-
We have an update on ResetEra's ownership. More info here!
Woah it’s like the general billions of consumers are used to new products coming every year!
Vita wasn't even that high end in comparison to OG Switch relative to when they came out. Vita is quite similar to Switch in the sense that theoretically the SOC is very powerful for its time but it's massively downclocked. PSP is really the outlier from what I know.
Isn't that a very tiny niche of people who would be swayed by Nintendo games, care about resolution(and to a lesser extent framerate) but evidently don't care about the rest of the graphical package?(especially if the OG Switch is still the base)
.
I get the sentiment here, and perhaps you’re right for the non-gaming crowd, but the difference here is that I know when I buy the iPhone 12 that there’ll be a 13 next November. I know at that point in time the 12 will be discounted as well. These patterns don’t exist in gaming consoles.
If Nintendo announced that Switch “2” is releasing Spring 2022, we wouldn’t be having these discussions
I get the sentiment here, and perhaps you’re right for the non-gaming crowd, but the difference here is that I know when I buy the iPhone 12 that there’ll be a 13 next November. I know at that point in time the 12 will be discounted as well. These patterns don’t exist in gaming consoles.
If Nintendo announced that Switch “2” is releasing Spring 2022, we wouldn’t be having these discussions
Last edited:
Dane Switch coming holiday 2022, and not much more than Switch OLED (or even $350 while OLED drops), would be more easily swallowable when most of the games are still playable on the base Switch. easy not to be mad when you can still play the majority of 2023 games on the base switch. even if it's a subpar experience
if that were the case, Nintendo should not bother with dlss
Blanket statements like this are borderline hot takes
That would be assuming that the exclusives come out at lunch of the system, right? In the case that it offers a smoother experience than the current platform but no exclusives at launch, how would that make it differ? Most developers would target the base model, correct?
Last edited:
It's adorable that you think giving the vastly superior model the same launch price as the model released just over a year ago would make people less infuriated, not more.
OP
OP
I think there's also a good chance the DLSS model is going to have a MSRP of $399.99, assuming Nintendo discontinues the Nintendo Switch, and Nintendo drops the price of the OLED model to $299.99, so that Nintendo can keep the $100 price difference between tiers (e.g. the Nintendo Switch Lite is $199.99 whilst the Nintendo Switch is $299.99).
I cannot emphasize how vehemently I disagree with this. Just because you have access to a dev box doesn’t mean fuck all when it comes to knowing how Nintendo plans to market the device - especially when you’d likely have no idea what Nintendo themselves plans to release at or near launch.
You'd know whether or not your game will have to run on the base model in addition to the enhanced one, which tells you quite a lot.
You'd also have a good idea of when it is planned to be released.
that's what I said. it would piss people off, but at least they can play new games for another year before being dropped like a hot potato
Nintendo didn’t just shipped the new devkits to these devs with no explanation. They were at least debriefed. Apparently, they were told that this will be treated as a revision. That, of course, can change in time, but that idea shouldn’t be casually dismissed (though they are restricted in talking about it).
Sure, but considering I’m quoting Nate who said he knows of 3rd party exclusives, I can assume he thinks it doesn’t need to run on the base model. And release date doesn’t tell you anything about how it will be marketed. I’m not saying you’d have no info whatsoever.
But I could tell stories of how Microsoft was presenting the Xbox One to some companies and how none of what they presented came to pass….but that also ended up being true about a lot of what they publicly presented!
And the dev kits don’t appear to be final and things change. There’s literally no reason to assume that what devs have now are the final specs.
I mean as far as I know the soc hasn't even been taped out yet, so they can't be anything more than target kits.
I think the general consensus is that Nintendo doesn't have final specs.
it's probably possible to do a small scale run on preliminary tapes for testing and super early kits
Oh yeah I meant in general knowing whether it can have exclusive games can be telling about how it is marketed, I know in this case we are already working under the assumption that it can.
As for release timing I disagree, if devs see that it's coming 2022 then it's safer to put it further towards the "revision" concept, and conversely if it's planned for like 2025-2026 then it's safe to assume it's more of a successor.
The devs receiving devkits that early from Nintendo are very close partners, they are the ones that could have an impact on hardware decisions, like Capcom did with the RAM.
They would have totally been briefed on whether it is a revision or a successor. The stakes are not the same from a publisher's perspective.
They would have totally been briefed on whether it is a revision or a successor. The stakes are not the same from a publisher's perspective.
I honestly have no idea, and I'm not saying that will be the only or even the primary audience that this device targets, just that it will be a major focus at launch.
It's an area that Nintendo have yet to tap for the Switch though, and hitting untapped or undertapped markets is kind of an important part of their strategy.
Edit: I feel like I'm losing sight of my original point, so I'll reiterate- the 4k model will not be marketed to handheld players like this OLED one has been. Nintendo is not going to say "play all of your favorite Switch games on the go, now hitting their target framerates and at native resolution!" The benefits of handheld play on the new model will not be readily apparent like they are on the OLED model, or like the 4k aspect will be for TV play with that new model.
Last edited:
the usual companies, Capcom, Square Enix, Ubisoft, Bandai Namco, but I'm hoping companies like Saber, Iron Galaxy, and Panic Button were in on it too. they make the "impossible ports" happen, so they damn well know what's best needed
Looking back on things now in retrospect, conversations around the rumored Switch revision in 2018 and knowing that Mariko was in production as early as 2018. Can we draw some similarities to what Nintendo maybe aiming to achieve next year...
gbatemp.net
Some new information that hints about Mariko
https://twitter.com/qlutoo/status/975498335070162944 https://twitter.com/hexkyz/status/975497880747126784...
I still suspect that Xavier or NX with more RAM are being used for current devkits, and the actual soc will not be taped out until next year now.
For those curious as to why, looking at the specs can give a *rough* idea.....
Xavier:
Here's info on the other variants that could be for early DK:
NX(15W):
NX(10):
I can’t find videos about them that shows performance of them though as they aren’t really meant for that, but they are good for emulation from what I see
.
I should stress, I emphasized "rough"
For those curious as to why, looking at the specs can give a *rough* idea.....
Xavier:
- 8-core ARM v8.2 64-bit CPU, 8MB L2 + 4MB L3 frequency up to 2.26GHz
- Volta architecture
- 512 CUDA Cores(8SMs)
- 854–1377 MHz
- FP32: 874GFLOP/s–1410GFLOP/s
- FP16: 1748GFLOP/s–2820GFLOP/s
- 64 Tensor Cores
- 16 GB of LPDDR4X RAM
- 256-bit LPDDR4x @ 2133MHz | 137GB/s
Here's info on the other variants that could be for early DK:
NX(15W):
- 6-core ARM v8.2 64-bit CPU, 8MB L2 + 4MB L3 frequency up to 1.4GHz, or....
- 4-core ARM v8.2 64-bit CPU, 8MB L2 + 4MB L3 frequency up to 1.4GHz, or....
- 2-core ARM v8.2 64-bit CPU, 8MB L2 + 4MB L3 frequency up to 1.9GHz
- Volta architecture
- 384 CUDA Cores(6SMs)
- 1100 MHz
- FP32: 845GFLOP/s
- FP16: 1690GFLOP/s
- 48 Tensor Cores
- 8 GB of LPDDR4X RAM
- 128-bit LPDDR4x @ 1600 MHz | 51.2 GB/s
NX(10):
- 2-core ARM v8.2 64-bit CPU, 8MB L2 + 4MB L3 frequency up to 1.5GHz, or....
- 4-core ARM v8.2 64-bit CPU, 8MB L2 + 4MB L3 frequency up to 1.2GHz
- Volta architecture
- 384 CUDA Cores(6SMs)
- 800 MHz
- FP32: 614GFLOP/s
- FP16: 1229GFLOP/s
- 48 Tensor Cores
- 8 GB of LPDDR4X RAM
- 128-bit LPDDR4x @ 1600 MHz | 51.2 GB/s
I can’t find videos about them that shows performance of them though as they aren’t really meant for that, but they are good for emulation from what I see
.I should stress, I emphasized "rough"
Last edited:
I don't know if the majority of OLED owners would be upset for a new 4K model within a year, but I agree that some could be. On the macro level Nintendo might decide that the tradeoff is warranted, but it'd still benefit their customer relationship to avoid arousing too much discontent. Obviously they cannot disclose their future product roadmap, but IMHO they are giving hints of the interim nature of the OLED model:
- The NOA rep publicly advised people not to buy the model unless you like the OLED display.
- Nintendo itself never once used the word "premium" or its synonyms to describe the model, but simply calls it a "member" of the Switch family.
- The product is awkwardly named "Nintendo Switch (OLED model)" instead of a marketing friendlier name such as "Switch Brite" or anything that might imply a more advanced model.
Ah; misread what you said, but that's at least a little bit more reasonable.
I don't believe for a second that the base Switch model (and the Lite / OLED by extention) will be dropped by the end of 2023 though. Enthusiasts (AKA regulars of this thread) will hate it, but i'm certain most devs (Nintendo especially) will keep their new releases compatible with those models well into 2024 and beyond. EoL (or more accurately as I see it, end of first-party support) for the base Switch may very well be 2026 or 2027, close enough to or reaching a decade life span. You'll see complaints here and around the internet about those older models continuing to hold Nintendo back; hell, that's been the basis of many discussions about a more powerful revision / successor for years; but in the end the existing audience of 80+ Switch owners speaks for itself. This year is still considered the halfway point of the Switch's lifespan by Furukawa after all.
I don't think the marketing focus of a DLSS Model was ever in question here, though. Should be quite obvious to everyone that the main appeal would be the 4K docked resolution, just as the main appeal of the OLED Model is the titular OLED screen. The marketing focus isn't really relevant to the discussion as I understand it though; we're talking about the actual utlity of these devices. Following the common speculation here; they'd both be hybrid models, launching at a premium price point compared to the base model, within a year of each other. I say any frustration about upgrading to the OLED Model this year only to be met by an objectively superior model a year later is entirely justified; and you'd see both hardcore and casual OLED owners alike upset or confused in that scenario.
Even if we play this by marketing, i'd argue the OLED Model is already being pushed as the defacto best of both worlds model in spite of the real lack of enhancements for docked play. The LAN Port isn't being viewed as a huge deal to enthusiasts (who likely already own a USB to LAN adaptor for online play), but it's one of the key enhancements being marketed. They showcase it (alongside an upcoming 2022 release, Splatoon 3) in the trailer, on the official sites in all regions, and on the box itself (the way many will have this model advertised to them, seeing it in-stores). It's supposed to be the big difference for docked play, even if it isn't a new feature at all really.
What do you think about the posibility of a 2022 DLSS-compatible model being a TV-only Switch, then? In that case the OLED Model wouldn't immediately be made redundant around a year after launch, and you'll still get a more powerful Switch in a form factor enthusiasts and PS/Xbox fans (the audience you believe this model will appeal to most, right?) would by and large still be willing to invest in. I've argued before that a TV-only Switch would be positioned as the cheapest option in the Switch family before, but its really the only way for me to rationalise the 4K/DLSS Model releasing in 2022.
The DLSS Model (as people here imagine it, launching next year) would have an OLED display too, no? That's the whole point of this discussion; any enhancement the OLED Model has, even the titular one, becoming immediately redundant in the face of a new hybrid model a year later is a displeasing concept to some.
I'll add that suggesting people sit out and wait for the Real revision to come along is what this forum has been saying since rumors of a preimum model first popped up. Think it's about time to give that one a rest.
Last edited:
Marketing is powerful, that's how the mass market learns about a product. My entire argument is about that mass market not being likely to be "pissed off" at Nintendo offering a 4k DLSS model a year after an OLED model, since the two products are and will be marketed towards different audiences and use cases. Of course the actual utility of the two will overlap greatly, but the discussion here has primarily been about how such a situation would be perceived, mostly when the 4k model is announced.
As for the LAN port, maybe I haven't been paying attention but it's barely been discussed in any of the media released by Nintendo, it seems to be an afterthought more than a marketable feature. It's likely that they couldn't find any use for the USB 3 port in the back so they figured they'd put in an Ethernet port as heavily requested when the next dock iteration came along, regardless of what the Switch tablet launching with that dock was for.
I think it's unlikely that we're getting a TV only Switch that will have new performance profiles, simply because I don't see the market for a TV only device being big enough to justify adding in 2-3+ new development optimization targets. It's certainly a possibility but I don't think there's a high chance of it. It would indeed resonate well with the audience I mentioned but as I said this new mouse 4k model clearly would not ONLY be targeted at them, especially after it launches.
There are games being made for Switch and also with these new dev-kits. Could they be cross-gen? Maybe. But no one I've talked with is under the impression they are working on next-gen hardware. Could it change? Of course. Anything can change & Nintendo can pivot at any given moment; but at this moment: it remains a revision concept.
just to be certain, these dev kits are different from the new Mariko-based kits with 8GB of memory? obviously, they have to be if these are for Dane Switches
These kits have DLSS... so they aren't the ADEV kits. ADEV aren't required for any development. They will likely serve the role of phasing out prior kits due to the extra RAM that could be used to debug & process development more efficiently.
To be clear, is that due to the hardware itself, or by what N briefed them about with respect to the hardware?
Thanks for sharing these nuggets of knowledge. It makes sense that compared to PC and mobile games, console titles are more prone to going out of spec to exploit the quirks of a homogenous hardware. It reminds me of the story of Mel. because that's what real programmers™ do. Let's say if the 4K model comes out and it indeed follows the iterative hardware model, do you think that it'd force the developers to adjust how they develop for Switch to be more like for PC/mobile?
I don't disagree. My point, however, wasn't that sweeping. It is my thesis that a 4K model might be coming in 2022 and Nintendo's conservative messaging around OLED is carefully calibrated to hopefully (they may yet fail to) prevent the "displeasing" situation of misaligned expectations. I did not and do not suggest everyone to wait, but only if you have an inkling of yourself being displeased by an advanced Switch. Personally I'm going to get the OLED model to replace my OG hackable, but have prepared myself to accept an eventual 4K usurper.
Edit: I am aware that I'm in a privileged position not to be upset for a short-term purchase, and do not expect everyone to feel the same.
Last edited:
Ah, thanks at least for replying.
I can’t remember which one but I think either the PS4 Pro or the XB1X devkits were in dev hands by February of the year they released.
I've been thinking about it some more, and I think I've figured out the missing piece to this incredibly complicated puzzle.
The 2022 Switch hardware, assuming it exists as rumored, will be a TV only, stationary device.
This conclusion reconciles a lot of conflicting information, and while I still think it's more likely we get nothing in 2022, if we do get hardware I think it will be this.
The "Switch Pro" being a "Switch Home" better justifies the short replacement period and the existence of the OLED model. A handheld upgrade can exist in this off year to drive sales in anticipation for the third pillar.
The conflicting information about the status of the device, whether dev kits exist or if the chips aren't even taped out yet (which I recognize aren't mutually exclusive but they are odd) could be imagined as follows. Obviously this is fanfiction, but I'm of the opinion that any 2022 hardware is outlandish so I'll speculate accordingly.
Consider the possibility that presently power draw is the specification that Nintendo is woefully dissatisfied with. Rather than abandoning the hardware and the third party ports that DFG has alluded to, it is decided that the power hungry chips, currently not satisfactory for a mobile device, is to be used for a stationary model and pushed for enthusiasts alongside the core gamer title of BOTW2 in fall 2022. The hybrid design upgrades, already planned for the hypothetical failed 2022 hybrid, are instead incorporated into a Switch OLED model meant to push hardware sales while giving the portable "half" of the market its upgrade prior to what would otherwise be seen as abandonment of that sector. Once a die shrink is possible, akin to the 2019 model, a hybrid Switch is sold with the benefits of the OLED model (2021) and the TV-only DLSS model (2022).
This is wild speculation, but I think that the notion of a power hungry design being sold early as a stationary device while being optimized for a hybrid model later is the only way to justify the OLED model and the 2022 DLSS model's coexistence that doesn't fall back on "Nintendo is just insanely greedy, enough so to replace a premium model a year after its launch."
I think we either see that scenario or the hardware comes later. Why make an OLED model if something that undeniably replaces it is coming?
The 2022 Switch hardware, assuming it exists as rumored, will be a TV only, stationary device.
This conclusion reconciles a lot of conflicting information, and while I still think it's more likely we get nothing in 2022, if we do get hardware I think it will be this.
The "Switch Pro" being a "Switch Home" better justifies the short replacement period and the existence of the OLED model. A handheld upgrade can exist in this off year to drive sales in anticipation for the third pillar.
The conflicting information about the status of the device, whether dev kits exist or if the chips aren't even taped out yet (which I recognize aren't mutually exclusive but they are odd) could be imagined as follows. Obviously this is fanfiction, but I'm of the opinion that any 2022 hardware is outlandish so I'll speculate accordingly.
Consider the possibility that presently power draw is the specification that Nintendo is woefully dissatisfied with. Rather than abandoning the hardware and the third party ports that DFG has alluded to, it is decided that the power hungry chips, currently not satisfactory for a mobile device, is to be used for a stationary model and pushed for enthusiasts alongside the core gamer title of BOTW2 in fall 2022. The hybrid design upgrades, already planned for the hypothetical failed 2022 hybrid, are instead incorporated into a Switch OLED model meant to push hardware sales while giving the portable "half" of the market its upgrade prior to what would otherwise be seen as abandonment of that sector. Once a die shrink is possible, akin to the 2019 model, a hybrid Switch is sold with the benefits of the OLED model (2021) and the TV-only DLSS model (2022).
This is wild speculation, but I think that the notion of a power hungry design being sold early as a stationary device while being optimized for a hybrid model later is the only way to justify the OLED model and the 2022 DLSS model's coexistence that doesn't fall back on "Nintendo is just insanely greedy, enough so to replace a premium model a year after its launch."
I think we either see that scenario or the hardware comes later. Why make an OLED model if something that undeniably replaces it is coming?
Last edited:
A disappointment.
Appeal already knocked down tenfold.
personally speaking
the gamers, however, will be satisfied
As skittzo has already argued, the OLED model is marketed as a vast improvement and reinforcement of the portable half of the switch. Why create such a device? Because the TV equivalent to the Switch Lite is the only current path forward for their new technology.
It basically appeals to the group that only plays docked and not the ones who alternate, and even then, the performance should be much higher considering it isn’t constrained by battery life and have better cooling.
But if a TV only model and not at least even more so? tragic.
That said, if the dock has HDMI 2.1, then it makes it a bit shaky of a conclusion.
Last edited:
Interesting theory I guess. Don't think there would be a huge market for this though. It would be still limited to playing the same games as the hybrid Switch just at a higher resolution I guess? Neat, but I don't think they could charge less than $250 for that and I don't know how many people would be interested at that price.
I would have to assume that it is due to the marketing they were briefed on since the system is apparently powerful enough for developers to make exclusives.
However, the “next-gen” hardware in this case would be weird anyway since this system will still be technically around the range of raw power as the last gen’s pros at max.
the Switch TV is the gamer device
BOTW2 around the same time would push it hard imo
and it's our best conclusion imo given the existence of the oled model
It's be a no brainer purchase for me at $199, an easy buy at $249, and a strong consideration at $300
I think it's more plausible there is no 2022 device period.
The OLED Switch is going to be sold out well into 2022 at a ridiculously high profit margin for Nintendo that they won't be able to get from a new model even at $400. They have plenty of software to drive sales targets in 2022.
If there is a decline in sales it would make more sense that it happens in 2023, that's where you want a new model.
They’ll never release a TV Only Switch that is superior to what’s available in the hybrid form factor. Full stop. It actively discourages consumers who value TV play from ever considering trying to the full product.
If it ever exists, it releases either 1. As an analog to Lite; Cheap, and with around the power of the current docked Switch. Or 2. Years after a hybrid device with DLSS hits the market.
Edit: I realize I’m writing very matter-of-fact here, and Nintendo does some unexpected things, so anything’s possible. But I don’t see it. It completely undermines the hybrid form factor’s value as the flagship version
If it ever exists, it releases either 1. As an analog to Lite; Cheap, and with around the power of the current docked Switch. Or 2. Years after a hybrid device with DLSS hits the market.
Edit: I realize I’m writing very matter-of-fact here, and Nintendo does some unexpected things, so anything’s possible. But I don’t see it. It completely undermines the hybrid form factor’s value as the flagship version
Last edited:
Switch 1 isn't going to be dropped completely for a while, but you're definitely not going to be playing every major release on it for that whole period of time. By the time the thing's been on the market for a couple years, the install base should be more than sufficient to sustain exclusive titles, and even Nintendo is probably going to want to get in on some of that action with a few of their higher budget games as a way to encourage upgrades. Combine that with the large number of titles that are never going to be ported to Switch 1, but might come over to Switch 2, and Switch 1-only owners will definitely be missing out on some things, even if they'll still be getting a fair amount of releases.
Also it's worth remembering that raw install base != the number of potential users you can sell to by supporting a platform, especially after a superseding platform is released.
There's been a lot of talk about Nintendo potentially "fragmenting" their platform, but introducing features in a TV-only Switch before the hybrid model would be one of the few things could do that could actually cause that problem to a meaningful degree. The second you need to buy two devices to get the best experience docked and handheld, it undermines the nature of the platform as a handheld/console hybrid. Also frankly, a TV-only version of the Dane Switch is not going to be a very competitive console as a standalone device.
The Switch OLED is the same sort of thing as the Game Boy Pocket, GBA SP, DS Lite, or 3DS XL, where they address a bunch of minor shortcomings but still deliver fundamentally the same experience. It's coming a bit later than usual, but the timeline wouldn't be that far off from the GBA SP in terms of relation to it's successor if that releases in 2022. GBA is also probably one of the Nintendo platforms that lasted the longest after its successor was out.
The idea of a "gamer" device makes no sense conceptually. Switch Lite already showed that people still find the hybrid concept to be more compelling and are more than happy to let the Lite shelfwarm in favour of the base model. The TV version would just be a worse version of that because the marketshare for a TV Switch is significantly smaller than the handheld market. Even taking into account the added power of a new SoC.
In other words, Nintendo would be wasting time and resources to open up and manage three manufacturing lines, each with differing components. I don't care what anyone says, that makes no business sense if the marketshare for the third product is so small.
If anything, the best conclusion is that OLED Switch means no impending hardware releases in 2022. Sales data has shown that the Switch sold well from 2017, 2018, and 2019, with 2020 leading to peak sales during a global pandemic (which makes sense, staying in at home = more opportunity to play games = more demand for gaming). Nintendo might as well ride out the wave until they get a better sense of where the decline in sales momentum starts before planning the next release, which I strongly believe will be a successor with all the bells and whistles that people were hoping for.
I have to agree with the first part of this. A Switch TV will match the docked profile of a hybrid Switch just like how the Switch Lite matches the undocked of a hybrid Switch.
I think the ship has sailed on a Switch TV with the current specs, but I'm not sure I see the thought process behind having a Switch DLSS TV launch 2 years after a Switch DLSS though? I'd imagine the Lite came that much later due to power/battery savings of the more efficient chips and a TV model wouldn't have to factor those in. I'd think launching both at the same time would give Nintendo the ability to offer the stronger hardware at two price points and in particular draw in enthusiasts that'd purchase more software over the life of the device too.
