Nintendo Switch Spec Thread

GaemzDood

Well-Known Member
https://www.pcgamesn.com/intel-coffee-lake-mobile-specifications
Hey Nintendo engineers, if you're reading this and you're designing the specs for the next gen Switch iteration, take a gander at this.

Presumably, the PS5 and NextBox will use Ryzen cores if Sony and Microsoft aren't absolutely retarded and don't want to hold gaming back, so methinks that this mobile Coffee Lake iteration, along with a card based on a *mobile* 1070 or above GPU (they do exist) would be the best way for Nintendo to keep up while still providing a handheld experience.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
 

theMightyME

Owner of The Total Screen
4K would certainly be nice, but at this point I would be happy with just about any resolution if Netflix was just on the damn Switch to begin with. Even the Wii U and 3DS have Netflix apps, so why not the switch?
I don't need Netflix, Netflix is on fucking everything, I watched Netflix on a zit on my mother's knee yesterday...

What I need is Amazon... Because that is on less stuff, and is currently a pain to watch on my tv
 

Shoulder

Your Resident Beardy Bear
https://www.pcgamesn.com/intel-coffee-lake-mobile-specifications
Hey Nintendo engineers, if you're reading this and you're designing the specs for the next gen Switch iteration, take a gander at this.

Presumably, the PS5 and NextBox will use Ryzen cores if Sony and Microsoft aren't absolutely retarded and don't want to hold gaming back, so methinks that this mobile Coffee Lake iteration, along with a card based on a *mobile* 1070 or above GPU (they do exist) would be the best way for Nintendo to keep up while still providing a handheld experience.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
I don't think gaming has ever really been "held back" though. No matter what sort of hardware you put into a platform, developers will max it the moment they get their hands on it, and only then will they take the time to become more efficient with the hardware given. It's like structural engineering in a way. It's not about what you can do without compromise, it's about what you can do given the limitations of what you have available at the time.
 

EvilTw1n

Even my henchmen think I'm crazy.
Moderator
I don't need Netflix, Netflix is on fucking everything, I watched Netflix on a zit on my mother's knee yesterday...

What I need is Amazon... Because that is on less stuff, and is currently a pain to watch on my tv
The main reason my Wii U is still hooked up to my TV is Netflix. I know a lot of people watch it on a bunch of different devices, but I don't want to watch Netflix on my computer or my phone. I want to watch it on my big screen. I'll be able to put the Wii U away and clear up some space when whoever is responsible for the app finally gets their butts in gear.
 

theMightyME

Owner of The Total Screen
The main reason my Wii U is still hooked up to my TV is Netflix. I know a lot of people watch it on a bunch of different devices, but I don't want to watch Netflix on my computer or my phone. I want to watch it on my big screen. I'll be able to put the Wii U away and clear up some space when whoever is responsible for the app finally gets their butts in gear.
Get a Chromecast, $35 and the best way to watch Netflix, YouTube, and more...

Hell I could get you one for $25, I think

You use your phone as a controller, using the phone apps of Netflix and such as your remote... There phone apps are the best interface for the services, and the casing quality is beyond what the Wii u send out, it is very sharp and clean, and color and luminosity accurate... I got one after having a Wii u, and never touched the Wii u for it again

It can seem silly if you already have a way to watch, but the experience is important, and Chromecast crushes everything else in that regard

Only real downside is no Amazon prime

You can even watch porn with it lol... By using the chrome browser, you'll see a cat icon show up on all sorts of videos on your phone or computer

Then you can carry your screen too, and show anybody exactly what is on your phone, if you want to share pictures or anything...

Seriously, can't recommend it enough
 

GaemzDood

Well-Known Member
I don't think gaming has ever really been "held back" though. No matter what sort of hardware you put into a platform, developers will max it the moment they get their hands on it, and only then will they take the time to become more efficient with the hardware given. It's like structural engineering in a way. It's not about what you can do without compromise, it's about what you can do given the limitations of what you have available at the time.
That is a good point, but Dark Souls II is a prime example of why I think otherwise. The E3 trailer literally was a generation ahead of the final code, precisely because the developers were held back by 7th gen console development and presumably lost the original code to port over to the PC. If those limitations prevent gaming as a whole from making significant progress, then that is being held back.

You can make strides with given hardware at hand. A lot of games this generation proved this, such as Watch Dogs 2 compared to the first game, COD Advanced Warfare compared to Ghosts, and the upcoming Last of Us Part II compared to Uncharted 4. The consoles this generation still have untapped potential thanks to Compute Shaders, but since Nvidia takes top priority for most AAA games, I doubt a lot of developers will exploit this, save for those that do (see DICE, Far Cry Primal team, id Software, The Coalition, and Deck13).
 

Goodtwin

Well-Known Member
Compute shaders are seeing usage from most if not all AAA developers. Ubisoft has done multiple seminars on it at GDC. The thing with compute shaders is this, it isn't a secret sauce, but instead a solution to make use of these lulls in shader usage. Nvidia architecture is better suited to maintaining complete shader usage. This is why it became popular to say Nvidia flops were superior to AMD, because at the same spec, Nvidia would outperform the AMD cards. AMDs GCN architecture leaves upwards of 30% wasted cycles, but with the use of compute shaders, they can get it to nearly 100%. To compute shaders are really just a work around for a flaw in AMDs architecture.

I am not a big believer in games being totally handstrung by the hardware. I think it is more so the abilities of the people writing code. We have seen some gems over the years demonstrating high level AI, head and shoulders above anything else, and does so on the same hardware everyone else is using. Coming up with unique gun gameplay experiences is the way to create good games. If the technical advantages of new hardware are the only thing pushing your game forward, it will likely and up a dull experience. Most people do not consider Crysis to be a great game. It was a technical showpeice, but not necessarily all that fun to play. Once you get last the visual wow factor, you are left with a game you won't want to play users down the road. Minecraft is a shining example of having a great game concept, and not letting hardware limitations get in the way. It has N64 graphics in HD, and is one of the biggest success stories in the last decade.

Sent from my SM-G360V using Tapatalk
 

theMightyME

Owner of The Total Screen
Compute shaders are seeing usage from most if not all AAA developers. Ubisoft has done multiple seminars on it at GDC. The thing with compute shaders is this, it isn't a secret sauce, but instead a solution to make use of these lulls in shader usage. Nvidia architecture is better suited to maintaining complete shader usage. This is why it became popular to say Nvidia flops were superior to AMD, because at the same spec, Nvidia would outperform the AMD cards. AMDs GCN architecture leaves upwards of 30% wasted cycles, but with the use of compute shaders, they can get it to nearly 100%. To compute shaders are really just a work around for a flaw in AMDs architecture.

I am not a big believer in games being totally handstrung by the hardware. I think it is more so the abilities of the people writing code. We have seen some gems over the years demonstrating high level AI, head and shoulders above anything else, and does so on the same hardware everyone else is using. Coming up with unique gun gameplay experiences is the way to create good games. If the technical advantages of new hardware are the only thing pushing your game forward, it will likely and up a dull experience. Most people do not consider Crysis to be a great game. It was a technical showpeice, but not necessarily all that fun to play. Once you get last the visual wow factor, you are left with a game you won't want to play users down the road. Minecraft is a shining example of having a great game concept, and not letting hardware limitations get in the way. It has N64 graphics in HD, and is one of the biggest success stories in the last decade.

Sent from my SM-G360V using Tapatalk
Minecraft also hold up better over time because art trumps tech in design

In 10 years crysis 2 will make tech snobs gag, while old Minecraft videos on YouTube will encourage nostalgia
 

GaemzDood

Well-Known Member
Compute shaders are seeing usage from most if not all AAA developers. Ubisoft has done multiple seminars on it at GDC. The thing with compute shaders is this, it isn't a secret sauce, but instead a solution to make use of these lulls in shader usage. Nvidia architecture is better suited to maintaining complete shader usage. This is why it became popular to say Nvidia flops were superior to AMD, because at the same spec, Nvidia would outperform the AMD cards. AMDs GCN architecture leaves upwards of 30% wasted cycles, but with the use of compute shaders, they can get it to nearly 100%. To compute shaders are really just a work around for a flaw in AMDs architecture.

I am not a big believer in games being totally handstrung by the hardware. I think it is more so the abilities of the people writing code. We have seen some gems over the years demonstrating high level AI, head and shoulders above anything else, and does so on the same hardware everyone else is using. Coming up with unique gun gameplay experiences is the way to create good games. If the technical advantages of new hardware are the only thing pushing your game forward, it will likely and up a dull experience. Most people do not consider Crysis to be a great game. It was a technical showpeice, but not necessarily all that fun to play. Once you get last the visual wow factor, you are left with a game you won't want to play users down the road. Minecraft is a shining example of having a great game concept, and not letting hardware limitations get in the way. It has N64 graphics in HD, and is one of the biggest success stories in the last decade.

Sent from my SM-G360V using Tapatalk
I recommend you watch this. I couldn't go into heavy detail since I was on mobile, but suffice to say, there's a lot more to it than what I highlighted, which is a pretty common half-truth and doesn't tell the full story. AMD's GCN architecture allows for cocurrent processing and is designed for multi-engine tasks, where compute tasks can run simultaneously. Multiple developers, including Tiago Sousa, have said that Async Compute was key to hitting performance targets on consoles. You can see the AMD parity or advantage in games that make heavy use of Compute shaders: For example, Quantum Break uses copy cues for the temporal effects and reconstruction through Async Compute. This is why the game lags so hard on Nvidia cards compared to AMD. AMD cards don't have "bad shader usage," it's that older rendering techniques that leaves other aspects idling that's outdated. There are already games being built exclusively with compute shaders right now: Dreams for the PS4.

For AMD GPUs, games that aren't heavy in compute shaders lag behind. Hellblade: Senua's Sacrifice lags behind on an RX 580 compared to the GTX 1060, and it runs at 900p on PS4 Pro (which breaks Sony's rules) when outputting at 60 FPS. As a matter of fact, UE4 has a pretty big shader problem that hamstrings performance. Epic only introduced compute shaders for things like SSAO in Paragon, but the only big UE4 game to use Async Compute is Gears of War 4. It's also one of the few UE4 games to run at 1080p.

As for the other part, I actually agree, save for the part about Crysis. The original Crysis was actually very novel in its gameplay and arguably still is because of all the tactical freedom available. There's a reason it still has a modding community today. Crysis 2 and 3 were style over substance though, and aren't fondly remembered.

Side Note: I just realized that I'm outnumbered in my "games are being held back" contention, so fuck it, you're right.
 
Last edited:

Goodtwin

Well-Known Member
Side Note: I just realized that I'm outnumbered in my "games are being held back" contention, so fuck it, you're right.
It is far from a right and wrong situation, because better more capable hardware does give developers more building blocks to play with, but I havent seen a pattern that suggest games get exponentially better, or even change in a significant way when compared to its predecessors. Most game changing concepts are grounded in originality, and not leaning on the hardware to make their game good. Even within the elements that pushed COD forward, it wasnt really a limitation of the hardware that had prevented those elements in previous games. I think Titanfall pushed COD to adapt many of its elements, but Titanfall was on 360 as well. So I guess the point is the elements that make a game fun and fresh are rarely brought to life thanks to more capable hardware. However, we all want to more capable hardware in the future right. Nobody wants things to stand still.
 

Odo

Well-Known Member
Side Note: I just realized that I'm outnumbered in my "games are being held back" contention, so fuck it, you're right.
I agree with you that hardware limitations hold gaming back.

I also agree with Goodtwin that we don't need high-tech hardware to make a successful game like Minecraft.

Both things are true in different situations.

We could be playing SNES for 30 years and be content, but we can be content with PS4-like experience too. So, just because we could be happy playing SNES-like games for 30 years, it doesn't mean that we shouldn't take advantage of high tech hardware. And when we don't, we hold gaming back.

If technology stops right now and we have to deal with PS4 technology for 50 years, yeah, many incredible games will be developed and we all be happy playing those games for 50 years, but still, in those 50 years we could have got better and bigger games.

I don't think that games are only about art. It's about technology too. I don't think it's like cinema. I still think that films from the 50's are the best, much better than the films we have today. However games needs technology to provide more ways. Nintendo released N64 and turned Mario into a 3D platformer in a incredible way because N64 was far more powerful than SNES. And PS took dominance, just because they released a more powerful SNES with CDs and that gave developers an entirely new technology platform to thrive and to create new experiences. SNES were holding back the industry and the industry and the gamers moved to PS.
 

GaemzDood

Well-Known Member
It is far from a right and wrong situation, because better more capable hardware does give developers more building blocks to play with, but I havent seen a pattern that suggest games get exponentially better, or even change in a significant way when compared to its predecessors. Most game changing concepts are grounded in originality, and not leaning on the hardware to make their game good. Even within the elements that pushed COD forward, it wasnt really a limitation of the hardware that had prevented those elements in previous games. I think Titanfall pushed COD to adapt many of its elements, but Titanfall was on 360 as well. So I guess the point is the elements that make a game fun and fresh are rarely brought to life thanks to more capable hardware. However, we all want to more capable hardware in the future right. Nobody wants things to stand still.
For instance, even though the Switch undocked is just only somewhat ahead of the Wii U, Switch sequels to Wii U games are already a generation ahead, in the sense of a PS4 sequel to a PS3 game.

Xenoblade Chronicles 2, despite being rushed and buggy, pretty much revamped everything from X. For one, lighting is a generation ahead with realistically behaving specular and physically based materials, real time lighting scenewide, subsurface scattering is in use, the game uses collision detection for almost all of the geometry, pop-in is vastly reduced, it uses Temporal AA and SSR (albeit a fucking atrocious implementation with no fall off, tons of dithering, and lots of edge masking, seriously they should have just used the scene captured 2D reflections a la Breath of the Wild for water), post processing effects like depth of field and motion blur are a generation ahead, and SSAO is vastly improved (it's actually impressive on it's own, unlike BotW's which looked awful).

Splatoon 2 is a massive leap over the first game, in addition to running between 864p and 1080p docked at a locked framerate. The game's hub world uses real time reflections (skip to 0:59), material reflectance and light luminosity varies due to the BRDF/depth buffer, image based lighting and cube maps for pretty much every material where it makes sense (even tables and chairs make use of IBL), specular highlights, real time soft shadows (lots of pop-in though, as a sacrifice for the actual quality), much higher polygon character models with smoother edges, adaptive tessellation (or something of that nature) for paint deformation, real time shadows that are surprisingly soft and don't have lots of jaggies or dithering, global illumination (note the color hue on the rock formation here), and bokeh depth of field.

Super Mario Odyssey was covered in depth by brainchild here.

The difference between Kirby on Wii U and Switch is, in my opinion, about as big as the leap between Uncharted 3 and 4.
 

EvilTw1n

Even my henchmen think I'm crazy.
Moderator
Get a Chromecast, $35 and the best way to watch Netflix, YouTube, and more...
I may, at some point.

They could also just release the darn app.
I am not a big believer in games being totally handstrung by the hardware. I think it is more so the abilities of the people writing code. We have seen some gems over the years demonstrating high level AI, head and shoulders above anything else, and does so on the same hardware everyone else is using. Coming up with unique gun gameplay experiences is the way to create good games. If the technical advantages of new hardware are the only thing pushing your game forward, it will likely and up a dull experience.
This reminds me of the discussion we had on BotW a little while back, which in turn jogged my memory on an old DF article:

"The obvious suspect would be the Wii U's 1.2GHz CPU, a tri-core piece of hardware re-architected from the Wii's Broadway chip, in turn a tweaked, overclocked version of the GameCube's Gekko processor."

"Revolutionary" design isn't common. Throwing more characters onscreen like AC did this gen and calling it innovation is weak sauce. Meanwhile, BotW did so much with so little, a meager CPU iterated off of a damn GC-era design.

No one is saying more powerful and efficient hardware design is a bad thing. But the hard and necessary task of innovating gameplay is about rethinking basic game design and the creative ethos behind it all. Otherwise you're just makimg shinier versions of decade's-old formulas and marketing that as something consequential, when it's really...

 

GaemzDood

Well-Known Member
I know I didn't add it to my Switch game wishlist, but I would really like to see a Rise of the Tomb Raider port. However, simply porting the Xbox One version, with its various issues which I'll get to, wouldn't be feasibly possible, and porting the Xbox 360 version would just be half-assed and a sign that they didn't give a shit. Believe it or not, despite the power disparity, there is room to improve the renderer itself while not degrading performance, so this is my wishlist for a Rise of the Tomb Raider Switch port.

1. Temporal anti-aliasing, for the love of god please: The game has shimmering that puts Alien: Isolation without the TAA mod to shame, but that game at least had the excuse of coming out before Brian Karis presented his 2014 paper on an effective solution for shader aliasing. The game already has high quality motion vectors in place (although this means you can't dynamically disable things like motion blur like on Xbox One without screwing up the AA), and temporal filters could be used further similar to this great paper for Filmic SMAA in Call of Duty.

2. In the case of a Switch port, rather than locking to a native resolution, consider using temporal reconstruction to get to a higher one (960x1080->1920x1080 docked, 640x720->1280x720 handheld). Uncharted 4 uses a really efficient and barely noticeable method of reprojecting across multiple frames for volumetric lighting (if you look really close at the edges interacting with light shafts, you'll notice stippling), hair rendering, soft shadows, and reflections. Horizon: Zero Dawn's volumetric clouds use a quarter res buffer every frame and updates 1 out of 16 pixels for each 4x4 pixel block for final image. I was thinking of something similar for a Rise of the Tomb Raider Switch port, except with a half resolution pixel count being reprojected.

Some methods look terrible in motion, such as Killzone: Shadow Fall's multiplayer, Fast Racing NEO on Wii U, and Super Mario Odyssey undocked, but that's due to a multitude of factors, and as shown in Horizon it can work right when the right things are in place.

3. A different method for water reflections: I hate it when games use screen space reflections for water without any fallback (see also Xenoblade Chronicles 2), which Rise does. Zelda: Breath of the Wild's scene captured 2D reflections proved to be really efficient for water rendering and I'd like to see those used over the screen space method.

4. Screen space shadows for foliage rendering: The Xbox One version cuts back on shadow density in foliage heavy areas such as the Geothermal Valley. This is likely because the game uses traditional shadow maps for foliage shadows as opposed to the more efficient and innovative screen space shadow method seen in Gears of War 4. Screen space shadows would allow for higher quality shadows to be casted by foliage at a lower performance cost.

In addition to that, rather than generating sample distribution shadow maps that are also incredibly pixelated at points, I would propose a shadow volume method that, as explained in the link, casts within a specified 3D space instead of just the surfaces and objects in an environment. Aside from the sky occlusion looking more believable when shadow volumes are implemented, dynamically generating shadow volumes within a 3D space also provides the benefit of full real time volumetric lighting when it's combined with atmospheric fog inscatter noise patterns that can receive shadows. This would be done in order to allow for volumetrics without the need of generating compute shaders like on PS4 and Xbox One, something that saw cards like the 750 Ti suffer as a result.

5. Fixing the light leaking in the GI pass as well as the PBR inaccuracies: Rise of the Tomb Raider makes use of image based light probes for GI, and it does look good most of the time. But then you get other cases when there's light leaking in occluded areas as well as Lara having lots of glossy specular reflections in places that shouldn't have this (for instance, why does she look like she's covered in transparent glossy paste if she's in a dark, dry cave). In addition to that, a proper energy conservation system would go a long way with the PBR. Specular highlights are crazy exaggerated as a result of a lack of it; you'll see a light casting a specular highlight that looks crazy overblown compared to the light that's being casted, and interiors generally look bland too.

6. A different method of ambient occlusion rendering: The Xbox One version uses Broad Temporal Ambient Obscurance, but a lot of contact shadows look pretty blob like. The PS4 and PC version set to "On" use standard SSAO, and while it is a step above most traditional SSAO solutions, it looks overly dark and Lara is poorly self shadowed (although this issue is only mostly fixable if you enable VXAO). Kirby Star Allies seems to be using a Directional Occlusion-like AO method that gives a free light bounce, maybe something like that would be usable with a similar reprojection method to what I proposed above?

7. Half-res alpha, to save on performance.

Some of these would considerably improve performance, like the temporal reconstruction and screen space shadows. Also, given that the Switch has shown the ability to do tessellation/displacement mapping (Kirby's water uses tessellation, I think Splatoon 2's paint deformation does, and Mario Odyssey's water uses vector displacement), the tessellated snow mesh could most likely work on it. The game could use the same assets, albeit at a lower resolution. Draw distances would have to be curtailed, but a lot of things that were axed on 360, like the foliage and geometry density, could most likely stay in, albeit at a lower quality.
 
Last edited:

GaemzDood

Well-Known Member
Rather than make another thread and deal with potential spam issues, I would rather post this here with all of the talk of a PS5 at E3 2019.

What would a next gen Switch entail? I kind of outlined it in another thread that I typed in a hurry.
It would be a custom Volta series GPU with major upgrades to the memory bandwidth and TFLOP count. These are my theoretical specs: The docked GPU would utilize 8.4 teraflops, a 2048-bit GDDR6 memory interface, 16 GB/s of RAM, 64 ROPs, 2,816 CUDA cores, 484 GB/s of bandwidth, and 160 TMUs. These specs would be utilized in order to allow developers to support console releases with Nvidia GameWorks features, as well as 4k support. Docked would be clocked at 1506 MHz with memory is running at 7Gbps. The CPU would be a custom 8 core mobile Kaby Lake chip, most likely a i7-8809G.

Undocked would downclock considerably and half performance.
However, with new architecture comes new features, and in the case of Pascal, you get Async Pre-Emption, Mixed Precision Compute, Simultaneous Multi-Projection, 4th gen Delta Color Compression, etc. If Nintendo were also to release a high end hybrid console with the latest Nvidia tech, which they could considering there are already slim mobile computers doing it and they've made more than enough money on 3DS and Switch sales, exactly what would that entail? Well for one thing, G-Sync and HDR are the two biggest contenders. But there's one feature that Nvidia eclipses AMD in: tessellation! This would be a major advantage of a new high end Switch successor compared to the PS5 and Xbox One Y (they really screwed the naming). AMD is around seven percent slower when it comes to tessellation if I recall correctly, and it's a bottleneck which Nvidia seems to like to exploit if The Witcher 3 and Final Fantasy XV are anything to go by. In addition to that, they also have an entire GameWorks library of next generation rendering features.

Lets face it, Zelda has always been Nintendo's go-to franchise for tech demoing and pushing tech boundaries on their hardware, even before Breath of the Wild. Wind Waker was a tech marvel for the GameCube that blew away the demo Nintendo showcased before that, the E3 2012 Wii U Zelda demo amazed everyone (BotW eclipses it though), and Ocarina of Time pushed the N64 so hard they had to cap it at 20 FPS.

If a new "open air" Zelda game came out on this next gen console, I would love for it to have VXGI with world space AO [VXAO] and specular reflections, frustum traced soft shadows, shadow casting lights everywhere, Nvidia HairWorks on Link including full self shadowing and self occlusion with no LODs, Nvidia PhysX FleX, tessellated meshes that can be dynamically deformed and generate self shadows, ray marched volumetric fog and volumetric clouds, and GPU accelerated particles. However, what would be best of all is a world where every NPC has a procedural AI that reacts differently to each other and the actions of the player, along with building that can be entered at any time with no loading screens and have fully interactive objects.

Similarly, if Bayonetta 1 + 2 on Switch sell well now, and Bayonetta 3, which I assume is going to be a massive leap over Bayonetta 2 if Nintendo's other games indicate anything, does well in the future, maybe we can see a similar leap to visuals above something like Scalebound (before Microsoft shitcanned it) for a next gen Bayonetta, at 60 FPS and not open world of course.
 
Last edited:

theMightyME

Owner of The Total Screen
Rather than make another thread and deal with potential spam issues, I would rather post this here with all of the talk of a PS5 at E3 2019.

What would a next gen Switch entail? I kind of outlined it in another thread that I typed in a hurry.

However, with new architecture comes new features, and in the case of Pascal, you get Async Pre-Emption, Mixed Precision Compute, Simultaneous Multi-Projection, 4th gen Delta Color Compression, etc. If Nintendo were also to release a high end hybrid console with the latest Nvidia tech, which they could considering there are already slim mobile computers doing it and they've made more than enough money on 3DS and Switch sales, exactly what would that entail? Well for one thing, G-Sync and HDR are the two biggest contenders. But there's one feature that Nvidia eclipses AMD in: tessellation! This would be a major advantage of a new high end Switch successor compared to the PS5 and Xbox One Y (they really screwed the naming). AMD is around seven percent slower when it comes to tessellation if I recall correctly, and it's a bottleneck which Nvidia seems to like to exploit if The Witcher 3 and Final Fantasy XV are anything to go by. In addition to that, they also have an entire GameWorks library of next generation rendering features.

Lets face it, Zelda has always been Nintendo's go-to franchise for tech demoing and pushing tech boundaries on their hardware, even before Breath of the Wild. Wind Waker was a tech marvel for the GameCube that blew away the demo Nintendo showcased before that, the E3 2012 Wii U Zelda demo amazed everyone (BotW eclipses it though), and Ocarina of Time pushed the N64 so hard they had to cap it at 20 FPS.

If a new "open air" Zelda game came out on this next gen console, I would love for it to have VXGI with world space AO [VXAO] and specular reflections, frustum traced soft shadows, shadow casting lights everywhere, Nvidia HairWorks on Link including full self shadowing and self occlusion with no LODs, Nvidia PhysX FleX, tessellated meshes that can be dynamically deformed and generate self shadows, ray marched volumetric fog and volumetric clouds, and GPU accelerated particles. However, what would be best of all is a world where every NPC has a procedural AI that reacts differently to each other and the actions of the player, along with building that can be entered at any time with no loading screens and have fully interactive objects.

Similarly, if Bayonetta 1 + 2 on Switch sell well now, and Bayonetta 3, which I assume is going to be a massive leap over Bayonetta 2 if Nintendo's other games indicate anything, does well in the future, maybe we can see a similar leap to visuals above something like Scalebound (before Microsoft shitcanned it) for a next gen Bayonetta, at 60 FPS and not open world of course.
so lets look at the necessities

1. It HAS to be another hybrid, going hybrid is big change, and you don't come back from it, you commit, you double down... it is like moving from California or New York to Idaho because it is so much cheaper... it can be a great move... but you can't come back... it is too expensive to come back... so you have to go knowing that is your new life and not just the next 5 years

2. It CANNOT be high priced... it needs to be at or bellow the switch launch msrp, the novelty of that change in direction from nintendo will be worn off by the next system, so you can't elevate the barrier for entry, you should lower it, or make it a significant mind share value beyond what the Switch was.

3. Nintendo apparently signed a multi generation deal with NVidia... that combined with the half gen cycles becoming more standard these days, as well as Nintendo being stuck with a hybrid until a radical new direction arrives means that the next system will almost certainly be running a successor to the Tegra X1... given that over the counter older parts are cheaper, it'll probably be the next one NVidia puts out, which will be a few years old by the time the new hybrid launches

I add all of that together with the switch having to dock to be on TV seemingly more to distance itself from the wii u than from physical limitation makes me think the next hybrid wont have that restriction and will likely connect to the TV wirelessly... no dock

that being said I think before we get that system we will get an upgraded switch... likely with a 1080p screen and a dock mode capable of 4k... probably comparable to a ps4 in power (not a ps4 pro)

and I think we could get that by 2020 and maybe even another iteration by like 2023 that scales up even further.... all before the switch's true successor which I think will have the added gimick of functioning like a wearable hub... meaning your switch succesor will interact with tons of devices that you carry on your person or that are found in locations or at home... and it will do it all wirelessly and in a fairly seamless way... like you wont dock the screen in a vr visor, you will just put one on while your switch sits nearby on the table or in your backpack... but even more than that I think we will see more no screen games like 1,2 switch was trying to do... where maybe you are wearing headphones and have a watch on... and those will connect to your switch, and you can launch a game with a hand gesture from the switch beign in sleep mode and use audio queues to play while walking around... things like that and AR... i think the easy hub nature of the system will be a highlight in the way hd rumble and the joycons were for the switch... and it will seamlessly connect to all sorts of crap... not just at home, but like if you go to mcdonalds it will be built on the back of some wireless standard that by that time will be in many things, but it wont entirely conform to that standard... and as such it will do things with existing in location ahrdware that nobody thought to try before... and it will be in the itnerest of businesses to set up hooks for it... like how businesses set up poke stops and leave bait for pokemon at their locations and such for pokemon go

it might do things like itneract with displays built into tables at restraunts for example

that is what I think... all of that AND traditional gaming

that is what I think will be next... atleast at this time.. tech is in an itneretsign place and certain developments in the tech world in general could radically change my expectations...

right now the biggest bottlenecks in all of tech are heat and power (meaning battery) battery tech just has WAY too much r&d going into it not to see an unexpected breakthrough in the next 5 or so years

I mean look at your phones, smart watches etc... in all of those devices like 90% of the bulk is battery, and another 9 is heatsinks and cooling... take care of those limitations and things will change FAST

I mean consider this


and then imagine devices that don't need batteries because you have a bigger device in your pocket feeding power to them... forget smart glasses... think smart contacts think of change at that level, and then imagine where that could take us

everything I speculate about now could seem trivial after a single major announcement
 

GaemzDood

Well-Known Member
so lets look at the necessities

1. It HAS to be another hybrid, going hybrid is big change, and you don't come back from it, you commit, you double down... it is like moving from California or New York to Idaho because it is so much cheaper... it can be a great move... but you can't come back... it is too expensive to come back... so you have to go knowing that is your new life and not just the next 5 years

2. It CANNOT be high priced... it needs to be at or bellow the switch launch msrp, the novelty of that change in direction from nintendo will be worn off by the next system, so you can't elevate the barrier for entry, you should lower it, or make it a significant mind share value beyond what the Switch was.

3. Nintendo apparently signed a multi generation deal with NVidia... that combined with the half gen cycles becoming more standard these days, as well as Nintendo being stuck with a hybrid until a radical new direction arrives means that the next system will almost certainly be running a successor to the Tegra X1... given that over the counter older parts are cheaper, it'll probably be the next one NVidia puts out, which will be a few years old by the time the new hybrid launches

I add all of that together with the switch having to dock to be on TV seemingly more to distance itself from the wii u than from physical limitation makes me think the next hybrid wont have that restriction and will likely connect to the TV wirelessly... no dock

that being said I think before we get that system we will get an upgraded switch... likely with a 1080p screen and a dock mode capable of 4k... probably comparable to a ps4 in power (not a ps4 pro)

and I think we could get that by 2020 and maybe even another iteration by like 2023 that scales up even further.... all before the switch's true successor which I think will have the added gimick of functioning like a wearable hub... meaning your switch succesor will interact with tons of devices that you carry on your person or that are found in locations or at home... and it will do it all wirelessly and in a fairly seamless way... like you wont dock the screen in a vr visor, you will just put one on while your switch sits nearby on the table or in your backpack... but even more than that I think we will see more no screen games like 1,2 switch was trying to do... where maybe you are wearing headphones and have a watch on... and those will connect to your switch, and you can launch a game with a hand gesture from the switch beign in sleep mode and use audio queues to play while walking around... things like that and AR... i think the easy hub nature of the system will be a highlight in the way hd rumble and the joycons were for the switch... and it will seamlessly connect to all sorts of crap... not just at home, but like if you go to mcdonalds it will be built on the back of some wireless standard that by that time will be in many things, but it wont entirely conform to that standard... and as such it will do things with existing in location ahrdware that nobody thought to try before... and it will be in the itnerest of businesses to set up hooks for it... like how businesses set up poke stops and leave bait for pokemon at their locations and such for pokemon go

it might do things like itneract with displays built into tables at restraunts for example

that is what I think... all of that AND traditional gaming

that is what I think will be next... atleast at this time.. tech is in an itneretsign place and certain developments in the tech world in general could radically change my expectations...

right now the biggest bottlenecks in all of tech are heat and power (meaning battery) battery tech just has WAY too much r&d going into it not to see an unexpected breakthrough in the next 5 or so years

I mean look at your phones, smart watches etc... in all of those devices like 90% of the bulk is battery, and another 9 is heatsinks and cooling... take care of those limitations and things will change FAST

I mean consider this


and then imagine devices that don't need batteries because you have a bigger device in your pocket feeding power to them... forget smart glasses... think smart contacts think of change at that level, and then imagine where that could take us

everything I speculate about now could seem trivial after a single major announcement
https://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2018/01/07/drive-xavier-processor/
Nintendo does have this as an option as well. It also supports Volta.

Being comparable to a PS4 in power and having a 4k dock would be useless, especially considering that even the PS4 Pro doesn't have many native 4k games. Also, considering how next generation hardware is going to be a major step up from even the One X, Nintendo releasing a PS4 equivalent console would leave them behind for 3rd party developers. Games next generation are most likely going to adopt more dynamic global illumination solutions and more advanced rendering pipelines with things like less reliance on screen space effects and a better grip on higher poly counts, among other things like more advanced physics in the vein of Nvidia's GameWorks tech. Considering how much money Nintendo has, a high end console wouldn't be out of the equation.

I really like the idea of a discrete pocket sized battery that can be attached to a handheld with a wire. That would be really convenient, especially for playing games that suck up battery.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:

EvilTw1n

Even my henchmen think I'm crazy.
Moderator
It hasn't even been a year since Switch launched; I ain't in any hurry for a successor. If anything, I could see them increasing the screen size a bit and shrinking the bezels for a slightly bigger screen (at 1080p, as Ty mentioned) in a year or two. Maybe add more memory/storage while they're at it. They can't change the form factor too much; the joycons are already pretty small as-is. That aside? They're not in a horsepower war, so they're not going to chase a hypothetical PS5 (and ruin any hope of portable battery life).
 

GaemzDood

Well-Known Member
It hasn't even been a year since Switch launched; I ain't in any hurry for a successor. If anything, I could see them increasing the screen size a bit and shrinking the bezels for a slightly bigger screen (at 1080p, as Ty mentioned) in a year or two. Maybe add more memory/storage while they're at it. They can't change the form factor too much; the joycons are already pretty small as-is. That aside? They're not in a horsepower war, so they're not going to chase a hypothetical PS5 (and ruin any hope of portable battery life).
It just seems like kind of a waste of a potentially epic contract with Nvidia to release substantially inferior hardware in the near future, especially when this is the same Nvidia that's doing really epic things like ray traced shadows, voxelized global illumination and AO, and real time particle physics, things that would be breathtaking to see in a new Zelda game for instance. GameWorks on a console, to me at least, is more appealing than 4k, coming from someone with a 4k TV.

I can see why they used a Tegra X1 with the Switch, it was a compromise for battery life and they also needed to recoup costs after their losses with the Wii U.
 

Koenig

The Architect
It hasn't even been a year since Switch launched; I ain't in any hurry for a successor. If anything, I could see them increasing the screen size a bit and shrinking the bezels for a slightly bigger screen (at 1080p, as Ty mentioned) in a year or two. Maybe add more memory/storage while they're at it. They can't change the form factor too much; the joycons are already pretty small as-is. That aside? They're not in a horsepower war, so they're not going to chase a hypothetical PS5 (and ruin any hope of portable battery life).
Still, I do hope that their next system is in the ball park such that downgraded ports are still possible (or more importantly, feasible) with various "PS5" or "Xbox 2" (4?) titles. Nintendo does not need to fight the power war, but I do not think it is wise for them to ignore it either.
 

Shoulder

Your Resident Beardy Bear
Nintendo are more interested in maximizing their profits for the Switch, given they got such a great deal on the Tegra processors. They'll have little incentive in launching a Super Switch until their profits slows down considerably. As long as the Switch is selling very well, the only thing that'll be on their minds is maybe improving some of the form factor, and ergonomics of the system. But horsepower? Don't bet on it for a few years. The only thing I could see is the patent of the Supplemental Computing Device coming to light, and a new dock launching with additional hardware that communicates with the Tegra chip, giving current, plus new games a boost for docked mode.
 

theMightyME

Owner of The Total Screen
Nintendo are more interested in maximizing their profits for the Switch, given they got such a great deal on the Tegra processors. They'll have little incentive in launching a Super Switch until their profits slows down considerably. As long as the Switch is selling very well, the only thing that'll be on their minds is maybe improving some of the form factor, and ergonomics of the system. But horsepower? Don't bet on it for a few years. The only thing I could see is the patent of the Supplemental Computing Device coming to light, and a new dock launching with additional hardware that communicates with the Tegra chip, giving current, plus new games a boost for docked mode.
Naw man, nvidea had already made 2 successors to the X1, using the same architecture, the manufacturing process for the X1 will eventually be more of a hindrance than upgrading to one of the x1s successors because they will have moved their manufacturing to a smaller process that there X1 can't be manufactured with... It won't be a switch pro like with the ps4 pro, but more like the upgrade from ds to dsi.
 

Juegos

All mods go to heaven.
Moderator
This is the timeline for the Japanese release of Nintendo 3DS versions, together with their respective updates.

Nintendo 3DS - Feb 25, 2011 - Vanilla hardware.
Nintendo 3DS XL - Jul 28, 2012 - Larger screen (and battery?)
Nintendo 2DS - Oct 12, 2013 - No 3D and no clam shell design, but cheaper.
New Nintendo 3DS - Oct 11, 2014 - More processor cores, more RAM, NFC for Amiibo, right analog "c-stick", ZL and ZR buttons, Super Stable 3D feature.
New Nintendo 3DS XL - Oct 11, 2014 - Same as NN3DS, but with larger screen (and battery?)
New Nintendo 2DS XL - Jul 13, 2017 - Same as NN3DSXL, but without stereoscopic 3D.

So it only took 17 months for the 3DS to get a new form factor with a larger screen, two-and-a-half years for a cheaper "downgrade" version, and three-and-a-half years for a modest upgrade that was still compatible with the existing library.

I think it's possible for Nintendo to first release a downgrade version of the Switch either for the upcoming holiday or early next year. The core message of the system is "play anywhere", which doesn't require them to allow the system to play on a TV. Even if they do consider playing on a TV a core part of the system's branding, however, we gotta remember that this was also true for stereoscopic 3D with the 3DS and they had no problem giving that up to make the cheaper 2DS.

Further, it's very possible for them to release a modest upgrade in 2020 (or earlier, going by what mightyme has said about Nvidia's production of successors to the X1). But more than that, I think another 2-3 years after that we would get yet another modest upgrade. I think if Apple can get y'all to change phones every 2-3 years, there's no reason that Nintendo can't do the same thing. I think they'd already be doing that with the 3DS if it hadn't been made completely obsolete by the Switch.
 

GaemzDood

Well-Known Member
Fuck me, there are so many great ideas on where to take the Switch.
Nintendo are more interested in maximizing their profits for the Switch, given they got such a great deal on the Tegra processors. They'll have little incentive in launching a Super Switch until their profits slows down considerably. As long as the Switch is selling very well, the only thing that'll be on their minds is maybe improving some of the form factor, and ergonomics of the system. But horsepower? Don't bet on it for a few years. The only thing I could see is the patent of the Supplemental Computing Device coming to light, and a new dock launching with additional hardware that communicates with the Tegra chip, giving current, plus new games a boost for docked mode.
I like this idea too. Use the same handheld, but with a different, much, much more powerful dock. Only problem is how would games that take advantage of this scale down to the regular Switch dock and handheld without resorting to sub-sub HD resolutions, especially in the context of really demanding games.

We'll see how Wolfenstein II on Switch turns out. The game has 30x more draw calls than DOOM and uses full volumetric fog and lighting that interacts with everything. It's a really demanding game.
 

EvilTw1n

Even my henchmen think I'm crazy.
Moderator
The core message of the system is "play anywhere", which doesn't require them to allow the system to play on a TV. Even if they do consider playing on a TV a core part of the system's branding, however, we gotta remember that this was also true for stereoscopic 3D with the 3DS and they had no problem giving that up to make the cheaper 2DS.
This is true. But...no one ever really gave a shit about 3D once the 3DS came out. Not even Nintendo, really. It was great for hype pre-release, but became a wholly collateral feature post-release (people bought Mario 3D Land because it was Mario, not because it was available with a 3D feature most people didn't even use). My opinion might certainly be wrong, but I don't think that's the case with Switch. The core experience of Switch is that it's modular. "I can play BotW on a road trip/flight/train ride, then plug it in at home" is an easy feature to market. It's something everyone immediately understood. Take away half of that, and you have a nicer Vita with Nintendo software.

Nintendo might do it, anyways, of course. If they look at user data over the next two years and see 95% of people aren't docking the system, then they'll have a good reason to change course.
 

Juegos

All mods go to heaven.
Moderator
This is true. But...no one ever really gave a shit about 3D once the 3DS came out. Not even Nintendo, really. It was great for hype pre-release, but became a wholly collateral feature post-release (people bought Mario 3D Land because it was Mario, not because it was available with a 3D feature most people didn't even use). My opinion might certainly be wrong, but I don't think that's the case with Switch. The core experience of Switch is that it's modular. "I can play BotW on a road trip/flight/train ride, then plug it in at home" is an easy feature to market. It's something everyone immediately understood. Take away half of that, and you have a nicer Vita with Nintendo software.

Nintendo might do it, anyways, of course. If they look at user data over the next two years and see 95% of people aren't docking the system, then they'll have a good reason to change course.
Right now, the data agrees with you:



When that data came out, a lot of journalists interpreted it as an indication that the Switch is more of a handheld than a living room TV system. But some saw the bigger picture: most players use both options. If Nintendo somehow made a revision that was only playable in portable mode*, at least a portion of that majority would be upset, and the minority that only plays in docked mode would be completely alienated.

*I'm not even sure it's possible to save money by making a "portable-only" Switch, as practically every electronic device is capable of projecting its image either wirelessly or through HDMI/USB to a TV or monitor. We'd only be losing the dock and the overclocked CPU, but it's not like the dock really is that expensive to make, unless we're all missing something crucial about it.
 

theMightyME

Owner of The Total Screen
Right now, the data agrees with you:



When that data came out, a lot of journalists interpreted it as an indication that the Switch is more of a handheld than a living room TV system. But some saw the bigger picture: most players use both options. If Nintendo somehow made a revision that was only playable in portable mode*, at least a portion of that majority would be upset, and the minority that only plays in docked mode would be completely alienated.

*I'm not even sure it's possible to save money by making a "portable-only" Switch, as practically every electronic device is capable of projecting its image either wirelessly or through HDMI/USB to a TV or monitor. We'd only be losing the dock and the overclocked CPU, but it's not like the dock really is that expensive to make, unless we're all missing something crucial about it.
As for the downgraded switch, I still see 2 sperate versions coming...a smaller handheld, perhaps with the controls built in... And a console only version which could be significantly cheaper.
 

Shoulder

Your Resident Beardy Bear
Right now, the data agrees with you:



When that data came out, a lot of journalists interpreted it as an indication that the Switch is more of a handheld than a living room TV system. But some saw the bigger picture: most players use both options. If Nintendo somehow made a revision that was only playable in portable mode*, at least a portion of that majority would be upset, and the minority that only plays in docked mode would be completely alienated.

*I'm not even sure it's possible to save money by making a "portable-only" Switch, as practically every electronic device is capable of projecting its image either wirelessly or through HDMI/USB to a TV or monitor. We'd only be losing the dock and the overclocked CPU, but it's not like the dock really is that expensive to make, unless we're all missing something crucial about it.
In all honestly, a handheld-only Switch I think completely defeats the purpose of the Switch in the first place. Now, granted, the 3DS was the same way, and then Nintendo gets rid of the 3D feature, and calls it the 2DS. But I think it's trivial at best to even create a handheld only Switch, it seems like a pointless endeavor. If a gamer simply doesn't want to play games in docked mode, then don't put the damn thing on a dock.

But on the other hand, you could probably save yourself 50 bucks by not having a dock included, and via software, lock out docked mode, so the hardware doesn't scale up. You could probably even get away by having a smaller screen, but then you run into potential issues with overall size in terms of the Joy-Cons since they are already pretty small.

Personally, as of right now, I think it's in Nintendo's best interest to not bother with a handheld only or docked only version of the Switch, and simply keep it as is, but improving it as it goes along.
 

EvilTw1n

Even my henchmen think I'm crazy.
Moderator
Right now, the data agrees with you:



When that data came out, a lot of journalists interpreted it as an indication that the Switch is more of a handheld than a living room TV system. But some saw the bigger picture: most players use both options. If Nintendo somehow made a revision that was only playable in portable mode*, at least a portion of that majority would be upset, and the minority that only plays in docked mode would be completely alienated.

*I'm not even sure it's possible to save money by making a "portable-only" Switch, as practically every electronic device is capable of projecting its image either wirelessly or through HDMI/USB to a TV or monitor. We'd only be losing the dock and the overclocked CPU, but it's not like the dock really is that expensive to make, unless we're all missing something crucial about it.
After I posted that, something kept bothering me in the back of my mind, and I couldn't figure it out. Then I remembered:

"...but we are going to create a system that can absorb the Wii U architecture adequately. When this happens, home consoles and handheld devices will no longer be completely different, and they will become like brothers in a family of systems.

"Still, I am not sure if the form factor (the size and configuration of the hardware) will be integrated. In contrast, the number of form factors might increase."

https://nintendoeverything.com/iwat...bsorb-the-wii-u-architecture-adequately-more/

Now, that could be misdirection.

Iwata talking about more than one form factor could have been talking about how Switch can be played in multiple form factors. And Switch definitely achieves the task of consoles and handhelds no longer being completely different. But a family of systems? Brothers? Maybe you're absolutely correct in your assessment of what Nintendo did with the 2DS. I'd go one further and say that it's conceivable they could make a device with a bit of a smaller screen (5 inches?), shrink the length of the device, build the controller in, ditch HD rumble/IR camera/extra shoulder buttons on the internal edge, and make a 3DS successor with Switch's internals. Market it as a more robust device for kids, but it could still hook up to a TV via a plug-in HDMI, and it could sync to a Pro Controller if you wanted the console experience.

Then you release your upgraded Switch with the 1080p screen and a better CPU, improved Joy-Cons, and you have your family of systems.

It's conceivable. Right now, it's impossible to imagine Switch without its core ability - a complete, all-in-one experience (no pro controller needed; it's all in the box and easy to understand) - excised. But that's because it's 2018. In 2007, everyone thought motion controls had a lot of mileage in them, and that Nintendo would be a fool to abandon that gravy train. But the train left the station and what once seemed revolutionary became passé. Maybe the same will happen with Switch, and that chart will eventually show a lot of people playing it exclusively in one mode. And maybe you call the stripped down model something else entirely.
 

theMightyME

Owner of The Total Screen
After I posted that, something kept bothering me in the back of my mind, and I couldn't figure it out. Then I remembered:

"...but we are going to create a system that can absorb the Wii U architecture adequately. When this happens, home consoles and handheld devices will no longer be completely different, and they will become like brothers in a family of systems.

"Still, I am not sure if the form factor (the size and configuration of the hardware) will be integrated. In contrast, the number of form factors might increase."

https://nintendoeverything.com/iwat...bsorb-the-wii-u-architecture-adequately-more/

Now, that could be misdirection.

Iwata talking about more than one form factor could have been talking about how Switch can be played in multiple form factors. And Switch definitely achieves the task of consoles and handhelds no longer being completely different. But a family of systems? Brothers? Maybe you're absolutely correct in your assessment of what Nintendo did with the 2DS. I'd go one further and say that it's conceivable they could make a device with a bit of a smaller screen (5 inches?), shrink the length of the device, build the controller in, ditch HD rumble/IR camera/extra shoulder buttons on the internal edge, and make a 3DS successor with Switch's internals. Market it as a more robust device for kids, but it could still hook up to a TV via a plug-in HDMI, and it could sync to a Pro Controller if you wanted the console experience.

Then you release your upgraded Switch with the 1080p screen and a better CPU, improved Joy-Cons, and you have your family of systems.

It's conceivable. Right now, it's impossible to imagine Switch without its core ability - a complete, all-in-one experience (no pro controller needed; it's all in the box and easy to understand) - excised. But that's because it's 2018. In 2007, everyone thought motion controls had a lot of mileage in them, and that Nintendo would be a fool to abandon that gravy train. But the train left the station and what once seemed revolutionary became passé. Maybe the same will happen with Switch, and that chart will eventually show a lot of people playing it exclusively in one mode. And maybe you call the stripped down model something else entirely.
you forgot the console only version.... no screen, no joycons, no battery, just a black box that plugs into the TV and a pro controller

I would say that the console only version and the handheld only (though still dockble, perhaps with its own dock that is purchased separately) verisons come first, and then a beefed up version comes atleast a year later
 

EvilTw1n

Even my henchmen think I'm crazy.
Moderator
Somewhat pertinent to the discussion:

But looking at 3DS sales more broadly shows the system continuing to find an audience in Switch's shadow. In the nine months following the Switch's late March 2017 launch, Nintendo shipped 5.86 million 3DSes worldwide. That's down just nine percent from the 6.42 million in sales over the same nine-month period in 2016, before the Switch was available. And it's down only a hair from 5.89 million shipments during the same period in 2015 when the 3DS was much newer.

If you focus on North America, 3DS shipments were actually up about 18 percent year-on-year for the 2017 calendar year, selling 2.91 million units. That's an increase over both 2015 and 2016 for the continent, a reversal that's pretty much unheard of at this point in a portable console's life.

https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2018...switch-the-nintendo-3ds-refuses-to-die/?amp=1

The oldest member in the family of systems refuses to die.
 

Koenig

The Architect
I think it's possible for Nintendo to first release a downgrade version of the Switch either for the upcoming holiday or early next year. The core message of the system is "play anywhere", which doesn't require them to allow the system to play on a TV. Even if they do consider playing on a TV a core part of the system's branding, however, we gotta remember that this was also true for stereoscopic 3D with the 3DS and they had no problem giving that up to make the cheaper 2DS.
Though to be fair, I'd wager more people are using the Switch in docked mode than people ever used the 3DS's 3D functionality. I do think we will be getting a revamped switch within a year or so; probably with an improved battery life and a beefier (or rather more efficient) variation of the tegra chip)
 

Goodtwin

Well-Known Member
Somewhat pertinent to the discussion:

But looking at 3DS sales more broadly shows the system continuing to find an audience in Switch's shadow. In the nine months following the Switch's late March 2017 launch, Nintendo shipped 5.86 million 3DSes worldwide. That's down just nine percent from the 6.42 million in sales over the same nine-month period in 2016, before the Switch was available. And it's down only a hair from 5.89 million shipments during the same period in 2015 when the 3DS was much newer.

If you focus on North America, 3DS shipments were actually up about 18 percent year-on-year for the 2017 calendar year, selling 2.91 million units. That's an increase over both 2015 and 2016 for the continent, a reversal that's pretty much unheard of at this point in a portable console's life.

https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2018...switch-the-nintendo-3ds-refuses-to-die/?amp=1

The oldest member in the family of systems refuses to die.
3DS has a huge library of games, and got a huge boost from Pokemon Sun and Moon. The price point is also a big factor. You can buy a 2DS that comes with MK7 for $80. 3DS is in that budget impulse buy category, even for the $149-199 models. Nintendo isn't going to prematurely discontinue it while it is selling, but I do not see it being a pillar they will support with new game development going forward. I think Nintendo needs to have good overlap going forward. They should always have their older product priced as a budget option, and their new product as the premium option.

Sent from my SM-G360V using Tapatalk
 

GaemzDood

Well-Known Member
Speaking of specs in general, I'm a bit frustrated that so many games lately are being released with half hearted technical details, so to speak. I'm afraid that this is that time late in a console's lifecycle where developers stop giving a shit in regards to achieving acceptable levels of image quality and performance because "hey, next gen is happening."

Need proof? Look at the steady build up of 720p, sub-HD, and dynamic resolution Xbox One games coming out. Wolfenstein II (1000x800), Ark: Survival Evolved (1152x640), Fortnite's 60 FPS patch (1056x594), Titanfall 2, Battlefield 1 (1100x620), Call of Duty: WWII (800x900), Dynasty Warriors 9 (1280x720), Tekken 7 (1280x720), Metal Gear Survive (1280x720), Assassin's Creed: Origins (1344x756), and Final Fantasy XV (1344x756). Same situation with the PS4. In the beginning of the generation, I could count all sub-1080p games on my fingers. Now I can't, and that's kind of a problem; what's also a problem is that most of these games don't even have the excuse of pushing 64 players with destructible scenery like Battlefield. Tekken 7 (1536x864) is a 1v1 fighting game, Shadow of the Beast (1600x900) is a sidescroller, and The Witness (1600x900) is a puzzle game with baked lighting.

Also, I realize this is all purely anecdotal observations.
 

GaemzDood

Well-Known Member
Outlast runs at 1008 on Switch, which is mathematically 93.33% of 1080p, which means that the horizontal resolution is 1792, assuming it's not dynamic. It's also 30 FPS, and the only reviewer so far noted mild screen tearing. Considering it's an engine not natively supported on Switch, and, well, it's the Switch, that's pretty good, considering the only other UE3 game on the system is sub-HD (though it is 60 FPS).

Outlast 2 *technically* has a dynamic resolution on other consoles, but it doesn't activate unless you purposely try to make it (i.e. zooming in on a character's hair with the camera), so I wonder how it is on Switch.

The Outlast titles are insanely well optimized, and Outlast 2 in particular is exemplary in terms of how much tech it's pushing and how well it runs, it's 1080p and 60 FPS on the Xbox One...using an engine not even built for it (they did heavily modify it). It uses tons of shadow casting lights (foliage casts shadows too, really impressive), global illumination lighting similar to the method used in The Last of Us, subsurface scattering, lots of temporally stable post processing effects (film grain, per object motion blur, bokeh DoF, etc.), physically based rendering, volumetric lighting and fog with inscattering, atmospheric scattering, soft shadows, parallax occlusion mapping, planar reflections, temporal supersampling, the list goes on. Oh, and it was built by an indie team. To say that Outlast 2 is one of the best looking games of this generation, on top of being 1080p and 60 FPS, is an understatement. It even looks better than a majority of UE4 games if I'm being totally honest.
 
Last edited:

Koenig

The Architect
So here is my question to you, @GaemzDood : If (When) Nintendo launches a redesigned version of the Switch, what internal components do you think they could upgrade or replace to improve the performance of platform without going to far from the envelope of the base model (IE an iteration like the 3DS/New 3DS etc)
 

theMightyME

Owner of The Total Screen
So here is my question to you, @GaemzDood : If (When) Nintendo launches a redesigned version of the Switch, what internal components do you think they could upgrade or replace to improve the performance of platform without going to far from the envelope of the base model (IE an iteration like the 3DS/New 3DS etc)
it really isn't like that, the switch has an soc, meaning everything is on the 1 chip... the cpu cores, the gpu cores, the ram, every aspect of the machines performance is on a single chip... and it seems to be an off the shelf chip.... so the msot likely change would be to the next iteration of that soc architecture... which should improve just about everything, gpu cores, cpu cores, and ram... the only thing thta is really seperate which could be improved is the flash memory on the device, which could see a capacity bump.. maybe a read/write speed bump, i dunno

but everythign is on a single chip



you can see on that picture the cores... the 4 in the middle making a big square/rectangle are the A57s, the 4 side by side above the a57s are the a53s, the ram is bellow both sets, and the tons of little squares on each side are the gpu cores, that is what is inside the switch

here are the tegra models
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tegra#Tegra_X2

my guess si that it would skip the x2 and go right to xavier


it has double the gpu cores, and the cores themselves are faster and more efficent/modern, it is still 8 cpu cores, the cpu cores are a custom nvidea build and are the same type for all 8 , where as on the x1 it used 4 large cores and 4 small cores switchign between them for power efficiency, the xavier should be able to run more simultaneous cores without frying, it should have either LPDDR4 of LPDDR5 ram, where as the x1 had LPDDR3, so that just means the ram is faster

it is being marketed as an AI and autonomous car chip, but the x1 was initially marketed as a car entertainment center chip... the calculations are similar to what a game consoel would need, as are the calculations for bitcoin mining which is why graphic cards are used for that too
 

Koenig

The Architect
I am well aware that the Tegra is an integrated chip; I was wonder more so to what changes to its design or the Switches other components (Ram for example) might benefit most from a change. It is is definitely a good possibility that Nintendo will just use the next iteration in the form of the X2 or the Xavier, or considering Nvidia's expected "20 year relationship", a modified version of the chip with specific alterations in mind to meet Nintendo's needs.

My Question was more so what would give the most mileage for any of these changes or upgrades while still keeping the core design and compatibility in check. (Although it is my understanding that the X1 and X2 would share all the same instructions and low level timing if needed)
 

GaemzDood

Well-Known Member
I am well aware that the Tegra is an integrated chip; I was wonder more so to what changes to its design or the Switches other components (Ram for example) might benefit most from a change. It is is definitely a good possibility that Nintendo will just use the next iteration in the form of the X2 or the Xavier, or considering Nvidia's expected "20 year relationship", a modified version of the chip with specific alterations in mind to meet Nintendo's needs.

My Question was more so what would give the most mileage for any of these changes or upgrades while still keeping the core design and compatibility in check. (Although it is my understanding that the X1 and X2 would share all the same instructions and low level timing if needed)
I'd like to see a Max-Q GPU, as you know, but if their goal is to stick to Tegra design, then Xavier is the best option. The X2 already looks dated compared to Xavier. I listed a bunch of features supported in Pascal, but since Xavier, in addition to having performance on par with a base PS4, is running off Volta, it should be at least 30% faster if Nvidia's previous iterations are anything to go off of....the problem is that by the time the Switch 2 launches in 2020, the PS5 might already be out, and being a generation behind in performance is exactly one of the reasons why the Wii U flopped (Wii didn't target a traditional market, Wii U did...mainly kids though). By 2020, having 8 GBs of RAM is going to look measly.

Nintendo, or Gunpei Yokoi, has a strange hardware philosophy, but hopefully Nvidia weans them off of it since it didn't do them any favors with the Wii U.
 
Last edited:

theMightyME

Owner of The Total Screen
I am well aware that the Tegra is an integrated chip; I was wonder more so to what changes to its design or the Switches other components (Ram for example) might benefit most from a change. It is is definitely a good possibility that Nintendo will just use the next iteration in the form of the X2 or the Xavier, or considering Nvidia's expected "20 year relationship", a modified version of the chip with specific alterations in mind to meet Nintendo's needs.

My Question was more so what would give the most mileage for any of these changes or upgrades while still keeping the core design and compatibility in check. (Although it is my understanding that the X1 and X2 would share all the same instructions and low level timing if needed)
Ram is integrated in the chip too, the components would only change if it is custom, but considering the X1 is off the shelf, it is unlikely to be changed...

Again the ram is also on the Soc, unless the switch has additional ram beyond that

I think Xavier is it... Just as the x1 was a few years old when the switch came out

I also think we will get a switch upgrade in 2019... But it won't be the switch successor, more like the DSi or PS4 pro

Early reaction seems to place Xavier beyond PS4, but below PS4 pro

And the architecture is close

I also disagree that it is either likely or better for Nintendo to pursue power again ... Nintendo made the right move with switch.. And it had paid off in spades, you can't say the Wii was a different market and then ignore the success of the switch that is happening right now

Merging their markets was clearly the right choice, and outsider if front tech obsessed sites like digital foundry, there isn't any complaints about the switch's limited performance... It is good enough, and the switch 2 will be better

I said this before the switch came it, but it is still happening, tech is shrinking faster than it is growing and each new iteration will be closer to the competition... They choose the right path
 

simplyTravis

Lamer Gamers Podcast Co-Host
Ram is integrated in the chip too, the components would only change if it is custom, but considering the X1 is off the shelf, it is unlikely to be changed...

Again the ram is also on the Soc, unless the switch has additional ram beyond that

I think Xavier is it... Just as the x1 was a few years old when the switch came out

I also think we will get a switch upgrade in 2019... But it won't be the switch successor, more like the DSi or PS4 pro

Early reaction seems to place Xavier beyond PS4, but below PS4 pro

And the architecture is close

I also disagree that it is either likely or better for Nintendo to pursue power again ... Nintendo made the right move with switch.. And it had paid off in spades, you can't say the Wii was a different market and then ignore the success of the switch that is happening right now

Merging their markets was clearly the right choice, and outsider if front tech obsessed sites like digital foundry, there isn't any complaints about the switch's limited performance... It is good enough, and the switch 2 will be better

I said this before the switch came it, but it is still happening, tech is shrinking faster than it is growing and each new iteration will be closer to the competition... They choose the right path
I think the idea that there will be a pure handheld system again is gone. The cell phone and cheapo-tablet industry has taken over and there will be no going back for a dedicated system to gain enough ground against it. That being said, the Switch is showing that gamers want to be able to play high-quality games on the go and still have the same experience on a couch without any hiccups. Users are putting down their cell phones en masse right now to experience gaming again just as social media usage is starting to stagnate (thank goodness.) With the Switch we have the almost perfect mixture of online gaming, couch gameplay, and random rooftop party gaming available. Hell, with Jackbox games and the ease of connection to other people's tv's I've introduced dozens of people to the Switch. I seriously could bring this thing to a rooftop party...

I still think there is a place for dedicated console gaming right now. With the advent of games-as-service we are playing certain games much longer and the "whales" that these games depend on want to have the prettiest experience possible. That being said, I think the dedicated console industry only has a few more generations at most. Once PC Operating Systems figure out how to make gaming easy without any hiccups the console will go away in favor of various ecosystems such as Steam. Right now it's just too clunky in comparison to systems that you simply pick up a controller, press on, then start playing within seconds.
 

theMightyME

Owner of The Total Screen
I think the idea that there will be a pure handheld system again is gone. The cell phone and cheapo-tablet industry has taken over and there will be no going back for a dedicated system to gain enough ground against it. That being said, the Switch is showing that gamers want to be able to play high-quality games on the go and still have the same experience on a couch without any hiccups. Users are putting down their cell phones en masse right now to experience gaming again just as social media usage is starting to stagnate (thank goodness.) With the Switch we have the almost perfect mixture of online gaming, couch gameplay, and random rooftop party gaming available. Hell, with Jackbox games and the ease of connection to other people's tv's I've introduced dozens of people to the Switch. I seriously could bring this thing to a rooftop party...

I still think there is a place for dedicated console gaming right now. With the advent of games-as-service we are playing certain games much longer and the "whales" that these games depend on want to have the prettiest experience possible. That being said, I think the dedicated console industry only has a few more generations at most. Once PC Operating Systems figure out how to make gaming easy without any hiccups the console will go away in favor of various ecosystems such as Steam. Right now it's just too clunky in comparison to systems that you simply pick up a controller, press on, then start playing within seconds.
I have been saying for a while now that eventually playstation and xbox will just be apps on a generic platform there is a point coming in which cheaper mroe powerful set-top boxes will come along that they cannot compete with (mostly because of china), and when that happens they will need to take another approach entirely.... sony is well possition to do a better version of what ubisoft does where you can buy the game sons team but you need to get their uplay stuff installed too... sony could do that and possibly even reach out to 3rd parties to be involved in it too... microsoft has less int he way of 1st party content so that might be harder for them... but they are really good at these kind of services so they could go the dicord route...but much mroe game focused and open up an api that other developers cna plug into their games to use microsoft's service in a more advanced way than what discord can offer...

at this point of convergence, nintendo is the only one that can really stand alone... I mean sony COULD if they really focused on it for a few generations, but nintendo is there NOW... at that point off in the future you will have a plsyatation app, an microsoft app, a generic system that hosts both of those apps, and a nintendo system that doesn't

that is a ways off though.. at the earliest in like 2 more generations, but perhaps as far off as 4 or 5 more
 

GaemzDood

Well-Known Member
I'm doing some math in my head: if, based on the specs of my ideal GPU console specs I listed above, what resolution would a game like Kirby: Star Allies be able to run at on this system while targeting 60 FPS? For reference, it runs at 1536x864p on Switch.
The docked GPU would utilize 8.4 teraflops, a 2048-bit GDDR6 memory interface, 16 GB/s of RAM, 64 ROPs, 2,816 CUDA cores, 484 GB/s of bandwidth, and 160 TMUs.
 
Top