Support NeoGAF

[LordRaptor]

Handheld sales are declining worldwide thanks to mobile

The uncomfortable truth GAF doesn't like to look at, and hides behind things like revenue or MAUs as a metric replacing units sold, or how healthy it is that first place console is - only just - outselling last gens last place console, is that dedicated gaming devices as a whole are declining worldwide.

It's why we're getting "mid gen upgrade" consoles. It's why both Sony and MS are putting their previously console-exclusive software libraries onto PC.

In a declining market, it makes all the sense in the world to not be competing internally by having to split output across multiple devices, but instead focus all efforts on one, and it also makes all the sense in the world to make that one device the successor to a successful product rather than an usuccessful one.

 

[DrROBschiz]

I'm... trolling a Nintendo thread? 0_0

It's not obsession with graphical power, it's to have a decent third party support and doesn't feel like Nintendo is being "left out" like it did in the past 20 years. It's to have games from Nintendo themselves that don't feel restrained by the hardware, such as Skyward Sword. It's when multi platforms actually do hit the platform I don't want to feel like the Nintendo console is getting a severely downgraded version to the point where it's just not the same game. It's the fact that there shouldn't be such a visible compromise when purchasing a Nintendo platform.

This is why I care about power. I still think 360 titles look great, and I think Wii U titles look downright incredible at times. But it's the stuff above that gets me.

Third party support isnt exclusive to PS4/XB1 unless the only games you care about are flagship EA/Ubi/Activision titles

Otherwise the spectrum of third party software spans the wide spectrum of the gaming landscape

 

[Captain Europe]

The unwritten caveat was 'with Nintendo games'.

If you want Nintendo/Japanese third party games, you buy a Switch, if you want Naughty Dog/third party games, you buy a PS4/Pro. If you want Halo/Forza/third party games, you buy an Xbone/Scorpio. If you just want third party games, get a PC.

Yeah but each one was looking more technically beautiful than the next one (not talking about art style here, just pure technological graphics fidelity).

I'm scared Nintendo will have to do so with the next 3D Mario too, and sacrifice the 60fps for that because the Switch isn't a generational leap over Wii U.

I wouldn't worry, they know 60fps is important in a platformer, they'd sooner downgrade the graphics than cut the framerate in half.

 

[AndersK]

Prob isn't the right place to ask but how loud is this thing going to be? I don't wanna be sitting on the tube making a bunch of noise before I even start smashing some buttons

The official GAF-scale of loudness only contains "whisper quiet" and "jet engine".

So, jet engine, obviously.

 

[nOoblet16]

As I said the when this type of argument was brought up way back in some speculation thread: your job as a hardware partner for a console is to provide what the console manufacturer wants, not what you think they should want.

And this once again clearly illustrates that performance is very far down on Nintendo's list of priorities.

I agree and you are right...but Nvidia has indeed kind of screwed hardware manufacturers in the past. I think of PS3 and RSX which they developed and probably oversold it while knowing that the future was going to be about unified shaders since they were working on the 8 series on the side the same time (I know about Ken's original plan to use 2 cells and not a GPU and how that could have affected it and all but still).

 

[Kssio_Aug]

You just cherry picked one sentence while ignoring the greater context.

It was the main sentence, that also answered your own question. Nintendo is trying to appeal both of their audiences, the one that buys handheld and the one that buys their home console. 3DS still sells pretty damn well and it is a handheld released in 2011 with totally out-dated specs. They know there's a good audience there.

Their home console audience in the other hand is used to not expect a pwerful machine since 2006. And, if we look before it we would come across N64 and GC, both that failed hard against the competition that, coincidentially enough, had a much weaker hardware than they had.

Can you blame them to beleive they can have good results with a weaker hardware?

 

[JoshuaJSlone]

The unwritten caveat was 'with Nintendo games'.

Then you buy the one device that is by far the most powerful Nintendo game console ever.

 

[cyberheater]

I think that's unfair, many long-term Nintendo fans would love them to release more powerful hardware.

I've bought every Nintendo home console since the SNES. I was hoping that finally Nintendo was ready to compete after the utter failure of the WiiU but no. They never learn.

 

[Shahadan]

That's so incredibly sad to me, truly.
This shows how people have grown not to expect any work on hardware from Nintendo.

"Work on hardware" does not necessarily mean high specs though. They probably had a hard time hitting power consumption, size, and battery targets (and there are sitll issues from what we've heard). And the control schemes etc.

If you meant that people have grown to not expect good specs from them, well, I thought that was a given after Wii, 3DS and Wii U.

 

[KingSnake]

What I don't understand is, since this is going to be NVIDIA's first foray back into the mainstream console market (not counting Shield here) for some time, why would they do it with such a potentially gimped / under clocked hardware?

Surely if Switch fails because it is perceived to be under powered, this is not going to reflect well on NVIDIA or their future involvement with Nintendo / Sony / MS consoles?

Nvidia delivered based on requirements from Nintendo. That's what Nvidia will be judged on as a provider for console market. Delivery according to the requirements, in time and the costs.

It makes me wonder just how many games will still be 720p when plugged into the dock.

Given the clocks I assume a lot of 3rd party games will run at 720p while docked and 540p in handheld mode.

 

[DrROBschiz]

As I said the when this type of argument was brought up way back in some speculation thread: your job as a hardware partner for a console is to provide what the console manufacturer wants, not what you think they should want.

And this once again clearly illustrates that performance is very far down on Nintendo's list of priorities.

Are we expecting it to "perform" poorly?

Im expecting software to be built to spec and perform well in both modes

 

[ASIS]

Third party support isnt exclusive to PS4/XB1 unless the only games you care about are flagship EA/Ubi/Activision titles

Otherwise the spectrum of third party software spans the wide spectrum of the gaming landscape

And this wide spectrum largely ignored the Wii and Wii U. At the very least Wii got a lot of great quirky titles in the beginning and end of its life span, Wii U got completely abandoned.


oh and I barely buy any games form EA/Ubi/Activision, but it's silly to lump them into one and imply that they don't matter.

None. The Switch is what it is, they just have to accept it. If they want to play Nintendo games, they will have to buy a Switch.
As soon as the games are shown, specs won't matter much, it will be a must own device for any Nintendo fan, old, lapsed and new.

For sure, BOTW is already looking delicious.

 

[TheMagician]

Just in the queue at Argos for a Barbie car for my niece and they've just brought out a Wii U from the back for someone.

May the force be with them.

 

[DrROBschiz]

And this wide spectrum largely ignored the Wii and Wii U. At the very least Wii got a lot of great quirky titles in the beginning and end of its life span, Wii U got completely abandoned.


oh and I barely buy any games form EA/Ubi/Activision, but it's silly to lump them into one and imply that they don't matter.

Depends on your market targets and goals dude

You guys seem to forget just HOW large the market really is and where Nintendo could carve a spot out with their brand power

 

[KingSnake]

Just in the queue at Argos for a Barbie car for my niece and they've just brought out a Wii U from the back for someone.

May the force be with them.

I don't know, suddenly the Wii U is not so outdated, just unsupported. Still has great games.

 

[Durante]

Are we expecting it to "perform" poorly?

Im expecting software to be built to spec and perform well in both modes

I think it is very clear from context what I meant by "performance".

 

[MuchoMalo]

I'm sorry friends

 

[Matbtz]

True but i do wonder when comparing each company's best how Naughty Dog managed to upgrade The Last of us which is one of the most impressive looking ps3 games that had terrible aa and the framerate was all over the place (20-30 most of the time), how they managed to upgrade it to 1080p with better aa/motion blur/better assets/textures/shadows and running 60fps most of the time on ps4? Call me crazy but i have the same expectations with Zelda. If Naught Dog can do it then why not Nintendo with the switch?

I also would want 60fps AA/ motion blur and all on BotW Switch but I guess the situation is different. The leap between PS3/PS4 is larger than Switch/Wii U I guess.
Furthermore I think there is a difference between develop a game for a platform then do a remaster of it after selling a maximum amount of it on the said platform and develop a game, releasing it on 2 platforms at the same time.. With the remaster the development time is only focused on the upgrade.
I guess the wii u is a bit holding the switch version. If you release (if that's possible) a much better version on switch, you fuck the wii u users and the sells.

 

[Jonneh3003]

I'm sorry friends

Rumors get the better of us, don't worry about it!

We'll learn everything soon enough.

 

[ASIS]

Depends on your market targets and goals dude

You guys seem to forget just HOW large the market really is and where Nintendo could carve a spot out with their brand power

Nintendo clearly wants the the core demographic. Otherwise they wouldn't show Skyrim in the reveal trailer.

 

[Suburban Thug]

The part he/she picked out IS the greater context.

I disagree, go back and read the entire comment string. First they claimed Switch shouldn't be compared to PS4/XBO and expecting a Nintendo console with comparable power to their competitors was unreasonable. I pointed out that Nintendo straight up calls the thing their next home console on the official website. They then claimed it was an East vs West thing because handhelds are popular in Japan and I presented hard data from Nintendo themselves showing handheld sales are declining worldwide thanks to mobile.

The fact that it is a hybrid device should not matter; I don't think it is crazy to want the docked version to match the 3 year old tech of PS4/XBO when that wasn't even cutting edge to begin with. I feel like Nintendo gets held to a different standard where it's ok to expect gimped hardware because the 1st party software is the best in the industry. I have a hard time justifying a secondary console to play 1 or 2 Nintendo games a year because they refuse to make something third parties can easily work with to port games over. Nintendo has been going with the "half-step behind" approach for a while now and I wish they would beef up the hardware so I could make Switch my primary gaming device. It's hard to invest money in their products; I want something that will get most of the 3rd party AAA heavy hitters without compromises being made over gimped hardware.

 

[DrROBschiz]

Nintendo clearly wants the the core demographic. Otherwise they wouldn't show Skyrim in the reveal trailer.

Skyrim was one of those broad appeal games though

Not sure how heavily they are going to lean on that

 

[Opus Angelorum]

I've bought every Nintendo home console since the SNES. I was hoping that finally Nintendo was ready to compete after the utter failure of the WiiU but no. They never learn.

FeelsBadMan

 

[MacTag]

And this wide spectrum largely ignored the Wii and Wii U. At the very least Wii got a lot of great quirky titles in the beginning and end of its life span, Wii U got completely abandoned.

oh and I barely buy any games form EA/Ubi/Activision, but it's silly to lump them into one and imply that they don't matter.

Wii U has over 500 3rd party games, Wii has over 2000. That wide spectrum is wider than you might expect.

 

[LordRaptor]

Given the clocks I assume a lot of 3rd party games will run at 720p while docked and 540p in handheld mode.

I don't think developers will ever target a non-native resolution for the only screen every Switch is guaranteed to have and that due to its size needs to be as sharply rendered as possible.

 

[Matbtz]

I'm sorry friends

Only 23 days to go !

 

[ASIS]

Skyrim was one of those broad appeal games though

Not sure how heavily they are going to lean on that

Your guess is as good as mine.

But Just Dance also has a broad appeal. They clearly chose Skyrim for a certain demographic.

 

[crinale]

I'm expecting "which games are native res?" question will be asked frequently after the release.
(The native res I mean is to have 720p at un-docked mode).

 

[Scoobie]

Nvidia delivered based on requirements from Nintendo. That's what Nvidia will be judged on as a provider for console market. Delivery according to the requirements, in time and the costs.

I agree that NVIDIA is a business and the bottom line is $$$. However I can't help feeling if the Switch is viewed as under powered, it will come back to NVIDIA, they will be judged and their reputation will suffer - although I admit this is just my feeling and not purely rational thinking . Although NVIDIA has lost out to AMD recently I am guessing (even though it may appear otherwise) this was down purely to the business deals at the end of the day and not NVIDIAs track record of providing GPUs in past consoles.

 

[KingSnake]

Nintendo clearly wants the the core demographic. Otherwise they wouldn't show Skyrim in the reveal trailer.

Indeed there is again a disconnection between their intent and their product (like with Wii U, ), if the 2 SM is true. You have a product intended for a rather core audience powered by "casual" chips. Which maybe can be fine, following some Wii model, if it's cheap enough to be instant buy.

 

[OrbitalBeard]

I don't think developers will ever target a non-native resolution for the only screen every Switch is guaranteed to have and that due to its size needs to be as sharply rendered as possible.

Maybe, but the Vita is full of games below native-resolution.

 

[Durante]

I don't think developers will ever target a non-native resolution for the only screen every Switch is guaranteed to have and that due to its size needs to be as sharply rendered as possible.

After Vita I'm really not at all sure of that.

 

[Krakatoa]

So is it possible the new Zelda will run better on the Wii U?

 

[DrROBschiz]

I don't think developers will ever target a non-native resolution for the only screen every Switch is guaranteed to have and that due to its size needs to be as sharply rendered as possible.

I really dont see it being a huge issue

Building games that can scale to different resolutions is kind of the norm.. at least for many developers already

 

[TheAngryMonkey]

I think that's unfair, many long-term Nintendo fans would love them to release more powerful hardware.

I would love for my Nintendo console to be everything my Xbox is for 3rd party and online capabilities while playing those sweet 1st party titles.

 

[Scrawnton]

I've bought every Nintendo home console since the SNES. I was hoping that finally Nintendo was ready to compete after the utter failure of the WiiU but no. They never learn.

The problem is Nintendo did learn. They learned to not focus on raw power and focus on gameplay and differentiating themselves from the competitors. Them not learning would be them releasing a system identical to PS4 and Xbox One. Instead they learned to avoid the power race, release a unique console that focuses on traditional gameplay, and enter a handheld first market (despite what they're press release says) and recapture that segment of the market.

Nintendo was never going to release a powerful box and leave the handheld market empty allowing phones and tablets to take more and more of it. At this point Nintendo has a much better chance of being successful expanding the handheld market and taking that back than they do with battling it out against Sony and Microsoft in the console space.

So yes, they did learn. They just aren't doing what you want, but that doesn't make them doomed or wrong.


**Remember what happened to Sega? They released a couple flopped systems and invested all of their eggs in the dreamcast basket. A powerhouse for its time and they failed. That failure cost them their console business. They've been in nothing but decline as a publisher since. Nintendo wants to avoid this. They know how inpenetrable the console market is when you are as far behind as they are.

 

[KingSnake]

I don't think developers will ever target a non-native resolution for the only screen every Switch is guaranteed to have and that due to its size needs to be as sharply rendered as possible.

What do you think the developers will do when the PS4 native resolution is 1080p or even below and they need to run it on a machine 5 times less powerful? Eliminate all the grass and leaves? Getting rid of all the NPC? Render only squares? There is a limit in optimisation.

 

[DrROBschiz]

Yeah despite the compromises there are plenty of positives to outweigh the negative in my opinion

 

[LordRaptor]

Maybe, but the Vita is full of games below native-resolution.

After Vita I'm really not at all sure of that.

Aren't the games doing that on Vita because it had no performant AA solutions and didn't support deferred rendering, so they used upscaled blurring as a form of anti-aliasing?

Because it seems highly unlikely the Switch won't support deferred rendering.

e:

What do you think the developers will do when the PS4 native resolution is 1080p or even below and they need to run it on a machine 5 times less powerful? Eliminate all the grass and leaves? Getting rid of all the NPC? Render only squares? There is a limit in optimisation.

A modern AAA title has a fuckton of post-processing and VFX that can be reduced or removed that improve image quality on a 42" Television but not so much on a 6.2"

 

[Scrawnton]

So is it possible the new Zelda will run better on the Wii U?

Not a chance.

 

[Kssio_Aug]

I disagree, go back and read the entire comment string. First they claimed Switch shouldn't be compared to PS4/XBO and expecting a Nintendo console with comparable power to their competitors was unreasonable. I pointed out that Nintendo straight up calls the thing their next home console on the official website. The fact that it is a hybrid device should not matter; I don't think it is crazy to want the docked version to match the 3 year old tech of PS4/XBO when that wasn't even cutting edge to begin with. I feel like Nintendo gets held to a different standard where it's ok to expect gimped hardware because the 1st party software is the best in the industry. I have a hard time justifying a secondary console to play 1 or 2 Nintendo games a year because they refuse to make something third parties can easily work with to port games over. Nintendo has been going with the "half-step behind" approach for a while now and I wish they would beef up the hardware so I could make Switch my primary gaming device. It's hard to justify a purchase when I don't have all day to play games like I did as a kid; I want something that will get most of the 3rd party AAA heavy hitters without compromises being made over gimped hardware.

If you ignore the techology beghind it, yeah, that's "not unreasonable" to expect. However, a portable gaming machine with similar power to XB1 and PS4 is not something could be easily built and sold at a resoanble price to the the public.

They're not held to a different standard where's "ok" to expect gimped hardware once, since 2006, they get bashed over and over about it. The reason they keep doing it is because they believe they have better chances to succeed this way rather than building a powerful home console.

And if you want something you can play 3rd party AAA games, Nintendo is aware there are plenty of estabilished options offering it today. That said, even if they managed to get the 3rd party support, it doesn't necessarily mean their consoles would fly out of the shelves.

 

[MacTag]

I don't think developers will ever target a non-native resolution for the only screen every Switch is guaranteed to have and that due to its size needs to be as sharply rendered as possible.

Yeah, a modern 153/236 Gflop GPU should be fine for 720p. Nintendo didn't underbudget powerwise for their resolution like Vita did (15/29 Gflop GPU for 540p).

 

[ASIS]

Wii U has over 500 3rd party games, Wii has over 2000. That wide spectrum is wider than you might expect.

Quality over quantity. I know both libraries well enough to make that claim. I want better quality 3rd party support.

Yeah despite the compromises there are plenty of positives to outweigh the negative in my opinion

If anything this is really the first "negative" news regarding the Switch, everything else looks fantastic. But since this is a specs thread it's pointless to talk about the other attributes of the system.

 

[Prithee Be Careful]

Rumors get the better of us, don't worry about it!

We'll learn everything soon enough.

DF have a good track record on these kinds of things - I don't imagine there'll be many shocks come January. People might as well make their peace with it now or move on.

My experience with Nintendo tells me that none of these decisions will ahve been trivial - all we can do is customers is buy it or not and let others do the same (in peace, preferrably).

 

[calc84maniac]

Aren't the games doing that on Vita because it had no performant AA solutions and didn't support deferred rendering, so they used upscaled blurring as a form of anti-aliasing?

Because it seems highly unlikely the Switch won't support deferred rendering.

No, it's because the games couldn't handle rendering at 544p. The games that actually do run at 544p without anti-aliasing look great at that pixel density.

 

[TLZ]

Shut up.

Why is this attitude tolerated on here? Mods?

 

[Maxrunner]

So whos the responsable for the hardware build at Nintendo? They should inject new blood at the position.

 

[DrROBschiz]

Yeah, a modern 153/236 Gflop GPU should be fine for 720p. Nintendo didn't underbudget powerwise for their resolution like Vita did (15/29 Gflop GPU for 540p).

Man....

its crazy how much of a leap it is in the portable space

More of a modest upgrade over WiiU docked but not THAT modest

Its still the most powerful machine they have ever put out

 

[crinale]

Aren't the games doing that on Vita because it had no performant AA solutions and didn't support deferred rendering, so they used upscaled blurring as a form of anti-aliasing?

Because it seems highly unlikely the Switch won't support deferred rendering.

I've heard from some devs (including ones I have directly talked at TGS) said it was the battery life that actually made them go sub-native res. But yes lack of processing power, the reason you have stated, and others are good reasons too, I guess.

 

[KingSnake]

I agree that NVIDIA is a business and the bottom line is $$$. However I can't help feeling if the Switch is viewed as under powered, it will come back to NVIDIA, they will be judged and their reputation will suffer - although I admit this is just my feeling and not purely rational thinking . Although NVIDIA has lost out to AMD recently I am guessing (even though it may appear otherwise) this was down purely to the business deals at the end of the day and not NVIDIAs track record of providing GPUs in past consoles.

I don't think that Nvidia hopes to get a console win from Microsoft and PS4 and it might not even be beneficial for them because the margins they get on PC make them win much more money.

On the other hand Tegra is not the brightest part of their business, so getting a long term contract with Nintendo for these is a pretty good deal. Because if Switch is decently successful it will be a long term contract, Nintendo strategy being to go for iterative devices like the others, plus Nintendo likes to stick to an architecture as much as possible.

So I don't see any negative impact for Nvidia from this unless Switch is a disaster. And even then, I'm pretty sure they get paid enough.