Nintendo Switch Spec Thread

Socar

Active Member
On this I firmly disagree. It is not some fundamental force of the universe that prevents Nintendo from getting 3rd party support; it is their pwn continuous token efforts to support third parties combined with their market failures. If Nintendo made a dominant system for 2-3 generations without forcing developers to jump through hoops they could easily acquire 3rd party parity. (Making 2-3 dominant systems while maintaining said accessibility would be difficult though, but that should be a given)
I think what he's implying is the support from western third parties which I agree that Nintendo is unlikely going to get a lot of them. If you look at the past generations, There aren't that many western third party games that came for the Nintendo systems and the majority ones that do come out are shovelware.

the 3DS sold well so why hasn't EA made an attempt to make a game for the system unlike DS? Where's the Fifa game for the 3DS and so on?

Also, you say that Nintendo does not have a dominant system? What about the Wii? Where's GTAV for the Wii if Chinatown came for the DS? Infact, where is that third party that was suppose to be there?

What about the Wii? Not much of western devs out there.

However, they get strong support from the Japanese developers like Capcom and SEGA and Square Enix so in the eastern side of things, Nintendo has gotten a lot of support. Its the western side of things that Nintendo will not get a whole lot of.

This might sound a bit racist but if you look at it carefully, it seems to be that way.
 

theMightyME

Owner of The Total Screen
@theMightyME Just a slight correction that I made in the CT that I'll make here, the PS4 and Xbox One don't use half the ram for the OS, it's more around 3GB for the Xbone, and 5.5GB for the PS4. It was also said that the seventh core was also unlocked for developers with regards to the PS4, and there's likely to be more optimizations to allow more ram being made available to players.

The current rumor suggests 4GB of unified memory with someone saying 3.2GB for games, and 800MB for the OS (which seems reasonable honestly). But again, like you said, compression can make a big difference with regards to memory usage and bandwidth, and I believe nVidia has the tools necessary to do that with the Tegra processor.
Even so, that still shrinks the gap considerably which was my point . . . . I just find it weird that people think dead NEED the power they are using for their current games . . . They are wasting what is there because it is more than they can afford to do much with . . . Every ps4 game could be ported to pst with far less effort than most would think . . . It is like people arguing that because a Toyota can't keep up with a BMW if isn't safe for freeways
 

Shoulder

Your Resident Beardy Bear
Even so, that still shrinks the gap considerably which was my point . . . . I just find it weird that people think dead NEED the power they are using for their current games . . . They are wasting what is there because it is more than they can afford to do much with . . . Every ps4 game could be ported to pst with far less effort than most would think . . . It is like people arguing that because a Toyota can't keep up with a BMW if isn't safe for freeways
Oh, I don't disagree with your point at all. If you think about it, PCs are even worse with the OS and whatnot. People want more Ram because they run lots of shit in the background. Consoles don't necessarily need that, with the exception of downloading games and updates in the background, syncing your saves, and letting you know when Joe Nintendo is online so you can chat with them while you play.

And if you think about it, the games that currently run on the Xbox One, and PS4 is great with only 5 or more GB of ram, and accomplishing this with a CPU bottleneck reminiscent of the Wii U, but since the systems are selling, developers will work around that. It's also the same thing that if it's only 3.2GB of ram available for developers (which is still >3x more than the Wii U), developers will find ways to work around it. Not to mention, like I mentioned yesterday, game carts, on top of nVidia's own tools, might reduce the bottleneck, if there is one. This is certainly not a one-size-fits-all approach for Ram, or bandwidth, let alone the SoC itself. Different architectures, different feature sets, different media, and most importantly, different type of system.

As we've all mentioned before, because this is a hybrid system, a system that can do both as a home console, and portable device, the biggest compromise WILL be the power output. Even while docked, at best, it'll be just below the Xbox One's power, which in the scheme of things is pretty damn good...for such a small device. We are not dealing with a system that's bigger than your dinner plate. This is something that in theory could fit inside a large pocket, or someone's purse or satchel. Certainly can't do that with the PS4 or Xbox One.

If the Switch can deliver, developers won't care about power because they'll put the time and effort into it. And if you ask me, I think there's a great attraction towards a system that could play your favorite 3rd party games on-the-go, Skyrim being only one of those examples. Imagine if we could play GTA, Assassin's Creed, COD, Battlefield, Final Fantasy, etc on the go. That would be very enticing for many gamers, at least I think.
 

Koenig

The Architect
but that isn't exactly doable... basically they eat shit for 2 or 3 generations on the hope that the next one will do better with their perception? it still isn't up to them, and all it takes is a well planned marketing strategy by the competition to set you back years
With the exception off the Wii, Nintendo has eaten shit ever since the N64. Nintendo has not tried to directly compete with their competition in years, and it shows; Nintendo is a part of gaming legacy, but they have cut themselves out of the primary gaming market. When I say they can pull it off with 2 or 3 systems I mean that those systems themselves have to be good products in and of themselves; the image of a good console one generation can be completely undone by a poor one the next. Nintendo has not had a consistent console design (at least in terms of overall appeal) since the SNES. Trust is earned, not given. It is ENTIRELY up to them to design their systems and cater to the market and developers. In regards to marketing I agree, although Nintendo has the exact same ability to use marketing to their advantage.

To simply say that it is impossible is a lazy and defeatist attitude. It might not be the best choice in some cases, but it should still be considered. The Switch for example plays to Nintendo strengths and unifies their development teams which is huge advantage, that is good; but what about the long term? We simply don't know how long the Switch will be able to stay relevant or just how effective it will be as a "Hybrid". To assume that this is the best choice and ignore other options is arrogant, and from a business perspective, quite dangerous.

With that said I do think we should end the discussion here, at least in this thread. I don't want to de-rail the topic more than we already have.
 
Last edited:

Socar

Active Member
I wonder if screen protectors will be needed for the switch since it doesn't have a clamshell like the DS family.

If the Switch can deliver, developers won't care about power because they'll put the time and effort into it. And if you ask me, I think there's a great attraction towards a system that could play your favorite 3rd party games on-the-go, Skyrim being only one of those examples. Imagine if we could play GTA, Assassin's Creed, COD, Battlefield, Final Fantasy, etc on the go. That would be very enticing for many gamers, at least I think.
Like I said earlier, its highly unlikely that GTA will ever come to a Nintendo system including Switch...just think of the children here......
 

mattavelle1

IT’S GOT A DEATH RAY!
Moderator
. To assume that this is the best choice and ignore other options is arrogant, and from a business perspective, quite dangerous.

Koenig said that^

From a consumer standpoint tho you have to assume that said company has exhausted there possibilities tho when they launch there products.

At that point when they show or launch there product you have the choice then to say "I don't or do agree with there path."
 

Socar

Active Member
With the exception off the Wii, Nintendo has eaten shit ever since the N64. Nintendo has not tried to directly compete with their competition in years, and it shows; Nintendo is a part of gaming legacy, but they have cut themselves out of the primary gaming market. When I say they can pull it off with 2 or 3 systems I mean that those systems themselves have to be good products in and of themselves; the image of a good console one generation can be completely undone by a poor one the next. Nintendo has not had a consistent console design (at least in terms of overall appeal) since the SNES. Trust is earned, not given. It is ENTIRELY up to them to design their systems and cater to the market and developers. In regards to marketing I agree, although Nintendo has the exact same ability to use marketing to their advantage.

To simply say that it is impossible is a lazy and defeatist attitude. It might not be the best choice in some cases, but it should still be considered. The Switch for example plays to Nintendo strengths and unifies their development teams which is huge advantage, that is good; but what about the long term? We simply don't know how long the Switch will be able to stay relevant or just how effective it will be as a "Hybrid". To assume that this is the best choice and ignore other options is arrogant, and from a business perspective, quite dangerous.
That's Nintendo in a nutshell. Taking risks to raise profit rather than coping with others is exactly what Nintendo has done then and even now. Do you honestly think that they can really just copy others and do it better cause they tried that once and it didn't turn out well which of course I'm talking about the Wii U having almost the same quality as the previous specs but nothing turned out well. Why? Because they took risk in it.

But wait, the 3DS didn't do much interms of power and yet it sold well. Why? Because they took the risk to do so. Every single thing Nintendo is doing now is more risky than what Sony and Microsoft will ever do. Honestly, looking at the PS4 and Xbox One, they both played it safe by not making their consoles overwhelmingly expensive while at the same time, just....upscaled the graphics a bit.
 

Goodtwin

Well-Known Member
I feel confident that Switch will not see many AAA Western Published games. So across the board support isn't going to happen. However, it will see a hell of a lot more exclusives than the PS4 and Xbox One recieve, and in not talking first party, but third party games like Monster Hunter. Go look at the emense amount of third party exclusives on the 3DS, and that gives a good indication of what's to come. Third party support is going to be really strong, but perhaps it's not the kind of support "you" desire. If that's the case, there are two excellent choices to enjoy those big AAA experiences.

Sent from my SM-G360V using Tapatalk
 

tekshow

Active Member
Overall, with the rumors and speculations you guys have laid out here... the Switch is sounding pretty capable. It'll be a beast of a Nintendo machine and fingers crossed they'll have some huh output this time around. I was thinking yesterday that Seamus skipped the ol' N64... So maybe she'll make a return after hibernating over the Wii U?

As far as third parties are concerned I don't get that either. Unless you're 14 years old, you probably have another option to play all those third party games. I'm so glad Nintendo is hitting us with another unique innovation. The last thing I want is another box with identical games.

My biggest dilemma in buying most third parties these days comes down to online network, if friends have the game, and what room of my house I'll be playing it in. If the Switch gets third parties I could totally see that as a major attraction personally. That would mean I could game in the bedroom and when the wife needs her beauty rest I could just take the Switch wherever I want. Potentially I could have another dock downstairs and easily move it between big screens. I could honestly see myself forgoing 4K upscsaling or HDR just for that level of mobility.

Going out of town, oh I'll just take Splatoon or COD with me Andy okay over WiFi. No lugging of a 15" laptop required.


Great points on the ram, Tegra, and concepts all around gentleman. You make lurking here on TNE a worthy endeavor.
 

Shoulder

Your Resident Beardy Bear
Overall, with the rumors and speculations you guys have laid out here... the Switch is sounding pretty capable. It'll be a beast of a Nintendo machine and fingers crossed they'll have some huh output this time around. I was thinking yesterday that Seamus skipped the ol' N64... So maybe she'll make a return after hibernating over the Wii U?

As far as third parties are concerned I don't get that either. Unless you're 14 years old, you probably have another option to play all those third party games. I'm so glad Nintendo is hitting us with another unique innovation. The last thing I want is another box with identical games.

My biggest dilemma in buying most third parties these days comes down to online network, if friends have the game, and what room of my house I'll be playing it in. If the Switch gets third parties I could totally see that as a major attraction personally. That would mean I could game in the bedroom and when the wife needs her beauty rest I could just take the Switch wherever I want. Potentially I could have another dock downstairs and easily move it between big screens. I could honestly see myself forgoing 4K upscsaling or HDR just for that level of mobility.

Going out of town, oh I'll just take Splatoon or COD with me Andy okay over WiFi. No lugging of a 15" laptop required.


Great points on the ram, Tegra, and concepts all around gentleman. You make lurking here on TNE a worthy endeavor.
If you're talking about Online, don't forget to bring up voice chat. We've beaten that shit so hard , and criticized Nintendo so much about it, even the Nintendo Ninjas wouldn't dare touch us. So yeah, we are rather vocal about that.

The Switch MUST...I'll repeat that... MUST have voice chat as a native built-in option. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. The PS4 does it, and it works beautifully. LSB and I have used a few times, and we've never had issues with it. And yes, it is cross-game chat as well.
 
I wonder if screen protectors will be needed for the switch since it doesn't have a clamshell like the DS family.



Like I said earlier, its highly unlikely that GTA will ever come to a Nintendo system including Switch...just think of the children here......
what. Wii had some horrifically violent games, and that was about as casual a console as they could get.
If you're talking about Online, don't forget to bring up voice chat. We've beaten that shit so hard , and criticized Nintendo so much about it, even the Nintendo Ninjas wouldn't dare touch us. So yeah, we are rather vocal about that.

The Switch MUST...I'll repeat that... MUST have voice chat as a native built-in option. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. The PS4 does it, and it works beautifully. LSB and I have used a few times, and we've never had issues with it. And yes, it is cross-game chat as well.
its not happening. Look, the Pro controller doesnt even have an input for any type of headset.
 

Koenig

The Architect
I wonder if screen protectors will be needed for the switch since it doesn't have a clamshell like the DS family.
I think @Shoulder mentioned this before, but if the Switch does use an inductive touch screen they can vastly increase the durability of the glass/plastic covering the screen; couple this with a quality bevel and something akin to Gorilla Glass, and I don't think we will have to worry much about the screen breaking.

At this moment I have to agree with @FriedShoes that there won't be voicechat at all.
:mangry:
 

Goodtwin

Well-Known Member
Shut your damn mouth....No voice chat......Fuck......You guys are probably right, but I am hoping your wrong. Perhaps the Switch will support Bluetooth headsets. I will hold out hope until we know for sure, but the lack of proper voice chat is a feature that should be standard, and it holds back games like Splatoon and Mario Kart from enjoying more widespread success. Honestly, its not even less powerful hardware that holds Nintendo back, but dumb ass moves like no voice chat that hurt Nintendo's image as an out of touch company. Its so easy to protect the children, games default with voice chat off, so you have to turn it on, and you can only voice chat with people on your friends list. Is that so hard?

Lack of internal storage and low capacity cartridges is going to turn off some developers that are creating games taking up 50+ GB these days. Third parties have typically seen lower attach rates on Nintendo hardware, so games that would require significant effort to fit inside the rumored 16GB capacity carts may opt to just skip the platform, even if the processing hardware is capable enough. Its kind of going back to the N64 and Gamecube days where some developers skipped the platform because of the capacity limitations. For third party games like Skyrim and NBA 2k, mentioning them because they were shown in the trailer (yes, I know they technically confirmed), but for those games 16GB is plenty. Skyrim on the 360 fit in nicely on a DVD, which is about 12GB dual layered, and NBA 2K17 was still released on the 360 this year as well, so it shouldn't be an issue. Games like Mass Effect 4 and Assassins Creed? I don't know, they may skip the Switch.
 

theMightyME

Owner of The Total Screen
With the exception off the Wii, Nintendo has eaten shit ever since the N64. Nintendo has not tried to directly compete with their competition in years, and it shows; Nintendo is a part of gaming legacy, but they have cut themselves out of the primary gaming market. When I say they can pull it off with 2 or 3 systems I mean that those systems themselves have to be good products in and of themselves; the image of a good console one generation can be completely undone by a poor one the next. Nintendo has not had a consistent console design (at least in terms of overall appeal) since the SNES. Trust is earned, not given. It is ENTIRELY up to them to design their systems and cater to the market and developers. In regards to marketing I agree, although Nintendo has the exact same ability to use marketing to their advantage.

To simply say that it is impossible is a lazy and defeatist attitude. It might not be the best choice in some cases, but it should still be considered. The Switch for example plays to Nintendo strengths and unifies their development teams which is huge advantage, that is good; but what about the long term? We simply don't know how long the Switch will be able to stay relevant or just how effective it will be as a "Hybrid". To assume that this is the best choice and ignore other options is arrogant, and from a business perspective, quite dangerous.

With that said I do think we should end the discussion here, at least in this thread. I don't want to de-rail the topic more than we already have.
there is a big difference between eating shit unintentionally, and eating shit intentionally... the dedicated console market is a VERY red sea, it makes NO SENSE to explore it further when they come at it from a disadvantage.. they HAVE to have a point of differentiation .... it is in no way arogant of nintendo to look at their strengths and find a way to more fully exploit them.... it is practical... they lost the console market in the west, they lost casuals to smartphones, their handheld market is thriving, especially in japan, but handhelds as a whole are less popular in the west.... those are all practical assessments, and nitendo has them to divise a plan that lets them combine their markets...

it is the opposite of arrogant

as for the long term vision... well in a few generations consoles themselves will be pretty much irrelevant IMO, we have already stepped DEEP into the world of diminishing returns, VR is too expensive and FAR too limited to reach full popularity at this time... the hybrid route is the BEST move for nintendo.. a single device for all of their software... a device they can iterate on ... the best option is probably to update the hardware every 2-3 years similar to what we are seeing right now with scorpio and ps4 pro... new hardware that enhances the experience but isn't necesary to play all of the games... after 2 generations they can trim the fat... so the switch 2 doesn't play any exclusives, just looks better than the switch, but the switch 3 will start cutting off the switch 1 from more intensive games if necesary... hell the switch mechaic of cotnrols that seperate from a screen also make it deal for a potential VR set, though it wouldn't work well with what is sure to be a 6" 720p screen.... but it might work ok on say a 5" 1080p screen, and will be beatiful on a 5" 4k display... so as the switch iterates, it can move into VR cleanly as well

there is a LOT of room to move forward with the hybrid format, far more versatile options than a dedicated console offers

once our phones are good enough to reliably provide competitive console gaming graphics (probably in about 6 years), as devices you need anyways, consoles will start to become irrelevant.... you NEED a phone... and your phone is pretty much at the same level as the ps5... so why get a ps5... and why would developers support a ps5 when they face less restrictions, higher profit margins, and a MUCH larger audience by developing for android and iOS... pull out a controller, leave your phone in your pocket, or dock it... cast to your TV... at the same graphical fidelity of the competing dedicated consoles... with a device you need for other purposes anyways

it is coming... the gap is shrinking VERY quickly in performance.. next up is efficiency, running high performance without overheating or depleting battery too quickly... all of that WILL happen.. no might... WILL

when it does consoles mean nothing... the only exception is if you can provide enough to differentiate yourself... at that point MS will have halo, forza, and gears... not nearly enough... and base don MS's new CEO and his vision I see him abandoning xbox systems in favor of an x-box branded experience within mobile devices.... Sony will be in a slightly better position with their exclusives, but it wont take long for them to change strategy either...

Nintendo on the other hand has a massive stable of franchises that can live on their own and be supported by exterior mobile efforts...

int he coming console-less future, nintendo will probably be the only game in town... everythign else will be on mobile devices

so it isn't that the switch has a limited future compared to everything else.. it is the opposite
 

theMightyME

Owner of The Total Screen
Shut your damn mouth....No voice chat......Fuck......You guys are probably right, but I am hoping your wrong. Perhaps the Switch will support Bluetooth headsets. I will hold out hope until we know for sure, but the lack of proper voice chat is a feature that should be standard, and it holds back games like Splatoon and Mario Kart from enjoying more widespread success. Honestly, its not even less powerful hardware that holds Nintendo back, but dumb ass moves like no voice chat that hurt Nintendo's image as an out of touch company. Its so easy to protect the children, games default with voice chat off, so you have to turn it on, and you can only voice chat with people on your friends list. Is that so hard?

Lack of internal storage and low capacity cartridges is going to turn off some developers that are creating games taking up 50+ GB these days. Third parties have typically seen lower attach rates on Nintendo hardware, so games that would require significant effort to fit inside the rumored 16GB capacity carts may opt to just skip the platform, even if the processing hardware is capable enough. Its kind of going back to the N64 and Gamecube days where some developers skipped the platform because of the capacity limitations. For third party games like Skyrim and NBA 2k, mentioning them because they were shown in the trailer (yes, I know they technically confirmed), but for those games 16GB is plenty. Skyrim on the 360 fit in nicely on a DVD, which is about 12GB dual layered, and NBA 2K17 was still released on the 360 this year as well, so it shouldn't be an issue. Games like Mass Effect 4 and Assassins Creed? I don't know, they may skip the Switch.
I think nintendo needs to create an all purpose switch app for phones that can take a lot of the brunt of services off of the switch itself... voice chat could be one of these... by having the switch pair with your phone you could use the headphones/set alreayd paired to your phone for voice chat on switch games, as well as have your phone handle stuff like street pass... I also said before that you could use soemthign like google's daydream visor with your phone as a screen and sensor array for nitnendo's step into vr... everyone has a phone already, so leverage that, and take the stress off the system itself... by pairing with a phone and having an app on the phone you could control it all through the switch itself so it would feel like it was running on the switch when it was really running on your phone
 

Socar

Active Member
once our phones are good enough to reliably provide competitive console gaming graphics (probably in about 6 years), as devices you need anyways, consoles will start to become irrelevant.... you NEED a phone... and your phone is pretty much at the same level as the ps5... so why get a ps5... and why would developers support a ps5 when they face less restrictions, higher profit margins, and a MUCH larger audience by developing for android and iOS... pull out a controller, leave your phone in your pocket, or dock it... cast to your TV... at the same graphical fidelity of the competing dedicated consoles... with a device you need for other purposes anyways
I'm not saying you're wrong here but I doubt that the phone market will solely be the only way to play games. There's a reason why consoles are still relevant and that's because they can handle so much compared to phones. Your phone can take a lot of heat and can drain the battery life faster than a typical console and that's one of the issues that the 3DS had is that because of it being more powerful than the DS, the battery life came lower.

Then there's the other problem of the type of games that you have on a phone. Simply copying and pasting existing ideas is NOT the best way to make profit and many devs are shut down simply because they don't make enough profit on mobile and end up suffering huge amounts of loss. Remember how SEGA and Capcom at one point suffered. The marketing approach on mobile is very difficult compared to Consoles because there's too many apps to count and are hard to pin point differences.

Consoles are doing even well now because they are healthy and are safe because at the very least, you can get profit out of it which is simpler than mobile. Mobile development is cheap so don't expect to see AAA games on mobile because they will always end up being cheap.

I mean, look at the size of a typical AAA game and tell me, can an app on a phone eat up that huge junk load of storage for a AAA game? I rather have a main story campaign rather than having short app games that rely on microtransactions to complete the entire game or that they need the internet inorder to play the game.

Phones may become powerful but I doubt that the mobile gaming will take over and I hope to god that doesn't happen!
 

tekshow

Active Member
Trust me I don't wanna be wrong about voicechat, but it just seems like something Nintendo would omit.
So what you're saying is you DO wanna be wrong about voice chat? ;)

They just need adult barriers in place like a passcode. It could be that there's notifications immediately to disable or enable chat. I feel like if they're thorough about explaining it they can manage the friendly appeal Nintendo is known for.

I'm kinda worried about it, you can definitely mark me down as a maybe. The one hope I have us they've been nailing the bullet points lately and everything I've questioned they've addressed. We probably won't know about Voice and online structure until closer to launch. Ughhhhh
 

theMightyME

Owner of The Total Screen
I'm not saying you're wrong here but I doubt that the phone market will solely be the only way to play games. There's a reason why consoles are still relevant and that's because they can handle so much compared to phones. Your phone can take a lot of heat and can drain the battery life faster than a typical console and that's one of the issues that the 3DS had is that because of it being more powerful than the DS, the battery life came lower.

Then there's the other problem of the type of games that you have on a phone. Simply copying and pasting existing ideas is NOT the best way to make profit and many devs are shut down simply because they don't make enough profit on mobile and end up suffering huge amounts of loss. Remember how SEGA and Capcom at one point suffered. The marketing approach on mobile is very difficult compared to Consoles because there's too many apps to count and are hard to pin point differences.

Consoles are doing even well now because they are healthy and are safe because at the very least, you can get profit out of it which is simpler than mobile. Mobile development is cheap so don't expect to see AAA games on mobile because they will always end up being cheap.

I mean, look at the size of a typical AAA game and tell me, can an app on a phone eat up that huge junk load of storage for a AAA game? I rather have a main story campaign rather than having short app games that rely on microtransactions to complete the entire game or that they need the internet inorder to play the game.

Phones may become powerful but I doubt that the mobile gaming will take over and I hope to god that doesn't happen!
my whole point is that the difference between consoles and phone spec is RAPIDLY shrinking... not saying their isn't a difference, or that phones are there yet.. but that it is coming very very soon... in like 2 years flagship phones will probably be as powerful as a ps4... in another 2 they will be at near serpico spec, by the time the next level beyond serpico comes out phones will be right there with them in terms of power.... if not at that exact speed at a speed aproaching that... so maybe 5 years, maybe 7... but the difference will essentially shrink to nothing... then the only issues will be heat and drain... and work is being done to fix those factors as well... once all of those factors are fixed, what is the point of having a console ? lag free wireless stream from your phone to your TV, the same performance, the abiltiy to connect maybe 20 soemthing devices over blutooth (controllers headsets, etc..) an always on data interconnection, wifi, everything... the device in your pocket that you keep on you at all times will do EVERYTHING your console can and at the same quality... at that point... why buy a console.... the reason is simple... games!... but why in the hell wouldn't activision put call of duty up for the BILLIONS of android and iphone users when they currently only put it up for the millions of ps4 and xbone users... and at that point.. when they have an install base on a phone of 100 million users.... why even bother supporting the 40 million user base amrkets of the consoles? so multiplats go out the window.. then it is just an issue of exclusives.... microsoft barelyc ares abotu exclusives, and their CEO is about bringing their wares to the palces people are.. so they will switch with the industry... sony has a good library of exclusives.. but without multiplats they can't sustain.... Nitnendo can just abrely sustain on their own with 2 divded platforms, but could probably do fine with just 1.... pplus they already have their claws digging into mobile as a back-up/second pillar

when I say everything will be on phones... I don't mean phones as we know them now.. I am talking about phones in say 7 years from now

people seem to think that hardware power on portables lags 1 gen behind consoles.. but that isn't how it works... that generation gap is steadily shrinking and eventually their simply will not be a gap

a big part of this is the amount of money going into smaller tech... when amd makes a cpu for a console they get a nice investment, ncie profits to fund their next chip by selling like 40 million units or so wholesale... when Qualcomm makes a SoC for a phone they sell around 500 million units... that gives them a MUCH larger profit base to dip into for their next gen chips... the console market is TINY compared to the mobile market, funding moves MUCH MUCH MUCH faster in mobile which allows their tech to shrink faster than console tech can grow
 

Socar

Active Member
my whole point is that the difference between consoles and phone spec is RAPIDLY shrinking... not saying their isn't a difference, or that phones are there yet.. but that it is coming very very soon... in like 2 years flagship phones will probably be as powerful as a ps4... in another 2 they will be at near serpico spec, by the time the next level beyond serpico comes out phones will be right there with them in terms of power.... if not at that exact speed at a speed aproaching that... so maybe 5 years, maybe 7... but the difference will essentially shrink to nothing... then the only issues will be heat and drain... and work is being done to fix those factors as well... once all of those factors are fixed, what is the point of having a console ? lag free wireless stream from your phone to your TV, the same performance, the abiltiy to connect maybe 20 soemthing devices over blutooth (controllers headsets, etc..) an always on data interconnection, wifi, everything... the device in your pocket that you keep on you at all times will do EVERYTHING your console can and at the same quality... at that point... why buy a console.... the reason is simple... games!... but why in the hell wouldn't activision put call of duty up for the BILLIONS of android and iphone users when they currently only put it up for the millions of ps4 and xbone users... and at that point.. when they have an install base on a phone of 100 million users.... why even bother supporting the 40 million user base amrkets of the consoles? so multiplats go out the window.. then it is just an issue of exclusives.... microsoft barelyc ares abotu exclusives, and their CEO is about bringing their wares to the palces people are.. so they will switch with the industry... sony has a good library of exclusives.. but without multiplats they can't sustain.... Nitnendo can just abrely sustain on their own with 2 divded platforms, but could probably do fine with just 1.... pplus they already have their claws digging into mobile as a back-up/second pillar

when I say everything will be on phones... I don't mean phones as we know them now.. I am talking about phones in say 7 years from now

people seem to think that hardware power on portables lags 1 gen behind consoles.. but that isn't how it works... that generation gap is steadily shrinking and eventually their simply will not be a gap

a big part of this is the amount of money going into smaller tech... when amd makes a cpu for a console they get a nice investment, ncie profits to fund their next chip by selling like 40 million units or so wholesale... when Qualcomm makes a SoC for a phone they sell around 500 million units... that gives them a MUCH larger profit base to dip into for their next gen chips... the console market is TINY compared to the mobile market, funding moves MUCH MUCH MUCH faster in mobile which allows their tech to shrink faster than console tech can grow
If that's true, then why is the NES mini edition announced and that people still have demand over such stuff? Not everything is going to be released on Mobile even when the time comes because there are lots of things that mobiles will never be able to do. Will the day that using windows on laptops come to an end if Mobile becomes powerful? Not really because you need a computer to program applications and testing softwares all of which mobile cannot do. And if its the stuff that the mobile can't do, then you can say that it ALSO can't do a lot of games either.

I am not a fan of the virtual controls that are in the touch screen as they make the Tiger com look better. Sure, third party controllers can work but really? It just won't look so natural unlike Switch.

The ones who manufacture phones have no interest in getting into the gaming business as all they are obsessed with is just making their phone better. There's really not much of difference between a phone and a PC because they both can do multitasking etc etc so why would many game devs just release games that are not for mobile if mobile gaming is big?

Because Mobile marketing is hell. Its not healthy because there's too many billion apps that look alike and unlike console games where its easy to get attention, mobile isn't and it won't be long now that the pokemon go hype will vanish. Because its mobile and mobile games don't last very long both download wise and gameplay wise.

So no. While I agree that Mobiles will be more powerful than ever, I seriously doubt that it will take over console gaming.
 

Shoulder

Your Resident Beardy Bear
If that's true, then why is the NES mini edition announced and that people still have demand over such stuff? Not everything is going to be released on Mobile even when the time comes because there are lots of things that mobiles will never be able to do. Will the day that using windows on laptops come to an end if Mobile becomes powerful? Not really because you need a computer to program applications and testing softwares all of which mobile cannot do. And if its the stuff that the mobile can't do, then you can say that it ALSO can't do a lot of games either.

I am not a fan of the virtual controls that are in the touch screen as they make the Tiger com look better. Sure, third party controllers can work but really? It just won't look so natural unlike Switch.

The ones who manufacture phones have no interest in getting into the gaming business as all they are obsessed with is just making their phone better. There's really not much of difference between a phone and a PC because they both can do multitasking etc etc so why would many game devs just release games that are not for mobile if mobile gaming is big?

Because Mobile marketing is hell. Its not healthy because there's too many billion apps that look alike and unlike console games where its easy to get attention, mobile isn't and it won't be long now that the pokemon go hype will vanish. Because its mobile and mobile games don't last very long both download wise and gameplay wise.

So no. While I agree that Mobiles will be more powerful than ever, I seriously doubt that it will take over console gaming.
Same reason why people buy old cars, or other vintage stuff: nostalgia, and it's cool. For example, I have two slide rules that I got from my Grandfather, and my Dad. Calculators are of course much better, and a lot more accurate than a slide rule are, but the simple mechanical feeling of them, and just the nostalgic nature is a draw. I also think being able to use a slide rule is pretty cool in and of itself.

Same goes with driving a manual. Those things are on their way out, and there's nothing we can do about it, but there will be those who will continue to drive them, whether by buying older cars with them, or simply keeping their cars with a manual, even though autonomous cars are starting to make their way,
 

Socar

Active Member
Same reason why people buy old cars, or other vintage stuff: nostalgia, and it's cool. For example, I have two slide rules that I got from my Grandfather, and my Dad. Calculators are of course much better, and a lot more accurate than a slide rule are, but the simple mechanical feeling of them, and just the nostalgic nature is a draw. I also think being able to use a slide rule is pretty cool in and of itself.

Same goes with driving a manual. Those things are on their way out, and there's nothing we can do about it, but there will be those who will continue to drive them, whether by buying older cars with them, or simply keeping their cars with a manual, even though autonomous cars are starting to make their way,
Maybe so, but can you feel that nostalgia playing on the phone? Does it feel natural playing it on the phone?
 

Shoulder

Your Resident Beardy Bear
Sorry my bad. I thought you were defending theMightyME's statement towards mobile killing off consoles.
No, I wasn't lol.

I will say that mobile will definitely have an impact on gaming as we know it today, but that being said, I do think that in the end, like Film, there will still be a conventional way of engaging in your favorite form of entertainment. I remember back in the early 2000s when this internet of things would be the death of Cinema as we know it, and while it certain has had its fair share of impact to dampen its success, movie theaters are still around, and I think just as popular as ever. I believe that in time, video games will still have their place with dedicated systems, and dedicated games meant for our enjoyment, and entertainment. Mobile will not be the death of conventional gaming.
 

Koenig

The Architect
I think it is best to consider mobile, handheld, console and PC as entirely separate markets that happen to overlap in various sections. A Venn diagram would be the most simply way to envision it, but not entirely accurate.
 
I just found this, seems legit.



I've also found several rumors pointing to the fact that while the Tegra X1 is in early devkits, all signs and sources are pointing to a probable inclusion of Parker in the Switch. The latter is clearly a capable chip for what we'd want the Switch to do. It's a 50% increase on a paper and probably a lot more with the custom work NVidia has invested.

Here's the article for that image:
http://www.fool.com/investing/2016/08/25/report-nvidias-codename-parker-to-power-the-upcomi.aspx

Both Eurogamer and Digital foundry are on the Parker bandwagon. DF goes as far to say that a custom Tegra X1 would still be a leap over the Wii U. They NAILED the details of the Switch long before the reveal, this is back from July and is incredibly accurate.

I've watched this a few times:

Everyone here seems to have so much good information on what is and isn't reasonable to expect, but you sir are causing me to get way too hyped for the power of the Switch (and I mean that in a good way, ha ha ha!)
 

theMightyME

Owner of The Total Screen
Maybe so, but can you feel that nostalgia playing on the phone? Does it feel natural playing it on the phone?
see, so you are thinking of it in a very narrow scope... you are thinking wtf might thinks we are just going to play cod on our ohones with a touch pad... thta is NOT what I am sayign at all.. I am saying that in the future, your phone will be even more of your all purpose computer... and it will seamlessly interact with peripherals... you might sit down in front of a keyboard/mouse and monitor... but it will be your phone that is wirelessly driving them all.... if you hid the phone and put a dummy tower next to it you would just think you were using a computer.... because everythign would scale, the UI would change, etc... the phone in your pocket would say "ok, I am a computer now" you might not even interact directly with your phone much at all... it will seemlessly itneract with other stuff....

I have a smart watch, and while the use case of smart watches is tiny right now... when I go to take a bus somewhere I bring it, I have my headphones in, and I am settign what I listen to, skipping tracks and adjusting volume all on my watch.... while i listen in my headphones... my phone is just the thing driving all of it... i might never touch it on the trip.... but it is still all happening on my phone

THAT is what I mean by gaming coming to phones...

you will sit down in front of your TV, pick up a controller, hit the start button, it will switch your TV on and switch to the right input (like chromecast already does) and suddenly you will have a console interface.... but that interface isn't running off of a console, or off of the controller.. it is running off of your phone...

the 1 device you have no hesitation at spending $600+ on every 2 years

we aren't there yet.... but my view is as a futurist, I am looking ahead....

it is like if I was to talk abotu self driving cars 5 years ago everyone would be like "yeah right not in our lifetime".... now their are fully autonomous vehicles, there are semi-autonomous vehicles in mass production, and trucking companies are starting to move forward on working prototypes of self driving (though still manned) trucks... because it is safer for the computer to drive than a trucker who has been awake and on the road for 48 hours straight

even here on these boards if you go way back you can see me posting about how excited I was for self driving cars, and the average mindset was skeptical... now everyone is on board that it WILL happen, but they have different ideas about when and how....

even computer tech... I saw a futurist talking about how new nano machine manufacturing processes could make a laptop for the price of cardboard.... or that a car could be entirely manufactured from base parts within a unit the size of a single car garage (as in the parts are stored there too)

this isn't scifi, this is stuff that is already mostly possible, it just hasn't hit mainstream production....

5 to 7 years might seem to close for a console to obsolete... but that is a VERY long stretch of time when you consider the pace at which technology is currently growing...

and as I said before... the tech that develops fastest is based entirely on its use in the market.... cellphones have the shortest general lifespan and largest install base of all consumer electronics... by leaps and bounds... and so the tech that goes into them is growing WAY WAY WAY faster than just about any other technology is

battery drain has been mentioned (by me too)... well battery is currently going through a huge renaisance too thanks to Elon Musk's Tesla... his new giga factory is set to produce twice as many lithium ion batteries in that factory alone than are produced in the rest of the world combined right now... that kind of throughput means that HUGE innovations are going to happen...

and there were already some pretty impressive new innovations in battery tech...

wireless charging for example is at the consumer level and has been for a few years now... then there are super capacitors which ask us why we would even need batteries at all... most interesting though is research being done into tech that harvests power from wireless signals... in other words... by being in a city that has loads of wifi signals, and cell signals, your phone could keep itself charged by literally eating the energy being pumped into the airwaves... this is REAL!!!!

http://thenewstack.io/delivering-po...e-next-billion-devices-no-batteries-required/

this stuff is all like 4-5 years out.... it is coming very soon....

then you add in all the experimentation being done with quick pairing, casting, and mirroring by google, apple, amazon, and so many other

and of course the raw power tech coming to mobile sized processors and it seems clear as day to me that any video game devices we buy in the future will most likely just be peripherals for our phones... which sit in our pockets, on a table, or in a dock out of sight, and out of mind... yet driving the whole experience.

people need to broaden their views man, keep up on what is happening in tech... this is super exciting times we are living in... and every compromise we used to have is going away as the technology develops...

remember the argument about the bad audio quality on mp3 players.... well now most phones can support uncompressed FLAC files, and quite a few (like the HTC 10) are even supporting 24bit audio with built in powerful DACs

it used to be that the best camera was the one you always had with you (your phone) precisely because it was the one you had with you... but that gap too is shrinking ridiculously fast

http://www.theverge.com/circuitbreaker/2016/10/29/13466786/google-pixel-photo-better-than-iphone

sure dslr still produces better results.... but for how long... the gap used to seem insurmountable... you just can't get past large heavy glass lenses.... is what people thought, but now the use of technology and image processing algorithms is making people second guess those assumptions

at a certain point in tech the idea of a phone driving your console gaming experience will just be a no brainer... why buy additional space taking tech... it will be convenience and variability that initially drives us in this direction.. and there WILL be gaps in the quality of the experience... but those gaps are not inherent... they wont last

the idea of an electric car used to be laughed at by people who take cars seriously.. now the tesla model s p100d is the fastest production vehicle in the world... 0-60 in 2.5 seconds


we need to think further ahead than what is currently in our pockets, in our garages, and connected to our TVs
 

Goodtwin

Well-Known Member
Phones will always be battery and thermally limited. Even your most powerful phone today would struggle to outperform an Xbox 360. So even though in a handful of years we may be seeing a phone capable of PS4 Pro performance, the next ten consoles will be pushing 8 times that. Being able to run hot with no limits in power draw will always result in more processing power. Now we may only be one console generation away from photo realism, and thus improvements become impossible to see. I believe Mark Cerny said with about 40 Tflops, they could create true photo realism visuals. Once a phone can reach that, then I agree, consoles will be obsolete, but that's probably 15 years away.

Sent from my SM-G360V using Tapatalk
 

theMightyME

Owner of The Total Screen
Phones will always be battery and thermally limited. Even your most powerful phone today would struggle to outperform an Xbox 360. So even though in a handful of years we may be seeing a phone capable of PS4 Pro performance, the next ten consoles will be pushing 8 times that. Being able to run hot with no limits in power draw will always result in more processing power. Now we may only be one console generation away from photo realism, and thus improvements become impossible to see. I believe Mark Cerny said with about 40 Tflops, they could create true photo realism visuals. Once a phone can reach that, then I agree, consoles will be obsolete, but that's probably 15 years away.

Sent from my SM-G360V using genital warts
I completely disagree.... there are HUGE revolutions already happening in battery, and those will be dwarfed by what happens when the gigafactory is fully operational.... heat is the next frontier, different component materials are already seeing to that

it will happen sooner than 15 years
 

Socar

Active Member
@theMightyME

I agree that tech is improving. But there is just one flaw that gaming has that other techs don't and this is exactly what Nintendo might have realized. What can you do on a phone? All you can do is simply touch it. Not every dev is even making use of the gyro that the phone comes with. And Nintendo always finds new ways for consumers to play games. Look at the DS. It sold well because it had new ways to play games. the Game Boy was new at the time because you can play games anywhere.

Phones may be the future of gaming but considering that Nintendo will soon realize that there's only so little you can do playing a game on a phone, they will continue console gaming and Microsoft and Sony are no doubt gonna be there as well.
 

Cubits

Well-Known Member
I remember when GTA3 launched on android it had ps3 controller support. That was what, five years ago? I plugged my phone into my tv and played that game with a real controller, from mobile. With miracast streaming tech, as found in the wii u gamepad, you wouldn't even have to plug anything in, just hit go.

This isn't future tech, it's several years old.

Around the same time i headed a project which investigated a similar solution for office computing, whereby each individual used their work phone as their PC. The handset would dock with the monitor, and wirelessly accept a keyboard and mouse. Because we run a citrix virtualised desktop environment, the power and operating system of the phone itself is inconsequential. The net result is lower cost, significantly lower power usage, and improved security, portability, and convenience.

But as cool as the results of the phone power race are, the end solution for gaming will be virtualised streaming services, where console power will become meaningless. OnLive gave it a red hot go, but it was too far ahead of the infrastructure and societal trends. Video services like Netflix were far from mainstream when they launched, connection quality wasn't a consideration for the vast majority of people, and the backend server costs were far higher than they are now.

Sony ate the company to consolidate it into their "now" service, but that's a little like an oil company buying tesla.

Microsoft has the distributed networking power to turn on such a service for a significant number of countries, but all they've really committed in that field is "cloud-based assistive processing" for their traditional games, and even that feature is utter vaporware at this point.

Amazon has a similar physical network, which they sell wholesale to smaller companies. They've been getting into the gaming sphere recently, after establishing their own video streaming service. They might give streamed gaming a spin next, and they have the money to stick it to the other players.
 

theMightyME

Owner of The Total Screen
@theMightyME

I agree that tech is improving. But there is just one flaw that gaming has that other techs don't and this is exactly what Nintendo might have realized. What can you do on a phone? All you can do is simply touch it. Not every dev is even making use of the gyro that the phone comes with. And Nintendo always finds new ways for consumers to play games. Look at the DS. It sold well because it had new ways to play games. the Game Boy was new at the time because you can play games anywhere.

Phones may be the future of gaming but considering that Nintendo will soon realize that there's only so little you can do playing a game on a phone, they will continue console gaming and Microsoft and Sony are no doubt gonna be there as well.
you aren't reading what I typed . . . Not at all . . . I am talking about using a controller with your phone . . . Which you can already do , but I am talking about using a controller and a TV screen and playing a game on your phone without ever taking it out of your pocket . . .
 

Socar

Active Member
you aren't reading what I typed . . . Not at all . . . I am talking about using a controller with your phone . . . Which you can already do , but I am talking about using a controller and a TV screen and playing a game on your phone without ever taking it out of your pocket . . .
And you aren't getting my point. What makes you think that Nintendo will sooner or later do something as to make games on a phone exclusive when they will realize that whether it supports a controller or not, it doesn't do anything new?

And again, you're missing the point that marketing mobile games is LIKE HELL! Its not easy as marketing a console game which can give guarantee sales.
 

theMightyME

Owner of The Total Screen
And you aren't getting my point. What makes you think that Nintendo will sooner or later do something as to make games on a phone exclusive when they will realize that whether it supports a controller or not, it doesn't do anything new?

And again, you're missing the point that marketing mobile games is LIKE HELL! Its not easy as marketing a console game which can give guarantee sales.
and again you continued to not read my post.... I specifically stated in the original post that it is nintendo alone who can survive with their own machine in that coming climate....nintendo CAN have their own device because they have enough strong IPs to do so, they can carve out a niche that sony and ms cannot.

as for marketing.... everything changes base don the conditions, the future for companies like sony and ms is to have a centralized app on other devices, this would give developers a chance to have a more limited platform than the open wild west of the mobile market.... but that too will fade as developers of quality mobile games DO stand out and garner additional sales of future games based on their reputation
 

Goodtwin

Well-Known Member
and again you continued to not read my post.... I specifically stated in the original post that it is nintendo alone who can survive with their own machine in that coming climate....nintendo CAN have their own device because they have enough strong IPs to do so, they can carve out a niche that sony and ms cannot.

as for marketing.... everything changes base don the conditions, the future for companies like sony and ms is to have a centralized app on other devices, this would give developers a chance to have a more limited platform than the open wild west of the mobile market.... but that too will fade as developers of quality mobile games DO stand out and garner additional sales of future games based on their reputation
I think your absolutely right, people are missing the point of Switch, it's not Nintendo trying to win back EA, Ubisoft, and Actvision, but a platform that can be successful with or without those publishers. Streamlining all of Nintendo's software into one device will open up opportunities for neglected IP's to be resurrected, and new IP's to be born. It's not like Nintendo is truly going solo, there will be a magnitude of 3DS developers in board, along with a strong lineup of Indie games as well. The funny thing is, the more successful Switch is in spite of limited support from the large western publishers, the more likely they are to support the platform. Prove you can do it without them, and they will come around. I hope Beyond Good and Evil is Switch exclusive, not just because I want the game, but because the Sony and Microsoft fanboys will be beside themselves. Just like all the complaing with Bayonetta 2 being Wii U exclusive.

Sent from my SM-G360V using Tapatalk
 

theMightyME

Owner of The Total Screen
I think your absolutely right, people are missing the point of Switch, it's not Nintendo trying to win back EA, Ubisoft, and Actvision, but a platform that can be successful with or without those publishers. Streamlining all of Nintendo's software into one device will open up opportunities for neglected IP's to be resurrected, and new IP's to be born. It's not like Nintendo is truly going solo, there will be a magnitude of 3DS developers in board, along with a strong lineup of Indie games as well. The funny thing is, the more successful Switch is in spite of limited support from the large western publishers, the more likely they are to support the platform. Prove you can do it without them, and they will come around. I hope Beyond Good and Evil is Switch exclusive, not just because I want the game, but because the Sony and Microsoft fanboys will be beside themselves. Just like all the complaing with Bayonetta 2 being Wii U exclusive.

Sent from my SM-G360V using genital warts
This
 

Goodtwin

Well-Known Member
3DS really does show how specs are not very important to consumers. 3DS is actually surging in sales, it's doing better year over year, and with Pokemon coming, that momentum isn't likely to change. If the price is right and the games are there, specs take a back seat. With the New 3DS model dropping its price to $99 this Black Friday, I could see the system having strong sales for at least a year following Switchs release.

Sent from my SM-G360V using Tapatalk
 

Cubits

Well-Known Member
By combinerising the home console and portable, the market currently filled by the 3DS would also see increased third party support from publishers/developers who typically shy away from that market (hopefully?).

Although portable Skyrim will only appeal to the few who won't be saturated with that game world by march, it does set a precedent for seeing portable versions of games and genres which haven't really touched the portable market in any meaningful way. Bethesda, TakeTwo, EA, Activision, Ubisoft; they've barely made a meaningful portable game between them in the last decade. We've seen half-assed CoD games on the DS and PSP, but it could finally be a competitive product because it can be designed in-line with home console sensibilities.
 

Odo

Well-Known Member
The Switch for example plays to Nintendo strengths and unifies their development teams which is huge advantage, that is good; but what about the long term? We simply don't know how long the Switch will be able to stay relevant or just how effective it will be as a "Hybrid". To assume that this is the best choice and ignore other options is arrogant, and from a business perspective, quite dangerous.
Although Switch represents a bold move from Nintendo, I agree that it's a dangerous one. I'm still confident that Nintendo can't go on with their unique features and their own franchises alone. 3DS is doing well with Nintendo and Japanese games, but I'm not sure yet that Nintendo can replicate that level of success again.

Wii U has Nintendo franchises and failed. 3DS is old. Nowadays Monster Hunter success on 3DS looks more and more like an exception. It's possible to replicate 3DS success, but it's not piece of cake. I hope Switch ends up being a cheap console, they need to sell units as soon as possible in the first year.

I'm still cautious about what Switch will deliver.
 

Odo

Well-Known Member
once our phones are good enough to reliably provide competitive console gaming graphics (probably in about 6 years), as devices you need anyways, consoles will start to become irrelevant.... you NEED a phone... and your phone is pretty much at the same level as the ps5... so why get a ps5... and why would developers support a ps5 when they face less restrictions, higher profit margins, and a MUCH larger audience by developing for android and iOS... pull out a controller, leave your phone in your pocket, or dock it... cast to your TV... at the same graphical fidelity of the competing dedicated consoles... with a device you need for other purposes anyways
Just asking. Do you believe that once smartphones deliver enough power, companies like Rockstar will just put GTA7 on iPads and ignore Sony and Microsoft? Do you think that the console market is nothing but a market that sells plug-and-play computers for games?
 

Odo

Well-Known Member
3DS really does show how specs are not very important to consumers. 3DS is actually surging in sales, it's doing better year over year, and with Pokemon coming, that momentum isn't likely to change. If the price is right and the games are there, specs take a back seat. With the New 3DS model dropping its price to $99 this Black Friday, I could see the system having strong sales for at least a year following Switchs release.

Sent from my SM-G360V using genital warts
By combinerising the home console and portable, the market currently filled by the 3DS would also see increased third party support from publishers/developers who typically shy away from that market (hopefully?).
I agree with you both in case Nintendo Switch is really cheap. $200 cheap. Or less hopefully.
 

tekshow

Active Member
Just asking. Do you believe that once smartphones deliver enough power, companies like Rockstar will just put GTA7 on iPads and ignore Sony and Microsoft? Do you think that the console market is nothing but a market that sells plug-and-play computers for games?
It's definitely shifting. As a result that's why you have Play Anywhere coming from MS and PS Now/Vue from Sony. It's a quest to stay relevant, as is the Pro and Scorpio. They're banking hard that on the next cycle people still want they plug and play computer as a console. A lot of the luster for secondary features is dying off as well. Smart TVs are now standard, and my remote makes it so snappy that I almost never use the streaming services from the games machine. I hit the Netflix button on my remote Andy bam, I'm in the app.those tertiary features and using the console to stream content is dwindling as well.

I agree with you both in case Nintendo Switch is really cheap. $200 cheap. Or less hopefully.
It might not be out of the gate, but I bet Nintendo is planning the path. It was a big misstep of the U that they could never compete on price, I don't think they'll do that again. 3ds was above $200 when it launched and now it has more features and a big screen for $99 bucks, that's a great deal. Nintendo with their philosophy is probably making a profit on that hardware.

I could see the Switch going for $350 with a game and extras at launch, but incremental decreases each holiday.
 
So I was a little disappointed with Mrs. Clinton not getting Elected President after voting for her yesterday and decided to stay up until I heard her Concession Speech the next day at 10:30 am (meaning I stayed up for 15 and a half Hours straight). Upon waking up I think I figured out part of the Switches internal layout. It was right there from the Beginning.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1099932

Referring to the first Post Only (because I don't want you guys needing to read more than you have to). This Patent was Uncovered back in August 20th, 2015 through Neogaf. I believe this is the Internal Design for the NS.


Before I get too far ahead of myself, watch the Above video from the Start but Pause the Image at 2:25 into the Video.

I believe that the "Game Apparatus- Fig 1" was the Original design for the NS "Dock" internals and (once Image is tipped to the Right) is placed in the back of the NS Dock (or Image shown at 2:25 mark of SuperMetaldave64 video linked above). Of course since the Patent was 1 year and 1 Month before Nintendo started to put the Switch into Production some of the placement of the parts within were altered. Case in point #19 Card Slot was moved to Fig. 2 Controller Upper Right portion. #18 was Moved to #19 and then #16 Moved to where #18 was. What the Exact Final Design is we won't know until Digital Foundry Opens one up and Confirms what is where. But as long as y'all trying to talk Specs might as well try to have a Visual to go with it...

Unless Eurogamer comes through again with information from their sources, we will likely have to wait until January to know just how powerful this thing really is. Even if Nintendo nor Nvidia really lay out all the specs, the games will do most of the talking. Once we see what the games, and digital foundry does their work with figuring out the native resolution, we will know just how far they have pushed this Tegra technology.

There are a few reasons to be optimistic that this could be really impressive "mobile" tech though. Three hours of battery life is short, assuming that rumor is true, and that means the processor is sucking some serious juice. The screen being 6inch 720p screen means its pulling less than most tablets that use 1080p or higher screens. The Google Pixel C actually uses the Tegra X1 processor, albeit at 850Mhz instead of 1Ghz, but it last longer than 3 hours and doesn't use a cooling fan. Which brings up another point, the sources for Eurogamer made mention of the "audible" cooling fan for the Tegra X1 in the dev kits. People who have Shield Consoles have commented how their Shield Consoles are nearly silence, which brings me to believe the dev kits are overclocking the Tegra X1 to simulate the higher performing custom chip.

Another reason I believe the Switch is pretty capable is because of the list of supporting developers. Epic Games and Betheseda have not typically show Nintendo hardware support, like any support.....none. These guys aren't interested in trying to customize their games for what they would consider to be relic hardware. I know Skyrim isn't actually confirmed, but come on, it was shown in the trailer, and they are on the supported developer list. I would be pretty shocked at this point if Skyrim doesn't make it on Switch.

@Koenig
Even if Nintendo doesn't want to talk specs, I hope they let Nvidia do some talking. Lets face it, the majority of consumers don't really know what to make of specs anyhow, so its really just for the community of tech enthusiast. Hopefully the secrecy is a thing of the past.
I believe the Controller will be Whisper Silent. Only when Attached to the Dock would the Cooling Fans need to Operate. Part of why The Battery would only last 3 hours. That and Nintendo wanting to Sell a Extended Battery Charger to be placed on the Bottom of the Controller (through USB) when taken on the Go. Maybe Extend Battery life up to 12 Hours before needing Recharged... :cool:
 

Koenig

The Architect
I wonder if the system will consolidate the Joycon batteries into its source of power when they are attached; this would allow the system to essentially have three seperate batteries. If the Joycon batteries have an adequate battery this could be extremely beneficial, even more so if they are made more robust to help boost the main unit.
 
Last edited:
Top