-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
WSJ: Nintendo to Launch Two New Switch Models. Premium "Enhanced" Model and Cheaper Portable Model.
- Thread starter JehutyRunner
- Start date
- Status
You said you refuse to believe there won't be a cheaper switch, I'm saying the lite one fill that role
With Nintendo hardware I always assume the worst and hope for the best
I hope with the Iwata era over they realign hardware design towards a more balanced approach rather than spending a large.chunk of the budget on one feature.
The Wii U power efficiency focus was such a misguided quest.
I hope with the Iwata era over they realign hardware design towards a more balanced approach rather than spending a large.chunk of the budget on one feature.
The Wii U power efficiency focus was such a misguided quest.
Looking at it from a marketing perspective, IMO at this stage any Switch model below $200 will greatly devalue the perception of the Switch. Even $200 is taking a risk. My experience is that pricing a product too low can actually hurt its sales (and in the case of a console attract the "wrong" type of customers, those that don't buy much of anything).
I still don't understand why they went for that.
I think it was maybe a selling point for like a thousand people vs being actively detrimental to everyone else, lol
Ok, I'll take the hit; I trust Thraktor's tech analysis. Is it possible that Nintendo would consider an AC powered screenless switch in the next few years? It seems counter to the off-TV functionality emphasis over the last few years, but I'm certainly interested in speculation on that topic.
For the budget model, I wonder if it would damage cost savings of removing joy cons if they included a second controller (in addition to the controls on the switch itself that don't remove like joy cons) that is essentially a Joy Con Grip but without detachable cons too, no HD rumble or camera, so the budget model can be docked too and played on TV since controls aren't removable
Still, this all seems to complicate such a simple, effective concept needlessly. I can get removing the camera and HD rumble but removing the joy cons and making switching more complex or not possible just seems unnecessarily complex for a one of a kind concept.
People instantly understand the Switch's main draw. With some of these proposed models that will muddy it.
I hope they keep joy con compatibly across budget and regular models, maybe remove rumble and camera from budget model but still let it work with normal cons if the user has them, and just shrink the screen to like 5 inches or so.
Still, this all seems to complicate such a simple, effective concept needlessly. I can get removing the camera and HD rumble but removing the joy cons and making switching more complex or not possible just seems unnecessarily complex for a one of a kind concept.
People instantly understand the Switch's main draw. With some of these proposed models that will muddy it.
I hope they keep joy con compatibly across budget and regular models, maybe remove rumble and camera from budget model but still let it work with normal cons if the user has them, and just shrink the screen to like 5 inches or so.
If they're willing to put out a mini switch that ditches half the features of the hybrid then why wouldn't they put out a box that ditches half the features and covers other aspects of the market? that's my thoughts and reasoning.
That's our disagreement, you think the cheaper model is for gamers that want a Nintendo Vita to play Xenoblade 2 and Bayonetta 3 on it, I believe the cheaper model is for families, kids and casuals to play Pokemon, Animal Crossing and Mario Party. I don't think Nintendo cares that much anymore about handheld-only gaming, if they did they would have released a 3DS successor three years ago and release a new homeconsole. Truth is smartphones have totally killed handheld consoles and if Nintendo wants people to carry around the Switch instead of a smartphone they need to offer them something more than a handheld-only experience.
I had a theory they were planning something like the Switch from the start and Wii U was basically a step towards that tablet like device , if it had used more power, the current Switch would have been a downgrade, so they came with that power efficiency excuse , also they were afraid to jump from Wii/3DS game development to PS4/ONE like device
yea, it's possible. Iwata said they'll look at other form factors if they feel the need arises. it'd be using the same chipset and everything else, but the build would be cheaper.
now will it be a more powerful machine? who knows. it could just be a permanently docked spec switch, could be a 4K box.
I think this answer is pretty close
but it's less about Wii U -> Switch not being a downgrade and more about ensuring that their software would be easily portable to a mobile architecture, which they seem to have anticipated would be the centerpiece of their future platform.
If they'd designed for a power-hungry system it would have been that much harder to shift development paradigms again when they moved to Switch.
My guess is more that early in development they were just trying to make an in house chip powerful enough to move them into the HD era and also fit in the tablet form factor, but when it became clear that wasn't going to work out, instead of scrapping the chip and starting over, they just cranked it up as much as they could and shifted to the tablet controller. I kinda suspect the expansion port on the bottom of the gamepad is a remnant of an early attempt at a docking port, it seems to be capable of outputting video at least.
If Nvidia is building a stand alone box for the switch platform, I don't see them skipping out on a RTX gpu core, not just Turing, but the full RT and Tensor core setup, Thraktor is a bit light on gpu performance too, it should be ~4tflops, 9x 720p to 4K, this is also the performance level of a GTX 1060. Of course I think this box is likely still a few years off, no reason to rush the form factors, they are already looking to support VR this year, no need to look at 4K gaming yet, in 2022 they can do it with a 7nm or even 5nm chip and a much more powerful ARM architecture, like a successor to A76.
Nvidia didn't get into the console market again for the slim profit margins, they did it to influence developer's tools, and RTX is a big deal for them, so I fully expect them to push out a Switch console capable of 4K in a few years, likely targeting 9 to 10TFLOPs, plenty for Nvidia to compete with Navi, since Navi is still GCN and not a brand new architecture. (thus architecture flop performance won't drastically increase).
I think Nintendo and Nvidia look at a 0.9tflops docked performance, and shoot for about 10x that in a stand alone console, as well as a new switch in 2022 pushing 1080p with ~2.4tflops of performance, allowing this next model to push 720p support at 0.9tflops and even 480p performance at 400gflops. The current Switch can still be upgraded via its clocks to handle these newer games where cpu performance allows, though they wouldn't run very well, it should be able to play these games at reasonable enough performance for those who want it.
Thing that is important to remember about what Nintendo is doing here, is that they can release hardware that doesn't sell, as long as one of the Switch form factors sell, it doesn't matter if a complete failure pops up with even less than wii u numbers, the support for different resolutions is minimal via apis like Vulkan, and is why PCs have a ton of different settings.
People looking for Nintendo to compete in raw performance, well that's never really happening again, but Nvidia will keep Nintendo close enough to remain relevant, and it's even possible that for a year or two that the 4K switch would be the most powerful dedicated gaming device on the market, before a ps5 pro launches in 2023 or 2024.
Financial reasons. I am not saying this won't happen eventually but the current chances of success of a box only variation are, based on everything we've seen, far far (far) lower than a handheld only variation. Imo of course.
wait until e3/mid june. I think we'll get announcements of new models then.
I put an "If" at the beginning of my post for a reason, I also don't think it would happen before 2022, but eventually Nintendo will address the 4K market, and an enhanced dock/stand alone console is the only sensible way to accomplish that level of performance.
Coming up with the future for Nintendo is a tough thing because they do march to their own drum. That may very well change with the new leadership but I have said since the Switch has been out we have no idea what Nintendo will do next. Everyone assumes a Switch 2.0 is inevitable. This is Nintendo and they could go right back to a home console next gen and not even blink an eye.
A Hybrid system has been a rousing success for them but it has its own sets of limitations that will only become more apparent as time goes and tech keeps marching on. As Z0m3le says eventually Nintendo will have to reach out to the 4k crowd and that is going to mean something beyond what a Switch 2.0 or even a 3.0 could do. So while they may very well stay with a hybrid system going forward they will have to find someway to boost significantly the power of the device at home. Switch 1.0 came at what was more or less a good time where Its capabilities versus its competitors was a small enough power margin gap. Soon we will be having 10-15 tflop consoles and there the long running Nintendo problem will surface.
A Hybrid system has been a rousing success for them but it has its own sets of limitations that will only become more apparent as time goes and tech keeps marching on. As Z0m3le says eventually Nintendo will have to reach out to the 4k crowd and that is going to mean something beyond what a Switch 2.0 or even a 3.0 could do. So while they may very well stay with a hybrid system going forward they will have to find someway to boost significantly the power of the device at home. Switch 1.0 came at what was more or less a good time where Its capabilities versus its competitors was a small enough power margin gap. Soon we will be having 10-15 tflop consoles and there the long running Nintendo problem will surface.
I do not get the big push for 4k this or that. To me it really only adds much for productivity use cases. For gaming I care way more about stable frame rates and effective shader use. Most things higher than 720p get lost for gaming and video playback get lost past the desire to see the entirety of the display within the human field of vision. The gain in fidelity seems vanishing to me.
I don't see a conventional console from them ever again. I think it'll be hybrids until basically game hardware goes kaput and is replaced by streaming services (if that comes to pass).
The one exception I would say to that is maybe a VR console, but even that, I think that type of a concept would be butter suited for a Switch successor.
I wouldn't expect a conventional home console but I could certainly see them come up with a Powered Dock Scenario where they say hey in handheld we will give you X performance for your games. Plug it in and you can get Y performance. Mobile Chips will advance at a pace to allow such a thing like a 2 tflop handheld that can dock with a 8 tflop console for instance.
You're why WSJ wrote this garbage.
It's a lie straight and simple and I hope people remember this after e3.
WSJ liars.
Yep, personally I think a dock makes more sense for them, but Nintendo can do anything they want inside the Switch platform, if something sells a million units, that is fine, it's not really an investment for Nintendo because they don't need to create an entire library of unique software for it. Labo is another example of Nintendo creating a brand just for experimenting with concepts/ideas, there is no real investment to cardboard, so they can do something like Labo VR, and if it takes off, they can create their own stand alone Switch powered VR device, much like Oculus Quest, Namco even created that VR Mario Kart experience a few years ago, so seeing something like MK8D VR patch, is not far fetched at all, we could see just about every Nintendo IP get the VR treatment, and if they can offer a good standalone VR experience for $300-$400, they can certainly take advantage of their low cost to entry point.
Nintendo's platform is honestly the most secure going forward IMO, because Switch already has something like 35 Million users and is up this year over last, with a stronger library and new models launching this FY, they should see 20 Million+ sales this year, and that is going to put them in a solid position, because next gen Sony and Microsoft consoles aren't expected to launch until the end of next year, meaning that Nintendo doesn't have that direct competition next year either, giving them a chance to break 75 Million consoles by this time 2021, all while Sony and Microsoft are building up to their first 10 Million users.
Since you've been a developer at a major publisher that even has a game streaming on the Switch, I think it's important to note that streaming is actually a benefit to Nintendo Switch's form factor, they might never have to completely abandon the initial Switch units thanks to streaming games, it wouldn't actually surprise me if Nintendo bought services from Microsoft or Google for cloud based streaming, they had a long standing relationship with both companies and we already see Microsoft services being welcomed on the Switch platform, which I believe shows Nintendo is looking at their hardware in a different way than Microsoft looks at theirs.
There is actually a ton of benefits for Nintendo in this big shakeup that is coming, these new competitors really look to be fighting out in a new market that can only really benefit the Switch form factor (streaming) and fighting over 3rd parties where Nintendo can bank on their stronger first party line ups to keep their relevancy throughout next gen. Not to doom Sony, because they will be fine, but when you are king, you are usually the one with the most to lose and these competitors are going to eating out of Sony's shares via 3rd party relationships, a thing that Sony benefits from more than anyone else. Sony of course has been absolutely killing it in first party IPs, but they aren't really creating lasting IPs, by that I mean that we have no idea if death stranding will get a sequel, or detroit, we just know that Sony has a chance to release a GotY contender every year.
Microsoft also has a crazy position moving into next generation, where they are going to lean more on Windows, and continue to turn Xbox into a gaming service platform, rather than a hardware platform. If they do get Gamepass on the Switch, that will be absolutely insane for them, because they will have broke that barrier between competitors and brought Gamepass over as a netflix like service, especially if they leverage Xcloud, I'm also wondering if my Vizio Chromecast powered smart TV will be able to acquire Gamepass, because that holds a huge market for Microsoft too.
I won't touch on Apple or Amazon because I don't believe either have made a big enough commitment to the industry to challenge the others, but while everyone is laughing at Google Stadia, it might drastically eat into the market share of these other platforms in terms of where 3rd party games are sold. Seriously, the ability to watch a trailer of a game on youtube and then just click a play now button at the end of the trailer and instantly be given a free 30 minute demo of the game, with a monthly sub option for unlimited play, or a buy option... It could blow away the barrier to entry for a gamer... There is nothing that reaches as many customers that is that immediate or easy to use, if Google can pull that off, they will take from everyone else. Their ability to use their competitor's controllers is also huge, because they are keeping you familiar to your playstation/xbox/nintendo brand, while moving you onto their platform. A single good experience there, might keep you there forever.
Yep. Four decades actually.
1977: Color TV-Game 6, Color TV-Game 15
1978: Color TV-Game Racing 112
1979: Color TV-Game Block Breaker
1980: Computer TV-Game, Game & Watch (Silver)
1981: Game & Watch (Gold), Game & Watch (Widescreen)
1982: Game & Watch (Multi Screen), Game & Watch (New Wide Screen)
1983: Game & Watch (Table Top), Family Computer, Game & Watch (Panorama)
1984: Game & Watch (Super Color), Game & Watch (Micro Vs.)
1985: NES
1986: (Famicom Disk System), Game & Watch (Crystal Screen)
1989: Game Boy
1990: Super Famicom
1991: Super NES, AV Famicom / NES (101)
1994: (Super Game Boy)
1995: Satellaview, Virtual Boy
1996: Game Boy Pocket, Nintendo 64
1997: Super Famicom Jr. / Super NES (101)
1998: Pokémon Pikachu, Game Boy Light, (Super Game Boy 2), Game Boy Color
1999: (Nintendo 64DD)
2000: Pokémon Pikachu 2 GS, Pikachu Nintendo 64
2001: Game Boy Advance, Pokémon mini, Nintendo Gamecube, (eReader)
2002:
2003: Game Boy Advance SP, (Game Boy Player), iQue Player
2004: Nintendo Gamecube (101), Nintendo DS
2005: Game Boy micro, Game Boy Advance SP (101)
2006: Nintendo DS Lite, Wii
2008: Nintendo DSi
2009: Nintendo DSi XL
2010:
2011: Nintendo 3DS, Wii (101)
2012: Nintendo 3DS XL, Wii U, Wii mini
2013: Nintendo 2DS
2014: New Nintendo 3DS, New Nintendo 3DS XL
2015:
2016: Famicom mini / NES Classic
2017: Nintendo Switch, New Nintendo 2DS XL, Super Famicom mini / Super NES Classic
2018:
2019: ???
And this doesn't include non-consumer hardware (arcade, hotel, commercial vehicle) or licensed hardware like the Sharp Twin Famicom, Panasonic Q or Game & Watch Mini Classics.
Offcourse that we disagree because you fail to see that current model is aimed for family play and local multiplayer, look at comercials for games you keep mentioning like Labo, SMP, 1, 2 Switch, hole point of those games is family play and local multiplayer, and all that offers current Switch model.
All informations we have until now for cheap Switch revision point about low price handheld focused revision with cut features, and that almost certain means no local multiplayer (at least right out of box), so clearly point and focus of such a revision would be different from current Switch.
Such a revision is not only aimed at kids, but to casual also (and huge majority of casuals players are smartphone players), also to generally to handheld lovers, core gamers..that love handheld play but they are not willing to pay $300 for TV play or Joy Cons that they dont need.
Like Thraktor wrote, whether it appeals to people currently buying Switch's is irrelevant, it's there to appeal to the people who were previously buying 3DSs (cheap, ie small, handheld-only devices with integrated controls).
Of Course they care about handheld play, and what you saying dont make any sense, because every Nintendo handheld sold much better than Nintendo home console, including last two gens in smartphone era. Why do you think 3DS has life span of 7-8 years while Wii U had life span of only 4 years?
Truth is that home consoles were much weaker for Nintendo than handhelds and with Wii U they had their worst selling piece of hardware ever (not counting Virtual Boy), and with point that technology finally is ready, best they could do is to make hybrid platform and merge their handheld and home console divisions in one unified division.
But that doesn't mean in any case that they will not release Switch low price handheld focused Switch revision that will basically replace 3DS place and price point on market.
Yeah, I could easily see something like Switch TV, in 2020/2021,
basically something like similar like Switch dock without screen and Joy Cons, shipped with Switch Pro Controller for around $150-200.
Last edited:
He is not saying they have to move on from the Switch platform at all. A dock or Switch console could achieve the performance he is talking about without starting a new platform.
I personally will only buy a switch or hybrid form console. No way I could go back even from the Wii U I couldn't go back. I will not and can not have not gaming experiences tied to a tv only.
There is zero evidence to support this. The Wii U was never a part of Nintendo's long term master plan. It was the best hardware they could get while preserving bc and having an expensive screen controller.
So one thing we've kept hearing about for the past two years is how Nintendo has been trying to bring the price of the Switch down. If the mini is a handheld only device, there is no insurance that it can continue to drive sales for years until they can afford to bring the pro (only hybrid) model down in price. 4 years without a price drop for their successful form factor that is clearly driving sales, is insane imo.
That is the major reason I think they will just put the new SoC in the current model and drop its price to $239-$249. I also don't think an additional $20 price drop of the handheld model to $179 would hurt Nintendo as its a much more impulse buy than $199.
This also leaves Nintendo the option to make a more premium model out of this Pro device, offering it for $329 and really making it a premium device with say an aluminum case could make it a lot more attractive to people who already own the Switch.
That is the major reason I think they will just put the new SoC in the current model and drop its price to $239-$249. I also don't think an additional $20 price drop of the handheld model to $179 would hurt Nintendo as its a much more impulse buy than $199.
This also leaves Nintendo the option to make a more premium model out of this Pro device, offering it for $329 and really making it a premium device with say an aluminum case could make it a lot more attractive to people who already own the Switch.
My only issue with a base system that isn't portable is what happens when they come out with an upgraded version? There are only so many TVs in a house. Releasing a lite or pro handheld let's more people in a household use the older models. But a base system is either hooked up, sold, or useless.
I know the other companies do this a lot, but Nintendo hasn't really released multiple home console versions - at least not versions that compel users to upgrade.
I know the other companies do this a lot, but Nintendo hasn't really released multiple home console versions - at least not versions that compel users to upgrade.
This means that the switch hybrid everyone loves, is still $299 in year 2021. Sure the handheld model will help sales, especially in Japan, but driving growth for 2 years just seems unlikely. Especially when they could drop the price of the current model to $249 this year.
The TV only Switch was always the least likely scenario by far. Handheld focused switch mini is much more realizable with an optional dock and can still preserve all the "modes" Switch TV would have only 1/3 modes and be gimped as hell.
But anyone expecting the switch "Mini" to be sold cheaper than 249.99 is out of their mind. I can't imagine a scenario where Nintendo would kneecap their own profits like that. When the last system they sold at "break even" was the Wii U
i've been thinking about this. The switch is essentially the tablet itself, with the ability to slot joycons into it and dock it. As long as the tablet stays intact with the same capabilities, the concept of the switch does. I'm guessing we'll see the following
Switch lite - 720p screen. System is lightly more powerful than the switch with a much better battery life and no bezels. Made from cheap materials. Comes with a basic, u-shaped controller it slots into which turns it into something like a 2ds
Switch pro - 720p screen. System is 2-4x powerful than the switch with a similar better battery life and no bezels. Made from better quality materials (possibly oled screen). Comes with joycons/dock as normal. Dock possibly has some sort of 4k tech
Switch lite - 720p screen. System is lightly more powerful than the switch with a much better battery life and no bezels. Made from cheap materials. Comes with a basic, u-shaped controller it slots into which turns it into something like a 2ds
Switch pro - 720p screen. System is 2-4x powerful than the switch with a similar better battery life and no bezels. Made from better quality materials (possibly oled screen). Comes with joycons/dock as normal. Dock possibly has some sort of 4k tech
I'm glad someone else is bringing up the Quest route. I think that's exactly what they should do if they're looking to offer a higher cost, "premium" Switch device. A standalone, wireless VR headset that doubles as a traditional Nintendo console would be a groundbreaking consumer product. It looks like that VR form factor is going to have the best potential to penetrate the mainstream and Nintendo is in a unique position to capitalize. Their entire gaming ecosystem is already built around mobile processing.
A Switch priced above the $300 mark that could play BotW at 1080p would be kinda neat. A Nintendo device that combines their home console experience with a wireless VR platform at $400 would send shockwaves through the industry. Plus, I think eschewing the handheld mode in the premium device would be helpful with the "multiple switches per home" goal. It's a device that may be compelling enough to upgrade AND keep your original Switch, vs trading in your old one for the new, slightly better model. Can Nintendo diehards turn down being Samus in VR? Can VR enthusiasts turn down a VR device with Nintendo software at such a low cost? Is there anybody in the industry with a better pedigree when it comes to selling fitness-based games to a wide audience (a huge component of VR)?
I honestly believe the VR industry is gonna catch on before too long, but Nintendo could jumpstart that exponentially by literally copying the Quest. If this device did WiiU numbers, it'd be a huge leap forward for the medium.
Why would it stay $300 two years later? If Nintendo wants to drop the price they presumably would.
"Switch hybrid everyone loves" is the only switch.
People that haven't bought one yet, the target audience for a new model, don't love it
I don't think a $200 model would exist if only it would break even. The point is to create a multi-Switch household. That requires a cheaper price point and $250 doesn't seem like a big enough difference especially if it appears obviously cheaper.
Yeah pretty much, they don't have to sell big numbers at all since it can share the current library, even games that don't support VR can use a theater mode in VR. There is next to no investment with labo, it's cardboard, if it sells well, Nintendo can jump on VR with a standalone HMD that is close to XB1 in terms of power and comes in at $349.
Hadn't thought about it, but I guess a portable switch that's a VR headset but can also dock would be interesting.
Don't think that's what the pro will be, it's too early for that with the Quest not out yet (?)
I do wonder if it would actually be $400.
Theoretically, using Switch pro parts it shouldn't be much more than $300 by 2021?
Imagine it'll all depend on how Oculus Quest does and if there's any demand for it
Because the Pro Switch model would cost $300 to put on shelves with what Nintendo deems is a reasonable profit left over, it takes time to drop the price of such a device, so it won't be able to come down in price next year and possibly not until holiday 2021, that's a long time to not offer the market that is looking for the hybrid Switch form factor that is already a hit, at a cheaper price point than $299. There is no guarantee that a handheld only model will have the lasting impact at $199 to carry growth over the next two years.
All I'm saying is there is a clear advantage to keeping the current sku around and offering it for 50 to 60 dollars less than it currently sells for, and they can just drop the same chip in it that is in the mini.
I really don't see how you can get the price to produce down below 220-230 range if you're only removing the joycons and the dock. Some of the components inside the joycons would still be needed for functionality like RFID, sticks, buttons and rumble (non HD but still). So I think they would still sell it for $250 out the gate. Considering how modest their price drops have been in the past, (not counting the panic-mode year 1 3DS price drop) I just don't see it happening. Nor do I think that extra 50$ is what's keeping people from picking up a switch at $250.
They can sell the current model for Atleast $30 less than at launch with the same profits, because they offer that discount now. In Japan they kept the Joycons but sold the device without a dock and it sold for $240 dollars, that means it is possible to sell the switch now without a dock for a profit at $210, the Joycons add a ton of complexity to the device, 2 more circuit boards, 2 batteries, wireless radios, HD rumble, 2 male and 2 female rails. The reason they were able to sell the 2ds for so cheap is because they could use a single circuit board, that's a huge huge cost saving measure, one that can be duplicated if they drop the Joycons.
They can get a handheld only switch well under $200 and still sell it at a profit, heck the Nvidia shield tv sells for a profit at $139 and the difference there is a 720p screen, but the shield tv comes with a separate controller.
Yeah, Labo is a good way to dip their toes in the medium with little risk. I'm hoping that they're already looking forward at a next step for VR and using Labo as a test run combined with a way to give their younger fan base a chance to engage with the medium. The sheer amount of work that went into Labo garage for VR and the fact that we really can't expect Mario and Zelda to be very enjoyable with the hardware as-is, has me hopeful that this is all part of a bigger plan in motion.
Yeah, Quest won't be out until the end of this month and was just announced this past September. It's likely too quick to expect Nintendo to have a product ready, I'm just hopeful that they've got a genuine surprise in store.
However, Oculus has been demoing the Quest publicly since 2017 under the code name "Santa Cruz", so it's not like this hasn't been telegraphed for years. If Nintendo has been interested in VR, they've been aware of this form factor more than long enough to play with the idea.
The impatient gamer in me wants them to release something like this asap, but if they do wait a year or two until stuff like foveated rendering becomes feasible to bring to market, they could definitely drive down the price point and provide experiences that outpunch what their gpu can do in 2019 by a large margin. Like you said, tech might progress to the point that they could release a much better device in 2021 for a lower price than what they could today.
- Status