For what it's worth, BL2 has a better frame rate now than in the video you linked. That's like the worst I've ever seen it run.

Given the power advantages that at least PS4Pro and Scorpio will probably have over switch it is Unlikely this will convince people to go for Switch over MS or Sony consoles. But it may mean Nintendo fans won;t feel like they need to buy a second console to get all the best multiplat content.

This is really good actually. This will at least provide some ports for launch window. Depending on how well this launches this could provide a lot of third party support!

I dunno. Xbox One already has games running at sub 720p. Do you really think that lowering the resolution to 540p (Nintendo's minimum) and lowering the distance grass pops in will really be enough? No matter how modern the architecture, if it isn't strong enough, then no setting tweaks will make up that. The system is maybe half the power of the Xbox One. I doubt that lowering the resolution will be that huge of a difference.

Won't matter if space is an issue.

True. I really don't have a clue about how they will solve the SD card issue. And I hope it has a nice internal storage. Not sure if there's a cloud-based tech that could solve this.

I'm actually more concerned about internal storage than cards.  With card prices falling all the time and Nintendo's intiment relation with that industry, they should be able to provide 16, 32, and 64 gig cqrds without much issue and without much increase in cost to publishers.  But internal storage...I just don't know how they will handle this.  The Switch needs to be very capable for its size without going over $300 so cost cutting is a major concern and I could see internal storage being part of that effort.

I've thought about it since the whole 16/32/128GB rumor came to be, and literally the only thing that could possibly save them is like some revolutionary and ground-breaking cloud storage tech. Cloud storage is why Apple neuters their space, so it's not completely out of the realm of possibility that Nintendo could do something like that. And they own NERD, so it's not like they haven't invested in it.

But I don't think that's happening. I'm in the "there's no hope" camp.

That sounds good but then, reading further, I'm not so sure if this isn't partially PR from Nvidia in an attempt to impress investors, consumers, and publishers. What stuck out, especially, was this--"all of these architectures are common in the sense that they all use modern GPUs, they all use programmable shading, and they all have basically similar features.”

That's kind of like saying that a Yugo is like a Lamborghini in that they have four tires and an engine.

I mean, I mostly believe that it's mostly true but I'm wondering if his "simple" is the same as a developer's "simple".

That is just not true. Remember, 3DS had to make games $10 more expensive because of 2GB of extra memory. And that was just because of 2GB-4GB. The issue here is the price of carts compared to discs. If the recommended size is 16GB, that means that it's a price bottleneck, not a space issue. 16GB is likely the $60 size equilibrium since Nintendo wants the Switch to be marketed and consumed as a home console with home-console style games sold at a home console price. If $60 is the equilibrium price for a mere 16GB, 32GB will be like $70-$75. 64GB will be like $80-$90. People are grossly overstating just how how much buying in bulk reduces cost. Disks cost pennies to manufacture. Carts cost more. 64GB carts cost WAY more. That's all a publisher needs to ditch the platform.

Since the Switch uses physical media, the internal storage is only an issue for patches. Which is a big issue, but not as big of an issue as one that literally prevents games from being made.