Discussion [The Verge] Tech Fails of 2022: The Nintendo Switch Really Showed Its Age

[PixelKnight]

gottem.

Obviously so I can also play my SNES games and some not-very-demanding indies on it too. Maybe we’ll even have the GameBoy games on it by then

I think I’m more worried about Ys X on the current Switch than Zelda TotK, mainly as YS IX was one of the few games where I really noticed the performance drops.

 

[VegiHam]

Like, just because the Switch is bad, doesn't mean I want to free up £400 or however much in my budget just to play next year's new Nintendo games. I'd rather play rough games on the machine I already have for a bit longer.

I'm in no hurry to be asked to make a big purchase.

 

[Gingerbread Man]

The "look at the sales!" argument is not meant to delegitimize any opinion; rather, it is a reminder that some opinions are subjective and there isn't a capital-T Truth. There is nothing wrong in longing for a more powerful Switch, but it is tiring to read the snarky "literally unplayable" comment any time a Switch exclusive releases. If we don't want to play the sales card, @ToniC139 made an excellent post.

If you look at the list of first party games on Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Nintendo_products#Nintendo_Switch (and you exclude third party games that they publish), they have around 71 games by my count.

In handheld mode, there's only 12 games that are not at least dynamic 720-648p (Xenoblade 2 + Torna, Pokken Tournament, Yoshi's Crafted World, Link's Awakening, Xenoblade DE, Origami King and both Mario + Rabbids games, which are all 3 600p, Pikmin 3 Deluxe, Age of Calamity, Bayonetta 3 and Scarlet and Violet). And those also include the only ones that have framerate issues (at least from my experience). And realistically, stuff like the Mario RPGs and Link's Awakening still look good at their resolutions in handheld mode, especially on the smaller Switch screens, it's only the ones that have really low resolutions that have issues (but this varies from person to person).

It is also tiring to read "it's obviously a Switch Pro footage!!!" anytime a Switch game is announced. This has been going on for years, at this point. A Switch revision for an enthusiastic audience was first rumored alongside the Switch Lite in 2019 (ultimately, it was the red-box Mariko Switch), and again in 2021 right before OLED was released. Monster Hunter Rise was one of those "obviously running on Switch Pro" games when it was announced in 2020, and so was Mario + Rabbids 2 in 2021. Half of Switch lifetime has been haunted by a non-existent Pro model.

Admittedly, this time the DLSS rumors feel a lot more solid, because, well, more than rumors, they are leaks. Also, we're entering Switch's 6th year, and sooner or later, Nintendo has to release a new console . Personally, I hope to see it released before (or with) Pikmin 4, because Pikmin is one of those games where a higher resolution can really make a difference. If it doesn't happen, oh well, I'm sure the game will be reasonably playable on my 2017 Switch.

 

[boodream]

No. It ran fine on 360 and Bayo 2 ran fine as well. The hardware is old. It needs to be updated. It always amazes me the people who want to defend a corporation.

It still amazes me how much the use of the word "corporation" has become a totally overused argument. Being impatient for the release of a more expensive console will not make any "corporation" suffer.

 

[DittoM]

It still amazes me how much the use of the word "corporation" has become a totally overused argument. Being impatient for the release of a more expensive console will not make any "corporation" suffer.

But we need to take the moral high ground over not getting our shiny new toy fast enough.

 

[Scrawnton]

Like, just because the Switch is bad, doesn't mean I want to free up £400 or however much in my budget just to play next year's new Nintendo games. I'd rather play rough games on the machine I already have for a bit longer.

I'm in no hurry to be asked to make a big purchase.

Whynotboth?.gif

I don't think anyone's arguing to force Nintendo to release Switch 2 and cut off Switch next year. Most of us want cross gen games that actual run good on Switch 2. You can stick with the one you have.

Even if games aren't cross gen, it's been six years, it'd be completely reasonable to release a new system and ask people to buy it if they want to play new games. That's how this has always worked.

 

[Hero of Hyrule]

Like, just because the Switch is bad, doesn't mean I want to free up £400 or however much in my budget just to play next year's new Nintendo games. I'd rather play rough games on the machine I already have for a bit longer.

I'm in no hurry to be asked to make a big purchase.

In an ideal world Nintendo maintains cross-gen releases for a couple years and handles the transition like GB->GBC

 

[Yoshifan31]

I’m sorry but I’ve seen this argument multiple times and it’s really stupid to me.
Switch 2 will surely allow for enough graphical fidelity, performance and resolutions for many years so only few people who don’t know what they’re talking about would complain.
There’s a reason PS4 games are still released and run great even in 2022, the problem with current Switch is that it doesn’t even reach those standards so current technical complains are very legitimate.
Switch 2 situation should be very different imo, so imagining that we’ll see the same scenario even after 5/6 years doesn’t really make sense.

You forget the part where Elden Ring released on PS4 this year. Or how the people that care about generations constantly throw tantrums about cross gen games holding games back, or even the Series S holding it back.

I’m not expecting this sentiment to go away with a Switch 2 because 1080/60 just won’t be good enough for them. I play Switch games on a 4K TV and I have simply no idea where the hell people are coming from when they call them blurry, even 720p is still HD after all so what does “looking acceptable” really mean. Oh wait, it’s just about console warring so you can say that your version that runs the game at higher numbers is better than my garbage archaic hardware that is totally the wrong way to play the game. You simply can’t win arguments against these types because that’s what they do, they judge gaming according to their metrics and nothing else, they will always “ackchually” you back just like Linux users will always be insufferable with their superior customisation or whatever.

Everyone agrees that better performance is preferrable. The point of the people that are sick and tired of Switch 2 speculation is that it is simply insufferable. People tried to wish this thing upon existence since the Switch with the red box and improved battery life. It’s coming when Nintendo decides it’s coming and there is nothing we can do about it, so no need to constantly mentioning it in every corner of the Internet. It created this completely false narrative about the Switch in general, to the point where you have articles like this one which have literally no basis in reality. Every game on every platform can have performance issues, it’s just that the Switch in particular is met with some of the most absurd hyperbole, always following it up with “we need a new Switch”.

The actual reality is that videogames are probably the type of software that is the most difficult to develop, test and maintain in the world. There will always be devs and designers that will bite more than they can chew, or simply not care about optimizing their games further. So when you notice that any game you play has some fluctuation at some point, you have two choices. You either become a PC gamer and do the necessary to mitigate this problem, or you just let it go and not beat that drum in front of people that either don’t notice it or don’t care. It’s simple as that

 

[boodream]

In an ideal world Nintendo maintains cross-gen releases for a couple years and handles the transition like GB->GBC

This ideal world seems very plausible. The Playstation 5 exists since november 2020 and in november 2022, Playstation 4 owners were still able to buy the newest God of War.

Nobody (and by nobody I mean literally nobody) won't be happy when a "Switch 2" will be released. Even the one who will have to wait a bit to buy one. We're all excited about it.

But at the same time, if the Verge is able to name me just one game devekopped by EPD who is unplayable and unenjoyable BECAUSE of the current Switch, then I'll think the article that opened this thread is something else than pure crap. For god sake, you have to be blind not to see that in 2022, both Splatoon 3, Xenoblade 3 and obsivously the first 3D Kirby ever are the most tecnically game of thir respective franchises.

And I'm not even talking about 2017. Everyone is willing to play a smoother and prettier version of Breath Of The Wild. But calling it a "technical failure" is just a ridiculous joke.

 

[ToniC139]

My favorite part (not here thankfully, on Twitter and other forums) is people having selective memory about how games perform. It's fine to want new hardware, I want new hardware too eventually (to see what kind of new games are possible and what new gimmicks we'll get), but claiming stuff like that even the first party games aren't 720p/1080p is funny.

If you look at the list of first party games on Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Nintendo_products#Nintendo_Switch (and you exclude third party games that they publish), they have around 71 games by my count.

In handheld mode, there's only 12 games that are not at least dynamic 720-648p (Xenoblade 2 + Torna, Pokken Tournament, Yoshi's Crafted World, Link's Awakening, Xenoblade DE, Origami King and both Mario + Rabbids games, which are all 3 600p, Pikmin 3 Deluxe, Age of Calamity, Bayonetta 3 and Scarlet and Violet). And those also include the only ones that have framerate issues (at least from my experience). And realistically, stuff like the Mario RPGs and Link's Awakening still look good at their resolutions in handheld mode, especially on the smaller Switch screens, it's only the ones that have really low resolutions that have issues (but this varies from person to person).

What is the acceptable range for resolution docked for people that want a new Switch? Because it feels weird to demand all games be 1080p on the Switch when a lot of PS4/XB1 games had to drop down to 900p or lower, so I'll just assume 1080p-900p is "acceptable". Then, there's only 14 games out of the 71 that don't hit that. (Pokken Tournament, Xenoblade 2, Bayonetta 1, 2, 3, Yoshi's Crafted World, Link's Awakening, Tokyo Mirage Sessions #FE, Mystery Dungeon, Xenoblade DE, Pikmin 3 Deluxe, Bowser's Fury, BDSP, Scarlet Violet). And again, these are the games that also generally have framerate issues. I was also generous and included as many games as possible, even games where the computational powers of the Switch was not the reason the resolution isn't high (like Wii U ports where the resolution wasn't changed, or games like BDSP and Mystery Dungeon that just run the same in both modes).

(I didn't include games that have dynamic resolutions that could theoretically be really low but they are Splatoon 2, 3, Mario Odyssey and BotW docked, handheld they're fine.) Also didn't include XC3 because it runs at 1080p docked and 880p handheld after upscale, which is the effective resolution.

So at most 14/71. I'm not sure if that's acceptable to people or not, but to me that seems fine for a console 6 years into its life.

Also, this is from my experience/analyses on YT/dev talks, there could be games where there are bad framerates or resolutions I'm not aware of.

Ok lol I forgot Fire Emblem Three Hopes, that's also below 900p/720p. So I guess add 1 to each number above.

I was also thinking of looking back at previous Nintendo consoles if I get time over Christmas. You'll only see non native resolutions on Wii U, but it'd be interesting to see how many games have slowdown/framerate issues on the older consoles.

 

[Bosintang]

There's absolutely nothing wrong with wanting a new hardware after nearly 6 years of the console on the market. But conversly, there's nothing wrong with pointing out that from a business point of view, Nintendo does not need a new console in 2023. And Nintendo being first and foremost about the money, it's their job to plan in advance when would be the sweet spot to release their machine.
I've argued several times on the reason why I didn't consider early 2023 as likely. I'd welcome being wrong and I'd surely buy a new console if it released tomorrow, but it's not something I desperately need to enjoy games on Switch. The recently released Immortal Shell proves, once more, that making ambitious games running decently on the system is first and foremost a question of efforts.

 

[spekkeh]

(offtopic, I love Famiboard's feature of seeing how often a post has been quoted so I don't accidentally post something that's already been mentioned or join a pile on, something a certain other site desperately needs)

BOTW has sold nearly 30M over a 6 year period, as you said. Now imagine what TOTK can do releasing on the same system, which now has well over 100M sold. Its day 1 sales are going to be colossal. Do you really expect Nintendo to turn that revenue down?

I don't think that's necessarily how it works, or only up to a point. Look at how much Twilight Princess sold to early Wii owners (nearly 7M), as opposed to the Gamecube that had a 2x bigger marketshare after a full year (1.5M), then look at how much Skyward Sword sold to nearly 100M Wii owners: 3.9M. I think The Last of Us also sold a bit more on the new PS4 than on PS3 at the end of its life, but don't quote me on that. Certainly GTAV did, but it kept selling all through the generation. I think the few times that multiple zelda's released on one console, the first one sold markedly better (Zelda->II, OoT->MM, TP->SS). But I think in general big single player games benefit from a console launch, because they kind of push the system and people are interested in that showcase game that pushes their new toy, and big multiplayer games benefit from an established market, because the critical mass pushes the success forward.

 

[VegiHam]

Whynotboth?.gif

I don't think anyone's arguing to force Nintendo to release Switch 2 and cut off Switch next year. Most of us want cross gen games that actual run good on Switch 2. You can stick with the one you have.

Even if games aren't cross gen, it's been six years, it'd be completely reasonable to release a new system and ask people to buy it if they want to play new games. That's how this has always worked.

In an ideal world Nintendo maintains cross-gen releases for a couple years and handles the transition like GB->GBC

I'd love a long cross gen period, but if recent experience with the PS4 is anything to go buy, we'd transition from everyone saying "Switch Pro When" to everyone saying "When will Nintendo stop letting Switch 1 hold back Switch Advance games? Mario is COMPROMISED" or something

 

[Scrawnton]

I'd love a long cross gen period, but if recent experience with the PS4 is anything to go buy, we'd transition from everyone saying "Switch Pro When" to everyone saying "When will Nintendo stop letting Switch 1 hold back Switch Advance games? Mario is COMPROMISED" or something

I don't think people have an issue with how Switch games look from a technical or graphical standpoint. Just resolution and frame rate instability. Cross gen games would be ideal because that just means great performance on Switch 2.

 

[N 2 Deep]

I ain't gonna lie the Switch has been showing its age since like 2020

Most people do not care though

I desperately want Switch 2 next year, but Nintendo could drag this out until Holiday 2024 if they want to (and might do)

 

[VegiHam]

I don't think people have an issue with how Switch games look from a technical or graphical standpoint. Just resolution and frame rate instability. Cross gen games would be ideal because that just means great performance on Switch 2.

That's how people feel now, sure. But two years after PS5 launch, people get mad when they learn a game is coming to PS4 also. I expect the same would happen in the Switch cross gen period.

 

[Marce-chan]

I'd love a long cross gen period, but if recent experience with the PS4 is anything to go buy, we'd transition from everyone saying "Switch Pro When" to everyone saying "When will Nintendo stop letting Switch 1 hold back Switch Advance games? Mario is COMPROMISED" or something

I've seen people saying the Switch can't have the next 3D Mario because Bowser's Fury is 30FPS in portable mode lol.

Kirby and the Forgotten Land is 30FPS but they aimed for a higher than ever graphical and quality and scope, but people tend to forget that just because of the number.

Apparently people even erased that Super Mario Odyssey (dynamic 900p60 with big scope, current gen graphics and superb effect), Luigi's Mansion 3 (1080p native and I don't even have to compliment this one because anyone can see there are barely even PS4 games that look that good), Metroid Dread (this one is ignored because it plays in 2D, despite having more effort than most 3D games), Astral Chain(holy f this game looks like some 2020-2022 current gen games) and Xenoblade Chronicles 3 (that one they ignore all the praise that DF gave, the scope, the tech, the world, the models and design, and literally being 1080p with TAAU just because the actual resolution you can't even notice is 540p).

I see people whining about Shin Megami Tensei V too and I wonder if they ever played another Atlus game?? Like it's a generational leap beyond Persona 5, any comparison shows that, so it being dynamic 720-1080 and not featuring AA really takes away the merit of having the best graphics and scope of any Atlus game??? Then we have people saying Soul Hackers II wouldn't be able to run on the Switch and I can only laugh, the game literally proves that games like Pokémon SV having severe technical and graphical issues in 2022 isn't a Switch thing, but a rushed game thing.

 

[Hero of Hyrule]

Soul Hackers 2 wouldn’t run on Switch because Atlus barely got it running on base PS4/XBO. That says more about the developers than the hardware in this case though.

 

[Herb Alpert]

Can't wait for the tech fails of 2023 : switch really really showed its age

 

[Kappa]

I personally hope It doesn't come out yet. It won't have DLSS or be able to output above 900p if releases within 2 years or so

 

[Serif]

I personally hope It doesn't come out yet. It won't have DLSS or be able to output above 900p if releases within 2 years or so

Sure it can. The leaked specs with DLSS already indicate a ~2 year development time and the Nvidia SoC it's based on (Orin) came out this year. Even without the leaked specs Tegra chips have had tensor cores since 2019 (Xavier) so I would've still bet on it.

900p would depend on the game.

 

[Galgavias]

(offtopic, I love Famiboard's feature of seeing how often a post has been quoted so I don't accidentally post something that's already been mentioned or join a pile on, something a certain other site desperately needs)

I don't think that's necessarily how it works, or only up to a point. Look at how much Twilight Princess sold to early Wii owners (nearly 7M), as opposed to the Gamecube that had a 2x bigger marketshare after a full year (1.5M), then look at how much Skyward Sword sold to nearly 100M Wii owners: 3.9M. I think The Last of Us also sold a bit more on the new PS4 than on PS3 at the end of its life, but don't quote me on that. Certainly GTAV did, but it kept selling all through the generation. I think the few times that multiple zelda's released on one console, the first one sold markedly better (Zelda->II, OoT->MM, TP->SS). But I think in general big single player games benefit from a console launch, because they kind of push the system and people are interested in that showcase game that pushes their new toy, and big multiplayer games benefit from an established market, because the critical mass pushes the success forward.

Yeah but the GameCube was an unpopular console which sold pretty badly all told. If Nintendo had released TP on GC alone it wouldn't have sold anywhere near the numbers it did. And regarding Skyward Sword, it released right at the end of the Wii's life when the allure of motion controls had worn off with everyone's attention focused on Skyrim instead. It never stood a chance of doing TP numbers. The Switch is in a much better place than both the GC and Wii were at this point in their lifespan. People are still buying Switch software in their droves. It's a healthy console.

TOTK ain't going to hit BOTW numbers for sure, but honestly, we should be expecting upwards of a 10M opening weekend for it, probably even higher, which is still an insanely big launch. Nintendo aren't going to want to turn their noses up at revenue like that.

Edit: Not to mention the numbers that Pokemon Scarlet and Violet just achieved prove that there remains a huge market for predominantly single player on the console. Nintendo don't need to hold Zelda back for their next console for it to achieve a huge level of success.

 

[Tangerine_Cookie]

Can't wait for the tech fails of 2023 : switch really really showed its age

Tech fails of 2024: "Holy shit why are you guys still buying the Switch"

 

[shoptroll]

Man that article was basically a glamorized “I got a Deck, now I hate my Switch” forum post.

We get it, the hardware isn’t keeping pace with some of the software released on it. Yes, we’re probably due for new hardware… any day now.

But I don’t think Nintendo is in any danger if this continues for another year or two. Switch has a very deep indie catalog and if they can keep their internal or partner developed titles in check they can ride this out for a bit longer.

But not too much longer. The biggest blunder would be having a repeat of the Wii’s twilight years when hardware sales suddenly dropped off a cliff and they weren’t ready for it.

The system is “good enough” for a number of scenarios and while it’s unfortunate that some high-profile releases lately could’ve been better served by staying in the oven for longer (which is likely signs of a faltering production pipeline or ongoing remote work issues) I think they’re still the exception to the rule.

Soul Hackers 2 wouldn’t run on Switch because Atlus barely got it running on base PS4/XBO. That says more about the developers than the hardware in this case though.

I think you could say the same about Game Freak’s releases this year too

 

[Sadist]

You know, reading the article after a week of waiting, it’s not that bad, but the choice of words is poor to say the least. These writers really need to recheck their articles and think “am I conveying my thoughts with click-baity words or with a more level headed view?”

Yeah yeah I know, levelheaded articles don’t get clicks, still, it’s an article which boils down to “look I’ve seen niche hardware which is kinda cool, but has its problems too, but you know, more powerful Switch would be fun.” I’m kinda hoping Switch 2 rumours will appear in 2023 so we can lay the discussion to rest.

 

[Serif]

I was reminded of this topic reading about Sports Story performance.

The Switch is capable of running a lot of games but it's not powerful 'enough' i.e. not enough overhead to 'brute force' perfect performance if there are engine limitations or optimization issues e.g. Sonic Colors Ultimate being ported using Godot or CrossCode using an HTML5 compiler. These games also have issues on the stationary consoles but are exacerbated on the Switch.

Why does the Switch have performance issues in 2D games or Wii ports? It's not literally because it cannot handle 2D games or Wii ports, there are many counterexamples. It's because of the nature of development, each of those games has their own engine and development tools and resources allocated to it, where not everything can be optimized to the metal for Switch. There are definitely instances of large improvements on the software side - we've literally seen game patches like Panzer Dragoon Remake that double the framerate, or those like Ark that overhaul the entire game. Even for all the different indie games out there - Hollow Knight is Unity, Bloodstained is Unreal, Hades is a custom engine, etc. If each of these games targeted the Switch exclusively they'd look and run much better, but they're multiplatform and Switch is one among many different targets. Many more layers of abstraction than previous generations of handhelds - a good thing for overall third party support but has its caveats.

There's obviously a line to be drawn. We should expect better of the media we pay for, and our expectations come from comparison. There are hundreds of 2D pixel art games running pitch perfect on the Switch, so if a new 2D pixel art game comes out and chugs, I'm not 'blaming' the Switch. If a new 3D open-world RPG comes out, I'd scale my expectations accordingly. But of course - devs don't have unlimited time to address bottlenecks in games. It's one of the reasons to want new hardware - rising tide lifts all ships.

Basically I wanted new hardware yesterday but until then, there's millions of Switches out there hungry for patches. Feed 'em.

 

[mariodk18]

I think the hopium is strong if you think Switch 2 is going to get ports like SF6 even if it was available early next year.

What I will say with regards to SF6 is that Capcom is the Japanese Ubisoft. They had some kind of title at the launch of the most recent Nintendo systems. Switch had USF2, Wii U had MH3U, 3DS has SFIV. They more or less rolled dice to decide platform support for the PS2/GC/XB generation, giving RE to GC. Even after everyone (including Capcom) abandoned the N64, they still put out RE2 and MML. Oh and a little title called "Magical Tetris Challenge" developed by none other than Hidemaro Fujibayashi (who also directed the GB Zelda games and later joined Nintendo). Wii had Tatsunoko vs Capcom AND MH3 as an exclusive. They shifted MH, which blew up on PSP, to the 3DS and were one of the few big JP 3Ps majorly supporting the 3DS in addition to an exclusive RE game in Revelaitons. Switch had a ground up MH built for it, another exclusive MH game in Stories 2, a customized RE engine, Nintendo added more RAM at their request and ports out the wazoo (which Bamco hasn't done with their internal games). Don't forget every single modern RE game being brought over via cloud and that weird RE 5/6 live action focus trailer at E3 2019.

And looking to other consoles, DC had RE code veronica and Xbox received the Dead Rising games as exclusives for quite a while. My main point is that you can be near guaranteed that Capcom will have something at launch or within launch window for Switch 2. SF6 most definitely and RE4R or some other RE game will be there within the first year.

 

[Rainbow]

I will buy some more games for my Switch. And i will have fun playing them, like a lot of fun. And one more extra round of fun for all the mourners. It will be glorious!!!

 

[JoshuaJSlone]

I think Mario Kart 8 Deluxe is already both Mario Kart 9 and Mario Kart 10, sadly... Won't be colored surprised if they announce like a new pack of all new courses and characters alongside the patch that makes it compatible with 4K and RT for next Switch.

Wouldn't be sad either btw.

Nintendo would be incredibly sad to not have another game to sell 50 million copies of.

Because by the time a Switch 2 comes out we’ll be well underway into the PS5/XSX lifecycle and standards will change. When more games on those systems are running at 4K 60fps, I fully expect people’s to start whining about how the Switch 2 library is “literally unplayable” because games are 1080 30fps.

30fps has sucked for decades. That it's now 1/4 the max rate of many TVs rather than just 1/2 makes it even worse.

I think the hopium is strong if you think Switch 2 is going to get ports like SF6 even if it was available early next year.

Since when is Capcom stingy about ports to hardware that can handle something?

Spoiler

try to enter the NSO app tab and redeem points for icons or browse the eShop while a game is running and tell me with a straight face we don't need new hardware. I dare you.

Such actions should work fine on DS-level hardware. If they're not on Switch, there's no reason to think they won't equally screw it up on PS7-level hardware.

 

[Scrawnton]

Such actions should work fine on DS-level hardware. If they're not on Switch, there's no reason to think they won't equally screw it up on PS7-level hardware.

The problem with Switch in regards to the eShop and NSO app is its slooowwww Wi-Fi chip. Those apps are glorified web pages and Switch's Wi-Fi speed caps at like 30mbps and the Ethernet port isn't much faster whereas my MacBook from 2013 gets 400mbps over my Wi-Fi and my M2 Mac Air and my new iPhone get 700mbps+ on my Wi-Fi.

The next Switch needs to come equipped with a much better Wi-Fi chip so that cloud gaming and general usability of the store and other web based apps is actually reasonable.

 

[mariodk18]

Maybe people just have a problem with strong words like "fails" and "need". I don't think the blowback is usually as strong when others say "I want" new hardware because it's personal. But when someone says "we need" a new Switch or the Switch is "getting old and outdated", they kind of speak for others in a way. Outside of food, shelter, and water, no one "needs" much else really.

But this is an article in the modern internet age, so putting "needs" or "fails" or "it's time" grabs the clicks, as it draws in the people who disagree and agree with those statements.

 

[DittoM]

30fps has sucked for decades.

Guess we’re just gonna have to disagree on that. 30fps has never impacted my enjoyment of a game unless it’s unstable or if it’s only 30fps in handheld mode (Hyrule Warriors DE and Bowser’s Fury).

 

[MSnap]

The “quit having fun!” meme but the guy is shouting “bootlicker!”

 

[Maxrunner]

Sports story has issues? How?

 

[ShadowFox08]

Voted the first option, but I can wait for May,. Switch doesn't have to go anywhere. Just give it 1st party mulitplatform support and let devs decide if they want exclusives on Drake.

 

[Rampo360]

Switch could use an upgrade long ago. The fact that despite it's age managed to be a huge success for many years shows that its hardware weakness wasn't that important.

 

[AngryAlchemist]

Takes like this are kind of eh because we keep getting amazing looking new Switch games all the time, so where's the pressure for more hardware? Because games like Scarlet and Violet exist? Eh. We obviously need new hardware sometime soonish but it's not because of the games currently coming out for the Switch.

 

[Deleted member 2]

30fps has sucked for decades. That it's now 1/4 the max rate of many TVs rather than just 1/2 makes it even worse.

The maximum framerate of high-end TVs is not a normal benchmark to judge a game's value.

Does 60fps "look like shit" because it's only 1/4 the max rate of 240Hz tvs?

Some people need to just grow stronger eyes, swear to god

 

[TheSpaceBetween]

Yeah but the GameCube was an unpopular console which sold pretty badly all told. If Nintendo had released TP on GC alone it wouldn't have sold anywhere near the numbers it did. And regarding Skyward Sword, it released right at the end of the Wii's life when the allure of motion controls had worn off with everyone's attention focused on Skyrim instead. It never stood a chance of doing TP numbers. The Switch is in a much better place than both the GC and Wii were at this point in their lifespan. People are still buying Switch software in their droves. It's a healthy console.

TOTK ain't going to hit BOTW numbers for sure, but honestly, we should be expecting upwards of a 10M opening weekend for it, probably even higher, which is still an insanely big launch. Nintendo aren't going to want to turn their noses up at revenue like that.

Edit: Not to mention the numbers that Pokemon Scarlet and Violet just achieved prove that there remains a huge market for predominantly single player on the console. Nintendo don't need to hold Zelda back for their next console for it to achieve a huge level of success.

I don't think Zelda is going to do Pokemon numbers. I could see it doing 5 maybe in its first week.

 

[Laguna]

How can you call a 2017 system, a 2022 Tech fail in the first place? Every excuse seems to be good enough to attack Nintendo.

 

[Laguna]

But this is an article in the modern internet age, so putting "needs" or "fails" or "it's time" grabs the clicks, as it draws in the people who disagree and agree with those statements.

Beeing manipulative to generate clicks and engagement is scummy behaviour that has to be scrutinised.

 

[woodhead]

I mean someone could also write an opinion about how PS5 and XBox X are showing their age without ray tracing and tensor cores in the year 2022. Really outdated tech right there

 

[julian]

I’d take these arguments more seriously if half of them didn’t come from people claiming Nintendo launched the Switch with “outdated” or “ancient” hardware to begin with. The most vocal critics do not seem to understand the compromises needed to make a system handheld so we should all fully expect the exact same rhetoric the moment Nintendo launches another hybrid, because there is no world where that hybrid system will compare to a PS5/XSX and somehow that will be Nintendo’s fault even if it’s the most powerful handheld ever released.

 

[Jersh]

The problem with Switch in regards to the eShop and NSO app is its slooowwww Wi-Fi chip. Those apps are glorified web pages and Switch's Wi-Fi speed caps at like 30mbps and the Ethernet port isn't much faster whereas my MacBook from 2013 gets 400mbps over my Wi-Fi and my M2 Mac Air and my new iPhone get 700mbps+ on my Wi-Fi.

The next Switch needs to come equipped with a much better Wi-Fi chip so that cloud gaming and general usability of the store and other web based apps is actually reasonable.

This isn't the case. Both the Wi-Fi and Ethernet are about three times as fast what you're claiming in ideal conditions (and likely inhibited by the OS and not the hardware itself), and it doesn't make these apps go any faster. You shouldn't need hundreds of Mbps for a webpage to feel responsive anyway.

The issue is either related to how these apps are set up or for whatever reason Nintendo's servers are just that slow to respond.

 

[woodhead]

I think there was a japanese presentation from nintendo about the eshop tech and that it uses a web tech stack. Websites and programs that are build with web tech stuff like javascript, react, native and whatelse are not known for resource friendly programming so maybe thats the problem

 

[julian]

I think there was a japanese presentation from nintendo about the eshop tech and that it uses a web tech stack. Websites and programs that are build with web tech stuff like javascript, react, native and whatelse are not known for resource friendly programming so maybe thats the problem

There is nothing about being a webstack that makes it inherently slow. You can make extremely efficient Javascript applications but if you program something inefficiently, it will be slow. Or if the backend is too slow to respond with data, the front end will be slow.

 

[karmitt]

There is nothing about being a webstack that makes it inherently slow. You can make extremely efficient Javascript applications but if you program something inefficiently, it will be slow. Or if the backend is too slow to respond with data, the front end will be slow.

Could be wrong but I just assumed Nintendo didn’t allocate many resource to it. I’d be surprised if these apps weren’t written fairly well - Nintendo is trying to squeeze everything they can out of the hardware, no? There’s a lot of talent and I don’t see why Nintendo wouldn’t often have first dibs over there.

 

[woodhead]

There is nothing about being a webstack that makes it inherently slow. You can make extremely efficient Javascript applications but if you program something inefficiently, it will be slow. Or if the backend is too slow to respond with data, the front end will be slow.

I agree but sadly the most websites I have seen are either badly programmed or are bloated with trackers and ads which makes them slow. I don't think ads and trackers are a problem in case for the eshop so what is the problem if it isn't inefficient programming?

 

[woodhead]

Found the presentation about the eshop tech https://html5experts-jp.translate.goog/shumpei-shiraishi/24538/?_x_tr_sl=ja&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en

 

[julian]

Could be wrong but I just assumed Nintendo didn’t allocate many resource to it. I’d be surprised if these apps weren’t written fairly well - Nintendo is trying to squeeze everything they can out of the hardware, no? There’s a lot of talent and I don’t see why Nintendo wouldn’t often have first dibs over there.

The 3DS and Wii shops were not written in Javascript, and are native apps that should have the full system resources yet they suffer even worse speed issues.

I was going to say it’s probably resources as mentioned and that they should rely less heavily on big images but I was just messing with the eShop and it felt much faster than I’d remembered. It’s really not that bad. It also clearly loads some initial data and then slowly loads in images so you can scroll quickly without first waiting for everything to come in. Which seems pretty good to me. The big issue is the initial data which doesn’t feel like a UI issue.

Found the presentation about the eshop tech https://html5experts-jp.translate.goog/shumpei-shiraishi/24538/?_x_tr_sl=ja&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en

None of their tech stack seems crazy and most if not all those libraries are still used regularly. Only one I’ve had serious issues with is react-router and that’s because I inherited code from a contracting company that used it in the dumbest way imaginable and there is no universe where Nintendo made that same mistake. I’ve also made sites using react-router without those crazy issues. The rest of the libraries I’ve used to make multiple sites with.

I agree but sadly the most websites I have seen are either badly programmed or are bloated with trackers and ads which makes them slow. I don't think ads and trackers are a problem in case for the eshop so what is the problem if it isn't inefficient programming?

I’m actually pretty sure they do use trackers or at least google analytics on all their sites. Not sure what that would do to performance though since I haven’t had to deal with it in my work.

How did we get on this talk anyways? Oh, the slow NSO app. So I was exploring the eShop and the NSO app and had some thoughts on where and why some things are slow but honestly they were behaving speedier than ever for me. Not sure if the hotel internet I’m on is clearly set up better than my home internet or if it’s because I’m in a much less populated area but it’s clear the app can be relatively quick in certain scenarios.