Topic: "Nintendo Switch 2" what improvement's should the next Console have?

Go to Genres>Select a Genre>shows a list of games based on that genre.

@LinkxPeach Right now from eShop you can go to browse > genre > select a genre > shows a list of games based in that genre. So only one more step than what you said. Don't get me wrong, they could make the display more attractive, but it does exist.

I guess a second way to get to the same place is browse > other > select a genre > shows games in that genre. Same number of steps, but this second option has genre in a faster menu rather than visually.

There should be no question if the latest games can run on Nintendos system so if they were smart they'd put power as a priority for their next system. I'm sick of hearing about all the games that the switch can't handle like it's some kinda handicapped piece of last gen garbage. I love Nintendo but they need to get with the times.

Okay, ty. Are you trying to tell me to shut up? By saying, “than what you said.”

Realistically?

• Steamdeck power with visuals and performance between a base Xbox One and base PS4.
• DLSS 2.2 upscaling to 4k for 1st party titles and select 3rd party titles ONLY
• Otherwise, same Switch we know and love. Ya it'll have a redesigned UI, joycon, eShop interface, etc, but at the end of the day, it'll be a more powerful Switch, nothing more and nothing less

@NeonPizza
I get you're a tech-head, but saying things like "90 fps" for a hybrid Nintendo platform isn't even remotely in the ballpark of possibility.

Neither is pretty much any of that stuff listed.

It can be fun to dream, but I tend to stay grounded in reality. And in reality, we'll get the approximate Steamdeck power (so similar graphics to Xbox One and PS4, definitely not "+"), and up to 60fps for select games. That's it. None of that other stuff is happening (feel like I'm coming across harsh, I don't mean to).

I'd love to see VRR. But if even SteamDeck isn't doing it, ain't no way in HELL Nintendo is doing it. Not for Switch 2, Switch 3, Switch 4 or Switch 5. Maybe (and I do stress maybe) for Switch 6. But by that point we won't need it anyways.

@Truegamer79
I love Nintendo but they need to get with the times.

No doubt Nintendo isn't "with the times" in many respects, but I don't think power is one of them. Not any more. The notion that Switch is less powerful because they're "not with the times" blatantly disregards the nuance of the facts. It's a 5-10 watt hybrid portable system released in early 2017 for a $299 price point, and as low as $199 with Lite. That's why it's less powerful than multi-hundred Watt dedicated power platforms released in late 2021 for $399-499. It's nothing to do with times, and everything to do with purpose. You can't achieve lightweight portability at ultra-low power consumption, slim form factor and long battery life at low cost, and also achieve graphical parity with consoles 10x the size, weight, power draw and double the cost released 4 years after the fact.

Nothing about the lifespan of Switch has deviated from historical trends. Both PS3/360 and PS4/X1 lasted 7-8 years. Switch is only 6.25 yrs old. Obviously, the later the system gets into its lifespan the less impressive the power will seem. When it launched, Switch was the most powerful handheld in the world. The jump from the 3DS/Vita to Switch was just as big a technological leap for portable gaming as PS2 to PS3 was for console gaming.

The fact is, no handheld has ever been able to run every console game (and before Switch, it was rare to see a handheld run any console game). Obviously SteamDeck has raised the bar even further, but that's a $400-650 device that just released 1.5 years ago. And Switch 2 should match it in terms of performance and pricing on the lower end.

That's not to say you're wrong, because I too would like more games to run on Switch, and currently there's only so much that can be done. But I don't think that's because they didn't "get with the times", it's just a reality of technological constraints at a given price point. When Switch 2 releases, the gap between handheld and console will shrink again, then when PS6/Xbox5 releases, the gap will expand, then with Switch 3 the gap will shrink, on and on forever. But with each iteration of Switch, the gap will shrink smaller than it ever has before. And within a few generations, as we continue to approach diminishing returns, the time will come where the graphical disparity between power platform and handheld is marginal at best.

@Truegamer79

Getting 30fps at 720p with a few hours of battery life should be Nintendo's target.

Nintendo haven't cared about fidelity and performance since the GC.

Leave the 8k 60 fps ding-a-ling swinging for the Sony Ponies and the Xbots.

@NeonPizza

No disagreement, seeing framerates north of 60fps is pretty special.

But when I see PS5 and XBX games still at 30fps, hoping for anything over that in a handheld that's expected to be generationally no more powerful than a base PS4, seems to be asking a bit much.

@JaxonH Kind of, but there's also going to be a gimmick layered on top of the base Switch. Nintendo has never not had a gimmick of some kind since 7th gen when they stopped playing the power game and I highly doubt they're going to stop now when all but 1 of their gaming systems since then has been at least relatively successful. The next gen Switch is probably going to be more like what the 3DS was to the DS, where it was a more powerful DS that does DS things, but it also had stereoscopic 3D on top of that. Similarly, the next gen Switch is probably going to be a more powerful Switch that does Switch things, but also introduces a new gimmick of some kind on top of that. Yes, it'll probably have upgraded visuals and the things you listed, but that probably won't be the main selling point in their eyes, they're going to try and sell it on whatever gimmick they add on top of the Switch.

The only thing i Really want is Game Broadcasting Capabilities via the Twitch App like on PS4

In other news.

Todd Howard is happy to report Starfield will run at 30fps on Xbox Series S and X.

Happy...he said.

@NeonPizza
Unrealistic because it's not Nintendo's priority. It's certainly feasible on a technical level, but lots of things are feasible on a technical level that Nintendo doesn't prioritize.

HDR is almost definitely not going to be a focus. Sure, it'll have the capability via HDMI 2.0 or 2.1, but I very seriously doubt any games will bother. HDR in gaming blew over as a fad anyways. For movies and film it made sense as the camera can only capture light a certain way, but with video games the artist can design it how they want from the start.

4k upscaled is realistic, but only when utilizing DLSS. And I don't think most devs will bother. I think they'll just release at 1080p and call it a day. Maybe I'm wrong, but looking at the PC side of things, the utilization of FSR is far more prominent than DLSS. And that's assuming they even do that much. AAA are the only ones that might use it, and even then they're more likely to not. AA devs won't bother at all.

Btw, I recognize for you and a group of others ultra-high framerates matter. But as someone who's played 120fps and flipped back and forth to 60fps to test it, I could barely notice. It was so remarkably unimpressive I permanently locked everything to 60 for VRR on a global level. And I think there's far more people like me out there, especially on the Switch platform. So, not saying it doesn't matter, just saying it doesn't matter for most.

@Bolt_Strike
I agree. I just don't think it'll be the primary focus or selling point. Up til Switch, they were flinging gimmicks at the wall in desperation to see what would stick. Well... they found one that stuck. And I fully expect that to remain the primary focus. It'll probably have some cool little twist tacked on, but it won't change the fundamental case to the consumer- a hybrid handheld console that's more powerful and can run better looking, better performing games, and more of them.

Might be a good thing nintendo doesn’t make powerhouse consoles, yikes. I fear for the future

@JaxonH They need to market both relatively equally. The hybrid form factor is a selling point over other consoles, PCs, and mobile devices, but they need a selling point over the Steam Deck, other competing hybrid devices that may pop up, and even the Switch itself (you need a reason for current Switch owners to make the upgrade or for whatever demographic of customers that doesn't have a Switch but wants one to choose the next gen device over the OG Switch). The new gimmick is going to be the focus for the latter, and it needs to be fairly prominent in marketing to be effective, otherwise you end up with a Wii U situation where people don't know why they should bother with the upgrade (or maybe don't even understand that it's a next gen upgrade in the first place).

I think it's highly possible, maybe not probable but possible. 90fps isn't some magical thing, it's just a framerate. The only reason 60fps is the "standard" is because 60Hz screens were the standard due to NTSC regions having 60Hz AC power. TVs that can do 120Hz even at 4K are pretty commonplace these days and you can get pretty mid-range phones with 90Hz panels. I mean I have a Samsung Galaxy A33 which has a 6.4" 1080p 90Hz OLED panel. I brought it for less than the same retailer sells the non OLED Switch.....

Whether or not games run at 90fps? Different story. But there are certainly some games that even the Switch hardware as it is could run at 90fps. If you push that spec up 3-4X AND add tensor cores for DLSS? Well, certainly 90fps is achievable. Especially in small scope and heavily optimised titles like Mario Kart and Smash

VRR shouldn't be looked at as a high end feature. The biggest impact is with lower powered devices. If reduced power consumption while maintaining a smooth experience is the goal? Then absolutely they should go with VRR. IMO it would be absurd for them not to do it. VRR is firmly on the top of my list of features I want to see in Nintendo's next hardware and, frankly, it seems more likely than not that it will happen. At the very least I think we'll get it when docked but undocked is where VRR would really shine

Also I wouldn't say that the Steam Deck is a good yardstick here. The Steam Deck display is clearly one of the components where they cut costs. I would think Nintendo has a bit more leverage in that space (case and point the Switch OLED and the relatively exotic 3DS screen tech). Also Nintendo is working with Nvidia here and VRR is something NVidia pushed earliest and hardest. In comparison Valve is working around a custom Linux distro and, from my understanding, VRR on Linux is.... still a bit experimental....

My phone can technically run at 90 fps, but I admit I have never been able to tell the difference between 20 fps and 90 fps. Whenever someone complains about inconsistent framerate I'm like 'huh?' I can only assume some people's brain-visual interfaces run faster than mine. So I have nothing against that type of Switch update, but I doubt I would notice. It's hard to satisfy everyone so it will be interesting to see what Nintendo decides to prioritize.

One thing to add to my personal wishlist after playing exercise games a lot recently--if they can make motion control/detection better somehow that would be nice. I don't have any ideas, it would just be neat if it could be improved.

@FishyS
The thing is what people perceive as "bad frame rate" is usually inconsistent frame timing. It just so happens that if you can't hit one of those hard frame targets dictated to by the refresh rate of the screen you have wildly inconsistent frame timing. And that's something you only really see when you're missing those targets

That's why you'll see games saying they're targeting 30fps or 60fps or whatever

Higher refresh rates give you more frame targets to hit in the "usable range". So 60Hz has 60, 30, 20, 15 while 90 has 90, 45, 30, 22.5, 18, 15. VRR on the other hand has the screen wait for the frame so effectively infinite targets you can hit. Making the statement "we're targeting 60fps" redundant

For me the biggest thing im hoping for is that the next system does end up "switch 2" (or whatever name they go with as long as its not "new Nintendo switch") since i feel the base concept is too good to use just once, plus its not like there's really any other options when it comes to the dedicated portable console since things like the steam deck are more of a portable PC.

as for improvements it would be nice to see analogue triggers on the new joycons (and hopefully improvements regarding drift)

im hoping for full BC both physical and digital also hopefully offering the option to "upgrade" when it comes to cross gen games, plus it means that releasing games for switch would still be viable hopefully making a smooth transition to the new system.

while this is more on the software side im hoping that more games will offer the option of "performance" and "graphics" modes since it seems to becoming more of a standard on other systems.

In terms of specs I'm not expecting something on the level of some of those high end portable PCs but i imagine with the improvements in mobile tech that the system could still be a pretty big jump while still keeping a similar form factor.

really im just hoping they keep the emphasis on choosing how you want to play the games rather than something more restrictive, plus as the switch showed theres still room for experiments like labo, ring fit and mario kart live.

I noticed a newbie user WaveBoy was from the previous deleted user NeonPizza.

Somebody keep called me Toxic.
Here is the Toxic for you.