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

[SuperFakerBros]

Since Furukawa is surprising me already, I'm going to go for a bigger cope: 120hz support.

So we can run 40fps titles in 120hz containers for a much smoother output than 30fps/60Hz.

If Furukawa can see that far ahead we are eating good.

I’d genuinely be surprised if 120 Hz was supported in handheld mode. Maybe a little bit in docked mode but, even there, I’d be surprised

 

[Concernt]

Huge fan of Botw, found Totk pretty underwhelming:

Spoiler: My thoughts as to not hog people's screen space

I think part of it was Botw's shine wearing off but the lack of any meaningful cohesion between the two games story wise beyond surface level was bad, people don't remember you, there isn't much of an in game explanation to sheikah tech vanishing etc

the dungeons still being mostly meh

the flashbacks in the dungeons telling you the same thing 4 times,

the fact that memories are still the primary way to even tell you the story

the lore just being kinda ass and not fleshed out (botw by comparison left so many mysteries and years worth of theories) we see 2 important zonai in the whole game that's actually insane, the secret stones are stlil pretty much a mystery but a lame one because there's barely any exposition

the basic combat actions still being the same was a bummer - despite fuse it was still really samey, could've given more options other than flurry rush (I mean there's three other button indicators lol) why am i using the same 3 hit combo i've been doing for 7 years

sky islands were a little lacking, depths wasn't that fun to navigate - more tedium than anything (this is me being picky)

zelda's sacrifice was mid in the end because it got reverted with the power of love (lame)

secret stones turn people into dragons but we never see the three dragons we've known for 7 years as humans (lame)

overall it felt a little bit too sandboxy, I think being able to solve puzzles however made me feel like a swiss army knife. it wasn't satisfying to clear some of the puzzles with ultrahand builds. The game made me realise I like less freedom than I thought. I like knowing that I figured out the one way to clear this whatever.

edit: there also wasn't enough zelda-ey stuff, you'd think they'd throw in a shadow link for the one time or something idk. it wasn't ethereal or weird enough, felt too grounded. next game is when they get wacky. I have faith in the studio

Excited for the next entry though, hopefully it's all new, not as sandboxy - if it is I'll play it all the same, zelda is still zelda.

Oh wow, yeah, I feel the same way about a lot of that stuff but way more extreme. Some elements felt closer to downright offensive or backward, rather than merely lame to me, but we're way off topic.

I hope the next Zelda plays into physics and light to take fill advantage of the new hardware. Imagine instead of a mirror shield, it's a customisable prism shield using ray traced light. So many things they could do. One element of simulation TOTK and BOTW are really bad at is water (like, Pokémon has more dynamic water animation for flying over it), so seeing that explored would be great.

 

[ziggyrivers]

I'd rather they don't spend too much time on yet another physics engine, and sacrifice both dungeon design and storytelling.

That's okay for two entries. But a third one? Ugh....

 

[ns156]

I’d genuinely be surprised if 120 Hz was supported in handheld mode. Maybe a little bit in docked mode but, even there, I’d be surprised

Yeah I was just thinking of docked mode. Wouldn't expect it in handheld mode.

 

[eye0h]

Since Furukawa is surprising me already, I'm going to go for a bigger cope: 120hz support.

So we can run 40fps titles in 120hz containers for a much smoother output than 30fps/60Hz.

If Furukawa can see that far ahead we are eating good.

I don't think I've ever played a game at locked 40fps, is it much better than 60hz panel running games at 30fps? Could you get the same effect with a 60hz VRR screen or would it need to be 120hz?

 

[Concernt]

Since Furukawa is surprising me already, I'm going to go for a bigger cope: 120hz support.

So we can run 40fps titles in 120hz containers for a much smoother output than 30fps/60Hz.

If Furukawa can see that far ahead we are eating good.

I actually hope not, for a bunch of technical reasons, but regardless of hope, Nintendo focuses on the best experience for the most people. Right now that means 4K HDR, vanishingly few people have 120hz ready sets at the moment, while a 120 screen on the device would mean a parity shift between the two modes for most people, which is undesirable, alongside increased costs, which could have been spent elsewhere (like better motion controls).

 

[redmutineer75]

Not a single thing in BotW tops doing election manipulation via mushrooms, cheese, and pulling a Watergate twice, all to get a cunty hat. I rest my case.

 

[SoldierDelta]

... I think we've hit the Zelda cycle is just getting restarted post-BotW. Game of the Year conversation when it released, re-evaluation, it was always bad and the previous Zelda game is the best work of fiction ever put to video games. I honestly should've expected this.

Who cares, TotK is excellent in every department except the story, idgaf.

 

[SuperFakerBros]

Yeah I was just thinking of docked mode. Wouldn't expect it in handheld mode.

That’d be nice but it would also break some level of parity with handheld mode so I don’t know if I’d quite expect it

 

[Dakhil]

If the chip is on 4N, could they switch to N4P at some point? It's only a little better, but it is better.

Hypothetically, yes. But considering there's no power efficiency and transistor density improvements when transitioning from TSMC's N4 process node to TSMC's N4P process node, Nintendo and Nvidia probably don't see a point in doing so. (TSMC said that TSMC's N4P process node only has 6% better performance compared to TSMC's N4 process node. And Dylan Patel said that TSMC's 4N process node is a custom variant of TSMC's N4 process node based on teardowns.)

 

[ns156]

I don't think I've ever played a game at locked 40fps, is it much better than 60hz panel running games at 30fps? Could you get the same effect with a 60hz VRR screen or would it need to be 120hz?

It's a much smoother experience by far, for a smaller cost than trying to get a game to work at 60.

I actually hope not, for a bunch of technical reasons, but regardless of hope, Nintendo focuses on the best experience for the most people. Right now that means 4K HDR, vanishingly few people have 120hz ready sets at the moment, while a 120 screen on the device would mean a parity shift between the two modes for most people, which is undesirable, alongside increased costs, which could have been spent elsewhere (like better motion controls).

I'm tired of 30hz games, especially in an OLED world. 40hz/120 is an excellent compromise that still can work if you don't have a 120hz set.

 

[eye0h]

... I think we've hit the Zelda cycle is just getting restarted post-BotW. Game of the Year conversation when it released, re-evaluation, it was always bad and the previous Zelda game is the best work of fiction ever put to video games. I honestly should've expected this.

People were saying the things I said week 1 tbf, I think a lot of people just had varied opinions. Not fair to dismiss them as just 'zelda cycle' when they're valid lol. I'll leave it at that as to not get too off topic.

 

[Concernt]

Who cares, TotK is excellent in every department except the story, idgaf.

No.

Some people just don't like it, no "cycle" required. This rhetoric doesn't help anyone. (And we're still off topic here.)

I hope Nintendo, going into the next generation, realises that more mechanics is not necessarily a better game just because they gave bstter hardware to work with.

 

[ns156]

That’d be nice but it would also break some level of parity with handheld mode so I don’t know if I’d quite expect it

You could still run 40fps games at 60hz especially if both portable and docked support VRR.

 

[Concernt]

I'm tired of 30hz games, especially in an OLED world. 40hz/120 is an excellent compromise that still can work if you don't have a 120hz set.

No, it can't. It requires a TV support a refresh rate divisible by 40hz, which vanishingly few do; which is my point.

 

[redmutineer75]

I40hz/120 is an excellent compromise that still can work if you don't have a 120hz set.

It doesn't, though. Using it on a 60 Hz monitor will lead to inconsistent frame times, which will look and feel much worse than locked 30.

 

[SoldierDelta]

People were saying the things I said week 1 tbf, I think a lot of people just had varied opinions. Not fair to dismiss them as just 'zelda cycle' when they're valid lol. I'll leave it at that as to not get too off topic.

No.

Some people just don't like it, no "cycle" required. This rhetoric doesn't help anyone. (And we're still off topic here.)

I hope Nintendo, going into the next generation, realises that more mechanics is not necessarily a better game just because they gave bstter hardware to work with.

Probably best to nip it in the bud yeah, this is a hardware thread.

I mainly linked it to the Zelda cycle because that's just usually what happens (and general reception towards TotK will probably go down over time upon further revaluation and with the new Zelda title), but I do agree that TotK is a bit of a weirder case. I do think the game is great... just not a particularly great sequel to Breath of the Wild nor does it work much on its own for the story. Gameplay wise I love it, I think the world feels fresh despite it using so much of BotW's landscapes, it fixed some of my issues with BotW even if there's a few places where it added new ones... idk just a generally weird game.

I feel like Nintendo, if and when they approach a sequel, either has the choice of either going further into weird game mechanics (which personally I'm fine with) or having an actual story (which personally is something i want). I don't really mind where they head, just as long as it's interesting and developed.

 

[eye0h]

Soooo what are the chances of VRR?

 

[Pokemaniac]

I think they'll disable hardware in compatibility mode because OG Switch games won't use it. Switch games are only designed to use 4 CPU cores (well, 3 actually, with one for the OS) so there's no point giving them 8. On the GPU side, games are expecting 2 SMs, and although I sort of suspect there might be a bit more scope to spread work across more SMs, but it's probably opening a can of worms of potential issues by trying to create a solution which works across every game. You could do it for games using OpenGL or Vulkan, but they're likely only used by games which were never pushing the graphical envelope in the first place. The simplest solution is to just use 4 CPU cores and 2 SMs and leave it at that.



I suppose it's partly that I just don't think the benefits of "turbo mode" BC would be enough to be a significant selling point for the console. Of course this is all subjective, and I'd appreciate a more stable framerate in Link's Awakening as much as anyone, but I don't think the fact that you can play some existing games at a slightly improved framerate or resolution is a big selling point for a next-gen console.

The scope of the benefits you'd be able to achieve is important here. For games which maintain consistent resolutions and framerates already (which includes many of the best-selling titles on the system) the benefit is zero. Then you've got games which don't quite maintain a solid framerate or come in just below peak resolution when using DRS, which would receive a noticeable, but not major boost. For games that have big issues, either in framerate or extremely low resolutions, I don't think Nintendo will be able to do as much with straightforward BC as many people seem to expect.

People's expectations for BC improvements come from PS5 and XBSX, and I think it's worth comparing those to Switch 2's situation. On PS5, the BC implementation uses the PS4 Pro version of the game if one exists, which means a game designed for 8 CPU cores and a 36 CU GPU. The PS5 has an identically-sized 36 CU GPU, running at as much as 2.5x the clock speeds of the PS4 Pro, and an 8 core CPU that's far more powerful than PS4P. That means that a PS4 game running in boost mode can use the full PS5 GPU and CPU with huge performance improvements on both sides. Even games without a PS4 Pro version will benefit from massively higher clock speeds on the GPU side, and a similar CPU boost.

For Xbox Series X, MS have gone with just 30% more CUs in the GPU over Xbox One X (although with a less significant clock speed boost), and a similar jump to a far more powerful 8 core CPU. So Xbox One games (with One X versions) running in BC are able to use around 77% of the Series X's GPU shader performance.

With Switch 2, Nintendo have gone pretty much the opposite direction that MS and Sony did with their consoles, and instead of a similar size GPU with much higher clock speeds, we have a far larger GPU with likely much more modest clock speed improvements. With a GPU that's 6 times as big as Switch's (and no Switch Pro to have prepped games for bigger GPUs), games running in BC mode are only going to be able to leverage 17% of the console's shader hardware, compared to 100% on the PS5 and 77% on the XBSX. As much as Switch 2's hardware is a huge leap over the original Switch, original Switch games aren't going to be able to use the majority of that.

The CPU side will be better, between big performance-per-clock improvements and moderately higher clocks, so I'd imagine most CPU-limited games should be generally ok, but I'd expect games which are limited by the GPU to get nowhere near the boost we see on PS5 and XBSX.

I honestly wouldn't be surprised if Nintendo don't even mention any performance improvements from BC, instead focussing on games which are patched to properly utilise the new hardware. That's not to say I think battery life in BC mode would be a major part of their marketing or anything, but I could definitely see their spec sheet listing, say 3-6 hours on Switch 2 titles and 8-12 on OG Switch games, which would be enough to get picked up by press and perhaps dampen some of the impact of it not having quite as much battery life as current Switch models do.

I'm not convinced Nintendo would fully turn off hardware in BC mode, at least not all the time. This is partially because some of that hardware may help to facilitate the BC mode itself (having a few extra worker threads to ensure the shader translator can keep up seems like a pretty reasonable optimization), but also because games after a certain point are going to all be well aware of what hardware they're running on, even if they're not at all native. Once games are on an SDK version with full Switch 2 support, there's no reason not to give them access to all the hardware resources that are left over after the BC overhead.

However, from an advertising perspective, I agree that the focus (with respect to existing Switch 1 games) will be squarely on titles that have received explicit patches. Being able to run untouched titles better is a nice side benefit, but not really that big of a deal most of the time.

 

[Serif]

Damn y'all, I put all the Zelda threads on ignore to avoid Tears discussion but it ends up in here anyway. Lmao.

Anyways. VRR on the Steam Deck has been an interesting use case of getting a smoother 40-50 FPS experience on a TV. On the home consoles I think it's more used for getting a smoother experience between 60 - 120 FPS? The Deck is an odd creature cause there's no optimized ports, so VRR is more of a bandaid* On the Switch 2, I would hope for games that target 60 to be locked at 60. 40 FPS modes would be nice in theory but again, I wonder about parity, and how many different profiles developers would need to test for both modes.

* Just a reminder that I totally hate the Steam Deck and am biased against Valve

 

[MP!]

Huge fan of Botw, found Totk pretty underwhelming:

Spoiler: My thoughts as to not hog people's screen space

I think part of it was Botw's shine wearing off but the lack of any meaningful cohesion between the two games story wise beyond surface level was bad, people don't remember you, there isn't much of an in game explanation to sheikah tech vanishing etc

the dungeons still being mostly meh

the flashbacks in the dungeons telling you the same thing 4 times,

the fact that memories are still the primary way to even tell you the story

the lore just being kinda ass and not fleshed out (botw by comparison left so many mysteries and years worth of theories) we see 2 important zonai in the whole game that's actually insane, the secret stones are stlil pretty much a mystery but a lame one because there's barely any exposition

the basic combat actions still being the same was a bummer - despite fuse it was still really samey, could've given more options other than flurry rush (I mean there's three other button indicators lol) why am i using the same 3 hit combo i've been doing for 7 years

sky islands were a little lacking, depths wasn't that fun to navigate - more tedium than anything (this is me being picky)

zelda's sacrifice was mid in the end because it got reverted with the power of love (lame)

secret stones turn people into dragons but we never see the three dragons we've known for 7 years as humans (lame)

overall it felt a little bit too sandboxy, I think being able to solve puzzles however made me feel like a swiss army knife. it wasn't satisfying to clear some of the puzzles with ultrahand builds. The game made me realise I like less freedom than I thought. I like knowing that I figured out the one way to clear this whatever.

edit: there also wasn't enough zelda-ey stuff, you'd think they'd throw in a shadow link for the one time or something idk. it wasn't ethereal or weird enough, felt too grounded. next game is when they get wacky. I have faith in the studio

Excited for the next entry though, hopefully it's all new, not as sandboxy - if it is I'll play it all the same, zelda is still zelda.

Absolutely

 

[carbvan]

Soooo what are the chances of VRR?

Probably little to none. They already have to develop 2 modes, TV and handheld, and try to keep those modes as close as possible. Adding in a 3rd much more niche mode, whether it be in handheld or TV, seems like a lot of effort for a mode most people won't use. This isn't even taking into account how like half of players won't be able to even use a VRR/40hz mode since a lot of people play in only 1 mode exclusively.

 

[ns156]

No, it can't. It requires a TV support a refresh rate divisible by 40hz, which vanishingly few do; which is my point.

No, it just requires a TV capable of VRR. I said it was a long shot, but there's absolutely nothing impossible about the ask.

 

[Dekuman]

Having a Switch mode , similar to Wii mode BC on Switch 2 would be sub optimal as players won't be able to take advantage of Switch 2 power and features and would essentially be stranded on an island. Since we have nothing indicating the BC will be hardware based, i don't see why they wouldn't just do the BC people are familiar with instead of the very clunky BC worked on 3DS and Wii U

 

[RumHamRigRunner]

I really cannot wait for whatever the Zelda team puts out next. I’m probably in the minority here but I enjoyed BotW and TotK equally and I appreciated everything they added to TotK. I know both games have flaws but I don’t think there’s a lot of gaming moments I can point out that top some of them from TotK as well as BotW. Both games are iconic in every way. I wouldn’t be surprised if Nintendo EPD 3 went for a different art style for the next Zelda game considering the next-gen Switch is powerful enough to support one.

 

[Dimensio]

It's been discussed ad nauseam that they and NVIDIA very much likely do.

No, It's been discussed that these improvements are almost certainly not going beyond simple resolutions and framerates increases at best, and it was pretty much confirmed by insiders with the latest BC news.

The Switch wasn't backwards compatible with Wii U. It needed exclusives to get out the door. The next platform doesn't need nearly as many and with crossgens already looking much better than they would on Switch, they'll be compelling launch titles even if they aren't exclusive.

Even if the Switch was somehow backwards compatible with the Wii U it would have still needed exclusives to be as successful as it is.
My point is that backward compatibility with the previous console library, while definitely a very important selling point is absolutely not enough on it's own for a console to sell well.
The 3DS and Wii U were both backward compatible with their very successful predecessor Wii and DS while also lacking significant exclusives in their first year, and you know how it turned out for them.

 

[ns156]

No, It's been discussed that these improvements are almost certainly not going beyond simple resolutions and framerates increases at best, and it was pretty much confirmed by insiders with the latest BC news.

No? Nate didn't say that at all. All he said was the level of enhancements allowed was unknown and still being tested. You are making up conjecture and stating it as if it were fact from these insiders. Unless I missed something new?

 

[Concernt]

it just requires a TV capable of VRR.

1. A TV with VRR that can display 40hz or 80hz is by defintion displaying a refresh rate divisible by 40hz, that's what I said.

2. That's a vanishingly small number of televisions, and the diagram of sets with 120hz and sets with VRR is practically a circle.

I never said it was "impossible", but it's definitely not particularly practical or desirable.

 

[Concernt]

On the home consoles I think it's more used for getting a smoother experience between 60 - 120 FPS?

While generally true, some games are capped at 30fps without VRR and vary from 40-100 with, like Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020 on Xbox Series X.

 

[Shareholder Chad]

... I think we've hit the Zelda cycle is just getting restarted post-BotW. Game of the Year conversation when it released, re-evaluation, it was always bad and the previous Zelda game is the best work of fiction ever put to video games. I honestly should've expected this.

Who cares, TotK is excellent in every department except the story, idgaf.

Dungeon design hasn't been good since Twilight Princess imo. The puzzles are lackluster. The gameplay innovations are some of the craziest and cool stuff I've seen in a game. Problem is, That wasn't what I personally wanted from a Zelda game. BOTW is different. It was the first to tackle a brand new design and I appreciated the game for it. TOTK doesn't get that same excuse.

I'd rather they don't spend too much time on yet another physics engine, and sacrifice both dungeon design and storytelling.

That's okay for two entries. But a third one? Ugh....

This is where I am at as well. I respect the hell out of the developers for what they did. It was impressive. The issue is, That philosophy of gameplay over everything is better suited for Mario games. Zelda is where I want my story and puzzle fix. BOTW was a great change of pace that I feel did not need to be repeated.

Its a great game but it wasn't for me.

 

[PandaAndino]

fps and resolution patches from switch 1 games in pc or even in the same switch mariko is just a 2kb text file that can be made by a fan in seconds. We must ask for them not hope for them.

 

[darthdiablo]

BOTW was great, so was TOTK. I hope they do more of “open world” LoZ goodness in the future entries.

That said, maybe we all should move on back to hardware discussion? Certain topics about BOTW/TOTK can be a bit touchy.

 

[redmutineer75]

fps and resolution patches from switch 1 games in pc or even in the same switch mariko is just a 2kb text file that can be made by a fan in seconds. We must ask for them not hope for them.

The standard of having something work in an actual console is much, much higher than in an unofficial PC emulator. If it's between keeping it at a lower framerate or introducing physics or rendering issues, any professional AAA game dev will choose the former every time.

 

[Dimensio]

Unless I missed something new?

In the Switch 2 thread the person that was cited by necro in his report about BC clarified what he meant by improvements since people kept using machine translations and he said this:

I’m seeing some confusion here due to how that report (that wasn’t written by me) is what reached the anglosphere (and mostly through machine translations), so let me clarify:

The main info I was talking about in the podcast is the existence of physical and digital backwards compatibility.

I have no details regarding any kind of automatic upscaling or whatever it is that people want out of the hardware in that sense. What I did mention in the podcast is that I’ve heard from multiple sources (three, in this case) about updating games within the backwards compatibility structure for better performance in the new hardware.

Assuming he is right "Within the backwards compatibility structure" pretty much confirms that they won't allow games to be recompiled for Switch 2 and make use of all the Switch 2 features such as DLSS and Ray-Tracing.
The updates will only increase resolution and framerates just like PS4-PS5. I asked and even him said to expect a PS4-PS5 situation.
And even if he wrong I know that it's technically possible to do that, but I sincerely doubt Nintendo will do it.

fps and resolution patches from switch 1 games in pc or even in the same switch mariko is just a 2kb text file that can be made by a fan in seconds. We must ask for them not hope for them.

Exactly my feeling on the matter, They wouldn't take a single dev no more than day of work to do. It makes sad seeing so many people saying how They would be fine with the same resolutions as switch 1, I think it would be a real tragedy to leave all those Switch games at those low resolutions forever, especially all the ones with performance issues.

 

[ns156]

In the Switch 2 thread the person that was cited by necro in his report about BC clarified what he meant by improvements since people kept using machine translations and he said this:


Assuming he is right "Within the backwards compatibility structure" pretty much confirms that they won't allow games to be recompiled for the Switch 2 and make use of the Switch 2 features such as DLSS and Ray-Tracing.
Switch 2 new feature and the updates will only increase resolution and framerates just like PS4-PS5. I asked and even him said to expect a PS4-PS5 situation.
And even if he wrong I know that it's technically possible to do that, but I sincerely doubt Nintendo will do it.


Exactly my feeling on the matter, They wouldn't take a single dev no more than day of work to do. It makes sad seeing so many people saying how They would be fine with the same resolutions as switch 1, I think it would be a real tragedy to leave all those Switch at those low resolutions forever, especially all the ones with performance issues.

Fair enough. I wasn't expecting more than FPS/resolution bumps (but things like draw distance and AA and so on are definitely within the scope of that and better be addressed too), but it would be myopic of Nintendo to not allow NVN2 conversion patches since DLSSing to 4K for a dev who wishes to do so will cost far less performance and look just as good if not better, so the battery would be happier.

 

[Serif]

The standard of having something work in an actual console is much, much higher than in an unofficial PC emulator. If it's between keeping it at lower framerate or introducing physics or rendering issues, any professional AAA game dev will choose the former every time.

The patches they're referring to run on real Switch hardware. You are right about the different standards. It is true that hacking into games can introduce instability.

But honestly, for all of these mods of popular third party Switch games running at higher res or framerate, I'm not really seeing anything broken or unstable. Presumably because these were downported from versions intended to run on stronger hardware and are already scalable. Not saying there aren't any broken results at all, but that quite a few games should fare ok.

That, and developers would have access to the actual code, unlike the modders who are doing hex edits. They're in a position to make the right sort of changes.

 

[Concernt]

That said, maybe we all should move on back to hardware discussion? Certain topics about BOTW/TOTK can be a bit touchy.

Oh gee, the Irish woman can be a bit touchy about a monarchist restoration fantasy so sexist it can't even call its fucking queen a queen? Who would have guessed!

Right, right, right... Right you are. We're in another bit of a hardware information drought right now and doing circles as we do so. I do wonder if the "4kdp" over "usb30"(3.0) will be what's used in the end, that is to say use the same speed and specification of USB connector and simply dedicate the USB 3.X lanes to video, or if they'll use a new one and enable USB 3.0 ports on the dock for external storage, while simultaneously allowing 4K60HDR output.

 

[yusufied]

In Exactly my feeling on the matter, They wouldn't take a single dev no more than day of work to do. It makes sad seeing so many people saying how They would be fine with the same resolutions as switch 1, I think it would be a real tragedy to leave all those Switch at those low resolutions forever, especially all the ones with performance issues.

It might take a dev and some QA but yeah the process shouldn’t cost a whole lot.

 

[Dimensio]

(but things like draw distance and AA and so on are definitely within the scope of that and better be addressed too)

Oh yeah, I expect draw distance to be improved too (games like Kirby and the Forgotten Land and Odyssey come to mind).
Basically everything that was supported by the Switch 1 but wasn't done because there wasn't enough power is fair game.

but it would be myopic of Nintendo to not allow NVN2 conversion patches since DLSSing to 4K for a dev who wishes to do so will cost far less performance and look just as good if not better, so the battery would be happier.

True but also adding DLSS to the rendering pipeline of game and converting it to the NVN2 api is already a lot more work compared to patches and would also require a lot of testing and QA.
In an Ideal world they would allow that, but at that point honestly they should just make a Native switch 2 version.

 

[ShadowFox08]

Yes, but I don't think all PlayStation 5 games can run on the PlayStation 6 in that scenario. In the best case scenario, Sony could approach PlayStation 5 backwards compatibility on the PlayStation 6 similarly to how Microsoft approached Xbox 360 and Xbox backwards compatibility with the Xbox One.

---

Probably never, considering the SRAM area between TSMC's N5 process node family and TSMC's N3E process node is exactly the same at 0.021 μm². And many SoCs are designed with 70% SRAM and 30% logic in mind. (TSMC's numbers are assuming a SoC's designed with 50% logic, 30% SRAM, and 20% analog in mind.) So at best, there's miniscule cost savings transitioning from TSMC's 4N process node to TSMC's N3E process node due to SRAM not scaling down, assuming Drake's fabricated using TSMC's 4N process node.

Maybe we'll see a 15-20% energy efficiency savings on the node alone? Nintendo could always use a bigger battery, and update other components of the hardware to save power draw even further like Steam Deck OLED from original Steam Deck.

For a lite model, I don't expect much. Mariko lite model was barely longer in battery time than OG switch, and that's due to the battery size iirc.

 

[PandaAndino]

The standard of having something work in an actual console is much, much higher than in an unofficial PC emulator. If it's between keeping it at a lower framerate or introducing physics or rendering issues, any professional AAA game dev will choose the former every time.

Around 10% of cases has a speed or rendering problem, but without the original code modders fix them to (xeno games or zelda games are examples of this cases) and they had day one 60fps patches for them. Btw pc emulators patches works also in original hardware because those patches are looking to change the game they are emulating from switch. If modders can, actual game developers should have it easier.

The patches they're referring to run on real Switch hardware. You are right about the different standards. It is true that hacking into games can introduce instability.

But honestly, for all of these mods of popular third party Switch games running at higher res or framerate, I'm not really seeing anything broken or unstable. Presumably because these were downported from versions intended to run on stronger hardware and are already scalable. Not saying there aren't any broken results at all, but that quite a few games should fare ok.

That, and developers would have access to the actual code, unlike the modders who are doing hex edits. They're in a position to make the right sort of changes.

Yes you are right.

 

[grobla123]

I don't think visual parity between handheld and home mode matters all that much. Heck people currently dock their OLED switch in to Non-OLED TVs.

If a game runs at full 120 (idk a port or something) in home mode, then lock it at 60 for handheld, same for 40 to 30. Some people might notice the difference. And they'd probably be happy the TV runs more smoothly rather than sad the handheld runs less smoothly. I don't see why its a big deal. Intentionally gimping one experience to not be "too good" compared to the other form is a very strange choice. A Hybrid should be reasonable good for both handheld and tv use. 120/40fps options would not be an unusual expectation for TV mode, even if Nintendo themselves may rarely use it.

Some games tie physics to frame rate, which is a pain, but they can simply lock those specific games to the same frame rate and not be a hindrance to unrelated games. Seems like a lot less hassle than existing handheld profile visual differences like L.O.D and actual asset changes/changes to effects, which may still need to happen on odd occasion.

Allowing for 120/40fps should not be expensive in and of itself, why would it even? I'd say a new console, even a hybrid should support HDMI 2.1 out the gate in 2024.

 

[BingBong43]

No, It's been discussed that these improvements are almost certainly not going beyond simple resolutions and framerates increases at best, and it was pretty much confirmed by insiders with the latest BC news.

Even if the Switch was somehow backwards compatible with the Wii U it would have still needed exclusives to be as successful as it is.
My point is that backward compatibility with the previous console library, while definitely a very important selling point is absolutely not enough on it's own for a console to sell well.
The 3DS and Wii U were both backward compatible with their very successful predecessor Wii and DS while also lacking significant exclusives in their first year, and you know how it turned out for them.

I didn't say it wouldn't have exclusives, it just doesn't need (that many) exclusives in the launch window. Far, far fewer than Switch needed at launch, that's for sure.

 

[HockeyBird]

MOM! The future hardware thread is being weird again!

 

[Individualised]

Careful bud. I was saying this a few weeks back and everyone came for my head.

But if third parties are going to come out with a slew of titles not previously possible on Switch, and Nintendo has some incredibly compelling features to make Switch games look better than ever on the new device, what's their hurry to put out AAA exclusives in the launch window?

Seems like they could easily coast on just one or two or even no actual first-party exclusives during the first several months to a year of the console's life.

It's likely to have a lifespan similar to that of the OG Switch, so wouldn't it make sense to pace the software releases similarly? So many folks are already clamoring for what amounts to a Switch Pro that having the next device essentially serve as one for as long as they can get away with just makes business sense.

The demand will already be there and getting folks buying single SKU games will ultimately just get them invested in a library that will play best on the latest hardware, regardless of when they choose to make the switch, pun intended.

I somewhat agree. This isn't what Tulpa has been saying though; that the system will be positioned as a pro system with little to no exclusives whatsoever.

 

[yusufied]

Right, right, right... Right you are. We're in another bit of a hardware information drought right now and doing circles as we do so. I do wonder if the "4kdp" over "usb30"(3.0) will be what's used in the end, that is to say use the same speed and specification of USB connector and simply dedicate the USB 3.X lanes to video, or if they'll use a new one and enable USB 3.0 ports on the dock for external storage, while simultaneously allowing 4K60HDR output.

4K HDR10 at 60 Hz would push us into the 20 Gbps territory. I'm not even going to consider upping that to 120 Hz at this point just for the sake of simplicity. We know we're getting 4K and we know Nintendo has been testing HDR.

One more thing before I speculate, USB name changes are weird. This is where we are at right now.

Keep in mind the one USB port on the Switch needs to be able to carry the video/audio signal, controller inputs over USB, and an Ethernet connection all at once. And now with the "Switch 2", assuming it will also use one USB port to carry all those same signals, I think we may need to go all the way up to a USB 4.0 port to get a bandwidth of 40 Gbps, reserve just over 20 Gbps for HDMI, and leave just a little under 20 Gbps for controller inputs and just barely enough speed over Ethernet to stream a 4K 60 YouTube video. I think it may also be flexible enough to have games push into 4K SDR at 120 Hz but that's just wishful thinking.

 

[Brofield]

With all due respect, did anything new come to light in the last ~50 pages? I'm guessing nothing too wild since it was the weekend, but I mean...Xbox's new direction was a Saturdayton just last week.

 

[My Tulpa]

i think it's highly unlikely a new 3D Mario is going to be able to run on the base Switch. they need true next-gen exclusives to sell the new system, the bigger the better.

No offense, but says who? lol

I dont think Nintendo feels they need a new 3D Mario to be larger in scope and having more mechanics going on than, say, TotK.

I also dont believe they had a great new way to play 3D Mario and they made sure Drake hardware was built to accomplish their new gameplay idea goals (assuming the new hardware has no hidden new gameplay gimmick that we don’t know about).

And most importantly, I believe Nintendo wants to maximize the reach of their software the next few years than the reach of their iterative hardware. They would want a new 3D Mario to be accessible to as many people as possible rather than gated to relatively expensive hardware. Most of the Mario movie loving crowd will want to play Mario on the Swrich they currently own. Nintendo wants the new hardware to push Switch library sales and engagement not use popular title exclusivity to push people to move to expensive new hardware as soon as possible.

 

[Estew]

Are we really back on "Switch 2 will just be a Switch Pro!" again? God, March really can't get here quickly enough.

 

[PatrykPrime]

Dunno what on earth happened besides TOTK discussion but tomorrow is Monday. The start of the anticipation regarding what kind of direct we'll get. And if there isn't one this week for some reason, God help us all.