• 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!)

I don't see how the weight of a portable has anything to do with it's assumed cost.

The psp 3000 is lightweight as heck, WAY more than a switch. And that's why even though it isn't ergonomic, it's not uncomfortable to hold for long periods of time like a switch without a grip.

One of the key issues with switch comfort is related to how heavy it is compared to the ds lite and gba. Although the ds still felt awful to hold for long periods of time due to it's cramped design and lack of grip.

Also, something feeling cheap has way more to do with design and finish. The psp at the time felt like a premium product because of how glossy plastic looks shiny and pretty and how minimalistic and well-made the buttons and overall handheld's face was.
Why are you replying to a post from January? Not saying anything about your post itself, just wondering why you're dredging it up? Might be some missing context
 
On the matter of the Indie World, it had a new branding and adjusted format, much like the Partner Showcase earlier. Obviously, it was pretty good, but of note, they probably wouldn't change branding for just a year then shift to another, meaning this is very likely the branding for Indie World next generation, too.

What does this tell us?

They're keeping the Indie World branding, of course, and not changing it again (RIP Nindies Showcase). Likely this means indies will be very much included on the next generation system, and early on, just like Switch.

The colour scheme of Indie World is consistent with the branding of the next generation. So, black, blue and red. However, now, and hear me out, it has a gradient, with the o and d in "World" fading from deep blue to neon blue and crimson red to neon red respectively. Call me crazy, but I think this may indicate something, that red and blue will continue to be used, and that it will launch with controllers of these colours, but that these colours are being refreshed, from neon variations to deep or matte variations.

If red and blue weren't consistent with the next system's branding, they could have easily nixed from from the new logo this time, rather than changing it again this time next year.
 
On the matter of the Indie World, it had a new branding and adjusted format, much like the Partner Showcase earlier. Obviously, it was pretty good, but of note, they probably wouldn't change branding for just a year then shift to another, meaning this is very likely the branding for Indie World next generation, too.

What does this tell us?

They're keeping the Indie World branding, of course, and not changing it again (RIP Nindies Showcase). Likely this means indies will be very much included on the next generation system, and early on, just like Switch.

The colour scheme of Indie World is consistent with the branding of the next generation. So, black, blue and red. However, now, and hear me out, it has a gradient, with the o and d in "World" fading from deep blue to neon blue and crimson red to neon red respectively. Call me crazy, but I think this may indicate something, that red and blue will continue to be used, and that it will launch with controllers of these colours, but that these colours are being refreshed, from neon variations to deep or matte variations.

If red and blue weren't consistent with the next system's branding, they could have easily nixed from from the new logo this time, rather than changing it again this time next year.
Ooh, joycon controllers with gradients like those Splatoon 3 joycons would be hot

The blue/red with a dark grey at the bottom
 
lol did you lose an avatar bet?
No, I just participate in the whimsy of April Fool's Day because it turned into April Fool's Month of my own volition 😋

Besides, @Suswave is hella talented; who am I to deny their art skills especially when offered so generously?
 
This seems like it would increase electricity consumption a lot which is hard for mobile hardware
I was more talking for future RTX cards, but with node stagnation, something's got to give. Assuming similar die sizes and densites, putting all of that neural silicon on would require sacrificing shader cores. That's been a thing since Volta, but the extra space from better nodes meant that shaders got an increase anyways. Now that shrinking has stopped, it's a truly zero-sum game.
 
I was more talking for future RTX cards, but with node stagnation, something's got to give. Assuming similar die sizes and densites, putting all of that neural silicon on would require sacrificing shader cores. That's been a thing since Volta, but the extra space from better nodes meant that shaders got an increase anyways. Now that shrinking has stopped, it's a truly zero-sum game.

I'm more thinking about for the Switch 3... I could see them keeping the CUDA core number the same while maybe shrinking the silicon percentage of the CUDA cores from 90% to 45% (as they may be able to do one more 2x shrink) and just giving almost all of that silicon space to the tensor cores.

Going from like a 90% CUDA, ~7% tensor, ~3% RT distribution in the likely Switch 2 chip to something like 45% CUDA, 48% tensor, 7% RT for a Switch 3 chip.
 
Last edited:
Can we talk in more laymen term? I know it isn't accurate but I am curious. I have a 50 inch TV with HDR10 and 4k. Amongst these level will they play?
  1. PS5 level 4k, 120
  2. PS5 level 4K30
  3. PS5 level 1440p 60 fps
  4. PS5 level 1540p 3p
  5. PS5 level 1080p 30 to 60 or below
  6. PS4 1080p 60
  7. PS4 1080p 30
  8. PS4 900p 60
  9. PS4 720p

How well would a switch 2 running those games on those particular on a big television? This is assuming with DLSS and all the optimization for the Switch 2?
 
Can we talk in more laymen term? I know it isn't accurate but I am curious. I have a 50 inch TV with HDR10 and 4k. Amongst these level will they play?
  1. PS5 level 4k, 120
  2. PS5 level 4K30
  3. PS5 level 1440p 60 fps
  4. PS5 level 1540p 3p
  5. PS5 level 1080p 30 to 60 or below
  6. PS4 1080p 60
  7. PS4 1080p 30
  8. PS4 900p 60
  9. PS4 720p

How well would a switch 2 running those games on those particular on a big television? This is assuming with DLSS and all the optimization for the Switch 2?
1440p30fps will be the standard for most Nintendo first party games in docked mode.(I'm not expecting 60fps)
 
Can we talk in more laymen term? I know it isn't accurate but I am curious. I have a 50 inch TV with HDR10 and 4k. Amongst these level will they play?
Little unsure what you're asking? Maybe a bit of a language barrier here. By "PS5 level, 4k 120fps" do you mean "a game where the PS5 does 4k120?"
 
Can we talk in more laymen term? I know it isn't accurate but I am curious. I have a 50 inch TV with HDR10 and 4k. Amongst these level will they play?
  1. PS5 level 4k, 120
  2. PS5 level 4K30
  3. PS5 level 1440p 60 fps
  4. PS5 level 1540p 3p
  5. PS5 level 1080p 30 to 60 or below
  6. PS4 1080p 60
  7. PS4 1080p 30
  8. PS4 900p 60
  9. PS4 720p

How well would a switch 2 running those games on those particular on a big television? This is assuming with DLSS and all the optimization for the Switch 2?
Drake can do all those things if you put in the right game. It's the wrong question to ask
 
What I don't understand is, if people know that PS5 and PS4 have different games with different resolutions and framerates, why would the same not be true of a hypothetical Switch 2? None of these consoles are going to have standardized resolutions and framerates.
 
With the recent fallout 4 NG update releasing soon, i have been wondering. How would backward compatibility or even FPS boost work on the switch 2. Since despite Xbox shortcomings, their biggest strength right now would be how good the backward compatibility is, for example a game like sonic unleash is able to play a smooth 60fps, which improves the day time stages significantly and Red dead 1 is another good example. (still 30fps, but the 4k upgrade looks good)


Like i'm no developer, but would be Switch 2 just brute force better performance or do developers need to tweak it and would DLSS implementation be hard or something seamless.

Like having a game like Mario Odyssey be 4k DLSS, sounds so weird, yet so appealing.
 
What I don't understand is, if people know that PS5 and PS4 have different games with different resolutions and framerates, why would the same not be true of a hypothetical Switch 2? None of these consoles are going to have standardized resolutions and framerates.
You're right, that's the reality, dlss intervenes so that native rendering resolutions can be dynamic, rather than there being some sort of "standard".And games of different sizes and different levels of optimization will result in different resolutions.
 
Can we talk in more laymen term? I know it isn't accurate but I am curious. I have a 50 inch TV with HDR10 and 4k. Amongst these level will they play?
I'm going to assume what you were asking was: "I have a game on PS5/PS4 that runs at this resolution and frame rate. Spitball me the resolution and frame rate of a theoretical Switch 2 port."

  • PS5 level 4k, 120
Drake: 1440p, upscaled from 1080p, 60fps

  • PS5 level 4K30
Drake: 1080p, upscaled from 720p, 30fps

  • PS5 level 1440p 60 fps
Drake 1080p, upscaled from 720p, 30fps

  • PS5 level 1440p 30
Not coming to Drake without serious cuts above and beyond resolution.
(corrected to what I assume you meant)
  • PS5 level 1080p 30 to 60 or below
Not coming to Drake
  • PS4 1080p 60
4k, upscaled from 1080p, 60fps
  • PS4 1080p 30
4k, upscaled from 1080p, 30fps. Maybe 1440p, upscaled from 720p, 60fps?
  1. PS4 900p 60
1440p upscaled from 1080p, 60

(Do these games exist? Wild)
No frame rate, so not sure where the headroom is?
How well would a switch 2 running those games on those particular on a big television? This is assuming with DLSS and all the optimization for the Switch 2?

Look, this is just WILD SPECULATION FROM TWO NUMBERS, TAKE THIS WITH ENOUGH SALT TO SCARE YOUR DOCTOR. But! I'll put my rough methodology in a spoiler tag, so you can see how much/little you buy it

For PS4, I assumed that Drake could do whatever PS4 could do, and there there was enough performance left over for a 4x upscale. That's probably about right across the board

For PS5, napkin math says that it's 4-5x as much raster perf as Drake. So I halved the resolution, halved the frame rate, and applied a light 2x DLSS upscale to cover any remaining sins. If that resulted in a game which made no sense (1440p15fps), I tweaked the numbers till they did.

This assumes a lot including:
  • Halving the frame rate is enough to smooth over any CPU differences.
  • Performance scales linearly with pixels
  • That Drake's better RT hardware allows comparable lighting and effects to stay on where Series S would collapse
  • That ultra performance mode to get to just 1080p would look so awful that it would be better to adjust settings in other ways, even if it was somehow technically possible
 
Making comparisons with resolution in mind would be difficult even when the device in hand. We don't even know clock speeds, technically. Especially for a device assumed to lean heavily on upscaling technology, where different games and developers may choose different upscaling techniques of different speeds and qualities.

I would however say that next to PS5, it's probably a case of "anything you can do, I can do... Worse" outside of RT, where it will likely pull ahead. Games of shockingly low resolution on PS5 are primarily like that not because the design or gameplay demands it, but for lack of optimisation. Developers willing to put in optimisation effort to bring a game to NG Switch are unlikely to find an unsurmountable hurdle- even the CPU's objectively poorer performance has ways around it. It's a question, in a sense, for the executives, and if they think the audience on NG Switch is big enough to make the investment to properly optimise for it.

As for expected resolutions, well, as ever, I'm optimistic, I think 4K60 will be more common than 1080p60 on Switch 1.
 
Drake can do all those things if you put in the right game. It's the wrong question to ask
Well, that's the thing. A lot of devs won't do any special optimization for the Switch 2. Which why we know the name of iron galaxy and panic hutton because they were the few who brought the "impossible port" over to the switch.

Yeah, pretty much.
Sorry for the rudimentary post. I jump on my treadmill and I kinda rush my post.

Look, this is just WILD SPECULATION FROM TWO NUMBERS, TAKE THIS WITH ENOUGH SALT TO SCARE YOUR DOCTOR. But! I'll put my rough methodology in a spoiler tag, so you can see how much/little you buy
This is great. And I get it there's nuance to this and every game won't be the same. I learned that architectural difference around the 3DS and Wii era.
Not coming to Drake
So something like FF16 would need a "switch 2" remake like dragon quest 11 S did for the Switch?
 
So I guess the reason why I ask is that I wanted to know if we do get ports, which I assume the majority will be quick, easy and largely not optimized. How will it look on a big screen? I have a less than 300 dollars 50 inch TV. I assume this will be the norm for majority of households in the US (well between 40 to 50). How well will it hold up? A majority of the big devs will want to bring last gen games, which is ok. Also, we do want current gen games. How well will it fare?

Also, if, and I mean if, the Xbox goes wayward.... what type of competition does Playstation have on the television? I mean just really Nintendo, right? Don't get me wrong. I never assumed that 4K60 would be a norm on the switch thats really 1440p for a PS5 game. Never assume it was better. Just want to understand what was the gap and how satisfying will those gaps be (in general).
 
With the recent fallout 4 NG update releasing soon, i have been wondering. How would backward compatibility or even FPS boost work on the switch 2. Since despite Xbox shortcomings, their biggest strength right now would be how good the backward compatibility is, for example a game like sonic unleash is able to play a smooth 60fps, which improves the day time stages significantly and Red dead 1 is another good example. (still 30fps, but the 4k upgrade looks good)


Like i'm no developer, but would be Switch 2 just brute force better performance or do developers need to tweak it and would DLSS implementation be hard or something seamless.

Like having a game like Mario Odyssey be 4k DLSS, sounds so weird, yet so appealing.

what MS did for a lot of the games was go back and make custom emulation. for other games, they were probably updated in some way to have enhanced capabilities when played on a better console. for switch games, that would mean games would need a flag to tell the games to use a third profile for drake to increase resolution and frame rate

So something like FF16 would need a "switch 2" remake like dragon quest 11 S did for the Switch?
probably not. unless you count stuff like The Witcher 3 the same
 
So I guess the reason why I ask is that I wanted to know if we do get ports, which I assume the majority will be quick, easy and largely not optimized. How will it look on a big screen? I have a less than 300 dollars 50 inch TV. I assume this will be the norm for majority of households in the US (well between 40 to 50). How well will it hold up? A majority of the big devs will want to bring last gen games, which is ok. Also, we do want current gen games. How well will it fare?

Also, if, and I mean if, the Xbox goes wayward.... what type of competition does Playstation have on the television? I mean just really Nintendo, right? Don't get me wrong. I never assumed that 4K60 would be a norm on the switch thats really 1440p for a PS5 game. Never assume it was better. Just want to understand what was the gap and how satisfying will those gaps be (in general).
300 dollars?I'm shocked at the prices in the US, in China a 50"+ Sony/Samsung TV starts at 5999 RMB ($800+)
 
So I guess the reason why I ask is that I wanted to know if we do get ports, which I assume the majority will be quick, easy and largely not optimized. How will it look on a big screen? I have a less than 300 dollars 50 inch TV. I assume this will be the norm for majority of households in the US (well between 40 to 50). How well will it hold up? A majority of the big devs will want to bring last gen games, which is ok. Also, we do want current gen games. How well will it fare?

Also, if, and I mean if, the Xbox goes wayward.... what type of competition does Playstation have on the television? I mean just really Nintendo, right? Don't get me wrong. I never assumed that 4K60 would be a norm on the switch thats really 1440p for a PS5 game. Never assume it was better. Just want to understand what was the gap and how satisfying will those gaps be (in general).
Xbox has been explicit that they aren't leaving anytime soon, given they have at minium one additional generation planned and in development, and a platform tends to be supported by software for a minimum of ten years, we're looking as Xbox hanging around until nearly 2040 at minimum. In the medium term they "aren't going anywhere", and if I'm not mistaken they used those exact words to describe their position in the market. Xbox may be small but it's easy to port to from PS5 or PC and it still makes Microsoft money, that's the important part.

We can't know everything about how Nintendo's hardware will scale relative to PlayStation, but in terms of handheld mode NG Switch next to the base PS5, we're looking at about an 8X difference in raw power. That's a lot- but it also isn't unsurmountable. Where PS5 goes 4K, NG Switch (in handheld mode), goes 900p before upscaling, without other optimisations. Not a bad position to be in.

All of this is pretty speculative but importantly, also pretty meaningless.

The market will change and the target platforms for new games will depend on the scale and market, and those are constantly in flux. We can't really say for sure what consoles will or won't get what, there are still examples of games coming to Xbox but not PlayStation despite the difference in platform size, there's still tens of millions of players on the Xbox Network, and last I saw the active playerbase of the big three is actually pretty similar, with Xbox having fewer consoles but more active users as a proportion of owners. The console market is changing drastically and will continue to do so, absolutely, but that isn't doom, and that isn't good news.

As for what I THINK will come to NG Switch? Everything. Basically everything. Every third party game that the developers can get a version made in time for launch, or even months or a year later. If it's not exclusive, if it isn't crushing itself to 240p on Xbox Series S with no optimisations possible beyond that, then it can come, and because Nintendo's market position is likely to remain strong, it likely will come. It's all about executive decisions, and they want money, and that means sales and users, and that means the biggest customer base they can find. Even if they have to sacrifice quality to do so, like Mortal Kombat.
 
On the matter of the Indie World, it had a new branding and adjusted format, much like the Partner Showcase earlier. Obviously, it was pretty good, but of note, they probably wouldn't change branding for just a year then shift to another, meaning this is very likely the branding for Indie World next generation, too.

What does this tell us?

They're keeping the Indie World branding, of course, and not changing it again (RIP Nindies Showcase). Likely this means indies will be very much included on the next generation system, and early on, just like Switch.

The colour scheme of Indie World is consistent with the branding of the next generation. So, black, blue and red. However, now, and hear me out, it has a gradient, with the o and d in "World" fading from deep blue to neon blue and crimson red to neon red respectively. Call me crazy, but I think this may indicate something, that red and blue will continue to be used, and that it will launch with controllers of these colours, but that these colours are being refreshed, from neon variations to deep or matte variations.

If red and blue weren't consistent with the next system's branding, they could have easily nixed from from the new logo this time, rather than changing it again this time next year.
Possibly meaning that Switch 2 will launch with a Red/Blue SKU like the OG Switch?
 
A dark gray with SNES colored buttons could be an interestring call back!
Consider, black controller body with grey circles around the two button diamonds. Now THAT would be distinctive, and contribute to visual clarity. Especially if one of the launch options is Blue/Red and the face buttons are colourful.
 
300 dollars?I'm shocked at the prices in the US, in China a 50"+ Sony/Samsung TV starts at 5999 RMB ($800+)
Well, to make things cheap, all tvs are smart tvs? Why? Wouldn't that make it more expensive you say? Actually, no, TV manufacturers makes deals with Hollywood and subscriptions services to run ads on the TV. I have a Vizio and the first things that pop ups are advertising for various platforms.
there's still tens of millions of players on the Xbox Network
And I get that. I do, but isn't 20 a year or 50 a year more enticing than 80 or 120 a year (assuming Nintendo ramps up their services) we already have rumors of devs questioning if it is worth porting to the Xbox now. Which lead me to the next point.

As for what I THINK will come to NG Switch? Everything. Basically everything. Every third party game that the developers can get a version made in time for launch, or even months or a year later. If it's not exclusive, if it isn't crushing itself to 240p on Xbox Series S with no optimisations possible beyond that, then it can come, and because Nintendo's market position is likely to remain strong
I agree, and this is where my point comes in. If the Switch can get everything and it is "Just like" (of course it isnt accurate) the series S but more Japanese support and a cheaper online, and you can't are anywhere on the go. What's the point? I am not saying they will cut off the Xbox network nor will Xbox stop putting first party games. I am just thinking the paradigm of "Xbox vs Playstation", which has been a thing for the last 23 years will revert back to "Nintendo vs Sony".

And the paradigm I mean is that when the media speaks they ignore Nintendo, no one matter how successful they are or not.
 
I took ate a whole bag of salt right now and I'm willing to say that doesn't sound too far off from a Series S , which I'm perfectly with for the games I play.

Edit:whoops, I meant to reply to the oldPuck post about resolutions and fps on drake.
No, you're fine. Your reply made me feel special.
 
And the paradigm I mean is that when the media speaks they ignore Nintendo, no one matter how successful they are or not.
What media are you watching or listening to?

Nintendo genuinely isn't comparable to the other consoles right now, they don't exist in the high performance home console market, in those comparison, between consoles getting all the third party releases, it's not relevant.

Outside of those discussions it seems to be the DEFAULT. It used to be a movie, a TV show, or a stock photo would use a Wii Remote, then for a time it was a DualShock 4, and now... It's a Joy-Con. If someone is buying a console and only picking up ONE console, Nintendo Switch is a hybrid that fits any lifestyle or situation and has by far the most compelling first party exclusives. Nintendo Switch has been hugely popular and continues to be. It's consistently outselling the much younger PS5 in Japan and of the current consoles on sale, PS5, Xbox Series X|S and it, it has the biggest active userbase.
 
Well, that's the thing. A lot of devs won't do any special optimization for the Switch 2. Which why we know the name of iron galaxy and panic hutton because they were the few who brought the "impossible port" over to the switch.


Sorry for the rudimentary post. I jump on my treadmill and I kinda rush my post.


This is great. And I get it there's nuance to this and every game won't be the same. I learned that architectural difference around the 3DS and Wii era.

So something like FF16 would need a "switch 2" remake like dragon quest 11 S did for the Switch?
The DQXIS thing is a confusion. On switch it is not a version made from scratch, when the producers said that they were referring to the new extra content. The game is a port with a lot of extra content
 
What media are you watching or listening to?
Oh come on it is the gaming media. There are times you would have a game that's out for all platform and IGN would put out for PS, Xbox, and PC. Completely ignoring Nintendo. This mainly happened around the Wii and Wii U era. Sometimes the early years of the switch.
he DQXIS thing is a confusion. On switch it is not a version made from scratch, when the producers said that they were referring to the new extra content. The game is a port with a lot of extra content
They put in a lot of work more than usual for a good switch port. Cut down on some of the Geometry. Reduce the texture resolution that is not ugly. They done a lot to get it to not only fit the Switch but look amazing.
Nintendo genuinely isn't comparable to the other consoles right now, they don't exist in the high performance home console market, in those comparison, between consoles getting all the third party releases, it's not relevant
And that's what I am saying just because it isn't 4K doesn't mean they should get ignored.
 
Oh come on it is the gaming media. There are times you would have a game that's out for all platform and IGN would put out for PS, Xbox, and PC. Completely ignoring Nintendo. This mainly happened around the Wii and Wii U era. Sometimes the early years of the switch.

They put in a lot of work more than usual for a good switch port. Cut down on some of the Geometry. Reduce the texture resolution that is not ugly. They done a lot to get it to not only fit the Switch but look amazing.

And that's what I am saying just because it isn't 4K doesn't mean they should get ignored.
What you mention is still something that is done with good PS4/other consoles to Switch ports. That was also done with MK11, to give another example. It doesn't make it a game made from 0, they are still ports that take a higher version as a base version.

The thing is that in the interview the port itself was never talked about in that context, they talked about the effort dedicated to the new content (which is a lot of extra new content)
 
Okay lemme ask the real question here: are we getting a Bayonetta 3 switch 2 patch? Because that game looks rough. I love it but cmon, they only had 1 target hardware.

Anyway, the actual real question is, assuming it happens, which games do you think Nintendo will go back and patch besides the usual Zelda TOTK? Only 10m+ sellers or games that need it the most like Bayo3?
 
I think that's a regular port. They didn't really do the texture but just reduce the quality.
In MK11 they reduced the geometry and reduced and redone textures so that they fit well in the port. It's something that most good ports to Switch do.

DQXIS is a great port, but it is not a remake. Of course, between all the extra content and the 2D version, they worked a lot on new content and put a lot of effort into it (and that's what they were referring to in the interview, although word of mouth later created confusion regarding the matter)

Luckily, on Switch 2 it is probably easier to port without having to resort to tweaks or smart changes like the good ports to Switch.
 
Last edited:
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