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

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Is Switch's processing power important to you?

 

Is it?

Very, I won't buy it if it's weak 171 25.26%
 
Moderately so 281 41.51%
 
Not really 127 18.76%
 
No, power doesn't matter to me 63 9.31%
 
No, cos I'm not buying one 35 5.17%
 
Total:677
superchunk said:
JWeinCom said:

I don't really understand much of that.  Do you have a for dummies version?

The best rumors... the ones people who have actually stated facts that were proven true are that NS is not equal or XboxOne... it's less than XboxOne. 

The CPU is actually better in NS as the Jaguar in XboxOne/PS4 is a craptastic low-power mobile CPU that has plenty of docs to show that ARM is better... and yes it is just as easy now to put shit on ARM as it is X86 so don't preach that BS.

However, the GPU is definitely less than Xbox One which is in turn less than PS4. This doesn't mean games could not be ported to NS, just that they will need to be lower graphically... i.e. scaled down. Where WiiU flatly could not be ported to once they moved on from PS360 middleware (and it wasn't worth the cost to make that technology work with WiiU), the NS can be ported to based on out-of-the-box functionality on the most significant middleware such as Unity/Unreal/etc. Once EA adds the functionality (low cost) for their tools, which will be required for mainstream stuff like Madden and Star Wars, they will have every incintive to put every other game on there as well. (same with any other dev specific tooling)

Base XboxOne/PS4 will be around for a few more years and as such, scaling to those systems will be important meaning it won't be much of an issue to push to NS as is. Then in 3-ish years when the next XBoxOne/PS5 is coming, Nintendo can pull a PS4Pro/Scorpio with the NS and keep up the trend of being a low bar tech machine with the best first party line-up known to man.

So... power isn't the big issue at this point... the supportive tech/middleware is where it is at. So long as NS is low cost with excellent Nintendo exclusives, it can do very well in the market and will only be better off with 3rd party support too.

Thanks for that.



Around the Network
freebs2 said:
SuperNova said:
Can it run BoTW at a Rock steady 30 fps? Other than that, not really.

Considering WiiU is targeting 30fps, the Switch should be either going for 720p60fps or 1080p30fps.

Well it runs pretty badly on the wiiU so far, it doesn't look like they will manage a steady 30fps there.



JWeinCom said:
superchunk said:

The best rumors... the ones people who have actually stated facts that were proven true are that NS is not equal or XboxOne... it's less than XboxOne. 

The CPU is actually better in NS as the Jaguar in XboxOne/PS4 is a craptastic low-power mobile CPU that has plenty of docs to show that ARM is better... and yes it is just as easy now to put shit on ARM as it is X86 so don't preach that BS.

However, the GPU is definitely less than Xbox One which is in turn less than PS4. This doesn't mean games could not be ported to NS, just that they will need to be lower graphically... i.e. scaled down. Where WiiU flatly could not be ported to once they moved on from PS360 middleware (and it wasn't worth the cost to make that technology work with WiiU), the NS can be ported to based on out-of-the-box functionality on the most significant middleware such as Unity/Unreal/etc. Once EA adds the functionality (low cost) for their tools, which will be required for mainstream stuff like Madden and Star Wars, they will have every incintive to put every other game on there as well. (same with any other dev specific tooling)

Base XboxOne/PS4 will be around for a few more years and as such, scaling to those systems will be important meaning it won't be much of an issue to push to NS as is. Then in 3-ish years when the next XBoxOne/PS5 is coming, Nintendo can pull a PS4Pro/Scorpio with the NS and keep up the trend of being a low bar tech machine with the best first party line-up known to man.

So... power isn't the big issue at this point... the supportive tech/middleware is where it is at. So long as NS is low cost with excellent Nintendo exclusives, it can do very well in the market and will only be better off with 3rd party support too.

Thanks for that.

But the issue also comes up for how third party games perform could ultimately be how long Nintendo is supported by third parties. With that, the question of even if it can be ported easily, will optimization be a priority for Switch or not? There were games that were better on Wii U than PS3 and Xbox 360 (Need for Speed, Rayman, and even ZombiU with some arguably having the best version over the Ps4 and Xbone) yet they didn't sell. Now people are expecting ports which will not be able to compete with last gen hardware will do better? I don't see it. 



SuperNova said:
freebs2 said:

Considering WiiU is targeting 30fps, the Switch should be either going for 720p60fps or 1080p30fps.

Well it runs pretty badly on the wiiU so far, it doesn't look like they will manage a steady 30fps there.

It would be quite disappointing if final version doesn't hit 30fps for most time.



Pavolink said:

Yes, I care. People believe that power = graphics. But that's not the case. As BotW had showed us, the Wii U power was used to create a big open world with life.

I dont want to be offensive here, but honestly - Zelda Botw has less NPCs than last gen open world games. Also, the graphics and framerate are more 6/7 gen than 8th.

Nothing personal, just saying.



Around the Network

It's certainly not future-proof for home gaming, barely "present-proof".

I do wonder when the next device Nintendo will release after the Switch will be, and if the Switch will truly comprise the entirety of Nintendo's Console business. I assume so though.



bigtakilla said:
JWeinCom said:

Thanks for that.

But the issue also comes up for how third party games perform could ultimately be how long Nintendo is supported by third parties. With that, the question of even if it can be ported easily, will optimization be a priority for Switch or not? There were games that were better on Wii U than PS3 and Xbox 360 (Need for Speed, Rayman, and even ZombiU with some arguably having the best version over the Ps4 and Xbone) yet they didn't sell. Now people are expecting ports which will not be able to compete with last gen hardware will do better? I don't see it. 

Need for Speed was a good port, but it was released way after the original, and was sent out to die with no kind of promotion.  The Need for Speed team commented on how little EA or Nintendo really cared about the project.  By then, the relationship was soured to the point that neither really cared.

Rayman Legends sold 600K (second most it sold on any console) and Zombi U sold a million.  Not enough to make them worthwhile exclusives, but probably enough to make ports worth it.  

There weren't that many ports that were timely and well made.  A lot of them that were sold well relative to the fanbase.  If porting is cheaper, and Nintendo does a better job at driving the install base, they should be ok.



JWeinCom said:
bigtakilla said:

But the issue also comes up for how third party games perform could ultimately be how long Nintendo is supported by third parties. With that, the question of even if it can be ported easily, will optimization be a priority for Switch or not? There were games that were better on Wii U than PS3 and Xbox 360 (Need for Speed, Rayman, and even ZombiU with some arguably having the best version over the Ps4 and Xbone) yet they didn't sell. Now people are expecting ports which will not be able to compete with last gen hardware will do better? I don't see it. 

Need for Speed was a good port, but it was released way after the original, and was sent out to die with no kind of promotion.  The Need for Speed team commented on how little EA or Nintendo really cared about the project.  By then, the relationship was soured to the point that neither really cared.

Rayman Legends sold 600K (second most it sold on any console) and Zombi U sold a million.  Not enough to make them worthwhile exclusives, but probably enough to make ports worth it.  

There weren't that many ports that were timely and well made.  A lot of them that were sold well relative to the fanbase.  If porting is cheaper, and Nintendo does a better job at driving the install base, they should be ok.

And what 3rd party games are going to be expected to sell more than a million on Switch first year? Hell, Bayo 2 didn't sell a mil, and Platinum has expressed interest in making a sequel.



bigtakilla said:
JWeinCom said:

Need for Speed was a good port, but it was released way after the original, and was sent out to die with no kind of promotion.  The Need for Speed team commented on how little EA or Nintendo really cared about the project.  By then, the relationship was soured to the point that neither really cared.

Rayman Legends sold 600K (second most it sold on any console) and Zombi U sold a million.  Not enough to make them worthwhile exclusives, but probably enough to make ports worth it.  

There weren't that many ports that were timely and well made.  A lot of them that were sold well relative to the fanbase.  If porting is cheaper, and Nintendo does a better job at driving the install base, they should be ok.

And what 3rd party games are going to be expected to sell more than a million on Switch first year? Hell, Bayo 2 didn't sell a mil, and Platinum has expressed interest in making a sequel.

I can't really answer that cause I don't know what games are coming out, or what the switch's price an such will be.  O_o... Of what we know so far though, Sonic 2017 has a chance.  

Games don't necessarily need to sell a million.  They need to make enough to cover the price of porting and make a reasonable profit.  One million sales equals about 16 million dollars in revenue.  Odds are that a port will cost waaaay less than that, so sales of 500-750K may be enough to make it worth it in a lot of cases.  Especially when you factor in potential revenue from DLC.  And, Nintendo could waive part or all of the platform fee to make porting more enticing.



JWeinCom said:
bigtakilla said:

And what 3rd party games are going to be expected to sell more than a million on Switch first year? Hell, Bayo 2 didn't sell a mil, and Platinum has expressed interest in making a sequel.

I can't really answer that cause I don't know what games are coming out, or what the switch's price an such will be.  O_o... Of what we know so far though, Sonic 2017 has a chance.  

Games don't necessarily need to sell a million.  They need to make enough to cover the price of porting and make a reasonable profit.  One million sales equals about 16 million dollars in revenue.  Odds are that a port will cost waaaay less than that, so sales of 500-750K may be enough to make it worth it in a lot of cases.  Especially when you factor in potential revenue from DLC.  And, Nintendo could waive part or all of the platform fee to make porting more enticing.

Then I could see the issues with exclusives, but ports should take relatively little cost comparitively. Saying they made no money off million sellers on games bult for 3 to 4 poeces of hardware is insane.