By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
curl-6 on 20 December 2016
Edit Thread
AngryLittleAlchemist said:
curl-6 said:

It's not that I want it to be underpowered, it's that you want it not to be underpowered.

Anyone with a general knowledge of graphics technology could have told you from the moment Switch's form factor was revealed that it was never going to be on par with Xbox One in terms of power.

Of course I want it not to be underpowered, but at the same time that doesn't create an inherent bias. Stop trying to us the "i'm completely neutral guys" position to completely back up stoogyness.

I mean i'm not about to get into a fight about graphical knowledge, I think I have a better idea of it than the general consumer, but you could be more knowedgeable, who knows. I never said I expected it to be near Xbox One though, I said other people did. Quite frankily, with this leaked information, there are multiple routes Nintendo could and should have taken to make it more power heavy. I don't think there's any arguing that. Even with the similarities between the newest Maxwell and Pascal, there's no doubt using a Pascal would have been slightly better at least. I think the amount of underclocking might be taken a bit too far, too. You have a cooling system, use it more affectively. These small changes add up. It's like the people who think there isn't a difference between an intel i7 and an intel i7 k besides the ability to overclock. Believe it or not, there's small differences in just about any model that add up. 

Yes, they could have made it more powerful than this if they'd wanted. But that's not who Nintendo are, not anymore. Their commitment to powerful hardware died with the Gamecube. Since then, every system they've made has opted for low powered hardware. Switch is simply the continuation of the same trend.