It's exactly like the Wii U in that they doubled down on the "move your game off the TV" aspect. In utility, it is a Wii U with vastly extended (infinite) working range measured from the base unit. In design approach, it is an inversion of the Wii U, moving the processing hardware and storage responsibilities from the base unit into the controller.
Price and good 1st party exclusive beget install base begets exclusive 3rd party support begets ongoing hardware sales.
The sales split between 3DS and 3DS XL still demonstrates quite clearly that consumers are more than willing to pay for a premium experience. So do the sales splits of the hilariously single-digit number of day-and-date multiplatform Vita+3DS releases. If there is a better way to experience the same game, consumers will pay for it.
3DS and Wii peculiarities (dual screens, controller) led to many de-facto exclusive designs simply because they were too difficult to transfer to other platforms. The Switch does not have any built-in advantage of this sort. EO, Layton, Ace Attorney are either dead already or, if they do get reworked to a single wide-screen setup, are no longer self-shackled to a Nintendo design. The Switch will, completely unlike the Wii, completely unlike the 3DS, have to compete on the quality of the experience it delivers, and performance is a factor in this, always has been.
The new advantage it has is making every game a portable game, if the consumers wishes it. There is no longer a developer-imposed "portable game" vs "console game" dichotomy.
Actually I see this as Nintendo's best shot at receiving and retaining 3rd party multiplatform releases, simply because the option to go portable on anything and everything might outweigh the performance drawbacks.
Who actually expected PS4 performance, though? I feel like that gets thrown around a lot and there certainly have been a handful of pie-in-the-sky dreams about the maximum that could be done with Switch's hardware profile, but most people have been fairly realistic about it within a realistic range of optimistic and pessimistic estimates.
However, there's a pretty wide middle ground between "as powerful as a PS4" and "1/10 as powerful as a PS4" which is more likely to be where the Switch sits, somewhere.
Zelda better be 1080p, stable 30 fps and have other visual upgrades. Otherwise this might get really ugly.
...ehh people who don't care much about the specs but who are in rather for the experience.I'm still trying to figure out who is going to buy this apart from die hard Nintendo fans.
Japanese commuters.I'm still trying to figure out who is going to buy this apart from die hard Nintendo fans.
first two are almost a given, but that third... maybe improved draw distances, but I wouldnt hope for much more.
on an unrelated note: @those who are comparing these (still incomplete and not concrete) Switch horsepower numbers to WiiU numbers, are we overlooking the fact that the WiiU has to be constantly rendering two images?
first two are almost a given, but that third... maybe improved draw distances, but I wouldnt hope for much more.
on an unrelated note: @those who are comparing these (still incomplete and not concrete) Switch horsepower numbers to WiiU numbers, are we overlooking the fact that the WiiU has to be constantly rendering two images?
Thought it was a video stream? Not sure how it works tbh.first two are almost a given, but that third... maybe improved draw distances, but I wouldnt hope for much more.
on an unrelated note: @those who are comparing these (still incomplete and not concrete) Switch horsepower numbers to WiiU numbers, are we overlooking the fact that the WiiU has to be constantly rendering two images?
Yeah. I could understand that but what about in the Western world?Japanese commuters.
You kept laughing for a while because Switch (as suggested in the DF article) has a very similar memory setup to the xb360 (which also had a UMA setup with 22.4GB/s to main ram and Xenos had its fb in eDRAM which had to be resolved to main RAM for RTT, similarly to how Switch has its fb in local memory of unspecified high BW, which has to resolve to main ram, only that Switch Maxwell's uses generations-newer compression tech)?I just realised that it has 25 GB/s memory bandwidth that's also shared with the CPU. I just kept on laughing for a while. The X360 actually has more effective bandwidth than this and we saw how many sub HD games were on it. This thing will struggle with 720p let alone 1080p.
From Nintendo? It's going to be horrible, their screens are always horrible.
I'm still trying to figure out who is going to buy this apart from die hard Nintendo fans.
Let's not pretend that the second screen ever rendered something of high detail.
If Nintendo first party developers wanted a machine like that to develop for, they'd have it. By all accounts the company's hardware and software teams collaborate fairly closely.
I still think it's selling Switch short to just call it a "portable with TV out" without having more information than this story provides.
January is going to be interesting. Nintendo is going to get slain if games don't look noticeably better on the Switch.
Zelda better be 1080p, stable 30 fps and have other visual upgrades. Otherwise this might get really ugly.
But from a Western point of view that has a lot more appeal and of course the chance of 3rd party support.You could say that about a Nintendo home console with a standard pad which was the same at the Xbone in power.
Nintendo have to role the dice here.
lt's like Nintendo goes out of its way to create the shittiest hardware possible, and honestly if you couple these underwhelming specs with rumors about the first year lineup being full of remasters you can't shake off the feeling they're trying to sell you a repackaged Wii U for 300 bucks.
You could say that about a Nintendo home console with a standard pad which was the same at the Xbone in power.
Nintendo have to role the dice here.
So a docked Switch is more powerful than WiiU?
400GLOP (Switch docked) vs 352GFLOP (WiiU)
But a portable is less than half of WiiU GPU wise?
160GLOP (Switch portable)
I'm still trying to figure out who is going to buy this apart from die hard Nintendo fans.
I'll be surprised if the Switch sells for anything lower than £230 come release.
I will happily pay £250.
I'm still trying to figure out who is going to buy this apart from die hard Nintendo fans.
Yeah the strawman is getting annoying now. No one thought this would be a PS4 level system, people simply had the audacity to expect a decent bump compared to Wii U, instead we get the old ducktaped joke.
lt's like Nintendo goes out of its way to create the shittiest hardware possible, and honestly if you couple these underwhelming specs with rumors about the first year lineup being full of remasters you can't shake off the feeling they're trying to sell you a repackaged Wii U for 300 bucks.
In an alternate reality, the Nintendo 6DS released to actually shitty specs while the Sony Playstation Vita 2 released exactly as the Switch is releasing now.
The Vita 2 releases to thunderous acclaim from GAF, for being a "proper, powerful handheld" unlike that gimmicky Nintendo toy.
Starfox hahaLet's not pretend that the second screen ever rendered something of high detail.
I'm still trying to figure out who is going to buy this apart from die hard Nintendo fans.
Yeah the strawman is getting annoying now. No one thought this would be a PS4 level system, people simply had the audacity to expect a decent bump compared to Wii U, instead we get the old ducktaped joke.
lt's like Nintendo goes out of its way to create the shittiest hardware possible, and honestly if you couple these underwhelming specs with rumors about the first year lineup being full of remasters you can't shake off the feeling they're trying to sell you a repackaged Wii U for 300 bucks.
I am not sure game software developers are the ones deciding the focus of the console, the power consumption, the console size, and all factors which limit your architecture/performance choice. Sure they will ask for the best hardware that Nintendo can give them given the other constraints. Wii U was not a poorly engineered console, its design is a function of the company goals and self imposed requirements.
So a docked Switch is more powerful than WiiU?
400GLOP (Switch docked) vs 352GFLOP (WiiU)
But a portable is less than half of WiiU GPU wise?
160GLOP (Switch portable)
Wii did not win because it targeted lower specs either.
It'll be fine. A vocal minority will be grumpy, wider populace won't be that concerned.
SourceSo would you say the video was made for hardcore gamers?
Our core philosophy is that we want to increase the number of gamers at all ages, and there's no change to that. So we have no intention to lean just towards core gamers. But to communicate our new idea, when you think about who will understand it first, naturally it will be people who really understand games. To communicate that as quickly as possible, we focused on those folks who really understand games.
Yeah the strawman is getting annoying now. No one thought this would be a PS4 level system, people simply had the audacity to expect a decent bump compared to Wii U, instead we get the old ducktaped joke.
lt's like Nintendo goes out of its way to create the shittiest hardware possible, and honestly if you couple these underwhelming specs with rumors about the first year lineup being full of remasters you can't shake off the feeling they're trying to sell you a repackaged Wii U for 300 bucks.
No they aren't.
DS Lite: Better display than PSP and most phones at the time.
DSi XL: First affordable mass consumer device (to my collection) to ship with an IPS display with unfaltering viewing angles.
3DS XL: Best-in-class anti-reflectance for the time
N3DS/XL: Uses Sharp's IGZO tech for low power consumption. Best-in-class anti-reflectance coating. Some devices shipped with IPS screen tech.
3DS wasn't as good as DS for a variety of reasons, most of them probably linked to the need to make the product more affordable and actually profitable. Every 3DS requires Nintendo to pack-in three screens: Two for the upper 3D display and one lower screen. The Yen was strong at the start of the generation and Nintendo had to cut the price of the 3DS while launching the original XL at a more affordable price. Something had to give.
Switch is a single-screen device that also doubles as a kickstand-supported tablet. Nintendo knows viewing angles are going to be important on this, like they were the DSi XL (a device made for sharing and viewing on a table), and as shown in the Zelda Switch demo, they have at the very least opted for IPS tech with the display. Now we know it's 720p, which is a decent ppi given the size and resolution, but what I'm interested in is colour accuracy and calibration. I'm hoping the screen at least covers the sRGB gamut for consumer content, and is well calibrated with a whitepoint close to 6500K. The N3DS XL's screen is too blue (closer to 8000K).
Lol oh god i doubt I would be able to use the switch on the trains I get on in the mornings. So so crowded.Japanese commuters.
There's still room for Switch to be a decent bump compared with Wii U and still conform to the specs in the Eurogamer article. Their info isn't the whole picture. It may not be at that level, but we just don't have all the data.
I don't see this as a repackaged Wii U so much as what the Wii U should have been. But like I said earlier, even if you think Nintendo makes shitty hardware, you surely can't think Nvidia does. They no doubt had certain performance targets Nintendo gave them to meet in terms of power consumption and capabilities as well as cost, and Nvidia turned over to them the best possible machine that could hit those targets.
No, I'm not saying their collaboration reaches that extent, I'm only saying that if Nintendo's developers were clamoring for significantly higher powered hardware, that would carry a great deal of weight.
Wii UI is 176Gflops.
I do not think you would look at a classsic style Japanese company like Nintendo for first party game software developers strongly disagreeing openly with the company direction and push for that much of a departure from the holistic company choice.
When software guys like Miyamoto are as highly placed in the company as they are, I absolutely would. Iwata's background was also in software.
I certainly don't think the situation is one in which the hardware department develops whatever hardware catches their fancy and they hand it over to the developers and say, "Here's what you get; you'll make games for this and you'll like it."
Franz Brötchen;226905105 said:As someone stated before, if this were in fact the PS Vita 2, Sony GAF would be nothing but hype, citing the docked mode as ultimate destruction of the Wii U.
Instead, only by Nintendo having the audacity to market it as a home console first, we have 80+ pages of mostly Nintendo ridiculing.
If this sells for 250$/, I am very interested to hear how a more powerful system that has to also run everything in portable mode should've been accomplished while still turning a profit on each console?
So a docked Switch is more powerful than WiiU?
400GLOP (Switch docked) vs 352GFLOP (WiiU)
But a portable is less than half of WiiU GPU wise?
160GLOP (Switch portable)
Even from that review, interesting how he could rate color reproduction of a 6 bit per color panel higher than a 8 bit per color one, but for all intents and purposes between the higher DPI, higher resolution (the latter also matter to reduce the visible aliasing on the overall image), and the contrast ratio difference the categories people normally buy a gaming screen for were all clearly in favour of the PSP (the original one compared there to a DS revision) and handheld wise that did not change with PSVita compared against the 3DS.
Yes it is. Nintendo are marketing it this way. In fact, the Switch will co-exist alongside the 3DS next year, whereas Wii U is dead in the water.This is not a home console first and foremost...