StarTopic Future Nintendo Hardware & Technology Speculation & Discussion |ST| (New Staff Post, Please read)

Reader mode
Concernt said:
Unironically, with foveal rendering, that would only really need DLSS 3.X and adequate power - though that adequate power is something like a 100mm² chip on a 9 Angstrom process, if we're talking Switch formfactor. A couple times more powerful than T239 with adequate Tensor performance, it's the kind of thing a Switch 3 could very well be. The problem for Nintendo isn't that silicon won't get to the point of fitting into their devices while also providing adequate performance, but the cost of the sensors and screens.
Click to expand...

Foveated rendering is like an infinity gem in VR’s pocket for mass adoption.

1. Foveated rendering (Hardware accessibility)
2. Multi-person accessibility (sharing, couch multiplayer, online multiplayer)
3. Health/Ability accessibility (Figuring out motion sickness and addressing options for those without the ability to move, wear the hardware, etc.)
4. Economic accessibility (Cheap hardware)
5. Experience accessibility (Great software)
6. Platform accessibility (Not marrying hardware to a platform. Ability to mix and match hardware and storefronts. Looking at you Sony and meta)
Bonus/Glove: Convenience accessibility (as easy to setup and turn on like a regular console game)

I did think too hard on this but it was a fun thought.
 
New Spyro will be a Switch 2 launch title (or at least in the launch window).
 
Some years ago the VR industry was putting a lot of hope on Foveated Rendering, expecting performance gains even up to 20x. But time passed and it became clear that the challenges were even greater than they initially seemed. Michael Abrash's roadmap for foveated rendering never materialized and Meta is still stuck on fixed foveated.

John Carmack talked about why it's so hard to get it working especially with the multiplied gains that people were expecting from it

QkPnaSm.png



 
Shareholder Chad said:
Foveated rendering is like an infinity gem in VR’s pocket for mass adoption.

1. Foveated rendering (Hardware accessibility)
2. Multi-person accessibility (sharing, couch multiplayer, online multiplayer)
3. Health/Ability accessibility (Figuring out motion sickness and addressing options for those without the ability to move, wear the hardware, etc.)
4. Economic accessibility (Cheap hardware)
5. Experience accessibility (Great software)
6. Platform accessibility (Not marrying hardware to a platform. Ability to mix and match hardware and storefronts. Looking at you Sony and meta)
Bonus/Glove: Convenience accessibility (as easy to setup and turn on like a regular console game)

I did think too hard on this but it was a fun thought.
Click to expand...
You're never gonna get Nintendo on board with number 6.

I'd say there is another element, though I suppose it's part of 3: visual accessibility. Of the developed world, a huge, huge portion of adults require vision correction. Unless this can be provided for, for the majority of prescriptions, ideally without having to change the lenses between different users using the same headset. Then there's also colour blindness: colour correction for the real world has to be taken into account for passthrough and AR.

These might sound kind of mad, but they have to be reasonably affordable, and effectively replace (or accomodate) corrective glasses of almost any type. This isn't ENTIRELY off the wall, colour correction is software, while lenses that can flex and deform, or say, a set of two lenses, motorised to adjust to the user... And ideally, you want it to do all this, effortlessly, instantly, every time.

Without those considerations, glasses-wearing, filter-needing, near-sighted homunculi like myself will always have undue barriers to XR. On the other hand, if it can do all this, it would actually INCREASE my quality of life.

Unless it was Nintendo branded, wherein I would simply get used to contacts again because I need to play my Ninty.
 
bmfrosty said:
I have no idea. I just know that every time I see an article about NV exiting the GPU market, it talks about their AI business.

I think that a solid B2B marketing effort takes less than consumer products once established. I have to imagine outside of PC gaming enthusiasts that the integrated GPU on their CPU is more than enough, and x86 are only being made by AMD and Intel. I think every AMD CPU now has a GPU. I don't know if Intel is there yet, but I can't imagine that it's far off.
Click to expand...
I see. It seems that the dedicated GPU must have a hard time expanding. I mean the preconceived notion is PC gaming is expensive to get into. So I can see why.
shoichi said:
Margins are small for the non-chip maker GPU manufacturers (ASUS, Gigabyte, MSI, Zotac, etc.), especially when GPU makers use Nvidia instead of what would probably be better margins had with AMD or recently Intel. But AMD/Intel aren't as popular in the GPU space, so they'd get less in sales even if they had more margin gain. Hard for those companies when the chip makers make GPU's in-house as well which are able to easily undercut them in price.

It's a major reason one of the major GPU makers in EVGA (RIP) decided to exit the GPU market completely and make mostly just PSU's (for now). I loved their Step-Up program.
Click to expand...
I heard it was because Nvidia was such an asshole to work with. Now I see
 
Dakhil said:
Considering people are talking about VR, I also want to mention that 1080p isn't considered the ideal resolution for VR. The ideal resolution for VR is 8K (per eye).
Click to expand...
My vision isn't perfect, but 2k as in ~2160x2160 per eye is completely adequate and makes games look incredible. In the ten years since that article was published there have also been other improvements to VR optics, such as pancake lenses, in the pursuit of "human eye" resolution. That's not to say 8K wouldn't be amazing - but it's just a theoretical perfect resolution, far beyond what would be simply adequate, especially as it relates to a likely low-budget headset from Nintendo.
I think a similar comparison would be 4K to 720p on a small to medium-sized TV. While the 4K TV would be nearly lifelike from a few feet away, the 720p one is still completely capable of playing games and having them look good enough, though objects in the distance may get blurry.
 
omniryu said:
I heard it was because Nvidia was such an asshole to work with
Click to expand...
Its only the "asshole" companies that innvoate, Apple, Nvidia, Nintendo, Rock star games etc. Others copy them and are "nice" for busniess purpose only ie your Microsofts, Samsungs, AMDs and Sonys.

Very few companies are really good like Valve but thats also cause its a private company( no shareholders to appease).

Most people who hate these companies because of lockin and lawsuit hungry but without these companies i doubt the industry would be the same as it is now.
 
RumHamRigRunner said:
I think there's a safe chance that the successor to the Switch 2 won't be using the Tegra line of chips anymore.
Click to expand...
I think that's hard to say.

Nvidia hasn't revealed anything beyond Thor for Nvidia's line up of Arm based SoCs.

And there's the rumour from Reuters that Nvidia's designing Arm based SoCs for PCs that run on Microsoft Windows for after 2024 (since Qualcomm's exclusivity for designing Arm based SoCs for PCs running on Microsoft Windows ends at the end of 2024).

So who knows?
 
Nintendo uploaded the official English translation of Nintendo's Q&A session for the nine months financial briefing for the fiscal year ending on March 2024.

From the Q&A
Another difference from past platforms is that we have been working with DeNA to spread the use of Nintendo Account since before the launch of Nintendo Switch. Nintendo Accounts are an important touch point for maintaining long-term connections with our consumers. They can be used when consumers migrate to new hardware. Furthermore, they are also an important way for us to reconnect with people who have been taking a break from video games for a while and then, at some point, become interested in the unique entertainment that Nintendo has to offer. From that perspective, I believe that Nintendo Accounts will continue to be important going forward.
Click to expand...

I know it's been said before and they've given similar answers before, but this is very strong hint of BC and a unified platform and storefront.
 
Ars2439 said:
My vision isn't perfect, but 2k as in ~2160x2160 per eye is completely adequate and makes games look incredible. In the ten years since that article was published there have also been other improvements to VR optics, such as pancake lenses, in the pursuit of "human eye" resolution. That's not to say 8K wouldn't be amazing - but it's just a theoretical perfect resolution, far beyond what would be simply adequate, especially as it relates to a likely low-budget headset from Nintendo.
I think a similar comparison would be 4K to 720p on a small to medium-sized TV. While the 4K TV would be nearly lifelike from a few feet away, the 720p one is still completely capable of playing games and having them look good enough, though objects in the distance may get blurry.
Click to expand...

Yeah, playing Red Matter 2 on PSVR2, which runs at 1.2x native screen res via ETFR, really impressed me. I'd take upgrades to pancake lenses, OLED screen brightness and sub-pixel resolution before regular resolution at this point. Especially if the PS5 Pro or PS6 can do ML upscaling for even better supersampling.
 
PatrykPrime said:
Introducing the Joy-Pros. We removed all of the cons and replaced them with pros.
Click to expand...
Supreme Overlord said:
Aren't those just the same thing but with more polished functions and a more professional title?
Click to expand...
PatrykPrime said:
They don't have any of the negatives. Durable and ergonomic with no stick drift. I.E, what I want the Switch 2 Joy-Cons to be like.
Click to expand...

Oh, that was a double entendre. If you replace the con artists with "professionals," you end up with scammers and thieves all the same, just more polished ones.

Add to that the idea that these "Joy-Pros" are upgraded Joy-Cons, with lesser elements fixed and further improvements added, and you have the same thing but with more polished functions (and a more professional title).

I agree, though, that I would want improvements made all around to the existing design. I would also hope for further enhancement, such as improved motion detection and replication/imitation of IR pointing. So, yes, none of the negatives and more positives overall.
 
Hmm. I am starting to back pedal on my statement about the 90s. The one where I said Super Switch sounds too 90s. But what if they use a name they planned on using but didn't? The Nintendo Switch Ultra?
How about we go back to Super Nintendo, why was it named "Super" Nintendo? Because of Mario? What if they applied the same thing again, but using Super Mario Wonder. The Nintendo Wonder? The Nintendo Switch Wonder?

Still Switch 2 is the best
 
Assuming this thing does get announced in March, I can't see it just being a small trailer drop on YouTube. That was necessary for the Switch, especially in 2016, but I feel such an idea would be terrible for the Switch 2, as you don't want consumers mistaking it for just another revision or some other news to come along a day or two later and overshadow it. I think we'll likely get a dedicated presentation of some kind, where it will explain the unique features, gimmicks, controllers, games and pricing. Because of that, and assuming that happens, I'm actually curious what they'll do for the summer, as March is too close to June to really need to have another direct of some kind.
 
Mango said:
Assuming this thing does get announced in March, I can't see it just being a small trailer drop on YouTube. That was necessary for the Switch, especially in 2016, but I feel such an idea would be terrible for the Switch 2, as you don't want consumers mistaking it for just another revision or some other news to come along a day or two later and overshadow it. I think we'll likely get a dedicated presentation of some kind, where it will explain the unique features, gimmicks, controllers, games and pricing. Because of that, and assuming that happens, I'm actually curious what they'll do for the summer, as March is too close to June to really need to have another direct of some kind.
Click to expand...
I think the initial reveal will be a little longer and feature more games than the trailer for the original Switch. Nintendo has earned much more trust with developers in the Switch era. Fully expecting to see some missed ports like Elden Ring, Resident Evil 4 remake, or Persona 3 Reload.
 
boodream said:
If the console is released at the end of the year, an announcement in March rather than in June will only slow Switch 1 sales even faster for no reason. valid, in my opinion. It may not be very important, as you say, but allowing developers to speak in March rather than in June seems even more secondary to me.
Click to expand...
If it's showing up as late as November, I feel there'd be value in letting people know earlier which of this year's third party games will be showing up, rather than guessing. Like, if Visions of Mana releases in May on four other platforms and they can't confirm a Switch 2 release until a month later? That's helping Sony and Valve, but not Nintendo or players who would regret getting a different version if they knew they could've gotten it on Switch 2.

And also, again, it's year 8. They're only forecasting about 1.8m more hardware for January-March. For April-June, whether or not Switch 2 is known about might be the difference between a 2m quarter and a 1.5m quarter. Which isn't nothing, but not a big loss if those 0.5m want a Switch 2.
TomNookYankees said:
Open face dock is an obvious one. Just too many reasons to do it that it would be dumb not to do it.
Click to expand...
And yet, they chose not to for both Switch 1 docks without anyone twisting their arms.
 
Quailman said:
The second quote is quite telling, it makes you think that the next xbox is going to be an arm based machine using an Nvidia gpu. The supposed xbox leak last year has Microsoft thinking if they want to use an amd cpu or arm cpu...along with the fact that microsoft hasn't signed a contract with AMD about their next xbox console can lead you to believe that they're switching chip manufacturer. Which I am speculating the reason why they're going multiplat is to start developing games on machines that uses arm which could lead us to believe we will probably see more microsoft games on the Switch 2.

Silicon:

  • CPU: ARM64 vs x64 (Zen6)
  • CPU: Balance of Big/Little CPU Cores
  • GPU: Co-design w/ AMD or license AMD IP (Navi 5/RDNA5)
  • NPU: Balancing the desire for flexible, programmable ML silicon versus high performance silicon for targeted workloads
  • Forward compatilbility
Graphics Innovation:

  • Next Generation DirectX Raytracing
  • Dynamic Global Illumination
  • Micropolygon Rendering optimizations
  • ML Based Super Resolution
  • Extensibility Model for Faster Iteration and Innovation
Click to expand...

where did we hear that microsoft hasnt resigned with amd?
 
From the translated Q&A:
It takes a long time and thorough planning to get ready for new hardware, and those plans are not impacted by whatever the latest business conditions might be.
Click to expand...
Oh hey, look, that thing that I've said for several years turns out to be true! So all those people in the past who said that Nintendo could just wait until Switch sales slowed and turn on a dime to release new hardware when that happens can take their reality check now.
 
yusufied said:
I think the initial reveal will be a little longer and feature more games than the trailer for the original Switch. Nintendo has earned much more trust with developers in the Switch era. Fully expecting to see some missed ports like Elden Ring, Resident Evil 4 remake, or Persona 3 Reload.
Click to expand...
I'm expecting something in-between the 2016 trailer and the January 2017 presentation. I don't think we'll need a whole section to go over the new Joycons for example, but I do think we need ample time to illustrate and communicate directly to general audiences that this is a new console and not just a new revision. I also think we'll probably know about when it's happening a week or two in advance, and if it's before GDC as Nate claims it'll probably be March 6th or 13th if I had to guess.

As far as third parties are concerned tho all I'm hoping for is Persona 3, I'd say I'm hopeful for the FF7R games but we all know that ain't happening.
 
Dakhil said:
Assuming I've understood what the question's asking, Moore's Law is Dead claims that Intel wants to provide SoCs for the next-gen Xbox console.

But as I've said before, Moore's Law is Dead's very unreliable for these reasons.
Click to expand...
ah, ok yeh if its mlid then lol, lmao even. if microsoft is really exploring arm socs for next gen then a complete amd or nvidia soc make the most sense. of course we all know bout nvidias arm offerings, but amd does also have a potential zenbased arm core in k12 that they could bring back
 
7hatDeadCat said:
ah, ok yeh if its mlid then lol, lmao even. if microsoft is really exploring arm socs for next gen then a complete amd or nvidia soc make the most sense. of course we all know bout nvidias arm offerings, but amd does also have a potential zenbased arm core in k12 that they could bring back
Click to expand...
There's also a rumour from Reuters back in October 2023 that AMD's planning on designing Arm based SoCs for PCs running Microsoft Windows as well.

So who knows?
 
Concernt said:
You're never gonna get Nintendo on board with number 6.

I'd say there is another element, though I suppose it's part of 3: visual accessibility. Of the developed world, a huge, huge portion of adults require vision correction. Unless this can be provided for, for the majority of prescriptions, ideally without having to change the lenses between different users using the same headset. Then there's also colour blindness: colour correction for the real world has to be taken into account for passthrough and AR.

These might sound kind of mad, but they have to be reasonably affordable, and effectively replace (or accomodate) corrective glasses of almost any type. This isn't ENTIRELY off the wall, colour correction is software, while lenses that can flex and deform, or say, a set of two lenses, motorised to adjust to the user... And ideally, you want it to do all this, effortlessly, instantly, every time.

Without those considerations, glasses-wearing, filter-needing, near-sighted homunculi like myself will always have undue barriers to XR. On the other hand, if it can do all this, it would actually INCREASE my quality of life.

Unless it was Nintendo branded, wherein I would simply get used to contacts again because I need to play my Ninty.
Click to expand...
I think we'd sooner see Nintendo explore a partnership with Apple for VR content similar to Apple's partnership with Disney than have them make and produce their own VR device.
 
VagrantValmar said:
Unironically better than dpads. People are just way too used to actual dpads to appreciate the superiority.

It can be improved (idk exactly how but it could be easier/softer to roll between the buttons) but having ZERO fake inputs in Tetris and fighting games is worth it.
Click to expand...
Exactly. You get me.
 
BingBong43 said:
Where can I find more discussion of these features and evidence?

What else has been added besides the “fifty” controllers?
Click to expand...
The discussion has generally been had around when the firmware updates happened. I don't have links to the discussions handy, but the raw info that fueled the discussions is mostly on the various firmware update pages on Switchbrew.

That said, the specifics of the features and changes are a lot less interesting than just the basic fact of them being there. There's little practical impact of Nintendo implementing Device Tree Blob support or skipping a large block of syscall IDs, but it all paints a picture of there being a second hardware target for the firmware for some other system.
nitroplum said:
With Switch 1 preorders opened with the January event, not the Trailer in october. So it depends on what the March reveal is. If it's just a trailer then I would think probably no preorders. If it's a timed event with reveals and a longer explanation, then I would prepare for preorders.

Personally, I think the March event will be a more full-featured event and will have preorders.

Others stick very strictly to the original Switch reveal plan which I don't think makes sense considering they had to explain a whole new form factor to people back then. If the Switch 2 is just a more powerful Switch then I see no reason they can't just hold an event and launch 2 months later.
Click to expand...
For practical purposes, I think the console reveal and preorders opening will be separate events. Trying to do it all at once is likely to lead to chaos.

The exact timeline of the Switch reveal is unlikely to be followed, but I do expect a similar split in presentations. They're likely to be a lot closer to each other with Nintendo not dodging the holidays this time.
 
All depends on what the hardware is. If it is "just" a more powerful Switch, they have no need to explain the hardware through a preemptive trailer, people already have known the concept for years.
If there is a twist, maybe it is better to introduced hardware first, then the games later, like it was done for the og switch.
 
Herb Alpert said:
All depends on what the hardware is. If it is "just" a more powerful Switch, they have no need to explain the hardware through a preemptive trailer, people already have known the concept for years.
If there is a twist, maybe it is better to introduced hardware first, then the games later, like it was done for the og switch.
Click to expand...
Guess there is no absolute need but it would create hype for sure. They announced Oled and lite with a trailer in the same style as the Switch reveal, and I expect the trend to continue.

There are still things to show off. The form factor, new controller features, throw a few technically impressive ports in there,
and a first party premiere or 2.
 
Hermii said:
Guess there is no absolute need but it would create hype for sure. They announced Oled and lite with a trailer in the same style as the Switch reveal, and I expect the trend to continue.

There are still things to show off. The form factor, new controller features, throw a few technically impressive ports in there,
and a first party premiere or 2.
Click to expand...
I know this is not what you are saying, but after rewatching the OLED it's definitely clear to me that should not do a reveal in that exact style. A very fitting reveal trailer for a revision, but it would be confusing as hell to debut a new generation with such a trailer, with its focus on the minor improvements in form factor.

If there is a next gen reveal trailer like this, I want "next gen" to be plastered all over it in words, not just as an implication. Hit us with "Switch to the next generation of play/power" or some other cheesy but obvious slogan to make clear it is a new system.
 
Zedark said:
I know this is not what you are saying, but after rewatching the OLED it's definitely clear to me that should not do a reveal in that exact style. A very fitting reveal trailer for a revision, but it would be confusing as hell to debut a new generation with such a trailer, with its focus on the minor improvements in form factor.
Click to expand...
I think the games would be enough to do that, but that would off course depend on them having games to show off that looks a generation better than anything on Switch. A new 3d Mario game built to show off NVN2 features, a ps4 port with improvements, a current generation only title with bells and whistles enabled. I think that would do the trick.
 
Hermii said:
I think the games would be enough to do that, but that would off course depend on them having games to show off that looks a generation better than anything on Switch. A new 3d Mario game built to show off NVN2 features, a ps4 port with improvements, a current generation only title with bells and whistles enabled. I think that would do the trick.
Click to expand...

The game that would have the most impact imo, something as huge as "skyrim on the go" was in 2016, would be GTA 6. I'm sure Nintendo wants that to happen, but would it be technically possible, we have no clue so far.
 
Hermii said:
I think the games would be enough to do that, but that would off course depend on them having games to show off that looks a generation better than anything on Switch. A new 3d Mario game built to show off NVN2 features, a ps4 port with improvements, a current generation only title with bells and whistles enabled. I think that would do the trick.
Click to expand...
Right, fair enough. They might need to have something even more massive than Skyrim, since Skyrim still had the excuse of being a gen 7 game. Some major PS5/XSX game would be necessary. GTA6 is definitely a great candidate for that as @Herb Alpert said, but R* are rather weird with platforms so it's difficult to predict it. Alternatives would be MH Wilds, Starfield, or Elden Ring I think (or a number of those at the same time 😃 ).
 
Herb Alpert said:
The game that would have the most impact imo, something as huge as "skyrim on the go" was in 2016, would be GTA 6. I'm sure Nintendo wants that to happen, but would it be technically possible, we have no clue so far.
Click to expand...
If the device can run games graphically roughly on par with the Series S according to rumors from Gamescom, there's very little reason why it couldn't. There might be some additional work on it, but the Series S and Series X are both getting GTA6 so like... yeah it should be on the device, especially since Take-Two have shown their enthusiasm about the Nintendo Switch.
 
BingBong43 said:
I think we'd sooner see Nintendo explore a partnership with Apple for VR content similar to Apple's partnership with Disney than have them make and produce their own VR device.
Click to expand...

That would be an interesting concept. I highly doubt it would be Apple due to cost but Nvidia could be an easy partner if they both desire to invest in it. Its probably best to give it 5 years or so and let other companies do the legwork of getting VR mainstream capable then explore the idea again.
 
Pokemaniac said:
For practical purposes, I think the console reveal and preorders opening will be separate events. Trying to do it all at once is likely to lead to chaos.

The exact timeline of the Switch reveal is unlikely to be followed, but I do expect a similar split in presentations. They're likely to be a lot closer to each other with Nintendo not dodging the holidays this titime.
Click to expand...
I can't see Gamestop not rushing to open up pre-order.
 
BingBong43 said:
I think we'd sooner see Nintendo explore a partnership with Apple for VR content similar to Apple's partnership with Disney than have them make and produce their own VR device.
Click to expand...
Sam Altman thinks Vision Pro is good. I think what’s makes Vision Pro so good is the software. The hardware is great too but it’s a gen 1 product.

Embeds for twitter have been disabled. Please refer to our site rules for more information.
Original post: https://tw*tter.com/tweet/status/1756072368236376171

Apple does have a lot of respect for Japanese products and people. They have a good relationship with Nintendo and Sony. They also invite Japanese devs to their WWDC more so than western devs. With that said Apple is probably wanting the premium MR market in 10 years time. Likely with a >$1500 headset so while Nintendo might create apps for it they might invest their whole ecosystem so that it’s cheaper for families.

I hope if Nintendo does XR it’s with their own OS, Android is not great for XR and I would hope it stays far away from Nintendo’s software strategy.
 
re: VR:
I've posted these thoughts before, but I do think Nintendo is in a unique spot to tackle a VR solution with a Switch-style system, without any extra hardware purchases. It has a screen, split controllers with motion sensors, and a separate piece of hardware you can plug the screen into.
If you could transform to dock into a headset, and add some additional stuff in there, maybe add a camera on the screen for eye-tracking and glasses-free 3D.
It's a cute solution that feels very 'Nintendo'.
 
Shareholder Chad said:
* Hidden text: cannot be quoted. *
Click to expand...
The modular nature of the Switch means that if they do invest money into it for a potential Switch 3 with a higher resolution screen, suddenly there could be 100+ million potential VR headsets without alienating the majority of users who don't really care about VR. And at the same time, from that majority, many could try it out without investing a lot of money since they would only need a cheapish plastic add on. The ones investing would be Nintendo adapting some games to VR and what not. It could work, and I would be excited even if I have a PSVR2 that I've barely touched.
 
Last edited:
omniryu said:
I can't see Gamestop not rushing to open up pre-order.
Click to expand...
I've been thinking about the overall pre-order situation too but I don't really believe it's GameStop's call in this case. With the Switch, Nintendo didn't reveal pricing or the date until the January presentation, in which then stores had everything they needed to open pre-orders. I think they will follow a similar (maybe not exact) plan for this console and so, I don't think the pricing model or release date really will be available from the get-go to allow GameStop (or any large retailer really)to put up pre-orders. Doing this also would likely require allotments to be known for each store before the console is announced for the influx of people wanting to get a pre-order (for the Switch, I remember they had sheets of paper on the doors that said how much of the gray and colored joy-con models they had been allotted) and, I imagine, could cause a logistical nightmare to take place even beyond what may occur when pre-orders usually go up for gaming consoles. A non-Nintendo example would be the PlayStation 5. The console was revealed in June, allowing for retailers to begin their own marketing of the console (areas on their websites for news, reminders for when pre-orders go up) and then September, after the second PlayStation Showcase for the console, the pre-orders opened up.

If this console is coming out in two months after its reveal, as is apart of some of the speculation I'm seeing, I imagine pre-orders open a week after its reveal but I imagine Nintendo is going to try use a First-Look/Reveal as one marketing measure and then a Presentation + Pre-Order timeframe as another.

I do want to emphasize everything I said here is only based on my own observations! I might've said something that isn't completely true or reached a little and I apologize for that if that's the case. If someone is more familiar with these types of launches, please feel free to reply, I'd love to learn more! :)
 
Last edited:
Pokemaniac said:
We have pretty good reason to believe that the console has a new split controller, which is more likely than not in a similar form factor to the Joy-Cons.

HID services - Nintendo Switch Brew

switchbrew.org switchbrew.org

Joy-Con - Nintendo Switch Brew

switchbrew.org switchbrew.org

The firmware has some support (part of which was added pretty recently) for a mysterious controller codenamed "fifty" which has left and right versions just like Joy-Cons. We can't conclusively tell what form "fifty" will take, but a next gen version of Joy-Cons that is adapted to the shape of the new device and probably picked up a new feature or two seems like a pretty logical guess.
Click to expand...
yeah, im feeling 50/50 odds on this one
 
0
The key advantage Nintendo would have with VR/AR over everyone else is their IP. The tech is pretty much there, it's the software that isn't. There are no killer apps that have hooked mainstream audiences. What VR needs to succeed are games like Mario Kart, Zelda, Pokémon, etc. People would kill for the chance to live out those games.

That being said, I don't think Nintendo is interested in developing a secondary platform just for VR/AR, and I don't think they would be interested in developing a wide array of games that require an expensive add-on. I think it would be a smart move to develop VR and AR games for existing devices like Meta Quest and Apple Vision Pro, similar to what they do with mobile games. I actually think a "Pokémon GO 2" for Apple Vision Pro would be a great way for Nintendo/TPC to kickstart their venture into this arena, followed by Mario Kart VR for Quest and similar devices, a Zelda game of some kind, etc.
 
Reader mode
You must log in or register to reply here.
Please read this new, consolidated staff post before posting.
Last edited:


Back
Top Bottom