developers are able to access a web applet to display specific websites within their game/app
So I guess you will be able to login to hotspots, after all.
(This was obvious from the beginning, here's your dinner)
developers are able to access a web applet to display specific websites within their game/app
can't open the file at work. is the specs any good? better than expected?
I am just happy Nintendo is doing away with that damn sensor bar. I hated that thing.
Not good enough. Because the exclusivity in this case is not tech restricted as much as it is legal/business wise.
If I knew the answer I wouldn't still be here. I was honestly asking because no one wanted to give a straight answer.
This is an argument that can work even against the PS4 and Xbox 1. None of those games have BoTW, Xeno 2, Splatoon, etc. But that's not his point.
He is saying that the specs inside his pixel is more powerful than what is inside the Switch. If that statement is true then everything you said is irrelevant. It doesn't matter that you hate mobile games. The real question is this: Can the pixel run Breath of the Wild better than the Switch or not? Hypothetically speaking. The only relevant argument you can bring is by comparing battery life and see how it goes.
I don't know much, but what I do know is that the quality of the games are completely missing the point of his statement.
The hardware specs don't tell us much we don't already know (and predate the Eurogamer leaks, in any case), but it's interesting to hear about some of the OS features.
In particular, I'm a little disappointed to hear that save data isn't automatically synced to the cloud, given Nintendo's mobile games already do this pretty seamlessly. I suppose the "data store" feature would allow it on a game-by-game basis, but it would be nice if the OS handled it automatically for every game rather than having to worry about whether the developer has decided to implement it or not.
I will, thank you for your concern.
Well, some of the earliest rumors were nvidea approached nintendo with the X1 and offered a really good deal because nvidea had wafers on order for the next years that they didn't use because the X1 wasn't the succes they hoped for.
The original rumour:
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1218933
As Thraktor said it back then:
Well, some of the earliest rumors were nvidea approached nintendo with the X1 and offered a really good deal because nvidea had wafers on order for the next years that they didn't use because the X1 wasn't the succes they hoped for.
The original rumour:
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1218933
As Thraktor said it back then:
I think saying "but save data is not automatically synchronized" implies there is a method for actually synchronizing it. Hopefully that will be a manual cloud upload/download process, rather than a transfer from an SD card.
I think it was a mistake referencing the specs directly in the title. Look how much the discussion has devolved. We're not even talking about the documents anymore
Wasn't this the consensus already? Don't think we need any new info to tell us this.
I think saying "but save data is not automatically synchronized" implies there is a method for actually synchronizing it. Hopefully that will be a manual cloud upload/download process, rather than a transfer from an SD card.
Rude!
Yeah, because you need a $800 phone to beat these underwhelming specs.
Based on the DF-specs there are endless cheap China-Phones with a higher peak cpu-power and many with a higher peak in gpu-power compared to the undocked mode.
Sofar 3rd-party support for Switch is indeed pretty bad.So nothing but a confirmation that the Switch is basically DoA with little-no future third party support.
This sounds REALLY familiar.
Obviously.
Why do you think they've been so proud to show off Skyrim.
A 6 year old game that will look and run worse on Switch than it currently does on Xbox and PS4.
I think people just need to have their expectations in check. This thing is not powerful any way you look at it. No modern game will run on it, and if it does, it will be crippled compared to other console versions.
Not sure why the idea that a Nintendo console being so under powered that multiplatform third party is absent is so crazy. It's been happening for over 10 years at this point.
can't open the file at work. is the specs any good? better than expected?
This is partly my fault, I just wanted a simple answer. Like these two:I think it was a mistake referencing the specs directly in the title. Look how much the discussion has devolved. We're not even talking about the documents anymore
They shouldn't be, it's a false equivalency. Not only that, but as has been pointed out, the Tegra X1 is no slouch when compared to the A Series SoCs.
Take a look at the battery specs too, because the Switch has a bigger battery, but runs for a fraction of the time, and generates more heat. iPhone 7 comes with a 1960mAh battery, compared to Switch's 4310mAh. iPhone also comes with a base storage amount of 32GB (which is only the 7, prior models started with 16GB and those were the most popular models at $700). RAM is also an issue there. There are technical reasons for why you don't see gaming experiences that would even rival the Vita or 3DS on smartphones.
The switch is built from the ground up to play video games. The chipset, the development environment, everything has been built for that purpose.
Smartphones are all arounders. They are good at a lot of things, but they lack features that make them good for gaming applications.
Straight to the point, easily pointing out why the Pixel cannot run Switch games even with the price range set up. That's the answer I was expecting, and again I do apologize for derailing the thread.I don't think the Pixel or the Pixel C is more powerful than the Switch for playing games. That is a specific distinction that's extremely important from a hardware point of view, because for a device to play games for several hours it cannot throttle its processors. On the other hand, all phones and tablets do throttle, and they do so relatively quickly.
There is no way a Pixel or Pixel C can run at the processing level that the Switch can for as long as the Switch can, and that's all that matters for a gaming device. So in that context, the Switch is the most powerful handheld gaming device ever made.
Your stance is like going in PS4 threads and comparing it to a PC, complaining that you can't run any productivity tools on it.
The Switch is not a mobile phone, and a mobile phone is not a Switch. This is good. I don't understand why you would want this to be otherwise. (As a gamer)
If there is cloud saving I assume it's manual because it would take a long time if you have a sizable amount of games.
I expressed myself wrong - the original rumour is ofcourse in the OP, the wafer part is an example by you on why it would make sense to make such a decision.This was speculation, not a rumour. I didn't (nor do I now) have any inside info on the matter.
Can we use this when somebody say something dumb? lol
The Snake-Pass UE4 port looked pretty good. Or is that not considered a 'modern game'?
So if these GPU specs are legit then is the consensus that the Switch is still underpowered to properly support AAA XBO and/or PS4 ports?
I think there was hope that some franchise AAA ports like COD, Assassins Creed etc. would be playable on the system with 'medium setting' results... perhaps at a lower resolution, framerate,etc. Even if they are lesser ports, the ability to play these type of games on the go is a novelty that could potentially sell units.
Hopefully they'll appear in the form of MyNintendo Missions. All three of their recently-released mobile games feature Missions, so I'm hoping their games on Switch and future platforms feature them as well.
Why is that? If you're in Wifi range, it pings the storage and checks if there are new saves, then uploads or downloads. Save files aren't usually huge and don't take more than a few seconds to upload or download.
The only problem I see would be catching your Switch mid download / upload and taking it outside of wifi range.
Sofar 3rd-party support for Switch is indeed pretty bad.
We have an official use of this, it's very blurry but it's a good guideline:We Mockup-Gaf now
I tried to play around with the dummy UI in the OP.
Matt going HAM.
His point is solid though.
Everyone speculating that if Sony or Microsoft made a console that was the same form factor as the switch it would be way more powerful is wrong. The Maxwell Tegra is likely the beefiest mobile GPU right now next to the Pascal Tegra in the self driving cars.
At best I can see Sony or Microsoft going a bit bigger to add more RAM and get away with charging $50-100 more.
Basically, for its form factor, the switch is having industry leading chips.
Switches major strength and what will allow it to punch well above its weight compared to similarly specced devices is top notch tools / apis etc that nvidia made. Which is probably the main reason Nintendo partnered with Nvidia to begin with.The Snake-Pass UE4 port looked pretty good. Or is that not considered a 'modern game'?
Based on this how doomed is Nintendo?
-Doomed;
-Very doomed;
-Super Duper Doomed;
-Sega
A novelty for a tiny number, I suspect. There doesn't seem to be much of a market for full-blown console experiences on the go outside of a dedicated minority.I think there was hope that some franchise AAA ports like COD, Assassins Creed etc. would be playable on the system with 'medium setting' results... perhaps at a lower resolution, framerate,etc. Even if they are lesser ports, the ability to play these type of games on the go is a novelty that could potentially sell units.
We Mockup-Gaf now
I tried to play around with the dummy UI in the OP.
A novelty for a tiny number, I suspect. There doesn't seem to be much of a market for full-blown console experiences on the go outside of a dedicated minority.
A novelty for a tiny number, I suspect. There doesn't seem to be much of a market for full-blown console experiences on the go outside of a dedicated minority.
My bad, I didn't notice you were discussing the 6s. Here's the 6s comparison: https://gfxbench.com/compare.jsp?be...ame1=NVIDIA(R)+Tegra(R)+X1&D2=Apple+iPhone+6SThe performance benchmarks are somewhat different to what the specs show and tilt more towards the A9 vistory in most of them. Much like Nvidia (gaming) flops often outperform AMD (gaming) flops. Also, you're comparing the A8 there
Yeah, because you need a $800 phone to beat these underwhelming specs.
Based on the DF-specs there are endless cheap China-Phones with a higher peak cpu-power and many with a higher peak in gpu-power compared to the undocked mode.
EDIT:
This is too much fun
As evidenced by..?
Ah I see With them being blurred out on other images I assumed they came from the leaker.Those are Nintendo's images, you know that?
We Mockup-Gaf now
I tried to play around with the dummy UI in the OP.
Probably based on things like the Vita and PSP where they were touted as portable device that provided console experiences.
And because they didn't do well, that must mean no one wants to play those types of games on portable devices.
The other point could be that because things like candy crush are so popular people obviously don't want to play console games on the go.
It's all opinion really with no real concrete evidence. For me personally the appeal of the switch is that I can play games like Zelda on the go.
As evidenced by..?