Topic: The Nintendo Switch Thread

Just got the 100th shine on Bowsers Fury. What fun. Absolutely loved it.

@JaxonH What about the rumour that Nvidia is stopping production of the current Switch chip? If that one is true wouldn't it be more likely that there's only 1 model and it's the 2nd one?

@electrolite77
Bowser's Fury was the best little gaming surprise for me in a long time. I really loved it.

@JaxonH

I appreciate NtH and MVG's weekly discussions, very insightful information within the realm of the internet rumor mill. If the V3 proposes zero increases in game performance, then I feel I could skip it. With so many games beginning to struggle performance wise on the Mariko, it's the boost in performance a new SoC would provide that I'm really eager for.

@Socar
I mean, the OLED isn’t up for debate- thats the one thing where the contract has been confirmed. Yes Nintendo has always use LCD. Why? Because it’s cheaper. But what if OLED was cheaper? Wouldn’t that fit Nintendo‘s behavior? Because the reporting is saying the OLED is cheaper due to excess supply. Did you notice that in the Bloomberg article? Linneman also discusses this in the video.

@Grumblevolcano
Not sure. Either that report is incorrect, or they are indeed stopping production and just moving to a another revision with a die shrink, like they did with Mariko v2. Maybe jumping down to 8nm. That would provide more efficiencies and perhaps a small boost in power.

@Magician
Ya, I can appreciate that. I think we’re all looking for that boost in performance, right? Without it I think a lot of people would be OK skipping it. Of course I gotta get one, even if just for the OLED. But maybe it will come with a little bit of a boost still, who knows. As grumble just mentioned, if they really are stopping production of the chips maybe they’re just doing another die shrink like they did before, and since they already took care of battery life maybe this time they put it towards performance. Maybe it’s nothing too significant but perhaps it ironed out some frame rates and keep things running at 720p handheld more often. That’d be cool.

@JaxonH That is completely bogus. OLED is far more expensive to manufacture than it is for LCD. There are no what-if scenarios that would make OLED manufacturing cheaper.

OLED is still too expensive no matter how you put it. And there are too many pros for LCD than there is for OLED. Especially considering that POLEDs aren't even that used commonly(As you can tell, the Switch screen is made out of plastic). Meaning that it won't work for Nintendo's favor at all as the PS Vita demonstrated.

There's also the problem that OLED can cause burn in display which LCD's don't do. Not to mention that OLEDs don't have backlight for brightness unlike LCD and even with the color contrast, LCD isn't really that bad compared to OLED. OLED technology is simply not needed. What the source is saying is simply stating things that Nintendo is never going to do because if they were considering OLED, they would have done so for the Switch instead of going for plastic LCD screen.

There is no incentive to move over OLED unless the technology in LCD is not powerful enough than OLED AND that OLED becomes more improved. Nintendo has been stuck with LCD for years and its unlikely that they would transition over OLED anytime soon. Hence why these speculations are just simple bogus.

@Socar
You’re not listening.

It’s not “speculation”. It’s reported, confirmed fact. Nintendo has signed a contract with Samsung for OLED screens. That’s a fact- that’s not my opinion. That’s not speculation. It’s happening, whether you want to believe it or not.

There are plenty of reasons for it (excess supply = low cost / great deal + consumers feel they’re getting a superior product- win win). If you’re just going to ignore those facts and do zero investigation for yourself and just repeat your ignorance then I’m not interested in having a discussion with you.

@JaxonH Plenty of news that gets "Reported" are also "speculations" Unless its official, it is what it is which is speculation. There were reports of Nintendo working with Sharp but that never came to fruition and remained silent. Are you seriously thinking that Nintendo would actually fall for going into OLED even if Samsung is to manufacture the screens?

There is no confirmation in this and all it really is is just speculation. Just like how those Pro rumors have been for the past four years. Its going to be bogus unless its close to something what Nintendo would actually do.

In what manner has Nintendo actually, made hardware that was "superior" to its competition? Nintendo for its longest history has never made better hardware unless there is a benefit for it. And for the "Pro" here, there is no real benefit for both Nintendo and the consumers because

1. Nintendo would have to invest in expensive materials to produce not just OLED screens but also the new chipset which as Nintendo has just stated so many times, they are never really into the horsepower kind unless their innovation requires it(as in the case for the Switch, it had to be on par with phones to play games on the go and on station).

2. Nintendo will need to price the Pro that would be reasonable. They can't price it around 500-600$ and 450$ would be too much compared to the Switch which 300$ is already getting flak.

3. Repairing costs would be more for both Nintendo and for consumers due to the materials used.

There is nothing in this that benefits them both. Yes the pro will come out sooner than later but to have OLED with the advanced chipset is overstating how Nintendo develops hardware.

The way I see it, the Pro is probably going to have longer battery life and perhaps better processing power that is at best going to help load things faster or have smoother FPS while keeping base Switch relevant. I don't see Nintendo doing this way unless it is official and reported isn't official.

You can ignore all you want but the reality is that regardless of what you say here, its still just speculation, and nothing has been confirmed officially.

Nintendo wouldn't be making the screens themselves, @Socar ....? They also don't make the chips!

@Socar
Look man.

You believe whatever you want. It’s not my job to convince you of anything. If you want to believe the moon is made of cheese and goblins live in the core of the earth, then you do you.

You see that? Cheaper cost.

You see that? That’s the guy who told us about Switch Lite and Mariko. This isn’t frothful speculation from anonymous 4chan post. This is a business contract, the details of which have been confirmed. You believe what you want. You will be proven wrong in due time.

@JaxonH Fine by me mate. Just don't get disappointed that you fell for a speculation and that the pro isn't what the report stated it was to be.

@BruceCM Right..I said invest which means someone else does it, and someone else has to charge Nintendo for the materials which Nintendo still has to pay out of their pockets...?

@Socar
The report says nothing about a “Pro”. So Idk what you’re even talking about.

Report only mentions an OLED screen and 4k signal output. That’s it. That’s not necessarily a “pro” in the way most think of the term- it’s a revision model. It’s likely the model many have referred to as a “pro”, but the crux of the matter is that it’s a new revision with OLED and 4k. Call it a Pro, call it an XL, call it whatever you want. But a revision is on the way.

I’m not “falling” for any speculation. I believe the facts, which are that a business contract for OLED has been signed with Samsung. That’s not speculation. That’s confirmed. That’s fact. That’s beyond dispute. There is no “speculation” about that. It’s happening.

I do believe a significantly more powerful Switch is coming, in addition to the new revision, but that’s my own personal belief based on the evidence I’ve seen. If things change then I’ll modify my beliefs. But that doesn’t change the fact a new Switch revision is coming, it will have 7” OLED and it will output 4k signal. Anything beyond that is speculation (which there’s nothing wrong with- it’s good to speculate based on evidence).

@Wavey84
Yea, I think a "mini" console (though in this case more like an original-sized) is highly likely. A totally faithful reproduction of the GameBoy or one of the many variants would sell like hot cakes. Make it able to connect to the internet to download games and - boom - they'll print money like crazy.

I'm undecided if Gameboy Mini is happening or not. It's been a while since the last Nintendo mini console, and it stands out that both of them were made when Nintendo's future in console gaming was fairly uncertain. But obviously its the next one they would do, since its the most popular old system they could bring back.

Maybe Nintendo don't think there's a need for any more consoles to be added to the online service. They barely updated the NES and SNES libraries as is. They could just be looking at the figures for how many are signed up and decided there is no longer a need to try and attract people to the service due to the sheer amount of games that require it to use the online functions.

I'd prefer the mini over nso. I lost my og Gameboy 😪

I could see Nintendo doing a GB Mini, but not the one that everyone wants. Not one with 20-30 games preloaded, but something more like the Mario G&W that came out with 2-3 games themed to a specific series.

For example a Zelda themed one with Link's Awakening + OoS +OoA preloaded.

Why are you in such a state of denial over this? I honestly don’t understand why you’re so vehemently arguing against this being fact. It’s as if you want an inferior product in your hands for four more years.

It’s makes no sense. At all. But I digress, you’ll see the facts soon enough.

Historically yes but in terms of materials and potential cost when mature OLED will eventually be cheaper. The higher cost of OLED has been mostly because it's a significantly less mature technology than LCD. Less mature -> More Defects -> Higher cost. Ten years ago you'd pay 20x more for an OLED TV vs an LCD one, these days it's more like 2x.

However because of the nature of creating panels, smaller panels are less impacted by the defect rate. When there's single a defect on a wafer you're cutting into 55" panels? You lose a 55" panel. A single defect in a wafer you're cutting into 6" panels and you only lose one 6" panel. So in practice smaller panels get cheaper quicker than larger panels. It's why OLED is the panel type on pretty much any phone that's not a budget model and why it's the only panel type for smartwatches. The Switch screen is small so the cost gap between OLED and LCD would be trivial at this stage.

If you don't believe that OLED is getting to the point where it's almost the same cost as LCD in these sizes consider this. You can buy a Samsung phone outright that has a 6.4" 1080p OLED panel, 128GB of internal storage, 4GB RAM, 5000mAh battery and all the usual stuffs you get with phones for the same price as the Switch. The Switch has a 6.2" 720p LCD, 32GB of storage, 4GB RAM and a 4300mAh battery.

I think it's fair to say there's plenty of room for a slightly larger 720p OLED panel at the price Nintendo is charging for the Switch. They could 4x the internal storage, go OLED, double the RAM, move to a more modern SoC and still sell it at a profit.