Wyrdness said:
I don't think you get what is being said here the speculation isn't on the Switch it's on all future platforms adopting the same or similar form factor, you're not reading the posts properly I assume you're only skimming over them because the latest tech is never used in platforms that's the point the will be several progressions between the release of a new platform and its successor the new cards being bigger aren't an issue because they're not used straight away much like consoles never use the last GPU tech either. This rate of progression lowers the costs of the tech before it for example PS4 level performance or performance close to it is already around in mobile tech but not viable as it's costly and power consuming but over the next 6-7 years progression will make such tech easily viable to the point that tech above PS4 performance may be viable when the Switch's successor is on the way similar to how Switch itself was still able to be in the middle of Wii U and X1 performance wise despite being a hybrid platform. |
Errr you are assuming I don't know how to read for the second time, ok... I'm not assuming the speculation is about Switch. I'm talking about next iterations. The point is that doesn't matter how much tecnology progress having a display will cost more than not having a display, or will we get to a point where TVs will be donated by TV makers? Same consideration for battery. Sure there can be a time a lot of people will be satisfied by whatever console is released on a portable formfactory and wouldn't mind the additional performance they would get if it was a table, but the assumption that it will be the norm and will replace table consoles isn't necessarily right.
And again, same architeture, same tech, same all, small chip versus big chip...big chip will have more computational units and therefore will be more powerfull.
Yes in 7 years you'll have stronger than even PS4Pro portable HW. The thing is that you'll also have something even stronger and cheaper to produce for your table.

duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363
Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994
Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."







