ArceusSupremacy

@rushiosan it's definitely not coming out next year. We'll probably see Metroid Prime 1 definitive edition.

Nooooooo you're ain't touching any IP sir, learn how to develop good games first please. NMH 3 is a terrible game.

@Tulio517 what? Ever heard of natures for example? A feature that is completely useless in the main game, that no one has asked for, and only exists to make it harder to get competitive Pokémon? I'm really glad they're gone for Legends btw.
Also literally hundreds of moves that are again, mostly useless in the campaign, like most status moves?
Masuda has literally stated one of the reasons for Dexit was balancing competitive.

There is just no reason for the VGC to take place in the main line games, it never made sense and it especially doesn't make sense now

@Ludovsky yes, that's what I'm saying, it doesn't make any sense, especially because judging by the views of VGC on YT, it's a small minority of the community who engage in competitive.

Pokémon is literally one of the worst games to play competitively.

It's tedious to learn, tedious to train for, boring to watch.

It also should be a separate game, it doesn't make sense for the mainline games to make compromises in their campaigns to better accommodate competitive play.

I could totally see new generations being partially introduced in Go, since the game unfortunately is more important for the brand than the mainline games.

@Sunanootoko yes but that's not all their lisenses, as far as I know, many are still tied to FIFPro.
Wait is FIFPro related to the FIFA or not?

@nocdaes breaking up with FIFA doesn't mean the loss of all licenses. They can still make deals with the individual leagues, like PES does, it's just more work to do.

But yeah, EA FIFA without lisenses would suck.

@syrupdash Eeeexxxxxcuse me sir, "Football", please.
They filed "EA Sports FC". Pretty okay name to me.

@kalosn no games on Switch are upscaled, but I know what you mean. Yes, the ram on Switch is ridiculous and that has an impact on textures.

@Lyricana there are 5. But they're way bigger than most XB regions.

@Madao well done sir, don't play that game.

I think it's hard to compare it to Monhun since the areas there aren't as open, it's hard to get a sense of how big the areas you can actually access are when summed up.

@Kirgo I'm pretty sure they said "open world" in the first reveal or am I wrong?

On a broader sense you could still call this open world, people call the Witcher 3 open world.

@mariomaster96 that doesn't mean it's not open-world, it could be interpreted either way.
Like it could be you would be limited through natural barriers, and the progression in te story would grant you access to the ridable Pokémon to overcome those natural barriers.

Again, the Pokémon Company is pretty bad at communication.

@DomGC no, this is completely non-sensical.
Legends only exists because people complained about SwSh.

This is the by far most ambitious game in the history of the company, SwSh sold great, so what else could be the reason for them to take that risk? Because people spoke out and told them what they wanted.

You people should thank those who are true consumers and tell their opinion, instead of just accepting everything for the sake of...avoiding conflict or whatever? Things never get better with that mindset, no matter in what situation.

@Madao it's speculated that we will have 4-5 areas, and we already know that Obsidian Fieldlands alone will be much larger than the Wild Area in SWSH.

But it's most certainly not gonna be as big as BOTW or The Witcher 3. I don't even think this would make sense in a Pokémon game.

@GrailUK that for sure, it's the absolute right step. But it's GF, if they to this wrong it could ruin the game, it could feel really really awkward.

But how are you gonna be limited when you're flying or climbing? Will there be a lot of invisible walls? This would feel extremely awkward.

Hoping for the best, I still would like a Treehouse with gameplay of the game.

@sanderev dude, you don't know DLSS. Look at stuff before you make claims.

There is DLSS footage that DOES look beter thsn 4K, inform yourself if youcall yourself a gamer.

@kalosn you don't understand how it works. It's upscaling, the textures don't need to be anything near 4K.

@Yorumi you obviously never had a proper look at 4K, or maybe you need glasses?

That whole biology thing is complete bs, do research before you claim things like that, I would like to see a valid scientific source backing that claim. The human eye can see the difference between 1080p and 4K very well, just because you haven't experienced it, it doesn't mean that it's biologically impossible.

Also, you probably never seen a current DLSS demo. It's currently generating imagery that looks better than native 4K, it adds details that aren't there.

@johnvboy you obviously do not follow Nintendo very closely or have bad memory.

They always commented on these rumours, they did that even back in the DS era (and of course, they lied). What's new is that they're commenting it on their business twitter account.

@Yorumi DLSS is quickly improving, and Nintendo is doing some work themselves, uspcaled 4K will looked good.

You say you understand it, but you keep completely ignoring all the improvements it could bring that I mentioned, instead you keep complaining about the quality of the upscaling.

@Yorumi also, you're completely underestimating what DLSS can do.

1- The Pro would have better hardware. So even if you play it in 1080p, you will get way better visuals.

2- With upscaling, you can make the game way more visually complex, because it can be rendered at very low resolutions. I assume you like Pokémon? Legends Arceus could, for example, offer high res textures, more details like way more blades of grass, higher draw distances, improved lgihting if they want to. And all of that even if you keep playing in 1080p.

@johnvboy what Nintendo says doesn't mean anything when the company is known for lying all the time when it comes to comment on rumours. They have no credibility.

There are much more reasons to think the information from Bloomberg is true than to discredit them.
Again, Furukawa himself said they are going for cutting edge tecnology, so the argument "Nintendo historically doesn't do that" doesn't hold any water. Those types of arguments are not convincing in general, people never thought Nintendo would do a handheld with two screens, a 3D handheld, a hybrid system.
Things do change.

@Yorumi well you will not get over 60 fps or ray tracing. You're outta luck I guess.

@johnvboy that's a good point, and that's why we are not saying the Switch Pro is coming for sure, but there is enough evidence to say it is very likely.

We have official patents from Nintendo with technology that has been developed for years that could only be used in a new hardware.

Nintendo said again and again that they want to support the Switch for 10 years, and that they want to stretch the switch's lifespan, thus the assumption that this is not their next platform, but an upgraded model.

Bloomberg and other sources say there are dev kits. Especially Digital Foundry claims that this is definitely the case, and they were the only ones that were right about the hardware coming in 2021 being an OLED model and not the Pro yet, but they also claim that a 4K DLSS Switch is definitely in development.

So for me, reasonable people should be able to realize that the Pro is indeed very likely.

@NoTinderLife The Switch Pro is a Switch that can switch, it is portable. That's the infos that we have and that's what makes sense.

It's a tablet that runs games at up to 720p on handheld, on dock it's upscaling to 4K.

@sanderev Nintendo said they want to support the Switch for 10 years. This could mean 7-8 years as a main platform + 2-3 years of cross gen, but most certainly not 6 years + 4 years of cross gen, they will not do that.

A new platform in 2023 is completely out of the question, it's 2024 at the earliest, imo 2025 is even more realistic.

@sanderev you have no evidence to say there will never be a Switch Pro. You can keep shouting "No Switch Pro", but that doesn't add anything to the discussion, and doesn't make sense as an argument. Right now, all evidence points towards a Pro model being real.

You're arguing unnecessarily about names, you should be able to realize that we are not discussing the names, but the concepts behind the names. I'm not saying the console would be called "Switch Pro 2", I think you should be smart enough to understand that.

@Bulborb again, DLSS. Upscaling. Competing in hardware power isn't the point, the point is having better upscaling software. And DLSS is far better than any other upscaler right now.

@johnvboy yes and they were right about both. They were right about the OLED screen. So why do you doubt their right with the 4K model?

@Bulborb the Switch is also 4K capable in theory with the Tegra X1. So this would be "even more true" for the Switch Pro.

@sanderev there will be enough Gen 9 games that can be ported. Not all, but many. By the time this isn't the case anymore, they can release a Switch Pro 2. Simple as that.

@sanderev The next gen will not come in 2023, 100% not. This would be less than 7 years, there's no reason for Nintendo to do that.

I hope you understand the concept of upscaling, with that, the Switch Pro would be able to get Gen 9 ports running at lower resolutions, but with better upscaling than other platforms, because it's NVIDIA. It doesn't need to even come close to PS5 in raw power.

Proof to that, is that most next gen games are still coming to even the Xbox One Fat, which isn't much more powerful than the Tegra X1 at full clock.

@sanderev that line of thinking doesn't make sense. A rumour is a rumour, it's neither false or right until it gets confirmed. The frist serious 4K rumours from trustworthy sources started last year, not in 2017.

No one is saying it's actually gonna be called "Pro", we just call it that to make clear what the idea behind it is, comparing it to the PS4 Pro. It's easier than saying "enhanced Switch" or whatever.

" They don't make a lot of money on the console alone" that supports the idea of a phone model starting with an enhanced Switch Pro. They make money with software mostly.

The biggest problem with generations is that you completely restart your install base in the transition. Nintendo suffered because of that with the Wii to Wii U. So I can definitely see their fear to release a next platform at all, instead of sticking to the Switch environment.

The thing with game compatibility is nothing Nintendo hasn't done before. It probably will be similar to the New 3DS, some exclusives, most games work on both. When Nintendo then release the "Switch Pro 2", they abandon the OG Switch, and continue to support the first Switch Pro.

This would be a very smooth way to keep their install base, by still releasing new hardware.

@GamingFan4Lyf too early for a successor. It will be either an upgrade, or the phone model.

A next console would not release before 2024, so a enhanced model in 2022 is nothing other companies haven't done.

@Silly_G DLSS. Nintendo patents. Google it.

@Heavyarms55 it's very unlikely it was just clickbait. Bloomberg is an important publication, they make millions with their reports, they don't need clickbait.

It was most probably just incomplete/ outdated information.

@Zag_Man yes exactly. Like think about the people who buy PS just for multiplats, most people judging by how relatively low even the biggest PS exclusives sell compared to their huge install base.

If Nintendo could steal those customers, I could see a Nintendo system with an install base of well over 170 million or so players.

It doesn't need to match the PS5, Nintendo has NVIDIA on their side, imo the best business partnership decision Nintendo has ever made. PlayStation will never be able to match NVIDIA in upscaling tech, so Nintendo could undercut PS5 in raw power, but make games that look just as good or similar thanks to DLSS. That could already be true with the currently rumored 4K Switch, since sources say it's raw power is PS4 level.

@johnvboy everything Bloomberg said was right aside of 4K. So why not believe the 4K was delayed like they're saying?

What about the patents? You can not say the Pro is definitely not real at all, there IS evidence it might happen.

@Bulborb no not entirely , the switch is losing to PS5 in Europe and that tendency could follow in other regions soon enough.

@Zag_Man I agree with gameplay over specs, but I and many others would be happy to play the newest Assassin's Creed, COD, next gen FIFA etc. on their Nintendo hybrid system.

I personally would drop Playstation if I could get those on my Nintendo system, even if with slight compromises.

@westman98 that sounds like something really smart you pointed out and I'm sad I don't know enough about PCs to understand it 🤣 lol

@YANDMAN I can see why people would be sceptical based on the history of the company, but things change, and there's way too much evidence now.

@skywake as I said, I believe the theory with the 4K Switch being intended for 2021, and that it got delayed. I believe the information given by Nate and Bloomberg, and based on those, that makes perfect sense to me.

@Robokku Furukawa himself said Nintendo did many mistakes in the past, and that from now on, they will use cutting edge hardware. The president of the company said that.

@SteB83 I agree, that's why I don't think Nintendo would do exclusives for the 4K model for the time being. Exactly like you said, they would just be as complex as current Switch games, with 4K upscale. Maybe better draw distance, more foliage, better post-processing, stuff like that.

I think Nintendo would then in a couple of years say: "The New Zelda works on Switch 4K, the new SW4K 2, but not on the original Switches, those get the cloud version (or nothing at all)".

But I could see third parties porting games like Assassin's Creed Valhalla exclusively to the 4K one right out of the gate, since the game would just be impossible on the OG Switch anyway, a cloud version would be the only possibility.

@danemord I think this would be very silly of Nintendo since they will never achieve the results of DLSS. Maybe this is exactly the reason why the patents didn't go through at Nintendo?

It could also be that the patents are based on DLSS, a custom version for Nintendo.

Developing their own upscaler would be just really silly.