Sure, but have we ever seen final development kits go out so late?
- Status
Sure, but have we ever seen final development kits go out so late?
That's my assumption. I'm expecting X1 performance levels when docked, lower when on the go.
The process node, CPU, and GPU cores could all be upgraded to a more efficient A72 and Pascal on 16FF, but for the sake of power efficiency and battery life, not additional performance.
phoenix_chipset
Regular
What have I said that suggests I don't recognise the advantages of Wii U?
Shaders in some respects, although N. use an unrealistic art style that makes the most of shaders and which few others would dare to try, I guess. Lighting I don't particularly agree with. Also your examples are limited environments where more can be spent on what's displayed. Furthermore, Wii U's more modern GPU enables some features, such as the grass in Zelda. So are Nintendo really doing more with hardware than other developers, or are they just doing the same? Because your assertion was that Nintendo are superior at extracting performance from hardware than other developers. I see no evidence of that, again citing more comparable games like Zelda as a reference point.
Wii was released in 2006. The median TV screen size was 42" (probably in US). The other consoles recognised the transition and made themselves HD.
No, I'm talking the broad Wii audience, mum's and 'non-gamers' who never played a console game in their life alongside gamers. People with no experience of games other than a passing glance at what someone else is playing, perhaps, who found the lack of quality and the shimmering and jaggies distracting.
Also, yes it's anecdotal evidence. Why raise it then? To counter your point that Wii graphics were good enough based on just your personal opinion. So I cite uncorroborated evidence that your personal opinions weren't universal and there was/is evidence that Wii should have been higher res. My evidence is supported by you in your quote "Nintendo themselves have said Wii should've been HD from the start." So Nintendo agree with me and disagree with you saying Wii was good enough.
It's also not relevant for the discussion of the hardware and its power. Game aesthetics belong in other threads. You said that N. are better at using hardware than other devs. The conclusion here seems to be 'you prefer look of N. games,' which is fine, but in the context of the discussion irrelevant. Given a consle with x power, devs, all devs including Sony's and Nintendo's and MS's, will have the capacity to do x amount of work. The aesthetics they choose are down to them. Nintendo has a clear aesthetic which typically is graphical undemanding and NS will be okay for achieving that at good quality in a handheld, as I've already mentioned.
Most of this is down to you just not understanding me. I never said Nintendo was better than *everyone else*, I said they were "among the best of the bunch." But they pretty much are the best in terms of technical polish.
What you're saying makes it sound like all developers that aren't indie are equally technically efficient. When you brought up Littlebig planet, that's a clear indication you thought Ps3 games were just as advanced, and the Nintendo games are simply different. Only now that I called you out you acknowledge Wii U's advantage. Yes, Nintendo are better than most other devs. Certain devs. In the same way that Rockstar is better than Volition.
From the very beginning I said Wii's graphics were good enough, "aside from the resolution". We've been on the same page from the start, we're not even arguing as to whether or not Wii should've been HD. At the same time, the core graphics are pretty good, and your eyes can adjust to the resolution unless you're using a massive screen. I'm not special, you could adjust as well. I mean what, suddenly all console games before the Xbox 360 look terrible and can't be enjoyed? Honest question, do you only play games from the current generation?
Doesn't matter that the average TV size was 42" in 2006, the Wii wasn't made with those TV's in mind. Which is why I brought up the N64 ; you wouldn't play that console on a big hdtv for the same reason you wouldn't use a Wii on it.
We may be discussing hardware, but we're discussing it because that dictates visuals and anything to do with visuals is relevant to the discussion. You can disagree with what i'm saying, but i'm entirely on topic.
Anyway that's it for me, we have to wait until January for a good look at the switch's games and won't know the hardware until months after it comes out. Peace.
Heil Hydra
nVidia's Shield Tablet K1 is sold 200USD, so Nintendo Switch price point could be comparable, at that price point I think it would sell very well, a little less well @250USD and would have a hard time @300USD, despite being unique.
(The 3DS currently starts @160€)
(The 3DS currently starts @160€)
$200 for Switch seems unlikely to me. The whole package includes more than the K1 tablet. I'm unimpressed with the build quality of the K1 too and expect Nintendo to reach beyond that (I'm on my third and it has a dodgy screen that colour-splurges in an area on touch). Then, as others mention, Nintendo are traditionally inclined to price high. Wii was highly priced for the hardware, and Wii U was priced high too. Then of course there's the folly of pricing below market interest and losing profits if the product is popular. I expect a $300 pricepoint, $250 minimum.
The Switch will see far higher volumes for production than any Nvidia Shield product, and should position them to sell a superior product at a similar price point.
Emily Rodgers who has been very accurate this whole year with leaks said back in May that multiple sources have told her that the Switch is more comparable to the Xbox One than the PS4, and even that might be pushing it. If her sources didn't turn out to be so damn accurate, I would be inclined to dismiss this statement, but she has earned credibility. So with that said, could a developer see a standard Tegra X1 as being comparable to the Xbox One? I wouldn't think so, but perhaps development kits are clocked far higher than typical. A Tegra X1 matched up to a much larger memory bus and very high clocks? Possibly? Regardless if Nintendo ever gives us complete specs, the software will eventually tell the story, just like results on Wii U killed off the idea that the GPU was 352Gflop chip similar to the HD5550.
Emily Rodgers who has been very accurate this whole year with leaks said back in May that multiple sources have told her that the Switch is more comparable to the Xbox One than the PS4, and even that might be pushing it. If her sources didn't turn out to be so damn accurate, I would be inclined to dismiss this statement, but she has earned credibility. So with that said, could a developer see a standard Tegra X1 as being comparable to the Xbox One? I wouldn't think so, but perhaps development kits are clocked far higher than typical. A Tegra X1 matched up to a much larger memory bus and very high clocks? Possibly? Regardless if Nintendo ever gives us complete specs, the software will eventually tell the story, just like results on Wii U killed off the idea that the GPU was 352Gflop chip similar to the HD5550.
Could be relative. Could treat the NS as an XB1 at 720p where it could be half the power, sort of thing. As for Nintendo giving compete specs, they won't. They never do as there's nothing to gain, unless they can gain some marketing plus-points with some fancy buzzwords or landmark achievements.
well yes, Nintendo like Apple aim to make a decent profit off the hardware, why should the switch be any different from their past modus operandi
emily rodgers has been on point, but her sources on specs are pretty meaningless after the leaked devkit specs, considering most of the parker/pascal talk comes from speculation, and not from sources.
D
Deleted member 13524
Guest
The Gamecube is also closer to the Xbone than the PS4, so I don't really see how that information is relevant.
Of course it was going to be weaker than the Xbone and PS4 the moment it was revealed to be a portable device. I do expect that mobile ~15W SoCs will match PS4bone somewhere in 2018 with 10 or 7nm, but not in a console starting production in 2016..
Note to self... don't take bunny to Vegas.
Exactly. That's my thoughts as well. After seeing the Xbox One S still pull 50 watts, which saw a huge reduction power draw thanks to the dye shrink, its pretty outlandish to expect a 15 watt chip match it. I'm with Shifty with the idea that perhaps a Tegra X1 does pretty well with 1080p Xbox One content when rendering at 720p. There would certainly be some other compromises on top of that, but those will mostly likely go unnoticed when playing on the tablet. When playing on the TV, certainly far more noticeable, but then again, if your primary concern is playing AAA 3rd party games on the TV, then the Switch likely doesnt strike a chord with you. Switch is not setting its sights on direct competition with the PS4/X1, but positioning itself in its own unique position.
I'm still wondering if there's another piece of hardware that fits into this somewhere. This patent may be nothing but I do wonder if such a device could augment Switch's power to enable a better experience at home. I know it's been discussed before and I apologize if it's a dead horse,
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-...9,415,309.PN.&OS=PN/9,415,309&RS=PN/9,415,309
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-...9,415,309.PN.&OS=PN/9,415,309&RS=PN/9,415,309
Yes I was going to mention those with the disclaimer, don't believe the stories about them losing money when they launched
3DS launched @ $249.99US, BOM cost = $103
Wii U launched @ $299.99, BOM cost = $180
OK theres some extra on top of BOM, eg shipping etc but both were priced far more than the cost of building them
BOM leaves out the cost of R&D, and in this case, we'd be ignoring the words of Nintendo themselves: https://www.engadget.com/2012/04/26/nintendo-confirms-that-its-selling-3ds-at-a-loss-expects-that/ http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2012/10/why-nintendo-is-losing-money-on-each-wii-u-launch-unit/
Nintendo admitting this was highly out of character, and was likely only done to inform investors(Remember, they're a public company).
Nintendo admitting this was highly out of character, and was likely only done to inform investors(Remember, they're a public company).
Yes I was gonna mention that as well. Whilst important, you can't really calculate those sort of things (plus you forgot to add in the all the ppl that work at the company salaries etc(*))
eg
say R&D was $100million which is prolly roughly what it was.
They make 100 3ds's and sell them at a whopping $1 million per 3DS (thus true cost = $1,000,103) they are still selling it at a loss!
You would think selling them at a million dollars they would be selling them at a profit? But no they're not
according to youOK say they make a million 3ds's 100mill / million = $103 + $100 = $203
now they've sold what? $100 million / 60 million 3ds's = $103 + $1.40 = $104.40
you may think what I'm saying is though logical is ridiculous but the thing is with the R&D you never know over how many items this initial cost will be spread over
also from the second article you linked to
I can't see any evidence on the Wii U being sold at a loss, the only evidence is the $172 cost of a controller on japanamazon, wow and the BOM for the whole machine is $180
(*)Similar to how trump saiz hes worth $10billion, which can be broken up into ~$1bilion in actual asset's and $9billion (his valuation of the 'trump' name
) or all these $billiondollar companies that make no profits, yet the directories all have the latest carsNintendo Switch has a 6.2" 720p multi-touch screen:
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2016-10-27-nintendo-switch-has-a-6-2-multi-touch-screen
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2016-10-27-nintendo-switch-has-a-6-2-multi-touch-screen
Awesome! It seems Nintendo does put Wii mote inside the joy con!
But why only on the right joycon?
Sure most wii games only use one hand, but it surely won't add too much cost making the left joycon have the same capability as the right joycon...
Especially with the potential of playing local multiplayer wii games on the go.
I have experienced the wonderful of this concept by playing wii on dolphin on a laptop with two wii motes with my friends on campus hahaha.
Soooo fun
- Status
Similar threads
