By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - NX April Direct Leak!

hentai_11 on 07 April 2016
tsogud said:
Wyrdness said:

The name shown to the public will be NEX though according to the post, NEX is a very marketable name if true, it can stand for Nintendo Extra in the same NES stands for Nintendo Entertainment System, most people just call the latter the NES. 

I would like the name more if it was Nintendo's tenth console or if it was the tenth gen, like a stylized version of "Nintendo Entertainment Ten" but it just seems so unfitting...

I like your idea and it even would work, if you include the different form factors of the consoles ...

1 Color TV game

2 NES

3 SNES

4 N64

5 GameCube

6 Panasonic Q

7 Wii

8 Wii mini

9 Wii U

10 NEX

http://nintendo.wikia.com/wiki/List_of_Nintendo_systems



Around the Network
captain carot on 07 April 2016
Pemalite said:
captain carot said:
Now for bandwidth: It's unlikely that Nintendo will be going with an expensive PCB. But if we take AMD's Tonga, that design is a bit more memory efficient than Pitcairn (PS4 CPU).
Then there's that 12GB RAM thing>192 or 384 bit memory interface. The latter one would be 50% wider than PS4's Xbones. So yes, in theory you could go with DDR3.

There are some serious questions though. For example:
Why that huge amount of RAM? 8GB total would probably be enaugh and well, you could go the Sony way with GDDR5.
NEX wouldn't seem that much more powerful but have almost double the free RAM though probably at least risking bandwidth issues.

12Gb of Ram doesn't mean it needs a 192bit or 384bit bus, it could have 256bit, nVidia used to do such a thing fairly often.
But it does come with some caveats...

12Gb really isn't "huge" either.

The consoles only have 4.5Gb - 5Gb of Ram reserved for gaming duties out of a total of 8Gb.
Let's say 2Gb is used strictly for graphics... That means you only have 2.5Gb - 3Gb of Ram for the game itself, not really much play area in 2016. In comparison the average gaming PC has 8Gb of system Ram, slowly moving over to 16Gb, the OS will only use at-most 2Gb and can free up more memory if things get tight. Then the GPU has it's own 2Gb+ memory pool on top of that, 12Gb of console memory would push the NX closer to the PC in terms of available memory devs can play with.

Still, I would take these rumors with a grain of salt.
There isn't any technical reason why they can't go with that particular memory setup, but it also wouldn't make sense for them to do so... I would hazard a guess it's just a dev kit with more memory for development purposes.

The 'average' gaming PC doesn't exist. That's at least the one thing people should've learnt from Steam statistics.

The rest is hardly comparable. I had 1.5 GB system memory when Xbox 360 came out. Though only a 128MB graphics card.

 

Right now, we are talking about (likely) much stronger PC's than NX will be.

 

So yes, might be devkit only. Or Nintendo decided for much but slow.



JEMC on 07 April 2016
TheSpindler said:
cycycychris said:
This guys is now just trolling us

Update 8: As promised some more info, this time NEX games that will be released on launch day or around the launch (launch window games), i haven't listed any game i don't have 100% confirmation on, (To name a few, Final Fantasy, Destiny, Battlefield, F-Zero-EX, Super Smash Bros Wii U Port).

Launch Games:

Super Mario NEX, from what i've heard it's very close to Mario Sunshine in terms of Graphics/Gameplay.
Zelda Wii U: Definitive Edition NEX
Luigi's Mansion
Fifa 17
Call of Duty
Deus Ex Mankind Divided
Dragon Quest
Mass Effect Trilogy: Definitive Edition
Mass Effect Andromeda, (launch window)

Nintendo will have a big E3 Press Conference and a lot to cover.

All this sounds plausible and safe bets actually.  Square will likely be there, Activision and EA will be there, at the start anyway.  I don't see any Ubisoft though, and they are usually always there.

Zelda Wii U is likely, we heard rumours of Luigi's Mansion from Geno was it, and Nintendo are likely preparing a new Super Mario Bros game. That F-Zero EX and Smash Bros port I don't know about though.

While that could be plausible, there are two things that make it very unlikely and prove that the leaker is no good:

1-There's no way a "simple" developer would know not only what other companies are working on, but when they will launch their games.

2-Mass Effect Trilogy? That's clearly a joke/jab for what happened at Wii U's launch.



Please excuse my bad English.

Currently gaming on a PC with an i5-4670k@stock (for now), 16Gb RAM 1600 MHz and a GTX 1070

Steam / Live / NNID : jonxiquet    Add me if you want, but I'm a single player gamer.

osed125 on 07 April 2016
JEMC said:
TheSpindler said:

All this sounds plausible and safe bets actually.  Square will likely be there, Activision and EA will be there, at the start anyway.  I don't see any Ubisoft though, and they are usually always there.

Zelda Wii U is likely, we heard rumours of Luigi's Mansion from Geno was it, and Nintendo are likely preparing a new Super Mario Bros game. That F-Zero EX and Smash Bros port I don't know about though.

While that could be plausible, there are two things that make it very unlikely and prove that the leaker is no good:

1-There's no way a "simple" developer would know not only what other companies are working on, but when they will launch their games.

2-Mass Effect Trilogy? That's clearly a joke/jab for what happened at Wii U's launch.

In one of the tens of thousands NX rumors, I remember seeing one about EA supporting the system because of the strong NX launch tittles/launch window. Maybe Nintendo is letting developers know planned games for their launch so they feel more comfortable making games for the new system. 

Still unlikely that a developer would know this information (if Nintendo is giving the list of launch games, is probably for higher ups only), but it is a possibility.



Nintendo and PC gamer

JEMC on 07 April 2016
osed125 said:
JEMC said:

While that could be plausible, there are two things that make it very unlikely and prove that the leaker is no good:

1-There's no way a "simple" developer would know not only what other companies are working on, but when they will launch their games.

2-Mass Effect Trilogy? That's clearly a joke/jab for what happened at Wii U's launch.

In one of the tens of thousands NX rumors, I remember seeing one about EA supporting the system because of the strong NX launch tittles/launch window. Maybe Nintendo is letting developers know planned games for their launch so they feel more comfortable making games for the new system. 

Still unlikely that a developer would know this information (if Nintendo is giving the list of launch games, is probably for higher ups only), but it is a possibility.

I doubt Nintendo would reveal such things. They could say that X company is working on one or two launch titles, for example, but they wouldn't say the exact titles.



Please excuse my bad English.

Currently gaming on a PC with an i5-4670k@stock (for now), 16Gb RAM 1600 MHz and a GTX 1070

Steam / Live / NNID : jonxiquet    Add me if you want, but I'm a single player gamer.

Around the Network
osed125 on 07 April 2016
JEMC said:
osed125 said:

In one of the tens of thousands NX rumors, I remember seeing one about EA supporting the system because of the strong NX launch tittles/launch window. Maybe Nintendo is letting developers know planned games for their launch so they feel more comfortable making games for the new system. 

Still unlikely that a developer would know this information (if Nintendo is giving the list of launch games, is probably for higher ups only), but it is a possibility.

I doubt Nintendo would reveal such things. They could say that X company is working on one or two launch titles, for example, but they wouldn't say the exact titles.

I was talking specifically about Nintendo games, but you are right, it makes no sense (and I also assume it could be illegal) for Nintendo to tell other companies about specific third party games.



Nintendo and PC gamer

Pemalite on 07 April 2016
captain carot said:

The 'average' gaming PC doesn't exist. That's at least the one thing people should've learnt from Steam statistics.

The rest is hardly comparable. I had 1.5 GB system memory when Xbox 360 came out. Though only a 128MB graphics card.

 

Right now, we are talking about (likely) much stronger PC's than NX will be.

 

So yes, might be devkit only. Or Nintendo decided for much but slow.

The average gaming PC does exist and in-fact the steam statistics backs that up.

And it is comparible, there was a reason why the PC had better graphics than the Xbox 360 for the entire generation.



--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--

captain carot on 08 April 2016

Well, not the entire gen. But it was surpassed very fast, GTX 8800...
With the finalized DevKits arriving very short before release the launch games had some issues, especially resolution and AA. But the first year saw some great looking an good running games for that time.
Yes, you coould have a SLI system or a 7950 GX². And the X1900 XTX performed great. But we#re talking about the 400-550 €/$ range back then.
On the other hand, two years after release games where optimized good enough you needed a way more powerful rig for the same performance. I remember Assassins Creed running more or less on PS360 level with an overclocked E4400 and Radeon HD3850 basically overclocked to 3870. If i remember right it didn't even benefit much from CPU overclocking.



Mummelmann on 08 April 2016

I can't wait for all this to be over, rumors and leaks are getting out of hand.



Pemalite on 08 April 2016
captain carot said:
Well, not the entire gen. But it was surpassed very fast, GTX 8800...
With the finalized DevKits arriving very short before release the launch games had some issues, especially resolution and AA. But the first year saw some great looking an good running games for that time.
Yes, you coould have a SLI system or a 7950 GX². And the X1900 XTX performed great. But we#re talking about the 400-550 €/$ range back then.
On the other hand, two years after release games where optimized good enough you needed a way more powerful rig for the same performance. I remember Assassins Creed running more or less on PS360 level with an overclocked E4400 and Radeon HD3850 basically overclocked to 3870. If i remember right it didn't even benefit much from CPU overclocking.

Even when the PC had less "power" than the consoles, cross plats still looked better.

And you needed to upgrade more often because games on the PC kept looking better and better and better. Once we reached Battlefield 3, there was a generational difference, the PC always had better looking games... That was true 20 years ago... And that is true today.

I remember playing around with the shaders in Oblivion... We were getting PC's with a Radeon 9700 Pro running that game better than the Xbox 360 could, which had a faster GPU and CPU and the same amount of Ram.

Besides... Most Core 2 Quad systems could handle the entire generation of games with the occassional GPU upgrade anyway, can even handle allot of the next gen games out now even with a bit of overclocking, plus a several decade large game library that is already established.



--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--