Everyone keeps talking about DLSS possibly putting the Switch 2 in the same ballpark with the PS5 and X Series in terms of being able to get ports from those consoles, but I keep thinking that where we will really see it being used is to alleviate situations like Point 2.

Like, if the Arkham collection were to come to Switch 2, instead of using DLSS to make it look nearly on par with PS5/XS versions of games and run north of 1080p and 60 fps, I could see publishers instead locking those games to 1080p so they could use even lower quality textures and assets on the card to save space and fit more games on it. Then they can say, "Look, no more code in a box! It's all here, just like you asked!!!"

And to be honest, I'd be cool with that. It will be a long time before I will own a TV that would allow me to see the difference that 4K output can produce, and 1080p still looks perfectly fine to me. Heck, 480p widescreen looks fine to me. I'd rather not need to constantly spend more money on storage just to be able to spend more money on games than to have prettier games that require me to figure out how I can afford them.

Considering the switch was a PS 3.6-7, I expect the next nintendo to be a PS 4.5/4.7, equivalent, but with all the bells and whisteles of the new generation cpu gpu technologies.

Oh for sure, I certainly wouldn't expect current gen console ports to be running at console settings. I think DLSS will probably allow Switch to basically be capable of running 4k/60fps console games at 1080p/30fps docked - which would be great, nothing to complain about there. So yeah for sure lower res textures used, less space used, and DLSS knocking the resolution/framerate up to respectable levels. But yeah good point about that being an added benefit of DLSS, textures being low res means less game card or SD card space used.

There are very few 4K/60 games even on PS5. PS5 can't run even a lot of PS4-tier graphics at 4K/60, like Control, which is technically a "PS4 era" game only can  only manage 1440p when running at 60 fps. 

Probably what you'll get is more likely

4K - 30 fps on a Playstation 5 game  to  720p native (DLSS to 1440p or 4K) - 30 fps on Switch 2

For 60 fps games it may get a little more challenging. Perhaps

1440p-60 on PS5 and 540p-600p dynamic native (DLSS to 1080p) - 60 fps on Switch 2. 

But you're probably going to have to live with some artifacting at this mode. 

Anyone else amused by the fact nothing has been confirmed, thus we don't have any details on the hardware (especially clock speeds) but yet people are throwing around performance numbers....

"I don't know what the hardware will be but we getting 1080p at 60 fps!."

Joking aside I'm glad people are backing off their original claims about matching ps5 visuals and are slowly becoming most realistic with expectations.  

Absolutely agree.  Not only to save space on the cartridges but also because high quality textures will need memory speeds I don't think the switch 2 will have.

Switch 2 will be a ps4/one, which is great and will be a massive improvement.

And you are absolutely right about panel quality being required for high end hardware.

lol no one is going to stuff full games onto a cartridge. You're going to have to download data and that's just how it's going to be. Even PS5/XSX games don't come fully on discs these days.

No one is going to want to pay the premium on extra cartridge space unless Nintendo subsidizes the cost IMO. Why should I as a publisher pay for a 64GB card for example when 32GB costs me less? You can download the rest. I'm not having my art staff redo the textures at some super low resolution either. Download it and tough shit if you don't like to do that. If anything what I think will happen is physical releases will become more and more of a limited print run type of thing made only for people who really, really, really won't buy anything but. They're going to want most people to buy digital because they make a lot more money per sale with digital. 

Apple iPhones are going to be PS4 quality maybe starting in like a week. Future iPhones will then go above that year after year. iPads and Macbooks will be beyond that. An M2 chip is closer to an XBox Series S. Don't think it's too smart for Nintendo to rest on their laurels here. They're not just going to be competing against more niche products like a Steam Deck any more and even those types of bulky handhelds are starting to get more of a mainstream push, walking into a Best Buy last week they had a giant "ROG Ally Is Here" promo sign outside the front door. 

A few things.  If you are right about the switch 2 having 64 to 128 gb, downloading games is going to be awful.  7 remake is 100 gb.  And standard SD cards for storage expansion are too slow, which will make options interesting.  

I'm glad you are finally acknowledging limitations of mobile hardware.

Nintendo has zero to fear from Apple.  Apple doesn't have mario, Zelda, metroid, Smash, Kart, animal crossing, pikmin, etc.  

Nintendo fans aren't going to care about Apple nor will PC gamers touch Apple and their closed systems.  You are grossly overestimating the threat Apple has to gaming.  

The fastest way to get yourself into trouble in this business is to not take competition seriously. 

It's been shown over and over and over and over again, yet some people still want to die on that hill. Did the 3DS and Wii U not have Mario, Zelda, Mario Kart, Smash, Animal Crossing, etc. etc.? Yes the IP are extremely important but you can't just half ass a piece of hardware and become lazy and think things are going to go A-OK. 

If they don't have an industry changing kind of feature (and I doubt it) for Switch 2 they're going to need a full generation upgrade over the existing hardware at least, if they just fart out a mediocre upgrade, it's just creating a good possibility of unnecessary headaches for no great reason. They've never released a system that was neither a large upgrade over their previous system OR had a completely industry changing functionality feature (Wiimote or hybrid console). It's either one of the other and in Nintendo DS' case it had both (and lo and behold it has the highest sales). 

Apple isn't a "closed system", lol (and Nintendo is some how an "open system?"). Apple products are the mainstream of the mainstream, very few companies move the kind of hardware volume they do, thus their ecosystem is huge, no game company could ever dream of getting the numbers they get. 

Nintendo's downfall has been predicted yearly for the last 30 years....  and here we are with the switch dominating.

And don't rewrite my words.  I said PC gamers are not going for apple's closed systems.  And Apple is a closed system while PC isn't.  PC gamers will not give a **** about apple.  Apple is for casuals.

McDonalds sells the most hamburgers, who cares?  Their products are still crap.  So is Starbucks coffee.  PC gamers will never limit themselves to Apple only hardware with limited upgrade ability.  It flatly isn't going to happen.