• 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.

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

Reader mode
Goodtwin said:
A Direct in the near future is basically a lock, and it's also a deadline for announcing new hardware. If the next Direct comes and goes with no new hardware announcement, then first half 2023 is off the table.
Click to expand...
To play devil's advocate, that's not always necessarily the case. One example is that Nintendo did a Nintendo 3DS Nintendo Direct on 1 September 2016 (here, here, and here) before revealing the Nintendo Switch on 20 October 2016.
 
Skittzo said:
Even before that actually. Nintendo has released new hardware every two years for like, multiple decades I think.
Click to expand...
I definitely think it would be odd for them to skip 2023.

It's also obvious, to me, that the most likely candidate for this device is the Drake switch, whatever it ends up being.
 
ILikeFeet said:
my expectations for Hogwarts is that there will be a drake version whenever drake launches, but it's just a 4K/60fps version of the switch game
Click to expand...
That's my expectation for the entire first year of Drake unless the game has RT.

I think I've said many times before, I'm confident this thing is coming Soon™️, but my expectations for power are pretty modest. Honestly I'd be more than happy with games running at a better resolution and framerate with few other changes, so many Nintendo games already look great, like Animal Crossing New Horizons, ARMS, Smash Bros., etc., and other than the resolution, Witcher 3 on Switch still looks great.
 
If a game is cross-gen, then there is no reason to hold the basic Switch release for Drake. If a game is exclusive to Drake, there is no reason to announce the "Switch" port for hardware that isn't announced.

I don't think we can infer anything about hardware release timing from software release timing.
 
Concernt said:
That's my expectation for the entire first year of Drake unless the game has RT.

I think I've said many times before, I'm confident this thing is coming Soon™️, but my expectations for power are pretty modest. Honestly I'd be more than happy with games running at a better resolution and framerate with few other changes, so many Nintendo games already look great, like Animal Crossing New Horizons, ARMS, Smash Bros., etc., and other than the resolution, Witcher 3 on Switch still looks great.
Click to expand...
that's too modest. you'd leave a lot of power on tap

EDIT: why is the snow yellow? like a very cold golden shower
 
oldpuck said:
If a game is cross-gen, then there is no reason to hold the basic Switch release for Drake. If a game is exclusive to Drake, there is no reason to announce the "Switch" port for hardware that isn't announced.

I don't think we can infer anything about hardware release timing from software release timing.
Click to expand...
They could hold back a cross gen release so that it can be marketed with the Drake version. That would probably be better marketing overall.

ILikeFeet said:
that's too modest. you'd leave a lot of power on tap

EDIT: why is the snow yellow? like a very cold golden shower
Click to expand...
You got the shiny snow!
 
Skittzo said:
They could hold back a cross gen release so that it can be marketed with the Drake version. That would probably be better marketing overall.
Click to expand...
Maybe? My guess is it could go one of two ways
  1. You release a Switch game, day and date with everything else
  2. People who want to buy the game do so on their platform of choice
  3. Drake is announced, a small library of games have patched
  4. Your game is on the list, it gets a second, Nintendo funded marketing push
  5. People who didn't initially buy your game now buy it because it is one of the few current ways to enjoy the new hardware
Versus
  1. You hold the Switch release for Drake
  2. Some of your possible Switch sales go to other platforms
  3. Drake is announced along with your game coming to both version so the console
  4. Some fans continue to delay purchasing till they can get new hardware
  5. But some folks who bought it for another platform double dip
There is also likely some money-hatting going on which might change the economics.

I think it's enough of a "maybe?" that we can't get any smells off of a single game's release date. Switch ports tend to be slightly delayed across the board. My ears would prick up if a bunch of Switch ports all were landing in the same month, though
 
oldpuck said:
Maybe? My guess is it could go one of two ways
  1. You release a Switch game, day and date with everything else
  2. People who want to buy the game do so on their platform of choice
  3. Drake is announced, a small library of games have patched
  4. Your game is on the list, it gets a second, Nintendo funded marketing push
  5. People who didn't initially buy your game now buy it because it is one of the few current ways to enjoy the new hardware
Versus
  1. You hold the Switch release for Drake
  2. Some of your possible Switch sales go to other platforms
  3. Drake is announced along with your game coming to both version so the console
  4. Some fans continue to delay purchasing till they can get new hardware
  5. But some folks who bought it for another platform double dip
There is also likely some money-hatting going on which might change the economics.

I think it's enough of a "maybe?" that we can't get any smells off of a single game's release date. Switch ports tend to be slightly delayed across the board. My ears would prick up if a bunch of Switch ports all were landing in the same month, though
Click to expand...
Hehe....he... I read money hating ...hehe...


Yeah, both plausible cases.
 
Last edited:
Operation Devastating Repulsive Anticipatory Knockoff Electronic (D.R.A.K.E.) was a psy-op commissioned by Nintendo IRD in order to examine the effects of collectively gaslighting a population.

False information was 'leaked' that indicated new Nintendo Switch hardware was releasing, despite Nintendo making official moves to the contrary, such as rereleasing limited edition Switch hardware.

In the end, the operation was a great success, allowing Nintendo to exist in a 'rent free' sense so to speak within these fans' hearts and minds for years upon years.

It concluded in 2027 upon the release of the New Nintendo Gameboy Micro Pro OLED (2nd Generation).
 
neon said:
Operation Devastating Repulsive Anticipatory Knockoff Electronic (D.R.A.K.E.) was a psy-op commissioned by Nintendo IRD in order to examine the effects of collectively gaslighting a population.

False information was 'leaked' that indicated new Nintendo Switch hardware was releasing, despite Nintendo making official moves to the contrary, such as rereleasing limited edition Switch hardware.

In the end, the operation was a great success, allowing Nintendo to exist in a 'rent free' sense so to speak within these fans' hearts and minds for years upon years.

It concluded in 2027 upon the release of the New Nintendo Gameboy Micro Pro OLED (2nd Generation).
Click to expand...
.... A gba pocket eith an 4 inch oled and 20-30 gba games for 100€ would be... Who cares for a switch when we have that!
 
0
JoshuaJSlone said:
"Software Development Kit" being referred to as a dev kit seems valid to me.
Click to expand...
Devkit means development hardware. Nvidia released Orin devkits, Microsoft is releasing a Windows ARM devkit; even Nintendo's SDK documentation uses the term to refer to SDEV and EDEV hardware. The "S" in SDK is pretty important to differentiate it.
 
0
JoshuaJSlone said:
"Software Development Kit" being referred to as a dev kit seems valid to me.
Click to expand...
I believe the term "devkit" is generally used to refer to the actual hardware that's used to develop games for consoles. It's needed because when console developers write code, they build it on a different machine than the actual console, like a Windows PC for example. If they build the game on their Windows PC, they can't run it on that same PC since it was built for a completely different architecture (the console). So if they want to run their game, they need a devkit, which is similar to the console hardware, but modified to allow for development. Devkits are not really needed to develop games for PCs because the hardware the game is built on and the hardware it will run on is the same (a Windows PC for example).

A software development kit is purely software. It's a collection of software tools (compiler, debugger, different libraries to interact with the hardware, etc) to develop software for a specific platform. There is a Windows SDK to make software for Windows for instance.
 
Would Nintendo pay third parties to release patches for Drake Switch for some of the older, bigger ports on the system? Like Witcher 3, No Man’s Sky and Skyrim?

I would expect games releasing this year (Hogwarts, Midnight Suns) would have Drake patches if it’s coming within the year.
 
ITSMILNER said:
Would Nintendo pay third parties to release patches for Drake Switch for some of the older, bigger ports on the system? Like Witcher 3, No Man’s Sky and Skyrim?

I would expect games releasing this year (Hogwarts, Midnight Suns) would have Drake patches if it’s coming within the year.
Click to expand...
Highly doubt it.
 
0
Arrtyfact said:
I believe the term "devkit" is generally used to refer to the actual hardware that's used to develop games for consoles. It's needed because when console developers write code, they build it on a different machine than the actual console, like a Windows PC for example. If they build the game on their Windows PC, they can't run it on that same PC since it was built for a completely different architecture (the console). So if they want to run their game, they need a devkit, which is similar to the console hardware, but modified to allow for development. Devkits are not really needed to develop games for PCs because the hardware the game is built on and the hardware it will run on is the same (a Windows PC for example).

A software development kit is purely software. It's a collection of software tools (compiler, debugger, different libraries to interact with the hardware, etc) to develop software for a specific platform. There is a Windows SDK to make software for Windows for instance.
Click to expand...
This isn't completely the case anymore. Games can be made, ran, and tested on windows even if they're exclusive to a system like the Switch.

In any case, I still assume Orin served as initial dev kits until Drake was ready

ITSMILNER said:
Would Nintendo pay third parties to release patches for Drake Switch for some of the older, bigger ports on the system? Like Witcher 3, No Man’s Sky and Skyrim?

I would expect games releasing this year (Hogwarts, Midnight Suns) would have Drake patches if it’s coming within the year.
Click to expand...
Nah. Nintendo ain't paying for shit unless they get something out of it directly like a cut of the revenue
 
ITSMILNER said:
Would Nintendo pay third parties to release patches for Drake Switch for some of the older, bigger ports on the system? Like Witcher 3, No Man’s Sky and Skyrim?

I would expect games releasing this year (Hogwarts, Midnight Suns) would have Drake patches if it’s coming within the year.
Click to expand...
No, but they can offer promotion of those patches in drake to third parties interested in making them.

In addition to that for games that are coming out close to Drake (eg Star Wars Hunters, Marvel Midnight Suns, Kingdom Come Deliverance) or that are receiving post-launch support (eg Dead by daylight, Fortnite, Minecraft, MHRise, No Mans Sky) it is very likely to have an upgrade for Drake.
 
0
SDK is a standard industry term of art, as is "devkit". No developer is going to confuse the two, or use one to refer to the other, any more than a gamer would use "switch" and "switch game" interchangeably. However, I can easily see non-technical press making that confusion.
 
0
ILikeFeet said:
This isn't completely the case anymore. Games can be made, ran, and tested on windows even if they're exclusive to a system like the Switch.
Click to expand...
Yeah, but if the Switch game runs natively on Windows then that version of the game is no longer the Switch version, it's the Windows version. It has been compiled to x86-64 instead of ARM. If you want to properly run and test the actual Switch version, you would need a Switch devkit, so it runs on the true hardware. Otherwise you're bound to find things not working in the final released product.
 
Devkits can be any variety of hardware. a Kit in late 2020 is likely going to be closer to a random grouping of hardware that can simulate a general expectation of hardware.
 
I honestly hope that some devs are , even if it doesn't really benefit them, add an easy patch.
say: increase LoD/Draw Distance, resolution and maybe framerate, and if its stable, test it and release it. no optimizing, no big change in assets... just increasing the targets, seeing if it runs stable, and if it does, great.

Main reason: it would be an "easy" way to get stuff like nier Automata more on par with the other versions. In regards to nier, they could do that to promote a replicant port (from what i remember nier sold well on switch).
Witcher 3? They made a pro patch, a next gen patch... i don't care for the game, but it could run better.

Doom 2016? maybe being able to render it in 60 and stable 720+ would be an option.
the game runs fine, ans is build with an engine that's great in scaling.

Many of those changes should not be to work intensive (except retesting and reevaluating),
but could be used for a promotional boost to push sales on the new switch? get them back into peoples mind?
 
Aether said:
I honestly hope that some devs are , even if it doesn't really benefit them, add an easy patch.
say: increase LoD/Draw Distance, resolution and maybe framerate, and if its stable, test it and release it. no optimizing, no big change in assets... just increasing the targets, seeing if it runs stable, and if it does, great.

Main reason: it would be an "easy" way to get stuff like nier Automata more on par with the other versions. In regards to nier, they could do that to promote a replicant port (from what i remember nier sold well on switch).
Witcher 3? They made a pro patch, a next gen patch... i don't care for the game, but it could run better.

Doom 2016? maybe being able to render it in 60 and stable 720+ would be an option.
the game runs fine, ans is build with an engine that's great in scaling.

Many of those changes should not be to work intensive (except retesting and reevaluating),
but could be used for a promotional boost to push sales on the new switch? get them back into peoples mind?
Click to expand...
The reason I am optimistic that this will happen, is that homebrew have already done most of those things you mention on moded Mariko units. In a lot of cases it's as simple as editing values in the Switch equivalent of a .ini file.
 
Hermii said:
The reason I am optimistic that this will happen, is that homebrew have already done most of those things you mention on moded Mariko units. In a lot of cases it's as simple as editing values in the Switch equivalent of a .ini file.
Click to expand...
Since the engines are mostly the same as on pc and other platforms that makes sense, but there is a simple problem:
while there is a chance since its just an init edit... it also meants finting time in the schedule of the porting studio
(in most cases it was not in house, and they will have moved on to the next project), then you need to re validate everything,
add the differentiation between SKUs and when to use what init, and then testing the game on the base switch and switch 2 before releasing the patch.

In other words: a probably 1 day change that would cost probably thousands of dollars and would need to bring back at least that much.
I could see it work, if porting studios still have the right setup configured in their CI to do the change fast, and the ambition is there to make it work.
 
Raccoon said:
why? aren't you cognizant of your unyielding march toward death?
Click to expand...
There's enough games planned for the current Switch to keep me busy, and I have other hobbies taking my time so I'm not exactly in a rush. Also, I'd be a bit frustrated if I had to replay Zelda just three months after it releases because Nintendo decided to release a new console. That's for me.

As for Nintendo, they sell more than enough console to coast through 2023 and give the current Switch a last holiday, and 2024 feels like a sweet spot, as it always did.
Alongside a new Mario, and with the Zelda DLC and a new, groundbreaking exclusive Mario Kart within the next 6 months. Because considering Mario Kart sales profile, it seems wise to release it early in the life of a new console. And this will help convincing everyone and their dog that it's time to transition to the new machine.
 
Aether said:
Since the engines are mostly the same as on pc and other platforms that makes sense, but there is a simple problem:
while there is a chance since its just an init edit... it also meants finting time in the schedule of the porting studio
(in most cases it was not in house, and they will have moved on to the next project), then you need to re validate everything,
add the differentiation between SKUs and when to use what init, and then testing the game on the base switch and switch 2 before releasing the patch.

In other words: a probably 1 day change that would cost probably thousands of dollars and would need to bring back at least that much.
I could see it work, if porting studios still have the right setup configured in their CI to do the change fast, and the ambition is there to make it work.
Click to expand...
That's a good point. Modders can accept occasional bugs and/or crashes. For retail software everything needs to be thoroughly tested and potential bugs need to be ironed out.
 
0
antonz said:
Devkits can be any variety of hardware. a Kit in late 2020 is likely going to be closer to a random grouping of hardware that can simulate a general expectation of hardware.
Click to expand...
That's another thing I speculated about previously, but have changed my mind on. There's no point to such hardware anymore. In the past, devkits were the only way to run, say, a Nintendo DS game during development. Now that the NintendoSDK exists and supports running NX games/libraries on Windows, that's good enough for all the early development that an ad-hoc or Orin devkit would enable. A final devkit is important because you need to run in the actual environment and on the actual specs of the final hardware, but an ad-hoc devkit doesn't give you either of those. Orin running L4T is useful for Nvidia to develop drivers, but it doesn't offer significant advantages to game developers, and third parties using either that or an even earlier ad-hoc box just adds extra expense and complexity.

As I said before, the NintendoSDK doesn't run on Linux, so it's unclear how a devkit like that could have been made to work even if it was a good idea. I think it's entirely believable that only SDKs had been distributed prior to Drake being sampled. As the latter seems to have happened sometime last year, that's enough time for third parties to move development to real hardware ahead of a possible 2023 release. For comparison, Nintendo's original plan for the Switch was to distribute devkits in November 2015 and launch the console pretty much one year later. Then the devkits were pushed back a bit, and due to the release date being delayed to March 2017, third parties ultimately had a year and a couple months' time with devkits before launch. Nintendo doesn't have to follow that same timeline again, but it gives you an idea of the kind of schedule that's possible.

Whether SDKs really were distributed all the way back in late 2020 is still questionable to me. If there was indeed some kind of delay, or "evolution" of hardware in how it was being produced or positioned, or whatever, that could explain why the process started that early. Or it could just be that Nintendo was fine with a longer SDK-only period this time, with the Windows SDK being mature and much easier for Nvidia to start adding new features to without waiting for HOS or hardware.
 
Modders have also found a way to run games in docked mode while switch is in portable mode. If the next Switch is more efficient it would be great if there was a setting to allow Switch 1 game to run in docked mode. This way you would get higher resolution in many cases higher than the display itself to give super sampling. Then some games in docked mode have more features and better graphics. This would be good as then developers don't require to do any work for updated games on Switch 2. Worse case scenario Switch 1 games would be brute forced to run in more stable frame rates as well as better resolution for games that have variable resolution coded. This is what PS5 and Series SX does.
 
kalosmani said:
Modders have also found a way to run games in docked mode while switch is in portable mode. If the next Switch is more efficient it would be great if there was a setting to allow Switch 1 game to run in docked mode. This way you would get higher resolution in many cases higher than the display itself to give super sampling. Then some games in docked mode have more features and better graphics. This would be good as then developers don't require to do any work for updated games on Switch 2. Worse case scenario Switch 1 games would be brute forced to run in more stable frame rates as well as better resolution for games that have variable resolution coded. This is what PS5 and Series SX does.
Click to expand...
Imo it's most likely that unpatched games will only run in docked mode on Drake. With a this powerful soc, it doesn't make sense to bother with portable mode. It will also half the amount of Q&A testing needed for BC.
 
NateDrake said:
Next week's episode will be about Microsoft. The Switch topic will come when it is ready but it's not at that point yet. Waiting to get the okay to share certain bits of information.
Click to expand...
i give you the okay. (you did not mention from whom =P) Good to see you still around. :coffee:

LiC said:
That's another thing I speculated about previously, but have changed my mind on. There's no point to such hardware anymore. In the past, devkits were the only way to run, say, a Nintendo DS game during development. Now that the NintendoSDK exists and supports running NX games/libraries on Windows, that's good enough for all the early development that an ad-hoc or Orin devkit would enable. A final devkit is important because you need to run in the actual environment and on the actual specs of the final hardware, but an ad-hoc devkit doesn't give you either of those. Orin running L4T is useful for Nvidia to develop drivers, but it doesn't offer significant advantages to game developers, and third parties using either that or an even earlier ad-hoc box just adds extra expense and complexity.

As I said before, the NintendoSDK doesn't run on Linux, so it's unclear how a devkit like that could have been made to work even if it was a good idea. I think it's entirely believable that only SDKs had been distributed prior to Drake being sampled. As the latter seems to have happened sometime last year, that's enough time for third parties to move development to real hardware ahead of a possible 2023 release. For comparison, Nintendo's original plan for the Switch was to distribute devkits in November 2015 and launch the console pretty much one year later. Then the devkits were pushed back a bit, and due to the release date being delayed to March 2017, third parties ultimately had a year and a couple months' time with devkits before launch. Nintendo doesn't have to follow that same timeline again, but it gives you an idea of the kind of schedule that's possible.

Whether SDKs really were distributed all the way back in late 2020 is still questionable to me. If there was indeed some kind of delay, or "evolution" of hardware in how it was being produced or positioned, or whatever, that could explain why the process started that early. Or it could just be that Nintendo was fine with a longer SDK-only period this time, with the Windows SDK being mature and much easier for Nvidia to start adding new features to without waiting for HOS or hardware.
Click to expand...
Im still confused how the nintendo SDK did not leak somehow.
I just find it really unrealistic that devs OR investigators that are reporting for that topic at bloomberg would mix up hardware and software in that way.
did they get 10 sentences that where like 4 words and non of them mentioned if its hardware or software? no asking for clarification?
DevKit is generally understood as hardware.

kalosmani said:
Modders have also found a way to run games in docked mode while switch is in portable mode. If the next Switch is more efficient it would be great if there was a setting to allow Switch 1 game to run in docked mode. This way you would get higher resolution in many cases higher than the display itself to give super sampling. Then some games in docked mode have more features and better graphics. This would be good as then developers don't require to do any work for updated games on Switch 2. Worse case scenario Switch 1 games would be brute forced to run in more stable frame rates as well as better resolution for games that have variable resolution coded. This is what PS5 and Series SX does.
Click to expand...

Hermii said:
Imo it's most likely that unpatched games will only run in docked mode on Drake. With a this powerful soc, it doesn't make sense to bother with portable mode. It will also half the amount of Q&A testing needed for BC.
Click to expand...

ironically some games run better in portable mode, and if the switch would be 720 in portable and >720 in docked, then running games in docked mode would maybe make them run generally worse in docked (depending on how the backwards compatibility is implemented, and if it tries to run games at the original clocks)
 
Aether said:
ironically some games run better in portable mode, and if the switch would be 720 in portable and >720 in docked, then running games in docked mode would maybe make them run generally worse in docked (depending on how the backwards compatibility is implemented, and if it tries to run games at the original clocks)
Click to expand...
The thing is, even if it runs games at original clocks it's a lot more powerful. 4 a78 cores running at 1ghz won't have any problem maxing out every switch game. Likewise if they disable everything but 2SM running switch clocks, Ampere is much more efficient than Maxwell.
 
Hermii said:
The thing is, even if it runs games at original clocks it's a lot more powerful. 4 a78 cores running at 1ghz won't have any problem maxing out every switch game. Likewise if they disable everything but 2SM running switch clocks, Ampere is much more efficient than Maxwell.
Click to expand...
oh, i hope (and expect) it to be so. i just have seen to many "but its stronger" cases where some wierd bugs lead to software behaving slightly different.
Heck, Sony said they want to support 99% of games, because they know there will always be edge cases.
(managing expectations and all)
All im saying is, having a menu option (put it in the quick menu like sound and stuff, or have it hidden till the user wants it there),
that lets us switch between portable and docked profile for original games.
i know its a "pro" option and not for the masses.

(Also: let me change whats in the quick settings menu. more options are good, and stuff like changingfilters should be a fast option in that menu)
 
0
Skittzo said:
Feels like the FTC is just stalling hoping for one of the EU regulators to block it.
Click to expand...
It's largely that. CMA looks like they'll approve it and FTC won't have a valid reason to block on its own. The fact they are removing Nintendo from the discussions and trying to reshape the case to suit their agenda is becoming too transparent.
 
Dakhil said:
To play devil's advocate, that's not always necessarily the case. One example is that Nintendo did a Nintendo 3DS Nintendo Direct on 1 September 2016 (here, here, and here) before revealing the Nintendo Switch on 20 October 2016.
Click to expand...
thats right , but also what he said makes sense , if nintendo didn't announced the new switch before February the chance to be released with Zelda will be very small cause there is not enough time between announcing it and release it , and it makes very little to no sense for any hardware to be available few months after the Zelda ...
 
0
NateDrake said:
The MS marketing cycle will begin soon.
Click to expand...
Yeah this seems pretty likely considering their surprising no-show at TGA. People were fooling themselves that MS would just remain quiet when this year feels like a put up or shut up year for them. They were quiet at TGA for a good reason.

Admittedly, I'm not huge on Microsoft's IPs but I do have a Series X and Game Pass has been a revelation for me.
 
Reader mode
You must log in or register to reply here.
Please read this staff post before posting.

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


Back
Top Bottom