• Nintendo plans two new Switch models for this year
    63 replies, posted
I feel like Nintendo's stuck between a rock and a hard place when it comes to what to do with a power boost. Then again, I still feel like Switch needed another year in the oven in the first place so that they could give it a beefier SoC to begin with. The thing is, the Gen7 Wii was indisputably more powerful than even the strongest Gen6 system, the original Xbox. And the Gen8 Wii U was stronger than Gen7's champ, the PS3. Yet neither of those was often included in the major multiplats that were pushed out to their contemporaries from the Microsoft and Sony sides. And now Switch - the first Gen9 system - isn't even as powerful as the base Xbone, the weaker of the two Gen8 twins. Once we see the Xb4/PS5 hit the scene, I can't see how Nintendo will be able to keep up with them without a massive power boost - one that would necessarily leave the current Switch in the dust. We'll be right back where we started where every major multiplat is PC/Xbox/PS and Nintendo gets left with little unless their version is massively scaled down, like many PS360 games were to the Wii (as unlike the Wii U, the Wii's market share was too big for publishers to ignore). Even now Switch is struggling with many PS4/Xbone ports. The only out I can see at the moment that would allow them to catch up without current Switch players feeling ripped off is for them to suddenly pivot and claim that the Switch is their Gen9 handheld that just so happens to work as a console (a la what Vita should have been), and to release a dedicated home console under different branding that uses all the same peripherals and accepts Switch cartridges, but has its own bigger cartridges that can't fit back in the Switch (such as GBA's cartridge slot being able to fit GB(C) cartridges but not vice versa, or more recently 3DS with DS carts). Then Switch still serves its use as the system you can take on the go, and it then becomes a matter of "does this game need to be released for the dedicated console or can we get away with putting it on a Switch cart so that it works in either and Switch owners can take it on the go?" Could even make dual-mode carts that work in a Switch in a lower-fidelity mode but also contain the assets to take advantage of the dedicated console's capabilities. Then way later down the line - several years later, long after anyone can be justifiably pissed off - they release a portable version of that dedicated console and unify everything again.
I don't believe they'd cut rumble completely because they have used it as a gimmick in so many games it'd suck to play it without it. Certain moons in Odyssey will be impossible. Some minigames in Super Mario Party wouldn't work. Unless they swap in normal rumble motors and come up with a software solution to approximate the HD rumble, I can't see it being cut
If the cheaper model is cheap enough and good enough, I might consider picking one up for Pokemon. I haven't played Pokemon since the NDS games since I couldn't justify buying a 3DS just for Pokemon, and those are the only games I really care about on Nintendo. Not being able to detach the controllers sounds like a potential pain though. But I've never used a Switch so don't know.
There's two major reasons you can't get docked quality play on the go with the switch as it stands. A. The system draws too much power in docked mode for the battery, it actually takes the full 3A that the power brick supplies, hence why you're not supposed to use anything except the OEM chargers because the system draws an odd power spec. It *could* work from the battery but the battery would get very hot and drain a lot quicker, this leads us to the second problem. B. Thermals. The switch is a fucking hot box to say the least. As someone who's very familiar with the tear-down and repair of the switch let me just say there really isn't a lot of room for anything in there. A single heatpipe that moves from the Tegra x1 to an absolutely fucking pitiful set of fins and an anemic 5v blower fan that's having to work way harder than it deserves. The thing is running about as hot as it really can. Any hotter and you'd be in the "too hot to comfortably handle" territory in handheld mode. A switch revision that could do docked quality on the go needs better thermals, which means the device needs to get bigger, something a "avid gamer" / "pro" version of the console could easily do since the form factor of the regular switch is really designed around portability and being comfortably usable by everyone, including children. It'd not likely need too much more room, but some room is definitely needed.
yea but that with the devs targeting the current switch. imagine them targeting the switch pro. Its gonna be like BOTW on wii u or Hyrule Warriors on the 3DS
I thought BotW on Wii U was almost on par with the Switch version, considering Wii U was the only version in development for most of its life?
Its not easy to compare the wii u to the switch because the wii u used powerpc architecture and base hardware was reminiscent from the GameCube era. The switch uses the modern ARM.
At the same time hardware is obsoleted so quickly and the switch was already behind in power when it released
I might evidently be in the minority going off of this thread, but I'd actually be okay with a large power leap and exclusive "Switch Pro" games/etc. From my layman's level understanding, wouldn't upgrading the Switch's Tegra X1 to a Tegra X2 place the Switch somewhere roughly around (vanilla) Xbox One levels?
BOTW on wii u ran absolutely fine though. it only really slowed down under the same conditions the switch version did
yea well BOTW wasnt a good example. Still though I just feel gimped for spending 300€ for what might just become a lackluster-experience-dispenser. I know thats probably not gonna happen. Honestly, maybe this is good. Its certainly better than them trying a new console and then possibly loosing the (quite frankly) great portability for a new gimmick that might suck. If the pro is much better I might save up some money and get it (and then give my switch to my friend or sth so he can play smash)
We jumped forward quite a bit since Gen8 started. Pascal and Ryzen were both huge game-changers.
I'd be surprised if the higher end Switch doesn't support 4K output, or at least "faux-K" as some have taken to calling reconstructed 4K. 4K adoption is only growing more and more as 4K televisions and monitors continue to come down in price. It would also prevent the Switch from feeling even more dated than it already is in some aspects, with current higher end consoles already having 4K support, as well as that probably being a staple of the upcoming next gen. While a 1080p screen on the console itself would be nice, I'm more than willing to bet the "pro Switch" will still have a 720p screen just for battery life and developer support reasons. To be fair, the 720p screen of the Switch is more than good enough for most games in portable mode. A lot of times, some games even appear better in portable mode than docked despite the lower resolution, simply because the screen is smaller and makes things like downscaling harder to notice. Depending on how this goes down, I'll probably buy this Switch Pro, or *new* Nintendo Switch or whatever they call it. Potentially better performance and higher resolutions is always a good thing. And it gives me a reason to finally homebrew my Switch I got on launch day, due to no fears of losing my account.
720p is definitely not optimal even for smartphones, and the Switch has a large screen. 1440p or something would be great, but I'd imagine 3D rendering being limited to 720p. (2D stuff could be full-res)
Honestly I havent had a single instance of the low res being an issue on a screen that small. Its a pretty decent screen. Phones tend to have higher res since it looks nice and most of the stuff is just ui. For a gaming console where most of the stuff isnt perfect shapes anyways isnt that big of an issue with a screen that isnt the size of a pc monitor or larger. If the screen was a tad bigger id appreciate full hd more but rn id rather have 720p and 60fps than 1080p and 40 fps. For a tv a higher res would make sense, however I too think its not a requirement here. You guys are forgetting the ps pro was made just to get to 4k at a reasonable fps and most of the last gen cards struggled to run above 60 constantly on 4k. Yes, current gen this isnt as much of a problem anymore but those cards for pcs tend to cost as much as the switch does. Its unreasonable for a tablet to have good graphics & 4k & 60fps unless there is some insane tegra package to run off from. Maybe just 1 step up from 1080p instead of going 3k-4k would be reasonable. I still think pushing for a consistent 60 fps is a better & more reasonable goal than pushing for a higher pixel densitiy. The latter doesnt affect gameplay and both make the games better and more enjoyable to play (and with more performance -> better filtering, shading & antialiasing which in turn makes the image sharper too.)
Hoping the high-end model comes with an Ethernet port on the dock. "Avid video gamers" do tend to enjoy consistent connections in online play. I also hope they update the USB-C-shaped port to actually comply with the standard electrically, and add more USB 3.0 ports.
I was replying to a post mentioning retina screens, aka the supposed maximum before you can't really notice a difference anymore. The switch has a decent screen, yes - but it's definitely a low-end one in the mobile tech world as far as pixel density goes. A higher res screen would serve it well, even if not fully utilized for 3D games.
Well fuck, time to buy a New Switch XL or whatever they're going to call it. They better add an option for transferring data.
Nintendo's mission statement seems to involve quality and simplicity. I'm not so sure they'd muddy the water by incentivising worse performance on their flagship product. Or have loads of different models, some which lack key features they consider core to the Switch, others which highlight key features that are missing on their base model. It seems to me like the last thing they'd want is messy "faux" resolutions and huge variable framerates. Or a "budget" Switch that doesn't have detachable joycons. A pro Switch could include QoL features like ethernet, proper USB-C and battery life. But even then...
You are kinda comparing a gaming console to mobile phones. Different usage and different standards. Mobile has more high res because fps isnt really the issue or the point. If you compare the switch to other mobile gaming consoles, it probably will come up on top or atleast in the top best. It might not be a fair comparison but I feel like performance & visual fidelity is more important for a mobile gaming console than resolution. The 3ds had noticeable pixels and I still enjoyed it for the games. If more performance = more games = longer lifetime im all for that. On the other side more resolution = less available performance = less games = less lifetime. If you compensate for the higher resolution with new hardware its fine, but you could have even better hardware with the old res. Just downgrading the rendering resolution is something the games generally do and making that a requirement might up the entry bar. Forcing it on the hardware side might not work since I dont think there is a way for the switch to differenciate the UI from the game, especially when other engines are used (so it might work for Unity & Unreal but if a studio does inhouse stuff it would be iffy. Nintendo would have to make a decent way of allowing the devs to somehow mark their ui elements I think or force all devs to use their ui framework and hand them a premade Graphics context for the game "screen". Im not entirely sure how switch development works, of course, since I am not a switch developer and dont have access to the resources a verified developer for the platform might or might not have, so this might just be bullshit. I just dont see the possibility of a unified render resolution limit, so just saying "just render the game at a lesser res and just make the ui full res" is putting the load on the developers for a quite minor improvement)
But that's just The Regular switch then Many games run below native resolution and framerate in both docked and portable mode. As long as a console allows third party developers, there will always be stuff like that.
I believe there are already options to switch data between consoles, so you'd be good in that scenario.
I believe there already is, but if there isn't, then Nintendo has a wave of potentially upset Splatoon 2 fans on their hands due to having absolutely no way of transferring their progress over to the new system.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.