they are (I should say we are) a tiny minority outside of Japan.
-
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.
Digital Foundry: Nintendo Switch CPU and GPU clock speeds revealed
- Thread starter Vashetti
- Start date
- Status
they are (I should say we are) a tiny minority outside of Japan.
You have to admit it was the first time Nintendo failed this hard with Wii U. And Nintendo is branching out right now, as you said yourself mobile and theme parks, there will be other ways of money flow for them. They're not a gigantic company like Microsoft, they can't afford failing in hardware business two times in a row, if the limb is infected they need to cut it off.
Don't think quitting hardware business is impossible for them, because it's certainly not. What impossible is being a third party company for other consoles. They'd rather die before making games for Playstation.
Interfectum
Member
The home console market isn't in a place to have a third HD box for people to dev for and buy. Nintendo would waste millions, if not billions, trying to rip some of the marketshare from MS and Sony, and for what? A tiny piece of a shrinking pie?
Nintendo is consolidating their portable and console efforts into one, low cost handheld system. The console nature should satisfy people wanting to play on their TV, the handheld should satisfy current 3DS owners.
The Switch is a huge gamble, but it's a gamble that at least has a chance of paying off for them if they play their cards right. Nintendo going all in on some overpowered HD console would basically be the end of the company as we know it.
Jonneh3003
Banned
Have the successor to the 3DS not prevent Nintendo from releasing a home-gaming console by saying it is a substitute to it.
Both markets can coexist.
Sure, the Switch as a 3DS successor is actually awesome.
My point is, the Switch as the Wii U successor is awful, and that's even more disappointing by knowing how awful the Wii U was too.
I'm pretty sure that Nintendo's main goal, perhaps only goal, was to address their own needs rather than what their markets needed. They cannot compete with Microsoft and Sony so they had to find a niche that was more novel. But their solution was going to be a worst of both worlds situation, and unless the Switch is a runaway hit from the get go, it's going to be a painful one.
That tiny minority is still more than Xbox One for example though. We're not quite as tiny as some like to think.
Pokémon Sun and Moon outperformed most AAA console games on PS4 and Xbox One... A very tiny minority indeed.
That's a ridiculous comment.
shadowsdarknes
Member
Talk about taking something complex and boiling it down to something extremely simple.
Bollocks. Shame on those peasent memes-dreams and shame on you.
They need to release a prefab pc and need to introduce their very own gog store, but from nintendo, like yeah, power to the people, we have rights, and we no plebs
Go big or go home.
Or go make a cheap handheld-console which is
pretty much
impossible to fuck up.
Even for nintendo.
I mean. Literally impossible. I will cry the hardest since my birth if it is only slightly ahead of the wii u. But even then: A handheld with lots of wii u ports I never played and new switch games, plus crazy local multiplayer abilities, which by the way, is a abandoned concept by every sucker on earth, for around 200€....it would be RAD
And yet the whole handheld market has shrunk by 70% since the last gen.
People are so easily satisfied by 3DS numbers which is amusing.
Most of these 3DS sales would not be had if it was priced at $250 which is probably the price for the Switch.
wonderful103
Member
You forgot to quote the entire thread
Thats still better than wii u numbers?
I was getting quite exited about this console. Coming off the SNES and Gamecube, I didn't get on with the wii (still bought it!), and didn't bother with the wii u at all.
That said, I think I will still get this.
Onimusha78
Member
DS sold like 150million units? And the 3DS 60 million? Compared to PS3's 83million units?
On what planet is that a tiny minority? We're not so stop undermining us lol
It's amazing 3DS pulled that many sales with how popular phone gaming is now. People have been saying this for years. Mobile gaming killed the Vita but 3DS still found great success.
This isn't a stupid competition, this is business. Nintendo will do, what makes them the most money, because they are a company and not a elite warrior race, which wants to save there honor.
People take those console wars way to literally and personal.
Maybe I'm missing something or not understanding something about deferred rendering, but how didn't your magical solution help run the same games at the same resolution between PS4 and Xbone with only a gap of 400 GFLOPS and it will help with a gap of 1.55 TFLOPS and a drop to 720p? What exactly are you saying it will be cut out to achieve that, as deferred rendering impacts the processing resources needed for lighting?
How is this not helping drastically reducing the minimal requirements for PC ports in the same way?
Kssio_Aug
Member
Exactly. I totally agree with you. Stronger hardware was never the main reason why a console failed or succeeded, there's way more in it.
calc84maniac
Member
And the numbers in the OP of this thread are also better than Wii U numbers. Yet somehow this can't be a console successor!
They do seem like they want to save honor though by having the Switch being a more powerful Wii U you can take on the go.
They can't accept failure and won't look at it healthily it seems like.
FTFY and it has been downhill too. In fact the whole dedicated gaming world is contracting, failing to attract young newcomers.
Enthusiasts fail to see appeal of things they do not understand is nothing new.
This is from a post I wrote back in July, but I feel is still relevant now:
" The central goal here for nintendo is creating a one stop shop for all the popular franchises that are associated with them across their handheld and home consoles, now in a single form factor.
The balance they're striking here with the hardware power, whether making use of the Tegra X1 or X2, is necessary to do this. Even if they made separate handheld and console products they would still need to be within similar power levels, or that would kind of defeat the intended production goal of a shared library (not having to create two versions of the same games to play to each hardware's strength.) That is why the hybrid approach makes sense.
The risks of making a powerful home console is that, if western third party did not jump entirely on board, nintendo is left with a high cost console that they are mostly supporting, versus a more attractively priced cheaper console that they are mostly supporting. The other risk here being that, if they are the ones mostly supplying software, a cutting edge console would lengthen production times and would become more expensive if they wanted to make proper use of the extra horsepower (look at Sony 1st party.)
So from a risk reward perspective, a situation where nintendo has the full brunt of their software teams working towards one product, in a pipeline that they are comfortable with and can be expedient with, the NX is one of the more sensible paths they could have taken. "
Onimusha78
Member
60 million in 5 years ain't half bad. PS3 did 83million in 10
It absolutely can be, but clearly it's not what everyone wanted. I was certainly hoping for a powerful home console personally like many others, and if I get this the home will still be mostly where it is used.
mario_O
Member
With the Switch they're going to compete with mobiles and tablets in a handheld-dying market. And the hybrid adds an underpowered home console that is not going to attract the so-called 'hardcore gamers'. It's going to be tough for Ninty this gen, but it was going to be no matter what...
My mere (non Nintendo user) opinion, but why is there a meltdown about this?
Ninty hasn't been about competing in the power section of things for what, more than 10 years now?
They have (most of the time successfully, more recently not so much with the WiiU) been all about the Blue Ocean market and trying to do their own thing, and it looks like the Switch will be no different.
Now if it does end up being a move toward to the Mobile (cell phones/ tablets) market, there will eventually be cause for concern, but so far, afaik, they have only tried to increase the mindshare of their franchises and tried to appeal to new consumers, attempting to funnel them toward Nint hardware, not the other way.
Let's wait and see how the console will actually perform, and how much support it will (actually) get from 3rd party before freaking out... With a lot of quality titles including Zelda and an experience that might transition seamlessly from home to on the go, I think a lot of people could be pleasantly surprised at how well the Switch will be received imo.
A word of caution though, Nintendo fans: buy 3rd party too.
The console, much like the WiiU, will also live and die by the availability of a good selection of 3rd party titles (specially now that the Amiibo craze seems to have passed).
Ninty hasn't been about competing in the power section of things for what, more than 10 years now?
They have (most of the time successfully, more recently not so much with the WiiU) been all about the Blue Ocean market and trying to do their own thing, and it looks like the Switch will be no different.
Now if it does end up being a move toward to the Mobile (cell phones/ tablets) market, there will eventually be cause for concern, but so far, afaik, they have only tried to increase the mindshare of their franchises and tried to appeal to new consumers, attempting to funnel them toward Nint hardware, not the other way.
Let's wait and see how the console will actually perform, and how much support it will (actually) get from 3rd party before freaking out... With a lot of quality titles including Zelda and an experience that might transition seamlessly from home to on the go, I think a lot of people could be pleasantly surprised at how well the Switch will be received imo.
A word of caution though, Nintendo fans: buy 3rd party too.
The console, much like the WiiU, will also live and die by the availability of a good selection of 3rd party titles (specially now that the Amiibo craze seems to have passed).
I still consider 3DS a great success. DS was unprecedented and monumental. 3DS is great. PSP was great. Vita vas poor.
If Switch can do 50 million lifetime sales that will be a great success for Nintendo in the new landscape.
MarkMclovin
Member
Is there a /s missing here?
Out of interest, sales aside, what classes the WiiU as a failure?
Compared to mobile and MOBA and such, it is of course a tiny minority. You see all the time ppl joking about cracking the 1% in developing game countries like China.
This is exactly why Big N is expanding their portfolio the way the are doing.
mocolostrocolos
Member
Angry Chair
Member
How did I know this would be a response? It was still a failure and is not the sales numbers Nintendo should aim for. They aren't going to make something destined to fail.
Low sales, low software output, and Nintendo dropping it faster to push consumers onto the Switch.
In the end Wii U probably made more money than it cost to produce everything, but it failed to be a mass market hit.
LordRaptor
Member
Uhhh... you do realise how ghetto a PC you can build that still runs contemporary third parties if your render target is at 720p right?
And what settings you can easily turn off that aren't even particularly visible on a 6" screen?
I mean, you're literally answering your own questions.
e:
To be clear, I'm not saying "The Switch can run everything, no problem!" - I'm saying that I expect developers who do support it to optimise for "handheld mode" first and foremost
Wow.
That actually makes a lot of sense.
I just believe that 3rd parties are likely one of the most important things for their next console to succeed.
And while a powerful but cheap, dedicated home console could have possibly attracted them, this hybrid with handheld hardware absolutely won't.
The real gamble Nintendo is taking, and has been taking since they introduced gimmicks as the main selling point of their home consoles consoles (Wii/Wii U), is that 3rd parties will either adapt to that or won't be needed at all.
Both of those assumptions are false, and that's on Nintendo for not recognizing that their consoles can't sale solely on 1st party, no matter how awesome they indeed are.
This hybrid idea is a half-assed way of trying to stay relevant in both markets, handhelds and dedicated home consoles, while choosing one and exploring it fully with no compromises made to fit the other would have probably made a lot more people happy.
This right here. Many people going on numbers without understanding architecture and using DBZ power levels/consoles taped together for comparisons. Hell we don't even know if these are the final specs as they're corroborated with only one source. But assumptions and all...
TheMagician
Member
What's this story/rumour that the new Mario game is said to be called 'Super Mario 64 - 2'?
Kssio_Aug
Member
My conclusion was totally sarcastic. But Wii U failed sales wise (and that matters to a brand continuity).
My point is that the power of the console hardware is not necerrasily corretlated to it's success or failure. You can't just look at Wii U and say that, just because it was weak it didn't receive 3rd party support what lead to it's failure, and that, because of it, they needed to make a strong hardware now capable to directly compete against XB1, PS4 and PC.
They've shown they had bad results with strong hardware AND good results with weak hardware. They're still betting in the weaker hardware with something new, and even though they can fail with Switch again I don't think that's unreasonable giving their position.
The problem of "How release a mid-gen console in a saturated market by the concurrence" is a very complex one. They can't make another X1/PS4 and expect 3rd party and consumer to switch for that new platform while offering nothing new except first party games. Why people would take another box like this while X1/PS4 have 80 million install base, a strong library and all ?
The, or at least one, answer is to offer something new and the switch represents that. This is a very powerful handheld, a better home console than wii u with the promise of being THE platform for Nintendo games (you don't need 2 nintendo consoles anymore)
Cool thing is, there are options for spec heavy home consoles out there and don't forget the whole PC nerd thing too. Obviously the bases are covered.
We have a PS4 and some Nintendo systems in our household. Reason being, NINTENDO first party games are only on NINTENDO so you buy them if you want to play their games. I think it's great having the option to choose what best serves you be it less tech heavy or not. Comes down to fun games from my experience. Just a thought. You want powerful specs? Buy a console that meets those specs. It is up to you to take care of it for yourselves. The companies don't care what people on GAF want. They want the mass market and the mass market doesn't give a shit what spec numbers are.
That being said. Nobody on here has concrete info on the performance of the Switch. Why get all doom before you see it or better yet, play it for yourself?
We have a PS4 and some Nintendo systems in our household. Reason being, NINTENDO first party games are only on NINTENDO so you buy them if you want to play their games. I think it's great having the option to choose what best serves you be it less tech heavy or not. Comes down to fun games from my experience. Just a thought. You want powerful specs? Buy a console that meets those specs. It is up to you to take care of it for yourselves. The companies don't care what people on GAF want. They want the mass market and the mass market doesn't give a shit what spec numbers are.
That being said. Nobody on here has concrete info on the performance of the Switch. Why get all doom before you see it or better yet, play it for yourself?
MarkMclovin
Member
Sales aside.
When you buy a console that has a great library of games, why does it matter to you as an individual, how well it sells?
I mean, as a PC, PS4 and WiiU owner, the WiiU EASILY has the better games for it. Maybe I prefer the games that Nintendo output, than other titles like your CoD's and Fifa's, but I still don't get how people list the WiiU as a failure when it has the games that it does.
Shikamaru Ninja
任天å ã® å¿è
There are different degrees to "successes" and "failures" here. The N64 is in another stratosphere compared to the Wii U when it comes to market impact and legacy of what it introduced. It also sold 20 million more units.
But it's Nvidia that designed the SoC...
To me it mattered because Nintendo slacked off on virtual console games due to poor sales. They couldn't even give us all the games Wii had on Wii U because they didn't find it to be lucrative enough. At the worst Wii U should've been the box to play all the old hits on and it never became that due to the sales.
Really? That's your deferring technique? (pun intended) Cut the bullshit.
FIFA 17 (one of the most casual 3rd party games) has as minimum requirement a Nvidia 650 which has 812.5 GFLOPS. So cut the bullshit.
How exactly the deferred rendering will help cover the gap between 1.7 TFLOPS and 150 GFLOPS with only a reduction of resolution from 1080p to 720p. Or from 1.7 TFLOPS to 393 GFLOPS while keeping the resolution. Enlighten me. With specifics, I can handle it.
PuppetMaster
Member
If this goes bad for Nintendo, it would make it a hat trick for Nvidia.
XBOX : Nvidia GPU. Market failure. And the Nvidia license fees were cited as a reason they could never bring costs down.
PS3 : Nvidia RSX. Sony's worst selling, and least profitable console.
Switch : Nvidia Tegra. We will see. But all signs seem to point to bomb.
XBOX : Nvidia GPU. Market failure. And the Nvidia license fees were cited as a reason they could never bring costs down.
PS3 : Nvidia RSX. Sony's worst selling, and least profitable console.
Switch : Nvidia Tegra. We will see. But all signs seem to point to bomb.
You're right, but my point is that the first would be a more attractive option for 3rd party studios to develop for, in my opinion, as the ports would be very straightforward and even if the install base wouldn't be that good at first of course, there would be no reason not to port the games as it could nowadays be done very easily.
When Nintendo tries to offer something new and differentiate themselves too much from the rest of the industry, it comes at a compromise in terms of processing power (which 3rd party studios don't appreciate much if it's that substantial), and with the fact that you have to develop specifically to fit Nintendo's new gimmick.
To me, the scenario in that second paragraph (which is the Switch basically), is a much more dangerous stance to take to attract games on that machine, outside of Nintendo's own.
PS: I'm so glad to be part of GAF, these kind of discussions are awesome.
yongeandcollege
Member
3DS was not a success by Nintendo's own projections. Software sales cratered.
Kssio_Aug
Member
Because we're not talking about personal preferences. I totally understand if someone prefers Wii U over PS4 or XB1, but we cannot deny that if every Nintendo console failed through the market as Wii U did, we would not have the option to play Nintendo consoles nowadays.
Wii U may not be a failure to an individual perspective (no product necessarily is, since someone can find enough joy in it), but it definitely was in the market perspective.
- Status