• Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!

    You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!

Official Nintendo Switch Discussion Thread

Johnknight1

Upward and Forward, Positive and Persistent
Joined
Feb 25, 2007
Messages
18,979
Location
Livermore, the Bay repping NorCal Smash!
NNID
Johnknight1
3DS FC
3540-0575-1486
I think the Nintendo Switch will launch at $400 USD probably with Nintendo taking a slight loss on the console for a while. I mostly left higher prices in case Nintendo realllly went in on specs, as well as if Nintendo had a deluxe model with 2 full controllers (which can both be 2-in-1's like what we saw in the preview ad), as well as maybe an official USB port extender (for things like 8-player Smash).

The one question I have past that is will the system be if you can customize the internal components of the system. It would be neat if you had the option of swapping out the hard drive. Swapping hard drives and trading data actually sounds really cool. It would also be super helpful for transferring data on setups for a variety of esports events and tournaments.
Also I want portability and Metroid. Maybe I'm just greedy. :p
Call it greed, but I call it what Nintendo is going to deliver unto us. The idea of huge modern adventure-centric titles like Elder Scrolls, Metroid, and Zelda on the go sounds incredible.

I love Skyrim on the PC, and I know it is immersive and all, but the focus isn't very gameplay-heavy. It's more isolated exploration, which makes it easy to drop in and out of. Zelda and Metroid (Prime) are mostly the same. Just imagining a new Metroid, Skyrim HD or Breath on the Wild on the go where I can pick up and play whenever... is partially beyond my comprehension.
Maybe they didn't want to confirm a Smash Switch port quite yet
Nintendo is probably going to announce it around when the system launches. No way we don't get Super Smash Bros. Switch CLASH by the end of 2019. I mean, look how fast Nintendo churned out another Splatoon!!! :laugh:
 
Last edited:

Cheezey Bites

Slime Knight
Joined
Jul 7, 2013
Messages
1,649
Location
Astoltia
NNID
koske1
3DS FC
4356-0097-9129
3: Remember the key difference between handheld and stationary devices. The reason a desktop performs better at gaming than a laptop is a variety of reasons. For one, a better power supply (since a desktop must ALWAYS be plugged, thus it is focused on performance). Secondly, better cooling (more space for fans, thus cooler temperatures. GPU's tend to max out around 90 C). So while the Nintendo Switch will likely keep the CPU, GPU and RAM intact while moved, it may lose fans (that are in the base) and whatnot.

This is the biggest reason for power drop offs, lowered resolution on the portable element (likely 720p vs. 1080p in the home variant), and less frames (along with frame drops when switching, which is inevitable). Now Nvidia has experience thanks to the Shield here on the mobile part. For the home system, both Nvidia and Nintendo have fantastic records with keeping their consoles cool (also in having low amounts of faulty systems/parts).

The Xbox One and PS4 have some issues in that department, although not as bad as their faulty predecessors. Given Nintendo being ahead of the curve there, that's another positive.
The handheld is reported to have active cooling inside it, and without the optical drive airflow will be vastly improved meaning it can cool a console level system with less power anyways. Ofcourse it won't be able to run a console level system without a sizable battery disrupting airflow, so it is very much a balancing act, but it will have it's own cooling. The dock will probably include further cooling and clock the cpu higher, allow increased power draw and not have to support the screen, but they've already reduced the handheld issues and even limited a console's optical drive issues.

And I really think you're underestimating how much money they save by not having an optical drive, to get something good enough for this gen is not only fairly expensive in of itself but the aforementioned airflow considerations actually do add a bunch to the system price (let alone because optical drives get hot). I think even at the performance you're suggesting (and I will say I don't think it'll be going for that) it would be cheaper than your estimates pretty much on the optical drive alone.
 
Last edited:

Big-Cat

Challenge accepted.
Joined
Jul 24, 2007
Messages
16,176
Location
Lousiana
NNID
KumaOso
3DS FC
1590-4853-0104
1080p = 1080 x 1920 pixels. 4k = 2060 x 3840 pixels, aka double the resolution, which takes about 4-6 times the power and cost to have run roughly as well. That's why aiming for it is so bad. Very few people would fork out $2,500-,$3,000 for a 4k/60fps Xbox One. They'd rather have a $400 Xbox One at 1080p/60fps, especially since most don't have a 4k monitor.

While the frame rates may not look to matter to you, they do, and you want at least 60 frames per second (at least on home consoles). Here's a good eye test to compare frame rate differences visually.
To add to this, certain genres like FPS and fighting games need to be at 60 FPS for precision and fluidity. No game of either genre worth their competitive salt goes below this.

Here's a bit of trivia: Those games typically are not as power demanding as other genres because of their commitment to 60 FPS. They will sacrifice background details for it. This is why the background characters in Street Fighter look like ****. They want to keep the majority of the details on the interactive elements.
 
Last edited:

Ura

Smash Legend
Joined
Feb 4, 2014
Messages
12,838
Switch FC
SW-2772-0149-6703
It is going to be a $400-$600 (US) system (probably $400-$500 more specifically), which is about right for what it is.

Stable at 1080p/60fps without much fidelity loss (sans tessellation, which graphics software technology isn't there yet for) for home console gaming, and 720p/60 or even 30fps gaming for portable gaming (with more limiters, but not too much).

That's perfect for everyone. This isn't an identity crisis like what the PS4 Pro will likely be (marketed to shareholders as a 4k system, while realistically sold to console gamers as still not a true 1080p console), nor whatever the Scorpio is (marketed as a 4k console, but won't even touch 1440p).

There's no identity crisis. Nintendo went for the mass market while also having power and Nvidia backing, all with a mobile element to make it unique and give it so much added value.
What you're saying might be right even though I really hope that isn't the case. I'm really hoping for this console to be sold at like $350 and $300 without all the fancy attachments. Sure that would make Nintendo sell at a loss but Nintendo always sells at a loss with their consoles.

Just don't want to be paying like $600+ for this console y'know?
 

CryoGX

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Feb 2, 2014
Messages
470
NNID
CryoGX
Yo, how would you guys feel about a Smash 4.5, ported over, merged and enhanced? Here's what I typed up earlier about it:

So with the Nintendo Switch revealed, it's been shown that ports of old and 3rd party games are coming, but they appear to be enhanced. With this in mind, it's to believe that the games that get brought over to the Switch are going to all be enhanced in some way.

Now, Sm4sh is slightly different. It's not dated, but it's a full game that has different content based on the console it's played on. With that in mind, the Switch is a completely new thing that's a console and a portable. Seeing as Sm4sh has portable and console content, I wouldn't feel that it'd be enough to just port SSB4 Wii U and call it a day, would you? That leaves out all the stuff the 3DS version had.

So here's the big question(s): What would you want out of a Smash 4.5? Would you want a Smash 4.5?

Here's my personal reasoning on why Smash 4.5 would be incredible for this console generation, instead of a straight-up Smash 5.


Sm4sh is only 2 years old
-Smash generally releases once per console generation, which is about every six or seven years. The game came out inSeptember '14. It's nowhere near time to move on from it. Sakurai put in all this work into developing this exceptional product for two consoles. I don't feel that we should truly just "port and wait for smash 5" when this game is still so incredibly young. Besides, with the Switch, a Smash 4.5 would be on...

Cartridges!
-Yeah, so what's so hype about cartridges? Oh, just their ability to store significantly more data than discs. Seriously, a modern cartridge is basically like a premium SD card. The 3DS used 8GB cartridges, which is more than enough space for a portable.

-Now, for a premium console hybrid, it'd make sense for the cartridges to come in at, the VERY LEAST, 32GB, considering the fact that the Switch is a next-gen console. And 32 gigs isn't exactly hard to do, probably just a bit expensive, but it is still nowhere near impossible considering the fact we have 512GB micro SD cards.

-Sm4sh Wii U was around 16GB in size. So, with our assumption that the cartridges on the Switch are going to be 32GB in size or greater; what exactly would be a smart way to make use of that extra half of the cartridge, while keeping this young product fresh and alive??

Merge and Update!
-Boom.

-I'll ask again: Why wait for Smash 5, when you can make Smash 4 that much better?

-Sm4sh's potential on one individual console was, to be frank, held back by the existence of the other. I love and play the 3DS version daily--don't get me wrong--but if Sm4sh were exclusively on the Wii U, it'd likely have the 3DS-exclusive content, and more (okay not that much, possibly, considering how the 3DS had a more retro direction, most notable in its map designs).

-Anyway, the Switch is neither a Wii U, nor a 3DS, and both versions of the games are still Sm4sh. Porting the Wii U version to the Switch leaves behind the modes and maps that the 3DS had. Seriously, wouldn't you like to have HD Yoshi's Island? Or possibly an updated Smash Run with online multiplayer and mode selection????

-How about an updated menu screen layout?

Return that which was once lost...
-YOU KNOW EXACTLY WHO I'M TALKING ABOUT

[Speculation] And maybe a bit...more? :3
-You see, since Sm4sh is only two years old and is going to be ported to a larger storage capacity (assuming), it wouldn't havethat much development time and effort compared to initially building the game, if the content of the 3DS version is merged with that of the Wii U version. And even then, the 3DS content wouldn't fill up that much of the extra space available.

-So why not re-future-proof this game? Why not revitalize it? Instead of bothering with a Smash 5, take what you already have and make it like new again!

-What exactly do I mean by this? Well, besides the merge, the game could be made to keep up with the current times:

New Maps
-To promote games like Breath of the Wild, Mario Switch, Pokemon Sun and Moon, and possibly even Splatoon!

More Costumes/Slots
-More storage, bruh. It's possible. Link in that glorious BoTW getup? Pls??

New Customs
-Okay no one really uses em, but wouldn't it be nice if DLC characters actually got customs?

New Final Smashes?
-Also relevant to the times and small, but nifty. Kirby's could be updated to Robobot Armor, for example.

Characters
-Saved it for last because you knew it was coming.

-So, if you didn't get the hint in the above point, Ice Climbers were a completely finished character, that went unreleased due to the graphical constraints of the 3DS. Their return was pretty much canceled by the 3DS version. So, they're a prime candidate to return for the Switch version of Smash, wouldn't you agree?

-Outside of them, the additional storage, and ability to work with an existing product, means that a newcomer might not be asking for too much? Or possibly more oldies, such as Wolf (so Etika can sleep with an empty conscience, if nothing else), or better yet PIC-- pffffffft
-Assuming that the already completed Ice Climbers got added, and Wolf returned, there could potentially be the possibility of another character being added to further hype up Switch Smash, and given the incredulous amount of 3rd party support Nintendo's getting this time around, as well as the new 1st party games inbound, I really have no idea who it, or they, could possibly be.

If you read all my points, I appreciate it! Would you guys like the prospect of rejuvenating Sm4sh instead of simply porting Sm4sh Wii U? Or would you rather stick with this for a few more years and wait for a Smash 5?
 

Ura

Smash Legend
Joined
Feb 4, 2014
Messages
12,838
Switch FC
SW-2772-0149-6703
Yo, how would you guys feel about a Smash 4.5, ported over, merged and enhanced? Here's what I typed up earlier about it:

So with the Nintendo Switch revealed, it's been shown that ports of old and 3rd party games are coming, but they appear to be enhanced. With this in mind, it's to believe that the games that get brought over to the Switch are going to all be enhanced in some way.

Now, Sm4sh is slightly different. It's not dated, but it's a full game that has different content based on the console it's played on. With that in mind, the Switch is a completely new thing that's a console and a portable. Seeing as Sm4sh has portable and console content, I wouldn't feel that it'd be enough to just port SSB4 Wii U and call it a day, would you? That leaves out all the stuff the 3DS version had.

So here's the big question(s): What would you want out of a Smash 4.5? Would you want a Smash 4.5?

Here's my personal reasoning on why Smash 4.5 would be incredible for this console generation, instead of a straight-up Smash 5.


Sm4sh is only 2 years old
-Smash generally releases once per console generation, which is about every six or seven years. The game came out inSeptember '14. It's nowhere near time to move on from it. Sakurai put in all this work into developing this exceptional product for two consoles. I don't feel that we should truly just "port and wait for smash 5" when this game is still so incredibly young. Besides, with the Switch, a Smash 4.5 would be on...

Cartridges!
-Yeah, so what's so hype about cartridges? Oh, just their ability to store significantly more data than discs. Seriously, a modern cartridge is basically like a premium SD card. The 3DS used 8GB cartridges, which is more than enough space for a portable.

-Now, for a premium console hybrid, it'd make sense for the cartridges to come in at, the VERY LEAST, 32GB, considering the fact that the Switch is a next-gen console. And 32 gigs isn't exactly hard to do, probably just a bit expensive, but it is still nowhere near impossible considering the fact we have 512GB micro SD cards.

-Sm4sh Wii U was around 16GB in size. So, with our assumption that the cartridges on the Switch are going to be 32GB in size or greater; what exactly would be a smart way to make use of that extra half of the cartridge, while keeping this young product fresh and alive??

Merge and Update!
-Boom.

-I'll ask again: Why wait for Smash 5, when you can make Smash 4 that much better?

-Sm4sh's potential on one individual console was, to be frank, held back by the existence of the other. I love and play the 3DS version daily--don't get me wrong--but if Sm4sh were exclusively on the Wii U, it'd likely have the 3DS-exclusive content, and more (okay not that much, possibly, considering how the 3DS had a more retro direction, most notable in its map designs).

-Anyway, the Switch is neither a Wii U, nor a 3DS, and both versions of the games are still Sm4sh. Porting the Wii U version to the Switch leaves behind the modes and maps that the 3DS had. Seriously, wouldn't you like to have HD Yoshi's Island? Or possibly an updated Smash Run with online multiplayer and mode selection????

-How about an updated menu screen layout?

Return that which was once lost...
-YOU KNOW EXACTLY WHO I'M TALKING ABOUT

[Speculation] And maybe a bit...more? :3
-You see, since Sm4sh is only two years old and is going to be ported to a larger storage capacity (assuming), it wouldn't havethat much development time and effort compared to initially building the game, if the content of the 3DS version is merged with that of the Wii U version. And even then, the 3DS content wouldn't fill up that much of the extra space available.

-So why not re-future-proof this game? Why not revitalize it? Instead of bothering with a Smash 5, take what you already have and make it like new again!

-What exactly do I mean by this? Well, besides the merge, the game could be made to keep up with the current times:

New Maps
-To promote games like Breath of the Wild, Mario Switch, Pokemon Sun and Moon, and possibly even Splatoon!

More Costumes/Slots
-More storage, bruh. It's possible. Link in that glorious BoTW getup? Pls??

New Customs
-Okay no one really uses em, but wouldn't it be nice if DLC characters actually got customs?

New Final Smashes?
-Also relevant to the times and small, but nifty. Kirby's could be updated to Robobot Armor, for example.

Characters
-Saved it for last because you knew it was coming.

-So, if you didn't get the hint in the above point, Ice Climbers were a completely finished character, that went unreleased due to the graphical constraints of the 3DS. Their return was pretty much canceled by the 3DS version. So, they're a prime candidate to return for the Switch version of Smash, wouldn't you agree?

-Outside of them, the additional storage, and ability to work with an existing product, means that a newcomer might not be asking for too much? Or possibly more oldies, such as Wolf (so Etika can sleep with an empty conscience, if nothing else), or better yet PIC-- pffffffft
-Assuming that the already completed Ice Climbers got added, and Wolf returned, there could potentially be the possibility of another character being added to further hype up Switch Smash, and given the incredulous amount of 3rd party support Nintendo's getting this time around, as well as the new 1st party games inbound, I really have no idea who it, or they, could possibly be.

If you read all my points, I appreciate it! Would you guys like the prospect of rejuvenating Sm4sh instead of simply porting Sm4sh Wii U? Or would you rather stick with this for a few more years and wait for a Smash 5?
I personally feel that a Smash 4 port on the Switch should be the definite Smash Bros on the Switch. That means treating it almost as if it were a new game with adding as many newcomers 3DS/Wii U got and adding in a bunch of stages and modes in addition to other things. I'm thinking along the lines of...

- 12 additional characters bringing the roster to 70
- 3DS stages added in along with new stages
- Adventure Mode
- Boss Battles
- Overhauled Classic Mode that plays like previous installments
- Additional Event Matches and Challenges
- A Custom shop to make it much more easier to buy Customs
- A bunch of more Mii Costumes
 

Big-Cat

Challenge accepted.
Joined
Jul 24, 2007
Messages
16,176
Location
Lousiana
NNID
KumaOso
3DS FC
1590-4853-0104
Balancing, negotiating rights, etc would be a nightmare at that scale. I'll have to check my sources, but Smash 4 was a LOSS for Nintendo because of how much the entire thing cost, from rights to wages to amiibos even.

And a $100 increase is not as big as you think. If you're a minor, yes, but for an adult, that's maybe waiting an extra week to get it.
 
Last edited:
D

Deleted member

Guest
So here's the big question(s): What would you want out of a Smash 4.5?
Better gameplay. Smash 4 is too dumbed down.

Would you want a Smash 4.5?
Not really, mods will fix Smash 4.

To add to this, certain genres like FPS and fighting games need to be at 60 FPS for precision and fluidity. No game of either genre worth their competitive salt goes below this.

Here's a bit of trivia: Those games typically are not as power demanding as other genres because of their commitment to 60 FPS. They will sacrifice background details for it. This is why the background characters in Street Fighter look like ****. They want to keep the majority of the details on the interactive elements.
Do FPS games have to run at 60fps?

FPS games are notorious for being graphically intense, so I would image it would be difficult for consoles to maintain a consistent framerate of 60fps.

I don't see this thing going above $400. I'd be surprised if it was more than $350 tbh.

Also I want portability and Metroid. Maybe I'm just greedy. :p
Hmmm...

https://shield.nvidia.com/store/tablet/k1

Maybe. It's always surprising how quickly tech drops in price. The Shield is running a Tegra K1, and it's going for $199. So I can see the Switch going for $300, maybe $350 if it's running the X1, but if it runs a variant of the X2 with Pascal architecture, expect it to be considerably pricey, as the X2 isn't even out yet.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tegra#Tegra_X1

And Nintendo better deliver on the mature games, and show gamers that they're gonna cater to them this time around (which is what they had promised with the WiiU at E3 2011 already), as I at least am not down for another uninspired Mario, another uninspired Mario Kart, and ANOTHER uninspired Smash, with Zelda getting delayed into next gen, and all the IP I loved getting turned into trash like Fed Force, and #TMS.

Tbh, they gotta get 3rd parties on board, and to stick around, or it's gonna be another WiiU. Reception to the Switch reveal has been very mild, at best. People have been very upset with Nintendo lately due to all the crap NoA has been pulling, with shutting down fan projects, taking down fanart, taking down YT videos, etc... has ruined the company's image for many gamers.

Also, bear in mind that Kimishima (is that his name? The new president), said that they will NOT sell the NX at a loss due to the current value of the Yen on the global market.

So long you forgot it is "Johnknight." :rolleyes: :grin: :shades: :chuckle:
Ha! Damn, you got me. Good to see you again though man.


1: Don't underestimate Nvidia. Nvidia made Sony pay a premium for that powerful PS3. Sony hated the price, so they made the PS4 far less technologically sophisticated for the time with their AMD partnership.

Nvidia was angered they couldn't land the Xbox One or PS4. So angered they made the Nvidia Shield to expand into the console market a bit (with moderate success). But Nvidia hates moderate success, or moderately strong. They want it all.

That's why if you look at the most powerful graphics cards... they're all Nvidia cards. Nvidia in the last 5 years has slowly left AMD in the dust at the high end (and even in regards to market share), but in the last 3 years has done so especially effectively at the high end. They don't want to be just the bargain or the entry level brand, but the everything brand.

And nothing says "everything" like the cutting edge. And the next Tegra chip... is going to be stronger than whatever weak sauce GPU is in the PS4, Xbox One and even the PS4 Pro (aka a GPU weaker than 2010's GTX 580; let that heatsink in).

Nvidia is upset at Sony and Microsoft. They want Vengeance. Blow up your entire solar system vengeance. Nvidia isn't hyping this Tegra chip in the Nintendo Switch up to be the Maxwell Tegra we all know. No, they're hyping it up to be the Pascal Tegra. And if we have learned anything from the Pascal GTX 10/1000 series line, it is "holy crap this beat my expectations" (unless you are an enthusiast for graphics cards with insane expectations, like 4k everything). Nvidia is all about that right now.

And despite being a mobile chip, the Tegra 2 GPU is on pace to be at worst around where the PS4 Pro GPU will be at. If that is indeed what we get, the GPU performance will be on par with the PS4 Pro (although the current generations' performance issue isn't GPU or RAM [well sort of RAM], but CPU).

2: That's just the graphics card. Nintendo is going to have a CPU too, definitely from Intel. Now, while Nvidia vs. AMD in GPU's may have been a recent blowout in regards to variety and high end, Intel vs. AMD in CPU's is wayyyy more extreme. While Nintendo won't get a high end CPU (i7-4790k, i7-6700k, i5-6600k), it will likely get something worthy of an entry level PC build.

Now while that may sound disappointing, that's actually great in comparison to the PS4, PS4 Pro, and Xbox One. All those consoles essentially have 2 generations outdated $20 CPU's. Literally bargain bin level. The PS4 and Xbox One have 4-core, 1.75 and 1.70GHz CPU's respectively that are 2 generations old. That's pathetic by any modern standard. The cheapest Best Buy laptops have better CPU's then that. The laptop I got in 2009 had a better CPU than that.

Something like an Intel i3-6100 would be expected of the CPU if it is Intel (maybe a tad weaker, but I doubt any stronger). If it is custom made, expect it to be about there. Nintendo has historically been very good with CPU's and understanding them (as well as optimizing energy performance).

3: Remember the key difference between handheld and stationary devices. The reason a desktop performs better at gaming than a laptop is a variety of reasons. For one, a better power supply (since a desktop must ALWAYS be plugged, thus it is focused on performance). Secondly, better cooling (more space for fans, thus cooler temperatures. GPU's tend to max out around 90 C). So while the Nintendo Switch will likely keep the CPU, GPU and RAM intact while moved, it may lose fans (that are in the base) and whatnot.

This is the biggest reason for power drop offs, lowered resolution on the portable element (likely 720p vs. 1080p in the home variant), and less frames (along with frame drops when switching, which is inevitable). Now Nvidia has experience thanks to the Shield here on the mobile part. For the home system, both Nvidia and Nintendo have fantastic records with keeping their consoles cool (also in having low amounts of faulty systems/parts).

The Xbox One and PS4 have some issues in that department, although not as bad as their faulty predecessors. Given Nintendo being ahead of the curve there, that's another positive.

4: Don't underestimate Nvidia's partners. Capcom, Konami, Square Enix, Epic Games, Activision Blizzard, Bethesda, Ubisoft, 2K (and by extension Firaxis and Rockstar), etc. etc. etc. The only major studio I can think of partnered with AMD is EA.

Nvidia has cornered the partners market in PC gaming. Nvidia is going to bring that into the Nintendo Switch. Combine that with Nintendo's loyal 3rd party partners in Ubisoft, Capcom and Square Enix, and that covers pretty much the entire 3rd party video game industry. Because of Nvidia driver updates likely happening on the Nintendo Switch and Nvidia graphics cards simultaneously, expect video games on PC to come to the Nintendo Switch easily. Overwatch, Tekken 7, Quake Champions, Doom 4, Fallout 4, Dishonored 2, Dark Souls III... are all in play.

5: Don't underestimate Tegra support. Both the Unity and Unreal Engine 4 support Tegra. You know what runs on Unity? All kinds of mobile and card games, including Hearthstone.

You know what runs on Unreal Engine 4? Dragon Quest XI, the FF VII Remake, Kingdom Hearts III, Gears of War 4, Paragon, Shenmue III, Street Fighter V, Tekken 7. Heck, tons of game run on the Unreal Engine 3. With the Unreal Engine team at Epic Games working hand and hand with Nvidia and thus Nintendo, ports will be easier than with other systems. All of these listed games (well probably sans SF V, Shenmue III and Gears 4) could come to a Nintendo console.

6: A new console demands a new price point. At lowest, this console will debut at $400 (which is pretty cheap; maybe $50 more than the Wii when it launched at $500 about 10 years ago when adjusted for inflation in US Dollars).

Nintendo could debut this system for as high as $600. This isn't a console made to be a cheap one-off (like the PS4 and Xbox One are becoming) aka a "console being a bad PC." No, this is a console becoming a great hybrid. And it won't have a competitor. It will be able to maintain the 720p/30fps (maybe 480p/60fps as well) mobile and 1080p/60fps home mark very consistently for half a decade. Because it is a solid investment and will last at that mark almost definitively, this is a fantastic thing.

Yes, people short on money may be mad. But hey, is it worse than hearing the PS4 is outdated instantly after dropping $400? No. At worst, you can wait until it drops to $400 or $300 or $200 and you'll still have a few great years out of it.

7: Cartridges are your best friend. They can fit any game on them, are cheap to make, and can store DLC. Oh, and best of all, they load A LOTTTTTT faster than discs or HDD memory. It's near SSD speed for consoles. The only way it could be better is if the system came with an SSD or had the option of adding one (I would love putting a 1GB SSD in a system!).

Faster loading times are always a positive. Combine that with Nvidia graphical power and likely a much better CPU than the PS4, PS4 Pro, Wii U or Xbox One, and that's a ton of appeal. That's always a positive. I think video game enthusiasts worldwide have come to dislike loading screens, and this is one FANTASTIC solution to it. And unlike with the N64, cartridges now nearly as cheap as discs, and can fit roughly as much memory! That's fantastic times, and this was the perfect time for cartridges! It's the best of both worlds!

8: The Appeal of Nintendo handheld systems. Nintendo has NAILED every handheld system (the Virtua Boy notwithstanding). Each system has made billions of profits and had a userbase of tens of millions, with over a dozen true classic titles that stand the tests of time. Combine that with the power of the home console and the Nintendo home console exclusives plus all the big 3rd party titles on consoles and PC, and expect huge growth.

Just imagine this: You can get the tradition big 3D Mario platformer, the cool 2D Mario platformers, the 2D small Zeldas, the vast 3D Zeldas, everything Phoenix Wright, big 3D first person Metroid, Donkey Kong Country, Xenoblades RPG action, Stunning Smash Wii U action and details, Bayonetta 2 hack and slash awesomeness, Splatoon rapid fire third person shooting...

...all on the go and at home. You are literally combining the best of both worlds and can mix and match.

As a kid, didn't you ever wish you could play Pokémon Red and Blue but with greater detail on the N64? You're gonna get a modernized version of that. Or what about the idea of playing Zelda: Ocarina of Time, Mario 64, or Smash 64 on the go? You're gonna get a modernized version of that.

Heck, you'll be able to do both with the Virtual Console alone! This is the perfect marriage of both of these things. Both the dreams are real. This is the best of both worlds.

\\

TL;DR: Overall this is the success of Nintendo handhelds meets the power of Nvidia meets Nintendo's efficient home consoles and the ability to customize how you play all-in-one.

How is this anything but the next major console revolution in video games and likely a gigantic box office hit? This could be bigger than the Wii and even the DS.

Sony and Microsoft can pretend to get 4k gaming down (my GTX 1070 sort of has 1440p down at max settings/60fps; these consoles won't hit 4k solidly until like 2028 lmao. The Pascal Titan X barely does 4k/max settings/60fps universally). Nintendo is going to nail 1080p@60fps home console gaming/720p@30 or 60fps mobile gaming for years to come with the Nintendo Switch.

This is the iPhone or iPad that doesn't need updating. The console that doesn't need a Pro version because it is outdated in 2 years and can't handle 1080p. This is the future.

Nintendo didn't find their niche in the home market, so they decided to destroy the old ones by combining everything. This is the power smartphone users wish their portable devices had. This is the portability console and desktop gamers wished they had. This is the best of both portable and home consoles, and this is what we all in the back of our heads wished we had when the Game Boy first came out. I don't think most of us have realized it yet.

Edit: I also didn't mention experts are saying developers and producers for PS4 Pro titles are now moving over to the Nintendo Switch because of Nvidia + the Switch likely being a stronger system. That's a very positive sign, since the Pro isn't that much stronger than the standard lackluster PS4.
Man, you are overhyping the hell out of this machine. For starters, Pascal is a GPU for PCs, it's not their mobile chip. Their Pascal-based mobile chip is the X2, and here are its specs:

Tegra X2
Nvidia Tegra "Parker" will feature Nvidia’s own custom general-purpose ARMv8-compatible core Denver2 as well as code-named Pascal graphics processing core with GPGPU support. The chips will be made using FinFET process technology, which likely means that it will be made using TSMC's 16 nm FinFET+ manufacturing process.[93][94][95]

  • CPU: Nvidia Denver2 ARMv8 (64-bit) dual-core + ARMv8 ARM Cortex-A57 quad-core (64-bit)
  • RAM: up to 16GB LPDDR4
  • GPU: Pascal-based, 256 CUDA cores
  • TSMC 16nm FinFET process
Model number CPU GPU Memory Adoption
Processor
Cores Frequency (GHz) Microarchitecture Core configuration1 Frequency (MHz) GFLOPS Type Amount Bus width (bits) Bandwidth (GB/s) Availability

Denver 2 + Cortex-A57 2 + 4
? (Pascal) 256:?:?
750 (FP32) / 1500 (FP16) LPDDR4
128-bit 50

Mind you, that it's not out yet. But I wanna highlight its performance speed. Which is between 750-1500 GIGAFLOPS, with a 4 core processor.

For comparison, these are the PS4 stats:

Single-chip custom processor
CPU : x86-64 AMD “Jaguar”, 8 cores
GPU : 1.84 TFLOPS, AMD Radeon™ based graphics engine

That's 1.85 TERRAFLOPS, or 1840 GFLOPS.

And here is the PS4 Pro, which, remember, was a "necessary upgrade" according to devs and Sony:

Single-chip custom processor
CPU: x86-64 AMD “Jaguar”, 8 cores
GPU: 4.20 TFLOPS, AMD Radeon™ based graphics engine

4.20 TERRAFLOPS with an 8 core processor. That's four times as powerful as the X2. And that's even assuming the Switch is using the X2, and not the X1, which imo, it's probably running a custom X1, as Nvidia announced the X2 well after the NX had been teased by Nintendo. But if it is the X2, like you said, this thing will be pricey, but even still the X2 doesn't even best the PS4 vanilla, it's only 85% of the max power of the PS4 vanilla.

Anyway, all that aside, like I said before, if this thing is a dedicated gaming machine, it's horribly underwhelming compared to the PS4 Pro, which is gonna be selling hot this Christmas, and is only going for $400. It's gonna go mostly ignored by most gamers due to its poor performance resulting in bad ports.

Which brings me to another point. the PS4, PC, and Xbone are all running AMD, and using AMD architecture. Nintendo going with Nvidia, immediately means more effort for ports for devs, which is a problem the PS3 ran into last gen thanks to its custom "Cell Processor." Which means many devs will be very reluctant to port their latest game over to the Switch unless there's some sort of incentive (large install base, new market, money).

So like I said before, unless the Switch is running Android OS, or a competitive software, and is pushing to penetrate a new market with their machine, the Switch isn't gonna see much in terms of 3rd party support, and sales within the industry. Refer back to this image:

1477043675792.png


Potable gaming is dying. The 3DS sold LESS than the PSP did the previous gen, and the Vita absolutely died (ironic given its name). With the growth of mobile devices, and casual apps, I doubt there's gonna be much growth in the market for dedicated portable consoles no matter what Nintendo does. A hybrid console will come off as nothing more than a gimmick which resulted in an underpowered machine to most gamers, and has no chance of appealing to nongamers who have their tablets which offer more functionality.

Personally, I'm very skeptical the Switch will be a success, unless it's a gaming tablet and tries to breach a new market, like I wrote in my original post. I'm honestly gonna be skipping out on the Switch unless it becomes a sweeping success with a massive library of games to play, and not only Nintendo games. People are overestimating the efficiency of having to develop for only one console. 3DS development is still much simpler than HD development, which Nintendo already proved to be unprepared for with the WiiU, and even still, the 3DS library was still very underwhelming compared to the DS and GBA. As someone who owns a hacked DS and a hacked 3DS, the 3DS library is absolutely boring, and its mostly he;d up by 3rd party games. I'm personally not keen on getting another machine than only plays Nintendo games, and all the ones I like never come out, and if they do, they're horribly uninspired and casualized to all hell to appeal to a "broader audience." And then, having to miss out on 3rd party games that I DO wanna play, like Guilty Gear, and Overwatch, and Soulsbourne, because I don't spend enough time gaming to justify an investment in more than one machine. Most gamers are tired of Nintendo's ****, and feel the same way I do.

Again, if this isn't a gaming tablet, taking the PS2 strategy, and offering more functionality to appeal to a bigger market, and thereby securing 3rd party devs, it's dead in the water man. It simply can't compete with the PS4, let alone the Pro.



As an aside, it's kinda nice to see the old gang all here. Brings back memories of the old days. We got Kuma, and N3ON, and John, and Swamp. We're missing a few, but I guess I could hassle Holder, and Gus to get their asses in here and join the party.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Cheezey Bites

Slime Knight
Joined
Jul 7, 2013
Messages
1,649
Location
Astoltia
NNID
koske1
3DS FC
4356-0097-9129
What you're saying might be right even though I really hope that isn't the case. I'm really hoping for this console to be sold at like $350 and $300 without all the fancy attachments. Sure that would make Nintendo sell at a loss but Nintendo always sells at a loss with their consoles.

Just don't want to be paying like $600+ for this console y'know?
Wii U is the only console Nintendo has ever sold at a loss, and that was because of poor exchange rates more than anything. They've also stated that they'll sell at a profit. But unless they're making an untenable Pro beating tablet they should have no issues.

My expectation is we should expect only a little more than a Wii U Slim sort of price scale. It's increase in power is likely nowhere near what JohnKnight is talking about; in fact the reports are it's less than Xboxone (though with more modern features and efficiency higher I think it'll effectively outperform it by a small margin). That sort of increase would be mostly balanced out by the lack of optical drive, leaving the primary extra costs to come in from the extra and bigger batteries and the increase in screen resolution. If I were to estimate I think they'll go $229. I don't think they could do $199 at a profit, and $229 is an emotive number that I think will allow a very small profit. Infact if you look at it another way, the Xbone Slim is $299 for a notable late gen profit-margin, and if the Switch is similar performance using more modern architecture that'd save some money there, while the screen and battery would likely be balanced out by the lack of optical drive. Even at the upper end I think with the sort of power Emily Rogers has reported we'll be seeing it below $270.

That said, the SCD is a different matter, and when that comes out I could see that being an added expense to put it into the Pro territory, and possibly even bringing back multi-screen gameplay since it'd give the dock it's own computing power.


As for the Pro and Scorpio being much needed, that's very true, it's hard to sell games that are held back by the main systems and their contracts that often disallow better versions (the reason so many PC ports are 30fps untill they're modded). This is something Nintendo don't do but Sony and Microsoft are famous for... and the change to Pro and Scorpio puts that enforced maximum higher allowing them to use prettier visuals and sell their games more effectively as well as appease a sizable section of the fan-base that the PS4 has been seriously impacting on. Nintendo don't need to match them as long as they don't enforce parity (which they don't do), they just need the bar to be set high enough to appease publishers, while matching a level they have to develop for due to market share anyways (OG PS4 and Xbox level).
 
Last edited:
D

Deleted member

Guest
Wii U is the only console Nintendo has ever sold at a loss, and that was because of poor exchange rates more than anything. They've also stated that they'll sell at a profit. But unless they're making an untenable Pro beating tablet they should have no issues.

My expectation is we should expect only a little more than a Wii U Slim sort of price scale. It's increase in power is likely nowhere near what JohnKnight is talking about; in fact the reports are it's less than Xboxone (though with more modern features and efficiency higher I think it'll effectively outperform it by a small margin). That sort of increase would be mostly balanced out by the lack of optical drive, leaving the primary extra costs to come in from the extra and bigger batteries and the increase in screen resolution. If I were to estimate I think they'll go $229. I don't think they could do $199 at a profit, and $229 is an emotive number that I think will allow a very small profit. Infact if you look at it another way, the Xbone Slim is $299 for a notable late gen profit-margin, and if the Switch is similar performance using more modern architecture that'd save some money there, while the screen and battery would likely be balanced out by the lack of optical drive. Even at the upper end I think with the sort of power Emily Rogers has reported we'll be seeing it below $270.

That said, the SCD is a different matter, and when that comes out I could see that being an added expense to put it into the Pro territory, and possibly even bringing back multi-screen gameplay since it'd give the dock it's own computing power.


As for the Pro and Scorpio being much needed, that's very true, it's hard to sell games that are held back by the main systems and their contracts that often disallow better versions (the reason so many PC ports are 30fps untill they're modded). This is something Nintendo don't do but Sony and Microsoft are famous for... and the change to Pro and Scorpio puts that enforced maximum higher allowing them to use prettier visuals and sell their games more effectively as well as appease a sizable section of the fan-base that the PS4 has been seriously impacting on. Nintendo don't need to match them as long as they don't enforce parity (which they don't do), they just need the bar to be set high enough to appease publishers, while matching a level they have to develop for due to market share anyways (OG PS4 and Xbox level).
Optical Drives are super cheap these days. The real issue is the screen, a 720p capacitive touch screen won't be cheap. The WiiU Screen was single-touch, resistive 480p LCD display, which was a lot cheaper.

Likewise, the X2 isn't a cheap chip, if the Shield is going for $199, running the K1, the Shield Pro with the X1 going for $250, $300+ for a Pascal variant is reasonable.

Also, remember that the WiiU cost $350 at launch, and the Vita $250, so I'm guessing $350 as well. 3 hour battery life and 32Gb storage space suggests that they cut costs on the Hard Drive and battery to try and keep the price down as much as they could, because otherwise, those two alone would have shot the price up to over $500. And again, like you said, they wanna sell this at a profit.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Cheezey Bites

Slime Knight
Joined
Jul 7, 2013
Messages
1,649
Location
Astoltia
NNID
koske1
3DS FC
4356-0097-9129
Even relatively cheap PC 2x blu-ray drives cost $40-50 at retail, I know it's cheaper to manufacture but given that console standard is 6x read speed, and now needs to be slimline and to account for all this in their airflow diagrams, casing materials and so on your concept of super cheap is a stretch.

The Shield is also held at an inflated price because it's a failure, much like the Wii U, supply and demand creates inflated prices. The Switch is set to be at least a moderate success going by the buzz, and is a new project that will be priced accordingly. Not to say the custom tegra won't eat up a good chunk of the budget, it will, but you're comparison is incredibly flawed.

As for the screen, unless they're going insane with quality it won't be too bad, most budget tablets have 1920*1200 multi-touch capacitive displays at $100, and that's after the rest of the electronics, battery, cameras (which NX doesn't have) and so on. Heck, the Amazon Fire is 1024*600 multitouch and that whole package only costs $50 at retail, the screen is clearly more than made up by the cost dropped in optical drive. Remember, this is a home console, the tablet screen is going to be a secondary concern, and this is Nintendo who have already used cheaper screens to save money on handhelds.
 
Last edited:

LancerStaff

Smash Hero
Joined
Jan 28, 2014
Messages
8,118
Location
Buried under 990+ weapons
3DS FC
1504-5709-4054
The Switch has a camera on the bottom of the right Joycon...

Most likely there's some sort of motion control, and there's what seems to be an IR port spotted on the right Joycon.
 

N3ON

Gone Exploring
BRoomer
Joined
Jan 6, 2008
Messages
21,444
Location
Vancouver
I'm not picky, as long as we get a decently requested newcomer, the ICs, and hopefully a few 3DS stages I'll be happy. I don't need no twelve characters, but I figure they'll probably add at least 4-6.

I don't really play Smash in any capacity other than local multiplayer these days, so the other stuff is totally superfluous, if not nice to see, for me.

Balancing, negotiating rights, etc would be a nightmare at that scale. I'll have to check my sources, but Smash 4 was a LOSS for Nintendo because of how much the entire thing cost, from rights to wages to amiibos even.
Where'd you hear that?
 

Cheezey Bites

Slime Knight
Joined
Jul 7, 2013
Messages
1,649
Location
Astoltia
NNID
koske1
3DS FC
4356-0097-9129




nothing at the bottom of the right joycon just the home button, and the IR port. There is that hole at the top of the left back, but I think that's just a screw hole, as your finger would cover it in use, and it's too deep to get good lighting on pictures.

There are likely motion controls, but they're not exactly expensive, pretty much everything has a gyro now, so that doesn't even factor into the conversation, and a pair of acceleromitors isn't gonna break the bank, I mean I've already found a 24 pack of 'em selling for less than $8 at retail (how good they are is unknown, but even if they use significantly better ones they'll be buying bulk and won't be paying retail price so I doubt the motion controls would add much more than $5 to the whole package).
 
Last edited:

Swamp Sensei

Today is always the most enjoyable day!
BRoomer
Joined
Jan 4, 2013
Messages
38,906
Location
Um....Lost?
NNID
Swampasaur
3DS FC
4141-2776-0914
Switch FC
SW-6476-1588-8392
Balancing, negotiating rights, etc would be a nightmare at that scale. I'll have to check my sources, but Smash 4 was a LOSS for Nintendo because of how much the entire thing cost, from rights to wages to amiibos even.
Got a source on this?
 

Johnknight1

Upward and Forward, Positive and Persistent
Joined
Feb 25, 2007
Messages
18,979
Location
Livermore, the Bay repping NorCal Smash!
NNID
Johnknight1
3DS FC
3540-0575-1486
Japanese company supporting / showing off a Japanese eSport? You do know how the Japanese Smash scene works right? Nintendo has literally nothing to do with them outside of like two events. Why would they not show Splatoon as their eSport platform when they're hosting tournaments all the time for it.
Nothing against Splatoon or anything, but Melee and Smash 4 right now are top 7 esports in terms of viewer engagement for the year on Twitch, and both have remained in the top 10 most viewed esports every month on Twitch.

The only other games to do that all year long are Call of Duty, DOTA 2, League of Legends, CS:GO and maybe Hearthstone and Heroes of the Storm (Overwatch as well if you count just from when it launched in May). Both games keep getting bigger in terms of audience size and engagement, and both games along with Smash Switch CLASH are going to be Nintendo's big 3 esport hits going forward (and yes, I do think Smash 4 will have staying power as an individual title, not much unlike Melee).
The handheld is reported to have active cooling inside it, and without the optical drive airflow will be vastly improved meaning it can cool a console level system with less power anyways. Ofcourse it won't be able to run a console level system without a sizable battery disrupting airflow, so it is very much a balancing act, but it will have it's own cooling. The dock will probably include further cooling and clock the cpu higher, allow increased power draw and not have to support the screen, but they've already reduced the handheld issues and even limited a console's optical drive issues.
The cooling in the dock is ultimately what is going to allow the home console mode of the Switch to outperform the portable version. You need constant cooling for higher performance and core and/or clock speeds.

Additionally it is worth noting the portable mode of the Switch having so much cooling on top of a high end portable graphics card is what will give it far more power when it comes to gaming than a tablet or smartphone, just in case anyone was wondering.
And I really think you're underestimating how much money they save by not having an optical drive, to get something good enough for this gen is not only fairly expensive in of itself but the aforementioned airflow considerations actually do add a bunch to the system price (let alone because optical drives get hot). I think even at the performance you're suggesting (and I will say I don't think it'll be going for that) it would be cheaper than your estimates pretty much on the optical drive alone.
Optical drives only cost like $40 tops (trust me, I checked; I built two very different PC's in the last 14 months). Consoles often have cheap optical drives anyways, and "cheap" ones these days are maybe $20-$25 with Blu Ray playing capabilities.

I do think a lot of money may be putting into faster processing. I'm not sure what kind of internal memory the system will have, but even with cartridges which have not only games on them, but memory, save data, DLC, and so on, the core system still needs to store data, as well as have room for downloadable games (via the eShop and Virtual Console), as well as system startup. I personally hope there is a deluxe version of the system that instead of having a standard internal mechanical drive, has a nice Solid State Drive (SSD) instead for multiple times less loading and boot up times.
What you're saying might be right even though I really hope that isn't the case. I'm really hoping for this console to be sold at like $350 and $300 without all the fancy attachments. Sure that would make Nintendo sell at a loss but Nintendo always sells at a loss with their consoles.

Just don't want to be paying like $600+ for this console y'know?
I'm not sure what is the standard in other countries, but $400 as a launching price is pretty much the new "lowest of the low" for new systems in America. While yes the Switch looks to have a fantastic, most great titles don't come for at least a year, so it isn't a huge loss. I'm actually unsure myself when I will purchase it to be honest.

If its' any inconvenience, a price drop for Christmas/Black Friday of next year would be very likely, at least on a temporary basis. And if you really want one, everything goes on sale. I nagged 2 GTX 960's last year for about $180 for both when 1 normally costs $180-$200 on eBay. There's always vendors competing to selling lower and lower in the free market.
 
Last edited:

Guybrush20X6

Creator of Lego Theory
Joined
May 22, 2012
Messages
15,882
NNID
Guybrush20X6
3DS FC
4253-3477-4804
Switch FC
SW-2140-7758-3904
I think loosing the optical drive is more a component size thing than a cost one. May also help in anti-piracy in the sense you can't just jam it into a PC and hack the encryption, you gotta find a go-between.

Still, it's very exciting and maybe a little worrying to think that graphics tech has plateaued enough that handhelds can compete with home consoles on graphic fidelity. Most smartphones are on par with/exceed the original DS in a smaller space but get bloody hot while doing so, doesn't seem too far a stretch to get a portable PS3/Xbox360 level machine on the go in the shape of a fat tablet.
 

Cheezey Bites

Slime Knight
Joined
Jul 7, 2013
Messages
1,649
Location
Astoltia
NNID
koske1
3DS FC
4356-0097-9129
The cooling in the dock is ultimately what is going to allow the home console mode of the Switch to outperform the portable version. You need constant cooling for higher performance and core and/or clock speeds.

Additionally it is worth noting the portable mode of the Switch having so much cooling on top of a high end portable graphics card is what will give it far more power when it comes to gaming than a tablet or smartphone, just in case anyone was wondering.

Optical drives only cost like $40 tops (trust me, I checked; I built two very different PC's in the last 14 months). Consoles often have cheap optical drives anyways, and "cheap" ones these days are maybe $20-$25 with Blu Ray playing capabilities.

I do think a lot of money may be putting into faster processing. I'm not sure what kind of internal memory the system will have, but even with cartridges which have not only games on them, but memory, save data, DLC, and so on, the core system still needs to store data, as well as have room for downloadable games (via the eShop and Virtual Console), as well as system startup. I personally hope there is a deluxe version of the system that instead of having a standard internal mechanical drive, has a nice Solid State Drive (SSD) instead for multiple times less loading and boot up times.
To the first point I completely agree. To the optical drive I still have issues.

Firstly just BD playing drives are even cheaper than that (I've found one for $15), but 1x is utterly useless for a console. But you are right, my last laptop build was about a year ago, and it appears for my pricing you can indeed now find 6x slimline readers, rather than just 2x (I guess PS4's continued success has made the blu-ray market grow). A quick google search for cheapest product has put the first passably fast drive at nearly $30, but it's way too bulky for a console (well, except OG Xbox One, but anything not anything a consumer would buy), so the next is over $35 retail, rather than my lower estimate of $40 so I guess that's a few dollars saving; I guess I concede that the console would have to be a much less emotive $239 without other features reduced.

As for the hard drive I doubt they'd use a mechanical drive anyways, since it is a tablet and gonna be rough housed a lot more than even a laptop, but reports are that they're using small internal storage (32 GB, probably a smaller physical size too) and relying on an SD card for downloaded games (which is perfectly reasonable in my books, SD cards will drop in price faster than Switches will). The likely SSD element is why I didn't count the drive as much of a saving compared to the notably bigger storage of the Xbone and PS4.
 

Johnknight1

Upward and Forward, Positive and Persistent
Joined
Feb 25, 2007
Messages
18,979
Location
Livermore, the Bay repping NorCal Smash!
NNID
Johnknight1
3DS FC
3540-0575-1486
I think loosing the optical drive is more a component size thing than a cost one. May also help in anti-piracy in the sense you can't just jam it into a PC and hack the encryption, you gotta find a go-between.
You also can't just write extra DLC data on a disc, nor delete it. Once it's there, it's there forever essentially. On a cartridge, that limitation of data being there forever is removed, and you can add data and store data there at will. Additionally, the read/write speeds of discs have always been slow, whereas with cartridges, it is almost instantaneous.

The PS1 discs used to be able to store essentially infinite memory on any number of discs for cheap, but couldn't load fast. The N64 could startup games and have virtually no loading screens, but the memory size was limited because after a certain point prices plateaued. Cartridge memory now is the best of both worlds. It stores huge quantities of memories very quickly and it reads and writes and loads memory very quickly.
To the first point I completely agree. To the optical drive I still have issues.

Firstly just BD playing drives are even cheaper than that (I've found one for $15), but 1x is utterly useless for a console. But you are right, my last laptop build was about a year ago, and it appears for my pricing you can indeed now find 6x slimline readers, rather than just 2x (I guess PS4's continued success has made the blu-ray market grow). A quick google search for cheapest product has put the first passably fast drive at nearly $30, but it's way too bulky for a console (well, except OG Xbox One, but anything not anything a consumer would buy), so the next is over $35 retail, rather than my lower estimate of $40 so I guess that's a few dollars saving; I guess I concede that the console would have to be a much less emotive $239 without other features reduced.
Yup, the tray is kind of worthless now anyways. Digital media and all, although man, some of these Xbox One and PS4 day 1 patch files are huge. Thank God it sounds like you can store the memory of DLC and patches to the cartridges, which is a truly innovative idea and feature.
As for the hard drive I doubt they'd use a mechanical drive anyways, since it is a tablet and gonna be rough housed a lot more than even a laptop, but reports are that they're using small internal storage (32 GB, probably a smaller physical size too) and relying on an SD card for downloaded games (which is perfectly reasonable in my books, SD cards will drop in price faster than Switches will). The likely SSD element is why I didn't count the drive as much of a saving compared to the notably bigger storage of the Xbone and PS4.
Using an SD card is viable for sure, but I'm not sure how well it would work as a primary drive.

As for the idea of a small internal SSD-esk storage like what smartphones do, I completely agree. I would say 64-128GB mark sounds about the ideal route, since console games take up a lot more space than just apps and songs. Again, I would definitely pay more for more space, however.
Here's a bit of trivia: Those games typically are not as power demanding as other genres because of their commitment to 60 FPS. They will sacrifice background details for it. This is why the background characters in Street Fighter look like ****. They want to keep the majority of the details on the interactive elements.
A fascinating part about the Switch will be how it lowers details when it switches from home to portable mode. That will be interesting to see. While yes there is some concern for witnessed frame drops in the demos we saw in the trailer in the portable mode, driver updates, system updates, game updates, and the ability to scale back details will all be in play.

I wonder if a future Smash game would have a "3DS" esk mode like jumping from Smash Wii U to 3DS to have stylized graphics to complement the mobility of the system and "hide" the lowered graphical abilities. I am sure some games will use such an idea for a mobile mode as at least an option. This is just one of many things to think about that we theoretically haven't even scratched the surface on.
Balancing, negotiating rights, etc would be a nightmare at that scale. I'll have to check my sources, but Smash 4 was a LOSS for Nintendo because of how much the entire thing cost, from rights to wages to amiibos even.
I've never heard any such thing. The game as a whole maybe cost about 140 million USD tops to produce and market even with all that DLC. About 14 million copies were sold at an average price of about $40 (between 3DS and Wii U), and Nintendo got roughly 1/2 the money from that.

$20 x 14,000,000 = $280,000,000 by my calculations, which would be double the expenses, even without factoring in DLC revenue, Amiibos sold (I still want Corrin, Cloud and Bayonetta damn it!) :mad: and consoles sold (especially Wii U's), as well as all the free advertising.

Even if Smash Bros was sold at a loss, the amount of free advertising is alone enough to make the money back. The movie Batman was initially seen as a blockbuster failure for Warner Bros, but the way it increased the value of the Batman brand via advertising... it shot the value of the IP up by at least 10 digits worth in real US Dollars.
And a $100 increase is not as big as you think. If you're a minor, yes, but for an adult, that's maybe waiting an extra week to get it.
This. While I get some of our younger and still in college (meh, personally stuck between AA and BA but not going to school personally) folks might be struggling, to most working adults (except those struggling to get by, and then, the hurt is real), that's a small lump sum of money. The average American makes over 2 million US Dollars in their lifetime last I checked.

\\

Ha! Damn, you got me. Good to see you again though man.
How... how have you not seen me? I never really went anywhere (well aside from that spring of hell last year; was it last year or the year before? I forget sometimes, because I don't really want to remember).
Man, you are overhyping the hell out of this machine. For starters, Pascal is a GPU for PCs, it's not their mobile chip. Their Pascal-based mobile chip is the X2, and here are its specs:

Tegra X2
Nvidia Tegra "Parker" will feature Nvidia’s own custom general-purpose ARMv8-compatible core Denver2 as well as code-named Pascal graphics processing core with GPGPU support. The chips will be made using FinFET process technology, which likely means that it will be made using TSMC's 16 nm FinFET+ manufacturing process.[93][94][95]

  • CPU: Nvidia Denver2 ARMv8 (64-bit) dual-core + ARMv8 ARM Cortex-A57 quad-core (64-bit)
  • RAM: up to 16GB LPDDR4
  • GPU: Pascal-based, 256 CUDA cores
  • TSMC 16nm FinFET process
Model number CPU GPU Memory Adoption
Processor
Cores Frequency (GHz) Microarchitecture Core configuration1 Frequency (MHz) GFLOPS Type Amount Bus width (bits) Bandwidth (GB/s) Availability

Denver 2 + Cortex-A57 2 + 4
? (Pascal) 256:?:?
750 (FP32) / 1500 (FP16) LPDDR4
128-bit 50

Mind you, that it's not out yet. But I wanna highlight its performance speed. Which is between 750-1500 GIGAFLOPS, with a 4 core processor.
It actually is Pascal; the X-1 is considered a Maxwell chip, which is the previous Nvidia generation (The GTX 700, 800 and 900 series belong to that same chip architecture). This belongs to the next generation of Nvidia cards: the 1000 series.

These are incomplete numbers to boot. Nvidia waited until Google made a universally acclaimed smartphone to dish out the X-1 for use. Now, they want to make a bigger splash with Nintendo and the Switch. Of course, even if the specs are weak-ish, it is going to be a modified version of the Tegra X-2, so it could be stronger.

Also, it is confirmed by Nvidia employees to be a heavily modified variant of the Tegra chip they are using, so it won't be underclocked like the standard mass produced GPU's are, because home consoles have great cooling, whereas tablets and smartphones have terrible cooling. Since there is better cooling, the clock speeds aren't going to be locked up, and it can be made even more powerful; it's like if my truck had its' mechanically induced speed limit of 100 mph removed if I were to use it on a racing track. I don't have it unlocked, because quite frankly don't need it unlocked for just driving around town or even cross country.

The Tegra GPU also will be used to function in a more PC-like build rather than the new mobile build (with a separate CPU), so there's that to consider as well. In other words, it will be the best of both worlds. So a lot of these PS4 and Xbox One comparisons are moot, since it will be significantly better.
Anyway, all that aside, like I said before, if this thing is a dedicated gaming machine, it's horribly underwhelming compared to the PS4 Pro, which is gonna be selling hot this Christmas, and is only going for $400. It's gonna go mostly ignored by most gamers due to its poor performance resulting in bad ports.

Which brings me to another point. the PS4, PC, and Xbone are all running AMD, and using AMD architecture. Nintendo going with Nvidia, immediately means more effort for ports for devs, which is a problem the PS3 ran into last gen thanks to its custom "Cell Processor." Which means many devs will be very reluctant to port their latest game over to the Switch unless there's some sort of incentive (large install base, new market, money).
The cell processor issue is gone this time around, so that's not going to happen.

You're also not taking into account the CPU. The weakness of the PS4 and Xbox One series weren't the GPU's, but the CPU's. This system, as I mentioned before, will have a stronger CPU. Gaming is so CPU intensive nowadays. If Nintendo has anywhere near the CPU I've suggested earlier, this thing will be fine with the performance threshold to be expected.

Additionally you underestimate Nintendo. Nintendo ran 1080p/60fps pretty fine for having 1GB of vRAM and a CPU/GPU combo. Imagine what they can do with Nvidia drivers, Nvidia optimization, and an actual separate GPU and CPU. There's going to be so much custom tinkering on this device, and it is all going to be optimized to make this system even easier to port to than the Xbox One or PS4 Pro.
Potable gaming is dying. The 3DS sold LESS than the PSP did the previous gen, and the Vita absolutely died (ironic given its name). With the growth of mobile devices, and casual apps, I doubt there's gonna be much growth in the market for dedicated portable consoles no matter what Nintendo does. A hybrid console will come off as nothing more than a gimmick which resulted in an underpowered machine to most gamers, and has no chance of appealing to nongamers who have their tablets which offer more functionality.
Tablets offer throwaway games that have no substance. They don't have good graphics, and when they do, they have no frame rate. When they have good frame rates, they don't have good graphics, and usually lack good gameplay. It's a Catch 22 for tablet games, and one the Switch won't have.
I'm personally not keen on getting another machine than only plays Nintendo games, and all the ones I like never come out, and if they do, they're horribly uninspired and casualized to all hell to appeal to a "broader audience." And then, having to miss out on 3rd party games that I DO wanna play, like Guilty Gear, and Overwatch, and Soulsbourne, because I don't spend enough time gaming to justify an investment in more than one machine. Most gamers are tired of Nintendo's ****, and feel the same way I do.
1. Souls and Guilty Gear's developers backs the Switch. Souls games aren't very hard to run with a good CPU, and Xrd is a very easy game to run. My laptop can run it at like 50-ish fps at about 788p, and it doesn't even have a graphics card. Additionally, Overwatch is very scale-able. Guilty Gear also runs on the Unreal Engine 3, and the Switch supports the Unreal Engine 4 too.

2. You underestimate Nvidia. Nvidia is partnered on all those games unless I am mistaken (well only kinda sorta with Overwatch). Those same drives they use on PC... will work on the Switch. That optimization will be even further precise.

4. This combines both the handheld and home console libraries of Nintendo. There's gonna be games for everyone. Every Nintendo handheld had tons of fantastic games for just about every kind of video game enthusiast, no matter what level of enthusiasm or interest they have in the art/medium. You add that with home console horsepower and big hitters, and you make the portable games big hitters like that, and this system's library is going to hit like the 1927 New York Yankees.
Again, if this isn't a gaming tablet, taking the PS2 strategy, and offering more functionality to appeal to a bigger market, and thereby securing 3rd party devs, it's dead in the water man. It simply can't compete with the PS4, let alone the Pro.
The PS2 was so dominant because it was the cheapest DVD player. Having an incredible early library before the GameCube and Xbox even came out didn't hurt either. That was a one-off win.
As an aside, it's kinda nice to see the old gang all here. Brings back memories of the old days. We got Kuma, and N3ON, and John, and Swamp. We're missing a few, but I guess I could hassle Holder, and Gus to get their ***** in here and join the party.
You say that like I don't communicate with most of those people you mention routinely... :shades:
 
Last edited:
D

Deleted member

Guest
How... how have you not seen me? I never really went anywhere (well aside from that spring of hell last year; was it last year or the year before? I forget sometimes, because I don't really want to remember).
You're right. It's really me who left really. Been off and about doing other stuff, working on my art, making comics about Donald Trump, lol, etc...


It actually is Pascal; the X-1 is considered a Maxwell chip, which is the previous Nvidia generation (The GTX 700, 800 and 900 series belong to that same chip architecture). This belongs to the next generation of Nvidia cards: the 1000 series.
It's Pascal tech, yes, but still not THE Pascal. The X2 is much weaker than their Pascal GPU, for obvious reasons. And actually, now that I think about it, the custom chip on the Switch most definitely runs Pascal tech. It's been Nvidia's wet dream for their Tegra chips to be used for something like this, do no doubt they pushed Pascal on Nintendo. Thus, the X2 makes for a fair comparison man. It will be in the same ball park man. Remember, the X2 isn't even out yet. So the custom chip will be similar to it, but optimised, but the X2 serves as good ref.


These are incomplete numbers to boot. Nvidia waited until Google made a universally acclaimed smartphone to dish out the X-1 for use. Now, they want to make a bigger splash with Nintendo and the Switch. Of course, even if the specs are weak-ish, it is going to be a modified version of the Tegra X-2, so it could be stronger.

Also, it is confirmed by Nvidia employees to be a heavily modified variant of the Tegra chip they are using, so it won't be underclocked like the standard mass produced GPU's are, because home consoles have great cooling, whereas tablets and smartphones have terrible cooling. Since there is better cooling, the clock speeds aren't going to be locked up, and it can be made even more powerful; it's like if my truck had its' mechanically induced speed limit of 100 mph removed if I were to use it on a racing track. I don't have it unlocked, because quite frankly don't need it unlocked for just driving around town or even cross country.

The Tegra GPU also will be used to function in a more PC-like build rather than the new mobile build (with a separate CPU), so there's that to consider as well. In other words, it will be the best of both worlds. So a lot of these PS4 and Xbox One comparisons are moot, since it will be significantly better.

The cell processor issue is gone this time around, so that's not going to happen.

You're also not taking into account the CPU. The weakness of the PS4 and Xbox One series weren't the GPU's, but the CPU's. This system, as I mentioned before, will have a stronger CPU. Gaming is so CPU intensive nowadays. If Nintendo has anywhere near the CPU I've suggested earlier, this thing will be fine with the performance threshold to be expected.

Additionally you underestimate Nintendo. Nintendo ran 1080p/60fps pretty fine for having 1GB of vRAM and a CPU/GPU combo. Imagine what they can do with Nvidia drivers, Nvidia optimization, and an actual separate GPU and CPU. There's going to be so much custom tinkering on this device, and it is all going to be optimized to make this system even easier to port to than the Xbox One or PS4 Pro.

Tablets offer throwaway games that have no substance. They don't have good graphics, and when they do, they have no frame rate. When they have good frame rates, they don't have good graphics, and usually lack good gameplay. It's a Catch 22 for tablet games, and one the Switch won't have.

1. Souls and Guilty Gear's developers backs the Switch. Souls games aren't very hard to run with a good CPU, and Xrd is a very easy game to run. My laptop can run it at like 50-ish fps at about 788p, and it doesn't even have a graphics card. Additionally, Overwatch is very scale-able. Guilty Gear also runs on the Unreal Engine 3, and the Switch supports the Unreal Engine 4 too.

2. You underestimate Nvidia. Nvidia is partnered on all those games unless I am mistaken (well only kinda sorta with Overwatch). Those same drives they use on PC... will work on the Switch. That optimization will be even further precise.

4. This combines both the handheld and home console libraries of Nintendo. There's gonna be games for everyone. Every Nintendo handheld had tons of fantastic games for just about every kind of video game enthusiast, no matter what level of enthusiasm or interest they have in the art/medium. You add that with home console horsepower and big hitters, and you make the portable games big hitters like that, and this system's library is going to hit like the 1927 New York Yankees.

Not quite, those aren't estimates, they are benchmarks at max power for all three, officially released by Nvidia and Sony respectively.

Anyway, I dunno man, but I'm still very skeptical about this being a success. My interest in the machine will depend on its library, and the library is really hinging on Nintendo retaining 3rd party support. Which itself will depend on the success of the machine at launch.

Which is something I don't have much faith in. Nintendo has NO momentum going into this after the Wii U, and moreover, they are launching this console in March, right after the Scorpio and Pro have sold like crazy during Christmas, and during the period in which most of their games will be coming out. Let me reiterate that, the Switch is launching right at the same time in which the next batch of PS4 and Xbone exclusives are coming out. People aren't gonna be looking to pay an extra $350 just to play another Mario platformer, a port of Zelda, and ports of games already on their console. They're gonna be looking at getting Persona 5, and FFXV, and Horizon Zero Dawn, and Titanfall 2, and Nioh, and Gravity Rush 2, and the Last Guardian, and For Honor, and Mass Effect Andromeda, etc... etc...

Now Nintendo might get SOME of these at launch, but most consumers by then will ALREADY own at least the PS4.

Not only that, but they haven't even released any details on the Switch, and won't be till 2017 according to them, leaving them with TWO months to fully unveil and market the Switch, a time in which most people will be focused on the launches following the Xmas sales.

And that's even assuming the console launches with a strong library.

Moreover, the console is still underpowered. X2 clocks in at 85% of the power of the PS4, which itself is 1/4 of the output of the Pro, which ITSELF is half as powerful as PC. To assume that a mobile chip can compete with any of those is crazy. The PS4 was already underpowered.

But anyway, let me put this into the perspective of the average consumer. The rumored and expected price for the Switch is $350 (which is reasonable considering the cancelled Shield X1 was priced at $299 and it was running the X1 not the X2, the Vita costs $250, and the Wii U launched at $350). The PS4, costs $299, and the Pro $399.

So, while the Switch might offer a lot of the games the PS4 does, you are paying $50 extra, just for portability, with 3 hours battery life, and 85% the performance on dock. And that's assuming you don't already own a PS4, which most people do. Which not only gives you better performance, a better library, but also a much bigger community to play games with, as most of your friends also own PS4s.

Moreover, for $50 more than the Switch, you can get a machine 4x as powerful, with the same perks already offered by the PS4, and not only that, IT is coming in just in time for the holiday craze, AND it's VR capable.

So, as someone who owns neither the PS3, nor a PS4, I find myself thinking, why would I invest in the Switch? Especially after the Wii U. Compared to the PS4, the only real draw of the Switch is the ability to play Nintendo games, and we've seen how successful that's been for Nintendo. Especially with the directions in which they've been taking their IP in recent years, if they even release games for them at all anymore.

Personally, I'm not really interested in the Switch, and won't be unless I see it being a sweeping success, which as it stands, I seriously doubt it will. As a generational console, its launch is already ****ed, coming out midgen, so unless it expands to a new market, it'll get an initial blast of PS4 ports, and when it underperformed in sales, the 3rd party devs will bail like they did with the Wii U.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Big-Cat

Challenge accepted.
Joined
Jul 24, 2007
Messages
16,176
Location
Lousiana
NNID
KumaOso
3DS FC
1590-4853-0104
I
Where'd you hear that?
Got a source on this?
For now, take what I said with a grain of salt. I could have remembered what they told me wrong.

However, let's say my memory was wrong and it wasn't Smash. Could Smash have still bombed? Let's consider GTAV. This game cost Rockstar $265 million to develop and market, likely to due to soundtrack licensing and the actors involved. This is the highest budget ever for a videogame, at the time anyway. The total sales for this game exceed 65 MILLION. Assuming $45 average a copy (to consider reduced prices and sales), you're looking at a gross profit of a little over 2.9 billion. The net profit was 90% of that which is nothing short of amazing. Though that number might reduce to 75-80% at most when take into account manufacturing console licenses, and the free post release DLC. Pulling that number out of my ass.

Smash has to have had an ungodly budget to consider when you include IP negotiations (which is huge and a nightmare), soundtrack licensing, hiring musicians, working with Namco, etc. Probably the one area they had to spend less on than GTAV were the actors. The most expensive person to probably get to voice someone was either Cam Clarke for Corrin or Helena Taylor for Bayonetta. One's a veteran voice actor and the other is a veteran TV actress. Mind you that the amount of recording involved was probably not a lot. IIRC, Jun Fukuyama spent two hours recording his lines for Roy in Melee.

Anyway, the amount of sales for 3DS and WiiU combine to 13.13 million. That's 8.23 for 3DS and 4.9 for WiiU. Setting both to maximum price, the gross profit the games provide $494 million and $294 million respectively. That's a total of $798 million in gross profit on the vanilla release of the game. Additional money was made over DLC for Smash (but not GTAV which has been all free), but the average person probably only bought the characters and stages. This average is to include people that bought everything and people who bought nothing (i.e. kids who don't know any better). My guess is that the sales of that probably raised the gross profit to maybe $900 million to 1 billion, but then you have to include the increased budget for work, rights, etc. Basically, every time DLC came, there was a reason as to why the DLC was pricey.

Then you had a similar process with everything when it came to amiibos, assuming rights to amiibo production were not already secured. You still had to consider manufacturing costs, and molds are very expensive.

Overall, I'm under the impression Nintendo broke even at most under these conditions.
 
Last edited:

Guybrush20X6

Creator of Lego Theory
Joined
May 22, 2012
Messages
15,882
NNID
Guybrush20X6
3DS FC
4253-3477-4804
Switch FC
SW-2140-7758-3904
On a tangent, using Smash as the first Amiibo platform as brilliant as you're getting everyone to buy all your characters from all your series and then if a game has functionality with them people will theoretically at least, be predisposed to buying it to get the most value out of them.

Can't help at notice that the non-Smash amiibo are designed more sturdy though. I guess that's what happens when you copy computer models 1:1
 

Cheezey Bites

Slime Knight
Joined
Jul 7, 2013
Messages
1,649
Location
Astoltia
NNID
koske1
3DS FC
4356-0097-9129
Manly Spirit, it's not about Launch. The reason they're releasing this (and they do for handhelds) in March is to gain momentum throughout the year. It's a known thing that such a release time is (at least when handled properly) sacrificing initial software sales to get the console some love. When done right a handheld or console's first party line-up will maintain a strong presence throughout the year with many exclusives (or at least exclusive content) games keeping the name in the public conscious, traditionally getting kids to ask for it for Christmas.

Now this is being marketted mostly to young professionals, but the same logic applies. Yes the Xbox One S is selling well now because they've had a short but notable slate of console exclusives (ReCore and the system selling Gears of War 4 just after the S' release) and had the successful pitch of play anywhere to ride into this holiday period, but the PS4 Pro is not pulling numbers and Scorpio isn't out 'till next holiday. Moreover the games coming out for PS4+Xbox in February are a big deal, yes, but Nintendo are announcing all their games during that time to combat that and garner momentum. After the competition's launch slate's pretty quiet and Nintendo (assuming they're doing it right) will launch game after game to keep Switch in the public conscious (even if not necessarily their homes yet) all the way untill Christmas when they can release a bunch of big games with promise of more in the new year. They use the March launch to build momentum for their primary sales period in Holiday.

If they have the games to pull that off or not is the question, especially when some of the stuff I was expecting aren't in the list (Monster Hunter 5 isn't a Switch exclusive going by the Direct on Thursday, and Beyond Good and Evil 2 is in pre-production, even if it's late pre-production it doesn't look like they'll make it for Holiday 2017), but we won't have a chance to know that untill next year. If the launch line-up looks great it won't be enough, if the rest of the first year line-up also looks great it probably will be.
 

William5000000

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Mar 12, 2015
Messages
228
Location
North Carolina
If "Super Smash Bros. Switch" ("Super Smash Bros. Swift") is to be made as an enhanced port of "Smash 4" for the Nintendo Switch, there are many problems that need to be fixed.

- FIX THE DARN TOP KO RANDOMNESS PLEASE (and no random tripping from "Brawl" please)! Seriously, the randomness on those top KOs (even if they're not truly random) is very bad for the metagame, especially in last stock situations. Make the Star KOs/Screen KOs occur for on-stage moves and upward Blast KOs occur for off-stage moves, even on Training Mode. That way, there would be no unfair wins or losses, as well as unfair punishes, and the matches would go much more smoother, even if it isn't 100% perfect.
- Fix the random untechable spin animation (100% damage or more)! Same reason as said above!
- Add voice clips for certain characters (such as Villager, Mega Man and Pac-Man) when they get Star KO'd. For Villager, add a sound effect for when he/she gets hit by an item from "Mario Kart 8". For Mega Man, add the voice clip when he dies from "Mega Man 8". For Pac-Man, add the dying sound effect from a very old arcade "Pac-Man" game.
- The Rage mechanic should only be in play from 100% damage up to 150% damage (VERY UNLIKELY), and it should be a factor on Training Mode.
- Crowd cheers quality should be improved, and the crowd should chant 8 times when the character is at 100% damage or more.
- Cloud victory fanfare ("Final Fantasy VII") should only last about 4 seconds, then maybe end it abrupt (NOT HAPPENING UNFORTUNATELY).

For every other problem (especially online, as people are just rude and rage quitting, and the random opponent picking), fix them please!

----------

If this game is going to intentionally have more characters on the roster, add Dixie Kong and Pichu. Dixie Kong is just as agile (but slower) as Diddy Kong. Pichu hasn't been seen in any "Smash" game since "Melee". Roy, Mewtwo, and Dr. Mario were brought back from "Melee", so why not Pichu too? And if possible, maybe Snake (though he is dead now, due to accelerated aging), Wolf, and Ice Climbers can be brought back from "Brawl" too, along with Ivysaur and Squirtle (without Pokémon Trainer). Obviously, Young Link from "Melee" won't be brought back because he was replaced by Toon Link from "Brawl".

Obviously, keep all the DLC characters!

----------

Add more features from the previous "Smash" games.
 
Last edited:

Big-Cat

Challenge accepted.
Joined
Jul 24, 2007
Messages
16,176
Location
Lousiana
NNID
KumaOso
3DS FC
1590-4853-0104
On a tangent, using Smash as the first Amiibo platform as brilliant as you're getting everyone to buy all your characters from all your series and then if a game has functionality with them people will theoretically at least, be predisposed to buying it to get the most value out of them.

Can't help at notice that the non-Smash amiibo are designed more sturdy though. I guess that's what happens when you copy computer models 1:1
The other amiibo models have considerably less small parts on them and are bigger overall. Compare the Bowser Smash and Mario amiibos and there's a significant difference in size.
If "Super Smash Bros. Switch" ("Super Smash Bros. Swift") is to be made as an enhanced port of "Smash 4" for the Nintendo Switch, there are many problems that need to be fixed.

- FIX THE DARN TOP KO RANDOMNESS PLEASE (and no random tripping from "Brawl" please)! Seriously, the randomness on those top KOs (even if they're not truly random) is very bad for the metagame, especially in last stock situations. Make the Star KOs/Screen KOs occur for on-stage moves and upward Blast KOs occur for off-stage moves, even on Training Mode. That way, there would be no unfair wins or losses, as well as unfair punishes, and the matches would go much more smoother, even if it isn't 100% perfect.
- Add voice clips for certain characters (such as Mega Man and Pac-Man) when they get Star KO'd. For Mega Man, add the voice clip when he dies from "Mega Man 8". For Pac-Man, add the dying sound effect from a very old arcade "Pac-Man" game.
- The Rage mechanic should only be in play from 100% damage up to 150% damage (very unlikely), and it should be a factor on Training Mode.
- Crowd cheers quality should be improved, and the crowd should chant 8 times when the character is at 100% damage or more.
- Cloud victory fanfare should only last about 4 seconds.
1. This would be nice.
2. You should apply this to Villager. They're the only three where you're not certain at first if they died of a Star KO.
3. First part's not happening. Second part should happen.
4. Meh.
5. You didn't play FF7.
 

William5000000

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Mar 12, 2015
Messages
228
Location
North Carolina
1. This would be nice.
2. You should apply this to Villager. They're the only three where you're not certain at first if they died of a Star KO.
3. First part's not happening. Second part should happen.
4. Meh.
5. You didn't play FF7.
What? Of course I played "Final Fantasy VII", plenty of times. I played that game way too much to know about the victory fanfare (yes, I know the victory fanfare is longer than most others, but still).
 
Last edited:
D

Deleted member

Guest
Manly Spirit, it's not about Launch. The reason they're releasing this (and they do for handhelds) in March is to gain momentum throughout the year. It's a known thing that such a release time is (at least when handled properly) sacrificing initial software sales to get the console some love. When done right a handheld or console's first party line-up will maintain a strong presence throughout the year with many exclusives (or at least exclusive content) games keeping the name in the public conscious, traditionally getting kids to ask for it for Christmas.

Now this is being marketted mostly to young professionals, but the same logic applies. Yes the Xbox One S is selling well now because they've had a short but notable slate of console exclusives (ReCore and the system selling Gears of War 4 just after the S' release) and had the successful pitch of play anywhere to ride into this holiday period, but the PS4 Pro is not pulling numbers and Scorpio isn't out 'till next holiday. Moreover the games coming out for PS4+Xbox in February are a big deal, yes, but Nintendo are announcing all their games during that time to combat that and garner momentum. After the competition's launch slate's pretty quiet and Nintendo (assuming they're doing it right) will launch game after game to keep Switch in the public conscious (even if not necessarily their homes yet) all the way untill Christmas when they can release a bunch of big games with promise of more in the new year. They use the March launch to build momentum for their primary sales period in Holiday.

If they have the games to pull that off or not is the question, especially when some of the stuff I was expecting aren't in the list (Monster Hunter 5 isn't a Switch exclusive going by the Direct on Thursday, and Beyond Good and Evil 2 is in pre-production, even if it's late pre-production it doesn't look like they'll make it for Holiday 2017), but we won't have a chance to know that untill next year. If the launch line-up looks great it won't be enough, if the rest of the first year line-up also looks great it probably will be.
I disagree. A strong launch is important.

Weak sales, means 3rd party devs jump ship, which means a weak library, which means, less sales, which means little to no 3rd party support, which means WiiU 2.0. Nintendo needs to make a splash and garner a large audience, otherwise they're not gonna get much of a chance to really draw any attention. This is the list for PS4 games set to launch 2017:

http://www.playstationlifestyle.net/2017-ps4-ps3-ps-vita-video-game-release-date-page/

I count a good 100 games give or take, with major drops coming out all the way until E3 2017. Among them, you have tons of PS4 EXCLUSIVES. This is the year PS4 gets a lot of exclusive titles not found anywhere else, and that WON'T be found on Switch. Here's a list of the most anticiptaed ones:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qqSjyb0RB0o

And it's not just CoD ****, you have a lot of legitimately good stuff dropping, like Nioh, Nier Automata, and Gravity Rush 2, among many many others, like Shenmue 3, which is dropping Summer 2017, and will be making a splash. Not to mention, Mass Effect Andromeda drops next year, and EVERYONE is gonna wanna play that.

Contrast that to the Switch lineup of confirmed games:
http://www.ign.com/wikis/nintendo-switch/Nintendo_Switch_Games

You got a bunch of WiiU ports, a couple of Dragon Quest games that are ALSO coming to PS4 and 3DS, shovelware, and a Mario game. We can add Skyrim and NBA 2k17 to that, but it's not like it'll make a difference, those games are coming to PS4 as well.

So what exactly is there to look forward to on the Switch? Everyone here is not even talking about a new Smash Bros, but a port of Smash 4, a game people can already play on WiiU. People keep namedropping Monster Hunter and Pokemon, but just like how people had said that Mario Kart and Smash would sell WiiUs, and that THEN it would outsell the PS4, I have serious doubts this will be the case with the Switch. Not to mention, only reason MonHun was on 3DS is cause it had the largest install base for portables, and Capcom is lazy and wants to keep using PSP assets. If they are forced to make new assets for an HD MonHun, expect that to drop on PS4 as well simply due to the large install base already there. And Pokemon? Well, SuMo come out on 3DS this Holiday, so I presume it'll be a while before anything noteworthy that can sell the Switch comes out.

You're telling me that people are gonna give up on getting Nioh, or Gravity Rush, JUST to play Smash 4.5? And Zelda? I have serious doubts. Not to mention, Switch ports will be WEAKER than the Pro, and no one is gonna buy a new console just to play games they can already play on the PS4 they already own. Switch isn't offering anything new to anyone. And if it fails to catch a solid install base from the getgo, say goodbye to any 3rd Party Exclusives. This exact same scenario happened to the 3DS till Nintendo revived it by cutting the price, marketing it hard, selling it at a loss, and making a bunch of games for it till it stuck. And overall, the 3DS library is very underwhelming when contrasted to the DS library.

So where is the Switch headed? If we go by what you're saying, then we're gonna see 2 years of it getting almost nothing, and failing to catch attention from the PS4 audience. Then after that, stuff will trickle in, but it'll never be anything truly spectacular. If that was Nintendo's strategy, then why didn't they just stick with the WiiU? It would have made a fine secondary console, and easily caught on among gamers if they kept churning out games for it and expanding its library, rather than killing it halfway into last year. Why make a whole new console that you're gonna have to push out if you're not even gonna compete and drop the launch, AGAIN. A console's launch is THE most important part of its lifetime, it makes or breaks consoles. It's very hard to recover a product that's had a bad launch. So again, unless the Switch is offering something new, or expanding to a new market, I don't see it being much of a success, considering its competition. Gamers are not gonna be interested in another underpowered Nintendo console. They haven't been for the last 3 generations, and yes, that INCLUDES the Wii, because it didn't perform well with gamers, it expanded to a new market.
 

Ura

Smash Legend
Joined
Feb 4, 2014
Messages
12,838
Switch FC
SW-2772-0149-6703
So what exactly is there to look forward to on the Switch? Everyone here is not even talking about a new Smash Bros, but a port of Smash 4, a game people can already play on WiiU.
To be fair though a port would ensure there would be no cuts to the roster where as a new game would definitely cut at least a handful of characters from the game and maybe even some other content so I would rather go with the port option.
 

Big-Cat

Challenge accepted.
Joined
Jul 24, 2007
Messages
16,176
Location
Lousiana
NNID
KumaOso
3DS FC
1590-4853-0104
Launch lineups are almost always ****. You have maybe one really good game at launch.

As for that PS4 list, you're forgetting that a lot of them are not exclusive to PS4. I believe Shenmue 3 might even be coming to PC. If it's coming to PC, I get it there instead of PS4. Did that with SFV and will be doing it again for Tekken 7 and possibly FFXV.
 

Guybrush20X6

Creator of Lego Theory
Joined
May 22, 2012
Messages
15,882
NNID
Guybrush20X6
3DS FC
4253-3477-4804
Switch FC
SW-2140-7758-3904
Everyone talks about a lack of games at launch, try and remember/spare a thought for if under 20, the Nintendo 64's Launch which had only two games.

Uphill to school both ways 4 miles every day!
 

Big-Cat

Challenge accepted.
Joined
Jul 24, 2007
Messages
16,176
Location
Lousiana
NNID
KumaOso
3DS FC
1590-4853-0104
Back in my day I had to walk FIFTEEN miles in the snow to get to school.
 

Cheezey Bites

Slime Knight
Joined
Jul 7, 2013
Messages
1,649
Location
Astoltia
NNID
koske1
3DS FC
4356-0097-9129
Ofcourse the Switch doesn't have many confirmed games, it hasn't had it's reveal event yet, just a concept teaser trailer. Moreover MonHun already has HD assets, not just from Frontier but their Chinese branch's better looking game; neither have the animation standard of a mainline game, but a mainline game would use them as a base. Moreover a major factor in it remaining 3DS is adhoc multiplayer being the primary selling factor in Japan, something PS4 lacks.

What I'm saying is Nintendo, if they're following the successful March launches will come out all guns blazing, buying first year third party support, and wowing us with games when it actually effects their momentum. Of course they're going to show the obvious Wii U sequels now because this is the time to get the idea across not sell the console. Retro's new IP, the other 'weird' new IP Emily Rogers has mentioned, the less obvious sequels, the 3DS sequels (Animal Crossing, Pokémon, Monster Hunter), the IP resurrections, the exclusive third parties; none of those would get announced before January as that's when the marketing begins. And only just begins. They launch in March with a moderate line-up and continue to produce a system seller a month, while buying another to fill that in and maintain a constant presence. That way the PS4' sporadic release schedule of mostly niche guff (and this from someone who's super excited for Atelier Firis, it's not gonna sell systems), remakes and PC ports can't keep constant interest. Yes Mass Effect'll be a big deal (it always is for some reason), and they have their own impressive exclusives (Robot Dinosaur Monster Hunter will need a big Switch game reveal to combat it's limelight stealing) but Nintendo have already said they've prepared for launch and for the months after it, they've practically stated their plan is to build momentum throughout the year and make Switch the hit holiday seller, and while I'm unsure if they can follow through I understand the logic.

If we go by your logic we get 3 months of the Switch getting a tonne of games, and then getting forgotten by Christmas. (to be fair, still better than Wii U)

Getting 10 million sales at launch and 3 million the rest of the year because you don't have a plan is worse than getting just 5 million at launch and picking up 10 million the rest of the year because you have a constant stream of exciting games and a fulfilling E3 adequately competing for the mind share, and not just because of install-base, but by keeping the system in consumer's minds it means the system enjoys higher software sales, the big issue held by the Wii which became an occasional party game to most.
 
Last edited:

N3ON

Gone Exploring
BRoomer
Joined
Jan 6, 2008
Messages
21,444
Location
Vancouver
For now, take what I said with a grain of salt. I could have remembered what they told me wrong.

However, let's say my memory was wrong and it wasn't Smash. Could Smash have still bombed? Let's consider GTAV. This game cost Rockstar $265 million to develop and market, likely to due to soundtrack licensing and the actors involved. This is the highest budget ever for a videogame, at the time anyway. The total sales for this game exceed 65 MILLION. Assuming $45 average a copy (to consider reduced prices and sales), you're looking at a gross profit of a little over 2.9 billion. The net profit was 90% of that which is nothing short of amazing. Though that number might reduce to 75-80% at most when take into account manufacturing console licenses, and the free post release DLC. Pulling that number out of my ***.

Smash has to have had an ungodly budget to consider when you include IP negotiations (which is huge and a nightmare), soundtrack licensing, hiring musicians, working with Namco, etc. Probably the one area they had to spend less on than GTAV were the actors. The most expensive person to probably get to voice someone was either Cam Clarke for Corrin or Helena Taylor for Bayonetta. One's a veteran voice actor and the other is a veteran TV actress. Mind you that the amount of recording involved was probably not a lot. IIRC, Jun Fukuyama spent two hours recording his lines for Roy in Melee.

Anyway, the amount of sales for 3DS and WiiU combine to 13.13 million. That's 8.23 for 3DS and 4.9 for WiiU. Setting both to maximum price, the gross profit the games provide $494 million and $294 million respectively. That's a total of $798 million in gross profit on the vanilla release of the game. Additional money was made over DLC for Smash (but not GTAV which has been all free), but the average person probably only bought the characters and stages. This average is to include people that bought everything and people who bought nothing (i.e. kids who don't know any better). My guess is that the sales of that probably raised the gross profit to maybe $900 million to 1 billion, but then you have to include the increased budget for work, rights, etc. Basically, every time DLC came, there was a reason as to why the DLC was pricey.

Then you had a similar process with everything when it came to amiibos, assuming rights to amiibo production were not already secured. You still had to consider manufacturing costs, and molds are very expensive.

Overall, I'm under the impression Nintendo broke even at most under these conditions.
So you think Smash 4 overall made a gross revenue (which - under those conditions - is what I assume you mean) of 1 billion dollars and are supposing that is breaking even. So you think Smash 4, including the Smash amiibos, cost a billion dollars to make when all is said and done.

That's pretty ridiculous. Especially if GTAV, a game that is larger and was in full active development longer than Smash, only took roughly 265 million.

Probably the one area they had to spend less on than GTAV were the actors.
Are you serious? How about modeling & texturing, animating, programming, marketing, soundtrack licensing, online infrastructure including servers, pre-production, debugging & testing, etc? GTAV is a huge, huge game. It spent five years in development. Probably the few areas Smash spent more on was IP licensing and original score including the remixes. And the amiibos, because there is no GTA equivalent to that.

I'm not saying Smash was cheap to develop, but GTAV is one of the most expensive games in history to create.

Now we don't know what Smash's profit margin is, but let's consider Destiny, the most expensive game ever made, which cost 500 million in development and marketing. Assuming your numbers are correct, before DLC Smash made nearly 800 million in revenue. Now, if it were Destiny, that would be a 300 million dollar profit. And since I don't think anybody with knowledge of video game dev costs would argue that Smash 4 cost more than Destiny to develop, we're left with a profit in excess of 300 million. Probably much more, since 500 million is an astronomical price for development, almost double that of GTAV, itself a bigger game than Smash.

With DLC, the licensing costs may have stayed the same, since characters such as Ryu and Cloud were being licensed, but actual dev and marketing costs went way down, as they were working with a smaller team, on a smaller scale.

And for amiibo, all you have to do is see that Nintendo listed them under profits in their investor meetings for FY 2014 and the individual fiscal quarters during which the Smash series saw regular releases to see they were extremely profitable.

When it comes to their triple A series: Super Mario, Mario Kart, Pokemon, Smash, Zelda, Nintendo doesn't "break even", they make hand over fist money.
 
D

Deleted member

Guest
Everyone talks about a lack of games at launch, try and remember/spare a thought for if under 20, the Nintendo 64's Launch which had only two games.

Uphill to school both ways 4 miles every day!
Launch lineups are almost always ****. You have maybe one really good game at launch.

As for that PS4 list, you're forgetting that a lot of them are not exclusive to PS4. I believe Shenmue 3 might even be coming to PC. If it's coming to PC, I get it there instead of PS4. Did that with SFV and will be doing it again for Tekken 7 and possibly FFXV.
Hmmmm....

nintendo-console-sales-001.jpg


Console launches have always been ****
Not really:

Famicom/Nintendo Entertainment System

Sega Dreamcast

Sony PlayStation 2

Nintendo GameCube

Microsoft Xbox

Xbox 360

Wii

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_video_game_console_launch_games#Fourth_generation

There is a very strong correlation between a console's launch lineup, and the console's overall performance in sales. The only anomalies being the Dreamcast, which actually performed very very well until the PS2 cannibalized it, and the PS4, which really was more due to Sony's brand recognition, and very good marketing on their behalf.

I don't even see why I should need to point this out, it's pretty damn obvious that a console not only needs variety and volume in the types of titles available to play from the get go, but it must ALSO come with a at least a few MUST PLAY killer apps that you can't get anywhere else. Even the Wii followed this pattern, its launch line up was super solid right off the box. Hell, even the N64 had that MUST PLAY killer app that literally revolutionized the industry, even if it did launch with only one game. You also only needed one game, as the industry was a lot smaller. I remember getting my N64 as a kid. SM64 was all you needed, and then Mario Kart dropped, then Star Fox, etc... Kids ACTUALLY played outside back then, shocking, I know. And even with the 64, we can see a severe drop in sales from the SNES to the 64, and you can see right away that the SNES had a much stronger initial launch lineup than the 64. Gamecube was much better than the 64, but it was also up against the PS2, and just by comparing the titles available to both consoles at launch, it's easy to see how the PS2 outpaced the Gamecube.

But in today's industry, if you don't have at least 2 awesome exclusives or very good reasons to buy your console at launch, PLUS hefty 3rd party support from the get go, you're ****ed. If your console launch goes arry, then you probably won't save the product. Only times I've seen this not be true has been with the PS3 and the 3DS. And both took massive efforts to revive, with tons of 3rd party deals, and price cutting till the thing was being sold at a loss.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Johnknight1

Upward and Forward, Positive and Persistent
Joined
Feb 25, 2007
Messages
18,979
Location
Livermore, the Bay repping NorCal Smash!
NNID
Johnknight1
3DS FC
3540-0575-1486
For now, take what I said with a grain of salt. I could have remembered what they told me wrong.
You're kinda taking that "each character costs $1 million to make, 3rd party and even 2nd party character, music, and licensing negotiations can double the price of items" dealio kinda far. $140 would only be a possible price tag if you include Amiibo, and even then it is a pretty far stretch.
It's Pascal tech, yes, but still not THE Pascal. The X2 is much weaker than their Pascal GPU, for obvious reasons. And actually, now that I think about it, the custom chip on the Switch most definitely runs Pascal tech. It's been Nvidia's wet dream for their Tegra chips to be used for something like this, do no doubt they pushed Pascal on Nintendo. Thus, the X2 makes for a fair comparison man. It will be in the same ball park man. Remember, the X2 isn't even out yet. So the custom chip will be similar to it, but optimised, but the X2 serves as good ref.
I'm definitely not expecting performance comparable to my GTX 1070 (I wouldn't mind if I could manually put it in the Switch home console dock though!), :laugh: but there's no reason to think that we won't see a GPU as strong as say a GTX 950. From my experience with Nvidia Pascal Generation GPU's, they run a lot cooler than other GPU's. I actually run This leads me to believe the amount of extra performance Nvidia will clock out of this system will be much higher than what a normal X2 can (along with it being in a console with cooling vs. just another smartphone).

I think the performance of the card will be comparable to a GTX 950 due to all of these factors, as well as the fact Nvidia is taking a huge lump sum percentage of the Switch (I hear in the neighborhood of 6%), which Nvidia expects to net around $400 million annually from (or about 6% of their annual income). That tells me this is a significant investment from both Nvidia and Nintendo. You don't invest like that unless you expect to turn a hefty profit.
Anyway, I dunno man, but I'm still very skeptical about this being a success. My interest in the machine will depend on its library, and the library is really hinging on Nintendo retaining 3rd party support. Which itself will depend on the success of the machine at launch.

Which is something I don't have much faith in.
Nintendo has 2 times the partners it had for the Wii U, and they are going to be more enthusiastic because their partner, Nvidia is involved.

Like I said, Nintendo and Nvidia pulling no punches. Games will be easier to port to the Switch than the X1, PS4, PS4 Pro or X1 S thanks to Nvidia Pascal tech, and because the drivers are going to be actively engaged, unlike the cheap and ultimately unwise and uninvolved deals the Gen 8 consoles all have with AMD.
Nintendo has NO momentum going into this after the Wii U, and moreover, they are launching this console in March, right after the Scorpio and Pro have sold like crazy during Christmas, and during the period in which most of their games will be coming out.
The Scorpio isn't going to launch until after E3 - you can quote me on that. And the Pro probably will sell decently, but not as well as one might think (likely in the 5-10 million range) before then.

Nintendo is waiting to launch the system with games. The PSP (outside of Japan) and 3DS all launched in that January to March area. The PSP did it to come out after the DS and cancel its' momentum and capture a large market share (it did both of that), and the 3DS did it to follow up on the momentum of the DS (it came out probably too early).

All of those consoles were massive successes, and all sold very well during the coming Christmas/Thanksgiving season. The PS2 came out early with not a lot of games in its' winter season and ultimatey didn't do good. All it had were sports titles until Gran Turismo 3 dropped about 10 months into its' lifespan (although that is technically a sports title).

Then the titles came flowing like a river in October to December 2001. In October, Devil May Cry, Grand Theft Auto III (gigantically huge title) and Tony Hawk's Pro Skater 3 all dropped. Capcom vs. SNK 2, Tekken Tag Tournament, and Metal Gear Solid 2 came in November. Lastly, Jak & Daxter. Max Payne, and Final Fantasy X all came last in December. So it took about 10 months for the PS2 to get 1 great title, and then it got dime a dozen about 13 months after it launched, with about 7 launching close to one another. It had a bad first half of the year to launch ahead of the competitors (in the GameCube and Xbox) and have titles ready to compete when those consoles launched, to take those consoles' momentum away.

The PS2 did that, and from then on out, it owned the 7th Generation of Home Console Gaming.. That is often the aim of these 1st consoles of a generation. I wouldn't be shocked if Mario Kart 9, a new Metroid title, Splatoon 2, a new Animal Crossing title, and/or a 3D Mario title came out in those last 3 months of the 2017 for the Switch.

So, it isn't even about the launch for the Switch; it's about what titles the Switch has at the end of 2017, or heck, maybe even until 2018. The Scorpio is going to come out Q3 or Q4 2017 launch, and the PS5 is likely a 2018 or 2019 launch.
Moreover, the console is still underpowered. X2 clocks in at 85% of the power of the PS4, which itself is 1/4 of the output of the Pro, which ITSELF is half as powerful as PC. To assume that a mobile chip can compete with any of those is crazy. The PS4 was already underpowered.
You're talking about GPU specifically. You need a good CPU, which the Nintendo Switch undoubtedly will have given these investments. Games these days are more CPU intensive than ever, and that is why Sony and Microsoft have failed to hit 60fps on so many games recently.
Moreover, for $50 more than the Switch, you can get a machine 4x as powerful, with the same perks already offered by the PS4, and not only that, IT is coming in just in time for the holiday craze, AND it's VR capable.
PS VR is super basic compared to high end VR. I don't see basic VR like that at $400 selling, and I don't see it taking much of a market share. Also, you drastically overrate the PS4 and PS4 Pro in terms of hardware power.

Sure the fancy "8GB OF VRAM" looks fancy, but when you consider it is still a many years outdated AMD GPU (probably not even at the level of a RX 460) and the overall performance and strength of the card, the 8GB is just a number. That isn't the same as having a GTX 1070 or 1080, in spite of what so many journalists who are supposed to be "experts" say it is (not all 8GB of vRAM is the same; basically all 8GB of RAM is the same though).
Personally, I'm not really interested in the Switch, and won't be unless I see it being a sweeping success, which as it stands, I seriously doubt it will. As a generational console, its launch is already ****ed, coming out midgen, so unless it expands to a new market, it'll get an initial blast of PS4 ports, and when it underperformed in sales, the 3rd party devs will bail like they did with the Wii U.
Many 3rd party developers are already jumping to the Nintendo Switch after they learned of the specs from Nvidia, per a few insider sources.
 
Last edited:
D

Deleted member

Guest
http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2016/...-we-can-guess-about-nintendo-switchs-insides/


Worth a read.^

Johnknight1 Johnknight1
The Switch is running a single mobile chip that handles both CPU and GPU. It's unreasonable to assume that it would ever be able to match a machine with TWO dedicated chips to handle each computation, plus a dedicated power source and ample cooling.

Also, I wanna make a correction to my previous analysis that someone brought up. I was comparing FP32 on the PS4, to FP16 on the X2. Games can't run on FP16.

So the breakdown on benchmarks for future reference looks like this:

Wii U - 324 Gflops
X1 - 512 Gflops
X2 - 750 Gflops
PS4 - 1840 Glfops
Pro - 4200 Gflops

Which is sensible.

Again, it's unreasonable to assume that a mobile chip can compete with dedicated hardware in terms of raw power.

The Switch will be the most powerful portable console ever made, hands down. A 720p portable gaming console. Dunno where it stands in contrast to the Vita, but it's certainly gonna be stronger than the Wii U. But it's still last gen tech in terms of processing power, as the Wii U was running last gen tech. But it's absurd to assume it can match up to the PS4 and Xbone, just look at the numbers. The numbers speak for themselves.

Reason I bring this up is cause people see Skyrim in and assume that that means the Switch MUST be as powerful as the PS4, but the remaster is still weaker than Skyrim in on PC at max settings and mods, which came out 3 years ago, and the PS3, and 360, both of which were weaker than the Wii U also ran Skyrim in just fine. There is no evidence to support that Switch is able to run the remaster, let alone at the same settings as PS4.

Again, it's unreasonable to compare a mobile chip to dedicated computers running two processors. The Switch will be a powerful mobile device (powerful enough to give Nintendo the added benefit of consolidating their in house studios into one device) and it better market itself as such, otherwise it's gonna be torn apart when compared to its competitors, or simply brushed off as another underpowered gimmick console.



Oh yeah, I also wanna add John, that Nvidia uses ARM CPU cores in their chips, which is a different architecture from the x86 and "POWER PC" used by the PS4, Xbone, and PC's. Meaning that due to the difference in architecture between the CPU cores on these platforms, porting games to the Switch will be considerably more difficult than porting them between the three main platforms. x86 has been the Windows standard since like forever, and it's what the Wii U used as well (that's why Wii U emulation is coming along so smoothly so quickly).

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARM_architecture

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/X86

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/PowerPC

To simplify.

ARM is used for mobiles and tablets mostly for Android.

x86 is used by the majority of PC's and the PS4 and Xbone.

and POWER PC is used by Apple for their Mac computers, and Linux.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Top Bottom