Pemalite said:
monocle_layton said:
Never said don't criticize the Switch. However, a more premium screen on it wouldn't make sense. Making it glass would leave it prone to cracks, and a 1080p-4k screen would simply destroy the battery, something people complained about as well.
Either we get a good screen with acceptable battery life or a spectacular screen with horrendous battery life. have both and you get a higher price tag, something no one would want
|
If battery was such a huge concern they would have used a more efficient SoC such as the Pascal based Tegra.
Also. The display technology itself is more important than the displays resolutions in regards to power consumption. You *can* have higher resolution panels consume less power than lower resolution panels. Samsung did it.
Nintendo could have also opted for a different battery chemistry which was also denser in terms of capacity.
Battery life is just a terrible excuse, Nintendo could have chosen better components. They exist. They are available. It's what *I* would have wanted, which may not align to what someone else wants. And that is okay.
|
We all appreciated anything which could've helped the Switch. However, Samsung IS the world leader in display quality, both in terms of technology and efficiency.
I'm sure Nintendo did whatever they could to bring an effective device. Sure, would be disappointing if they skipped out on better technology, but they're the ones who handle the finances and whatnot. I'll take a several billion dollar company's actions over whatever doubts I have
