Nintendo Switch Technical discussion [SOC = Tegra X1]

[Deleted member 13524]

Really? So a multi play was the PS3's most impressive title? How about 360?

For many people, GTA V is the most impressive title for both consoles.

It's always exclusives that squeeze the most from hardware.

Maybe this is only true for Nintendo platforms. Because no one else cares as much.

Isn't the X2 only used for cars?

No.

It's also my understanding that the X2 isn't really much more powerful than the X1, just a little more power efficient.

Max-Q mode on the Jetson TX2 already puts the chip at over 2X the GPU perf-per-watt of TX1 in Switch's handheld mode. Take into consideration that Jetxon TX2 TDP numbers already take into account lots of I/O unnecessary for a gaming console, 128bit 8GB LPDDR4 3733MT/s, 2x2 WiFi AC and Bluetooth, 32GB eMMC and other stuff.

If you take >100% more power efficient as "just a little"...

 

[phoenix_chipset]

The majority of multiplatform games are not the technical showpieces for consoles in general. What Snake Pass does do is give "some" insight into how cross platform games will scale to Switch. Inevitably, multi platform games that come to Switch will be compared to other consoles, and this will be the criteria used to determine the viability and likelihood of future multi platform games being ported over. Retro Studios could develop a new Metroid that blows us away, exceeding what we though a TX1 powered device is capable of, but that really doesn't tell us much about the viability of porting PS4/X1 games to Switch. Until we have a good variety of multi platform games on Switch, its hard to really nail down exactly how many compromises need to be made to transition from PS4/X1. Right now we know a much lower resolution and lower settings are obvious, but are ports of games like COD out of the question? I don't think so, but E3 should be a good indicator.

I see no reason the cod games couldn't come to the switch, unless the games after advanced warfare are inherently much harder to run for some reason ; even ps3 and 360 got a 60fps version of advanced warfare.

 

[BRiT]

Memory limits perhaps?

 

[phoenix_chipset]

Apparently Nintendo released a patch for zelda -

It certainly does look smoother.

 

[phoenix_chipset]

Memory limits perhaps?

Not saying Infinite warfare would be exactly the same on switch, but we're talking about a series that saw ports on the Wii until the Wii U released.

 

[Eteric]

I'd say CoD, Madden, Fifa, etc will be a given. It's other non-yearly franchises that will likely prove challenging to port. But challenging does not mean impossible, it's just that it has to be worth doing. While the Switch seems to be selling well right now, it's still got a ways to go to prove itself. I would suspect if Skyrim is pretty successful, we'll start seeing a few more ports of last gen games as well as new gen games. I just hope Bethesda doesn't fuck the port over and not include the DLC like the other versions got. It would be the Mass Effect situation all over again.

 

[bunnybug]

Not saying Infinite warfare would be exactly the same on switch, but we're talking about a series that saw ports on the Wii until the Wii U released.

is that really a port though? I think it's more of a reworked version, and activision probably did it cause it probably didn't cost much to work on such old hardware. i would love to see how switch handles a cod port, i'm guessing 900p/30fps.

 

[Eteric]

is that really a port though? I think it's more of a reworked version, and activision probably did it cause it probably didn't cost much to work on such old hardware. i would love to see how switch handles a cod port, i'm guessing 900p/30fps.

I don't think rebuilding any games from scratch will be necessary like it was for the Wii. While there's a pretty big gulf in power, I don't think anywhere near Wii level.

 

[phoenix_chipset]

I don't think rebuilding any games from scratch will be necessary like it was for the Wii. While there's a pretty big gulf in power, I don't think anywhere near Wii level.

They didn't even have to rebuild the cod games for the wii. Hell, modern warfare was a 1:1 port. Cod of all things isn't what the switch should have trouble with.

They may cut back on a couple things, but a current cod port to the switch would be the same game at its core. When advanced warfare is running on dx9 hardware with half a gig of memory, at 60fps... yeah.

I'd say CoD, Madden, Fifa, etc will be a given. It's other non-yearly franchises that will likely prove challenging to port. But challenging does not mean impossible, it's just that it has to be worth doing. While the Switch seems to be selling well right now, it's still got a ways to go to prove itself. I would suspect if Skyrim is pretty successful, we'll start seeing a few more ports of last gen games as well as new gen games. I just hope Bethesda doesn't fuck the port over and not include the DLC like the other versions got. It would be the Mass Effect situation all over again.

It could sell 100 million units and we'd still never see something like the witcher 3 on it, honestly. Some of it is they know it won't sell as much, and the other bit is they don't want to compromise on their vision too much.

 

[Goodtwin]

Even Black Ops 3 had its multi player ported to 360 and PS3. Its quality wasn't very good, but I think at that point it was pretty obvious that it also wasn't the primary focus, more like an after though really. Memory restrictions on 360/PS3 were notoriously problematic for developers. It was tough getting everything in that 512MB of memory. I fully expect COD to make the port to Switch. So many options to make it happen. Between resolution compromises and framerate getting dropped to a locked 30fps should make for a rather painless port. If there is a will there is a way, and its all about money. Nintendo consoles notoriously have poor attach ratios for third party multi plat games, so that is every bit as relevant as the hardware. Capcom was adamant that Switch have 3GB of memory to accommodate their RE engine. So this tells me memory was the biggest limiting factor with that particular engine, and not the capabilities of the TX1.

 

[Eteric]

One of Nintendo's challenges will be to get attach rates for third party games up. To do that, they have to be able to provide something the other systems cannot. I think portability is far more attractive than motion controls or a tablet controller were.

If I were Nintendo, I'd be working hard with EA, Activision, and other developers to get their games as close to their stationary console counterparts as possible. I'd also be porting and upgrading popular games from Gamecube, Wii, and Wii U, and last gen systems to fill in the gaps (similar to Wind Waker for the Wii U, in fact they should port that over next year sometime imo.) While they should be getting third parties on board, they should also be trying to create a game line up that you can't get on other systems. Fund more projects like Bayonetta 2. Even if the game doesn't sell a lot, if you get a lot of unique games on your system it'll eventually be hard for gamers to ignore.

I think Bayonetta 2 and Wonderful 101 were attempts at doing this, but by the time they had started they realized that the platform was to far gone. The Switch so far as a lot of good momentum, and E3 could boost that momentum if they have some cool announcements. They should do everything in their power to keep it going.

 

[Goodtwin]

I have spent about 6 hours with the patched version of Zelda this weekend, and it is so much better. In the worst offending areas, it still drops, but not as badly, and not as long. Areas that had minor drops before no longer have drops at all. There is one area in the game as that is notoriously the worst performing area, and while its still not great, it is much better than before. As you can see from the video above, the game seems to average above 29fps, and honestly this is in the areas that had issues. Areas in the mountains and the desert already ran a locked 30fps, so the patched version of this game brings performance up to par. Performance exceeds most other open world games. I would love to see them continue to look for further optimizations, but as it stands, I no longer feel that performance is a black eye on an otherwise fantastic game.

I would have to assume that the firmware GPU draining gremlin has been addressed by now.

 

[ProspectorPete]

In theory, every PS4 game could run on Switch:

 

[Deleted member 13524]

In theory, every PS4 game could run on Switch:

Lol, nothing like scaling the PS3's output down to 640*360 to try spin the idea of parity between the Wii and the PS3 versions.

Wait, but you were joking, right..?

 

[ProspectorPete]

Lol, nothing like scaling the PS3's output down to 640*360 to try spin the idea of parity between the Wii and the PS3 versions.

Wait, but you were joking, right..?

Sorry I watched several clips (MW3 and BO as well), didn't notice the resolution on this one. There is a big difference even on 360p, but in essence, the game is the same. Some might even prefer the Wii due to the control scheme. In the same way, Switch could run PS4 games; lower quality of course, but the essence of the game remains and the portability could add something just as the Wii controls added something to Call of Duty

 

[swaaye]

I could see multiplatform games being scalable down to Switch. Those games that run on PS360, XBO, PS4, and PC for example.

 

[Goodtwin]

Lol, nothing like scaling the PS3's output down to 640*360 to try spin the idea of parity between the Wii and the PS3 versions.

Wait, but you were joking, right..?

Nobody has insinuated parity. The argument has been if games could feasible scale down to Switch. Saying Switch can handle ports with some significant compromises, such as framerate dropped to 30fps instead of 60fps and resolution drops from 1080p to 720p and even lower for portable is all people such as myself have been insinuating. For some reason you do not agree with this, and then use "parity" as an argument? Nobody ever said Switch versions of multi plat games would be on par with PS4/X1. Would it be as drastic as COD on Wii? I doubt it.

 

[phoenix_chipset]

Uh, what? The cod games are 480p on wii Edit : nvm I see the video is 360p

Anyways the cod ports to wii are far from the console's best efforts. A switch port from ps4 would not be nearly as harsh either.

World at war on wii was the best conversion, graphically speaking. It wasn't that bad, had some nice fire effects.

 

[bunnybug]

I have spent about 6 hours with the patched version of Zelda this weekend, and it is so much better. In the worst offending areas, it still drops, but not as badly, and not as long. Areas that had minor drops before no longer have drops at all. There is one area in the game as that is notoriously the worst performing area, and while its still not great, it is much better than before. As you can see from the video above, the game seems to average above 29fps, and honestly this is in the areas that had issues. Areas in the mountains and the desert already ran a locked 30fps, so the patched version of this game brings performance up to par. Performance exceeds most other open world games. I would love to see them continue to look for further optimizations, but as it stands, I no longer feel that performance is a black eye on an otherwise fantastic game.

I would have to assume that the firmware GPU draining gremlin has been addressed by now.

no it doesn't, this is really reaching here, it's not even on par, which open world games on ps4 are dropping to 20fps?

Nobody has insinuated parity. The argument has been if games could feasible scale down to Switch. Saying Switch can handle ports with some significant compromises, such as framerate dropped to 30fps instead of 60fps and resolution drops from 1080p to 720p and even lower for portable is all people such as myself have been insinuating. For some reason you do not agree with this, and then use "parity" as an argument? Nobody ever said Switch versions of multi plat games would be on par with PS4/X1. Would it be as drastic as COD on Wii? I doubt it.

you are comparing 60fps, there aren't many of those on ps4, and the games that are 900p or dynamic resolution , and already pushing the hardware hard, plus what's there incentive to go through all that trouble of porting something that will be a butchered compared to there vision, there are nearly 90 million ps4/xb1 on the market right now, plus the history of thirdparty games just not selling on nintendo's console's

 

[Goodtwin]

The Wii was what, a 12 Gflop console with 88 MB of memory with a single core CPU clocking at 750Mhz. Even with the lower resolution on Wii, its not like it was native 720p on 360/PS3, they were typically running 600p. A 2.5x difference in pixel count. Wii was a totally different animal than the 360/PS3, and because sales potential was there, they dedicated a 30+ man team at Treyarch to do the Wii ports. Framerate test on Youtue showed a pretty solid 30fps too. The performance difference between Switch and the other consoles is large, not saying its not, but its nothing compared to what they were dealing with on Wii. Again, follow the $$$.

Most games do not have the sales potential on Nintendo platforms to dedicate any significant resources. Its going to be a dollars and cents thing. I expect EA will choose to pass on most of their lineup. Games like Fifa and Madden and perhaps even Garden Warfare are what I see as likely candidates. COD on Switch is almost a given at this point. The series is on a decline, and they know they have been able to carve out a niche audience on the Wii, so I totally expect it to show up later this year.