• 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.
  • Do you have audio editing experience and want to help out with the Famiboards Discussion Club Podcast? If so, we're looking for help and would love to have you on the team! Just let us know in the Podcast Thread if you are interested!

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

Reader mode
I know Orin was released after Ampere, so, is it using pure Ampere without any improvements or did it get some architectural improvements not found on Ampere? Do people here think the t239 could have gotten some microarchitectural improvements from Ada, considering it's a custom chip releasing a long time after Ampere and Ada Lovelace products came to market?
 
eye0h said:
pretty sure he said they have switch games in development till end of 2024 fiscal year or something to that effect
Click to expand...
All Furukawa said was that they had games to release in fiscal year ending March 2025 (and starting April 2024). Which was yet another non-answer since Luigi Mansion 2 and TTYD remake were already announced for that fiscal year.
 
Nintendo was referring to the fiscal year that ends 2025. But they didn’t say how far into that year support would come. He simply said they were working now on games that would release in that year.
 
Raploz said:
I know Orin was released after Ampere, so, is it using pure Ampere without any improvements or did it get some architectural improvements not found on Ampere? Do people here think the t239 could have gotten some microarchitectural improvements from Ada, considering it's a custom chip releasing a long time after Ampere and Ada Lovelace products came to market?
Click to expand...
It's pure Ampere and Nvidia classifies it as so. Although there are some power-efficiency, like FLCG, that perhaps might have been backported from Ada.
 
darthdiablo said:
Fukuwara article/quote. Redd thought folks here might be imagining up the bit about Nintendo mentioning they will continue supporting Switch 1 into the fiscal year that begins AFTER March 2024.
Click to expand...

Even so, why does that matter? I fully expect some cross-generation titles in the 12 months that follow the NG launch.
 
karmitt said:
Even so, why does that matter? I fully expect some cross-generation titles in the 12 months that follow the NG launch.
Click to expand...
Yeah I said the same too in earlier comments. That it doesn’t mean Switch 2 won’t launch by then.

The previous and the next generation console or handheld having overlapping releases has always been a thing.
 
karmitt said:
I’m lost. Why are we talking about March 2025 now?
Click to expand...
Furukawa said that they would release games in FY2025, which means April 24 to March 25.

Giancarlo misinterpreted that as they're releasing games until March 25. Then added that as a reasoning for expect Switch 2 in 2025.

Redd called out the first part as misinformation, but didn't explain why. At least 2 posters are thinking Redd didn't know about Furukawa quote. And nerds being nerds.
 
oldpuck said:
Nintendo was referring to the fiscal year that ends 2025. But they didn’t say how far into that year support would come. He simply said they were working now on games that would release in that year.
Click to expand...
Or even that support is ending by then. As others have mentioned, Luigi's Mansion 2 and TTYD remake are releasing that FY, so it's probably just Furukawa covering his bases while not revealing too much.
 
redmutineer75 said:
Or even that support is ending by then. As others have mentioned, Luigi's Mansion 2 and TTYD remake are releasing that FY, so it's probably just Furukawa covering his bases while not revealing too much.
Click to expand...
Yeah, it's very much a non-statement, as is typical for these things. He confirmed that they would release games for Switch during a period that they've already announced release dates for Switch games during.
 
RavensShade said:
For nintendo FY2024 means Fiscal year ending March 31st 2024. There are many organizations that do this.
Click to expand...
i now nintendo fisical year ends in march, but you are telling me their fisical year of 2024 ends 3 months into 2024, wont be the opposite? we are in their FY 2023 and that ends in March 31st of 2024, while their FY 2024 starts on april 1st of 2024 until march 31st of 2025, this is how i assume things worked with nintendo
 
ItsukaKasuga said:
i now nintendo fisical year ends in march, but you are telling me their fisical year of 2024 ends 3 months into 2024, wont be the opposite? we are in their FY 2023 and that ends in March 31st of 2024, while their FY 2024 starts on april 1st of 2024 until march 31st of 2025, this is how i assume things worked with nintendo
Click to expand...
When they refer to FY2024, it means the one that ends in 2024. Might be a bit confusing since for Nintendo it ends in March, but that's just how they do it. Hence, FY2025 runs from April of 2024 to March of 2025
 
ItsukaKasuga said:
??????????????? nintendo is ending their 2024 fisical year in march of 2024? im missing something here or what happen? because this isnt making much sense to me
Click to expand...
Read back the chain of posts :p

For clarity sake: the person I quoted mentioned 2024 FY, which ends this March.
 
Last edited:
0


While I think it's absurd myself, I still think it might be worth sharing here. If I don't, someone will later anyways. tl;dr, a Shpeshal Nick is claiming that Nintendo has been developing a Switch 2 which is not backwards compatible at all. Unknown if they moved forward with the idea. But, this is stupid. It is so stupid. Now I'm wondering, how much more difficult would it be to develop two of these systems side by side and only have 1 of them be BC? Would cutting BC drop the cost enough to justify creating this?
 
Anyone here has Nintendo stock? If you do, can you please DM if you don't mind. I have a few qs.

Apologies for the offtopic.
 
0
carbvan said:


While I think it's absurd myself, I still think it might be worth sharing here. If I don't, someone will later anyways. tl;dr, a Shpeshal Nick is claiming that Nintendo has been developing a Switch 2 which is not backwards compatible at all. Unknown if they moved forward with the idea. But, this is stupid. It is so stupid. Now I'm wondering, how much more difficult would it be to develop two of these systems side by side and only have 1 of them be BC? Would cutting BC drop the cost enough to justify creating this?
Click to expand...

Bluray based home console here I come 😛
 
Ah, the rumor from August that was teased and then never shared is finally back.

I don't believe there will be more than one SKU at launch, and I don't believe anyone has knowledge of Nintendo's plans for future SKUs after launch. So the rumor can't be true even without debating the merits of the supposed SKUs themselves (but they also don't make sense).
 
“We are still working on software for the Switch for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2025,”
Click to expand...
This means they will release at least one Switch game between Apr. 1, 2024 and Mar. 31, 2025. This is obvious considering that we already have Switch games on track for that period, like Luigi's Mansion 2 HD (Summer 2024). This says literally nothing about the time beyond Mar. 31, 2025 one way or the other, so there isn't anything new to glean here. Just a typical non-statement for journalists.
 
carbvan said:


While I think it's absurd myself, I still think it might be worth sharing here. If I don't, someone will later anyways. tl;dr, a Shpeshal Nick is claiming that Nintendo has been developing a Switch 2 which is not backwards compatible at all. Unknown if they moved forward with the idea. But, this is stupid. It is so stupid. Now I'm wondering, how much more difficult would it be to develop two of these systems side by side and only have 1 of them be BC? Would cutting BC drop the cost enough to justify creating this?
Click to expand...


I’m sorry, but as the main thiccccc fuck sicko alive, even I can’t entertain the possibility that Nintendo is planning a Switch 2 model that shoves the GPU of the Switch 1 in there as well. What are we doing here.
 
0
carbvan said:


While I think it's absurd myself, I still think it might be worth sharing here. If I don't, someone will later anyways. tl;dr, a Shpeshal Nick is claiming that Nintendo has been developing a Switch 2 which is not backwards compatible at all. Unknown if they moved forward with the idea. But, this is stupid. It is so stupid. Now I'm wondering, how much more difficult would it be to develop two of these systems side by side and only have 1 of them be BC? Would cutting BC drop the cost enough to justify creating this?
Click to expand...

that guy is always full of shit, you can easily block out any "reports" that come out of his mouth
 
carbvan said:


While I think it's absurd myself, I still think it might be worth sharing here. If I don't, someone will later anyways. tl;dr, a Shpeshal Nick is claiming that Nintendo has been developing a Switch 2 which is not backwards compatible at all. Unknown if they moved forward with the idea. But, this is stupid. It is so stupid. Now I'm wondering, how much more difficult would it be to develop two of these systems side by side and only have 1 of them be BC? Would cutting BC drop the cost enough to justify creating this?
Click to expand...

There would only be a substantial cost difference if they approached BC in the most inefficient way possible.
 
carbvan said:


While I think it's absurd myself, I still think it might be worth sharing here. If I don't, someone will later anyways. tl;dr, a Shpeshal Nick is claiming that Nintendo has been developing a Switch 2 which is not backwards compatible at all. Unknown if they moved forward with the idea. But, this is stupid. It is so stupid. Now I'm wondering, how much more difficult would it be to develop two of these systems side by side and only have 1 of them be BC? Would cutting BC drop the cost enough to justify creating this?
Click to expand...

To be fair, this isn't really a new claim as dumb as it is. There's been rumours out there claiming Nintendo would put out a physical and digital model respectively, if the digital model is dropping the cartridge altogether then that's technically what he's talking about. Again, not new.
 
Lancelot said:
To be fair, this isn't really a new claim as dumb as it is. There's been rumours out there claiming Nintendo would put out a physical and digital model respectively, if the digital model is dropping the cartridge altogether then that's technically what he's talking about. Again, not new.
Click to expand...
Of course, but I was thinking along the lines of they'd just cut it out entirely from the digital online console. Like you couldn't even play digital Switch 1 games. How much would that differ from the other system and is it even viable?
 
carbvan said:
Of course, but I was thinking along the lines of they'd just cut it out entirely from the digital online console. Like you couldn't even play digital Switch 1 games. How much would that differ from the other system and is it even viable?
Click to expand...
Yeah, that'd be absolutely ridiculous and one of the dumbest decisions ever for a console. Can't see Nintendo of all things pulling such a thing.
 
0
it's so cool that Nintendo has been talking about the NX platform being continued by its successor since Iwata was alive, NX had the biggest graphics company in the world as its provider, and somehow backwards compatibility is still constantly in question because some dipshitted homebrewers think it would be hard
 
nintendo-future-hardware-scaled.jpg


they did not have nvidia develop the switch graphics drivers as an impenetrable black box and also make this graph

they probably had this shit future-proofed before it even hit market

edit: yes technically this graph doesn't need bc to be valid but like come the fuck on y'know, look at it
 
oldpuck said:
Nintendo is slightly more constrained. Electricity matters a lot more. Every little bit of electricity spent costs battery life. It also means a bigger heat sink, and a bigger fan, which increases the size and the cost of the device, makes it more expensive to ship, and perversely leaves less room for the battery.
Click to expand...

Well, they could go with a vapor chamber. But that would just mean paying the cost in even more money rather than size. I think it would be worth it, though
 
Pokemaniac said:
There would only be a substantial cost difference if they approached BC in the most inefficient way possible.
Click to expand...
There's always the chance that, if nintendo is planning on the PS5 approach of a regular model and a digital only model, they are also planning on taking a much bigger profit margin on the regular model compared to the digital only model.
 
Lugia667 said:
man I always seem to enter when people are talking about BC fears huh?
Click to expand...

It's really easy to panic people, but hard to calm them down.

"Switch 2 has BC" : "Nah show me proof, take this with a grain of salt!!!"
"Switch 2 doesnt have BC : "Yeah, I knew it! They are cheap and probably doomed"
 
StarFox Grand Prix rumor also backed by a lot of individual so idk.
But they are more creditable than all of those dumb New Super Nintendo Switch Advance Pro Max Plus plus Alpha rumour for sure
 
0
TomNookYankees said:
There's always the chance that, if nintendo is planning on the PS5 approach of a regular model and a digital only model, they are also planning on taking a much bigger profit margin on the regular model compared to the digital only model.
Click to expand...

I honestly wonder if the idea of a digital Switch 2 even makes sense. I heard that the cartridge readers don't cost nearly as much as 4K Blu-ray drives do, so it would introduce greater complexity into the manufacturing for almost no savings. It would have to be purely about trying to increase high-margin digital sales.
 
BreakAtmo said:
I honestly wonder if the idea of a digital Switch 2 even makes sense. I heard that the cartridge readers don't cost nearly as much as 4K Blu-ray drives do, so it would introduce greater complexity into the manufacturing for almost no savings. It would have to be purely about trying to increase high-margin digital sales.
Click to expand...
There is little to no benefit of introducing a digital only model when the non-digital only model can still increase high-margin digital sales. Having a second model wouldn’t necessarily increase digital either.
 
0
BreakAtmo said:
I honestly wonder if the idea of a digital Switch 2 even makes sense. I heard that the cartridge readers don't cost nearly as much as 4K Blu-ray drives do, so it would introduce greater complexity into the manufacturing for almost no savings. It would have to be purely about trying to increase high-margin digital sales.
Click to expand...
They can cut off some complexity by shaving off the interfaces required for a card reader, but yea the prime motivation would be what you said.
 
carbvan said:


While I think it's absurd myself, I still think it might be worth sharing here. If I don't, someone will later anyways. tl;dr, a Shpeshal Nick is claiming that Nintendo has been developing a Switch 2 which is not backwards compatible at all. Unknown if they moved forward with the idea. But, this is stupid. It is so stupid. Now I'm wondering, how much more difficult would it be to develop two of these systems side by side and only have 1 of them be BC? Would cutting BC drop the cost enough to justify creating this?
Click to expand...

How the fuck would they even market that? How the fuck would the digital console not even play old digital games?
 
BreakAtmo said:
I honestly wonder if the idea of a digital Switch 2 even makes sense. I heard that the cartridge readers don't cost nearly as much as 4K Blu-ray drives do, so it would introduce greater complexity into the manufacturing for almost no savings. It would have to be purely about trying to increase high-margin digital sales.
Click to expand...

It's purely about trying to increase high margin digital sales for everyone!

The optical drive remains one of the cheaper components of these devices. But if anything, the use of cards as the input medium is FAR more expensive for Nintendo than the equivalent for the competition, because the math isn't just "reader price", it's "reader price plus expected cost of cards/discs", and gamecards are very expensive Vs blu ray.

If cartridges were a money saver, that's also what the competition would use they don't because they aren't.

If there were any feasible way to avoid all the issues with discs in a handheld, switch would use those, but there isn't so they can't, hence gamecards.

Edit: But this 'source' doesn't know a single thing and even the resetera thread had to be locked basically immediately because it's not worth giving everyone who claims to have inside information the attention they crave.
 
Just to toss it out there, Wii U achieved backwards compatibility by pretty much including a Wii within it. It runs pretty much perfect, down to even running GameCube games when modded because it's just a Wii, but it does drive production costs up. PS3 I believe did the same thing originally, which is part of the reason they gutted the feature when they needed to drive costs down. I know the general idea people run with is Nintendo achieving backwards compatibility via software, but honestly who's to say they won't go the Wii U or PS3 route again? And if that's the case suddenly it makes a whole lot of sense for Nintendo to offer a variant without Switch compatibility.

To be clear I'm not saying it's likely, this is definitely a rumor I need to hear reiterated by other sources before I put any stock into it. But I wouldn't completely dismiss it either, the idea really isn't that crazy if you think about it.
 
Reader mode
You must log in or register to reply here.
Please read this staff post before posting.

Furthermore, according to this follow-up post, all off-topic chat will be moderated.
Last edited:


Back
Top Bottom