Nintendo Switch News and Discussion Thread

[Alita the Pun]

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.

That's true, while SSD's are faster, HDD's tend to be cheaper. For my personal computer, I use a hybrid. Also, as for what AoH said, I believe that the disk contains the actual information for the game but they keep the bulky stuff (graphics, code, etc...) on the hard drive so you don't have to load the entire game every time you play it. I may be wrong though.

 

[CrimsonCavalier]

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.

So basically, whether or not the specs are actually correct (in terms of what @ the8thark said, end-user power vs pre-release dev kits), it does look like developers are going to have to make a choice: make a console game or a handheld game.

Let's assume that the Switch end-user product is actually somewhere between the XBO and the PS4 (which is the least it should be). Let's then assume that Bethesda ports Skyrim: Special Edition for the Switch (because they are going to do so). Then, let's assume that the game is going to run at 1080p30 on the television, while docked (this is a heavy assumption because no Bethesda game has ever run at a steady 30 fps, at least not on console).

Taking this "on the go" is going to create a very heavy downscale in power. Quite frankly, the game won't run properly "on the go". That's the essence of what these specs mean. Even if we assume that Digital Foundry got some of the numbers wrong or are basing this off of the dev kits and not the final product, it's obvious that the entire concept of taking full console games "on the go" isn't going to be as seamless as they are touting.

It seems that in order for games to run properly on the handheld, it's going to have to be developed with the handheld in mind, and aren't going to be as good on the TV. If it's developed with the TV in mind, it's simply going to take a huge hit when on the handheld.

 

[the8thark]

it does look like developers are going to have to make a choice: make a console game or a handheld game.

I actually agree with you. That's the compromise part. The Switch was always gonig to be a compromise console. Of cause one day we want there to be no choice to be made. That's the end goal, but the tech is not there yet. The Switch is just one step in the right direction.

I actually think for most games it'll be like we have the Switch and you dock it for a mid cycle refresh. As in it'll be smoother and higher res. In saying that, BotW looked the goods on the small screen on Jimmy Fallon. I agree with you totally that this is totally a concern. How much of a concern though? Hard to tell as none of the devs have mentioned this. Is this the NDA's talking or is this really not that much of an issue? I don't think we'll know till the emgargo lifts and everyone can fully talk about it.

 

[CrimsonCavalier]

I actually agree with you. That's the compromise part. The Switch was always gonig to be a compromise console. Of cause one day we want there to be no choice to be made. That's the end goal, but the tech is not there yet. The Switch is just one step in the right direction.

I actually think for most games it'll be like we have the Switch and you dock it for a mid cycle refresh. As in it'll be smoother and higher res. In saying that, BotW looked the goods on the small screen on Jimmy Fallon. I agree with you totally that this is totally a concern. How much of a concern though? Hard to tell as none of the devs have mentioned this. Is this the NDA's talking or is this really not that much of an issue? I don't think we'll know till the emgargo lifts and everyone can fully talk about it.

I think they're definitely talking about it. I'm sure they are.

I'll be honest, I hope most developers treat it as a home console. I know this is selfish, but since I couldn't give less craps about the portability of the Switch, (I'll probably hardly ever take my full console games with me to play at a lower resolution and a lower framerate) I would be happiest if they optimize it for TV play.

I think some indie games will be able to run perfectly in both forms (think: Shovel Knight, for example), and if some simpler games get a framerate boost by being played in the dock, well even better! But I refuse to compromise the gameplay of my console games because a developer had to make sacrifices just to make sure their game plays well on the handheld.

 

[the8thark]

A nice commentary.

 

[Jamie]

So basically, whether or not the specs are actually correct (in terms of what @ the8thark said, end-user power vs pre-release dev kits), it does look like developers are going to have to make a choice: make a console game or a handheld game.

Let's assume that the Switch end-user product is actually somewhere between the XBO and the PS4 (which is the least it should be). Let's then assume that Bethesda ports Skyrim: Special Edition for the Switch (because they are going to do so). Then, let's assume that the game is going to run at 1080p30 on the television, while docked (this is a heavy assumption because no Bethesda game has ever run at a steady 30 fps, at least not on console).

Taking this "on the go" is going to create a very heavy downscale in power. Quite frankly, the game won't run properly "on the go". That's the essence of what these specs mean. Even if we assume that Digital Foundry got some of the numbers wrong or are basing this off of the dev kits and not the final product, it's obvious that the entire concept of taking full console games "on the go" isn't going to be as seamless as they are touting.

It seems that in order for games to run properly on the handheld, it's going to have to be developed with the handheld in mind, and aren't going to be as good on the TV. If it's developed with the TV in mind, it's simply going to take a huge hit when on the handheld.

I'm not buying 2.5x as powerful. That's absurd. By what metric is my question.

 

[CrimsonCavalier]

I'm not buying 2.5x as powerful. That's absurd. By what metric is my question.

You mean from TV to handheld? Yeah, that's an incredible drop in power. It seems almost implausible. Just thinking about the drop in quality, not just in the visuals, but in the actual performance makes the entire idea of on the go gaming look like it isn't going to work. And in this case, I'll be the first to say "told you so."

If you mean 2.5x as powerful as the Wii U, that's a figure I'm not comfortable with either. The Switch docked simply has to be more powerful than the XBO. Because right now, the XBO is the weakest (XBO—PS4—PS4 Pro—and soon Scorpio) and there's just no way the Switch can afford to come in late and be weaker than the weakest crappy console that's been out for 3 years. That's why I don't think it will be. That's the part from the Digital Foundry article I am having a hard time believing. Especially since it seems none of the developers have really complained. In fact, most of them have been impressed. So we'll see.

 

[the8thark]

Especially since it seems none of the developers have really complained. In fact, most of them have been impressed. So we'll see.

I think NDA's prevent them from totally bagging the Switch. However if they hated it or thought it was not that good, they'd say nothing. They'd not praise it as highly as they currently are. The Wii and WiiU did not get this kind of praise pre-launch.

Nintendo makinmg a weak console? Not impossible. It's happened 2x before (Wii and WiiU). The 3rd party devs comments make us feel the exact opposite of "the switch is weak". SO the disbelief you have in these rumours, I also share with you. Wait and see I think.

 

[Lozjam]

I'm not buying 2.5x as powerful. That's absurd. By what metric is my question.

You mean from TV to handheld? Yeah, that's an incredible drop in power. It seems almost implausible. Just thinking about the drop in quality, not just in the visuals, but in the actual performance makes the entire idea of on the go gaming look like it isn't going to work. And in this case, I'll be the first to say "told you so."

If you mean 2.5x as powerful as the Wii U, that's a figure I'm not comfortable with either. The Switch docked simply has to be more powerful than the XBO. Because right now, the XBO is the weakest (XBO—PS4—PS4 Pro—and soon Scorpio) and there's just no way the Switch can afford to come in late and be weaker than the weakest crappy console that's been out for 3 years. That's why I don't think it will be. That's the part from the Digital Foundry article I am having a hard time believing. Especially since it seems none of the developers have really complained. In fact, most of them have been impressed. So we'll see.

Actually, upon doing more research. It's only the GPU that takes a hit from being undocked. Which is strange to say the least. However, one of the biggest things that GPU does over CPU is nearly always resolution.

Calculating the amount of power for each pixel, from 1080p to 720p. That's nearly the exact difference between the GPU of the Docked and Undocked Switch. So. In other words, is that if a game runs Docked in 1080p, than there will be no difference in the games besides it being on a 720p screen.

The CPU, or actual computing power is actually untouched.

As for power:
I have no doubt that these are the exact specs of the Switch. But these numbers alone mean actually less than we think. If raw numbers meant everything, than AMD would undoubtably be superior to Intel processors. Which isn't the case. The clock speeds mean nothing compared to how powerful The Switch is: it's really how efficient the architecture is. So it's impossible to tell exactly how powerful or not the Switch will be with these figures shown.

However, if you are looking for something more powerful than the XBO. I think you should get rid of those expectations now. I think Switch will get close to the XBO. It doesn't need to surpass the XBO so long as it gets third party games. It simply doesn't need it. Considering you can take this thing on the go, this is still incredibly impressive regardless.

Plus. The most powerful consoles of the generations, have almost never won. The PS4 was "the most powerful". But that was a fluke because:

Lol Wii U.

And more importantly. Microsoft were the biggest idiots on this earth. Had a terrible launch, pushed a terrible gimmick, and originally planned horribly anti-consumer aspects.


No.... The Switch is going to do well by the games it gets, third party and first party. Not by its power.

Especially if Nintendo brings back third party exclusives from huge developers. I think this could very well be possible.

 

[the8thark]

Your entire message above

I will say I agree 100%. What you there is exactly how I feel about it. You said it in an amazing, easy to understand way that just makes sense.

A side note:
The PS4 didn't win really win by it's own hand. The XB1 and WiiU lost by both having terrible self inflected damaging console launches. The PS4 just had to fix all the many PS3 mistakes (which it did) and do little else wrong and it'd win. The PS4 did nothing out standing to win. It was however the only console of the 3 that did not have a disaster of a console launch. It was average. Average beats out total disaster by a ton though.

On a separate note. The Switch is the most powerful console . . . of a different kind. It's the most powerful totally dedicated to gaming portable console. The power is there within the right context. Even today the most talked about devices are the portable ones. iPads, iPhones, Android devices, notebook computers, 3DS, etc etc. Mobile performance is more talked about in the wider community than desktop (or home console) performance is. A world where mobile performance means more than stationary performance is not the future. It is right here and now today. NVIDIA, AMD and others make specialty GPUs designed only for mobile devices (phones, tablets and notebook computers) for a reason. It's this technology that is the future, not the massive fan forced SLI integrated dual GPU setup in the beefiest of desktop computers. Sure the mobile GPU is not as powerful in terms of the raw numbers, but it's more exciting in what can be done with it. Being able to use those (still very good) mobile GPUs of all different places and for all different applications and processes without being tethered to a stationary power source is the way of the future.

The most powerful is not always the way of the future. Often the most innovative or most appliable to surrent tasks and problem (to solve them) becomes the way of the future. Did anyone ask, "why can't we play major 3D games on the go with our consoles?" I am sure many many people did. This is not solving a problem as such, as there was nothing broken that needed fixing. This however is improving what we already have (major 3D games) and widening their audience to even more people. Sure the Switch is marketed as a "home console" by Nintendo but games like BotW or Skyrim would not be playable on thew go even just a few years ago (outside the development labratory). Something totally unheard of.

Nintendo is not about being the post powerful overall. They gave up that persuit after the N64 and Gamecube. Nintendo has moved to innovate the industry in other ways. Not all the ways will be a hit or have a long lasting legacy on the industry. The Wii and WiiU though good consoles will not be remembered just like most Nintendo hardware is not. The Switch however will be rememberd because Nintendo dared to take what was once confined to the living room and take it to the world. Sure in a lower quality, but still it's being taken to the world.

Finally, I am really glad about Sony's VR initiative too. I really hope it takes off as well. It's a bold step into the unknown too (in a home console sense). MS though is stuck in the 2000's. The same old ways of playing consoles and the same old digital tech behind it. Sure Xbox Live is not all that bad but if MS don't do something soon like Nintendo and Sony have and attempt to truly innovate, they'll be left behind. Just like Blackberry was left behind. Just like Kodak was left behind.

In other words, is that if a game runs Docked in 1080p, than there will be no difference in the games besides it being on a 720p screen.

Do you know if the games have two different native resolution modes, 720 and 1080 or is one mode upscaled or downscaled from the other?

 

[Lozjam]

So, Michael Pachter has something interesting to say regarding the Switch.
http://nintendoeverything.com/micha...-the-easiest-of-the-big-three-to-develop-for/
According to him, he has heard that The Switch is the easiest console to developer.

Take this one especially with a grain of salt....
But this explains why third parties are so hyped up for this machine.

Easier Development = Being Able to Put out games faster + Putting games out cheaper + allowing for more creative freedom + More Profit

That in itself, in its true is waaaaaay more enticing to third parties than Specs, or factor, or really anything. This could be the way that Nintendo takes over third parties. Why develop for consoles that are more complicated to develop for.

Of course, Nintendo is going to need to bring in a lot of sales for the Switch. But if they do.... Third Party support of the Switch will be amazing. Even getting lots and lots of third party and indie exclusive game.

However, I want to stress this is michael pachter we are talking about. He is often wrong. However, we are so close to the full reveal of the Switch it very well could be he isn't lying. We will find out in January for sure, but this could very well be the reason that third parties are jumping on the Switch train and speak of it so well.

 

[CrimsonCavalier]

The latest is that the Switch isn't going from 1080 to 720 on the tablet, but WQHD to 1080.

Now, what this means is that no one actually knows what's going on, with different news reports coming from different places. It's insanity how much rumor-mongering there is right now! And "Nintendo" has surpassed both PlayStation and Xbox in internet search since the Switch itself was revealed.

I mean, there is definitely interest in the thing, and with so much interest, it's no surprise so many different people have so many different (and very often contradicting) things to say about it. Crazy!

I guess the moral of the story is, January can't come soon enough.

 

[Jamie]

The latest is that the Switch isn't going from 1080 to 720 on the tablet, but WQHD to 1080.

Now, what this means is that no one actually knows what's going on, with different news reports coming from different places. It's insanity how much rumor-mongering there is right now! And "Nintendo" has surpassed both PlayStation and Xbox in internet search since the Switch itself was revealed.

I mean, there is definitely interest in the thing, and with so much interest, it's no surprise so many different people have so many different (and very often contradicting) things to say about it. Crazy!

I guess the moral of the story is, January can't come soon enough.

Wow, what a wonderful moral. I couldn't live my life properly without.

 

[Bowsette Plus-Ultra]

I'll never understand Nintendo's approach to marketing their systems.

"Hey, we've got this brand new system we're going to reveal, but we're not going to talk about it for three months."

 

[Lozjam]

I'll never understand Nintendo's approach to marketing their systems.

"Hey, we've got this brand new system we're going to reveal, but we're not going to talk about it for three months."

It is working though....

With the Wii U, they made a terrible mistake by revealing the console way too early. This led to, as we know, a very terrible launch.

Now Nintendo is doing the exact opposite.
Now, this may be a little bit too much, considering the console is releasing in March, and we only know of a simple concept of the system.

However, Nintendo has been more searched in Google and Social Media than Microsoft and Sony, and the Switch has been way more highly wanted than the Wii U.

The Switch now has over 22,000,000 views in America alone, and this was just a simple 3 minute teaser. Worldwide the Switch has over 30,000,000 views, and this isn't even counting journalists videos, like GameXplain, IGN, GameSpot, ect.

It's clear that this mystery keeps the press rolling with Switch news, with all these rumors and speculation, this creates press with the Switch for all gamers.

While I do agree that this may be a tight timeframe, it's clear that Nintendo's marketing strategy, as of now, is working.