からは様々な技術サポートを受けています。
Why was the question about "Nintendo Switch" not "Nintendo console in general" though...
 
Uncharted4 is unquestionably behind the curve for 9th gen technical standards by any standard (especially considering it's a 2016 game), and the 3rd party benchmark target for switch2 should be the next gen version of Death Stranding and next gen version of some game that can't be mentioned, not Uncharted4.

By the time Nintendo started using Virtual Geometry and RT technology, the graphical caliber of a game like Uncharted 4, which was entirely an 8th generation game, no longer needed to be used as a reference. Please still focus on 9th gen games instead of 8th gen games.
Why are you telling people which games they can use in their hypotheticals of Switch 2 level games? That's such a weird thing to do. You are aware a decent amount of PS4 games will probably get ported to the system, right? It's totally valid since many people would still consider a lot of PS4 games good looking.
 
Why are you telling people which games they can use in their hypotheticals of Switch 2 level games? That's such a weird thing to do. You are aware a decent amount of PS4 games will probably get ported to the system, right? It's totally valid since many people would still consider a lot of PS4 games good looking.
The games from the end of the 8th generation look okay, however it's also true that they lacked the standards of more modern graphical technology.

With more modern graphics technology, it's only natural that I would want to aim for a better level of graphics, otherwise there would be absolutely no need to have so much 9th gen graphics technology built in on switch2.
 
Officially speaking, nobody knows the capabilities of T239's Optical Flow Accelerator (OFA).

The only possible information known is that T239 inherited the same OFA as T234.

Saying that, I do think T239's OFA isn't the same as the OFA on RTX 30 GPUs since optical flow does have automotive applications. And Drive Orin is designed for automotive vehicles.

But I also don't think that the T239's OFA is comparable to the OFA on RTX 40 GPUs.

Clearly then, the OFA is to help power the next Mario Kart! 🏎️
 
Why are you telling people which games they can use in their hypotheticals of Switch 2 level games? That's such a weird thing to do. You are aware a decent amount of PS4 games will probably get ported to the system, right? It's totally valid since many people would still consider a lot of PS4 games good looking.
They're just saying it's a low bar, a rather low one at that. High end PS4 games are much more representative.
 
They're just saying it's a low bar, a rather low one at that. High end PS4 games are much more representative.
It's important to note that many of the titles from the end of the eighth generation, i.e. after 2019, to the pre-ninth generation, i.e. before roughly 2023, are actually cross-generational in nature, and again, they can be thought of as high-end eighth-generation games.

But even with the late 8th gen games we can see the difference in the amount of geometry compared to the pure 9th gen games, let's look at the difference between the director's cut of death stranding and doom eternal and DS2 and doom the dark ages, not only are the textures better, but DF thinks that the geometry is a big breakthrough as well.Personally I'm hoping that switch2's virtual geometry tech will help and get as close as possible to the amount of geometry and polygons drawn in the 9th gen.
 
I'm only about 10 mins into this deep dive as I type this, but I wanted to somewhat better understand Virtualized Geometry, and lo and behold, that's what UE5's Nanite does, which I never really knew. Though, I doubt most even know what "nanite" is except it's got a nice name to it.



Seems to be a good deep dive into the tech.
 
I'm only about 10 mins into this deep dive as I type this, but I wanted to somewhat better understand Virtualized Geometry, and lo and behold, that's what UE5's Nanite does, which I never really knew. Though, I doubt most even know what "nanite" is except it's got a nice name to it.



Seems to be a good deep dive into the tech.

There are two types of virtual geometry technologies, one is the hardware accelerated virtual geometry, also known as mesh shaders, that NVIDIA introduced along with Turing graphics cards in 2018.The second is Nanite, a software virtual geometry technology introduced by ue5 in 2020. according to others, the latter is a lot friendlier to novice developers compared to the former, but experienced developers will use a combination of the two options.
 
Officially speaking, nobody knows the capabilities of T239's Optical Flow Accelerator (OFA).

The only possible information known is that T239 inherited the same OFA as T234.

Saying that, I do think T239's OFA isn't the same as the OFA on RTX 30 GPUs since optical flow does have automotive applications. And Drive Orin is designed for automotive vehicles.

But I also don't think that the T239's OFA is comparable to the OFA on RTX 40 GPUs.
All that information really says its that the Orin OFA is driver compatible with the Drake OFA. That doesn't mean they are exactly the same.
 
Since comparisons with the 2050 came up again, I'm curious what people's thoughts are on what cutbacks they made to the Matrix demo to run on Switch 2? We know that the 2050 couldn't run it at all, no matter what settings they put it on. And we also know that even the PS5 and XBSX could only run it at 1080p/30 fps at best. And people who saw the demo said it ran "similar" to the other two (whatever that means). What's the best case scenario we can expect?
Best case scenario is the same resolution, or perhaps better - Not a false hope because there are a host of variables to consider. We don’t know what version of UE5 each version showcased. We don’t know if other versions were showed natively, BUT we might presume they were because the AMD-powered systems preferred to showcase raw power, and that’s been on brand for PS/XBox. None of those have dedicated hardware on chip, so, they’re taxing their CPUs and GPUs harder to get the results they’re getting, and that’s why the extra grunt is needed for them. S2NS has the more modern architecture as well as dedicated hardware on chip, making it more versatile, so, it has at least three significant hardware-specific advantages over PS5/XSS/XSX (there are more…). Now, the word in those Gamescom reports was “comparable”, so, your mileage may vary, but at a surface level, that could mean anything from a little less (let’s say 720p or 900p at a similar frame rate), to near 1-for-1 parity ((Dynamic) 1080p with a similar frame rate), to better (higher resolution and more stable frame rate). That’s without accounting for the consensus view that Nvidia RT is better than AMD’s RT. In the best case scenario, one might imagine that the use of DLSS played a role to get better results, if not just “comparable” - In that regard, I don’t think we can underestimate the disruptive potential of S2NS, and that’s why I’ve been saying that “smarter engineering, NOT raw power will ultimately prevail”.

One other point on the system power - In your post, you wrote that the RTX 2050 GPU couldn’t run that Matrix Awakens demo on any setting. S2NS is running it on “targeted specs”, and that right there should tell you that the S2NS GPU will be better than the RTX 2050 in real world performance terms. We could also deduce that the final product won’t be a low-end Ampere SoC, but something more advanced than that. Still, there’s the advantage of being fixed hardware, and something that can be better optimised to that profile. The main take from all of this is that there won’t be a single game in the PS5/XS libraries which couldn’t exist in some capacity on the S2NS. There will be bad faith actors dwelling in certain forums who will state otherwise, and post “hardware would melt” memes, but that’s not the reality. For over a decade, developers have talked about scalability, while we haven’t been talking about Wii VS PS360-style differences since the Wii itself. So, collectively, it’s important that we move on from discussions about hardware capacity - the only restraints today are budget, time, and industry politics.

I feel that this kind of perspective is necessary in the general Nintendo hardware discourse, and fellow fans needn’t worry. To drive this point home, I would ask you to consider the following: Metal Gear Solid 5: The Phantom Pain and Dragon Age: Inquisition are on XB1/PS4 - Both have versions on their predecessors with 6.25% (1/16) of the RAM. Please take a look below, and follow me here…





Bear in mind that Dragon Age: Inquisition “maximised the potential of the XB1/PS4 versions at 900p/1080p and 30FPS”, according to its developers, BUT being a 30FPS title on XB1/PS4 didn’t stop EA from skipping the Wii U (which was more powerful than PS360) altogether, and producing serviceable versions on lower-spec, more dated consoles than it. This is what I mean by budget, time, and industry politics being the true restraints, not hardware capacity, and I promise you, no such discourse about “melting hardware” existed for the PS/XBox predecessors back then. Coming back to the topic, this is the true stretch of scalability, and it can be even greater as phones and tablets are in the mix today, however, the S2NS and future Nintendo hardware will have much smaller differences, architectural advantages, Nvidia over AMD, and disruptive potential, and as long as there’s an S edition from XBox, it’ll be even closer, and that’ll remain true in portable mode.
 
Very disputable, IMO, as that’s not an RT card, and I come back to the point that RT would not be on chip if there was no intention to use it.
considering this was about Alan Wake 2, it's important to note that AW2 on consoles don't use HW RT. or much RT at all. it's tracing SDF for low quality reflections on console (and seemingly none on Series S)

Reflections are a mixed bag on consoles. Alan Wake 2 primarily relies on screen-space reflections, so the game lacks the hardware RT reflections that we saw in Control on consoles, as well as the Remedy-developed single-player component of CrossfireX. These present the usual issues with SSR, namely problems with occlusion, especially for surfaces parallel to the player camera. Plus, sometimes the SSR takes on a bit of a grainy appearance. SDF reflections seem to be used as a fallback, again like recent Remedy titles, which are a kind of software ray tracing, just like Unreal Engine 5's software Lumen reflections. These don't do a great job of maintaining reflection detail though when the information needed for SSR isn't on-screen.
 


at Siggraph later this month, a team from Nanjing University will present a ML-based upscaler. the trailer shows off a 16x (270p > 1080p) upscale

1080p to 8K. I imagine it'll look like shit in an actual game, but kudos to them for making a presumably non-HW upscaler that can go that low.
 
0
Any questions about Oz?
Yes, though none of them super interesting. To summarize:

The plan to deal with scalping is to make lots of units.
The current fiscal projections do not include a successor.
Yes the yen is weak, and yes that affects profitability, but they don't expect a shift in the near future, and they won't discuss how it impacts the successor's pricing strategy.
Nintendo may consider moving successor production to different countries, in order to deal with the yen problem, but as a fabless company, they have limited flexibility.

A few sneaky questions tried to get in successor information indirectly, like asking about the Nvidia partnership, but Nintendo dodged by simply speaking in boring fact ("Nvidia makes the SOC in the Switch")
 
Yes the yen is weak, and yes that affects profitability, but they don't expect a shift in the near future, and they won't discuss how it impacts the successor's pricing strategy.
This.Regarding how Nintendo is pricing the switch2 in Japan, due to the depreciating yen, it's possible they'll bring Japanese pricing closer to North America, if North America is $449, Japanese pricing could be lower but close to that.
 
I tried to run the UE 5.4 city demo* on my RTX 3050 mobile (4GB, 35W max-TGP), but the most I can just do is stand still, because of VRAM issues and probably other bottlenecks also, limit performance. Thus any movement and it’ll spike up like crazy.

I recorded some footage of me playing around with it, but it's nothing worth spending much time watching in-depth. It's just me fiddling around and just seeing what happens with the framerate if I downclock the GPU. At 1280x720p.
Hidden content is only available for registered users. Sharing it outside of Famiboards is subject to moderation.



This is 1280x720 with DLAA medium settings (the UE5 scalability preset), low textures;

mPZvITl.png

It's a very optimistic screenshot, though, because walking back a bit and it'll be ~25fps ^^.

* Pre-built edit from the UE reddit, not a launch build so there's some additional overhead.

Well, that's what I'm curious about, and since the experience has improved so much, I do want to know just how close it is to the other consoles when it comes to running the big 9th gen games.

Yeah, that's why having some ballpark idea of, let's say the GTX 1650 (mobile) or RTX 2050 can provide some idea of how current games can scale, but both of those GPUs (as you've mentioned before) are VRAM constrained, so you can’t really test most modern games, but hey estimating is we can mostly do.

on-paper, it's looking promising for the type of platform we're getting.



at Siggraph later this month, a team from Nanjing University will present a ML-based upscaler. the trailer shows off a 16x (270p > 1080p) upscale


What in the magic.

Some nice fluid stuff also ^^.
 
pjimage-2021-05-12T133108.214.jpg




That and let's remember that the Playstation 4 gave us games that look like this. If you told me this was a game released this past year on the PS5 and not on a console eight years ago, I'd believe you.

Even if the Switch 2 really was only as good as a Playstation 4, I don't think anyone can bemoan the power of a PS4 portably in your hands - and we know we're getting effectively a PS4 at minimum.

This is why I say things like "this is the final frontier". On some level, it doesn't matter how good the Switch 2 is compared to a PS4, PS4 Pro, or Xbox Series S. It's going to be capable of pulling this off and without lots of duct tape and glue like Mortal Kombat was on the current Switch.

Once you get to this level, there really isn't anywhere left to go. Sony and Microsoft have been here for a long while, but Nintendo is finally joining the party. Whether we see games mostly in 2k or 4k (I'm betting the former), or if Nathan Drake is missing a few polygons in his hair, I'm hyped to see what Nintendo does with their 9th gen console because where is there really left to go from here?
Great point...like the 2 examples I have in mind when a point like this is made is The Last of Us II and Red Dead Redemption 2...

You gives us games that look like THOSE and play like those portably and docked? Holy shit, yes please....
 
The switch 2 has a better chance because of everything you mentioned and having a superior architecture, but the AMD chips used on high end PC handhelds so far can barely outpace a 2013 PS4 in raster GPU performance, like the Z1 Extreme in question.

I'm actually still impressed with PS4 graphics and with Switch 2 at the minimum matching PS4, I can't wait!

pjimage-2021-05-12T133108.214.jpg




That and let's remember that the Playstation 4 gave us games that look like this. If you told me this was a game released this past year on the PS5 and not on a console eight years ago, I'd believe you.

Even if the Switch 2 really was only as good as a Playstation 4, I don't think anyone can bemoan the power of a PS4 portably in your hands - and we know we're getting effectively a PS4 at minimum.

This is why I say things like "this is the final frontier". On some level, it doesn't matter how good the Switch 2 is compared to a PS4, PS4 Pro, or Xbox Series S. It's going to be capable of pulling this off and without lots of duct tape and glue like Mortal Kombat was on the current Switch.

Once you get to this level, there really isn't anywhere left to go. Sony and Microsoft have been here for a long while, but Nintendo is finally joining the party. Whether we see games mostly in 2k or 4k (I'm betting the former), or if Nathan Drake is missing a few polygons in his hair, I'm hyped to see what Nintendo does with their 9th gen console because where is there really left to go from here?

PS4 at minimum in terms of raw GPU power. This isn't even counting an improvement of architecture of at least 7 years with regards to similar capabilities, and then adding technologies on top of that like hardware ray tracing and DLSS. Like, a game on PS4 running at 1080p30 (because of the CPU) could be natively rendered at 540p60 on Switch 2, estimating a reduction of processing by half in a simple/inaccurate term, and upscaled via DLSS Performance mode to 1080p60 for portable mode. They could even throw the entirety of PS4-equivilent power into that 540p60 scenario for greater detail/effects.
You guys talking about Ps4 like it's good be that kind of power. But, the truth is that it's not.

But switch 2 can run this:

No Ps4 or Steam Deck can run this, so Switch 2 is stronger than both.

The problem now is not if the games looking good or not. They will, even many switch games can look good even today. The true problem is what games Switch 2 will have.

That machine will live the second half Ps5's life and Ps6's first half. It need to get enough power for thirds bring their games somehow to it. And a mere Ps4 can't archive it.

For luck, the machine that thread is helping uncovering will be capable enough to receive current and many future games. A Future-proof hybrid is what we really need to expect from Nintendo, not a "PS4 at best because Nintendo...".
 
That machine will live the second half Ps5's life and Ps6's first half. It need to get enough power for thirds bring their games somehow to it. And a mere Ps4 can't archive it.
the PS4 can't achieve that because it's lacking in CPU power and features. not so much raw gpu strength. the point of the Uncharted comparisons is that setting the minimums in aesthetic, not what how much better Drake can theoretically look.

as I said before, people will judge games on how they're presented, not by what features are on screen. that Uncharted image can be remade with RT and mesh shaders and whatnot, and no one will care about those, just that "it looks good". that's what diminishing returns is. and that's why Drake is in a good position: it has the feature set to live a long life and the minimums to retain a good looking image, arguably better than Switch
 
PS4 at minimum in terms of raw GPU power. This isn't even counting an improvement of architecture of at least 7 years with regards to similar capabilities, and then adding technologies on top of that like hardware ray tracing and DLSS. Like, a game on PS4 running at 1080p30 (because of the CPU) could be natively rendered at 540p60 on Switch 2, estimating a reduction of processing by half in a simple/inaccurate term, and upscaled via DLSS Performance mode to 1080p60 for portable mode. They could even throw the entirety of PS4-equivilent power into that 540p60 scenario for greater detail/effects.
posts like this really put into perspective for me how good we're gonna be eating with this device in terms of visuals alone. the wait and sparse communication from nintendo has made me admittedly very cynical as time has gone on, but through and through i am really excited to see what nintendo's incredibly talented artists and developers do with this monumental bump in power.
 
0
Just a small question, but was the Switch 2 running the Matrix demo confirmed to be true, or did it stay just a rumor?

Are we 100% positive that the Matrix demo was running on a Switch 2?
I would personally say it’s pretty much confirmed, since how many people collaborated.

And also the person who made the article in eurogamer was the one who reported on the Switch and got everything right, especially with what the concept it would be.

It’s also important to consider how valuable partner epic games has been, since they’re the one who made unreal engine functional on the Switch and their probably a valued partner to Nintendo, since we’ve seen an increase on first party games on Switch using unreal, a good example would be Pikmin 4.
 
I would personally say it’s pretty much confirmed, since how many people collaborated.

And also the person who made the article in eurogamer was the one who reported on the Switch and got everything right, especially with what the concept it would be.

It’s also important to consider how valuable partner epic games has been, since they’re the one who made unreal engine functional on the Switch and their probably a valued partner to Nintendo, since we’ve seen an increase on first party games on Switch using unreal, a good example would be Pikmin 4.
This is a pure fan theory, but I would say that there's at least a possibility Epic had a hand in convincing Nvidia/ Nintendo to integrate the FDE in Drake.

 
0
You guys talking about Ps4 like it's good be that kind of power. But, the truth is that it's not.

You're missing my point. The Switch 2 will do at least what a PS4 can do at minimum. Uncharted 4, The Last of Us, etc portably on the go.

Sit on that for a second. That's... amazing. That's really, really, amazing!

The march of technology goes on and a lot of fantastic looking games have come out recently, but we've long since hit a point of diminishing returns. I doubt anyone can look at what the PS4 can do and say that looks terrible and we're going to be getting that as a starter. It's why I'm happy they're still making ports for that black beast. Half of the players on PSN are still rocking a PS4 and when you look at the images below, can you blame them?

gow.png


Here's a comparison between a PS4, a PS4 Pro, and a PS5. At minimum? the Switch 2 going to be getting the far left image (in portable mode). Docked Mode will be somewhere in middle image. Most of the debates are how close to the far right the Switch 2 will get and imo it'll probably float somewhere between the middle and far right at it's best.

Maybe I'm speaking as an older player, but this is beyond huge. I can barely see the difference between the PS4 Pro version and the PS5 version. Even if the Switch 2 hypothetically could ONLY give us the far left image, is anyone really going to be dissatisfied with that? half of the 118 million players on PSN are still using a PS4 so clearly they don't think so: Kratos is sitting pretty on all of these machines!

There will always be lazy ports regardless of how powerful a console is just as there will always be lazy games. For every RetroStudios or Monolith Soft making black magic on the Switch's limited hardware, you have Gamefreak doing whatever the heck they're doing. But my point is not to miss the forest for the trees. It legit doesn't matter exactly where on the spectrum Switch 2 lands on. We're going to be getting visuals that look like the above images and that is huge.
 
pjimage-2021-05-12T133108.214.jpg




That and let's remember that the Playstation 4 gave us games that look like this. If you told me this was a game released this past year on the PS5 and not on a console eight years ago, I'd believe you.

Even if the Switch 2 really was only as good as a Playstation 4, I don't think anyone can bemoan the power of a PS4 portably in your hands - and we know we're getting effectively a PS4 at minimum.

This is why I say things like "this is the final frontier". On some level, it doesn't matter how good the Switch 2 is compared to a PS4, PS4 Pro, or Xbox Series S. It's going to be capable of pulling this off and without lots of duct tape and glue like Mortal Kombat was on the current Switch.

Once you get to this level, there really isn't anywhere left to go. Sony and Microsoft have been here for a long while, but Nintendo is finally joining the party. Whether we see games mostly in 2k or 4k (I'm betting the former), or if Nathan Drake is missing a few polygons in his hair, I'm hyped to see what Nintendo does with their 9th gen console because where is there really left to go from here?
so are you implying/sugesting the next 3D Mario could have a visual quality similar to Ratchet e Clank(2016)? is this real?is difficult to imagine Nintendo putting games with this such quality, they rely on cartoony stylized art style for most of it franchises, Metroid maybe, since is more of a stylized realism.
 
Why are you telling people which games they can use in their hypotheticals of Switch 2 level games? That's such a weird thing to do. You are aware a decent amount of PS4 games will probably get ported to the system, right? It's totally valid since many people would still consider a lot of PS4 games good looking.
will Switch successor struggle, if a PS6 game is ported to the console? or not.
 
so are you implying/sugesting the next 3D Mario could have a visual quality similar to Ratchet e Clank(2016)? is this real?is difficult to imagine Nintendo putting games with this such quality, they rely on cartoony stylized art style for most of it franchises, Metroid maybe, since is more of a stylized realism.

From a technical perspective? oh absolutely. Whether or not they do it is a question for them to decide and what art/animation style they go for, but it's absolutely feasible. That's the kind of power Nintendo is finally starting to play with and why it's good to get hyped.

....Gosh, I would love to see Splatoon 4 look like Ratchet and Clank 2016.

will Switch successor struggle, if a PS6 game is ported to the console? or not.

It's impossible to say how it could handle a console we know nothing about and it's a bit fruitless: there's hardly many exclusives on the PS5 as-is! and developers are realizing it's a fruitless endeavor with how long development times are, how poor sales are...refusing to go multiplatform is a death knell, especially when well-optimized ports can still give very visually impressive games like GOW:R that I showed above.

What can be said is that everything known about the Switch 2 indicates it'll have a very long shelf-life. DLSS will allow it to age more gracefully than the Switch 1 and whatever the Series S gets will absolutely be viable on the Switch 2. Those two are gonna be best buds on the bottom rung of the 9th gen ladder.
 
Last edited:
so are you implying/sugesting the next 3D Mario could have a visual quality similar to Ratchet e Clank(2016)? is this real?is difficult to imagine Nintendo putting games with this such quality, they rely on cartoony stylized art style for most of it franchises, Metroid maybe, since is more of a stylized realism.
Visual quality? Yes, probably even better. Artstyle maybe not.
 
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