• 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| (New Staff Post, Please read)

Reader mode
SiG said:
So 4N/5nm is on the table?
Click to expand...
Ever since the Nvidia leaks revealed the size of the chip, people here have questioned if this makes sense on 8nm.

Edit: there's no solid evidence for either node. What speaks for 8nm is the fact that it's the node of almost every other ampere device, including Orin. Insiders have also heard its 8nm, however that info is old now and proven not to be that reliable,

What speaks for 5nm is the sheer size of the soc, and what we know of amperes power characteristics on 8nm.
 
Hermii said:
Ever since the Nvidia leaks revealed the size of the chip, people here have questioned if this makes sense on 8nm.

Edit: there's no solid evidence for either node. What speaks for 8nm is the fact that it's the node of almost every other ampere device, including Orin. Insiders have also heard its 8nm, however that info is old now and proven not to be that reliable,

What speaks for 5nm is the sheer size of the soc, and what we know of amperes power characteristics on 8nm.
Click to expand...
While perhaps circumstantial evidence, it is curious to me that T239 appears to have gone through validation, production testing and preparation, taping out and finalisation, all on the same timeline as Ada Lovelace cards, all on 4N.

This sort of implies to me, though I could be dead wrong, that even if it isn't Ada Lovelace architecturally, it was treated like part of the Ada family for development purposes and seemingly production. (Fairly accurate Nvidia leaker Kopite7Kimi in fact said it was Ada, but we know now it isn't wholly)

It also has a CUDA version above Ampere, but below Lovelace.

This could all be coincidental but I feel like the evidence is slightly stronger for 4N than 8nm. Personally because of the above, I believe 4N is far, far more likely.
 
Concernt said:
While perhaps circumstantial evidence, it is curious to me that T239 appears to have gone through validation, production testing and preparation, taping out and finalisation, all on the same timeline as Ada Lovelace cards, all on 4N.

This sort of implies to me, though I could be dead wrong, that even if it isn't Ada Lovelace architecturally, it was treated like part of the Ada family for development purposes and seemingly production. (Fairly accurate Nvidia leaker Kopite7Kimi in fact said it was Ada, but we know now it isn't wholly)

It also has a CUDA version above Ampere, but below Lovelace.

This could all be coincidental but I feel like the evidence is slightly stronger for 4N than 8nm. Personally because of the above, I believe 4N is far, far more likely.
Click to expand...

Kimi talked about Orin and 'Dane' both being Ada, it wasn't one or the other. And both being 8nm too, We'll find out eventually how much of that is still relevant, but he's cast enough doubt over his own old tweets that I don't think it's worth trying to infer anything from them over 2 years later.
 
choice of node is more of a timing and projections thing than an architectural one. the needs of dgpus and automotive SoCs are different from a gaming tablet SoC after all, so being split into different nodes would benefit everyone. dgpus have a limited manufacturing lifespan and automotive SoCs aren't constrained by size or thermals, both of these don't apply to a gaming SoC
 
Hermii said:
Every other Nvidia product launching in 2023 is 5nm.


Its mostly just a marketing distinction.
Click to expand...
"TSMC introduced a new member of its 5 nm process family: N4. Compared to N5, the node offers 11% higher performance (6% higher vs N4), 22% higher power efficiency, 6% higher transistor density and lower mask count." TSMC 4N its just 5nm+
 
Gerald said:
"TSMC introduced a new member of its 5 nm process family: N4. Compared to N5, the node offers 11% higher performance (6% higher vs N4), 22% higher power efficiency, 6% higher transistor density and lower mask count." TSMC 4N its just 5nm+
Click to expand...
4N and N4 are not the same thing, confusingly. N4 is an iterative improvement over their 5nm mode. 4N is a custom version of 5nm just for Nvidia
 
Hermii said:
Ever since the Nvidia leaks revealed the size of the chip, people here have questioned if this makes sense on 8nm.

Edit: there's no solid evidence for either node. What speaks for 8nm is the fact that it's the node of almost every other ampere device, including Orin. Insiders have also heard its 8nm, however that info is old now and proven not to be that reliable,

What speaks for 5nm is the sheer size of the soc, and what we know of amperes power characteristics on 8nm.
Click to expand...

I kind of wonder if the initial plan was to launch a cut down/heavily underclocked version of the chip at 8nm and then eventually release a "Mariko/Lite" equivalent at 5nm a year+ later ... and as development went on it became clear Nintendo would be launching 1+ year past the initial 2023-ish target that Nvidia (or Nintendo) just said ... "hey how about we just skip the 8nm altogether and start at 5nm?".
 
Machrider said:
I kind of wonder if the initial plan was to launch a cut down/heavily underclocked version of the chip at 8nm and then eventually release a "Mariko/Lite" equivalent at 5nm a year+ later ... and as development went on it became clear Nintendo would be launching 1+ year past the initial 2023-ish target that Nvidia (or Nintendo) just said ... "hey how about we just skip the 8nm altogether and start at 5nm?".
Click to expand...
We could make theories all day and some of them may be right, but there is no way to confirm them.
 
0
Machrider said:
I kind of wonder if the initial plan was to launch a cut down/heavily underclocked version of the chip at 8nm and then eventually release a "Mariko/Lite" equivalent at 5nm a year+ later ... and as development went on it became clear Nintendo would be launching 1+ year past the initial 2023-ish target that Nvidia (or Nintendo) just said ... "hey how about we just skip the 8nm altogether and start at 5nm?".
Click to expand...
While I'm open to the idea that Nintendo/Nvidia shifted nodes at some point in the process, I don't think the plan was ever "launch at 8nm, move to 5nm quickly". There is an unusually high amount of work in that particular jump, both on the chip side and on the software side.
 
oldpuck said:
While I'm open to the idea that Nintendo/Nvidia shifted nodes at some point in the process, I don't think the plan was ever "launch at 8nm, move to 5nm quickly". There is an unusually high amount of work in that particular jump, both on the chip side and on the software side.
Click to expand...

True, though I do think Nintendo would want a full hardware mapping out before even commiting to the first design ... ie: like we plan to launch 8nm Switch 2 in early 2023, but we also know we are going to move to 5nm in 2025 for a revision and Lite model, just like the first Switch (as their plan circa 2020 lets say).

So Nvidia would probably have to have that roadmap figured out before hand, because if you're Nintendo you want to know what hardware options you have not just for the day 1 launch unit, I want to know if I'm Nintendo's president when we can launch revisions in the first half of the product cycle.

Like wasn't Mariko in the Switch firmware that hackers found quite early on? So Nintendo/Nvidia likely had the plan of going to a lower node and releasing Mariko/Lite models a bit after launch all along.

So maybe like the whole project (Switch successor) already got delayed by like a year++ due to COVID, Switch having better sales than expecting, manufacturing crunch, etc. etc. and then it became more feasible to just skip 8nm and start at the 5nm point.

Sort of like imagine for whatever reason if Nintendo launched Switch in 2019 due to a myraid of reasons, well if you're launching in 2019, you might as well probably go with the 16nm Mariko design and forget the previous version.

That might also explain the whole kerfufle about dev kits seemingly going out and then that hardware going into limbo.

We'll probably never know I guess, but if the Switch 2 chip is indeed 5nm day one, that might be a tip off.
 
Machrider said:
True, though I do think Nintendo would want a full hardware mapping out before even commiting to the first design ... ie: like we plan to launch 8nm Switch 2 in early 2023, but we also know we are going to move to 5nm in 2025 for a revision and Lite model, just like the first Switch (as their plan circa 2020 lets say).

So Nvidia would probably have to have that roadmap figured out before hand, because if you're Nintendo you want to know what hardware options you have not just for the day 1 launch unit, I want to know if I'm Nintendo's president when we can launch revisions in the first half of the product cycle.

Like wasn't Mariko in the Switch firmware that hackers found quite early on? So Nintendo/Nvidia likely had the plan of going to a lower node and releasing Mariko/Lite models a bit after launch all along.

So maybe like the whole project (Switch successor) already got delayed by like a year++ due to COVID, Switch having better sales than expecting, manufacturing crunch, etc. etc. and then it became more feasible to just skip 8nm and start at the 5nm point.

Sort of like imagine for whatever reason if Nintendo launched Switch in 2019 due to a myraid of reasons, well if you're launching in 2019, you might as well probably go with the 16nm Mariko design and forget the previous version.

That might also explain the whole kerfufle about dev kits seemingly going out and then that hardware going into limbo.

We'll probably never know I guess, but if the Switch 2 chip is indeed 5nm day one, that might be a tip off.
Click to expand...
The situation with the TX1 isn't too comparable because it is off-the-shelf. The TX1 was already going into production. Drake is made for Nintendo and node changes will be costs that Nintendo also incurs
 
Hermii said:
Mariko probably wouldn't have existed without Nintendo though.
Click to expand...
For sure. Honestly Nintendo Switch was the difference between Tegra X1 and gaming-first Tegra devices as a whole failing and being the largest single SOC by market share in gaming.
 
I do think for the new chip whether it's 8nm, 5nm, or whatever to start ... Nintendo will want not only that chip, Nvidia will have to provide a roadmap for a die shrink because Nintendo will want a smaller model and a model with better battery life anyway.

It worked well for the current Switch, no reason to not want the same for the successor. For consumers we just learn this stuff on the fly, but if you're the president of Nintendo like you don't only want just the (lets say) 2024 launch product, I'd want to know "OK, well when can we release revisions?" as well so you can plan your product cycle and software pipeline accordingly. You need to know this stuff years in advance, you need to know before you even launch the initial model I think.

So yeah maybe the original roadmap of 8nm followed by a 5nm version got changed to 5nm followed a 3nm version later or something like that.

Could just be a byproduct of waiting the extra 12-18 months perhaps past what the original time line was supposed to be. Like I could see Nvidia saying "well you know if you're going to wait this long, you might as well just go with 5nm and then you can pay us for another revision at 3nm later, 5nm and 3nm will give you better performance and battery life" and so on.
 
Hocot8 said:
It's a little ironic that you are accusing them of overthinking after typing all of this out. We don't know what is coming Q4 so to say they have nothing to hand their hat on is a bit presumptuous. Also, the President isn't really advocating for potential price increases unless I've missed a quote. He said to investors they aren't looking to change the prices of their hardware or software. And the Zelda price increase so far has been isolated to just that game.

A bit of an overreaction, imo, to say they need a leadership overhaul.
Click to expand...
Their Q4 for the current FY ends March 31 this year, so what else are you expecting them to drop in the next roughly 40ish days? I’m strictly referencing the current FY ending March 31, not the calendar Q4 later this year or their Q3 of the upcoming FY. Where’s the irony of overthinking there?

Also a lot of big companies have whacked Leadership after repeated bad results lately after riding COVID highs. Nintendo is a big corporation. Was my thought extreme? Sure, but not out of the realm of possibility with another poor quarter of missing hardware targets and relatively flat software sales.
 
0
Machrider said:
I do think for the new chip whether it's 8nm, 5nm, or whatever to start ... Nintendo will want not only that chip, Nvidia will have to provide a roadmap for a die shrink because Nintendo will want a smaller model and a model with better battery life anyway.

It worked well for the current Switch, no reason to not want the same for the successor. For consumers we just learn this stuff on the fly, but if you're the president of Nintendo like you don't only want just the (lets say) 2024 launch product, I'd want to know "OK, well when can we release revisions?" as well so you can plan your product cycle and software pipeline accordingly. You need to know this stuff years in advance, you need to know before you even launch the initial model I think.

So yeah maybe the original roadmap of 8nm followed by a 5nm version got changed to 5nm followed a 3nm version later or something like that.

Could just be a byproduct of waiting the extra 12-18 months perhaps past what the original time line was supposed to be. Like I could see Nvidia saying "well you know if you're going to wait this long, you might as well just go with 5nm and then you can pay us for another revision at 3nm later, 5nm and 3nm will give you better performance and battery life" and so on.
Click to expand...
don't know if they can do the same thing twice, for the same reason mid-gen refreshes aren't expected for Xbox and Playstation this gen. die shrinking might not be as cost effective again
 
There's also no reason for a power boost for the PS5 or Xbox Series X as almost all gains from more power will be to ray-tracing and that is way harder to implement well than 4K (which was the selling point of the PS4 Pro and Xbox One X) so most devs won't bother to use it well.
 
0
ILikeFeet said:
6nm is process compatible with 7nm products. it's why TSMC is pushing their customers to move to it. also doesn't offer enhancements over the base system
Click to expand...
Isnt the reason pro system doesn't make as much sense that cost per transistor doesn't go down like it used to?

For a portable system there's always the battery life incentive, that a plugged in system doesn't have. There's also the chance that a more power efficient chip could allow for cheaper cooling, offsetting some of the costs of the die shrink. Nvidia also has better AI tools now for die shrinks now, that they didn't have last time.
 
oldpuck said:
Investors are advocating for a price increase. They see inflation eating into margins, want those margins up and have seen Sony and Microsoft start leading the way, while the highest priced unit is the best swlling

Meanwhile, the Switch is selling better than just about any console in this stage of it's life, is still short of it's 6th birthday, which isn't uncommonly long as generations go, and has released an entry priced unit and an enthusiast unit.

Yes, Q3 under performed relative to expectations, but it was also investors who pushed those expectations up, who believed that there was unslaked demand limited by the component shortage and European shipping problems. That this turned out to not be entirely true is a problem lots of other manufacturers are making.

In terms of software sales, saying that Nintendo "only" has a big 3D Zelda is both underestimating Zelda and not factually accurate. I don't know what Tears will do, but while Sequels tend to do less well on the same console, the install base is much larger than it was in 2017. If it manages to keep pace with the previous game, it will outsell every Pokemon game released in 2021 combined.

I expect Metroid Prime, Kirby, Fire Emblem, and Pikmin to all do numbers roughly in line with their predecessors, down a smidge for the usual reasons. In terms of units sold, that would make 2023 a very good year for Nintendo, and an absolutely bonkers last year for a console. Yes, total software sales will be down, but only because so many Switch's have been sold, they've run out of people to sell Mario Kart to.

Which is exactly what Furukawa was referring to when he said that no hardware strategy would be sufficient to drive up sales. Dropping a new Zelda potentially adds a new evergreen, which has a high attach rate.

Will investors be upset if leadership blows the transition? Yeah, 100%. Do I have total confidence that Nintendo is going to stick the landing? Absolutely not. Is Nintendo currently failing to deliver value to investors? Nope! Is Nintendo behaving in a way that is unusual for them or for the industry? Absolutely not.

Do I think Nintendo is more responsive to investors than ever before, and in a way that is potentially harmful to long term prospects? Yes! But do I think that Saudi Arabia is going to push out the team overseeing the most successful moment the company has had in the 21st century just because a minority of fans are getting their More Powerful Toy Box six months later than they want it? No.
Click to expand...
Ok fair, but it’s nintendos responsibility to keep those expectations in check with their guidance. They can’t get their story straight and adequately do that lately. They’ve had to revise hardware forecast the last two quarters (or possibly longer? I have to check). I expect Q4 ending March 31 2023 will be more of the same.

Also how is TOTK a factor for their current FY Q4? It releases in Q1 of the next FY. Same as Pikmin. Maybe vouchers are a factor? Engage, Prime remake and Kirby may slightly help software sales, but I doubt it will do much to drastically move the needle by March 31. Also take the brick and mortar physical pre-orders with a grain of salt. Physical copies may have had very limited print and I expect it to normalize after the 22nd. I think someone here shared Dread has only done over a million copies to date? Prime may be different due to nostalgia.
 
Yeah, Nintendo doesn't need a die shrink to make a Lite. They put Mariko in the V2. I'm sure Nvidia and Nintendo have a long term plan for the SOC, but I don't see any value in intentionally undermining your launch product like that. Erista was an off the shelf product, and Nintendo rapidly customized and moved off of it. Drake is custom from the beginning, and moving from a Samsung DUV to TSMC EUV is not inexpensive.

The 20nm to 16nm change was probably a net cost savings for Nintendo, but that's not a given with 8nm to 5nm in the near future.

NVN locks in the number of SMs in the GPU. So it's unlikely Nintendo could open up more SMs in a 5nm revision. So the only thing they could offer is higher clock speeds, or better battery life. The range of viable clock speeds for Drake is small. Too high, and you bump against bandwidth limits, too low, you hit a point where you would be better off with a new design.

All that leaves is battery life, a thing that Nintendo improved with Mariko, but didn't advertise. Had Nintendo made TX1 for their own purposes, on their own timeline, they almost certainly would have started on 16nm, which was already being used in consoles before the Switch launched, and was very viable.

Drake may have switch from 8nm to 5nm at some point in the process, but I highly doubt Nintendo planned on an 8nm launch and to rapidly move to 5nm.

8nm might give Nintendo a route to a mid-gen node shrink, but it's not a clear win to hang your hat on.
 
Joseki said:
This is quite literally impossible considering there is no official hardware forecast past next month.
Click to expand...
Will they or won’t they provide a hardware forecast at their Q4 briefing for the following FY Q1? That is what I was referencing and my bad for not being clearer.

They’ve sold 14.91 million in their current FY. Can they hit their new target? Maybe - they should. Each quarter in 2023 has been down from the prior year about ~20% give or take. So if it’s flat 20% down from Q42022 (4.11m) in Q4FY23 ending March 31 (3.28m), they’ll just make their new forecast of 18 with 18.19. If it’s down 28% or more year over year then they’ll miss it.

Q4 briefing will be very telling what is achievable with the current switch and hardware strategy. Calls for a successor are only going to get louder, especially if they miss the revised target of 18.

This isn’t my day job so here you go. Welcome to draw your own conclusions.

www.nintendo.co.jp

IR Information : Sales Data - Dedicated Video Game Sales Units

www.nintendo.co.jp
 
0
oldpuck said:
Drake may have switch from 8nm to 5nm at some point in the process, but I highly doubt Nintendo planned on an 8nm launch and to rapidly move to 5nm.
Click to expand...
When do you suppose that timeframe happened? Perhaps it was from hearing the bad news about Samsung's 8nm yields despite its "maturity"? I'd like to venture a guess that maybe it took place around 2021 but I do get my dates mixed up...
 
SiG said:
When do you suppose that timeframe happened? Perhaps it was from hearing the bad news about Samsung's 8nm yields despite its "maturity"? I'd like to venture a guess that maybe it took place around 2021 but I do get my dates mixed up...
Click to expand...
Tinfoil hat time.

Late 2020 current gen consoles launches. The series S is of a particular interest to Nintendo, because it's the least common denominator for next gen development. Nintendo has meetings with epic games, with third parties about what it will take for them to support their next gen featuresets to bring their games over to the next Nintendo hardware.

It turns out their 6sm 8nm ampere hardware in development is just a bit shy of that threshold. Meanwhile the crypto mining market crashes, so Nvidia suddenly has a ton more reserved 5 nm capacity than they expect to sell, and the original Switch is still selling like hot cakes.

These two factors combined is the catalyst for the T239 project to undergo a major redesign and become the Drake we know today.

Do I think that's what happened? More than likely not, but it's fun to theorize.
 
Hermii said:
Tinfoil hat time.

Late 2020 current gen consoles launches. The series S is of a particular interest to Nintendo, because it's the least common denominator for next gen development. Nintendo has meetings with epic games, with third parties about what it will take for them to support their next gen featuresets to bring their games over to the next Nintendo hardware.

It turns out their 6sm 8nm ampere hardware in development is just a bit shy of that threshold. Meanwhile the crypto mining market crashes, so Nvidia suddenly has a ton more reserved 5 nm capacity than they expect to sell, and the original Switch is still selling like hot cakes.

These two factors combined is the catalyst for the T239 project to undergo a major redesign and become the Drake we know today.

Do I think that's what happened? More than likely not, but it's fun to theorize.
Click to expand...
Interesting narrative. Part of me likes to think Capcom could've chimed in and said something like "16GB of RAM would be nice".
 
Paul_Subsonic said:
Aren't the AI tools used for architecture changes as opposed to die shrinks ?
Shouldn't an eventual die shrink still be Ampere, or is there something I'm missing ?
Click to expand...
the AI is for layout optimizations. it would help with die shrinks by fitting the shrunken hardware in the most efficient packaging possible

AI Chip Design Solutions – AI Accelerator Solutions | Synopsys

Synopsys design solutions and services are behind many AI "super-chips", from the data center to the edge.
www.synopsys.com www.synopsys.com
 
SiG said:
Interesting narrative. Part of me likes to think Capcom could've chimed in and said something like "16GB of RAM would be nice".
Click to expand...
Well, the reason they specifically highlighted ram
Feedback for the Switch, was probably because it was an off the shelf chip. There wasn't really that much other feedback from third parties Nintendo could possibly have addressed, the design was done.
 
0
From the more recent documents about the MS-Activision thing

"Nintendo Switch Online has been excluded from our shares as Nintendo's cloud gaming service is very limited. Nintendo's cloud gaming service is only available on the Nintendo Switch device and [REDACTED]. Nintendo Switch Online gives gamers access to online play and cloud saving amongst other features. We therefore see Nintendo Switch Online as predominately an online multiplayer service rather than a cloud gaming service."


There is a platform censored by nintendo in the documentation, Which is mentioned that the NSO subscription service is available (you know, being able to play online, catalog of retro games, cloud storage, etc.)

Currently, for obvious reasons, the NSO service is only on Switch. It is quite likely that the platform being censored by nintendo is Switch2/Drake/YourFavouriteName.
 
Nyrnvs said:
Ok fair, but it’s nintendos responsibility to keep those expectations in check with their guidance. They can’t get their story straight and adequately do that lately. They’ve had to revise hardware forecast the last two quarters (or possibly longer? I have to check). I expect Q4 ending March 31 2023 will be more of the same.
Click to expand...
In what way is Nintendo's story not straight? Nintendo has been super consistent in their investor messaging. Yes, they were incorrect about demand in the post-component-shortage era, but they're not the only company who got that wrong, and it's not like investors were shouting at them about being wrong the whole time.

You're not painting a picture of habitual financial incompetence, or leadership uncertainty. You're painting a picture of record growth built on a sustainable, long term, consistent strategy, paired with some misjudgments borne of global economic uncertainty not seen since the Second World War. Nintendo is not the only one affected - Nvidia, Intel, Micron, and AMD have all revised sales estimates of game products down. The windfall in datacenter products over the last 6 months has buffered those companies from some of the financial impact, but the gaming sector has seen an across the board drop that was foreseen by none of the major players.

I just don't see the investor unrest you're anticipating. Nintendo bought back the Yamauchi family shares, and prior to the PIF investment the largest investor was a pension fund. Long term I think Nintendo is going to have to be more responsive to shareholders, but in the near term they aren't dealing with activist investors. This largely the same group of long term investors who didn't push Iwata to leave when the Wii U cratered.

Nyrnvs said:
Also how is TOTK a factor for their current FY Q4? It releases in Q1 of the next FY. Same as Pikmin. Maybe vouchers are a factor? Engage, Prime remake and Kirby may slightly help software sales, but I doubt it will do much to drastically move the needle by March 31. Also take the brick and mortar physical pre-orders with a grain of salt. Physical copies may have had very limited print and I expect it to normalize after the 22nd.
Click to expand...
Sorry, that was unclear of me. I was referring to how Nintendo's 7th year is going to go and how it is going to look to investors. Even if nothing but announced games come out and perform in line with historical trends, Nintendo will have an unusually good 7th year in terms of software sales, and again, and any underperformance relative to expectations is industry wide and not localized to Nintendo.

I don't think you're wrong that Nintendo might bungle this transition, and the rumors of a Pro, along with an unusually high number of leaks has exposed us to more of the sausage making than usual, but the picture currently being painted is of Nintendo doing as straight forward a generation upgrade as possible, on an industry standard timeline.

Nyrnvs said:
I think someone here shared Dread has only done over a million copies to date? Prime may be different due to nostalgia.
Click to expand...
Dread did 3 million to date making it the best selling Metroid game ever. The Prime games have generally outperformed the 3D entries, and though Remastered isn't receiving the marketing push Dread did, considering how other remakes and ports have done on the system and the attention it's getting, a similar number of sales seems achievable.
 
0
Ojoloco said:
From the documents about the MS-Activision thing

"Nintendo Switch Online has been excluded from our shares as Nintendo's cloud gaming service is very limited. Nintendo's cloud gaming service is only available on the Nintendo Switch device and [REDACTED]. Nintendo Switch Online gives gamers access to online play and cloud saving amongst other features. We therefore see Nintendo Switch Online as predominately an online multiplayer service rather than a cloud gaming service."


There is a platform censored by nintendo in the documentation, Which is mentioned that the NSO subscription service is available (you know, being able to play online, catalog of retro games, cloud storage, etc.)

Currently, for obvious reasons, the NSO service is only on Switch. It is quite likely that the platform being censored by nintendo is Switch2/Drake/YourFavouriteName.
Click to expand...
there is

no

fucking

way
 
Ojoloco said:
From the documents about the MS-Activision thing

"Nintendo Switch Online has been excluded from our shares as Nintendo's cloud gaming service is very limited. Nintendo's cloud gaming service is only available on the Nintendo Switch device and [REDACTED]. Nintendo Switch Online gives gamers access to online play and cloud saving amongst other features. We therefore see Nintendo Switch Online as predominately an online multiplayer service rather than a cloud gaming service."


There is a platform censored by nintendo in the documentation, Which is mentioned that the NSO subscription service is available (you know, being able to play online, catalog of retro games, cloud storage, etc.)

Currently, for obvious reasons, the NSO service is only on Switch. It is quite likely that the platform being censored by nintendo is Switch2/Drake/YourFavouriteName.
Click to expand...
Unless they plan to put it on mobile πŸ‘€
 
surely that must've either

A) been some sort of qualification that was deemed inappropriate (i.e. "and it sucks fucking ass lmao")
B) erroneously said it was on mobile devices which was deemed misleading
 
Raccoon said:
surely that must've either

A) been some sort of qualification that was deemed inappropriate (i.e. "and it sucks fucking ass lmao")
B) erroneously said it was on mobile devices which was deemed misleading
Click to expand...
Or my theory that Drake Switch hasn't leaked because Nintendo has put 75% of the world's population under NDA is true...
 
Isn't it on mobile already with the NSO app? The NSO app is what even enables the multiplayer portion with voice chat and has interaction with certain games. The document says "Nintendo Switch Online gives gamers access to online play" so saying "Nintendo Switch and mobile devices" does not seem inaccurate to me. Unless they are being strict with wording and NSO being 'on mobile' is not true when it comes to the retro gaming portion.
 
Skittzo said:
Or my theory that Drake Switch hasn't leaked because Nintendo has put 75% of the world's population under NDA is true...
Click to expand...
Dont forger MS has Mojang, Minecraft and Mojang games are a major partner for Nintendo and they have a pretty good relationship.

It would be normal that they have been among the first to have a development kit and information about the platform
 
Last edited:
Serif said:
Isn't it on mobile already with the NSO app? The NSO app is what even enables the multiplayer portion with voice chat and has interaction with certain games. The document says "Nintendo Switch Online gives gamers access to online play" so saying "Nintendo Switch and mobile devices" does not seem inaccurate to me. Unless they are being strict with wording and NSO being 'on mobile' is not true when it comes to the retro gaming portion.
Click to expand...
They talk specifically about the selection of games, cloud saves and charging for online play.


Also, if it were the external mobile application, it would not be censored because it would not be confidential information.
 
Serif said:
Isn't it on mobile already with the NSO app? The NSO app is what even enables the multiplayer portion with voice chat and has interaction with certain games. The document says "Nintendo Switch Online gives gamers access to online play" so saying "Nintendo Switch and mobile devices" does not seem inaccurate to me. Unless they are being strict with wording and NSO being 'on mobile' is not true when it comes to the retro gaming portion.
Click to expand...
this is exactly what happened imo

document said mobile, then presumably someone said "that makes it sound like nintendo has xcloud lmao"
 
Reader mode
You must log in or register to reply here.
Please read this new, consolidated staff post before posting.

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


Back
Top Bottom