Support NeoGAF

[Mick Swagger]

Smaller case: Weaker battery, lower cooling capacity, less ergonomic.
Bigger screen: More expensive, higher power draw.

Still think the large bezels make it look super dated, for something dropping in 2017. Like an older cheap off brand Android tablet they'd sell at Walmart for $49.99.

Ergonomics as an argument is terrible since you would hold it by the Joycons or use the kick stand, according to the promo video. Never saw it being used in hand unless being transported.

 

[AzaK]

Still think the large bezels make it look super dated, for something dropping in 2017. Like an older cheap off brand Android tablet they'd sell at Walmart for $49.99.

Ergonomics as an argument is terrible since you would hold it by the Joycons or use the kick stand, according to the promo video. Never saw it being used in hand unless being transported.

I was going to say the bezel is so the joy cons can slide in but I took another look and nope. There's a big bezel and then more lip for the joy cons. I agree it looks a little naff.

 

[Speely]

Nintendo also makes devices that can be dropped. A tiny bezel makes it hard for them to do that. I would bet that for its size and large screen, the Switch will be pretty durable. No real reason for them to include a large bezel otheriwse.

Edit: It certainly wouldn't be because of an engineering or design fail. This device is a marvel in regard to efficiency and functionality, and that's just going on what we have been able to glean from the trailer.

 

[Mick Swagger]

Nintendo also makes devices that can be dropped. A tiny bezel makes it hard for them to do that. I would bet that for its size and large screen, the Switch will be pretty durable. No real reason for them to include a large bezel otheriwse.

Their most durable hardware has had a bezel that overlapped the screen giving it kind of a lip. The Switch's screen is flush with the bezel.

 

[rekameohs]

I was going to say the bezel is so the joy cons can slide in but I took another look and nope. There's a big bezel and then more lip for the joy cons. I agree it looks a little naff.

The top bezel likely houses the IR emitter for the Joy-Con pointer, as well.

 

[Malakai]

Still think the large bezels make it look super dated, for something dropping in 2017. Like an older cheap off brand Android tablet they'd sell at Walmart for $49.99.

Ergonomics as an argument is terrible since you would hold it by the Joycons or use the kick stand, according to the promo video. Never saw it being used in hand unless being transported.

Sitting on a park bench while letting the dog do it's business? Guy is at the airport talking to another person holding the Nintendo Switch as a handheld?

 

[sanstesy]

The bezel doesn't seem that big from the pictures we have. Little bit wider on the sides than an iPad but that's basically it.

 

[Mick Swagger]

Sitting on a park bench while letting the dog do it's business? Guy is at the airport talking to another person holding the Nintendo Switch as a handheld?

Holding it by the joycons in both, not the bezel.

 

[ciD_Vain]

Hopefully it'll have Streetpass functionality.

 

[Speely]

Their most durable hardware has had a bezel that overlapped the screen giving it kind of a lip. The Switch's screen is flush with the bezel.

True, but even a flush bezel that is larger can, if designed to do so, reduce the chances that a drop will damage the screen. Most drops impact the edges first, and having more absorption between the edge and the screen helps.

 

[Mick Swagger]

True, but even a flush bezel that is larger can, if designed to do so, reduce the chances that a drop will damage the screen. Most drops impact the edges first, and having more absorption between the edge and the screen helps.

True.

I mean, my only gripe is the bezels. Priced at $350 or less and I'm in day one.

 

[ozfunghi]

Smaller case: Weaker battery, lower cooling capacity, less ergonomic.
Bigger screen: More expensive, higher power draw.

Hah! You're alive?! Last time i read a post from you i think it was during the WiiU CPU threads.

 

[WordAssassin]

I think there's rumors/speculation that the bezel also houses/hides a sensor bar, should the IR pointer on the bottom of JoyCon R theory turn out to be true. That could explain their width.

 

[ekurisona]

what's the earliest you guys think we could see a screen+joycon (minus the dock) sku?

 

[Speely]

what's the earliest you guys think we could see a screen+joycon (minus the dock) sku?

Spring 2018

 

[Foxix Von]

I think there's rumors/speculation that the bezel also houses/hides a sensor bar, should the IR pointer on the bottom of JoyCon R theory turn out to be true. That could explain their width.

Wouldn't that mean that I'd have to place the dock directly underneath my tv? That would basically make it unusable for me as I'd have to place it directly in front of my center speaker. That would just be horrible in my setup.

 

[Terrell]

Yeah but there won't be a Wii U mode this time, so they will likely charge again ?

Again, both the market, Nintendo and even their fans have changed. What sounded like a good idea before? More than likely not anymore.

I think the 1$ fee is fair, it's a new hardware

I agreed to it once. Twice is pushing it for me.

I should have said Wii/DS as I lump those together. People should have bought them once and that's that. They may have used the argument that "its different architecture" but that doesn't cut it these days.

For the 3DS, at launch, they weren't offering any of what was on Wii or Wii U. Heck, there's a lot of VC titles still unavailable on Wii U that are on 3DS, coupled with being available before Nintendo Network and unifying the eShop. I could see Nintendo at least not wanting to go through the hassle of consolidating pre-NNID purchase records for such a small segment of customers as people who own Nintendo consoles AND handhelds (yes, folks with both, you are a rare breed).

With Wii U, they said it was for the features not available on Wii VC. Which I still believe is a smokescreen for them not being forward-thinking enough to sign platform-agnostic VC deals with publishers and having to re-negotiate with them, but that's hearsay on my part.

But yes, there are no excuses anymore, which is why I don't think they'll charge again just for kicks or try to obfuscate it behind more features, since they're already designed in a way that allows more features to exist.

And put bluntly, it'd be a dick move at a time when Nintendo's fanbase is at an all-time low that they can't afford. Hell, even the PS2 full-price-for-trophy shenanigans dinged Sony in a way, a company that is by all accounts riding high this gen.

In any case, it's hard to say whether they'll re-charge VC customers. Anything you bought on Wii U or 3DS is on your NNID which is certainly gonna be incorporated into Switch. Those purchases are going to be on your account. On the other hand, the Switch is new hardware which means Nintendo would have to re-develop and re-test all its emulator jackets again. That costs money.

Unless they re-developed the jackets with new platforms in mind, with less (or no) assembly code to make them more adaptable to new platforms. But again, hearsay.

FWIW, I think I vaguely recollect something about how Nintendo was making Wii U VC architecture with the intention of folding the tech into future systems. I believe someone on GAF mentioned the way SNES VC for N3DS is made indicates they could do the same thing with it. So hopefully they'll be able to easily have tons of VC day/month one. I think a third console drip-feed would be a huge mistake, personally.

I agree. A source for those statements would be dynamite, though.

Have people discussed the grooves in the four cardinal directions on the control stick? I feel like this is something small that might actually have a noticeable impact on the way mainpulates the control stick. I've noticed in recent years the direction we naturally push a control stick doesn't always match the direction we're intending. It's small but you're more likely to push slightly to the side when trying to tilt forward. This is a natural consequence of controller grips being angled, which makes your thumb come in at angle.

If you're able to feel which direction is where directly on the stick without tilting, that could lead to some increased control accuracy.

It's a neat design compromise after removing the GameCube octagonal gate.

 

[Speely]

Does anyone else have a burning, almost irrational desire to see PSO2 release on the Switch?

I think it would be perfect. Especially if no region lock.

 

[James Scott]

I agree. A source for those statements would be dynamite, though.

However, I think that we no longer need this kind of effort under the current circumstances. In this perspective, while we are only going to be able to start this with the next system, it will become important for us to accurately take advantage of what we have done with the Wii U architecture. It of course does not mean that we are going to use exactly the same architecture as Wii U, but we are going to create a system that can absorb the Wii U architecture adequately. When this happens, home consoles and handheld devices will no longer be completely different, and they will become like brothers in a family of systems.

A5

 

[WordAssassin]

Wouldn't that mean that I'd have to place the dock directly underneath my tv? That would basically make it unusable for me as I'd have to place it directly in front of my center speaker. That would just be horrible in my setup.

Yeah it'll be interesting to see how it pans out if that turns out to be true. It's kind of like using the Wii U GamePad's built-in Sensor Bar, only you'd have to dock the GamePad at the bottom of your TV.

Guess we'll find out in January!

 

[Ninja Scooter]

The Switch is everything western AAA developers want.....in a handheld platform.

Everyone wanted Nintendo to go after 3rd parties. And this is their way of doing just that. They are making what seems like the most powerful handheld they can make (considering the likely price range) with traditional stick and button game controller controls. That's a change from the DS and 3ds mentality.

This is Nintendo's chance to grab 3rd party support. To gain it back. To get the best western AAA games. It will be different than the Wii U in terms of 3rd party support because the Switch won't be an expensive 360 or PS3 or crappy powered Xbox One. It will be the most powerful 3rd party AAA platform for a handheld.

The handheld part will get them back some platform cred amongst western AAA developers. Nintendo can say they have the best version of Elder Scrolls...on handheld. Best version of NBA Live ....on handheld.

OF course maybe the market ultimately won't care. But unlike the Vita, Nintendo can bring all their game creation to the handheld platform where even the lowly 3ds slid into a 61 million and counting install base.

Western third parties don't want to create games for handhelds, they want to cater to premium/power users. I don't expect the Switch to really make any inroads for Nintendo with Western third parties (and certainly not because it's a handheld, the Vita was powerful for it's time and no western third parties really gave a shit about it), but I also don't think it will need to. Nintendo consolidating their software efforts and no longer needing to spread their resources across multiple platforms means they will be better equipped to support a platform on their own, with the smattering of indies and the occasional third party partnership (think Bayo 2) to complement the lineup. If people are expecting parity/day and date releases with third party PS/Xbox/PC releases I think they are going to end up sorely disappointed.

 

[Speely]

Western third parties don't want to create games for handhelds, they want to cater to premium/power users. I don't expect the Switch to really make any inroads for Nintendo with Western third parties (and certainly not because it's a handheld, the Vita was powerful for it's time and no western third parties really gave a shit about it), but I also don't think it will need to. Nintendo consolidating their software efforts and no longer needing to spread their resources across multiple platforms means they will be better equipped to support a platform on their own, with the smattering of indies and the occasional third party partnership (think Bayo 2) to complement the lineup. If people are expecting parity/day and date releases with third party PS/Xbox/PC releases I think they are going to end up sorely disappointed.

I agree with everything you just wrote. However, there is a new element to be considered with the Switch: home console play anywhere. I think it's worth mentioning that this device seems poised to provide the home experience anywhere. Given that, merely by virtue of letting AAA third parties release their games on an easy-to-develop-for platform that is also not constrained by a TV (and ostensibly has sophisticated and modern local lan-type options) opens up something that is not available to them yet. Western third parties don't have to cater to a handheld here. They just have an option that is accessible, and that option happens to also have portable utility.

Not saying that Western third parties will flock to the Switch (N got some 'splainin to do) but there is a reasonable case to be made about why they should, and I think that is a conversation that is going on among Western developers of all kinds right now, especially given the hype that is leading up to this launch.

 

[Foxix Von]

Yeah it'll be interesting to see how it pans out if that turns out to be true. It's kind of like using the Wii U GamePad's built-in Sensor Bar, only you'd have to dock the GamePad at the bottom of your TV.

Guess we'll find out in January!

No problem if they include a sensor bar port somewhere on the dock. But if I have to physically have the whole unit directly beneath my display it'll be a fast way to guarantee I hold off a purchase lol.

 

[Ninja Scooter]

I agree with everything you just wrote. However, there is a new element to be considered with the Switch: home console play anywhere. I think it's worth mentioning that this device seems poised to provide the home experience anywhere. Given that, merely by virtue of letting AAA third parties release their games on an easy-to-develop-for platform that is also not constrained by a TV (and ostensibly has sophisticated and modern local lan-type options) opens up something that is not available to them yet. Western third parties don't have to cater to a handheld here. They just have an option that is accessible, and that option happens to also have portable utility.

Not saying that Western third parties will flock to the Switch (N got some 'splainin to do) but there is a reasonable case to be made about why they should, and I think that is a conversation that is going on among Western developers of all kinds right now, especially given the hype that is leading up to this launch.

the ability to "switch" and play on the go or at home is great for consumers, but I don't see how it creates any greater incentive for western third parties. Also, the power levels of this thing are still in question. I doubt it will be on par with modern consoles/PCs which means you are asking major third party developers to potentially significantly re-tool their games to get them to run on Switch.

 

[WordAssassin]

No problem if they include a sensor bar port somewhere on the dock. But if I have to physically have the whole unit directly beneath my display it'll be a fast way to guarantee I hold off a purchase lol.

Yeah if they made a separate sensor bar, or a USB dongle to use our old ones, that'd be awesome. But with the way the Switch pops up over the lip of the dock, it seems like it'd be all-inclusive that way. So you'd have the sensor bar at the top of the screen if you're playing in handheld form, or if you have it docked at home.

It's a really clever idea if it turns out to be true but I totally understand how inconvenient it would be for people. The way my entertainment system is set up, I was gonna have my Switch dock tucker under the TV, perpendicular to the TV. If the top of the Switch is a sensor bar, though, that's... not gonna work at all heh.

 

[Speely]

the ability to "switch" and play on the go or at home is great for consumers, but I don't see how it creates any greater incentive for western third parties. Also, the power levels of this thing are still in question. I doubt it will be on par with modern consoles/PCs which means you are asking major third party developers to potentially significantly re-tool their games to get them to run on Switch.

You really don't see how western third parties might want to get in on a major console manufacturer releasing a platform that lets them affect a new market? The very fact that is is "great for consumers" drives the possibility that it is great for devs/pubs. Consumers drive what publishers want. It's a new market with a big name and lots of brand recognition behind it, and one without a gimmick needed to drive it.

The power of the console is probably the least important part here since we sort of know the bottom line, and even a modest result would be fine for the average (read: nonGAF) consumer. The more important element here is the ease of development, and I would wager that a more familiar and well-supported platform will count a lot more than a power ceiling in this regard. Devs won't be lamenting a lack of power, but instead welcoming a friendly and familiar architecture that also lets their games be played anywhere.

 

[Deleted member 10571]

Yeah it'll be interesting to see how it pans out if that turns out to be true. It's kind of like using the Wii U GamePad's built-in Sensor Bar, only you'd have to dock the GamePad at the bottom of your TV.

Guess we'll find out in January!

Isn't there, at least theoretically, the option to calibrate the position of a sensor bar in relation to the screen? Since you don't expect the dock to be moved, it would be no issue if the system expects the sensor bar, let's say' at the bottom right of the tv and take this position as the default if you point directly at the tv.

 

[tr1p1ex]

I'm confused. The NS isn't powerful enough to get AAA third party games, right? Why would third parties waste their time on a Wii U+ machine?

Western third parties don't want to create games for handhelds, they want to cater to premium/power users. I don't expect the Switch to really make any inroads for Nintendo with Western third parties (and certainly not because it's a handheld, the Vita was powerful for it's time and no western third parties really gave a shit about it), but I also don't think it will need to. Nintendo consolidating their software efforts and no longer needing to spread their resources across multiple platforms means they will be better equipped to support a platform on their own, with the smattering of indies and the occasional third party partnership (think Bayo 2) to complement the lineup. If people are expecting parity/day and date releases with third party PS/Xbox/PC releases I think they are going to end up sorely disappointed.

Don't get me wrong. 3rd parties aren't going to have BF1, for example, on the Switch. Not enough power.

But anything current gen that also has 360/PS3 versions are game for Switch as are remasters of 360/PS3 games.

The difference then and now is the Wii U was just a console. All the ports that went to it looked pointless to most people because most people owned the 360/PS3, played those games, and could buy those games for much less than the full priced Wii U versions. Nevermind that the 360/PS3 were much cheaper than the Wii U by then. The comparison was terrible. It only got worse when the next-gen consoles came out. When the 360/PS3 were left behind so was the Wii U. So it was lose/lose.

BUt the Switch? It's a handheld too. So in that context ports don't look that bad because no one else is going to have better AAA 3rd party games on a handheld than 360/PS3 ports. And remember many current games still have 360/PS3 versions. You can't completely dismiss Nintendo now for AAA 3rd party support because they have that handheld angle with their new console that they didn't have before.

To be clear, there's a decent chance the market won't care about portability for those games. It might end up business as usual. And if 3rd parties don't put any love into the ports, well that will only make things worse.


But there's a small opening for Nintendo here to create and own the AAA western 3rd party portability space. And I think there is also a bit of general trend towards portability with all types of media that could have AAA western 3rd parties more open to doing something on a handheld and customers more interested as well. And NIntendo is making a much more AAA western 3rd party handheld than before too. It has good power from the sound of things and traditional controls.

What's in it for 3rd parties is making money off their back catalog and some current games by doing handheld versions of them. No different than what Nintendo did when they released Zelda:OoT 3ds, Majoras Mask 3ds, Donkey Kong Country Returns 3d, Super Mario 64 DS, ....

 

[Enter the Dragon Punch]

How would you guys feel about GameStream and/or Grid support for the Switch?

(GameStream is from your PC, Grid is Nvidia far superior alternative to PSNow for AAA modern titles and shit)

Personally really hoping for one of the two, if not both. Would be great to have for Nintendo only gamers who missed a lot of stuff the last two gens, and would certainly help with having stuff to play during software droughts for people who only use Nintendo platforms. Plus, handheld Witcher 3, Shadow Warrior 2, Mad Max, etc sounds nice.

 

[Ninja Scooter]

You really don't see how western third parties might want to get in on a major console manufacturer releasing a platform that lets them affect a new market? The very fact that is is "great for consumers" drives the possibility that it is great for devs/pubs. Consumers drive what publishers want. It's a new market with a big name and lots of brand recognition behind it, and one without a gimmick needed to drive it.

The power of the console is probably the least important part here since we sort of know the bottom line, and even a modest result would be fine for the average (read: nonGAF) consumer. The more important element here is the ease of development, and I would wager that a more familiar and well-supported platform will count a lot more than a power ceiling in this regard. Devs won't be lamenting a lack of power, but instead welcoming a friendly and familiar architecture that also lets their games be played anywhere.

I think Nintendo is going to have to prove they have attracted a new market first, before third parties will jump on board. Until then I think the major western players will take a wait and see approach. In your own post you highlight the conflict/issue that this thing might face with third parties: Yes the power of the console might be fine for the "average(nonGAF) consumer", but major western third parties are not targeting that market. They have their eyes directly on the core (read: GAF) consumer and are looking to push the power envelope further and further, which is only going to create extend that gap over the years. I wouldn't hold my breathe for major third party support to be honest, at lesat not anything drastically different than what Nintendo has been getting of late.

 

[EDarkness]

Does anyone else have a burning, almost irrational desire to see PSO2 release on the Switch?

I think it would be perfect. Especially if no region lock.

I would be there day one. Would even buy another NS so my wife and I could play together. Would be awesome.

 

[Branduil]

Western third party support of going to depend on how fast the Switch sells and how easy it is to dump ports on. If it's something you can just have a few people work on and get a decent return then yeah I could see a lot better support than in the past.

 

[EDarkness]

Don't get me wrong. 3rd parties aren't going to have BF1, for example, on the Switch. Not enough power.

I don't understand this. If the normal Tegra X1 had a nice version of Crysis 3 running on it, then why couldn't they put Battlefield on the NS which would have better specs?

 

[Enter the Dragon Punch]

I don't understand this. If the normal Tegra X1 had a nice version of Crysis 3 running on it, then why couldn't they put Battlefield on the NS which would have better specs?

Wasn't the Tegra port cancelled because it was trash?

 

[Acidote]

I don't know if this is the right place to ask or if anyone has that information yet (or if they can ask about it), but do we know if the dock has an Ethernet port? I assume the portable itself obviously won't, but the dock having it would be quite important for me.

 

[Speely]

I think Nintendo is going to have to prove they have attracted a new market first, before third parties will jump on board. Until then I think the major western players will take a wait and see approach. In your own post you highlight the conflict/issue that this thing might face with third parties: Yes the power of the console might be fine for the "average(nonGAF) consumer", but major western third parties are not targeting that market. They have their eyes directly on the core (read: GAF) consumer and are looking to push the power envelope further and further, which is only going to create extend that gap over the years. I wouldn't hold my breathe for major third party support to be honest, at lesat not anything drastically different than what Nintendo has been getting of late.

Fair enough. I think we are seeing things from different perspectives. I think that the familiar development environment combined with a new market will attract devs, while you think that the platform will need to prove itself worthwhile first without them. You may be right. I guess I am just officially on board thinking that any developer or publisher (who isn't already fine with their own ecosystem, aka Blizzard) will be looking at the potential of the Switch a bit sooner that that. To be fair, that might be my own wishful thinking.

 

[ramparter]

Wouldn't that mean that I'd have to place the dock directly underneath my tv? That would basically make it unusable for me as I'd have to place it directly in front of my center speaker. That would just be horrible in my setup.

Having a sensor bar on the console is only convenient for those who don't want extra accessory but you can always have a seperate one. It's just two leds, it doesn't even need to be connected to the console (original sensor bar was only connected for power supply).

 

[EDarkness]

Wasn't the Tegra port cancelled because it was trash?

I wasn't able to find any reasons why it was canceled (could be that the Shield wasn't doing that well, so it was scrapped). Still, the video of it running looks great. No reason why the NS couldn't run that game or any of the newer games for that matter.

 

[Ninja Scooter]

I don't understand this. If the normal Tegra X1 had a nice version of Crysis 3 running on it, then why couldn't they put Battlefield on the NS which would have better specs?

I'm not sure I would expect a reasonably priced handheld/tablet (one would assume Nintendo is going to target an MSRP in the $200-300 price range) is not going to be able to keep up with modern AAA PC/PS/XB games. My understanding is that the examples of "console/PC" games ported to the Shield/Tegra, like Metal Gear Raiden (a last gen title) and Crysis 3 were not exactly optimal ports. I'm super excited for the Switch and for what it means for Nintendo's dev houses (no more having to deal with substandard hardware like 3DS to get great 1st party Nintendo games, no more having their games split across multiple platforms) but I think people really need to temper their expectations with regards to things like the power and third party support.

 

[Obscuritas]

Western third parties don't want to create games for handhelds, they want to cater to premium/power users. I don't expect the Switch to really make any inroads for Nintendo with Western third parties (and certainly not because it's a handheld, the Vita was powerful for it's time and no western third parties really gave a shit about it), but I also don't think it will need to. Nintendo consolidating their software efforts and no longer needing to spread their resources across multiple platforms means they will be better equipped to support a platform on their own, with the smattering of indies and the occasional third party partnership (think Bayo 2) to complement the lineup. If people are expecting parity/day and date releases with third party PS/Xbox/PC releases I think they are going to end up sorely disappointed.

.


The "playing on the go" feature is not something that would bring third parties on switch, especially now that the handheld business is fading away in the western markets.

 

[EDarkness]

I'm not sure I would expect a reasonably priced handheld/tablet (one would assume Nintendo is going to target an MSRP in the $200-300 price range) is not going to be able to keep up with modern AAA PC/PS/XB games. My understanding is that the examples of "console/PC" games ported to the Shield/Tegra, like Metal Gear Raiden (a last gen title) and Crysis 3 were not exactly optimal ports. I'm super excited for the Switch and for what it means for Nintendo's dev houses (no more having to deal with substandard hardware like 3DS to get great 1st party Nintendo games, no more having their games split across multiple platforms) but I think people really need to temper their expectations with regards to things like the power and third party support.

Why are people talking about a handheld here? I'm sure the main (and the most optimal) way to play this system is on the TV. That's kinda where we need to focus, I think. Everyone defaults back to playing a handheld and I think that's just not the way to look at this. Still, connected to the dock, connected to the TV, I think it will be able to play ports of those games quite well. It's a dedicated gaming machine, with better hardware than the Shield. Assuming there's not a lot of OS overhead and the tools are good, it should be able to produce some nice game and run ports of current gen games. I guess we'll see in the end, but I'm thinking logically this should be the case. We haven't heard any real rumors about it being much weaker than the Xbox 1 so taking that into account it should be able to do it.

EDIT: I've also heard that Android OS has a lot of system overhead, which the NS shouldn't have considering that developers should be able to get closer to the metal and Nvida working on dev tools and stuff will definitely be good at getting the most out of the hardware.

 

[japtor]

Western third party support of going to depend on how fast the Switch sells and how easy it is to dump ports on. If it's something you can just have a few people work on and get a decent return then yeah I could see a lot better support than in the past.

Yeah other than sales the main thing will be if they can get their engines running on it and can dump stuff on without jumping through hoops (i.e. like on Wii/Wii U). Nvidia's support on the software side of things could be huge for this, vs whatever usual Nintendo stuff western devs have historically had issues with.

As far as hardware here's Battlefield 1 running on a low end dual core mobile i5 and integrated Intel HD 4400 graphics (theoretically somewhere between 300-400 GFLOPS according to the tables here):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k_j1_7oUn4g
Another on the 4600 (which was on desktop CPUs):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lTO6GvhC16o

...not exactly good (particularly the former) but it shows it's not like it's impossible to run on lower end hardware, devs build stuff to scale up and down a good amount. And there's dynamic resolution to help, might deal with different power profiles too if that's a thing for the Switch...all the way down to 160x90!

 

[BGBW]

Western third parties don't want to create games for handhelds, they want to cater to premium/power users.

Then why do they make such bad PC ports eh? kukukukuku

 

[Ninja Scooter]

Why are people talking about a handheld here? I'm sure the main (and the most optimal) way to play this system is on the TV. That's kinda where we need to focus, I think. Everyone defaults back to playing a handheld and I think that's just not the way to look at this. Still, connected to the dock, connected to the TV, I think it will be able to play ports of those games quite well. It's a dedicated gaming machine, with better hardware than the Shield. Assuming there's not a lot of OS overhead and the tools are good, it should be able to produce some nice game and run ports of current gen games. I guess we'll see in the end, but I'm thinking logically this should be the case. We haven't heard any real rumors about it being much weaker than the Xbox 1 so taking that into account it should be able to do it.

There is no difference in power between a handheld Switch and a dock Switch so I'm not sir why you think the distinction is important with regards to its power level. The guts of the hardware are all in the tablet, for all functional purposes it's a tablet with a hardware out for televisions, but a tablet nonetheless. So far some the examples we have on similar hardware architectures are 30 seconds of offscreen footage of a Crysis 3 port (a four year old game) that was cancelled and a poorly running Metal Gear Rising port (another 4 year old game). Granted Nintendo will get a custom Tegra so we have to factor that, but it seems like a pretty big leap to go from that to assuming this thing will run a modern, top of the line title like Battlefield 1. We had this same song and dance with regards to power and third parties in the lead up to the Wii U. Until proven otherwise, I just don't think Nintendo is interested in chasing those things and doesn't put a priority on them.

 

[EDarkness]

There is no difference in power between a handheld Switch and a dock Switch so I'm not sir why you think the distinction is important with regards to its power level. The guts of the hardware are all in the tablet, for all functional purposes it's a tablet with a hardware out for televisions, but a tablet nonetheless. So far some the examples we have on similar hardware architectures are 30 seconds of offscreen footage of a Crysis 3 port (a four year old game) that was cancelled and a poorly running Metal Gear Rising port (another 4 year old game). Granted Nintendo will get a custom Tegra so we have to factor that, but it seems like a pretty big leap to go from that to assuming this thing will run a modern, top of the line title like Battlefield 1. We had this same song and dance with regards to power and third parties in the lead up to the Wii U. Until proven otherwise, I just don't think Nintendo is interested in chasing those things and doesn't put a priority on them.

Wait, I was under the impression that connected to the dock it would run at higher speeds and the like? I think that was one of the rumors from the other day. Why would it run the same when not connected to the dock? The wouldn't make any sense. Which means that connected it should provide a better experience...and again that would mean that it would be the preferable way to play. Playing "on the go" will be where it'll be sub optimal since it'll have to downclock to conserve battery life. Nintendo said this is a console...not a handheld, so that would mean being a console would be the first consideration...at least in my mind.

 

[Terrell]

I think Nintendo is going to have to prove they have attracted a new market first, before third parties will jump on board. Until then I think the major western players will take a wait and see approach. In your own post you highlight the conflict/issue that this thing might face with third parties: Yes the power of the console might be fine for the "average(nonGAF) consumer", but major western third parties are not targeting that market. They have their eyes directly on the core (read: GAF) consumer and are looking to push the power envelope further and further, which is only going to create extend that gap over the years. I wouldn't hold my breathe for major third party support to be honest, at lesat not anything drastically different than what Nintendo has been getting of late.

Your assumption that the "core" gamer makes up the entirety of the market being targeted by 3rd-parties is mind-boggling. Selling a product isn't a zero-sum proposal. Better graphics entice the core gamer, which they want to continue, but games sell in the quantity they do (and on as many platforms as they do, with a wide range of power capabilities) because the average consumer is enticed by the offering whether it's on the bleeding edge or not. To think the core is all that matters to 3rd-parties is... borderline self-absorbed.

And how can they "extend the gap" when they're being mandated to hold to PS4/XB1 spec until a REAL new generation from either hardware provider starts?

 

[Ninja Scooter]

Wait, I was under the impression that connected to the dock it would run at higher speeds and the like? I think that was one of the rumors from the other day. Why would it run the same when not connected to the dock? The wouldn't make any sense. Which means that connected it should provide a better experience...and again that would mean that it would be the preferable way to play. Playing "on the go" will be where it'll be sub optimal since it'll have to downclock to conserve battery life. Nintendo said this is a console...not a handheld, so that would mean being a console would be the first consideration...at least in my mind.

http://m.ign.com/articles/2016/10/2...nintendo-switch-clarifies-additional-features

For all intents and purposes it's a handheld with a tv out, just executed better than we have seen before (with stuff like psp or vita remote play) I think they want the messaging to be that the game you play at home will be the same as on the go. They are probably hitching their wagon to the console wording because the Wii U is dead while the 3DS is still viable. It's the third pillar thing with DS and Gameboy again.

 

[Speely]

Wait, I was under the impression that connected to the dock it would run at higher speeds and the like? I think that was one of the rumors from the other day. Why would it run the same when not connected to the dock? The wouldn't make any sense. Which means that connected it should provide a better experience...and again that would mean that it would be the preferable way to play. Playing "on the go" will be where it'll be sub optimal since it'll have to downclock to conserve battery life. Nintendo said this is a console...not a handheld, so that would mean being a console would be the first consideration...at least in my mind.

Your assumption is likely correct. There is no reason to tie the concept primarily into the home docked experience otherwise.

Edit: ^^ Just reading the above linked article's wording gives you a hint

 

[Ninja Scooter]

Your assumption that the "core" gamer makes up the entirety of the market being targeted by 3rd-parties is mind-boggling. Selling a product isn't a zero-sum proposal. Better graphics entice the core gamer, which they want to continue, but games sell in the quantity they do (and on as many platforms as they do, with a wide range of power capabilities) because the averageconsumer is enticed by the offering whether it's on the bleeding edge or not. To think the core is all that matters to 3rd-parties is... borderline self-absorbed.

And how can they "extend the gap" when they're being mandated to hold to PS4/XB1 spec until a REAL new generation from either hardware provider starts?

Because the Switch will probably be below PS4/XB1 levels. Id be shocked if they entered on an even playing field in terms of tech, but I guess we will wait and see in a couple of months, but I don't expect any of the third party support for this thing to go beyond last gen Remasters/ports.

 

[Terrell]

Because the Switch will probably be below PS4/XB1 levels. Id be shocked if they entered on an even playing field in terms of tech, but I guess we will wait and see in a couple of months, but I don't expect any of the third party support for this thing to go beyond last gen Remasters/ports.

The gap is static. It's not like PS4 or XB1 have a hidden TFLOP to mine out of them that was conveniently left off of a spec sheet, the specs are what they are, and therefore, any gap that exists cannot "widen".