Discussion The "Switch 2" and Development Cycles

[Scrawnton]

Warning I am in no way presenting any evidence to support any of the claims I will make. This is just an opinion/conversation starter.

Everyone knows that every developer hit a slump of sorts when transitioning into HD development. Games cost more money and took much longer to make compared to SD consoles or handhelds. This growing pain was felt by every developer at some point in time. Nintendo was hit particularly hard when they transitioned to Wii U, which was a much bigger problem for them since they typically don't get the same third party support like Xbox and Playstation do when their first party studios are lagging behind with development.

It took Nintendo until the Switch generation to really nail down their developer pipeline in regards to HD software releasing. They have been the most consistent developer in being able to always have big games launching every quarter of the year (sometimes multiple per quarter) without severe delays, even during the covid pandemic where studios are still feeling the impact today. Switch never had a content drought from Nintendo despite their "feeling" like a drought due to when Nintendo decided when and when not to hype things up via a direct.

As HD generations went on, Sony, Xbox, and third party developers saw an increase in development costs and dev timelines as machines got more power. Which gets us to today, the PS5 and XSX generations. Development timelines seem to be skyrocketing where some games are taking five years to develop if they are not completely iterative on their previous games. We all see how hard microsoft is struggling right now to even release first party games for their systems. For example, Forza Motosport 7 released as an Xbox One X launch title in 2017, and we are going on six years since and we still do not have the followup from the same studio. It was already quietly delayed form the beginning of 2023 to latter 2023. This is a super long development cycle for a series that was on a two year release schedule for the entire xbox one generation until Forza 7 released.

This leaves us with Nintendo and the "Switch 2" development cycle question. Nintendo systems live or die by the quality and frequency of Nintendo first party releases. With the next system being the significantly real power jump since Wii U launching eleven years ago (Switch is not a 'generational jump' and I doubt thats controversial to say), will we see Nintendo hit with the same teething issues every developer gets with big generational leaps in power? Can Nintendo or the next system afford to have longer development cycles and first party content droughts out the gate when we all know third party developers most likely won't be on board from the get go until they decide to "test" the waters some years into the cycle?

Which scenario for the next system do you think would work best for the health of the system:

1. A majority of the games being "cross gen" with Switch level graphics but running at much higher framerates and resolutions, but games release with the similar cadence as they did on Switch where we always had first party games to keep us satiated.
2. A mix between cross gen / switch graphical fidelity with higher framerates and resolution and some games really pushing the hardware but they have much longer development times and we maybe only get one of those big games a year.
3. Nintendo pushes the new systems tech to the fullest with much higher graphical fidelity, but games take much longer to develop and Nintendo relies on hesitant third parties to fill in the gaps because Nintendo first party takes too long to release big games.

 

[ILikeFeet]

Nintendo isn't in the market for making extremely high fidelity games. they definitely don't prioritieze complex materials or polycounts (for example, Zelda character models are in the 20K range, same with pokemon and xenoblade). they like to slather the screen with effects though, but I think they'll make use of better lighting techniques before ramping up the material complexity and diversity. fuckload of shaders just ain't them.

so it's gonna be a mix. MonolithSoft, Zelda Team, Retro, etc will push the system, but the great deal of EPD will keep focusing on game feel over rendering complexity. so many games will be more akin to Hi-Fi Rush than Last of Us Part 1

 

[meatbag]

Nintendo isn’t pushing for the absolute top of graphical fidelity, preferring to enhance the visuals of their games through artistic direction and lighting. Switch 2 games are gonna look better, and I don’t think dev times are gonna change much. Especially since Nintendo likes to release Warioware, Snipperclips, 2D Kirby types of experiences.

 

[maidhhc]

I hope 3D Mario pushes it to the max as a showcase

 

[YolkFolk]

Nintendo isn't in the market for making extremely high fidelity games. they definitely don't prioritieze complex materials or polycounts (for example, Zelda character models are in the 20K range, same with pokemon and xenoblade). they like to slather the screen with effects though, but I think they'll make use of better lighting techniques before ramping up the material complexity and diversity. fuckload of shaders just ain't them.

so it's gonna be a mix. MonolithSoft, Zelda Team, Retro, etc will push the system, but the great deal of EPD will keep focusing on game feel over rendering complexity. so many games will be more akin to Hi-Fi Rush than Last of Us Part 1

Nintendo always have games that rival or surpass those on hardware of a similar power.

Nintendo’s first party Wii U / Switch games look as good and often better than the best looking PS3/360 games, and I’d image next gen that their titles will look as good as the best PS4/Pro games. NES, SNES, N64 and Gamecube they produced visuals as good as anyone else as well.

Obviously they can’t make a game technically better looking than TLoUP1 because they won’t have that kind of power available to them. If they did then it would be a different story.

 

[9-Volt]

The output from the EPD studios will be less frequent, no doubt about that but Nintendo will make up for this by working with even more external studios. I expect to see even more Koei Tecmo and Namco team ups for Nintendo next gen, both have enough manpower to help Nintendo achieve stacked schedules.

 

[Gartooth]

Performance is the most important thing to me but I do expect some level of bump to advertise the console as a compelling upgrade. Nintendo consoles have great software variety across franchises and genres that I'd rather that not suffer as much as possible.

 

[Rowsdower]

so many games will be more akin to Hi-Fi Rush than Last of Us Part 1

I’m going through Hi-Fi Rush right now, and having a blast. The game is absolutely stunning in its own way too, so this pleases me.

 

[SirArthur]

The teams that do big games will probably push the system. But I think outside of fidelity/polycount/etc, performance will most likely be prioritize to have a great feeling game.

In that part I am super interested in what they could do with more power. Cool physics in games a la BOTW, making Mario Party more toxic, trying out different artstyles, in general be more creative.

 

[meatbag]

Nintendo consoles have great software variety across franchises and genres that I'd rather that not suffer as much as possible

I think that it’s precisely because they have great software variety that their pipeline isn’t gonna suffer much. They’re not trying to pump out AAA game after AAA game. They’re just as happy to release a small puzzle game or a 2D Metroid, stuff you can churn out with relatively shorter dev times.

I am super interested in what they could do with more power

Definitely. When they get a specs bump Nintendo funnels that extra juice into stuff like fluid physics for Splatoon or the chemistry engine in BotW. Which I feel is far more exciting than being able to count individual pixels in the hair follicle of a character model.

 

[kimbo99]

Performance is the most important thing to me but I do expect some level of bump to advertise the console as a compelling upgrade. Nintendo consoles have great software variety across franchises and genres that I'd rather that not suffer as much as possible.

Performance is developer and engine based. Better performance will just mean developers will probably focus on minimally improving graphics but making sure the game runs more smoothly

 

[Advator]

I go for innovation but that wasn't an option in the poll :/

 

[ILikeFeet]

I go for innovation but that wasn't an option in the poll :/

I see this a lot with other systems, but at the end of the day, it's a myriad of hurdles as to why we don't see it.

• games are more costly than ever, so experimentation takes a back seat to what's tried and true
• extending that point, people more often buy what's tried and true
• a lot of the innovations are in very specific areas rather than something can can be applied to a whole game (unless said game is built around that gimmick). so it's a lot of R&D for small parts of a game and that's not really worth it

 

[BassForever]

You don't put out more powerful hardware to just do the same games graphically but at a higher frame rate.

 

[Leica]

This will largely depend and be very different per game I assume? TotK's development took a long time and even if the game after it has a smoother dev cycle I still expect it to take a very long time to come out, conversely something like Pokemon will continue to have games released at a much faster pace.

Nintendo as a whole is also going to be producing considerably higher fidelity games for sure.

 

[Gabev]

I would rather they prioritize performance over graphics, 1080p at 60 FPS should be the standard by now.

 

[ILikeFeet]

You don't put out more powerful hardware to just do the same games graphically but at a higher frame rate.

Nintendo is not going to support a 120Hz handheld panel

 

[JoshuaJSlone]

I go for innovation but that wasn't an option in the poll :/

That's a whole different axis.

 

[BassForever]

Nintendo is not going to support a 120Hz handheld panel

My comment was more general for the industry as a whole. Obviously Nintendo's hybrid approach adds further complications in the fidelity vs performance discussion.

 

[Mekanos]

Well it certainly won’t be like a Steam Deck, but I imagine a portable PS4 as a baseline.

 

[Deleted member 1108]

As long as it performs 1080p60fps consistently I'll be happy

 

[takriel]

Having a very low native resolution and upscaling that to 4K with good technology and thereby allowing most games to play at 60 fps will be plenty to chew on for the Switch 2.

 

[FeiFongWong]

If the machine is at ps4 level then I expect that kind of graphical fidelity. I cant wait to see xenoblade 4.

 

[Advator]

Read comments inline

I see this a lot with other systems, but at the end of the day, it's a myriad of hurdles as to why we don't see it.

• games are more costly than ever, so experimentation takes a back seat to what's tried and true
  - Nintendo always experiment in software and hardware. Power isn't enough to keep games interesting. This is proofed multiple times over and over again. They have also mentioned not bring a new switch to the market without having something fresh and innovative. Nintendo keeps the market fresh.
• extending that point, people more often buy what's tried and true
  - not really, look at wii and switch. People are more interested in innovation then a power upgrade. Especially now because the gaps are getting smaller and smaller. The cost higher and higher.
• a lot of the innovations are in very specific areas rather than something can can be applied to a whole game (unless said game is built around that gimmick). so it's a lot of R&D for small parts of a game and that's not really worth it.
  - that depends, here is a list:
  • dpad
  • 3d stick
  • shoulder buttons
  • rumble
  • tilt sensors
  • wii motion like vr controllers
  This is not the complete list but all of these innovation Nintendo did shown it becomes standard

Upgrade in power is boring, it will have some momentum in the start but it's again the same of the same

 

[ILikeFeet]

Well it certainly won’t be like a Steam Deck

it'll be better

As long as it performs 1080p60fps consistently I'll be happy

yea, I don't see that. expecting any sort of frame rate and resolution minimum always leads to disappointment and Drake will be no different. of all teams, I expect Monolith to push the boat out the most

Read comments inline




Upgrade in power is boring, it will have some momentum in the start but it's again the same of the same

I wasn't talking about Nintendo here, but just in general. I can see nintendo doing some select experiments, but I don't expect anything game changing anymore.

 

[Mekanos]

it'll be better

Better battery life maybe

 

[Deleted member 1005]

We already have PlayStation and Xbox making their entire marketing campaign about framerate and resolution, it would really, really suck if Nintendo decides to go that route as well.

I would be 100% fine with getting Switch quality games that benefit from the added power of a Switch 2, if it means we continue getting fun, unique experiences from Nintendo on a consistent basis. If Nintendo decides to make everything about fps and resolution while sacrificing their output, I would be incredibly upset.

 

[ILikeFeet]

Better battery life maybe

Bespoke games instead of a conversion on top of a windows game will easily put Drake ahead. SD's biggest point in its favor is the clock speeds, but fewer cpu and gpu cores will be a deficit. And then ram is a toss up

 

[Pennington]

I'm pretty conservative about what I expect for Nintendo's next generation. As has been mentioned, the team sizes and time required for UHD games is a huge jump and one that I don't think Nintendo is set up to make.

 

[ILikeFeet]

I'm pretty conservative about what I expect for Nintendo's next generation. As has been mentioned, the team sizes and time required for UHD games is a huge jump and one that I don't think Nintendo is set up to make.

I don't think Nintendo even needs to go so crazy to meet teh demands of UHD gaming. outside of a few series, just a change in the lighting model is enough to bridge the gap.

 

[Thunder84]

It’ll be a mix. The big franchises will, but stuff like Mario Party or Kirby will probably be cross-gen for a while without pushing many limits.

 

[Kappa]

Gonna be a 3ds to n3ds type upgrade



Which is more than enough for me

 

[Pokemaniac]

One of Nintendo's biggest strengths compared to other big publishers is they have a lot more range in their output. I don't expect that to change,

 

[Marce-chan]

I think it highly depends of what kind of games we're talking.

Splatoon 3 is a colossal jump graphically and tech wise from 1. Pikmin 4 looking like a big jump from 3. Luigi's Mansion 3 is miles better than anything on Wii U and very similar to PS4 games in everything I'd argue.

Now, games like BotW and MK8DX which are Wii U ports are still among the very best looking games on the system and still comparable and even better looking than a lot of PS4 games than aim for the same design.

If Tears of the Kingdom wasn't announced was instead of a Switch game it was a Drake launch game and was 60FPS and at higher resolution, I'm sure as hell we'd be happy AF with what that game achieved. Same with Splatoon 3, Xenoblade Chronicles 3, Metroid Prime Remastered, etc.

The very best looking Switch games at higher resolutions and frame rates, maybe with lighting and reflections tweaks is what I'd expect. Tears of the Kingdom isn't a next gen game and it took 5-6 years to make. Presumably similar dev cycles are happening with Metroid Prime 4 and whatever next 3D Mario comes.

Expecting bigger scopes or graphical/fidelity goals for games like the next 3D Zelda isn't reasonable imho because I don't feel like there's some mind-blowing next level to reach.

There's one thing tho, the very best looking games had some caveats and things they had to hold back in graphical features in order to optimize the games. Better hardware hardware will allow for them to not having to cut back some effects and explore more what they're already accomplishing in current games.

MP4 using screen space reflections or higher quality cubemaps(like those of BotW), next Mario being Odyssey/BF looking but with higher poly Mario or Luigi's Mansion-like graphics, next Mario Kart having higher poly karts/characters and using SSR or RT for reflections, next Zelda or a TotK patch with even better lighting and shadows, everything at higher resolutions is about the roof of what I expect.

 

[ILikeFeet]

Luigi's Mansion 3 is miles better than anything on Wii U

I don't know, the game did start on Wii U after all. hard to say if it's that much above the Wii U outside of resolution. I'd argue the same for Splatoon 3. it's a step up but not massively so I think

 

[Lucifer]

I don't think Nintendo should go for Xbox/Sony type of fidelity for realism.

But I think Nintendo definitely needs to step it up and make sure that fidelity is up to par for "Nintendo" style games.

It's such a shame to see these amazing art styles plagued by jaggies. I often think their games would look fucking insane in 4k.

 

[ArchedThunder]

Nintendo always have games that rival or surpass those on hardware of a similar power.

Nintendo’s first party Wii U / Switch games look as good and often better than the best looking PS3/360 games, and I’d image next gen that their titles will look as good as the best PS4/Pro games. NES, SNES, N64 and Gamecube they produced visuals as good as anyone else as well.

Obviously they can’t make a game technically better looking than TLoUP1 because they won’t have that kind of power available to them. If they did then it would be a different story.

Yeah, Nintendo always pushes their own hardware, the only time we don’t see a big jump in graphics between gens for them is when the jump in hardware is tiny, and even then they still do everything they can to make the hardware sing. Nintendo’s first party titles are going to be gorgeous. Obviously not every game is going to be pushing the system to its limits, but there with definitely be an increase in the base visual quality of their games.
Dev times will probably get longer, but I’m betting Nintendo will have more exclusives developed by 3rd parties than they already do to help keep the release schedule up. That and increase hiring to expand their internal teams.

 

[boodream]

EPD studios will undoubtedly produce fewer games, but Nintendo will make up for it by collaborating with even more outside studios. I expect Nintendo to collaborate even more with Koei Tecmo and Namco on the next generation, as both have enough manpower to help Nintendo meet the stacked schedules.

I can't predict what will happen, but it would run counter to all of Nintendo's initiatives and statements about building internal staff and relying less on external partners. Of course those partners will still exist, I know that, but in my opinion Nintendo will certainly not outsource MORE things than they currently do, quite the opposite.

If the machine is Ps4 level, then I expect that kind of graphical fidelity. I can't wait to see xenoblade 4.

You probably mean Xenoblade Chronicles X2, right?

Splatoon 3 is a colossal leap graphically and technically compared to 1. Pikmin 4 looks like a big leap compared to 3.

The Nintendo Switch is not what you could call colossal from a technical standpoint compared to the Wii U. Splatoon 3 is more accomplished than the two first ones, as we can hope that Splatoon 4 will be more accomplished than the 3, as well as Xenoblade 3 is technically better mastered than the 2, but personally I won't go as far as to talk about a jump, neither big nor colossal.

 

[Mr Doggo]

Im very interested in what retro will do for their first original title on the next console. I think the only thing bringing MPR down is the aliasing, when i saw a bit of gameplay on 4k on ryuzaki i could easily tell someone that it was a PS4 title.

 

[TheSpaceBetween]

We're already at 5 year dev cycles for the average "big" game. I'm happy to sacrifice graphical fidelity to cut that time back so long as the game runs smoothly.

 

[JorgenRaft]

What I want to happen and what I think will happen are 2 very different things.

 

[Pennington]

Whatever it takes, I think development cycles need to be reduced. As it is a game doesn't get a successor for around five years give or take. I think that's too long of a gap to create new fans (let alone retain existing fans). It's like half a childhood! Kids change so much in that amount of years.

 

[Apopheniac]

Nintendo is already constrained by the demands of modern game development on the Switch, with a lot of their premier franchises taking four or more years to release new mainline entries. The extra juice of a new machine will give them some leeway in optimizing games for the hardware, but I don't think Nintendo is eager to prolong their dev cycles further than they already have been.

 

[Dcubed]

I'm perfectly happy with the current level of visual fidelity on offer, hell I'd be happy to go back to GCN level visuals personally. I just want better rendering resolutions and framerates (ideally 4K 60FPS for everything, even if it has to be done via DLSS), with loading times eliminated.

 

[maniacmaison]

We're already at 5 year dev cycles for the average "big" game. I'm happy to sacrifice graphical fidelity to cut that time back so long as the game runs smoothly.

I have a PS5 and I fully agree with you. Im enjoying the hell out of the DLC of Xenoblade 3. I don’t need photorealism, I need cool games.

 

[Pechan]

I think a big hint of whats to come was given with their recent pricing structure, with games like Metroid being $40, kirby also being around 50 in europe/japan, it seems they are looking to mix these smaller titles with big ones like Zelda TOTK at 70, having those games with smaller dev cycles, the standard 60$ title and the "premium" experiences at 70$. But they may also charge 70 for everything on the next console, who knows.

 

[Mr Doggo]

I think a big hint of whats to come was given with their recent pricing structure, with games like Metroid being $40, kirby also being around 50 in europe/japan, it seems they are looking to mix these smaller titles with big ones like Zelda TOTK at 70, having those games with smaller dev cycles, the standard 60$ title and the "premium" experiences at 70$. But they may also charge 70 for everything on the next console, who knows.

if they try to charge 70 for a mario tennis game i will wish for their bankruptcy