Regarding Nintendo Handhelds, was the Switch concept inevitable?

[Mr Puggsly]

The_Liquid_Laser said:

Mr Puggsly said:

I think he's trying to say the Switch can handle PS4 games to some extent, some better than others, but his statement obviously just comes off ridiculous. I mean you can't compare Wolfenstein II and say its essentially the same. Or maybe he looks at a game like Tales of Vesperia and determines Switch and PS4 are about equal.

Its kinda like boasting a cheap video card can play the same stuff as an expensive video card. One just might look like garbage in comparison.

Actually what I'm talking about is diminishing returns.  In previous generations there was a noticable graphical leap when a new generation came out.

PS1 -> PS2  "Wow look at the huge difference in graphics"
PS2 -> PS3  "These HD visuals look amazing"
PS3 -> PS4 "Meh, it looks a little better...I guess"

If you've got a handheld with PS1 level graphics, like the DS, and it's out at the same time as the PS3, then visually it just doesn't compare.  Obviously people are going to like the looks of a PS3 much more than a DS.  On the other hand if you've got a handheld at PS3 levels, then people might not care about playing a PS4 at home, because it's just a minor upgrade at that point.

Well the specs on a Switch are much better than a PS3.  Specs on Switch are much closer to PS4 than PS3.  At that point you can only tell the difference with a side by side comparison.  Most people won't bother with that.  (I certainly don't bother with it.)  Instead most people will say, "Switch looks good enough."  The portability becomes a much bigger factor than the minor graphical upgrade. 

In fact even against the PS5, the Switch will look good enough.  A person has to have a pretty big 4K TV and/or be at the right distance to get the full value of 4K.  Most people will still think the Switch looks good enough.  I mean, more people bought a Wii than a PS3, and the graphical difference there was extremely noticable.  Because of diminishing returns, PS5 won't even seem like that much better over Switch.  Most people are just not going to get a 70" 4K TV so that they can tell the difference.  

This is why Switch was inevitable.  Handheld graphics have essentially caught up to home graphics.  Because of diminishing returns, the differences barely matter anymore.

Okay, so I was right. In a nutshell since they can play the same games you see them as equals. Even if the Switch port of technically demanding games are taking a massive hit in the overall fidelity.

First of all, the leap to PS3 to PS4 is not a minor leap especially when you look at games actually built for new hardware. Switch is more powerful than PS3 and handles some of the same games on PS4 quite well. However and most importantly, many notable and technically demanding games aren't on Switch nor is there proof Switch could handle them well. Even if Switch could handle technically demanding PS4 games to some playable extent, many aren't on Switch. So even if you feel your Switch is powerful device, you may still need a PS4 to play the latest CoD, BF, AC, RDR2 and list goes on.

I don't need to look at Ark, Doom, Wolfenstein II and other games side by side to see there can be a huge disparity between PS4 and Switch. It really depends on what games we're talking about. You proved my example right, you look at a game like Tales of Vesperia or Mega Man 11 and come to the conclusion PS4 and Switch are equals. If that's your barometer, I guess you would see them as the same.

Again, when you compare Switch to PS5 it really depends on what you're comparing. I mean games with less demanding visuals may look like equals on Switch and PS5. This is a silly discussion, we already see a huge disparity between some Switch and PS4 games. Now you want to bring PS5 into this?

I get your logic. Its just... dumb.