Forums

Topic: The Nintendo Switch Thread

Posts 121 to 140 of 61,583

FattyWhale_42

DefHalan wrote:

@FattyWhale_42: You were asking for a reason why a hybrid console wouldn't work. It won't work because you are having to sell two systems to someone that may only want one. It won't work because you are targeting a smaller audience than just making two devices that have the option to work together. Such a small audience would not be profitable.

FattyWhale_42 wrote:

And no, it isn't two systems, it's one; and because it's split, no one is "forced" to buy anything. What it does do, however, is make it where ALL games made can be bought and played by everyone. So recourses no longer have to be split between two different consoles. And people who can't afford the whole thing at once, can still play every game at the start, and then "upgrade" later. And people who don't need/want the "home" part, aren't "forced" to buy it either.

I think I'd already addressed that. And no, I didn't ask that. I asked why other people thought that (at least that was my intention, so I understand how you could see it that way; that's my fault).

Edited on by FattyWhale_42

AC:NH Name: Aaron — Island: Spinach — Let me know if you send me a friend request.
Game Rules

Switch Friend Code: SW-4410-3079-4430

DefHalan

@FattyWhale_42: So if I don't want the handheld part, I don't need to buy it? The Handheld part and the Home part work independently? Then that isn't a hybrid device, it is just two devices with the same marketplace.

and

FattyWhale_42 wrote:

I keep seeing people saying that a "Hybrid" system won't work, but I've yet to see any reasonable argument (I'm not saying there isn't one, I'm just saying I haven't seen one) as to why that is.

I have been providing reasonable arguments on why it won't work.

Edited on by DefHalan

People keep saying the Xbox One doesn't have Backwards Compatibility.
I don't think they know what Backwards Compatibility means...

3DS Friend Code: 2621-2786-9784 | Nintendo Network ID: DefHalan

FattyWhale_42

DefHalan wrote:

@FattyWhale_42: So if I don't want the handheld part, I don't need to buy it? The Handheld part and the Home part work independently? Then that isn't a hybrid device, it is just two devices with the same marketplace.

FattyWhale_42 wrote:

@DefHalan: The handheld part is the "brain" while the "home" part is the interface to the TV, optical disc drive, local multi-player, and will boost all the functions of the main unit. This will make the "home" part useful, but not necessary for those who don't want to play on their TV, who don't need local multi-player, who download all their games, etc.

and

FattyWhale_42 wrote:

I keep seeing people saying that a "Hybrid" system won't work, but I've yet to see any reasonable argument (I'm not saying there isn't one, I'm just saying I haven't seen one) as to why that is.

I have been providing reasonable arguments on why it won't work.

We'll have to agree to disagree.

AC:NH Name: Aaron — Island: Spinach — Let me know if you send me a friend request.
Game Rules

Switch Friend Code: SW-4410-3079-4430

gcunit

DefHalan wrote:

gcunit wrote:

DefHalan wrote:

That only works on games made to work on the lower hardware. If the game requires the bigger hardware, then it doesn't matter how big the install base of the lower powered hardware.

Sheesh - you're not following me: the game would run on either hardware, performing at that hardware's native level.

Is there a power difference between the handheld and home console? Lets say the home console is more powerful to match Sony and Microsoft's systems. If a game is created to run at that power level then how will it run on the handheld? Requiring games being able to run on either handheld or home console would mean a developer not wanting to make a lesser version of their game wouldn't want to create on that system, there are many developers not willing to do that. That is the problem with requiring that. Having it optional isn't much different than the way things work now, just making porting easier in the future, which we already know they are going to do.

Imagine all the code for a game on PS3 and all the code for the same game on Vita. Put those 2 pieces of code, taking out the duplication, on to one ISO. Imagine PS3 and Vita had proportionately scaled versions of the same hardware architecture, and a shared OS. That ISO would then run on both systems. Upgrade the spec of each to 2016 equivalents and there's your answer.

But NX doesn't have to compete with Sony and MS on power anyway.

What better way to celebrate than firing something out of the pipe?

Nothing is true. Everything is permitted.

My Nintendo: gcunit | Nintendo Network ID: gcunit

DefHalan

It seems like a lot of people have their own definition of what a Hybrid would be. Maybe we should try to define what it would be then we can have a discussion about if it would work on the market.

People keep saying the Xbox One doesn't have Backwards Compatibility.
I don't think they know what Backwards Compatibility means...

3DS Friend Code: 2621-2786-9784 | Nintendo Network ID: DefHalan

gcunit

Hybrid device and hybrid system are two different ideas. Both are hybrids though.

If the Wii U's gamepad was actually a 3DS, capable of being taken away from the Wii U but also capable of controlling it, then the combined system would be a hybrid of home console and portable.

Edited on by gcunit

What better way to celebrate than firing something out of the pipe?

Nothing is true. Everything is permitted.

My Nintendo: gcunit | Nintendo Network ID: gcunit

DefHalan

gcunit wrote:

DefHalan wrote:

gcunit wrote:

DefHalan wrote:

That only works on games made to work on the lower hardware. If the game requires the bigger hardware, then it doesn't matter how big the install base of the lower powered hardware.

Sheesh - you're not following me: the game would run on either hardware, performing at that hardware's native level.

Is there a power difference between the handheld and home console? Lets say the home console is more powerful to match Sony and Microsoft's systems. If a game is created to run at that power level then how will it run on the handheld? Requiring games being able to run on either handheld or home console would mean a developer not wanting to make a lesser version of their game wouldn't want to create on that system, there are many developers not willing to do that. That is the problem with requiring that. Having it optional isn't much different than the way things work now, just making porting easier in the future, which we already know they are going to do.

Imagine all the code for a game on PS3 and all the code for the same game on Vita. Put those 2 pieces of code, taking out the duplication, on to one ISO. Imagine PS3 and Vita had proportionately scaled versions of the same hardware architecture, and a shared OS. That ISO would then run on both systems. Upgrade the spec of each to 2016 equivalents and there's your answer.

But NX doesn't have to compete with Sony and MS on power anyway.

That idea sounds nice but impossible to do, from a development point of view. Every developer is going to program a game differently. Different assets will require different amounts of power. You cannot just tighten up the graphics on level 3. If one machine offers more power than there are engine based calculations that are behaving differently. This is why old PC games sometimes don't run correctly on new PCs. With so many different engines in the industry and each one using provided power in different ways, it would be near impossible for this to work. Also with the amount of freedom developers want from the hardware they work on, it would be limiting and push developers away. The change in power requirements for games would have to be a game by game change, nothing system wide would be able to appropriately run all games correctly. This is added work that some customers won't see and the developer isn't being paid for. It is easier for the developer to just target the weaker hardware and make a game run off that and have the more powerful hardware run the lesser version.

If the power that can be used isn't near to what the competitors offer then 3rd Parties are unlikely to lower their product for that lesser power. We saw during the Wii Era that companies would rather just create a whole new game based on their HD game rather than down porting that severely. I hope this makes sense.

People keep saying the Xbox One doesn't have Backwards Compatibility.
I don't think they know what Backwards Compatibility means...

3DS Friend Code: 2621-2786-9784 | Nintendo Network ID: DefHalan

DefHalan

gcunit wrote:

Hybrid device and hybrid system are two different ideas. Both are hybrids though.

If the Wii U's gamepad was actually a 3DS, capable of being taken away from the Wii U but also capable of controlling it, then the combined system would be a hybrid of home console and portable.

is the Home Console use-able without the Portable Console in this scenario?

People keep saying the Xbox One doesn't have Backwards Compatibility.
I don't think they know what Backwards Compatibility means...

3DS Friend Code: 2621-2786-9784 | Nintendo Network ID: DefHalan

gcunit

You do make sense, but you're still applying existing rules to a new situation. No-one's ever taken the approach of scaled hardware architecture before, as far as I know, but I think it's perfectly possible, and Nintendo, being the king of handhelds, is in the best position to pull it off. You clearly don't agree and that's fair enough.

What better way to celebrate than firing something out of the pipe?

Nothing is true. Everything is permitted.

My Nintendo: gcunit | Nintendo Network ID: gcunit

gcunit

DefHalan wrote:

gcunit wrote:

Hybrid device and hybrid system are two different ideas. Both are hybrids though.

If the Wii U's gamepad was actually a 3DS, capable of being taken away from the Wii U but also capable of controlling it, then the combined system would be a hybrid of home console and portable.

is the Home Console use-able without the Portable Console in this scenario?

Yes, due to alternative controllers e.g. classic controller, pro controller, wiimote.

What better way to celebrate than firing something out of the pipe?

Nothing is true. Everything is permitted.

My Nintendo: gcunit | Nintendo Network ID: gcunit

DefHalan

gcunit wrote:

DefHalan wrote:

gcunit wrote:

Hybrid device and hybrid system are two different ideas. Both are hybrids though.

If the Wii U's gamepad was actually a 3DS, capable of being taken away from the Wii U but also capable of controlling it, then the combined system would be a hybrid of home console and portable.

is the Home Console use-able without the Portable Console in this scenario?

Yes, due to alternative controllers e.g. classic controller, pro controller, wiimote.

So, how is that different than what we have now? We have seen games that connect to portable systems before. If the portable system is optional to the home console then how is it a Hybrid?

People keep saying the Xbox One doesn't have Backwards Compatibility.
I don't think they know what Backwards Compatibility means...

3DS Friend Code: 2621-2786-9784 | Nintendo Network ID: DefHalan

gcunit

Because the portable can control the home console, and they both run the same software.

What better way to celebrate than firing something out of the pipe?

Nothing is true. Everything is permitted.

My Nintendo: gcunit | Nintendo Network ID: gcunit

DefHalan

gcunit wrote:

Because the portable can control the home console, and they both run the same software.

Being able to use the portable console as a optional controller really isn't a problem, especially if the two systems are on the market as separately. It is basically what we currently have just having the portable system work the same as the GamePad or Pro Controller.

Sharing the same software library is a problem and that is where we go back into the old conversation which we kinda decided we are just going to disagree in that area. I don't think it is possible and you do.

People keep saying the Xbox One doesn't have Backwards Compatibility.
I don't think they know what Backwards Compatibility means...

3DS Friend Code: 2621-2786-9784 | Nintendo Network ID: DefHalan

skywake

FattyWhale_42 wrote:

I keep seeing people saying that a "Hybrid" system won't work, but I've yet to see any reasonable argument (I'm not saying there isn't one, I'm just saying I haven't seen one) as to why that is.

Well the posts thus far have made it pretty clear why you haven't heard any "reasonable" arguments. It's not that there aren't reasonable arguments it's just that you don't want to hear them. Anyways, in the risk of talking to a brick wall here are the three ways they could go about it and what I think of each.

#1. The product is literally both a portable and a home console. In this case effectively what they'd have to do is make a very high end portable that would also be an underpowered home console. This is a bad strategy for two reasons. Firstly nobody is going to spend that much on a portable system, case and point the Vita. And secondly even if it did exist people would still want the big games to release on a "real" home console. That's I can't see this idea working.

#2. We get a portable system that can dock into a more powerful configuration. This idea does exist in the tablet space already, the Microsoft Surface Pro 4 being the most recent example. Usually what they do is have all of the tablet components in one half including the screen, flash storage, CPU, memory and so on. Then in the other half they have a keyboard, mass storage and sometimes a GPU. But these are very high end devices that are bundled like that. Without the tablet component the second half is literally useless. To make it a stand-alone product? Well you'd add a CPU, RAM and.... at that point it's doesn't need the other half for any reason....

#3. Go for a software development solution. Sell the two products as individual products not unlike how Microsoft, Apple and Google sell phones, tablet, laptop and desktop components. Then build around that so that it's easy to develop for all of the devices at once. It wouldn't be a "release on both" button and it wouldn't be for all of the content. There's still be stuff that's too big for a portable console or the stuff that only makes sense on a portable. But some of the stuff. And ontop of that offer a single store front not unlike how Apple, Google, Valve and so on run things. That way we can keep the advantages of both forms while still getting the rewards of cross-buy and an expanded library across both. But this solution WOULD NOT be a hybrid console.

Edited on by skywake

Some Aussie musics: Pond, TFS, Genesis Owusu
"Don't stir the pot" is a nice way of saying "they're too dumb to reason with"

FattyWhale_42

skywake wrote:

FattyWhale_42 wrote:

I keep seeing people saying that a "Hybrid" system won't work, but I've yet to see any reasonable argument (I'm not saying there isn't one, I'm just saying I haven't seen one) as to why that is.

Well the posts thus far have made it pretty clear why you haven't heard any "reasonable" arguments. It's not that there aren't reasonable arguments it's just that you don't want to hear them. Anyways, in the risk of talking to a brick wall here are the three ways they could go about it and what I think of each.

#1. The product is literally both a portable and a home console. In this case effectively what they'd have to do is make a very high end portable that would also be an underpowered home console. This is a bad strategy for two reasons. Firstly nobody is going to spend that much on a portable system, case and point the Vita. And secondly even if it did exist people would still want the big games to release on a "real" home console. That's I can't see this idea working.

#2. We get a portable system that can dock into a more powerful configuration. This idea does exist in the tablet space already, the Microsoft Surface Pro 4 being the most recent example. Usually what they do is have all of the tablet components in one half including the screen, flash storage, CPU, memory and so on. Then in the other half they have a keyboard, mass storage and sometimes a GPU. But these are very high end devices that are bundled like that. Without the tablet component the second half is literally useless. To make it a stand-alone product? Well you'd add a CPU, RAM and.... at that point it's doesn't need the other half for any reason....

#3. Go for a software development solution. Sell the two products as individual products not unlike how Microsoft, Apple and Google sell phones, tablet, laptop and desktop components. Then build around that so that it's easy to develop for all of the devices at once. It wouldn't be a "release on both" button and it wouldn't be for all of the content. There's still be stuff that's too big for a portable console or the stuff that only makes sense on a portable. But some of the stuff. And ontop of that offer a single store front not unlike how Apple, Google, Valve and so on run things. That way we can keep the advantages of both forms while still getting the rewards of cross-buy and an expanded library across both. But this solution WOULD NOT be a hybrid console.

Hmm, perhaps I should have said "can't" instead of "won't". Because I believe it "can" work, although I'm not necessarily saying it "would" work.

But it's not my idea anyways. All I'm doing is taking as much information that's known, and filling in the blanks. I approach it from both the business, as well as the consumers side; analyze the current market; and make educated guesses.

The whole thing started when Nintendo started consolidating both of their gaming divisions into one. And yes, there are other possibilities than what I've mentioned, but it's the one I feel makes the most business sense (and I could be way off), so that's my guess until I have further information.

AC:NH Name: Aaron — Island: Spinach — Let me know if you send me a friend request.
Game Rules

Switch Friend Code: SW-4410-3079-4430

skywake

@FattyWhale_42:
The problem is that what we expect from a home console is so much more than what we expect from a portable. Even these days when the portable stuff is getting pretty good. Home consoles are hooked upto large, 1080p+ screens where every detail is visible to all. They have no power constraints and we're happy to spend quite a bit more on them. Portables are cheap, low powered solutions for something a bit lighter.

I think there's plenty of room for some software to exist between those two extremes. And I suspect that's what the merging of their portable and home console divisions was about. I just don't think there's any reason to believe that a single hardware solution can cater to both markets. Because the only "reasonable argument" I've heard for a workable "hybrid" hardware solution is one that's literally just two consoles and isn't really "hybrid" at all.

Some Aussie musics: Pond, TFS, Genesis Owusu
"Don't stir the pot" is a nice way of saying "they're too dumb to reason with"

Therad

How much are you guys prepared to pay for your proposed system? And at what power level? Wii, Vita, Wii U, PS4?

Therad

WebHead

It's very unlikely that NX's price will exceed $300.

WebHead

3DS Friend Code: 4296-3217-6922 | Nintendo Network ID: JTPrime

jump

Therad wrote:

How much are you guys prepared to pay for your proposed system? And at what power level? Wii, Vita, Wii U, PS4?

The power level of a Wii?

Nicolai wrote:

Alright, I gotta stop getting into arguments with jump. Someone remind me next time.

Switch Friend Code: SW-8051-9575-2812 | 3DS Friend Code: 1762-3772-0251

Top

Please login or sign up to reply to this topic