engines process things in different ways: you can have a fixed process that is consistent across devices but is much harder to optimize, and an "unlimited" process where you can just have things "work" by bruteforcing them, but your game's logic will effectively run better on a powerful pc instead than on a weaker one
this leads to fallout 76 situations, where if your pc is poweful enough you can effectively shoot faster than the other players.
it's a crutch, it's lazy and bethesda does it all the time i'm learning gamedev and i'm also doing it the bethesda way because optimization is a fricking nightmare to learn
i had to make an example of a dev that does things that way
i know that jap devs do it as well, but i'm not going to name examples i don't personally know about
but why is so common for japanese devs to do it, it is because most of them planned their games for primarily for the switch or is like a school of thought/ way of working that got pretty standardized in japanese dev culture (kinda like the ways in which american and japanese comics are so different)
I mean I'm just theorizing here, but habit. Not a technical reason, not a technical constraint, just.. habit. If a game can reach a mostly stable 30 FPS then expecting it to ever go past that is not a problem, so frick it, just make the numbers link up and stay that way. Maybe it is a lazy method of trying to not have to deal with complications and fluctuations of performance, but it seems to mostly be on the tier of "we taught people to do this in the 90's and it stuck".
Googled: Because rendering faster than the rate at which the physics are simulated would mean rendering extra frames that don't add any new information.
There's probably a more layman term for it or deeper reason but w/e
In the simplest of terms: it allows devs to squeeze more performance out of the hardware and why it's more prevalent on older games the devs never anticipated having to port to more powerful hardware.
>the devs never anticipated having to port to more powerful hardware
That's just the story of Japanese game development in general. >DURRRR LET'S THROW AWAY DOZENS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS WORTH OF SOURCE ASSETS JUST TO SAVE A COUPLE DOZEN THOUSAND DOLLARS ON EXTRA BACKUP DRIVES
If you only ever expect your games to be played on one piece of hardware and never ported to something stronger, there's no reason not to. Basically they're still in the 90s mindset of make a game once for one system and move on, never expecting a port.
they have a much higher proportion of console to PC releases
most of the time their releases aren't as graphically taxing (western releases)
consoles have pretty consistent internal framerate shenanigans
basically, they generally just don't have to worry about it as much.
most fighting games do it for consistency. 60 fps, an action takes a certain amount of frames every time, you always get your clues at the same time and can react accordingly because a lot of things are frame-perfect.
If Nintendo mandated them to support specific frame rates then they would do it absolutely. You saw this on the Wii where everything was widescreen except virtual console.
A ton of games don't actually, even on Switch. We know this thanks to emulators. I played Metroid Dread at 240 FPS, without mods or anything, and surprisingly the only thing that broke was map scrolling (your cursor moved way faster than intended, that's all).
With PCs becoming more and more popular, with consoles introducing backwards compatibility with improvements, with this cross-gen period lasting for four fricking years... almost no one ties logic to framerate anymore.
Googled: Because rendering faster than the rate at which the physics are simulated would mean rendering extra frames that don't add any new information.
There's probably a more layman term for it or deeper reason but w/e
I mean I'm just theorizing here, but habit. Not a technical reason, not a technical constraint, just.. habit. If a game can reach a mostly stable 30 FPS then expecting it to ever go past that is not a problem, so frick it, just make the numbers link up and stay that way. Maybe it is a lazy method of trying to not have to deal with complications and fluctuations of performance, but it seems to mostly be on the tier of "we taught people to do this in the 90's and it stuck".
Physics being locked to certain tickrate is not uncommon even in western games. Except in western games they use interpolation for physics when rendering graphics, so essentially rendered frames are lagging behind actual physics.
Example is Source Engine. Pretty ironic, since physics were the main focus of the engine and Source is known for twitchy games.
Also it's recommended way of doing physics in Unity
They do it ehenever they don't change the game format tho. Wii ran Gamecube out of the box, the Wii U ran the Wii. and their portables all played the previous generation before them.
The switch does nothing because it has a completely differente storage format for the games.
Yes, you fricking idiot., besides the ones mentioned you can even run GC games on the Wii U natively through software with some tools. The only reason you cant just pop in a GC minidisc is because the drive wasnt physically designed to read the tiny format.
The only reason is nintendo wants to frick you in the ass with artificial scarcity and reselling/renting to you the same games every 5-10 years. Such is the console life where gays are so used to getting screwed they can't fathom it being any different.
so they actually recycle everything, that kinda explains why the emulation develops so quickly (other than their consoles being weak and having bad security systems)
The only reason is nintendo wants to frick you in the ass with artificial scarcity and reselling/renting to you the same games every 5-10 years. Such is the console life where gays are so used to getting screwed they can't fathom it being any different.
Here's a picture someone made showing what the switch would look like with an 8 inch screen like we know it had and the colored buttons it seems like it will have. This is probably very close to what it will look like.
He made the bezel proportionally smaller in that image, but you can only make a bezel so small.
Also, the reason they made the screen bigger was probably specifically to make the console larger, not the other way around. A bigger console means you can fit a bigger battery, a bigger GPU, more RAM. There are only positives to it. The only thing lost is portability but the switch is already not portable. You cant fit that thing in your pocket. You'll need a slightly bigger carrying case to carry it, but who cares if it means it's much more powerful and has a bigger screen, better buttons and better analog sticks.
>You cant fit that thing in your pocket.
Fits in my pockets just fine. Granted it's in an unplayable state due to having to take the joycons off to put in a different pocket, but the fact is that it fits, and is only slightly bigger than my smartphone.
But why the hell would you try to awkwardly fit the thing and the joycons in your pockets when you can just use a carrying case?
I have not seen one person give a legitimately good argument for why the next switch should not be bigger. There's no downsides and only upsides. Being bigger makes it more comfortable to play, gives it better battery life, makes it more powerful and gives it a better screen. Why not?
3 months ago
Anonymous
>But why the hell would you try to awkwardly fit the thing and the joycons in your pockets when you can just use a carrying case?
I just told you there's nothing awkward about them fitting in my pockets at all. The only inconvenience is in having to put it together/break it down whenever I want to play/ are done playing. >I have not seen one person give a legitimately good argument for why the next switch should not be bigger.
I am not arguing for the next switch to be bigger or smaller. If I were to have an opinion of it, it'd be to drop the handheld gimmick to focus on just the console's power. For far too long detractors have been shitting on the technical failings of Nintendo games (most often on a graphical level) and at the same time its more staunch defenders hide behind the technical limitations of the Switch as a get out of jail free card for criticism. If it were to compete on a techologically equal playing field, it'd shut both sides up. Then bad Nintendo games can't be excused for being shit and good Nintendo games can't have sony/xbox tards going "well it'd be better on my console of choice!"
3 months ago
Anonymous
If they make it bigger (which they are) and use DLSS (which they are) they can compete much more evenly in power than they did on the switch. 3tflops+DLSS should make it roughly half the PS5. With diminishing returns that's nothing. It also puts Valve in a difficult position for a Steam Deck successor because they'll want a big power advantage over the switch 2 in the same way they had over the switch which will be much more difficult to achieve. They'd probably need more like 15tflops minimum to really wow people and that isn't gonna be available in a handheld for a long time.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>3tflops+DLSS should make it roughly half the PS5
Half a PS5 still makes it weaker than a PS5.
Moreover, Nintendo shouldn't be making a new console that'll only be lagging behind current gen. For a new console it ought to be leaping forward and getting the jump on the technological possibilities of a PS6 and whatever Xbox might come up with.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>nintendo NEEDS to compete
moron.
3 months ago
Anonymous
It really should though, that way morons can't hide behind its lagging hardware for when games are shitty.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>i NEED moar console wars
homosexual.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>Half a PS5 still makes it weaker than a PS5.
Half sounds like a huge difference but in computing that's fricking nothing. That's running the game in 1440p instead of 4k or 1080p instead of 1440p. It's such a minor difference no one will care. For comparison the switch 1 is almost 5x weaker than the PS4, so running a 1080p PS4 game requires it to drop to like 540p plus other compromises.
3 months ago
Anonymous
it is still handheld device and Nintendo will be lucky if it reach iPhone 15 pro level which basically slightly above ps4.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>it is still handheld device and Nintendo will be lucky if it reach iPhone 15 pro level which basically slightly above ps4.
It can dock to the wall and appears to be much bigger than the Iphone 15 so no moron it will not be iphone 15 level. The iphone also doesn't have DLSS support.
3 months ago
Anonymous
you cannot change cooling limitation for handheld device even if it can dock, which is main problem for chip perf besides power consumption.
3 months ago
Anonymous
Bigger console means the heat is more spread out and they can fit a bigger fan
This is not rocket science. The Iphone 15 will likely be on a node that gives 20-30% better performance than the switch 2. This is absolutely not going to account for the switch 2 being several times larger, not even close.
3 months ago
Anonymous
The limitation will be the die of the soc itself not the entire console
3 months ago
Anonymous
>The limitation will be the die of the soc itself not the entire console
The SoC is also going to be bigger you fricking moron. How do people get this stupid? You think the Orin isn't bigger than the X1?
3 months ago
Anonymous
Doubt it. Nintendo makes money sloppy seconds these days to maximize profits. There is a limit to the die size
3 months ago
Anonymous
>Nintendo makes money sloppy seconds
homie withered technology has been a core Nintendo principle for half a century at least.
3 months ago
Anonymous
Not for the Gay Cube and surprisingly the Wii U. The Wii U’s streaming tech was cutting edge for the time. It was a really bad gamble though
3 months ago
Anonymous
limit to the die size if you’re planning on making the chip efficient*
3 months ago
Anonymous
Iphone 15 can't even match a PS4.
3 months ago
Anonymous
Good thing the switch 2 is like 4x bigger than the iphone 15 and can dock to the wall or this might be a problem for Nintendo!
3 months ago
Anonymous
>iPhone 15 pro level which basically slightly above ps4.
What a fricking idiot you are.
$1300 iPhone 15 Pro runs Death Stranding at lower than PS4 settings at 400p 20FPS
At least try looking it up instead of just regurgitating marketing drivel
3 months ago
Anonymous
Different TDP, wattage and RAM availability. The processor itself is stronger. It’s just not designed for Vidya
3 months ago
Anonymous
They've tried normal stronger consoles and it doesn't work.
You cant make the Bezel too small because the joy con rails are hidden in there. Otherwise you'd have to have the rails awkwardly sticking off the side.
I'm weirdly very specifically excited about signs pointing towards colored face buttons coming back. This monochrome shit that's become so dominant just reeks of insecurity. I hope we also see standard Pro Controller variants as well, and with actually differently-colored shells instead of just the standard shell with some printed shit and differently-colored grips/back.
Nintendo has really been bringing the soul back lately. Kirby and the forgotten land, Metroid Dread and Pikmin 4 are all fantastic games with great atmosphere and they're bringing back the Mario RPG games and in doing so killing the Mario mandate - which we also saw in Mario Wonder. It makes me very hopeful for the next console's launch games.
and nothing you can really play or watch on a phone would be actually worth the price for that spec, short of fricking Fortnite that probably can't even 120fps with Lumen off.
Nintendo's handhelds have been incredibly successful, averaging about 100m sales. The 3DS was the only outlier because they fricked literally everything up, but even that sold 75m. Nintendo's handhelds are untouchable, largely because they dominate the Asian market.
Would unironically be OVER if they release the base model without an oled screen, just to release another hardware refresh in 5 years time with an oled
Nintendo has always used features like that to resell the console to people. My guess
Year 1: console
Year 2: console+more storage space
Year 3: lite version, original gets bigger battery
Year 5: pro version with OLED screen, paired with the next Zelda game
As to what a pro version would entail, nothing crazy, just enough to take key games up to 60fps.
Yeah, it would be really fricking weird if whatever comes next is back at having an IPS
Gonna be shitty if they don't give us an oled for the first model. but nobody would care for that detail and would just consume since it's the hot new thing
It's just too expensive. Steam could do it with the Deck because its hardware is pretty old at this point. The Switch 2 is using more up to date parts so if they're shoving an OLED screen in there it's just gonna be too expensive.
The Lite version will launch before Pokemon Gen 10, which will be November 2025. The cheaper, sturdier kiddie versions are always available for a new Pokemon generation. >DS Lite March - June 2006 >Pokemon Diamond and Pearl September 2006 - July 2007 >2DS October 12th 2013 >Pokemon XY October 12th 2013 >Switch Lite September 2019 >Pokemon Sword and Shield November 2019
I don't think they can get a lite version early on. From what we've seen it seems like the switch 2 is using a really advanced node for the GPU. A financially viable die shrink for that wont be available for a few years. So I think they'll start off with an expanded storage model instead.
I'm now wondering why Satya never fired Phil after finding out the names of the products xbox was shitting out.
Or maybe Xbox was used for laundering instead of profit?
I've never even seen an OLED screen irl so I don't care much, but as a CRTgay and judging by internet pictures I'm not surprised some people do, nice visuals do wonders for the overall experience. I don't think it's big enough to call it a dealbreaker though.
Doesn't matter at all, the point of not providing oled on the base design is costs saving, that way they can ease the entry barrier into their ecosystem to sell you 70 bucks games easily.
OLED is a way better in dark scenes, it's not even remotely close. But in bright scenes, IPS is not that bad.
Would it be a deal breaker? Probably yes, because we all know an OLED model is coming at some point, so why buy the shitty model when the good model is a year or two away. I wouldn't have bought my Steam Deck if I knew they were about to release an OLED version.
I hope it's not OLED. I don't trust the tech. My well-taken-care-of vita 1000 (got right at launch brand new) has some spots on its screen.
[...]
I believe he's referring to xenoblade.
The technology is way better now compared to a decade ago. As long as you don't play the same game with the same UI for 3000 hours, you won't see any burn in.
The thing about the screen is that an 8 inch 1080p LCD screen is still going to look better than a 7 inch 720p OLED screen. So while I'm sure some people would prefer an OLED screen, the higher resolution will still make it an upgrade.
If you mainly play in handheld mode why would you even buy the launch model? You know for a fact there will be a version with double the battery life in a few years, why not just wait for that? It seems to me the launch model only appeals to people who play mainly in docked -so who cares if the screen is LCD?
Generally, buying the launch model isn't the wisest decision and I'd only do it if there's an extremely good launch line-up of games that can only be played on the Switch 2.
Xenoblade games at 1080p would like quite fine. I hope it's real. 1440p would've been better, but if its free patch, it's better than nothing. 60fps would be nice as well, though I would rather want that for Astral Chain, it's more necessary here.
God damn, Astral Chain at 60fps 1080p would be dope.
What is better yuzu or ryujinx, if I only have a 1660 super?
It varies by game.
Don't ask me why, Switch emulation is moronic.
Generally, I've stuck with Yuzu (the early access version - either donate, or grab a compiled version from PinEApple) as it tended to have certain features earlier (ie Vulkan support etc) but Ryujinx had its benefits as well. As one anon said, it varies from game to game which one is preferable, but for many games both are equally good by now, but there are certain niches for each.
For instance, one that's a bit annoying to me is (unless they fixed it) Ryujinx does NOT natively support Dual Joycons. You have to basically use a 3rd party util like BetterJoy or DS4Windows make sure it makes/sees them as working together in dual mode, and then hide the individual R and L joycons, etc... so that Ryujinx can see the created dual setup. By comparison, Yuzu is flawless here and can detect, bind keys AND motion etc... a Dual Joycon setup just the same way you could a single Joycon or a Switch Pro controller. Now I think Ryujinx works just fine and exactly the same as Yuzu for single JoyCons or a Switch Pro controller (ie able to bind keys/buttons and supports motion direct via SDL2 no need for cemuhook etc, has built in driver support/needs no external drivers/config etc) but the dual joycon issue means its a lot easier for me to play some titles on Yuzu, like any of the fitness games - Ring Fit Adventure, Fitness Boxing Fist of the North Star (or Fitness Boxing 2), Fitness Circuit etc.
Mentioning Fitness Boxing Fist of the North Star reminds me - Yuzu also has support for "layeredfs" style mods and I've not looked into if its the same on Ryujinx. For instance, I made an "undub" mod for Fitness Boxing FotNS because they were dumb enough to not include Japanese audio in the western version, but in addition to Englis have just French and Italian for some reasons.
To give an idea of switch 2 performance, it has 12sm compared to 8sm on the steam deck. So just from that you expect it to be 1.5x stronger, which would make it roughly 2.6tflops even if it's not on a newer process, which it probably is. The idea it's gonna be iphone 15 level is silly. Of course I'm talking about docked mode, it would be more comparable to the Steam Deck in handheld because they will probably opt to use less power for battery life.
I expect it to be cut down to achieve a battery life longer than 15 minutes >The idea it's gonna be iphone 15 level is silly
Iphone 15 can't match a PS4 for games.
I think you cant read because I was talking about the docked mode. The steam deck maxes out at 15 watts. The switch already goes up to like 12 in docked, the significantly bigger switch 2 should be about to get at least ~18 watts so power isn't an issue there.
>But they also need to factor in handheld mode and the power ratio is determined by handheld power not docked.
They're just going to have a bigger gap between handheld and docked here. The switch has very little difference. Docked only runs about 2x handheld on the switch, just make it 3x here. There, there's your battery life moron.
In a world where third parties exist that's a recipe for disaster, Nintendo set out that you are supposed to make a Switch game for handheld mode and then build a docked version from that, but third parties completely ignored that, they build for docked and then try and get it to run in handheld mode giving games running at hilariously low resolutions in handheld, Nintendo will definitely want to avoid that with the Switch 2 considering what they know.
3 months ago
Anonymous
Why would Nintendo give a shit how third party games run in handheld mode? That's just a silly ass argument. The customer isn't gonna blame Nintendo if he's unsatisfied with the quality of handheld mode in Baldur's Gate 3 or Halo Infinite or whatever. Nintendo forcing developers to develop for handheld first would just convince a lot of third parties to skip their console all together. There's no financial benefit for them to do this.
3 months ago
Anonymous
Why would Capcom care about modders making nude mods for their games, because it makes them look bad. >There's no financial benefit for them to do this
Nintendo titles make up an overwhelming amount of software profits for the hardware, there's no real incentive to cater to third parties either.
3 months ago
Anonymous
We know objectively that Nintendo doesn't think like this because they've allowed tons of third party games on the switch that run like ass in handheld, even some of their own games like Xenoblade 2 ran pretty badly. Bowser's fury runs at half the framerate in handheld mode, and that's a 3D Mario game. They don't fricking care about handheld parity.
And how would they even enforce this? Would Nintendo require third parties to let them test all their games prior to release to arbitrarily decide if handheld is good enough. And then what if it isn't? Do they then require the developer to report the entire game?
3 months ago
Anonymous
Switch was the first iteration of this concept and it was legitimately less powerful than it needed to be, Nintendo let devs get away with stuff, but this is way different, you're talking about a 3x difference, devs making games aiming for 720 in docked mode are going to make absolute abominations in handheld mode and Nintendo will have an incentive to stop it, hell the Switch platform itself has proven to be such a runaway success that Nintendo could just outright deny third parties access to the hardware and it would still be an enormous success.
3 months ago
Anonymous
Not a single company is going to release a 720p docked switch 2 game. That makes no sense, when the console has DLSS. That means the internal resolution is like 240p, which isn't even a viable resolution for DLSS, so in other words the only way a 720p switch 2 game happens is if the developer is trolling. If devs want to put no effort whatsoever into porting they can just run the game at 540p and aggressively DLSS that up to 1080p.
3 months ago
Anonymous
DLSS upscaling isn't free, and it can be quite costly, companies make 480p docked Switch titles, they will do 720p docked Switch 2 titles, even below that.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>DLSS upscaling isn't free, and it can be quite costly, companies make 480p docked Switch titles, they will do 720p docked Switch 2 titles, even below that.
Who in the frick made a 480p docked switch game? Even the witcher 3 is 720p dynamic, only dropping as low as 540p. You enjoy just making shit up?
3 months ago
Anonymous
Xenoblade 3 is before it's upscaled.
3 months ago
Anonymous
Simple, give them a devkit that only has specs as far as handheld mode.
>I expect it to be cut down to achieve a battery life longer than 15 minutes
It's already cut down. It's a custom SoC. If they wanted a smaller SoC for better battery life, they would've made this choice when they were designing it
It will be further customized, don't worry you're not getting a 4tflop Switch with RT capabilities.
Arguably Switch 2 doesn't need to be more powerful than an Xbox One on paper at this point.
We know what we're getting dumbfrick. I already explained this in this thread. We know factually that it's 12sm. That makes it 1.5x stronger than the steam deck at a minimum, at least in docked mode. What part are you not getting here, is it just too hard for you to compare the number 8 to the number 12? Failed elementary math?
You don't know how many SMS are switched off, or the clock speeds, or what other customizations are happening, hell you post your own iteration backed by leaks and someone else posts their own backed by those same leaks, your claims are hollow at best, and at worst expect the battery life to be measured in minutes at max.
3 months ago
Anonymous
For what fricking purpose would they include SMs in the chip and then switch them off? Are you moronic? It would literally be spending more money for no benefit. Actually, it would be spending money to make the product worse because the extra SMs are taking up space in the console they could use for some other part.
3 months ago
Anonymous
Because they buy the chips with broken SMs and switch them off to save money.
3 months ago
Anonymous
The cost savings there would be massively overcome by paying for more SMs they aren't using while getting an inferior product. You are delusional man.
3 months ago
Anonymous
The cost savings come from buying the broken chips that would otherwise go unused, this is pretty standard fair.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>The cost savings come from buying the broken chips that would otherwise go unused, this is pretty standard fair.
Yes, they can save a little money by buying some broken chips
BUT HOW MUCH FRICKING MONEY DO YOU THINK THEY LOSE PAYING FOR TWICE THE SMs THAN THEY NEED?
ARE YOU FRICKING moronic MAN? DOES YOUR BRAIN EVEN WORK?
3 months ago
Anonymous
They are paying the lower cost for the chip that has that many useable SMs, and they would be losing a lot from having all of those faulty custom chips that have no use in the future.
Reuters literally reported today it's a custom designed chip for them. I guess you know better than reuters low IQ dipshit.
>reuters reported >custom
Yeah it's customized based on the based Tegra Orin, they cut it down to Nintendo's own spec instead of a pre set spec, they aren't making a completely new custom chip designed for Nintendo and only for Nintendo.
>Can't read >Makes up shit I didn't say
moron.
>i never said it's a custom design
3 months ago
Anonymous
Hey moron. Designing a console takes years. Nvidia did not design the Orin and then shop that out to Nintendo. They designed the Orin so that it would be usable by Nintendo. They were the biggest customer that chip was made for, the primary purpose of the chip.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>which is why it was designed for ai and self driving first
Aha.
3 months ago
Anonymous
The switch 2 will sell more Orin chips than all the other uses of it combined. They are the biggest customer of the Orin, they get the biggest say. You are stupid, get over it.
3 months ago
Anonymous
You're right that they are the biggest customer, but they also pay less per chip than cars which pay a premium for Tegra chips. >they get the biggest say
Which is why even though the Orin entered developed well into the Switch's life it was designed around cars and AI, these things don't match up whatsoever.
3 months ago
Anonymous
Cars - mobile
AI - DLSS
The Orin is exactly what Nintendo needed for their console, and it appears to be exactly the level of power and size to fit well in their next console with its larger 8 inch screen. I find it very hard to believe this worked out coincidentally for Nintendo.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>worked out perfectly for nintendo >cut down chip without the ai cores needed >people thinking it will have rt even though the amount of rt cores makes rt a complete waste of time per game and ai cores are used to denoise rt which it won't have enough to both upscale and do rt
3 months ago
Anonymous
>cut down chip
Orin is frickhuge. 12SM is bigger than anyone ever expected. Before Nvidia hack 8SM was a pipedream with 6SM being reasonable guess. >without the ai cores needed
If you're talking about DLA, it's an automotive part that was never used in any Nvidia graphics card. It has no use in gaming or DLSS. Stop parroting what uniformed youtubers spew. >people thinking it will have rt even though the amount of rt cores makes rt a complete waste of time per game
Mobile phone games have ray-tracing. Having 12 RT cores is better than anything PS5 or XSX have since it doesn't use up GPU resources.
3 months ago
Anonymous
AI cores were adapted to be used in self-driving cars not the other way around thoughever
3 months ago
Anonymous
DLSS does use those ai cores thoughever. Those cores are basically ASICS for very specific calculations
3 months ago
Anonymous
Mobile phones have RT but lets get real someone already posted RE8 running on Iphone Max worse than a PS4, you're not getting shit done with their mediocre RT capabilities... outside of a tech demo
3 months ago
Anonymous
>You don't know how many SMS are switched off
None. It's a custom design. They paid Nvidia to design a 12SM SoC to match the performance they wanted. Turning part of it off would be a waste of money.
Manufacturing those SoCs instead of a smaller ones would result in worse yields and waste of money
3 months ago
Anonymous
>it's completely custom
3 months ago
Anonymous
Reuters literally reported today it's a custom designed chip for them. I guess you know better than reuters low IQ dipshit.
No, if it were further "customized" it would have a different designation.
T239 is Switch 2 SoC and it has 12 SMs (1536 shader cores), 48 Tensor cores and 12 RT cores.
I expect up to 3TF in docked mode
Even the most powerful Orin has only 8 RT cores, Switch 2 one will be a cut down version of that, don't know where you're getting those extra RT cores from.
3 months ago
Anonymous
From the Nvidia hack. It has full specs of the T239.
It's based on Orin, but it's a custom design. It also has a better CPU and File Decompression Engine among other things. RT in T239 cores are also a newer generation than Orin ones, IIRC
I think the next Zelda comes in year 3 if switch 2, because I highly doubt totk took them 6 years with the full team, they probably were working on the next one alongside it.
So I think year 1 is gonna be open world Mario+ MP4.
Year 2: Smash+ Xenoblade/ Mario Kart
Year 3: Zelda + Xenoblade/Mario Kart + Animal crossing
I think year 4 or 5 for Zelda. My idea is something like this
Year 1: 3D Mario, Metroid Prime
Year 2: OoT remake, Mario Kart, Pokemon slop
Year 3: Smash, more Pokemon slop
Year 4: Animal Crossing+Zelda?
But with this said, the switch 2 will start in the holiday unlike switch 1, so year 1 is at the start and year 4 is 3 years in. So not as long to wait as it feels.
I think it can come before the holidays actually, I'm thinking:
March reveal
June showcase with games reveal
September release to build up the playerbase with a big release (Mario), in time to release another big holiday game (Metroid Prime 4).
If the switch 2 launches holiday 2024 then a holiday 2025 release means they can spend all 2025 advertising Mario Kart before launch like they did for Smash in 2018. Sounds like a good idea to me.
Mario Kart in year 2 makes sense since 8 just finished wrapping up DLC, but if I were Nintendo I'd want that as close to launch as possible.
If the switch 2 launches holiday 2024 then a holiday 2025 release means they can spend all 2025 advertising Mario Kart before launch like they did for Smash in 2018. Sounds like a good idea to me.
Nintendo won't have "won" anything unless this is somehow using a proper open OS like Steam (Deck) OS style Linux distro, or if its hardware is more mobile-focused again, more likely an Android distro. A Nintendo skinned Android distro is what the Switch always should have been instead of a proprietary iteration of the 3DS OS, locked down for fear of piracy. If there' backward compatibility with full access to hardware resources, that will be beneficial for modding/CFW and piracy needs with any luck as a vector for injection of exploits. Its sad how much potential was left on the table for Nintendo's new stupidity focusing on piracy even though their best selling platforms like the Wii and DS/DSi/3DS all had easier pirate capability.
I actually hope they fixed joycons drift this time, joycons are slept on because of that, playing games on bed with arms spread out instead of close to each other feels incredible
I hope they come out with another new gimmick instead of just a stronger switch, otherwise they are gonna get mog'd by gaming handhelds that are getting more and more powerful.
>I hope they come out with another new gimmick instead of just a stronger switch, otherwise they are gonna get mog'd by gaming handhelds that are getting more and more powerful.
It's going to be stronger than those gaming handhelds because it's quite a bit bigger than the switch, features DLSS and can dock to the wall which they may technically be able to do but no one does with them. I predict we wont see the steam deck 2 for a long time because it would be a very minor upgrade over this thing.
I just want them to release some fricking info about it already. I'm not planning on buying one I just want to see what weird gimmick they're gonna force and if it's actually gonna have DLSS. FSR 1 on the Switch blows ass.
Not at all happy about DLSS bullshit. Atop it being yet another Nvidia proprietary bullshit feature , normalizing even more unoptimized garbage where things don't run at the native res isn't a good idea. DOn't get me wrong I don't mind there being an option, but in a LOT of cases I imagine that a Switch 2 will depend on it in order to get anything close to parity for 1080p much less 4K output for titles released cross platform. >FSR
Eh, things have come a long way since the early days but I agree 1.0 can definitely suck if done poorly. However even looking at emulators the FSR options can be pretty decent. 2.x and 3.x however are great improvements and I'd rather see the Switch 2 use 3.x or beyond as an open standard, if they're going to depend on upscaling as core feature.
I think both FSR and DLSS are great. FSR 3 is pretty good and I wouldn't even mind seeing used on the Switch 2, but generally it seems like neither are really packaged in games despite supposedly being "super fricking easy" to implement. I just think the tech is neat same with raytracing but I prefer handmade/baked in lighting still. I can see Nintendo working with NVIDIA directly for their first-party games to implement a fine-tuned DLSS mode, while others can simply activate the DLSS/FSR option in whatever game engine they use and call it a day. That would be an improvement over whatever the frick they're doing right now for the Switch because none of them give a frick enough to optimize games for it anyway.
My concern there i that especially if they lean hard on the Nvidia connection, there will be a lot of stuff that requires "special" tuned DLSS modes or features to go right, so smaller devs, lower budget ports and the like can't just rely on "hey, set the engine to the latest DLSS version for a given feature set" and expect it to work. This will be even worse if Nvidia and Nintendo - both companies who love proprietary implementation - decide whatever profile or feature set or API call is some licensed thing and anyone who managed to get their game to have similar DLSS performance without the contract for the secret sauce will be treated from shady (alternate devs) to outright enemies (emulators, CFW, anything pirate-capable etc). Thus simply having the game playable with DLSS and working similar/the same as the secret sauce tuning will be a legal cudgel to suggest impropriety where, even if there's nothing done wrong or reverse engineering or whatever else, may still ruin a lot of projects for fear of the litigious process
"Hey man we actually know the switch 2 is much stronger than you think it is because of the hack on Nvidia" >durrrr but what if they switch off half the custom chip they specifically asked for instead of using a smaller cheaper one
I'm entirely okay with games still playing at 30fps although an increase of resolution (to native level) for BC games would be appreciated.
A boost in performance in certain Switch games I own such as Serious Sam 3, Samurai Maiden, Resident Evil 6, Age of Calamity and EDF4.1 is also welcomed, even if their current state didn't stop me to complete them.
The power available really leaves things up to devs which let's not dance around the bush are the laziest fricking Black folk to ever exist, every game since the PS2 could have been 60fps if devs didn't waste resources, now there's so much power available there really is no excuse for not being at least 1080@60fps while still looking amazing.
It honestly depends of the game and the hardware. I also own a Steam Deck (non-OLED) and played a few heavy titles on it such as Elden Ring, Judgement, Armored Core 6 and EDF5 with a refresh limit set at 30fps in order to save up the battery life as much as possible.
More talking about going forwards, the Switch is basically the last console that will have really hard limitations, from this point onwards developers have no excuses for their games looking and running like ass.
Devs are moving into games with bigger worlds and higher memory requirements. Dedicated AI upscaling cores will be also be a thing with RDNA3 and by extension the next generation of consoles. The gap in graphics will be the same as it is now, but the majority of switch owners don’t mind.
Completely besides the point, if a game isn't 60fps/1080 on Switch 2 it's a problem with the devs, not the hardware, Switch 2 even at the most conservative estimates just won't have the kinds of hard limits that older hardware had, it's got the CPUs to power the games, it's got a modern GPU with AI cores, it has plenty of Ram, it's got faster internal storage, I don't see it struggling on anything but lazy devs or devs going way too hard on visual fidelity.
3 months ago
Anonymous
It’s AI cores have been stripped out and the the GPU has enough RT cores to do the bare minimum effects. Games are made with the biggest market in mind and 3rd party have always sold worse on Nintendo consoles than any other platform. They’ll be made for stronger platforms and then scaled back for the switch. Games are made and then scaled back even for the highest end consumer hardware.
The 6th generation of consoles (PS2, GCN, Xbox) was the last generation with "hard" limitation really. There's not a single modern game that couldn't be done on PS360, with way worse graphics of course.
>Leaked
It's fricking crazy how Nintendo gets more fake leaks than any other studio. Is it just autistic fans or is it journos desperate for a Nintendo story since Nintendo fricking hates them all?
Source or fake and gay. Though, if it's real, hopefully they put some grips on the joycons. The things are tiny and with how flat they are, I get cramps in my fingers and my knuckles also lock up.
Releasing the switch 2 with a new mario kart is a guaranteed way to make its launch sucessful. The only alternative I can see would be a new 3D Mario, but even that wouldn't be as much of a guarantee as a new Mario Kart.
i boughted
>baby games
Humongous if factual.
>60fps
Not likely. Jap devs always tie physics and game logic to framerate.
They've gotten better about that over the years.
in moron terms, can someone explain why they do this?
engines process things in different ways: you can have a fixed process that is consistent across devices but is much harder to optimize, and an "unlimited" process where you can just have things "work" by bruteforcing them, but your game's logic will effectively run better on a powerful pc instead than on a weaker one
this leads to fallout 76 situations, where if your pc is poweful enough you can effectively shoot faster than the other players.
it's a crutch, it's lazy and bethesda does it all the time
i'm learning gamedev and i'm also doing it the bethesda way because optimization is a fricking nightmare to learn
>japs do something moronic
>B-BUT BETHESDA
i had to make an example of a dev that does things that way
i know that jap devs do it as well, but i'm not going to name examples i don't personally know about
name another western dev that still does it
but why is so common for japanese devs to do it, it is because most of them planned their games for primarily for the switch or is like a school of thought/ way of working that got pretty standardized in japanese dev culture (kinda like the ways in which american and japanese comics are so different)
I mean I'm just theorizing here, but habit. Not a technical reason, not a technical constraint, just.. habit. If a game can reach a mostly stable 30 FPS then expecting it to ever go past that is not a problem, so frick it, just make the numbers link up and stay that way. Maybe it is a lazy method of trying to not have to deal with complications and fluctuations of performance, but it seems to mostly be on the tier of "we taught people to do this in the 90's and it stuck".
Googled: Because rendering faster than the rate at which the physics are simulated would mean rendering extra frames that don't add any new information.
There's probably a more layman term for it or deeper reason but w/e
In the simplest of terms: it allows devs to squeeze more performance out of the hardware and why it's more prevalent on older games the devs never anticipated having to port to more powerful hardware.
>the devs never anticipated having to port to more powerful hardware
That's just the story of Japanese game development in general.
>DURRRR LET'S THROW AWAY DOZENS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS WORTH OF SOURCE ASSETS JUST TO SAVE A COUPLE DOZEN THOUSAND DOLLARS ON EXTRA BACKUP DRIVES
If you only ever expect your games to be played on one piece of hardware and never ported to something stronger, there's no reason not to. Basically they're still in the 90s mindset of make a game once for one system and move on, never expecting a port.
they have a much higher proportion of console to PC releases
most of the time their releases aren't as graphically taxing (western releases)
consoles have pretty consistent internal framerate shenanigans
basically, they generally just don't have to worry about it as much.
most fighting games do it for consistency. 60 fps, an action takes a certain amount of frames every time, you always get your clues at the same time and can react accordingly because a lot of things are frame-perfect.
If Nintendo mandated them to support specific frame rates then they would do it absolutely. You saw this on the Wii where everything was widescreen except virtual console.
I didnt know Bethesda was Japanese.
You can already run Xenoblade at 60fps with emulators.
but xenoblade is an rpg, he talking about things like TOTK and bayonetta
Can we please just genocide zoomers? It’s nothing but confidently-stated bullshit like this all day.
>H-HOW DARE YOU INSINUATE JAPAN ISN'T PERFECT
A ton of games don't actually, even on Switch. We know this thanks to emulators. I played Metroid Dread at 240 FPS, without mods or anything, and surprisingly the only thing that broke was map scrolling (your cursor moved way faster than intended, that's all).
With PCs becoming more and more popular, with consoles introducing backwards compatibility with improvements, with this cross-gen period lasting for four fricking years... almost no one ties logic to framerate anymore.
Physics being locked to certain tickrate is not uncommon even in western games. Except in western games they use interpolation for physics when rendering graphics, so essentially rendered frames are lagging behind actual physics.
Example is Source Engine. Pretty ironic, since physics were the main focus of the engine and Source is known for twitchy games.
Also it's recommended way of doing physics in Unity
>no source
Uh huh
>XB1 + 2 + 3 on Handheld mode
???
>jewtendo
>Full backwards compat
>what is gbc
>what is gba
>what is ds
>what is wii
>what is 3ds
The 3DS didn't have full backward compatibility.
They all have 1 generation of backwards compatibility
Was there a DS game that it didn't play?
The Guitar Hero games, because there was no GBA slot. I'm sure there were other games that had slot-2 peripherals as well.
Yeah, but those ones only played in half of the DS systems. the DSi models also don't play those
So?
It wasn't a 3DS problem. It was a Guitar Hero problem.
They do it ehenever they don't change the game format tho. Wii ran Gamecube out of the box, the Wii U ran the Wii. and their portables all played the previous generation before them.
The switch does nothing because it has a completely differente storage format for the games.
Nintendo always does backwards compatibility. They never drop game prices so it means they can keep selling their switch games for 60 dollars.
Yes, you fricking idiot., besides the ones mentioned you can even run GC games on the Wii U natively through software with some tools. The only reason you cant just pop in a GC minidisc is because the drive wasnt physically designed to read the tiny format.
The only reason is nintendo wants to frick you in the ass with artificial scarcity and reselling/renting to you the same games every 5-10 years. Such is the console life where gays are so used to getting screwed they can't fathom it being any different.
so they actually recycle everything, that kinda explains why the emulation develops so quickly (other than their consoles being weak and having bad security systems)
this
/thread
you tried tho, op
with such low specs i dont know what you would do with it unless you are trying to squeeze 30fps out of a sidescrolling mario game
There's no + or "start" button on the fakes.
It's a mock up, dummy
But when will it get Fallout and Halo?
post more switch 2 designs
wouldnt mind if it actually was like that
Here's a picture someone made showing what the switch would look like with an 8 inch screen like we know it had and the colored buttons it seems like it will have. This is probably very close to what it will look like.
>8 inch screen
wouldn't a smaller bezel be more likely than a larger system?
He made the bezel proportionally smaller in that image, but you can only make a bezel so small.
Also, the reason they made the screen bigger was probably specifically to make the console larger, not the other way around. A bigger console means you can fit a bigger battery, a bigger GPU, more RAM. There are only positives to it. The only thing lost is portability but the switch is already not portable. You cant fit that thing in your pocket. You'll need a slightly bigger carrying case to carry it, but who cares if it means it's much more powerful and has a bigger screen, better buttons and better analog sticks.
>You cant fit that thing in your pocket.
Fits in my pockets just fine. Granted it's in an unplayable state due to having to take the joycons off to put in a different pocket, but the fact is that it fits, and is only slightly bigger than my smartphone.
But why the hell would you try to awkwardly fit the thing and the joycons in your pockets when you can just use a carrying case?
I have not seen one person give a legitimately good argument for why the next switch should not be bigger. There's no downsides and only upsides. Being bigger makes it more comfortable to play, gives it better battery life, makes it more powerful and gives it a better screen. Why not?
>But why the hell would you try to awkwardly fit the thing and the joycons in your pockets when you can just use a carrying case?
I just told you there's nothing awkward about them fitting in my pockets at all. The only inconvenience is in having to put it together/break it down whenever I want to play/ are done playing.
>I have not seen one person give a legitimately good argument for why the next switch should not be bigger.
I am not arguing for the next switch to be bigger or smaller. If I were to have an opinion of it, it'd be to drop the handheld gimmick to focus on just the console's power. For far too long detractors have been shitting on the technical failings of Nintendo games (most often on a graphical level) and at the same time its more staunch defenders hide behind the technical limitations of the Switch as a get out of jail free card for criticism. If it were to compete on a techologically equal playing field, it'd shut both sides up. Then bad Nintendo games can't be excused for being shit and good Nintendo games can't have sony/xbox tards going "well it'd be better on my console of choice!"
If they make it bigger (which they are) and use DLSS (which they are) they can compete much more evenly in power than they did on the switch. 3tflops+DLSS should make it roughly half the PS5. With diminishing returns that's nothing. It also puts Valve in a difficult position for a Steam Deck successor because they'll want a big power advantage over the switch 2 in the same way they had over the switch which will be much more difficult to achieve. They'd probably need more like 15tflops minimum to really wow people and that isn't gonna be available in a handheld for a long time.
>3tflops+DLSS should make it roughly half the PS5
Half a PS5 still makes it weaker than a PS5.
Moreover, Nintendo shouldn't be making a new console that'll only be lagging behind current gen. For a new console it ought to be leaping forward and getting the jump on the technological possibilities of a PS6 and whatever Xbox might come up with.
>nintendo NEEDS to compete
moron.
It really should though, that way morons can't hide behind its lagging hardware for when games are shitty.
>i NEED moar console wars
homosexual.
>Half a PS5 still makes it weaker than a PS5.
Half sounds like a huge difference but in computing that's fricking nothing. That's running the game in 1440p instead of 4k or 1080p instead of 1440p. It's such a minor difference no one will care. For comparison the switch 1 is almost 5x weaker than the PS4, so running a 1080p PS4 game requires it to drop to like 540p plus other compromises.
it is still handheld device and Nintendo will be lucky if it reach iPhone 15 pro level which basically slightly above ps4.
>it is still handheld device and Nintendo will be lucky if it reach iPhone 15 pro level which basically slightly above ps4.
It can dock to the wall and appears to be much bigger than the Iphone 15 so no moron it will not be iphone 15 level. The iphone also doesn't have DLSS support.
you cannot change cooling limitation for handheld device even if it can dock, which is main problem for chip perf besides power consumption.
Bigger console means the heat is more spread out and they can fit a bigger fan
This is not rocket science. The Iphone 15 will likely be on a node that gives 20-30% better performance than the switch 2. This is absolutely not going to account for the switch 2 being several times larger, not even close.
The limitation will be the die of the soc itself not the entire console
>The limitation will be the die of the soc itself not the entire console
The SoC is also going to be bigger you fricking moron. How do people get this stupid? You think the Orin isn't bigger than the X1?
Doubt it. Nintendo makes money sloppy seconds these days to maximize profits. There is a limit to the die size
>Nintendo makes money sloppy seconds
homie withered technology has been a core Nintendo principle for half a century at least.
Not for the Gay Cube and surprisingly the Wii U. The Wii U’s streaming tech was cutting edge for the time. It was a really bad gamble though
limit to the die size if you’re planning on making the chip efficient*
Iphone 15 can't even match a PS4.
Good thing the switch 2 is like 4x bigger than the iphone 15 and can dock to the wall or this might be a problem for Nintendo!
>iPhone 15 pro level which basically slightly above ps4.
What a fricking idiot you are.
$1300 iPhone 15 Pro runs Death Stranding at lower than PS4 settings at 400p 20FPS
At least try looking it up instead of just regurgitating marketing drivel
Different TDP, wattage and RAM availability. The processor itself is stronger. It’s just not designed for Vidya
They've tried normal stronger consoles and it doesn't work.
Meh it's portable enough. If you're traveling its more convenient to pack then a whole laptop but I get what you mean.
i think the most moronic thing about the ps one has got to be the low height of the screen relative to the controller
If it has a bevel this large, I will kill myself.
You cant make the Bezel too small because the joy con rails are hidden in there. Otherwise you'd have to have the rails awkwardly sticking off the side.
I love shitty tech mock-ups
Kek the stupid shit indians come up with never ceases to amaze.
Test
I'm weirdly very specifically excited about signs pointing towards colored face buttons coming back. This monochrome shit that's become so dominant just reeks of insecurity. I hope we also see standard Pro Controller variants as well, and with actually differently-colored shells instead of just the standard shell with some printed shit and differently-colored grips/back.
Nintendo has really been bringing the soul back lately. Kirby and the forgotten land, Metroid Dread and Pikmin 4 are all fantastic games with great atmosphere and they're bringing back the Mario RPG games and in doing so killing the Mario mandate - which we also saw in Mario Wonder. It makes me very hopeful for the next console's launch games.
>1080p
>60fps
Meanwhile, we live in an age of mobile phones with 120fps screens at 4k.
and nothing you can really play or watch on a phone would be actually worth the price for that spec, short of fricking Fortnite that probably can't even 120fps with Lumen off.
For about 4 minutes until it burns a hole into the earth
I don't want to pay >$400 for my portable hybrid console. A 4k, 120fps, oled meme panel would spike to price by like 20/30%. No thanks!
you can't even play poker for 10 minutes on one of these without the entire thing becoming 5 degrees short of incandescent.
phone specs are a lie.
T. phone dev.
>for only 1500 dollars and a planned obsolescence of 2 years!
i'm not 13 years old
i game on a real machine, a computer (which lets me emulate all switch games for free too)
>i game on a real machine, a computer
You will never play Bloodborne.
I don't want Bloodborne, I want LittleBigPlanet.
Not even PlayStation has that at this point.
booting in fpps4
>he doesn't know
still not playing soulslop
It might not become a huge success like the Switch 1, but this thing is going to make it look like a joke (like the joke that it is tbh)
Nintendo's handhelds have been incredibly successful, averaging about 100m sales. The 3DS was the only outlier because they fricked literally everything up, but even that sold 75m. Nintendo's handhelds are untouchable, largely because they dominate the Asian market.
Would unironically be OVER if they release the base model without an oled screen, just to release another hardware refresh in 5 years time with an oled
Yeah, it would be really fricking weird if whatever comes next is back at having an IPS
Nintendo has always used features like that to resell the console to people. My guess
Year 1: console
Year 2: console+more storage space
Year 3: lite version, original gets bigger battery
Year 5: pro version with OLED screen, paired with the next Zelda game
As to what a pro version would entail, nothing crazy, just enough to take key games up to 60fps.
Gonna be shitty if they don't give us an oled for the first model. but nobody would care for that detail and would just consume since it's the hot new thing
It's just too expensive. Steam could do it with the Deck because its hardware is pretty old at this point. The Switch 2 is using more up to date parts so if they're shoving an OLED screen in there it's just gonna be too expensive.
>up to date parts
>more up to date parts
As far as we know, they are using Ampere from 2020. Just like Steam Deck uses RDNA2 from 2020.
The Lite version will launch before Pokemon Gen 10, which will be November 2025. The cheaper, sturdier kiddie versions are always available for a new Pokemon generation.
>DS Lite March - June 2006
>Pokemon Diamond and Pearl September 2006 - July 2007
>2DS October 12th 2013
>Pokemon XY October 12th 2013
>Switch Lite September 2019
>Pokemon Sword and Shield November 2019
I don't think they can get a lite version early on. From what we've seen it seems like the switch 2 is using a really advanced node for the GPU. A financially viable die shrink for that wont be available for a few years. So I think they'll start off with an expanded storage model instead.
>Lite console a year after the launch of a new console
nah no way
Is the OLED screen or lack there of really that much of a deal breaker?
Once you go OLED it's really hard to go back unironically
But in the grand scheme of things, not really, it's shitty but it's not a dealbreaker for the majority of people i would assume
I hope it's not OLED. I don't trust the tech. My well-taken-care-of vita 1000 (got right at launch brand new) has some spots on its screen.
I believe he's referring to xenoblade.
Can you MINI led on a screen that small yet? Mini led is just as good but far cheaper and less of the burn in
But it's nintendo and they won't do anything that revolutionary
Oh xenoblade for some reason I was thinking about Xbox lol
if only xbox had a naming scheme that easy
I'm now wondering why Satya never fired Phil after finding out the names of the products xbox was shitting out.
Or maybe Xbox was used for laundering instead of profit?
I've never even seen an OLED screen irl so I don't care much, but as a CRTgay and judging by internet pictures I'm not surprised some people do, nice visuals do wonders for the overall experience. I don't think it's big enough to call it a dealbreaker though.
It's a deal maker, OLED is a troony meme that kills your eyesight
Doesn't matter at all, the point of not providing oled on the base design is costs saving, that way they can ease the entry barrier into their ecosystem to sell you 70 bucks games easily.
OLED is a way better in dark scenes, it's not even remotely close. But in bright scenes, IPS is not that bad.
Would it be a deal breaker? Probably yes, because we all know an OLED model is coming at some point, so why buy the shitty model when the good model is a year or two away. I wouldn't have bought my Steam Deck if I knew they were about to release an OLED version.
The technology is way better now compared to a decade ago. As long as you don't play the same game with the same UI for 3000 hours, you won't see any burn in.
I play docked mostly anyway.
>XB1 + 2 + 3 on Handheld mode
??? I don't get at all what you mean by this
>LEAK: that thing nintendo has already done like three times before + the n3ds treatment
NO WAY???
The thing about the screen is that an 8 inch 1080p LCD screen is still going to look better than a 7 inch 720p OLED screen. So while I'm sure some people would prefer an OLED screen, the higher resolution will still make it an upgrade.
If you mainly play in handheld mode why would you even buy the launch model? You know for a fact there will be a version with double the battery life in a few years, why not just wait for that? It seems to me the launch model only appeals to people who play mainly in docked -so who cares if the screen is LCD?
Generally, buying the launch model isn't the wisest decision and I'd only do it if there's an extremely good launch line-up of games that can only be played on the Switch 2.
Xenoblade games at 1080p would like quite fine. I hope it's real. 1440p would've been better, but if its free patch, it's better than nothing. 60fps would be nice as well, though I would rather want that for Astral Chain, it's more necessary here.
God damn, Astral Chain at 60fps 1080p would be dope.
The xenoblade games all use dynamic scaling and selective scaling. It’s especially obvious with 2
3 uses fsr
I've been able to play Switch games at 4k/60 with mods for years on Yuzu
What is better yuzu or ryujinx, if I only have a 1660 super?
It varies by game.
Don't ask me why, Switch emulation is moronic.
Frick, then should I install both of them and try? Right now I'm going for Mario RPG and Kirby.
Generally, I've stuck with Yuzu (the early access version - either donate, or grab a compiled version from PinEApple) as it tended to have certain features earlier (ie Vulkan support etc) but Ryujinx had its benefits as well. As one anon said, it varies from game to game which one is preferable, but for many games both are equally good by now, but there are certain niches for each.
For instance, one that's a bit annoying to me is (unless they fixed it) Ryujinx does NOT natively support Dual Joycons. You have to basically use a 3rd party util like BetterJoy or DS4Windows make sure it makes/sees them as working together in dual mode, and then hide the individual R and L joycons, etc... so that Ryujinx can see the created dual setup. By comparison, Yuzu is flawless here and can detect, bind keys AND motion etc... a Dual Joycon setup just the same way you could a single Joycon or a Switch Pro controller. Now I think Ryujinx works just fine and exactly the same as Yuzu for single JoyCons or a Switch Pro controller (ie able to bind keys/buttons and supports motion direct via SDL2 no need for cemuhook etc, has built in driver support/needs no external drivers/config etc) but the dual joycon issue means its a lot easier for me to play some titles on Yuzu, like any of the fitness games - Ring Fit Adventure, Fitness Boxing Fist of the North Star (or Fitness Boxing 2), Fitness Circuit etc.
Mentioning Fitness Boxing Fist of the North Star reminds me - Yuzu also has support for "layeredfs" style mods and I've not looked into if its the same on Ryujinx. For instance, I made an "undub" mod for Fitness Boxing FotNS because they were dumb enough to not include Japanese audio in the western version, but in addition to Englis have just French and Italian for some reasons.
60FPS + 1080p brought by dlss technology.
If they don't call it switch 2 I'm gonna be very worried about its success.
Switch 4 U
To give an idea of switch 2 performance, it has 12sm compared to 8sm on the steam deck. So just from that you expect it to be 1.5x stronger, which would make it roughly 2.6tflops even if it's not on a newer process, which it probably is. The idea it's gonna be iphone 15 level is silly. Of course I'm talking about docked mode, it would be more comparable to the Steam Deck in handheld because they will probably opt to use less power for battery life.
they're going to crutch everything out with dlss anyway
enjoy 4k * 60fps fake frames bro
but Steam Deck is 800p. So using DLSS to scale 800p up to 1080p.
I expect it to be cut down to achieve a battery life longer than 15 minutes
>The idea it's gonna be iphone 15 level is silly
Iphone 15 can't match a PS4 for games.
Thunderbolt charging
>blast processing
I think you cant read because I was talking about the docked mode. The steam deck maxes out at 15 watts. The switch already goes up to like 12 in docked, the significantly bigger switch 2 should be about to get at least ~18 watts so power isn't an issue there.
But they also need to factor in handheld mode and the power ratio is determined by handheld power not docked.
>But they also need to factor in handheld mode and the power ratio is determined by handheld power not docked.
They're just going to have a bigger gap between handheld and docked here. The switch has very little difference. Docked only runs about 2x handheld on the switch, just make it 3x here. There, there's your battery life moron.
In a world where third parties exist that's a recipe for disaster, Nintendo set out that you are supposed to make a Switch game for handheld mode and then build a docked version from that, but third parties completely ignored that, they build for docked and then try and get it to run in handheld mode giving games running at hilariously low resolutions in handheld, Nintendo will definitely want to avoid that with the Switch 2 considering what they know.
Why would Nintendo give a shit how third party games run in handheld mode? That's just a silly ass argument. The customer isn't gonna blame Nintendo if he's unsatisfied with the quality of handheld mode in Baldur's Gate 3 or Halo Infinite or whatever. Nintendo forcing developers to develop for handheld first would just convince a lot of third parties to skip their console all together. There's no financial benefit for them to do this.
Why would Capcom care about modders making nude mods for their games, because it makes them look bad.
>There's no financial benefit for them to do this
Nintendo titles make up an overwhelming amount of software profits for the hardware, there's no real incentive to cater to third parties either.
We know objectively that Nintendo doesn't think like this because they've allowed tons of third party games on the switch that run like ass in handheld, even some of their own games like Xenoblade 2 ran pretty badly. Bowser's fury runs at half the framerate in handheld mode, and that's a 3D Mario game. They don't fricking care about handheld parity.
And how would they even enforce this? Would Nintendo require third parties to let them test all their games prior to release to arbitrarily decide if handheld is good enough. And then what if it isn't? Do they then require the developer to report the entire game?
Switch was the first iteration of this concept and it was legitimately less powerful than it needed to be, Nintendo let devs get away with stuff, but this is way different, you're talking about a 3x difference, devs making games aiming for 720 in docked mode are going to make absolute abominations in handheld mode and Nintendo will have an incentive to stop it, hell the Switch platform itself has proven to be such a runaway success that Nintendo could just outright deny third parties access to the hardware and it would still be an enormous success.
Not a single company is going to release a 720p docked switch 2 game. That makes no sense, when the console has DLSS. That means the internal resolution is like 240p, which isn't even a viable resolution for DLSS, so in other words the only way a 720p switch 2 game happens is if the developer is trolling. If devs want to put no effort whatsoever into porting they can just run the game at 540p and aggressively DLSS that up to 1080p.
DLSS upscaling isn't free, and it can be quite costly, companies make 480p docked Switch titles, they will do 720p docked Switch 2 titles, even below that.
>DLSS upscaling isn't free, and it can be quite costly, companies make 480p docked Switch titles, they will do 720p docked Switch 2 titles, even below that.
Who in the frick made a 480p docked switch game? Even the witcher 3 is 720p dynamic, only dropping as low as 540p. You enjoy just making shit up?
Xenoblade 3 is before it's upscaled.
Simple, give them a devkit that only has specs as far as handheld mode.
>I expect it to be cut down to achieve a battery life longer than 15 minutes
It's already cut down. It's a custom SoC. If they wanted a smaller SoC for better battery life, they would've made this choice when they were designing it
It will be further customized, don't worry you're not getting a 4tflop Switch with RT capabilities.
Arguably Switch 2 doesn't need to be more powerful than an Xbox One on paper at this point.
We know what we're getting dumbfrick. I already explained this in this thread. We know factually that it's 12sm. That makes it 1.5x stronger than the steam deck at a minimum, at least in docked mode. What part are you not getting here, is it just too hard for you to compare the number 8 to the number 12? Failed elementary math?
You don't know how many SMS are switched off, or the clock speeds, or what other customizations are happening, hell you post your own iteration backed by leaks and someone else posts their own backed by those same leaks, your claims are hollow at best, and at worst expect the battery life to be measured in minutes at max.
For what fricking purpose would they include SMs in the chip and then switch them off? Are you moronic? It would literally be spending more money for no benefit. Actually, it would be spending money to make the product worse because the extra SMs are taking up space in the console they could use for some other part.
Because they buy the chips with broken SMs and switch them off to save money.
The cost savings there would be massively overcome by paying for more SMs they aren't using while getting an inferior product. You are delusional man.
The cost savings come from buying the broken chips that would otherwise go unused, this is pretty standard fair.
>The cost savings come from buying the broken chips that would otherwise go unused, this is pretty standard fair.
Yes, they can save a little money by buying some broken chips
BUT HOW MUCH FRICKING MONEY DO YOU THINK THEY LOSE PAYING FOR TWICE THE SMs THAN THEY NEED?
ARE YOU FRICKING moronic MAN? DOES YOUR BRAIN EVEN WORK?
They are paying the lower cost for the chip that has that many useable SMs, and they would be losing a lot from having all of those faulty custom chips that have no use in the future.
>reuters reported
>custom
Yeah it's customized based on the based Tegra Orin, they cut it down to Nintendo's own spec instead of a pre set spec, they aren't making a completely new custom chip designed for Nintendo and only for Nintendo.
>i never said it's a custom design
Hey moron. Designing a console takes years. Nvidia did not design the Orin and then shop that out to Nintendo. They designed the Orin so that it would be usable by Nintendo. They were the biggest customer that chip was made for, the primary purpose of the chip.
>which is why it was designed for ai and self driving first
Aha.
The switch 2 will sell more Orin chips than all the other uses of it combined. They are the biggest customer of the Orin, they get the biggest say. You are stupid, get over it.
You're right that they are the biggest customer, but they also pay less per chip than cars which pay a premium for Tegra chips.
>they get the biggest say
Which is why even though the Orin entered developed well into the Switch's life it was designed around cars and AI, these things don't match up whatsoever.
Cars - mobile
AI - DLSS
The Orin is exactly what Nintendo needed for their console, and it appears to be exactly the level of power and size to fit well in their next console with its larger 8 inch screen. I find it very hard to believe this worked out coincidentally for Nintendo.
>worked out perfectly for nintendo
>cut down chip without the ai cores needed
>people thinking it will have rt even though the amount of rt cores makes rt a complete waste of time per game and ai cores are used to denoise rt which it won't have enough to both upscale and do rt
>cut down chip
Orin is frickhuge. 12SM is bigger than anyone ever expected. Before Nvidia hack 8SM was a pipedream with 6SM being reasonable guess.
>without the ai cores needed
If you're talking about DLA, it's an automotive part that was never used in any Nvidia graphics card. It has no use in gaming or DLSS. Stop parroting what uniformed youtubers spew.
>people thinking it will have rt even though the amount of rt cores makes rt a complete waste of time per game
Mobile phone games have ray-tracing. Having 12 RT cores is better than anything PS5 or XSX have since it doesn't use up GPU resources.
AI cores were adapted to be used in self-driving cars not the other way around thoughever
DLSS does use those ai cores thoughever. Those cores are basically ASICS for very specific calculations
Mobile phones have RT but lets get real someone already posted RE8 running on Iphone Max worse than a PS4, you're not getting shit done with their mediocre RT capabilities... outside of a tech demo
>You don't know how many SMS are switched off
None. It's a custom design. They paid Nvidia to design a 12SM SoC to match the performance they wanted. Turning part of it off would be a waste of money.
Manufacturing those SoCs instead of a smaller ones would result in worse yields and waste of money
>it's completely custom
Reuters literally reported today it's a custom designed chip for them. I guess you know better than reuters low IQ dipshit.
>Can't read
>Makes up shit I didn't say
moron.
No, if it were further "customized" it would have a different designation.
T239 is Switch 2 SoC and it has 12 SMs (1536 shader cores), 48 Tensor cores and 12 RT cores.
I expect up to 3TF in docked mode
Even the most powerful Orin has only 8 RT cores, Switch 2 one will be a cut down version of that, don't know where you're getting those extra RT cores from.
From the Nvidia hack. It has full specs of the T239.
It's based on Orin, but it's a custom design. It also has a better CPU and File Decompression Engine among other things. RT in T239 cores are also a newer generation than Orin ones, IIRC
Ganker can't into technology as always
you ignore power consumption which dictates far more than cu count since you can have more compute units clocked lower
the controller patent show the switch 2 being same thickness but taller and wider
I think the next Zelda comes in year 3 if switch 2, because I highly doubt totk took them 6 years with the full team, they probably were working on the next one alongside it.
So I think year 1 is gonna be open world Mario+ MP4.
Year 2: Smash+ Xenoblade/ Mario Kart
Year 3: Zelda + Xenoblade/Mario Kart + Animal crossing
I think year 4 or 5 for Zelda. My idea is something like this
Year 1: 3D Mario, Metroid Prime
Year 2: OoT remake, Mario Kart, Pokemon slop
Year 3: Smash, more Pokemon slop
Year 4: Animal Crossing+Zelda?
But with this said, the switch 2 will start in the holiday unlike switch 1, so year 1 is at the start and year 4 is 3 years in. So not as long to wait as it feels.
I think it can come before the holidays actually, I'm thinking:
March reveal
June showcase with games reveal
September release to build up the playerbase with a big release (Mario), in time to release another big holiday game (Metroid Prime 4).
Mario Kart in year 2 makes sense since 8 just finished wrapping up DLC, but if I were Nintendo I'd want that as close to launch as possible.
If the switch 2 launches holiday 2024 then a holiday 2025 release means they can spend all 2025 advertising Mario Kart before launch like they did for Smash in 2018. Sounds like a good idea to me.
Year 1 / launch games?
Metroid isn't a system seller
Which is why it would come alongside Mario with a few months gap.
September: Mario
December: MP4
Nintendo won't have "won" anything unless this is somehow using a proper open OS like Steam (Deck) OS style Linux distro, or if its hardware is more mobile-focused again, more likely an Android distro. A Nintendo skinned Android distro is what the Switch always should have been instead of a proprietary iteration of the 3DS OS, locked down for fear of piracy. If there' backward compatibility with full access to hardware resources, that will be beneficial for modding/CFW and piracy needs with any luck as a vector for injection of exploits. Its sad how much potential was left on the table for Nintendo's new stupidity focusing on piracy even though their best selling platforms like the Wii and DS/DSi/3DS all had easier pirate capability.
this is literally all i want from the switch 2, so i'm more than happy with this
I actually hope they fixed joycons drift this time, joycons are slept on because of that, playing games on bed with arms spread out instead of close to each other feels incredible
I hope they come out with another new gimmick instead of just a stronger switch, otherwise they are gonna get mog'd by gaming handhelds that are getting more and more powerful.
>I hope they come out with another new gimmick instead of just a stronger switch, otherwise they are gonna get mog'd by gaming handhelds that are getting more and more powerful.
It's going to be stronger than those gaming handhelds because it's quite a bit bigger than the switch, features DLSS and can dock to the wall which they may technically be able to do but no one does with them. I predict we wont see the steam deck 2 for a long time because it would be a very minor upgrade over this thing.
Wake me when they do something similar to trophies/achievements, then I might buy one
>XB1 + 2 + 3
I hate people who abbreviate everything and just expect you to know what they're talking about
So true, anon.
Anyways, what's your favorite AC game?
>60fps @ 1080p
even Chappelle can't make better jokes.
I just want them to release some fricking info about it already. I'm not planning on buying one I just want to see what weird gimmick they're gonna force and if it's actually gonna have DLSS. FSR 1 on the Switch blows ass.
Not at all happy about DLSS bullshit. Atop it being yet another Nvidia proprietary bullshit feature , normalizing even more unoptimized garbage where things don't run at the native res isn't a good idea. DOn't get me wrong I don't mind there being an option, but in a LOT of cases I imagine that a Switch 2 will depend on it in order to get anything close to parity for 1080p much less 4K output for titles released cross platform.
>FSR
Eh, things have come a long way since the early days but I agree 1.0 can definitely suck if done poorly. However even looking at emulators the FSR options can be pretty decent. 2.x and 3.x however are great improvements and I'd rather see the Switch 2 use 3.x or beyond as an open standard, if they're going to depend on upscaling as core feature.
I think both FSR and DLSS are great. FSR 3 is pretty good and I wouldn't even mind seeing used on the Switch 2, but generally it seems like neither are really packaged in games despite supposedly being "super fricking easy" to implement. I just think the tech is neat same with raytracing but I prefer handmade/baked in lighting still. I can see Nintendo working with NVIDIA directly for their first-party games to implement a fine-tuned DLSS mode, while others can simply activate the DLSS/FSR option in whatever game engine they use and call it a day. That would be an improvement over whatever the frick they're doing right now for the Switch because none of them give a frick enough to optimize games for it anyway.
My concern there i that especially if they lean hard on the Nvidia connection, there will be a lot of stuff that requires "special" tuned DLSS modes or features to go right, so smaller devs, lower budget ports and the like can't just rely on "hey, set the engine to the latest DLSS version for a given feature set" and expect it to work. This will be even worse if Nvidia and Nintendo - both companies who love proprietary implementation - decide whatever profile or feature set or API call is some licensed thing and anyone who managed to get their game to have similar DLSS performance without the contract for the secret sauce will be treated from shady (alternate devs) to outright enemies (emulators, CFW, anything pirate-capable etc). Thus simply having the game playable with DLSS and working similar/the same as the secret sauce tuning will be a legal cudgel to suggest impropriety where, even if there's nothing done wrong or reverse engineering or whatever else, may still ruin a lot of projects for fear of the litigious process
watch switch 2 cyberpunk port having fsr3 instead just to get framegen
"Hey man we actually know the switch 2 is much stronger than you think it is because of the hack on Nvidia"
>durrrr but what if they switch off half the custom chip they specifically asked for instead of using a smaller cheaper one
Yeah, and everyone who cites it can't even stick to a single spec for it, you keep flip flopping because you guys really have no idea.
>Engineers wienerfight
Hell yeah go at it
I'm entirely okay with games still playing at 30fps although an increase of resolution (to native level) for BC games would be appreciated.
A boost in performance in certain Switch games I own such as Serious Sam 3, Samurai Maiden, Resident Evil 6, Age of Calamity and EDF4.1 is also welcomed, even if their current state didn't stop me to complete them.
The power available really leaves things up to devs which let's not dance around the bush are the laziest fricking Black folk to ever exist, every game since the PS2 could have been 60fps if devs didn't waste resources, now there's so much power available there really is no excuse for not being at least 1080@60fps while still looking amazing.
It honestly depends of the game and the hardware. I also own a Steam Deck (non-OLED) and played a few heavy titles on it such as Elden Ring, Judgement, Armored Core 6 and EDF5 with a refresh limit set at 30fps in order to save up the battery life as much as possible.
More talking about going forwards, the Switch is basically the last console that will have really hard limitations, from this point onwards developers have no excuses for their games looking and running like ass.
Devs are moving into games with bigger worlds and higher memory requirements. Dedicated AI upscaling cores will be also be a thing with RDNA3 and by extension the next generation of consoles. The gap in graphics will be the same as it is now, but the majority of switch owners don’t mind.
Completely besides the point, if a game isn't 60fps/1080 on Switch 2 it's a problem with the devs, not the hardware, Switch 2 even at the most conservative estimates just won't have the kinds of hard limits that older hardware had, it's got the CPUs to power the games, it's got a modern GPU with AI cores, it has plenty of Ram, it's got faster internal storage, I don't see it struggling on anything but lazy devs or devs going way too hard on visual fidelity.
It’s AI cores have been stripped out and the the GPU has enough RT cores to do the bare minimum effects. Games are made with the biggest market in mind and 3rd party have always sold worse on Nintendo consoles than any other platform. They’ll be made for stronger platforms and then scaled back for the switch. Games are made and then scaled back even for the highest end consumer hardware.
The 6th generation of consoles (PS2, GCN, Xbox) was the last generation with "hard" limitation really. There's not a single modern game that couldn't be done on PS360, with way worse graphics of course.
>Leaked
It's fricking crazy how Nintendo gets more fake leaks than any other studio. Is it just autistic fans or is it journos desperate for a Nintendo story since Nintendo fricking hates them all?
Lmao, why does Ganker spread “””””””””rumors”””””””””””” with literally zero basis in anything, and worse still, make a thread about actual bullshit.
where do you think we are? back before the ps4 was released, there was a rumour that there wouldn't be one just because an anon posted some bs here
Frick’s sake, at least post some believable shit, this isn’t even funny.
Source or fake and gay. Though, if it's real, hopefully they put some grips on the joycons. The things are tiny and with how flat they are, I get cramps in my fingers and my knuckles also lock up.
>the old Pokémon DLC leak was 100% real
Holy frick.
Releasing the switch 2 with a new mario kart is a guaranteed way to make its launch sucessful. The only alternative I can see would be a new 3D Mario, but even that wouldn't be as much of a guarantee as a new Mario Kart.
Big if I can run CFW on it.