-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
What we know so far about the Nintendo NX with sources
- Thread starter Hero of Legend
- Start date
- Status
Tertullian
Member
The problem with a sub-720p handheld is that if Nintendo is serious about games designed for the NX home console being playable on the NX portable, then the screen needs to be large enough and good enough to have useable UI elements and such. Your typical AAA game with a complex HUD is just not going to be workable on a 4" 540p screen. Imagine trying to play Xenoblade Chronicles X exclusively on a 4" 540p screen. A 5" 720p screen is simply the bare minimum the thing needs to play modern games.
That, and 720p is already a bottom-of-the-barrel, bargain-basement, cheapest-of-the-cheap resolution in 2016. By the time the NX handheld comes out, even mid-range smartphones are going to have 1440p screens by default. Even the cheapest, crappiest Android tablet will have a 720p screen.
I realize those aren't 1:1 comparisons with a gaming handheld, and that Nintendo should pick a resolution that most games will be able to hit natively. But seriously, it's 2016. A $200 handheld in 2016 should be able to run games at 720p with acceptable graphical concessions. If it can't, Nintendo did something horribly wrong or is ripping us off.
People say this all the time on NeoGAF, but does it actually matter? On PC you can pick any old arbitrary resolution you want, and the game just automatically adjusts. Is it really any harder for developers to optimist a game for 1080p (on hone console) and 720p (on handheld) than it is for them to optimize it for 1080p and 540p respectively?
That, and 720p is already a bottom-of-the-barrel, bargain-basement, cheapest-of-the-cheap resolution in 2016. By the time the NX handheld comes out, even mid-range smartphones are going to have 1440p screens by default. Even the cheapest, crappiest Android tablet will have a 720p screen.
I realize those aren't 1:1 comparisons with a gaming handheld, and that Nintendo should pick a resolution that most games will be able to hit natively. But seriously, it's 2016. A $200 handheld in 2016 should be able to run games at 720p with acceptable graphical concessions. If it can't, Nintendo did something horribly wrong or is ripping us off.
People say this all the time on NeoGAF, but does it actually matter? On PC you can pick any old arbitrary resolution you want, and the game just automatically adjusts. Is it really any harder for developers to optimist a game for 1080p (on hone console) and 720p (on handheld) than it is for them to optimize it for 1080p and 540p respectively?
DrROBschiz
Member
I'd say 540p is even more likely because of the rumored shared library. It gives Nintendo some room to put stronger hardware in the console than in the handheld. 540p 5 inch. I think people would simply register that as HD. Sure we like higher res displays, but at what cost? Will they have to lower other specs or increase price ?
540p on a 4.8-5" screen isn't bad, see PS Vita.
Tertullian
Member
The PS Vita came out in 2011! Why is everyone so accepting of Nintendo just barely matching a device that will be five years old at the end of the year? Is it just low-as-heck expectations for Nintendo?
The 3DS was at least better than the PSP. And it came out at a time when Nintendo could still be bullish on portable consoles, still dominated the handheld industry, were coming off their most successful handheld ever, could still try to sell hardware at a profit, etc. Now smartphones are crushing their market share and their backs are up against a wall. They have to fight to get people to buy their next handheld.
So no, it's not acceptable to me if Nintendo's next handheld just barely manages to match the Vita. I expect it to be 5 years better than the Vita.
DrROBschiz
Member
Agreed
720 screen should be the minimum target
720 screen should be the minimum target
What's the cost difference between a 720p and 540p screen these days? Would 540p games look crappier on a 720p screen than a native 540p screen?
There obviously would be benefits to having a 720p portable for media playback through Netflix, Amazon Prime video, etc, or playing NX console games via streaming technology.
There obviously would be benefits to having a 720p portable for media playback through Netflix, Amazon Prime video, etc, or playing NX console games via streaming technology.
Because it is still perfectly fine
No one is looking at a 5" screen and saying "Damn I wish this piece of junk was 4k!" for example.Alright I agree that , all things being equal, a higher resolution screen is always better, but all things aren't equal and the gain is so small compared to the cost (in performance, battery life etc) that it's often not as black and white as it sounds.
Yes
Graphics Horse
Member
To me it's not about 'matching the vita', it's about giving it enough processing per pixel for it to be comparable to a home console. The closer your resolution gets to an hdtv, the less you can do with each pixel on a low power device.
Shalashaska161
Member
I'd prefer a 720p screen but a 540p on is fine. When games are actually running at native res on the Vita they look perfectly ok. Games like Uncharted or Gravity Rush were running way under 540p which is why they are so blurry.
Assuming NX is powerful enough to properly power a 540p 3D game then 540p is perfectly acceptable.
Honestly I'm just happy if we get something semi-sharp. I don't want another 3DS situation again where the screen resolution looks like shit from day 1.
Assuming NX is powerful enough to properly power a 540p 3D game then 540p is perfectly acceptable.
Honestly I'm just happy if we get something semi-sharp. I don't want another 3DS situation again where the screen resolution looks like shit from day 1.
DrROBschiz
Member
They ditch the 3d and bump the resolution they should be golden
NX should be pretty decent by default even if they go with budget electronics
Maybe because we prefer to still have dedicated devices avoiding another ps vita exit from the market and a good affordable price alongside an healthy financial status would be preferrable?
Because of the power of the machine.
It's like complain that Ps4 only can do 1080p, like Ps3.
The truth is that most of Ps3 games don't run at 1080. And most of the Vita games don't run at 540.
If Nintendo create a machine that can truly run games using 540p all the time, with modern textures and light effects, that will be a lot better than Vita.
R
Rösti
Unconfirmed Member
It appears the report is nothing of interest. Nintendo is apparently just in there by default.
I updated the original post with a diclaimer.
Who cares about the Vita coming out 5 years ago, especially when its hardware could barely handle that res with worse graphics than those expected from the portable NX. Who cares about matching this or matching that. 540p looks great on a 5" screen, period. It requires less horsepower than 720p to achieve a certain graphics target, which is actually important in the handheld space. That's all that matters.
Then if Nintendo can make a cheap 720p portable that kind of matches the Wii U graphics, has good battery life, doesn't throttle, doesn't explode because of high temps and they manage to sell it for an acceptable price, so be it. I wouldn't complain for having more. But it's still unrealistic.
Do you want a battery with a decent playtime or a screen?
This was one of the many mistakes the Vita made at its time... and it couldn't even run many of its own games at its shiny resolution.
DrROBschiz
Member
blu
Wants the largest console games publisher to avoid Nintendo's platforms.
You surely have an example in mind.
Well, I guess a bigger battery doesn't break the bank these days. Nintendo could afford a bigger one this time although how big could be related to the design of the case in question.
In any case I would lean towards battery life if I had to choose.
Actually I like the idea of a 540p screen (like other said, natively)... on both screens. I can't think on a Nintendo handheld without both screens, even if there not have a touch screen, but surely will have it. But I think the technology behind the integration both NX consoles will be more interesting, sure. The more time passes the more I am convinced that the idea of a single game = two devices will be real.. but it's a weird situation and it will be difficult to handle.
I can imagine that games oriented to the NX console can use a similar technology to the Wii U, doing streaming (maybe rendering the output to better results) to the NX handheld. Even they can add the Remote Play to play outside your home! Obviously the output screen will be not the same like in a TV/monitor, but if some UI elements are moved to the secondary screen would solve the problem.
But on the above idea the games will not run natively on the handheld device. Or if they find a solution, like run natively the game on the NX handheld with lower settings, lower performance, and if you have both consoles and want to play on the NX handheld then the streaming idea can be utilized.
Oh man, I am thinking all this and I feel bad for the designers and engineers from Nintendo that are working on how to resolve this problem. But if they succeed and it's easy to use to the final user, they will revolutionize the way of play games.
I can imagine that games oriented to the NX console can use a similar technology to the Wii U, doing streaming (maybe rendering the output to better results) to the NX handheld. Even they can add the Remote Play to play outside your home! Obviously the output screen will be not the same like in a TV/monitor, but if some UI elements are moved to the secondary screen would solve the problem.
But on the above idea the games will not run natively on the handheld device. Or if they find a solution, like run natively the game on the NX handheld with lower settings, lower performance, and if you have both consoles and want to play on the NX handheld then the streaming idea can be utilized.
Oh man, I am thinking all this and I feel bad for the designers and engineers from Nintendo that are working on how to resolve this problem. But if they succeed and it's easy to use to the final user, they will revolutionize the way of play games.
Are they also going to invent brand new battery technology?
Big batteries are hard to fit. Big batteries also get hot.
A 720p screen is considerably more power-hungry than a 540p screen. So it will not only drain battery faster just by being on and powered, but it will also demand higher throughput of the machine itself to render and justify that 720p. Meanwhile, you battery will already be running hot just from the screen and then you're going to ask for the machine to also generate and run good 720p games... These things are linked hand-in-hand, and changing the screen also changes the demands on the rest of the machine. 520p running games at native res will give you better battery life for the same battery, give you better looking games than sub-720p rendering on a 720p screen, and it won't give you a hotpocket.
There's going to be a fire.
NippleViking
Banned
If Nintendo really is pursuing any sort of synergy between handheld and console libraries, it will almost certainly be 540p for the handheld; it will be a struggle to scale home-console games to a 540p handheld as is. A 720p or higher screen would not only make the handheld more expensive (and frankly, NX needs to launch at $199), but demand more expensive hardware - and thus significantly more costly internals - to support it.
The battle is to build the best handheld they feasibly can for $199. Compromises will definitely be made to reach this pricepoint.
Before my replies, I just wanted to say that I searched for and Google translated (if necessary) a bunch of the earnings reports and Q&As from companies reporting in the last couple weeks. I just wrapped up Bandai Namco's things and, like the rest, didn't even get a morsel. Oh well!
In other news, it does look like that Sharp takeover with Foxconn will be happening after all. Not fully related other than just from a manufacturing standpoint.
Awesome, awesome post. I actually hadn't even heard about that linear image sensor patent! It actually provides another thing I was thinking about as far as interacting with games. They had a big hit with the Wii, and I just couldn't imagine they'd throw a more immersive experience with games like that entirely out the window. Touch can only replace it so much. They still include gyroscopes, which says something, but they are harping on about a new way of playing, a new experience.
Having image sensors all around the device (at least a majority of it) could enable some really innovative ways of playing. A WarioWare game would be insanity with all the different things you could do, such as swatting flies on a table or playing a theremin. You may look like a maniac, but it'd be a lot of fun. Having an array of sensors like that could add "depth" to 3D game mechanics, like drawing a bow or throwing something more realistically and with greater precision than just the button tap. I mentioned before having a touch pad (not a screen) on a handheld for different moves like pinches with the screen, and this could replace that and enable it on the handheld. (On that note, the console controller wouldn't need to have a screen in it and could just have these sensors and a touch pad in the middle. Then, you could just show any two screen games on one screen while still having the touch to interact with them, as far as backward compatibility/emulation goes.)
I think Graphics Horse mentioned earlier just having the Circle Pads in an elliptical form, a lot like the patent. With your recent mention about left/right-handedness, I was thinking that maybe it actually will have two of these pads (dual analog, but also buttons) while having two "trigger" buttons underneath the handheld, your A and B, located where you hold the thing that you can press with your middle fingers. I think it's important they have at least two physical buttons available, though I don't think they need to be side by side. I'm think of classic platformers where you hold a button to then press another to run and jump. You might be able to execute that easier, actually, having them separated, one on each hand, as your one thumb could only be so quick anyways. Then, you'd have the scroll wheels/triggers/nub/optical laser array/whatever on the top for L and R. You'd have more than enough buttons and inputs, plus motion possibilities.
In the above setup, I think it could still be either softened rectangle or elliptical/oval. I really don't know what to make of that yet! I think the scroll wheels (physical or optical) would feel/work better on a rounded surface. One thought is that the thing is elliptical, but you're able to get a peripheral to seat the handheld into to add grips, extra buttons, bongos, etc. The image sensors around it would detect that you're in "super gamer mode" and add the necessary additional capabilities on the fly. (Kind of like those controller for iPhones where they get cradled in.) That elliptical shape just gels more with the main body shape of controllers Nintendo has been putting out lately, like the Wii U Pro. This would be a great incentive to have both the handheld and console; you'd have extra enabled functionality. You will be able to play any game on either device, but this connection enables extra things.
You're telling me! It's interesting to try and figure out, but boy, any decision in one direction always causes problems in another. As Matthew McConaughey said, "You just gotta find that balance."
In other news, it does look like that Sharp takeover with Foxconn will be happening after all. Not fully related other than just from a manufacturing standpoint.
I was actually thinking myself much of the same regarding other potential devices within the NX platform. The Outward Facing Linear Image Sensor Patent features what appears to be a square shaped tablet device. A square shape is also mentioned in the Free Form patent we have been discussing. Likewise, playing on a handheld with an elliptical screen would be quite different than playing on a rectangular television. I think we may be getting too wrapped up in the "unified platform" idea. It's possible that Nintendo makes only some core tenants for the entire NX ecosystem regarding controls while giving each device its own unique features. Many assume a standard control scheme across devices, but Nintendo offered a variety of different controllers for Wii and to great success. I do think the initial handheld and home console will have similar input methods, but they needn't be exactly the same.
I agree with yourself, blu, and the recent analyst who say that AR will be thrust into the limelight on NX. This is going to be the year of virtual reality for many people, so NX needs to have some type of answer to that. The Free Form Display may be one part of that. I was rereading parts of the patent last night and I found this section quite interesting.
One wonders how the folks over at Nintendo can be concerned with such information regarding the human visual field and how fast one can glance in so many degrees while also releasing Star Fox this year.
As for what other features they might include: we've been getting some clues, but when it come down to it, Nintendo are simply unpredictable. I racked my brain trying to guess the QoL "non-wearable" gimmick and the closest I got was an alarm clock. I never would have thought of a sleep sensor. Likewise with Wii U, even after hearing about the controller screen, I tried to imagine it attached to a Wii Remote of sorts. Discarding such an iconic design seemed positively absurd, but they did it.
That being said, I see alot of potential in the linear image sensor patent which I linked to. It combines functions of the shoulder scroll wheel, the vitality sensor, and the pointer function of the Wii Remote (within a defined field). If they can get it to work reliably, it could be a great inclusion. And the patent mentions that the sensors could be composed a multiple optical sensors, which we know PixArt are in the business of making. Of course, mouse scroll wheels can also use optical sensors, so it's really a toss up. If it's an elliptical-shaped controller, I would really like an IR array along the entire perimeter in order to provide a VR control experience similar to Oculus Rift and HTC Vive, both of which use such a setup (really a reverse Wii setup, where the camera is in front of the tv rather than on the controller, which Nintendo already expressed interest in a while back. Wii U's solution works well, but I feel it really misses that absolute position detection which IR brings to the table.
Right, the patent talks about the scroll wheels perhaps having some limit in either direction, so they could do more of a "wheel nub" that scrolls without actually spinning a wheel 360 degrees. Personally, I think a capacitive or optical touch solution would be more in line with current trends. They could also mount some low profile buttons/triggers on the rear of the device. Even something like the back paddles of the Steam Controller. Just no ridiculous Gamepad "shelf" for crying out loud! How hideous it is!
That would be a novel approach, but I do seem them moving away from the clamshell design. We have cases for protection now and I'm firmly of the belief that Nintendo want NX to look like the modern devices kids and adults enjoy today.
One thing I have been considering more over the last day or so is a return to the symmetry of the DS. The DS line and Wii were friendly towards left-handed players. That consideration seems not to have been so much a focus in their successors, but perhaps, in order to expand the base, we will see a return. In the Free Form patent:So maybe 4 face buttons? Two on each side beneath the sticks? Again, Oculus seems to be on to something.
Awesome, awesome post. I actually hadn't even heard about that linear image sensor patent! It actually provides another thing I was thinking about as far as interacting with games. They had a big hit with the Wii, and I just couldn't imagine they'd throw a more immersive experience with games like that entirely out the window. Touch can only replace it so much. They still include gyroscopes, which says something, but they are harping on about a new way of playing, a new experience.
Having image sensors all around the device (at least a majority of it) could enable some really innovative ways of playing. A WarioWare game would be insanity with all the different things you could do, such as swatting flies on a table or playing a theremin. You may look like a maniac, but it'd be a lot of fun. Having an array of sensors like that could add "depth" to 3D game mechanics, like drawing a bow or throwing something more realistically and with greater precision than just the button tap. I mentioned before having a touch pad (not a screen) on a handheld for different moves like pinches with the screen, and this could replace that and enable it on the handheld. (On that note, the console controller wouldn't need to have a screen in it and could just have these sensors and a touch pad in the middle. Then, you could just show any two screen games on one screen while still having the touch to interact with them, as far as backward compatibility/emulation goes.)
I think Graphics Horse mentioned earlier just having the Circle Pads in an elliptical form, a lot like the patent. With your recent mention about left/right-handedness, I was thinking that maybe it actually will have two of these pads (dual analog, but also buttons) while having two "trigger" buttons underneath the handheld, your A and B, located where you hold the thing that you can press with your middle fingers. I think it's important they have at least two physical buttons available, though I don't think they need to be side by side. I'm think of classic platformers where you hold a button to then press another to run and jump. You might be able to execute that easier, actually, having them separated, one on each hand, as your one thumb could only be so quick anyways. Then, you'd have the scroll wheels/triggers/nub/optical laser array/whatever on the top for L and R. You'd have more than enough buttons and inputs, plus motion possibilities.
In the above setup, I think it could still be either softened rectangle or elliptical/oval. I really don't know what to make of that yet! I think the scroll wheels (physical or optical) would feel/work better on a rounded surface. One thought is that the thing is elliptical, but you're able to get a peripheral to seat the handheld into to add grips, extra buttons, bongos, etc. The image sensors around it would detect that you're in "super gamer mode" and add the necessary additional capabilities on the fly. (Kind of like those controller for iPhones where they get cradled in.) That elliptical shape just gels more with the main body shape of controllers Nintendo has been putting out lately, like the Wii U Pro. This would be a great incentive to have both the handheld and console; you'd have extra enabled functionality. You will be able to play any game on either device, but this connection enables extra things.
You're telling me! It's interesting to try and figure out, but boy, any decision in one direction always causes problems in another. As Matthew McConaughey said, "You just gotta find that balance."
Guardian Monkey
Member
Yes it matters. 4*540*960=1080*1920. That means you get 1 pixel handheld to 4 console. Yes you can scale what ever to whatever if you are talking 3d. But for text/pixels you need this or everything looks messed up because the pixels cant map correctly. If we are talking game sharing it would be silly not to do this as it would increase the workload greatly to account for this when programming.
blu
Wants the largest console games publisher to avoid Nintendo's platforms.
I actually have an example, verified daily.
My iPad lasts 1 - 1.5h in RR3, which renders at ~30 fps in 2048x1536 in Xbox1-level shading. It gets clearly warm-to-hot to the touch (aluminum unibody acting as a heatspreader, etc)
I would definitely prefer a hh that does 1024x768 at 60 fps and 360-level shading. Not getting hot to the touch would be just a bonus.
DrROBschiz
Member
GhostTrick
Banned
Because Vita wasn't powerful enough for 540p and that most games ran at subnative ?
Having a 540p screen isn't "matching" the Vita, or let's just say 1440p exceed PS4 ?
There's something you don't seem to realize before saying "720p should be the bare minimum" or "it's not acceptable" or "even crappy Android tablet will have x resolution".
It's nice to have a good screen. But it's also harder to power it. Any of your fancy phone don't even have the guts to display PS2 games at the native screen res they're all boasting. You want an exemple ? Tegra Shield Tablet. It's sporting a Tegra K1, which is a high end mobile SoC in a tablet format, so heat is a lesser problem. It has a 1900x1200 screen. Now take a game, designed for that SoC, like Trine 2. It runs at lesser graphics setting than PS360 version and it runs at a natie res of 1024x768. We're talking here about a high end SoC with a 192gflops GPU running in a 8 inch tablet.
If Nintendo is serious about shared library, then 540p makes the most sense and 720p should be the MAXIMUM if they want to be able to run their games at native res and decent framerate.
For now, only the highest end mobile SoC are able to run PS360 titles at 720p. Keep that in mind and you'll know why screen resolution isn't about the price of the screen itself, but the consequences around, aka hardware power.
Fine Ham Abounds
Member
DrROBschiz
Member
Solid points
Well Id be happy with Vita level screen with enough power to keep games at native res
Guardian Monkey
Member
540p is fine and is needed to work correctly anyhow for console.
blu
Wants the largest console games publisher to avoid Nintendo's platforms.
PSP actually has a higher resolution than 3DS, at least without 3D, it is 272p where the 3DS is 240p. The NX handheld should however be much more modern with a 64bit CPU and a modern GPU as well. 540p also means more performance than 720p. You can simply spread those Gflops around more on lower resolutions because you have less pixels to do stuff on. 540p could mean games looking current gen if Nintendo goes all out, that isn't going to happen on a 720p handheld though, you'd be lucky to stay above Wii U.
GhostTrick
Banned
DrROBschiz
Member
KojiKnight
Member
I'd much rather a device with a 540p screen that is capable of actually driving said 540p, then a 720p screen that upscales 540p (Vita had quite a few sub-native res games and they looked like butt).
GhostTrick
Banned
This. I hate subnative res, it just ruins the games. Uncharted looked so bad at times because of that. It's not only about the display, it's about the hardware power to drive it. People often take Killzone Mercenary as a prowess, let's not forget the game run at sub-native res a lot of times and saw dips below the 20fps.
Not to mention, I don't want to pay upwards of $250 for a handheld console again.
I'll take 540p if it helps keep costs down.
DrROBschiz
Member
Id pay 250 if it hit the right notes
We just have so little to go on right now
We just have so little to go on right now
Sure, they can do all those things. But how much do you want to pay for it?
Your last few posts about resolution and power were really insightful to me. I was of the belief it was more the quality of screen (and spacing of pixels) more than the hardware having to push out more of those pixels.
Is this still the case with the A53/A57/A72? I just ask since they are used primarily in mobile functions that I wasn't sure if this still applied, or if there was something inherent to it's architecture which makes it so useful for mobile displays in the first place. It probably does still apply, I just didn't know if using ARM made a difference.
Further, if they go with, say, A53 (again, I am NOT a hardware guru, I just remember it being mentioned a lot earlier in the thread), would 540p resolution still enable your average games to maintain at least 30 frames a second? Could it go to 720p and still maintain that, since the demands are higher as resolution goes up?
The CPU has nothing to do with the display, what powers the pixels and drives the display is the display adapter, this is what we call a graphics processing unit, or GPU.
Nothing isn't quite accurate. The rest of the hardware has to make sure it's able to feed the GPU data to process.
- Status