Nintendo Switch News and Discussion Thread

[Jamie]

@Lozjam @the8thark right but it's not actually "better" when plugged in. As in, the dock adds no extra power. If it doesn't enhance the handheld on its own, then I would consider the console to be a handheld console.

 

[the8thark]

@Lozjam @the8thark right but it's not actually "better" when plugged in. As in, the dock adds no extra power. If it doesn't enhance the handheld on its own, then I would consider the console to be a handheld console.

It kinda does. The dock allows the Switch to run at full speed/power. Without it you'd just have lower power internals better suited for portable.

 

[Jamie]

It kinda does. The dock allows the Switch to run at full speed/power. Without it you'd just have lower power internals better suited for portable.

Okay then what is a Laptop actually a Desktop because it gains a power boost when you plug it in? The game's code does not change based on whether it's plugged in or not. There are no in-game differences. The game doesn't run at a higher framerate or resolution or anything based on whether it's docked or not. At most the intended features run a bit smoothly just like a game on your Laptop might if it's plugged in. It's a handheld gaming device.

 

[the8thark]

The game doesn't run at a higher framerate or resolution or anything based on whether it's docked or not.

The rumours are saying 1080 on the TV and 720 on the console.

 

[Jamie]

The rumours are saying 1080 on the TV and 720 on the console.

If that's the case, then I suppose "home console you can take on the go" is fair, assuming the 720p is due to a technical limitation when it's not docked and not Nintendo cheaping out. I still contend though that the quality of the games in terms of graphics and framerate will reflect what is fair to assume are the limitations of a handheld device. Expecting it to have home-console quality is silly. The new standards for home consoles are things like the PS4 Pro which clearly is going to be way more powerful than this console.

 

[the8thark]

If that's the case, then I suppose "home console you can take on the go" is fair, assuming the 720p is due to a technical limitation when it's not docked and not Nintendo cheaping out. I still contend though that the quality of the games in terms of graphics and framerate will reflect what is fair to assume are the limitations of a handheld device. Expecting it to have home-console quality is silly. The new standards for home consoles are things like the PS4 Pro which clearly is going to be way more powerful than this console.

I do think it's the technical limitatioms of the console and not Nintendo cheapening out. But the WiiU did have a resistive touch screen, not a capacitive one and the internal SSD was pathetically low. Cheapening out there one could say. So hard to tell. 720p on the go for most things should be ok and on the console screen that is not too bad because the pixels are way closer together. It looked fine on Jimmy Fallon but as we all know that's no substisute for actually using the console. So we shall see in time.

Of cause the PS4 Pro will be more powerful the the Switch. That's a given. But the PS4 Pro is less optimised. Also for the most part games will look fine on the standard PS4. All games will play on both (though a few will play like trash on the standard PS4 and need the pro for a decent gameplay experience). Despite this I don't see the PS4 Pro being absolutely required by anyone apart from the VR folk who totally need the PS4 Pro's slightly more power.

The Switch is a compromise console. The evidence is all around for that. But the number of compromises it is making is quite low actually, in terms of playing modern 3D games well. As the generations go on, these kind of portable consoles will need to have less and less compromises till one day there is no compromises at all. When that day occurs the need for purely TV only consoles will be over. The Switch is a great step forard in this direction. I say in 20 years or so the difference between the TV tethered consoles (like the PS4) and the portable (ie like the Switch) consoles will be so small that the portability factor will no longer be a bonus. It'll be a feature that is required. Kind of like how HD graphics is required today for all consoles.

 

[Jamie]

I do think it's the technical limitatioms of the console and not Nintendo cheapening out. But the WiiU did have a resistive touch screen, not a capacitive one and the internal SSD was pathetically low. Cheapening out there one could say. So hard to tell. 720p on the go for most things should be ok and on the console screen that is not too bad because the pixels are way closer together. It looked fine on Jimmy Fallon but as we all know that's no substisute for actually using the console. So we shall see in time.

Of cause the PS4 Pro will be more powerful the the Switch. That's a given. But the PS4 Pro is less optimised. Also for the most part games will look fine on the standard PS4. All games will play on both (though a few will play like trash on the standard PS4 and need the pro for a decent gameplay experience). Despite this I don't see the PS4 Pro being absolutely required by anyone apart from the VR folk who totally need the PS4 Pro's slightly more power.

The Switch is a compromise console. The evidence is all around for that. But the number of compromises it is making is quite low actually, in terms of playing modern 3D games well. As the generations go on, these kind of portable consoles will need to have less and less compromises till one day there is no compromises at all. When that day occurs the need for purely TV only consoles will be over. The Switch is a great step forard in this direction. I say in 20 years or so the difference between the TV tethered consoles (like the PS4) and the portable (ie like the Switch) consoles will be so small that the portability factor will no longer be a bonus. It'll be a feature that is required. Kind of like how HD graphics is required today for all consoles.

Bulkier technology will always be more powerful than smaller technology, and always noticeably so because larger technology can obviously have more switches than smaller technology.

 

[Lozjam]

Alright, Digital Foundry has released the specs of the console, both docked and undocked. And whew.... Wow. Undocked this system takes quite a hit. This is almost 100% credible, Digital Foundry has never been wrong about leaks such as this.
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2016-nintendo-switch-spec-analysis

So.
Amid all of this technical jargon, here is what you should know:

While docked, the Switch is approximately 2.5 times more powerful than the Switch undocked... Developers have the choice of having the undocked console run like its docked while plugged in.

Regarding power of the system itself:
Undocked the console is a little bit more powerful than the Wii U, but it will be more efficient and easier to port to than the Wii U.

Docked: the console is 2.5 times more powerful than the Wii U. Pushing the system's power to probably around 80% of that of the XBOne.

There are a lot of unknowns however. We do not know what special things Nintendo has added to the hardware, to make it more efficient. However, Third Parties seem extraordinarily happy with the console, despite this lack of power. But that is where we are at regarding this.

As a handheld, this is still extremely impressive, as a console. It is perhaps a little underwhelming. We will just have to see what happens this January when we see more games running on the console. And what sort of experiences third parties are bringing to the tables

EDIT:
In other news, Vulkan is fully supported on the Switch.
http://nintendoeverything.com/switch-supports-vulkan-and-opengl-4-5/
This means that DOOM 2016 will be able to run on the system. I know @DoomDash will be very excited about this news if he wants to pick up the switch.

 

[the8thark]

Bulkier technology will always be more powerful than smaller technology, and always noticeably so because larger technology can obviously have more switches than smaller technology.

Not so. Miniaturisation is a thing. That's why the 3DS is more powerful than the NES even though the NES is way larger in size.

Alright, Digital Foundry has released the specs of the console

I strongly believe these are the specs of the demo or in development units. The final units we will get in March (I think) will have slightly different specs. I think we will either get the information on January 13 (at the keynote) or in March when folk like ifixit open up the Switch to show us what's inside.

It just seems this as the article says "Recently, Venturebeat essentially reconfirmed a Digital Foundry report from July". We do know that the development units the 3rd parties and others were using to make their Switch games were not the same as what will be released in March 2017. Digital Foundry did say back in july that their information did come from test/development hardware, not anything the end user will get to play with at home.

"There are some anomalies and inconsistencies there that raise alarm bells though."
The article also says this. The specs mentioned right after this statement in the article make no sense on an end user console. No HDMI 2.0, 4K, 30Hz output makes no sense, 307.2MHz is portable mode etc etc. Seeing BotW on Jimmy Fallon and how well it played portable, makes me think these specs are not of the final machines we will use.

To me the biggest question is how much different is what we will get in March compared to this leak? I do think a lot of it will be the same. I can't say what will be different though but I don't think it'll be anything major . . . but this is Nintendo here. They do want to sell the Switch not at a loss so I think they'll put in the weakest stuff that'll get the job done. This is essentially a compromise console after all. But a step in the right direction for the industry as I have said in many other posts here.

I'm not taking these numbers as gospel yet as we don't have proper confirmation yet that these numbers are not just the demo/development unit numbers.

 

[Ronin]

I feel that one very important technical aspect is being overlooked: as opposed to its competition, the Nintendo Switch is using cartridges instead of discs. The Xbox One and Playstation 4 are as bulky as they are because they need more powerful disc drives and a million fans to keep the console cool. The Switch completely circumvents that prerequisite since carts are less of a burden to read than discs, and can therefore actually run about the same despite its smaller infrastructure. Of course, that doesn't mean it can compete with the Xbox Slim or Playstation Pro in terms of power, but the portable functionality gives it an edge.

 

[the8thark]

I feel that one very important technical aspect is being overlooked: as opposed to its competition, the Nintendo Switch is using cartridges instead of discs. The Xbox One and Playstation 4 are as bulky as they are because they need more powerful disc drives and a million fans to keep the console cool. The Switch completely circumvents that prerequisite since carts are less of a burden to read than discs, and can therefore actually run about the same despite its smaller infrastructure. Of course, that doesn't mean it can compete with the Xbox Slim or Playstation Pro in terms of power, but the portable functionality gives it an edge.

Optical media read times are a serious bottleneck to modern gaming. You are totally correct here. Nintendo went with the carts to avoid this issue and because discs being used on the go are just asking to be all scratched up. Sure it's easier to lose a little cart but it's much harder to accidentially damage a cart. Also the carts are much easier to transport with you on the go.

 

[Jamie]

Not so. Miniaturisation is a thing. That's why the 3DS is more powerful than the NES even though the NES is way larger in size.

The NES was released ages before the 3DS. Currently the number of transistors we can fit in the same space roughly doubles every year. But a bigger space will always be able to fit more than a smaller one. The bigger the console, the more powerful it can be if you compare modern to modern. Comparing modern consoles to old consoles is ridiculous.

 

[the8thark]

Currently the number of transistors we can fit in the same space roughly doubles every year.
But a bigger space will always be able to fit more than a smaller one.

I totally get what you mean there even though how you said it too me a second to work out. What you mean is within the same rough time period and using the same specs (ie not trying to compare 20nm to 16nm or anything like that) you are correct. But that's exactly why the industry wants to miniturise everything. So they can fit more in the same space. What you say is the hard limitation with equivelant technology.

There are 3 options.

1. Make the product bigger to have more. As you are saying as more space to fit everything in. I'm agreing with you there.
2. Improve the technology so you can fit more into the same space.
3. Improve the tech so each part does more so you can get more performance out of the same number of things.

Comparing modern to modern is a good only if you compare it properly, as in remove most of the other variables, like different processes and tech improvements. But when this is done, what you say is correct.

**********************************

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1326366

New patent found. The end result of the patent is:

13.56000000-13.5600000 is the frequency for RFID chips so this is for Amiibo most likely.
2402.00000000-2480.00000000 This is bluetooth range.
So amiibo and joycons work over bluetooth.

That's my best guess.

 

[Adventurer of Hyrule]

I feel that one very important technical aspect is being overlooked: as opposed to its competition, the Nintendo Switch is using cartridges instead of discs. The Xbox One and Playstation 4 are as bulky as they are because they need more powerful disc drives and a million fans to keep the console cool. The Switch completely circumvents that prerequisite since carts are less of a burden to read than discs, and can therefore actually run about the same despite its smaller infrastructure. Of course, that doesn't mean it can compete with the Xbox Slim or Playstation Pro in terms of power, but the portable functionality gives it an edge.

The ps4 and xbox one dont read games from the discs, they read games from the install data on the hard drive. The disc is just for the license. (and installations of course)

 

[the8thark]

The ps4 and xbox one dont read games from the discs, they read games from the install data on the hard drive. The disc is just for the license. (and installations of course)

I am sure you know exactly what this means. Reading the data of HDD's (ie spinning platters). Not as fast as reading from SSD's. Sony and MS could add in 500GB SSD's but the prices of those would really up the end console price.