StarTopic Future Nintendo Hardware & Technology Speculation & Discussion |ST| (Read the staff posts before commenting!)

[Simbinha]

I don't think Nintendo will do any sort of cross-generation games on the Switch 2 at all. I'm not sure they've ever done that apart from BoTW and some other minor ports, but i believe that with the new marketing strategies that they've been taking ever since the changes in CEO and all, it's more likely they do a backwards compatible console with their major games having an 'upgraded' version/update for the Switch 2, much like what we have with the Series and PS5 consoles and their backwards compatible games. A ToTK 4K update, a Bayonetta 3 4K update, etc etc etc. I think this will make everything more streamlined for them and make the transition more seamless, perhaps

 

[Armoured_Bear]

I don't think Nintendo will do any sort of cross-generation games on the Switch 2 at all. I'm not sure they've ever done that apart from BoTW and some other minor ports, but i believe that with the new marketing strategies that they've been taking ever since the changes in CEO and all, it's more likely they do a backwards compatible console with their major games having an 'upgraded' version/update for the Switch 2, much like what we have with the Series and PS5 consoles and their backwards compatible games. A ToTK 4K update, a Bayonetta 3 4K update, etc etc etc. I think this will make everything more streamlined for them and make the transition more seamless, perhaps

Do you think they'll release a new 3D Mario game that 120 million willing customers can't buy?

 

[Simbinha]

Do you think they'll release a new 3D Mario game that 120 million willing customers can't buy?

Unless they want a 3DS² and a WiiU number 2, they will surely start by releasing heavy-hitters on Switch 2 alone. New major IPs will likely have their new releases on the Switch 2 with other games that have already been released getting upgraded versions on the current console. Lack of software was the major problem with all their 'failure' releases, i doubt they will stumble in the same mistake again. They will ride on backwards compatibility of the Switch 2 matched with new major IPs on the Switch 2 to move sales, i think.

 

[Armoured_Bear]

Unless they want a 3DS² and a WiiU number 2, they will surely start by releasing heavy-hitters on Switch 2 alone. New major IPs will likely have their new releases on the Switch 2 with other games that have already been released getting upgraded versions on the current console. Lack of software was the major problem with all their 'failure' releases, i doubt they will stumble in the same mistake again. They will ride on backwards compatibility of the Switch 2 matched with new major IPs on the Switch 2 to move sales, i think.

I really have no idea but it's became industry standard since BC become the norm so don't think the old assumptions are valid nowadays.

 

[InfinityWarrior88]

Nintendo is not Sony and Microsoft. What strategies the high end twins use don't always make sense for Nintendo's business and vice versa. Even then, only Microsoft's games went fully cross-gen for the first couple of years, partially because their goal is to treat Xbox like an evolving platform defined by Game Pass. My expectations are still 99% backward compatibility with some small games releasing on both Switch/Switch 2, but the heavy hitters and experimental casual games being Switch 2 exclusives.

 

[boodream]

The question can be summed up in fairly simple terms. If it is absolutely necessary to satisfy the existing user base of the existing console even after the release of the next hardware, how many years will it take for the next hardware to be used for what it is with games developed for it?

It is true that this generation shows particular evolutions. It has been influenced by covid and shortages, so maybe that’s particularism that’s not necessarily supposed to become standards either, I don’t know. In any case it will be interesting to observe.

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

I would assume games like Mario Party and Pokemon would be cross gen for at least two years after launch, probably some other games that aren't sold very much based on graphics either.

We're probably getting another Mario Party and another Pokemon RPG in late 2024 and I would expect both to be cross-gen (... Actually, they may just be Switch exclusive while being backwards compatible on the Switch 2) and I would expect Pokemon Gen 10 in 2025/2026 to be cross-gen.

 

[TLZ]

I'd rather their first party games for Switch 2 not be cross gen and be exclusive to it. I feel Switch had its run. Let the Switch 2 have it too. Want this new awesome shiny great looking game? Hop on over and buy this new hardware for it.

 

[D36]

I'd rather their first party games for Switch 2 not be cross gen and be exclusive to it. I feel Switch had its run. Let the Switch 2 have it too. Want this new awesome shiny great looking game? Hop on over and buy this new hardware for it.

I get that, but that's still a lot of active users that you're leaving behind and I reckon most of them aren't ready to upgrade, yet.

 

[Lelouch0612]

Cross-gen releases are a lock, it makes for a smoother transition, especially when shortages will be a thing.

Nintendo games also scale very well, so with the Switch 2 power gap, you will still have very attractive looking games for the more graphics/perf lovers.

 

[Concernt]

Mortal Kombat 1 is apparently headed to Switch, but not PS4 or Xbox One.

There's a... Surprise.

 

[karmitt]

Mortal Kombat 1 is apparently headed to Switch, but not PS4 or Xbox One.

There's a... Surprise.

Didn’t one of the MK Switch ports early gen run just horrendously?

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

Cross-gen releases are a lock, it makes for a smoother transition, especially when shortages will be a thing.

Nintendo games also scale very well, so with the Switch 2 power gap, you will still have very attractive looking games for the more graphics/perf lovers.

I mean, I do not think the games that are cross-gen are going to be games that put much (if any) effort into visuals.

I do not expect Pokemon Gen 10 to have lighting that looks above 360 caliber on any device.

Mario Party and other games will probably get a minor boost, but like, God of War Ragnarok as an example (which is a game heavily focused on graphics) barely got a boost on PS5 other than resolution. Most Xbox Series X games have been very visually unimpressive too which may or may not be related to cross-gen in some ways.

 

[TomNookYankees]

Do you think they'll release a new 3D Mario game that 120 million willing customers can't buy?

They already put 1.5 new 3D Marios on switch (odyssey and bowser's fury), the rumors are that the next Mario will be 2D, and usually 3D Mario games are used to showcase technical capabilities of their new console.

Assuming the rumors of a 2D mario coming up this year are true, it makes more sense for the next 3D Mario to be a year one game on their next console.

 

[RennanNT]

Nintendo has more than 100 mi active users.

Being extremely optimistic, they could manufacture 20 mi in the first year and 30 mi in the second.

Even if we ignore sales from who doesn't own a Switch, it will take about 3 years to get half of their install base to be able to migrate. Abandoning the other half of your install base for 3 entire years is all but a good idea.

Crossgen support will be dropped once supply is about to overtake demand, which could happen on launch window if they have a bad start, but likely will last 2~4 years with Switch losing support gradatively. With their short marketing cycle, they can swiftly adapt to the public response.

And with with them not even holding back TotK for a cross-gen release, it's clear where their priority lies.

 

[Kingpin722]

However Nintendo chooses to go about introducing the successor, cross-Gen period or not, ensuring and communicating clearly that any and all purchases and save data made on OG Switch will carry over seamlessly is important. This looks to be the first time for them to not have a complete reset and I don’t think it’s safe to have 130mil+ just hoping.

 

[ReddDreadtheLead]

I don't think Nintendo will do any sort of cross-generation games on the Switch 2 at all.

A ToTK 4K update, a Bayonetta 3 4K update, etc etc etc.

The first contradicts the second.

Unless they want a 3DS² and a WiiU number 2, they will surely start by releasing heavy-hitters on Switch 2 alone

Er, no one is saying they won’t? The issues with the 3DS and Wii U were multifaceted and not so simple, but the former greatly affected the latter and how they can support it.

Nintendo is not Sony and Microsoft. What strategies the high end twins use don't always make sense for Nintendo's business and vice versa. Even then, only Microsoft's games went fully cross-gen for the first couple of years, partially because their goal is to treat Xbox like an evolving platform defined by Game Pass. My expectations are still 99% backward compatibility with some small games releasing on both Switch/Switch 2, but the heavy hitters and experimental casual games being Switch 2 exclusives.

Again, I feel like people are misunderstanding what we mean by cross generation? No one is saying that there will not be any exclusive titles to the next system, what people are saying is that a cross gen scenario in which Nintendo will not drop the former platform like cold turkey immediately, they will still give it support for a while before moving completely to the next system because they only have one platform


If they dump everything on one platform, and the platform doesn’t succeed because the software is not appealing enough for the audience (cough, Wii U), they’re left with a platform that’s dead, and also a platform that was born dead. Stuck in the middle of nowhere.

Henceforth, it is not in Nintendo’s best interest to just straight up abandon the switch they’ll need to observe the consumers and how they react to the new system to adjust accordingly, but no one is saying that there won’t be any exclusive software to the Nintendo Switch 2. Simply that there’s going to be a period of transition, which we see as game updates or smaller games/DLC that remains. Splatoon DLC, Pokémon DLC, Mario Kart DLC(???), TOTK DLC(???), etc would be cross gen games.

There’s a reason people speculate like a new 3D Mario as a star title for the system



The switch 2 specifications, if accurate, make it too far a gap to reasonably support with the current Nintendo dev sizes for larger titles and midrange titles. And if they weren’t intendting on reaching such a scope, they should have never funded the R&D for a device that can support such a scope, in my honest opinion. Something much smaller and lighter and lower power would have been an upgrade while still keeping costs manageable.



Also, in the case of Sony, they did it differently from MS. Demon’s Souls.

And later Ratchet and Clank Rift apart

And later Returnal

They had them exclusives to push the system.

Though, not the huge exclusives, but still they had them.

They also had Gran Turismo 7, which would push the system more.

and now they have exclusive DLC for Forbidden West

However Nintendo chooses to go about introducing the successor, cross-Gen period or not, ensuring and communicating clearly that any and all purchases and save data made on OG Switch will carry over seamlessly is important. This looks to be the first time for them to not have a complete reset and I don’t think it’s safe to have 130mil+ just hoping.

I mean, Ninetndo did mention that in the period of transition, maintaining user engagement really high is important. Doing zero cross gen, and releasing every single title as exclusive to the next system, is very much not doing that. It’s straight up killing the switch support and bottlenecks the Nintendo switch 2 for a while until it’s able to supply sufficient amounts of hardware for people to actually buy.

 

[Ghostsonplanets]

Didn’t one of the MK Switch ports early gen run just horrendously?

No, it didn't? Flawless 60 FPS except for one or two stages where it dropped frames into 52/53 FPS. Outside of the obvious resolution, lower quality models and lesser texture work, it was a very good conversion given that it was a bit rushed. I have faith the MK I Switch version will be even higher quality due to newer engine that has native Switch support, Shiver already having experience with the system and Saber deep knowledge of Switch hardware and software.

 

[ziggyrivers]

Nintendo will do cross support. Moreso, they’ll focus on their evergreens. Watch their evergreens get next gen patched

 

[karmitt]

No, it didn't? Flawless 60 FPS except for one or two stages where it dropped frames into 52/53 FPS. Outside of the obvious resolution, lower quality models and lesser texture work, it was a very good conversion given that it was a bit rushed. I have faith the MK I Switch version will be even higher quality due to newer engine that has native Switch support, Shiver already having experience with the system and Saber deep knowledge of Switch hardware and software.

I must have misremembered the specifics. I remember people talking about the visuals being incredibly laughable - simplified and gutted. Perhaps it ran fine but it looked like a joke?

 

[BDGAME]

Both.

So far, the current Armv9 CPUs have worse performance per watt at lower watts than the Cortex-A78 as shown below.


And 6 Cortex-A78 cores and 2 Cortex-A55 cores probably require 2 separate CPU clusters since the Cortex-A78 supports a max of 4 CPU cores per CPU cluster. And more CPU clusters means more latency since there's more hardware components that needs to be communicated with.

The Cortex-A78C on the other hand supports a max of 8 CPU cores per cluster. (There exists a 6 core configuration of the Cortex-A78, but without the Cortex-A55 cores.)

Cool to know. I hope they use te 8 cores then.

 

[Ghostsonplanets]

I must have misremembered the specifics. I remember people talking about the visuals being incredibly laughable - simplified and gutted. Perhaps it ran fine but it looked like a joke?

No, it looked very good for a Switch game. It was a conversion from a PS4/XOne game and thus it had the usual share of optimizations: Simplified geometry, lesser quality post-processing pipeline, lesser texture work, reduced resolution (720p - 540p docked), etc. You can see by yourself here below(I'll put in spoilers to not clut the thread):

Spoiler

 

[Concernt]

Nintendo will do cross support. Moreso, they’ll focus on their evergreens. Watch their evergreens get next gen patched

Nintendo has ALWAYS done cross gen games. Link's Awakening DX for GB and GBC, the Oracle games for GBC and GBA. Some games on GBC even had a GBA-aware graphical enhancement element. Some DS games were enhanced on 3DS, like Black 2 and White 2. There were even cross-gen releases on Switch, like Fire Emblem Warriors for New Nintendo 3DS and Nintendo Switch.

NOW they have a unified development environment, a competent hardware partner and a flexible OS designed to scale up. Why WOULDN'T that apply to the games?

Nintendo has always done cross gen. Sometimes a little, sometimes a lot. Usually, this is done with a single SKU, compatible with the older generation, with enhancements on the newer generation. At no additional cost. Why would we expect it to be any different when now of all times it's easier than ever for them to do?

 

["James"]

The first contradicts the second.

I really don't see how just having updates qualify a game as a cross-gen title. BOTW's considered cross gen because it came out literally the same day on both Wii U & Switch. Meanwhile I don't see people calling MK8 or any other Wii U port a cross-gen release, because they came out years before on Wii U. In my mind cross-gen games are specifically games that release on last-gen hardware either on the same day, or later than next gen version. Any game that comes out on newer hardware or gets updated with support for it with a noticeable time gap between that and the OG release of the game isn't cross-gen.

 

[Tentacle-tropes]

I have no clue why some still use the 3DS or WiiU as examples of anything really since there is context around those, that on the Switch, would be hard or impossible to replicate:

• Both systems suffered from momentum lose of the DS & Wii due to a dearth of critical late stage software from 1st & 3rd parties. This was because of the need to prepare software for the WiiU.
• The 3DS suffered from a bad price miscalculation, software droughts (remember lots of key 3rd party software pulled & along with the WiiU being a resource hog), & 3D being unremarkable (it was even damaging due to some reports that came out around that time concerning 3D). Once the 1st party software started rolling in the system was overall fine.
• The WiiU was the WiiU. I’ve said it before & I’ll say it again; the WiiU is a conceptually unsound device that needed to be sent back to formula for any chance of salvage. No amount of previous momentum was gonna matter heading into that black hole of a device.

The only way you repeat a 3DS/WiiU is by trying to force the audience to upgrade by bypassing a cross-gen period.

 

[AxkilAvenger]

So I’m reading the DF TOTK thread over on the other site and they are talking about performance of the game on the OG Switch vs Oled. They say it performs better on the latter because of improved faster ram. If this is the case, does that mean some of the games I own will run better on Oled as well? Or is Zelda a one off.

 

[ILikeFeet]

You compare the Sony strategic choices for the Playstation 5 (in a shortage) with what Nintendo will do for the next switch.

I’m trying to explain why I think comparing PlayStation’s strategy with that of the next switch is not really justified. However, it is difficult to talk about their respective positions without evoking the core of Nintendo’s strategy, which is its job as a publisher. It’s their games that sell consoles, not GTA or call of duty.

If you find that this difference is not relevant, then indeed, switch 2 needs no exclusivity to sell.

Still lacks relevance. The early adopters will buy games on new hardware. Third party, first party, seventeenth party, it does not matter. First party exclusives sell consoles (cross gen or not is irrelevant, especially for the more hardcore early adopter), but third party still makes up a large part of Nintendo's revenue. It's not a coincidence that their worst years were when they were lacking in third-party support.

But again, the first party/third party divide isn't going to matter. Sony's cross-gen first party titles also did better on PS5

 

[lattjeful]

So I’m reading the DF TOTK thread over on the other site and they are talking about performance of the game on the OG Switch vs Oled. They say it performs better on the latter because of improved faster ram. If this is the case, does that mean some of the games I own will run better on Oled as well? Or is Zelda a one off.

Huh, that's interesting. Purely anecdotal, but I've been playing on my launch Switch and noticed the other day that my framerate in places like Kakariko are worse - or seem to be, at least - than what the Digital Foundry review shows. Could be some validity to that.

 

[Link_enfant]

It’s hard to tell.
Cross gen games seem necessary imo, smooth transition and all that, but there has to be enough incentive to buy the new hardware.
Cross gen upgrades need to be extremely obvious, clear and evident on the first look for everyone, and there has to be one or two major exclusive games like a new Mario.
But as good as Zelda TotK could have looked on [Redacted], I can definitely get why it wasn’t the best approach to “only” have this game as a showcase.
Most people would have just bought it on Switch, I’m sure.

 

[VDenter]

Do you think they'll release a new 3D Mario game that 120 million willing customers can't buy?

Yes, because Mario has always been used as a system seller. They want people to buy a new system to play it. You can't sell new hardware well if most of your heavy hitters also work on previous hardware.

 

[Bonejack]

Yes, because Mario has always been used as a system seller. They want people to buy a new system to play it. You can't sell new hardware well if most of your heavy hitters also work on previous hardware.

Not to dig on you, but it worked very well with BotW.

(And also kinda with TP back in the days.)

((You need to keep in mind that early adopters for such "luxury" devices are most often enthusiasts and not the average Joes and Janes.))

 

[VDenter]

Not to dig on you, but it worked very well with BotW.

(And also kinda with TP back in the days.)

((You need to keep in mind that early adopters for such "luxury" devices are most often enthusiasts and not the average Joes and Janes.))

Yeah because nobody outside of a niche really owned a Wii U. They put it on the Wii U because they already promised for years that Wii U owners will have a Zelda game to play. The situation here is not the same, now they won't have a Zelda game at launch to get people to buy new hardware, but an exclusive Mario game is definitely on the table, given how long it has been since Odyssey. This is why they did not delay TOTK to launch alongside the Switch 2.

Nintendo won't undermine a system seller by making a mainline Mario game playable on last-gen hardware, which has never happened. And I don't expect it to happen this time, Nintendo needs as many reasons as it can to get people to want the new system. Exclusive 3D Mario is one way to get the buzz going.

It's Nintendo's entire business model. Exclusives. "Buy this hardware because there are games on it you can't play anywhere else, including previous Nintendo hardware"

 

[10k]

Unless they want a 3DS² and a WiiU number 2, they will surely start by releasing heavy-hitters on Switch 2 alone. New major IPs will likely have their new releases on the Switch 2 with other games that have already been released getting upgraded versions on the current console. Lack of software was the major problem with all their 'failure' releases, i doubt they will stumble in the same mistake again. They will ride on backwards compatibility of the Switch 2 matched with new major IPs on the Switch 2 to move sales, i think.

You can release the 4k*60 HDR DLSS versions on Switch 2 and release the 900p30 versions on Switch 1.

The Switch is to be treated like an iterative family of devices, not starting from scratch every generation.

 

[Thraktor]

There appears to be no documentation on FLCG, the only references to a change in Ada's clock gating over Ampere are in marketing materials, and they are only in reference to the memory controller. In fact, all of RTX 40 power savings (that aren't from the improved node) are memory related

• GDDR6, stock, runs at lower voltages.
• "Tri-Speed Memory Control" - DVFS for memory controllers.
• "Improved clock gating" - no other explanation, but only mentioned in context of memory.

The general assumption is that FLCG must be some fine grained clock gating, because coarse grained clock gating is a given, and T239 is documented as the only Ampere GPU to use FLCG. But this may be an internal name for some alternative clock gating strategy.

Yeah, my guess is that it's some kind of fine grained clock gating, it's just a shame they haven't documented it anywhere. AMD implemented more fine grained clock gating in RDNA2 and made a point of mentioning it in their press materials as one of the factors in the improvement in performance per watt they managed over RDNA1, but it doesn't seem to be the kind of thing Nvidia discusses publicly.

It's probably confirmation bias, but if T239's GPU is using a fine-grained clock gating approach designed for Ada, then that makes me think it's more likely that they will be using TSMC 4N as well. Partly because back porting something that's ingrained into all the nooks and crannies of the architecture to an older manufacturing process would be time consuming and expensive, but also because it hints at the decision making process when designing the chip.

When Sony and Microsoft were designing the PS5 and Xbox Series S/X SoCs, they were stuck between RDNA1 and RDNA2, and it likely wouldn't have been feasible to use full-fat RDNA2 with the timelines involved. When asked what part of RDNA2 did they want to pull forward into their GPU, Sony's answer was "just the RT units" and Microsoft's was "as much as we can squeeze in".

When Nintendo and Nvidia were designing T239, they were in a similar spot, stuck between Ampere and Ada, where a full-fat Ada implementation probably wasn't on the table given tape out only a few months after the first Ada chips. When asked what parts of Ada should they prioritise, I would wager Nintendo's response was "anything that improves power efficiency". Outside the memory related improvements you mention, which wouldn't apply to an SoC with LPDDR, the only two changes in Ada that should have any impact on power efficiency are the move to TSMC 4N and FLCG. We know from the hack that T239's GPU supports FLCG, and we can infer from Orin power measurements that, absent of some kind of witchcraft, it must be on a more efficient process than Ampere's 8nm.

 

[NintenDuvo]

Wait is it true that the Switch OLED has more RAM than the OG??? I thought the innards were all the same

 

[ILikeFeet]

Wait is it true that the Switch OLED has more RAM than the OG??? I thought the innards were all the same

it doesn't. it has a different form of ram in LPDDR4X

 

[RennanNT]

Wait is it true that the Switch OLED has more RAM than the OG??? I thought the innards were all the same

The red box Switch, Lite and OLED versions all have improved CPU, GPU and RAM compared to OG, but Nintendo limited them to perform as close as possible as launch day Switch and only got better battery life out of these improvements. This is the first time I heard about them possibly running any game better than OG.

 

[ziggyrivers]

The red box Switch, Lite and OLED versions all have improved CPU, GPU and RAM compared to OG, but Nintendo limited them to perform as close as possible as launch day Switch and only got better battery life out of these improvements. This is the first time I heard about them possibly running any game better than OG.

Maybe it’s a matter of an aged console?

I’m sure that, if I buy a ZOLED, I’ll get better performance because I have a 2017 Switch

 

[ReddDreadtheLead]

I really don't see how just having updates qualify a game as a cross-gen title. BOTW's considered cross gen because it came out literally the same day on both Wii U & Switch. Meanwhile I don't see people calling MK8 or any other Wii U port a cross-gen release, because they came out years before on Wii U. In my mind cross-gen games are specifically games that release on last-gen hardware either on the same day, or later than next gen version. Any game that comes out on newer hardware or gets updated with support for it with a noticeable time gap between that and the OG release of the game isn't cross-gen.

I mean, a goal of a cross gen is to maintain user engagement high as they transition from one platform to the next platform. If just an update that makes the game perform significantly better than the base is all that’s needed to increase engagement, and even potentially increase sales (and maybe decrease file size in the process), that already fulfilled its job as a cross generation element.

Games coming to older and newer platforms at the same time have the goal of just keeping engagement up. Don’t want a Wii to Wii U case where there was no engagement. It was simply dead.

 

[Goodtwin]

T239 probably uses A78C, which is a version of A78 designed for "always on" performance. A78C's design makes no sense in phones, was used almost nowhere, and ARM markets it for "game consoles" - and ARM has never returned to the "C" variant in later gens. If you wanted to wildly speculate, you might assume that A78C essentially was a custom Nintendo design.

There have been two ARM CPU gens since the A78, the A710 and the A715. A710 is an unfortunate chip, ARM backtracked on 32 bit support at the last minute and the resulting chip eats too much power without performing better in most cases. A715 might be a good chip for Nintendo, but it's too recent to likely have been used - and if Nintendo thinks they need 32 bit support, then it's not usable.

Short of having a sub 1 hour battery life, the A78C is basically as good as it can get for Nintendo.

We will inevitably people bitching that Redacted has an old CPU not realizing that the A78C is one of the best, if not the best, CPU's Nintendo/Nvidia can implement within its power constraints. The requirements will be in the 4-5 watts for the SOC in portable mode. Fire up a Steam Deck and limit the TDP to 5 watts and see how well that performs, it certainly wont be the PS4 portable that it is when running full tilt. The Switch form factor isn't likely to change much and I do not believe Nintendo will allow it to be anywhere near as chunky as the Steam Deck, and certainly wont want the fan sounding like a leaf blower. Eight A78C CPU cores at 1.5Ghz is what I expect, and I think that developers will be pretty happy with that.

Do you think they'll release a new 3D Mario game that 120 million willing customers can't buy?

Its a tricky one, but I do expect the next 3D Mario to be cross gen. Early adopters of Redacted will be made up of the enthusiast gamers who are more than willing to pay good money to play the new Mario at a much higher resolution. The Switch build of the game might have to drop down to 720p in docked and 540p in portable, but this is consistent with how cross gen plays out. The previous gen consoles get a some somewhat compromised versions of games while the new hardware gets the premium experience. Or maybe Bowsers Fury was exactly the template for the next Mario game, and that is what you can expect from Switch while a 4K build of the game will be on Redacted.


For any game developers that are on these boards, how difficult would it be do a 4K overhaul of a game like Zelda TotK? Obviously resolution itself is easy enough to implement, but how about the LOD system? Those lower quality LOD's will certainly stand out when displayed in 4K, is this something easy to change so that higher quality LOD's are used farther out from the camera? Zelda TotK wont need much, but better texture filtering and improving the LOD's would go a long way. Shadow detail as well, they way shadow detail increases right in front of the player stands out like a sore thumb. I would have preferred they simply keep the lower resolution shadow in place, but for the Redacted build of the game this should get moved out far enough from the player to make it unnoticeable.

 

[Pokemaniac]

So I’m reading the DF TOTK thread over on the other site and they are talking about performance of the game on the OG Switch vs Oled. They say it performs better on the latter because of improved faster ram. If this is the case, does that mean some of the games I own will run better on Oled as well? Or is Zelda a one off.

There were some measurements when Mariko launched that showed some measurable but not notable performance improvements in BotW. It's likely the double buffered Vsync both games use that's exaggerating any slight difference that exists.

 

[Deleted member 887]

So I’m reading the DF TOTK thread over on the other site and they are talking about performance of the game on the OG Switch vs Oled. They say it performs better on the latter because of improved faster ram. If this is the case, does that mean some of the games I own will run better on Oled as well? Or is Zelda a one off.

Huh, that's interesting. Purely anecdotal, but I've been playing on my launch Switch and noticed the other day that my framerate in places like Kakariko are worse - or seem to be, at least - than what the Digital Foundry review shows. Could be some validity to that.

I'm trying to hunt it down and not finding it, but I've seen some indications of this in the past. The Mariko Switches - the Redbox Switch, the Lite and the OLED - upgraded the RAM type (as @ILikeFeet pointed out). It's the same amount, and it has the same bandwidth, but the older RAM (LPDDR5) was ceasing manufacture and the newer RAM (LPDDRR5X) uses less power.

RAM latency, which is distinct from bandwidth, is probably better on the Mariko Switches. It's really hard to determine, because latency almost never gets measured at the same bandwidth, and the two interact in non-obvious ways. But yes, it's entirely possible that there are (marginal!) benefits on the OLED, but you'd get the same benefits on a Redbox Switch or a Lite. It's only compared to the launch model, and only a tiny benefit in super specific situations.

 

[10k]

RAM latency, which is distinct from bandwidth, is probably better on the Mariko Switches. It's really hard to determine, because latency almost never gets measured at the same bandwidth, and the two interact in non-obvious ways. But yes, it's entirely possible that there are (marginal!) benefits on the OLED, but you'd get the same benefits on a Redbox Switch or a Lite. It's only compared to the launch model, and only a tiny benefit in super specific situations.

Ah ok, then the redbox owner like me is getting the same performance as the OLED. Phew.

 

[Deleted member 887]

We will inevitably people bitching that Redacted has an old CPU not realizing that the A78C is one of the best, if not the best, CPU's Nintendo/Nvidia can implement within its power constraints.

Yeah, it genuinely seems plausible to me that ARM designed A78C specifically for Nintendo. I know I've seen it in SOCs, but it is extremely rare, if you're going with a "Perf core/mid core/efficiency core" design, the A78 is a better bet for your middle core, and X1 is a better perf core.

Not only that, but the big advantage of the A78C is heavily multithreaded applications, which there just aren't a lot of in the mobile phone space, and even if there were, no one is going to put 8 "middle cores" in a phone, it's just a power disaster.

 

[Deleted member 887]

There were some measurements when Mariko launched that showed some measurable but not notable performance improvements in BotW. It's likely the double buffered Vsync both games use that's exaggerating any slight difference that exists.

Ah, yeah, that makes sense!

 

[lattjeful]

I'm trying to hunt it down and not finding it, but I've seen some indications of this in the past. The Mariko Switches - the Redbox Switch, the Lite and the OLED - upgraded the RAM type (as @ILikeFeet pointed out). It's the same amount, and it has the same bandwidth, but the older RAM (LPDDR5) was ceasing manufacture and the newer RAM (LPDDRR5X) uses less power.

RAM latency, which is distinct from bandwidth, is probably better on the Mariko Switches. It's really hard to determine, because latency almost never gets measured at the same bandwidth, and the two interact in non-obvious ways. But yes, it's entirely possible that there are (marginal!) benefits on the OLED, but you'd get the same benefits on a Redbox Switch or a Lite. It's only compared to the launch model, and only a tiny benefit in super specific situations.

Yeah I think it's something to do with the latency of the RAM. This is straight from John from Digital Foundry on the other site after testing both an OLED and a launch Switch:

"Yeah. It definitely does exhibit more slowdown on my older 2017 Switch versus the OLED. Significant in very select cases even."

What about Zelda specifically do you think has it be affected by latency, moreso than other titles? Is it just a combination of the limited bandwidth + the sheer amount of "stuff" in Zelda that has the memory latency be such a factor, since Erista and Mariko function the same otherwise?

EDIT: Saw @Pokemaniac's reply

 

[10k]

Yeah, it genuinely seems plausible to me that ARM designed A78C specifically for Nintendo. I know I've seen it in SOCs, but it is extremely rare, if you're going with a "Perf core/mid core/efficiency core" design, the A78 is a better bet for your middle core, and X1 is a better perf core.

Not only that, but the big advantage of the A78C is heavily multithreaded applications, which there just aren't a lot of in the mobile phone space, and even if there were, no one is going to put 8 "middle cores" in a phone, it's just a power disaster.

Multithreaded means nothing for gaming since most developers don't know how to utilize multiple cores based off what we're seeing with PC ports recently lol.

 

[Hermii]

Yeah, it genuinely seems plausible to me that ARM designed A78C specifically for Nintendo. I know I've seen it in SOCs, but it is extremely rare, if you're going with a "Perf core/mid core/efficiency core" design, the A78 is a better bet for your middle core, and X1 is a better perf core.

Not only that, but the big advantage of the A78C is heavily multithreaded applications, which there just aren't a lot of in the mobile phone space, and even if there were, no one is going to put 8 "middle cores" in a phone, it's just a power disaster.

I doubt it was only for Nintendo. If any they were hoping the pc/ arm market would get going.

"
Advanced features provide the scalability, developer support, and security needed for laptop class productivity and gaming on-the-go."

 

[TSR3]

Its a tricky one, but I do expect the next 3D Mario to be cross gen. Early adopters of Redacted will be made up of the enthusiast gamers who are more than willing to pay good money to play the new Mario at a much higher resolution. The Switch build of the game might have to drop down to 720p in docked and 540p in portable, but this is consistent with how cross gen plays out. The previous gen consoles get a some somewhat compromised versions of games while the new hardware gets the premium experience.

In the hypothetical example of a cross-gen 3D Mario, could Nintendo charge $60 for the Switch version and $70 for the [REDACTED] version? Is differential pricing something that Nintendo has done in the past for previous cross-gen titles?

 

[TSR3]

Multithreaded means nothing for gaming since most developers don't know how to utilize multiple cores based off what we're seeing with PC ports recently lol.

Is that true for current gen gaming though? XboxSeries and PS5 both have multi-core CPUs