General Switch Discussion

[Ronnie]

7 minutes ago, LazyBoy said:

Doesn't read like he's stirring to me, he's just asked whether you've changed your opinion, which is nothing to be ashamed of. You stated in the quoted thread that you expected consoles to last for 5+ years, and the switch and not yet hit 4. The general business strategy seems similar - offer a premium iteration of an existing SKU for the more hardcore gamer by boosting performance. So what's the difference.

To be completely open I was always slightly resentful at the short turn around between PS4 and Pro way back when, and now find myself looking forward to the Switch. I can't say for sure where that dissonance comes from, but the 2 things I would point to are:

1. Where as Sony and Microsoft are trying to stay at the peak of console graphics and performance (and thus the jump to a Pro or series X seemed excessive), Ninty are no so far behind that the gap between what you can play on the Switch and the best consoles can give is getting hard to ignore. I was willing to accept BotW 4 years ago, but if BotW2 doesn't look like its progressed I'd be a little disapointed.

2. I just with to play BotW2 in 4k. Quite frankly just the idea of it gives me tingles. 

edit: and Prime 4. Oh god Prime 4 in 4k. Just call it Prime 4k

The link to my old post was point-scoring and meant for others' benefit, there was no need to remind me of my own views. 

I think your reasons for the dissonance is fair enough. I'd add:

3. If the Switch Pro comes out at the end of the year, it'll be nearly 5 years after the OG release, which is more than enough time for a spec bump. Especially if it's a modest one. Nintendo have never chased power, so I think those expecting a super-charged console will be disappointed. Their 80 mil install-base is too important to leave out in the cold, so I'm not expecting a big boost in performance, unlike the Pro and the X.

[LazyBoy]

Just now, Ronnie said:

The link to my old post was point-scoring and meant for others' benefit, there was no need to remind me of my own views. 

I think your reasons for the dissonance is fair enough. I'd add:

3. If the Switch Pro comes out at the end of the year, it'll be nearly 5 years after the OG release, which is more than enough time for a spec bump. Especially if it's a modest one. Nintendo have never chased power, so I think those expecting a super-charged console will be disappointed. Their 80 mil install-base is too important to leave out in the cold, so I'm not expecting a big boost in performance, unlike the Pro and the X.

Well I benefitted from him quoting it as it allowed me to revisit a debate with parallels. If you feel targeted because he recalled something you said then either stand by what you said or disown it, no need to take it as an attack. 

I am a little confused by your added point. 4 years or 5 years, sure, you've drawn a line and that's ok. But then "especially if its a modest one" - so you're more comfortable with the upgrade if there is less improvement in it? I'm confused. Surely an iteration is only made more valuable if the level of improvement is better. If its only a minor upgrade doesn't that make it a bit of a rip-off? I could understand if there was lock-out for the existing install base, but that doesn't sound like it will be the case. 

[Ronnie]

3 minutes ago, LazyBoy said:

If its only a minor upgrade doesn't that make it a bit of a rip-off?

A rip off for who? When the DSi came out with modest upgrades I felt zero need to buy one, so didn't, and kept my DS.

If it's a big update, as long as they're not leaving behind existing owners, then cool, enough time has passed. If it's a more modest update, they have a shiny new model to entice people and they definitely don't leave behind existing owners. We'll see soon enough I guess.

I bought a PS4 a year after release, so to hear about a PS4.5 a year and a half later was disappointing, that's all.

[Goron_3]

11 minutes ago, Ronnie said:

The link to my old post was point-scoring and meant for others' benefit, there was no need to remind me of my own views. 

I think your reasons for the dissonance is fair enough. I'd add:

3. If the Switch Pro comes out at the end of the year, it'll be nearly 5 years after the OG release, which is more than enough time for a spec bump. Especially if it's a modest one. Nintendo have never chased power, so I think those expecting a super-charged console will be disappointed. Their 80 mil install-base is too important to leave out in the cold, so I'm not expecting a big boost in performance, unlike the Pro and the X.

The 3DS -> New 3DS was a bigger jump than the PS4 -> PS4 Pro. By a considerable margin. 

Simply based off of the likely chipset and the fact that we know they can't manufacturer the current Mariko chip for much longer , I'm willing to bet that it's going to be much larger than the above jumps anyway. The 80 million install base will still get games as software will be compatible with both devices (like it is in the Apple / Android ecosystem) but it's going to be a good performance increase. 2-4 years down the line they will turn the new model into the base model imo.

Anyway, let's just wait and see. With devkits going out, I imagine Digital Foundry will do a speculative video by the end of the month, where they pretty much know the final specs but have to phrase it like speculation (like with Series S).

Regarding the whole 'Nintendo don't chase power', that's only true to a certain degree. With N64, GameCube and Switc, they released the powerful piece of hardware they could for their target release price. Even the CPU /GPU combo in the Wii U cost near enough what the PS4's chipset cost Sony. They'll have a manufacturing target price for this new revision (which will certainly replace the current console) and they'll aim to match that as much as possible.

[Sheikah]

18 minutes ago, Ronnie said:

The link to my old post was point-scoring and meant for others' benefit, there was no need to remind me of my own views. 

I think your reasons for the dissonance is fair enough. I'd add:

3. If the Switch Pro comes out at the end of the year, it'll be nearly 5 years after the OG release, which is more than enough time for a spec bump. Especially if it's a modest one. Nintendo have never chased power, so I think those expecting a super-charged console will be disappointed. Their 80 mil install-base is too important to leave out in the cold, so I'm not expecting a big boost in performance, unlike the Pro and the X.

I linked to your original post because it's been 5 years and I don't expect anyone here to remember that well, and it provides an interesting look back.

Point 3 doesn't actually make sense though - because PS4Pro/X1X never left any of the base console owners out in the cold (all games continued to run on the base consoles - well, perhaps with the exception of Cyberpunk, but that's down to CDPR). I remember at the time you were adamant that this wouldn't be the case and that Sony was really screwing over the existing player base - something that never happened. It's also worth noting that Sony had a huge player base at the time, too, but you still believed the worst.

Lastly, if the Switch Pro comes out this year that'll be about 4.5 years after the Switch released. Xbox One X released 4 years after and you still criticised that (about the paradigm shift). You can't tell me 0.5 years makes all the difference?

 

[Dcubed]

35 minutes ago, Ronnie said:

A rip off for who? When the DSi came out with modest upgrades I felt zero need to buy one, so didn't, and kept my DS.

If it's a big update, as long as they're not leaving behind existing owners, then cool, enough time has passed. If it's a more modest update, they have a shiny new model to entice people and they definitely don't leave behind existing owners. We'll see soon enough I guess.

I bought a PS4 a year after release, so to hear about a PS4.5 a year and a half later was disappointing, that's all.

DSi was awesome! You totes missed out bud.

Flipnote Studio, Photo Dojo, the Art Style series... even just dicking around with DSi Sound was great fun!  

Edited March 5, 2021 by Dcubed

[Nicktendo]

Why any new Switch screen will be and should be 720p. Good thread. 

 

[Dcubed]

I've been saying since 2017 that any potential Switch Pro that comes out should retain the 720p screen.

In fact, even a potential Switch 2 should retain the 720p resolution screen at 6 inches.  At native resolution, the pixels are basically invisible anyway; anything higher resolution that that is literally a complete waste of hardware resources & battery power, since you literally can't see any benefit!

The only reason to go with a higher resolution screen at this size is if you really wanted to push VR games; otherwise? there's no point.

The current problem is that most major Switch titles that aren't Wii U ports are rarely actually achieving native 720p resolution.  Switch needs more hardware power for its games to actually hit the native 720p resolution; we don't need that hardware budget wasted on a higher resolution screen that'll increase hardware costs (thus also reducing the hardware budget available to the CPU/GPU, memory and everything else), reduce battery life and bring no visible benefit.

 

Also, as an aside, we really don't need a bigger screen.  The current Switch is already huge and barely qualifies as portable as it is; and 6 inches is plenty.  If anything? We need the Switch to shrink! Not get even bigger!

Edited March 6, 2021 by Dcubed

[Josh64]

1 hour ago, Dcubed said:

I've been saying since 2017 that any potential Switch Pro that comes out should retain the 720p screen.

In fact, even a potential Switch 2 should retain the 720p resolution screen at 6 inches.  At native resolution, the pixels are basically invisible anyway; anything higher resolution that that is literally a complete waste of hardware resources & battery power, since you literally can't see any benefit!

The only reason to go with a higher resolution screen at this size is if you really wanted to push VR games; otherwise? there's no point.

The current problem is that most major Switch titles that aren't Wii U ports are rarely actually achieving native 720p resolution.  Switch needs more hardware power for its games to actually hit the native 720p resolution; we don't need that hardware budget wasted on a higher resolution screen that'll increase hardware costs (thus also reducing the hardware budget available to the CPU/GPU, memory and everything else), reduce battery life and bring no visible benefit.

 

Also, as an aside, we really don't need a bigger screen.  The current Switch is already huge and barely qualifies as portable as it is; and 6 inches is plenty.  If anything? We need the Switch to shrink! Not get even bigger!

I agree about the size of the switch, the only pocket I can fit it in is my PJ pockets (which in lockdown do get about 1000% more use than previously but still)

A slightly bigger screen but same form factor, doing away with the bezels, would be best and probably necessary as if it isn't a full generational leap they don't want to start confusing the market with different sized joycons. 

[Dcubed]

That being said? Something like TCL's expandable display might be pretty dang cool to see in a future Switch...

[Kav]

£39.99 very much well worth the price!

 

[Sheikah]

£39.99 very much well worth the price!
 

How are you finding Apex on Switch? I heard about the 30 FPS and sub 720p and thought it wouldn't be viable.

[darksnowman]

2 hours ago, Kav said:

£39.99 very much well worth the price!

How's it compare to the Pro Controller? I forked out for a Pro soon after the joystick on my left joycon started wandering, but I'm always curious what else is out there. I've an 8bitdo kicking around too. Realistically the next thing I'd buy is replacement joycons whenever I can be bothered to put in the research time otherwise I'll likely never undock the Switch again.  

And what about those back buttons? If you assigned them as the shoot button, would it at all be like the z-trigger?

[MindFreak]

1 hour ago, Sheikah said:

3 hours ago, Kav said:

£39.99 very much well worth the price!
 

How are you finding Apex on Switch? I heard about the 30 FPS and sub 720p and thought it wouldn't be viable.

I read on Reddit that you should turn off cross-play so that you don't play at a disadvantage and once that's in place, it should actually be an enjoyable game. I haven't got the time or energy to play much these days and I haven't got the free space on Switch for the game, so I haven't tried it. 

[Kav]

2 hours ago, Sheikah said:

3 hours ago, Kav said:

£39.99 very much well worth the price!
 

How are you finding Apex on Switch? I heard about the 30 FPS and sub 720p and thought it wouldn't be viable.

I’ve not tried it yet I must admit, still putting my time into the PS4 version.

I only downloaded it on Switch for when the TV is in use and me & the step-son can game together (the Xbox is in his room).

I went into the Firing Range (practice area)  to set up the back-buttons on the controller and it felt as though there was input lag, I tried in handheld mode & with the normal Pro Controller too and it felt the same, but I’m not sure if that was due to my wifi signal being dump at the time.

[Ronnie]

Switch after 4 years outsells (dollar wise) DS after seven years in the US, a console that sold 150 million lifetime.

WTF. 

[Ashley]

Using dollar comparisons is a bit weird given even accounting for inflation the DS was 2/3rds the cost of the switch at launch so you can't make an exact comparison. 

Obviously the switch is doing well, just an odd metric to use given how malleable it is. 

[bob]

Yeah but (4*3)/2 = 6 which is still less than 7, so take that DS!

[Ronnie]

16 hours ago, Ashley said:

Using dollar comparisons is a bit weird given even accounting for inflation the DS was 2/3rds the cost of the switch at launch so you can't make an exact comparison. 

Obviously the switch is doing well, just an odd metric to use given how malleable it is. 

Was never meant to be an exact comparison given the different price points of the two machines. Just thought it was a pretty interesting stat.

[Rummy]

23 hours ago, Ashley said:

Using dollar comparisons is a bit weird given even accounting for inflation the DS was 2/3rds the cost of the switch at launch so you can't make an exact comparison. 

Obviously the switch is doing well, just an odd metric to use given how malleable it is. 

Didn't we also just have a bit of a very minor sneeze of a recession a wee before that too which has drastically driven up prices globally since?

Actually - even without the above and I'm too lazy right now to do it, I'd kinda be curious to see how a pure dollar comparison of all the consoles over time would compare as I'd expect each successor to outweigh it predecessor but it would be interesting if there were any weirdly notable dips...

[Ashley]

14 hours ago, Rummy said:

Didn't we also just have a bit of a very minor sneeze of a recession a wee before that too which has drastically driven up prices globally since?

Actually - even without the above and I'm too lazy right now to do it, I'd kinda be curious to see how a pure dollar comparison of all the consoles over time would compare as I'd expect each successor to outweigh it predecessor but it would be interesting if there were any weirdly notable dips...

The Wii U is, in many ways, a weirdly notable dip.

Plus I imagine the GameCube too but that's partially because it was cheap as chips. 

[Ronnie]

On 14/03/2021 at 6:56 AM, Rummy said:

I'd kinda be curious to see how a pure dollar comparison of all the consoles over time would compare as I'd expect each successor to outweigh it predecessor

Every Nintendo console has sold fewer units than its predecessor, with the exception of the Wii and Switch, so I don't think that's likely, especially if adjusted for inflation.

[Cube]

Decided to get back into Ring Fit Adventure. It turns out my Switch hasn't been turned on since before I got my current internet/router at the start of October.

 

I think it's odd how no other game has used the Ring Con in any way.

[WackerJr]

On 15/03/2021 at 9:48 PM, Cube said:

I think it's odd how no other game has used the Ring Con in any way.

I’d usually expect EA or someone similar to shoehorn it into an exercise game.

I’m not particularly surprised as yet. It’s still a very niche item & while it’s sold well (played better & sold heaps better than most anticipated) you’re limited to just those million or so worldwide that could play your game.  Combined with the pandemic hitting mere months after Ring Fit was released making it harder for developers.

Yes I’d be surprised if Nintendo weren’t developing a follow-up, but it’s still a big risk in difficult conditions for 3rd parties.

[Kav]

My SR button on the JoyCon has stopped working... no idea why as I don’t remove them from the Switch and it’s not been banged or anything.

I must say, with this and the drift I’ve got to say it’s the worst built Nintendo system I’ve ever owned.