• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Anyone else wish Nintendo would commit to just a little more power to allow their bigger IPs have better image quality?

KXVXII9X

Member
More power equals cost. Nintendo wants their products to meet a certain price point so that every parent can afford them.
I think the Steam Deck is a better value in the long run. Only $50 more than the OLED version and can run all Steam games, emulation, and other games.
 

AJUMP23

Gold Member
I think the Steam Deck is a better value in the long run. Only $50 more than the OLED version and can run all Steam games, emulation, and other games.
Steam deck released this year....Switch released 5 years ago. And was designed 7 to 8 years ago. Make sure if you emulate you buy the game.
 

Soapbox Killer

Grand Nagus
Just a bit more so it could reliably push 1080p docked. If it had dlss from there, we'd be in good shape. Switch 2 could take care of it. After having a switch this whole time, what I really wish for is a stationary console that could get more ports that don't have to be "impossible ports". That's not happening anytime soon, though. Anyone who has a better platform would skip those, including me, but it would make the switch stand on it's own more. Neither here nor there, I suppose.




I own every console and a Steam Deck and on more than one occasion I have passed up on playing a AAA game on the PS4/Xbox One to play on Switch. Inferior is relative to desire. Doom/ Eternal, Hades, Fortnite, Dark Souls I own a choose Switch because of the ability to play on the go , untethered to the TV.
 

KXVXII9X

Member
Steam deck released this year....Switch released 5 years ago. And was designed 7 to 8 years ago. Make sure if you emulate you buy the game.
For what is offers, I'm surprised how cheap it is and how close it is to the price of the Switch when it has released 5 years after. Of course, you should buy the game you emulated. I'm just talking about how much choice you have with the system. I'm sure the next Switch/Nintendo handheld will offer comparable value. I get what you are saying though. I think I thought you were talking about now, so sorry.
 

hinch7

Member
I think the Steam Deck is a better value in the long run. Only $50 more than the OLED version and can run all Steam games, emulation, and other games.
SD can't run all Steam games out of the box. While Proton is quite good, its not all there yet in compatibility with Steam OS/Linux. But yeah, much better performance at a similar price point. Plus you have touch-pads with haptics, analogue triggers+haptics, capacitive analogues. Expandable internal storage with some tinkering. And replaceable parts. Ofc the SD came in later in terms of tech, its still up there in terms of performance in handheld gaming at low wattage. Even with the release of the 6800U based handhelds.

QC on the Steam Deck kinda sucks though the after sales and customer service is sublime.
 

KXVXII9X

Member
SD can't run all Steam games out of the box. While Proton is quite good, its not all there yet in compatibility with Steam OS/Linux. But yeah, much better performance at a similar price point. Plus you have touch-pads with haptics, analogue triggers+haptics, capacitive analogues. Expandable internal storage with some tinkering. And replaceable parts. Ofc the SD came in later in terms of tech, its still up there in terms of performance in handheld gaming at low wattage. Even with the release of the 6800U based handhelds.

QC on the Steam Deck kinda sucks though the after sales and customer service is sublime.
Yeah, QC is something I'm holding out on. I was going to snag one but decided on a laptop instead. I wonder how many games will be supported in the long run as well. I see their updates and it looks like they keep fixing and adding more and more features which is good. I guess Nintendo's value is their trust and experience with handhelds. It is more controlled, but things work for the most part and you know what to expect.
 
Do they have the talent and money to rival AAA games? Can't see it with their simplistic games.
Come on man. Nintendo as a software publisher/developer has as much AAA talent as anyone.

Not all of their games are Animal Crossing level simplicity. There is more quality gameplay and world design in Nintendo first-party games than 95% of games out there.

But their hardware is extremely dated. It was dated when it launched, now it feels ancient. Their games are limited by their own choices of hardware power/costs.
 

hinch7

Member
Yeah, QC is something I'm holding out on. I was going to snag one but decided on a laptop instead. I wonder how many games will be supported in the long run as well. I see their updates and it looks like they keep fixing and adding more and more features which is good. I guess Nintendo's value is their trust and experience with handhelds. It is more controlled, but things work for the most part and you know what to expect.
I had a Q2 batch of the base 64GB model and it had a faulty left trigger. Unfortunate as it was perfect unit otherwise. The replacement I get has a little more screen bleed to the top left as I would want and the casting for the outer shell was quite a step down in terms of quality. Seen other reports of people have sticky triggers and buttons as well so its not a uncommon thing either.

And true, SD isn't really for the average pick up and play person(s). You need to go around and tinker with things and sometimes you may get the occasional glitch or crash in game. Even in verified games. With Nintendo they own the system and respective dev enviroments so QC will be much more consistent from hardware to software.

But yeah not a bad decision laptops are probably more versatile in that respect. Still, PC's being PC's (and SD being one) you can adjust IQ and performance to your liking. 40fps and 40hz being the optimal setup for the SD, for performance, image quality and battery life.
 
Last edited:

Soapbox Killer

Grand Nagus
Yeah, QC is something I'm holding out on. I was going to snag one but decided on a laptop instead. I wonder how many games will be supported in the long run as well. I see their updates and it looks like they keep fixing and adding more and more features which is good. I guess Nintendo's value is their trust and experience with handhelds. It is more controlled, but things work for the most part and you know what to expect.


The OLED Switch still has a few advantages over the SteamDeck (the OLED screen is a full leap over the SD) and if Nintendo decided to forgo the dock and joycons and put everything into the singular hardware I think they could surpass the SteamDeck at an even or cheaper price. I have both so I'm happy.
 

AJUMP23

Gold Member
For what is offers, I'm surprised how cheap it is and how close it is to the price of the Switch when it has released 5 years after. Of course, you should buy the game you emulated. I'm just talking about how much choice you have with the system. I'm sure the next Switch/Nintendo handheld will offer comparable value. I get what you are saying though. I think I thought you were talking about now, so sorry.
No need to apologize we are just talking.
 

Bo_Hazem

Banned
Come on man. Nintendo as a software publisher/developer has as much AAA talent as anyone.

Not all of their games are Animal Crossing level simplicity. There is more quality gameplay and world design in Nintendo first-party games than 95% of games out there.

But their hardware is extremely dated. It was dated when it launched, now it feels ancient. Their games are limited by their own choices of hardware power/costs.

Yeah maybe they are good games, but those games don't really sound to me like TLOU, GOW, The Witcher 3, GoT, RDR, and other high-caliber games with mature audience target.
 
Yeah maybe they are good games, but those games don't really sound to me like TLOU, GOW, The Witcher 3, GoT, RDR, and other high-caliber games with mature audience target.
They definitely have a different feel. Nintendo doesn't often go for the realistic feel like those games and I don't think that has much to do with hardware. I'm personally glad. As much as I love all those games you listed, I do get tired of the style.
 
Last edited:

gundalf

Member
I'm definitely in the camp clear-picture-quality than graphical-fidelity, a big open world or high polygon meshes are useless to me if the picture looks like a pixel mess or runs sub 30FPS.
 

daveonezero

Banned
By this logic no one should buy a current gen console or PC because eventually you will have a newer platform to play games on that will do 8k 120fps.

Nothing will ever be good enough. That isn't an argument. The beauty of the industry now is you have options.
 
Last edited:

KXVXII9X

Member
I had a Q2 batch of the base 64GB model and it had a faulty left trigger. Unfortunate as it was perfect unit otherwise. The replacement I get has a little more screen bleed to the top left as I would want and the casting for the outer shell was quite a step down in terms of quality. Seen other reports of people have sticky triggers and buttons as well so its not a uncommon thing either.

And true, SD isn't really for the average pick up and play person(s). You need to go around and tinker with things and sometimes you may get the occasional glitch or crash in game. Even in verified games. With Nintendo they own the system and respective dev enviroments so QC will be much more consistent from hardware to software.

But yeah not a bad decision laptops are probably more versatile in that respect. Still, PC's being PC's (and SD being one) you can adjust IQ and performance to your liking. 40fps and 40hz being the optimal setup for the SD, for performance, image quality and battery life.
Unfortunate about your Steam Deck...

I agree that the constant tinkering wouldn't be as attractive for families and kids. I do like being able to have more control over settings and other things.

I'm glad with my decision for a gaming laptop after LONG consideration.
 
Yeah maybe they are good games, but those games don't really sound to me like TLOU, GOW, The Witcher 3, GoT, RDR, and other high-caliber games with mature audience target.
Having played a number of those western developed games, I don't really think, apart from the shinny graphics, they are doing anything special at all. There is little innovation in God Of War, or the The Last of Us. All of those games have one thing in common, they all have huge budgets dedicated to visual and audio experiences. They also all have another thing in common, arguably they suffer in gameplay variations. Take away the shinny coats of paint and play them as just games and you have fairly mediocre experiences. I know that is really being very general and a bit dismissive of some of the positive aspects of these games, they are still fun.. sometimes.. just not always for me.. I got through the Witcher because the story was compelling the minute to minute action to get through that story was a lot of the time boring, lacked any real skill and didnt make me want to turn up the difficulty.
I quite God Of War because the combat is down right boring and the story actually annoyed me. It was like a bad netflix series. I do know people love it.. Just not for me. All this is to say.. I dont care that Nintendo doesnt make these dark brooding cinematic games that cost the earth. A little more performance is all a new Switch really needs. The direction Nintendo has gone in with First party software is absolutely fine for me. Less cinematic the better.
 
Last edited:

Woopah

Member
We know that Nvidia is working on a much more powerful chip for them with DLSS and some form of ray tracing. So it will happen at some point.

Is this a conspiracy theory? Anyone else agree with me on this?

Nintendo purposely gimps their systems, so most big and popular third party games dont show up. Therefore, Nintendo hoards more first software sales going up against weak third party games.

Think of all the really popular third party games that arent on Wii or Switch which get a lot of sales and play time. Nintendo first party games dont have to compete against them.
It doesn't make any sense as a theory because:

1. Nintendo gets a cut of every third party games on the system, so the more they have the better
2. Better third party support means more people are likely to spend money on Switch hardware
3. Switch third party support has improved very dramatically over the past 5 years, and yet first party sales have not suffered at all.
Yeah maybe they are good games, but those games don't really sound to me like TLOU, GOW, The Witcher 3, GoT, RDR, and other high-caliber games with mature audience target.
They are not as cinematic as those games, but not every game needs to be cinematic.
 

Astral Dog

Member
Its useless, they would use that "little more" processing for either the graphics or framerate before image quality. It would need to be a big jump

However, while i wish it was clearer i don't mind as much for now, there are rumors Nintendo are using Nvidia upscaling tech for the next generation Switch, that alone should solve most of their IQ issues, as it doesn't seem to be an expensive feature to include

so yes, i want to see Nintendo games in even higher quality, but i can wait patiently until their next system is announced, my 1080p TV is fine for now
 

Kokoloko85

Member
Not really, but now that have got their groove and future ( hyrbid portables ) then there gonna have to up the power a bit more next gen.
The only time I miss it, is with open areas and JRPG’s, open worlds, 3rd party ports etc. Games like pokemon and SMT’s open areas need alot more life
 

Chronicle

Member
nah. i care about gameplay. i'm perfectly happy with the image quality on switch. i don't buy nintendo consoles for graphics (or any console for that matter.)
Well their gameplay is trash too. Also immature as hell (assuming your sn adult).

And nah nintendo shouldn't use more power. The industry needs an entrance console with easy gameplay for customers. They'll step up sooner or later to where the big dogs are.

Come at me.
 

TLZ

Banned
Not in the slightest. Chasing image quality is for studios that don't know other ways to make a good game.
Come On Reaction GIF by MOODMAN
 

AndrewRyan

Member
The OLED Switch still has a few advantages over the SteamDeck (the OLED screen is a full leap over the SD) and if Nintendo decided to forgo the dock and joycons and put everything into the singular hardware I think they could surpass the SteamDeck at an even or cheaper price. I have both so I'm happy.
Surprised you think this after owning both. Even if the Switch was 20% more powerful (ha!) it would still be less valuable IMO due to the Deck being an open platform and Steam with its sales and backward/forward compatibility.
 

BadBurger

Is 'That Pure Potato'
The OLED Switch still has a few advantages over the SteamDeck (the OLED screen is a full leap over the SD) and if Nintendo decided to forgo the dock and joycons and put everything into the singular hardware I think they could surpass the SteamDeck at an even or cheaper price. I have both so I'm happy.

A custom 7nm Nvidia SoC that supports DLSS (as the Deck utilizes FSR) and comes anywhere close to the power and capabilities of the AMD APU in the Deck would be very expensive. I'm not really sold on the joycons being that expensive to fabricate either. Besides, the Steam Deck also has more expensive components such as the track pads, dual mics, faster storage controller and drives, more and faster RAM, USB-C controller and a capable bus for it, modern wifi networking, etc.

Now that I've typed all that out I'd be afraid to see the price of a Switch that actually compares to the Deck given Nintendo's preference of selling hardware for a profit day one. A $400 Switch wouldn't be anything like the $400 option of the Deck. I can already imagine how many corners they'd cut to earn a profit at $400 using a Nvidia SoC.
 

nikos

Member
Yup. Nintendo consoles have been running at lower resolutions than the displays I've had them connected to since GameCube.
 
Last edited:

EDMIX

Member
I do, but based on their portable's success...I just don't thank the majority of that market gives a shit.
 

I_D

Member
I'm putting up my flame-shields before I post this one...



Nintendo was in their prime with the SNES, N64, and Gamecube. The NES was decent/good, and everything since the Gamecube has been decent/bad, at best.
Not coincidentally, they were also aiming for mid/high-end hardware at those times.

The SNES was excellent for the time, despite being rivalled by other hardware.
The N64 wasn't even close. Nothing else compared at the time.
The Gamecube was excellent, and especially for its size. The only competitor was the Xbox, which was more than twice the size.



If you look back at Nintendo's ultimate, must-have, AAA, etc. titles, you'll find that almost all of them are on relatively-powerful systems.
Sure, they have instant-hits on other, less powerful, systems, but the consistency isn't as good as it used to be.



So yeah, I would be happy to see a high-powered Nintendo system. I've been waiting for a high-powered portable system for about fifteen years, and the hardware is finally ready, but nobody has actually used it yet. Hopefully Nintendo will actually take advantage of it with their next system.
 
Last edited:

EDMIX

Member
This isn't something recent. Sony stopped making japanese first party games over a decade ago, at least on home consoles. Sure, there was TLG (which was supposed to launch in 2009) and Gravity Rush 2 (which flopped) but that's about it.

yea but...you kind of answered that question then.

Those titles flopping make sense for Sony to move on to other IP and simply allow Capcom, Sega and Square and many more to fill that void with those AAA Japanese titles. Sony doesn't currently "need" AAA Japanese first party titles, they have more then enough big AAA titles coming exclusively to them to ensure that market continues for them.

The slow down of that support of that team is no different then any other team in gaming if they continued to make flop, after flop after flop or something. So I'd say both Sony and Nintendo make what makes sense for them as publishers. Its not like Nintendo is going out of their way to make a series of western flops just to fucking check a bullet point to then have folks pretending Sony needs to do the same with Japanese titles lol
With RE4 remake coming, FFXVI, Dragon Quest XII, SF6 and them Tales games and many more, I just don't think Sony gives a shit and rightfully so. They already have the markets biggest heavy hitters from Japan and they'd be correct to focus on what is working for them first party wise, not continue to fund flops.

Thats complete fanfiction and no one has yet to provide any logical reason on why they should after breaking so many records without those titles from their first party.

Nintendo on the other hand can't sit back and rely on Resident Evil 8, 4 remake, 2 and 3 remake, they can't sit back on FFXV, FFXVI or KH4 etc Thus, it makes sense why they'd have a deep Japanese first party, but they've always had that by default. They don't have much western titles lol

when Sony completely stopped supporting first party Japanese games.

They stop supporting flops, they didn't stop support Japanese games.

 
Last edited:

Danjin44

The nicest person on this forum
They stop supporting flops, they didn't stop support Japanese games.
Some Japanese never going to do big numbers does mean you stop supporting those game only invest guarantee sales?

Games like Last Guardian, Gravity Rush and even Soul Sacrifice never going sell as much big western games but it made game selections more interesting.

I mean Nintendo supported games like Bayonetta and Astral Chain knowing those games never seem as much Mario or Zelda but they wanted to make their select diverse, that used to be Sony but now all focus goes to western games.
 

EDMIX

Member
Some Japanese never going to do big numbers does mean you stop supporting those game only invest guarantee sales?

if those games can't continue funding those projects.

This is business. Its not a charity

If the game is never going to sell 20 million, that doesn't mean Sony stops making them as they have a boat load of series that don't move massive numbers that are still around, but its because they sell enough to justify them continuing to exist. When they are putting all this behind some AAA title that is flopping aka TLG, it makes complete sense that they have to part ways, same with that whole White Knight series lol

Games like Last Guardian, Gravity Rush and even Soul Sacrifice never going sell as much big western games but

I disagree. We don't know how much better any of those IP could have been under different circumstances, as we've seen AAA Japanese titles move huge units, its simply that TLG, WKC, Gravity Rush and Soul Sacrifice simply weren't the ones.

I mean..think about it, if Sony owned Capcom, you telling me RE series won't move massive units? Monster Hunter World won't move massive units? Soooooo clearly someone in Japan is moving massive fucking units to argue not only a market exist, they can sell as much as the um "big western games".

We have more then enough AAA Japanese titles that have been successful to argue that a market exist and games like TLG simply flopped. Its not cause no one wants those games, its not cause they can't be made...clearly Sega, Capcom and Square all have a fuck ton of titles that have broken records for us to see such a thing happens, it simply didn't happen at those teams at Sony besides that Astro Boy game.

I mean Nintendo supported games like Bayonetta and Astral Chain knowing those games never seem as much Mario or Zelda but they wanted to make their select diverse,

You can still do that with all the titles already on PS5 and PS4...

If Nintendo wanted their selection to be diverse, they would make a western title. As it stands, not only does Sony's first party break many records with their western titles, they have the support of those AAA Japanese titles that in turn also break records for them too.

I don't see any evidence that anyone's library is less diverse cause you want more weeaboo games by Sony or something, they already have that shit by other publisers....as to why they wouldn't waste the money doing even more of what they have a lot of lol

So where Sony has their own western first party, they also can depend on those big Japanese hitters like FF, Dragon Quest, Persona, Resident Evil, Persona etc I just don't see anything here to argue they are now suddenly less diverse cause the won't make WKC3 lol

"now all focus goes to western games" yea...thats 100% false btw. I get you like that weeboo shit, but stop lying about that just to argue. Most, sure, majority, you'd have a point...but stop arguing this whole "all focus" or "Sony completely stopped"


yea they stopped so much they are growing a Japanese team? smh.
 
Last edited:

Airbus Jr

Banned
Nintendo needs to get back on top

Rtx4 coming this year and the next nintendo system should be comparable to that
 
Last edited:

Kumomeme

Member
i dont expect much but just need to allow bit better quality of texture and AA + reasonable performance is enough for me.
 
Yes, nintendo games are very unambitious imo and for my taste. If BOTW is the peak of what they can accomplish they just aren't a publisher/platform I will continue to support. I play pokemon and thats about it.
 

TheTony316

Member
yea but...you kind of answered that question then.

Those titles flopping make sense for Sony to move on to other IP and simply allow Capcom, Sega and Square and many more to fill that void with those AAA Japanese titles. Sony doesn't currently "need" AAA Japanese first party titles, they have more then enough big AAA titles coming exclusively to them to ensure that market continues for them.

The slow down of that support of that team is no different then any other team in gaming if they continued to make flop, after flop after flop or something. So I'd say both Sony and Nintendo make what makes sense for them as publishers. Its not like Nintendo is going out of their way to make a series of western flops just to fucking check a bullet point to then have folks pretending Sony needs to do the same with Japanese titles lol
With RE4 remake coming, FFXVI, Dragon Quest XII, SF6 and them Tales games and many more, I just don't think Sony gives a shit and rightfully so. They already have the markets biggest heavy hitters from Japan and they'd be correct to focus on what is working for them first party wise, not continue to fund flops.

Thats complete fanfiction and no one has yet to provide any logical reason on why they should after breaking so many records without those titles from their first party.

Nintendo on the other hand can't sit back and rely on Resident Evil 8, 4 remake, 2 and 3 remake, they can't sit back on FFXV, FFXVI or KH4 etc Thus, it makes sense why they'd have a deep Japanese first party, but they've always had that by default. They don't have much western titles lol



They stop supporting flops, they didn't stop support Japanese games.

I know why they stopped. Just saying that this isn't anything recent.
 

Vargavinter

Member
I would finish more games if there was a stable frame rate, most games I've played are just fine. But others are pretty jarring. Adding achievements would make me finish some games perhaps a second round or most cases a first round.
 

KungFucius

King Snowflake
nope. BOTW and Super Mario Odyssey and Splatoon etc.....i had no image quality complaints.
Those games are fine for what they were but BoTW struggled to maintain decent framerates in the lost woods village. More power and that section of the game is greatly improved. I.e. the system's weakness caused the game to struggle. What ideas did devs have for games that had to be cut or scaled back because the system is too shitty?
 

th4tguy

Member
The same can be said for any console.
I am playing through fallen order right now on PS4 and it’s a muddy mess.
A console is like a bucket of water (overly simplified metaphor ). You can scoop out some for resolution, some for ai, some for faster frames, particles, physics, etc etc

Eventually you run out of water and you have to redistribute from one are to another to find the right balance.
Even with larger buckets of water, you are still working with a finite resource and you will find examples of these limits.

Even with series x and ps5 devs still have this problem. That is why we have dynamic resolution and 30fps games still.

Many many years from now, two or more gens down the road, we will still be imagining, “what if xyz console was just a bit more powerful. Maybe then this game would have propped frame pacing or hit this resolution or frame rate.”


As long as there are limits, we will be limited.
 
Top Bottom