Discussion Nintendo should make a powerful console.

[Esticamelapixa]

How is this sort of discussion still a thing? I would be shockingly surprised if Nintendo went back to powerful home console market. The only chance I could see of that happening would be sort of a cheaper Switch "spin-off" which is not portable but even then I do not see it happening and certainly wouldn't be "powerful" for current standards.

1) Nintendo is the "market leader" in the portable gaming space
2) I agree Nintendo would be a very strong contender in the high-end home console market if they went that route, likely would have now much more success than it had with N64 and GameCube (and definetely more than with the WiiU)
3) Making games is increasingly time consuming and costly
4) It is very very hard to keep both a handheld and home console: you canibalize your own sales; it costs a lot of money; you have to satisfy costumers in both markets and unable to put out games at a good pace; etc. More often than not we've seen Nintendo or Sony failing at keeping both a successful home console and successful handheld at the same time/same generation, this is not a coincidence.
5) Each generation we see less and less benefits from high end console gaming, diminishing returns and whatnot; currently we really do have, with the Switch
6) The hybrid approach has proven very successful: Switch is on track to be the highest selling gaming device ever; Nintendo is breaking sales records left and right with most their franchises reaching all time highs with their Switch itinerations; Nintendo is obtaining very good financials results during the Switch era, etc
7) In the hybrid space Nintendo as carved out its own little niche market where it would be very difficult for a new player to enter and disrupt; the same cannot be said for powerful home console sector, which already has 2 major players and Nintendo would struggle to go back to at least with as much success as they have with the hybrid.

Considering all of the above, which honestly I don't think anyone can disagree with, there is just no way Nintendo will make a powerful home console.

 

[Maxrunner]

They should just release anything at this point. Switch is now several times behind their direct competitors. Developers will stop caring about the console, regardless of its sales.

 

[Blue Monty]

Nintendo can't keep catering to their base with Mario and Zelda forever. The fact that every Nintendo console has sold less than the previous one with the exception of the Wii and Switch prove that. Eventually, those fans will get older and their tastes will change toward more mature games. Having CoD and GTA might help Nintendo get an older audience.

Nagoshi moment lol

 

[Raccoon]

Nintendo can't keep catering to their base with Mario and Zelda forever. The fact that every Nintendo console has sold less than the previous one with the exception of the Wii and Switch prove that. Eventually, those fans will get older and their tastes will change toward more mature games. Having CoD and GTA might help Nintendo get an older audience.

just because I haven't seen it said: there are more kids every day

 

[YoboD]

I'm almost 20 years old and I love Animal Crossing, Pokemon, and Mario. When will my tastes grow more mature? Asking for a friend.

I can tell you from experience the day you turn 20 you are forced to throw out all your Mario and Pokémon games and graduate to adult, mature experiences like Fire Emblem and Famicom Detective Club.

 

[Blue Monty]

I can tell you from experience the day you turn 20 you are forced to throw out all your Mario and Pokémon games and graduate to adult, mature experiences like Fire Emblem and Famicom Detective Club.

so once ur 20 u become a weeb?

 

[Shinespark]

I’m going to disagree while at the same time wishing in my heart that NINTENDO would make a PS5/XSX power console. My mind is blown thinking about BOTW in 4K with RT etc.

But, they went with Switch which is a really cool “gimmick” that obviously came at the cost of power due to also being handheld. At this point I hope they stay the course and iterate on Switch, delivering an upgraded model with DLSS and power maybe like PS4 Pro. Having that fidelity handheld will be another kind blown moment for me.

But this is one of the many things that's confusing me about the premise of the thread. The Steam Deck, which released 5 years after the Switch, is basically the power level you're describing when docked. With the Switch's successor still in development, releasing 2-3 years after the PS5/XSX, and releasing after Valve managed the Deck at $400, why should we assume the Switch's successor won't be able to output at 4k?

You kinda discuss this with you hopes for the future, but they didn't do that with the Switch bc it would've retailed at $1,000+ in 2017. If Nintendo said "the Switch OLED is the last console we'll ever make" this conversation would make sense, but it just feels so premature.

 

[Spork4000]

so once ur 20 u become a weeb?

Yeah, but only for 7 years.

 

[Gay Bowser]

Why is the affordability of Nintendo's consoles seen as a good thing? Haven't you ever heard the saying, "you get what you pay for"?

It’s a good thing for Nintendo because it gives them a market that their competitors don’t reach. Xboxes start at $299. PS5s start at $399. You can get a Switch Lite for $199.

Being relatively affordable is also important to Nintendo because it helps them reach a wider audience. It’s unlikely that a Switch that launched at $500 would have seen the same sort of meteoric mass-market success, even if it was correspondingly higher-tech and more powerful.

Over and over in this thread, you argue that Nintendo should abandon a successful differentiated path and basically do what two of their competitors already do, only…branded with Nintendo logos, I guess. That’s very seldom a good move in business. The first thing in any marketing class you learn is the importance of a USP, a unique selling proposition. What would a $500 powerful Nintendo console’s USP be? Nintendo’s first party games? One of your core points is that the CoD-and-Madden crowd would want more “mature” games, so I’m not sure why that market would value Nintendo’s first party lineup.

I’m not sure if you’re trolling or not. Maybe you’re just trying to wind people up and have a laugh at how silly we are for trying to explain business basics to you. But, on the off chance that you’re actually willing to listen, I’ll post this.

 

[Mudo]

But this is one of the many things that's confusing me about the premise of the thread. The Steam Deck, which released 5 years after the Switch, is basically the power level you're describing when docked. With the Switch's successor still in development, releasing 2-3 years after the PS5/XSX, and releasing after Valve managed the Deck at $400, why should we assume the Switch's successor won't be able to output at 4k?

You kinda discuss this with you hopes for the future, but they didn't do that with the Switch bc it would've retailed at $1,000+ in 2017. If Nintendo said "the Switch OLED is the last console we'll ever make" this conversation would make sense, but it just feels so premature.

I guess I’m hoping the successor is 4K using DLSS. I’m not the person to ask about tech stuff but I’m assuming they could do like a 1080p handheld screen then include DLSS docked to get to 4K there? Not sure honestly but I’m going on the assumption that what Nintendo ends up releasing will be lower spec then people hope for, due to the Wii then Wii-U. I just don’t think Nintendo is sitting around thinking “we must have 4K in the next console”. Sure we may get it due to that not being some huge barrier to cross nowadays….but I won’t be shocked if we end up somewhere under that either.

All of this to say, Nintendo marches to their own beat. And while I wish the Switch had even a little more power for docked games like BOTW, XC2 etc, to get them to like 1080p/30, I still have loved the games. Honestly just give me games at locked fps/resolutions and I’ll be a lot happier.

 

[Crusters]

I guess I’m hoping the successor is 4K using DLSS. I’m not the person to ask about tech stuff but I’m assuming they could do like a 1080p handheld screen then include DLSS docked to get to 4K there? Not sure honestly but I’m going on the assumption that what Nintendo ends up releasing will be lower spec then people hope for, due to the Wii then Wii-U. I just don’t think Nintendo is sitting around thinking “we must have 4K in the next console”. Sure we may get it due to that not being some huge barrier to cross nowadays….but I won’t be shocked if we end up somewhere under that either.

All of this to say, Nintendo marches to their own beat. And while I wish the Switch had even a little more power for docked games like BOTW, XC2 etc, to get them to like 1080p/30, I still have loved the games. Honestly just give me games at locked fps/resolutions and I’ll be a lot happier.

We know a few things about the successor, as hackers attacked Nvidia and leaked information that contained it. What we know is pointing to 4k (or at least 1440p) through dlss when docked is looking very likely.

Let's just compare an aspect we know of that is pretty telling of a systems direction between the switch and PS4, and the unannounced switch device and PS5.

Switch Shader cores: 256
PS4 Shader cores: 1,152

?switch Shader cores: 1,534 (plus 3rd gen Tensor cores, and 2nd gen RTX cores)
PS5 Shader cores:. 2,304

This is looking like a much smaller gap than last time.

Of course this is just one metric, one piece of a puzzle, and nvidia cuda cores and amd streaming processors aren't direct equivalents, however, that piece has to go with the rest of the puzzle, so while we don't know the specifics of everything, we do know Nintendo did not pay for this 12 SM gpu and then cripple the rest of the system just to pull a fast one on the ol Internet.

 

[Serif]

?switch Shader cores: 1,534 (plus 3rd gen Tensor cores, and 2nd gen RTX cores)
PS5 Shader cores:. 2,304

This is looking like a much smaller gap than last time.

How does this compare to the Series S? A quick search shows me 1280 cores.

 

[Crusters]

How does this compare to the Series S? A quick search shows me 1280 cores.

It has more cuda shader cores than the series S Has streaming processors, however amd and Nvidia use two different solutions for cranking out pixels. For something very big picture, like the stark gap between switch and PS4, and ?switch and PS5, it's an easy enough comparison at face value, as it's kinda really still just comparing like with like: (old switch vs ?switch) compared to (PS4 vs PS5). For something like that, comparing ?switch to series S, we just know they are roughly in the same ballpark core count wise, and then not much else about ?switch that would further clarify the situation (like what they are clocked at).

For a similar comparison we can look at:

Switch: 256 shaders
Xb Durango 768 Shaders

?Switch: 1,534 Shaders
XSs:. 1,280 Shaders

So while we don't know if that higher shader count will translate straight into above XSs (there are plenty of examples of cards with less shader cores outperforming those with more) we do know that the gap between the systems will be much much smaller this time.

 

[Shinespark]

I guess I’m hoping the successor is 4K using DLSS. I’m not the person to ask about tech stuff but I’m assuming they could do like a 1080p handheld screen then include DLSS docked to get to 4K there? Not sure honestly but I’m going on the assumption that what Nintendo ends up releasing will be lower spec then people hope for, due to the Wii then Wii-U. I just don’t think Nintendo is sitting around thinking “we must have 4K in the next console”. Sure we may get it due to that not being some huge barrier to cross nowadays….but I won’t be shocked if we end up somewhere under that either.

All of this to say, Nintendo marches to their own beat. And while I wish the Switch had even a little more power for docked games like BOTW, XC2 etc, to get them to like 1080p/30, I still have loved the games. Honestly just give me games at locked fps/resolutions and I’ll be a lot happier.

I think your point about Nintendo's tendency to undershoot expectations is well-founded. However, I think there's a major practical difference between the Switch follow-up and the Wii U which is the timing of both launches.

In order for the Wii U to be closer in power to the Xbone/PS4, it would've needed to be closer to cutting edge when it launched ahead of both consoles in 2012. With the Super Switch, it's arriving a few years late and it gets to benefit from lower component prices. That's what lends more credence (for me personally) to the posts above about the shader core discrepancy. It's basically predicting that Nintendo is going to use what's available off the shelf in 2022.

 

[Tentacle-tropes]

How is this sort of discussion still a thing? I would be shockingly surprised if Nintendo went back to powerful home console market. The only chance I could see of that happening would be sort of a cheaper Switch "spin-off" which is not portable but even then I do not see it happening and certainly wouldn't be "powerful" for current standards.

1) Nintendo is the "market leader" in the portable gaming space
2) I agree Nintendo would be a very strong contender in the high-end home console market if they went that route, likely would have now much more success than it had with N64 and GameCube (and definetely more than with the WiiU)
3) Making games is increasingly time consuming and costly
4) It is very very hard to keep both a handheld and home console: you canibalize your own sales; it costs a lot of money; you have to satisfy costumers in both markets and unable to put out games at a good pace; etc. More often than not we've seen Nintendo or Sony failing at keeping both a successful home console and successful handheld at the same time/same generation, this is not a coincidence.
5) Each generation we see less and less benefits from high end console gaming, diminishing returns and whatnot; currently we really do have, with the Switch
6) The hybrid approach has proven very successful: Switch is on track to be the highest selling gaming device ever; Nintendo is breaking sales records left and right with most their franchises reaching all time highs with their Switch itinerations; Nintendo is obtaining very good financials results during the Switch era, etc
7) In the hybrid space Nintendo as carved out its own little niche market where it would be very difficult for a new player to enter and disrupt; the same cannot be said for powerful home console sector, which already has 2 major players and Nintendo would struggle to go back to at least with as much success as they have with the hybrid.

Considering all of the above, which honestly I don't think anyone can disagree with, there is just no way Nintendo will make a powerful home console.

It’s a good thing for Nintendo because it gives them a market that their competitors don’t reach. Xboxes start at $299. PS5s start at $399. You can get a Switch Lite for $199.

Being relatively affordable is also important to Nintendo because it helps them reach a wider audience. It’s unlikely that a Switch that launched at $500 would have seen the same sort of meteoric mass-market success, even if it was correspondingly higher-tech and more powerful.

Over and over in this thread, you argue that Nintendo should abandon a successful differentiated path and basically do what two of their competitors already do, only…branded with Nintendo logos, I guess. That’s very seldom a good move in business. The first thing in any marketing class you learn is the importance of a USP, a unique selling proposition. What would a $500 powerful Nintendo console’s USP be? Nintendo’s first party games? One of your core points is that the CoD-and-Madden crowd would want more “mature” games, so I’m not sure why that market would value Nintendo’s first party lineup.

I’m not sure if you’re trolling or not. Maybe you’re just trying to wind people up and have a laugh at how silly we are for trying to explain business basics to you. But, on the off chance that you’re actually willing to listen, I’ll post this.

Even with all this being said in order for Nintendo to return to the more powerful home console segment of the market they actually have to be willing to do so in the first. And, Nintendo has multiple times throughout a year over the last several generations has told us they are not about that life.

 

[Mudo]

I think your point about Nintendo's tendency to undershoot expectations is well-founded. However, I think there's a major practical difference between the Switch follow-up and the Wii U which is the timing of both launches.

In order for the Wii U to be closer in power to the Xbone/PS4, it would've needed to be closer to cutting edge when it launched ahead of both consoles in 2012. With the Super Switch, it's arriving a few years late and it gets to benefit from lower component prices. That's what lends more credence (for me personally) to the posts above about the shader core discrepancy. It's basically predicting that Nintendo is going to use what's available off the shelf in 2022.

I’m very excited for whatever this ends up being in the end. I think it’s going to run things a lot better than the Switch has for a lot of games. And yeah 4K or anywhere near it will be great since I play most docked. I bought an mClassic cable just for my Switch and while it helps in XC2 (currently playing), that game is just too much for the console. I dream of a future with a Xenoblade running at like 1440/30 or higher lol.

 

[CastletonSnob]

It’s a good thing for Nintendo because it gives them a market that their competitors don’t reach. Xboxes start at $299. PS5s start at $399. You can get a Switch Lite for $199.

Being relatively affordable is also important to Nintendo because it helps them reach a wider audience. It’s unlikely that a Switch that launched at $500 would have seen the same sort of meteoric mass-market success, even if it was correspondingly higher-tech and more powerful.

Over and over in this thread, you argue that Nintendo should abandon a successful differentiated path and basically do what two of their competitors already do, only…branded with Nintendo logos, I guess. That’s very seldom a good move in business. The first thing in any marketing class you learn is the importance of a USP, a unique selling proposition. What would a $500 powerful Nintendo console’s USP be? Nintendo’s first party games? One of your core points is that the CoD-and-Madden crowd would want more “mature” games, so I’m not sure why that market would value Nintendo’s first party lineup.

I’m not sure if you’re trolling or not. Maybe you’re just trying to wind people up and have a laugh at how silly we are for trying to explain business basics to you. But, on the off chance that you’re actually willing to listen, I’ll post this.

A $500 powerful Nintendo console would have Nintendo's first party games in 4K and 60 FPS AND the same third party support that the PS5 and Xbox Series X get.

A console with Mario/Zelda in 4K and 60 FPS and great third party support would be the best console ever.

 

[Gay Bowser]

A $500 powerful Nintendo console would have Nintendo's first party games in 4K and 60 FPS AND the same third party support that the PS5 and Xbox Series X get.

[citation needed]

I know, I know, you don’t think you have to provide evidence because it’s “obvious.” But history has shown that it’s not. It’s unlikely that a Nintendo PS5/XSX competitor would get all the PS5/XSX games, for the same reason the Switch doesn’t get ports of every PS3/360 game now.

Also, I’m not sure that a huge part of Nintendo’s target market – children, and families buying games primarily for children – particularly cares about playing Nintendo first party games in 4K and 60fps, especially if it means significantly more expensive hardware. A “$500 powerful Nintendo console” is a much harder sell for a parent who has a child who just wants to play Pokémon. I don’t really understand why you continue to brush off this point.

 

[Deleted member 2]

Anybody wanna play something?

Splat, karts, arms, monhun, switch sports, whatev

Edit: wrong thread lol

 

[Gay Bowser]

i only play 4K 60fps games

 

[Deleted member 2]

i only play 4K 60fps games

I meant on PS5

 

[Supreme Overlord]

A $500 powerful Nintendo console would have Nintendo's first party games in 4K and 60 FPS AND the same third party support that the PS5 and Xbox Series X get.

A console with Mario/Zelda in 4K and 60 FPS and great third party support would be the best console ever.

Kid, I know you keep saying and repeating all these outlandish things and then asking everyone else to do all the thinking, and everyone keeps explaining your statements are entirely unsubstantiated and not supported with evidence or sound logic, but explain why this is in order to give you a chance to learn and grow.

But, really, your claims are incredibly faulty, and I'll leave it to you to understand this because it's really just obvious, simple logic.

 

[Shiba]

They should just release anything at this point. Switch is now several times behind their direct competitors. Developers will stop caring about the console, regardless of its sales.

It sucks mainly for first party devs since they're gonna have to accommodate the aging hard and while that might not seem major since most nintendo games are small scale and rely on their art style...the Xenoblade games are prime example of titles being too ambitious for their hardware.

Also handheld players are generally fine it's the people that mainly play dock that are the most affected by how performance and resolution are.

 

[Deleted member 645]

Really especially if there are so many people that claim lack of hardware for everything.

 

[Instro]

I wouldn't be surprised if they eventually take a stab at it again, and/or if there have been some concepts around the idea. Modern games are so scalable these days, so it should be a pretty trivial matter to put together a "big" Tegra based console that shares the same library as the handheld/hybrid. Given that they were willing to eschew the hybrid format with the lite, you'd think they would be willing to go the other way as well. Then again they probably don't want to mess with the golden goose too much.

 

[Roger Rabbit]

Assuming this new console is a TV only large box:

Minus points:

1. The R&D cost of a console that competes with MS and Sony.
2. The greater cost of parts.
3. Losing the customers who bought the console because it was cheap.
4. Losing the customers who bought the console because it was handheld / small and weren't included in 3.


For making a powerful console to be worth their while, the money spent by the people who would buy this new console but didn't buy a Switch would have to make up for all the above.

I can't see that being the case at all, and they'd be bad to alter their extremely successful (at present) sales pitch to go down that road on the off chance that it is a good idea.

 

[Serif]

I wouldn't be surprised if they eventually take a stab at it again, and/or if there have been some concepts around the idea. Modern games are so scalable these days, so it should be a pretty trivial matter to put together a "big" Tegra based console that shares the same library as the handheld/hybrid. Given that they were willing to eschew the hybrid format with the lite, you'd think they would be willing to go the other way as well. Then again they probably don't want to mess with the golden goose too much.

I think a Switch Home is in the realm of possibility down the line, but as a budget option i.e. an inverse Switch lite, with docked mode clocks. I feel like a souped up Switch Home that is more powerful than the Switch's docked mode would add another profile for developers to target that may not be worth the effort if not a lot of people buy it. Personally, I'd rather they just invest time in making the hybrid more powerful so that docked mode would benefit automatically and there's no loss of portability.

Speaking of which, @CastletonSnob what is your opinion of the next Switch specs from the Nvidia leak?

 

[GrislyRaccoon]

I think a Switch Home is in the realm of possibility down the line, but as a budget option i.e. an inverse Switch lite, with docked mode clocks. I feel like a souped up Switch Home that is more powerful than the Switch's docked mode would add another profile for developers to target that may not be worth the effort if not a lot of people buy it. Personally, I'd rather they just invest time in making the hybrid more powerful so that docked mode would benefit automatically and there's no loss of portability.

Speaking of which, @CastletonSnob what is your opinion of the next Switch specs from the Nvidia leak?

There was a leak?!? do you have a source?

 

[blondkayvon]

This thread is part of a larger trend of OP posting low-effort topics that a large amount of members are likely to have strong feelings about, only to refuse to meaningfully engage with any of the thoughtful arguments brought forth by said members on the topic (both subjective and factual). - blondkayvon, Donnie, paranoodle