Probably not. A lot of mobile phones are sub-native res and/or simplistic. Even a lot of Vita's most impressive games run at sub-native res(so do some of its PS2 ports). Pushing that many pixels is very resource draining.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Nintendo's next handheld will be based on the resolution of the XL model, right?
- Thread starter Solid SOAP
- Start date
Probably not. A lot of mobile phones are sub-native res and/or simplistic. Even a lot of Vita's most impressive games run at sub-native res(so do some of its PS2 ports). Pushing that many pixels is very resource draining.
IdreamofHIME
Member
Whats the WiiU pad? I expect it to be better than that at least.
Why would it need to cost 300-400 dollars? Have you checked the market for mobile hardware in the past... five years?
They're still better for precision.
Night Angel
Member
It better be 1080p... mobile hardware is hella cheap.
R10Neymarfan
Member
540-544p 3D at minimum. There would be no reason not to even reach the qHD status for screens. 480p mobile screens is that even possible in 2015? Does anyone even make those?
PlayStation VITA's resolution is sub 720p (which is 1280x720).
VITA's native res is 960 x 544 right?
I do realize that 3DS's res was actually lower than that of PSP, but this time I'd expect Nintendo to shoot for something a bit better than VITA's.
Obviously 1080p is a complete waste since it demands more GPU performance that could otherwise go into graphics and framerate.
Assuming a single non-3D screen, 720p at best.
Regardless, I sure will miss glasses free auto-stereoscopic 3D on the next handheld. The best I could hope for would be a higher priced model that does 3D.
I've only had the OG 3DS from 2011 so for me the time is right to get the NA New 3DS XL and I'm fine with that being the only option and don't really care it doesn't come with a power adapter.
Anyway, no I do not think Nintendo's next handheld will be stuck with the resolution of 3DS.
VITA's native res is 960 x 544 right?
I do realize that 3DS's res was actually lower than that of PSP, but this time I'd expect Nintendo to shoot for something a bit better than VITA's.
Obviously 1080p is a complete waste since it demands more GPU performance that could otherwise go into graphics and framerate.
Assuming a single non-3D screen, 720p at best.
Regardless, I sure will miss glasses free auto-stereoscopic 3D on the next handheld. The best I could hope for would be a higher priced model that does 3D.
I've only had the OG 3DS from 2011 so for me the time is right to get the NA New 3DS XL and I'm fine with that being the only option and don't really care it doesn't come with a power adapter.
Anyway, no I do not think Nintendo's next handheld will be stuck with the resolution of 3DS.
Nintendo wants to sell every unit for a profit. And history has shown that.
Stevey
Member
But that wouldn't sell, would it? So no-one would make that.
I get what you're saying though.
bobawesome
Member
If the next Nintendo handheld had one decent screen I'd be so happy.
……forgetit
Member
This is Nintendo we're talking about here.
Why do people think that Nintendo's next handheld needs to cost that much in order for it to have a decent performance? Do you honestly think that $400-600 phones cost that much to make?
Average bill of materials for a flagship today is around $230. And I'm talking about aluminum body, GPS, mobile chip, 3 GB RAM, 13-20 rear and 2-5 MP front cameras, etc.
If we take into consideration that next Nintendo handheld will have plastic body, no GPS, no mobile chip, 2 GB RAM, lower res cameras (around 5 MP) and other cuts when compared to a flagship, Nintendo could very well cut BOM below $200 and sell the device for $199 and still make a few bucks per unit. Not to mention that hardware will make strides towards being more powerful and cheaper. See, console makers make most of their money on software, so they have to sell hardware at loss or for a very small profit margin. Samsung, LG, and others have to make money on hardware, therefore, profit margins for phones and tablets must be much higher.
Nintendo is known not to be fond of losing money on hardware, but they will have to reconsider their strategy if the want to archieve strong market penetration. Ideally, they'll sell their next handheld at $150. Hell, Sony lost $300-350 per PS3 sold (if my memory serves me right).
……forgetit
Member
My point is it's not an unreasonable request. Nintendo could release a device with similar power at $200 and make $50-$60 of profit per unit.
The 2DS is one screen.
http://www.polygon.com/2013/10/15/4...wn-reveals-its-big-single-screen-construction
http://www.polygon.com/2013/10/15/4...wn-reveals-its-big-single-screen-construction
Perfect Cha0s
Member
Even just 720p would be a massive upgrade.
That doesn't take into account the fact that handhelds have buttons and sticks and also ignores the costs of manufacturing and shipping. BOM breakdowns are misleading.
Mithos
Member
It's 854 x 480.
Nintendo absolutely can increase power/cost efficiency and likely will for their upcoming products simply because the number of vendors for high-end mobile components has shrunk. It's still possible they go for something custom and that will have much higher costs but it's unclear if that's still a viable route. Perhaps more than that are the custom concerns. Backwards compatibility, custom hardware features, custom design, software and updates, services etc. Anything they make is very boutique in that way and always will. It's never going to use off the shelf designs.
In that way it's always going to cost more than other devices that are similar because the investment costs are considerably higher. Also, because it's unique it's probably not going to massively devalue over time because it's not a commoditized thing. So over time the hardware value will weaken but as with consoles, the ecosystem value will grow. At that point it's quite a different beast altogether than a mobile device because the sense of value comes from a completely different place. Again, it's because it's boutique, you're paying for something beyond the raw costs, not entirely unlike clothes and handbags.
In that way it's always going to cost more than other devices that are similar because the investment costs are considerably higher. Also, because it's unique it's probably not going to massively devalue over time because it's not a commoditized thing. So over time the hardware value will weaken but as with consoles, the ecosystem value will grow. At that point it's quite a different beast altogether than a mobile device because the sense of value comes from a completely different place. Again, it's because it's boutique, you're paying for something beyond the raw costs, not entirely unlike clothes and handbags.
I hope so honestly. It seems like they put all this investment on doubling down on the 3D, it'd be nice to see it stick around as it's really awesome when it works.
blu
Wants the largest console games publisher to avoid Nintendo's platforms.
Yep. It's full of cheap 1080p phones running console games at console fps..
This thread. /smh
……forgetit
Member
Even then, mobile technology has boomed tremendously sense the OG 3ds came out. It would be insane to put a sub 480p screen on a handheld in 2016-2017 and potentially more expensive than going with an actual 720p screen.
kitchenmotors
Banned
There have been quite a few hints that the 3DS' successor will have an AMD GPU which will probably be pretty custom by virtue of being an AMD GPU in a mobile/handheld device. However it was AMD who first commented, expressing interest in getting the contract for handhelds, so they might be giving them a killer deal.
I think people take for granted what the majority of smartphone/tablet use actually is. Heavy duty games drain batteries like no tomorrow.
EDIT:
True. My money is on 480p if 3D/dual screens, 540p if 2D/dual screens or 720p if 2D/one screen. The main issue isn't cost though, it's the performance needed to pump out that many pixels.
……forgetit
Member
Because they share similar manufacturing space, parts, and are in indirect competition with each other?
1st Course
Member
We're talking about Nintendo here. At best you're getting a device with Vita like specs.
Doesn't change the fact, that it's a stupid comparison. Go on find me the $200 phone that would be powerful enough to play Nintendo handheld games in 1080p with 60fps.
Nintendo doesn't manufacture handhelds so that they can sell Candy Crush clones in glorious 1080p.
……forgetit
Member
I'll make this easy for them
+
Together these have a retail value of $160. The moto E, while having an equal resolution to Vita, has at least double the power as far as internal specs go and has a huge profit margin. People need to stop acting like the industry hasn't had massive innovation sense the OG 3DS launched. Going below 540p would be insane when even crap phones do better.
Cost of a few plastic buttons is miniscule. Every BOM that I've seen does include manufacturing costs.
……forgetit
Member
I already did that with a tablet and it was under $200 and 2 years old.
If we got that at least i'd be more then happy, especially coming from Nintendo. lol
It's still costs though and I honestly wouldn't know how much something like a slide pad or c stick would cost(probably more than a button). How do they calculate manufacturing cost? Is it pure estimation?
But 3DS games are equivalent to Wii games at lower res(but in 3D). Even the highest end of mobile devices can't run PS3/360 level games at 1080p. If they were to put a 1080p screen in the 4DS the game wouldn't be a full gen leap above 3DS'.
Twilight Princess
Member
I want it to be a tablet. 7 in form factor.
I thought it was obvious, but I was not talking about GBA games, lol.
……forgetit
Member
My point is even in-expensive parts now are much better than a lot n this thread are assuming. Heck look at this thing.
Fairly top of the line when it launched, 720p screen, has all those pesky buttons that people in this thread seem to think add $200 to the cost, and currently selling at sub-lanch 3DS prices. If nintendo could do half of this in the 2 years that it'll probably take before we get a new hand held it would still be much better than what most in this thread are assuming.
nhlducks35
Member
It's 720p
...and a brick.
……forgetit
Member
If you mean a 3DS emulator then that's a different beast all together, but if you mean the quality of the games the tablet I posted can play games that stomp all over 3DS games graphically at the native res and at 60fps. So yeah, there you go.
If sony can sell a beefy machine like the Vita for $250 at launch, I don't see why Nintendo can't at least make their next handheld the same spec-wise. By that time, they could sell it for $200 or less, easily.
Imagine playing all of those first party nintendo games on a Vita-like screen with a beefy cpu/gpu.
They really need to ditch the dual screens and 3D.
Imagine playing all of those first party nintendo games on a Vita-like screen with a beefy cpu/gpu.
They really need to ditch the dual screens and 3D.
That streams games from your PC, correct? Along with emulation.
It's also $299 minimum (3DS was $249 at launch).