Nintendo reveals more specs for the Switch except for the ones that matter? That's not good....

[Riddler356]

On 1/13/2017 at 1:28 AM, treeroy said:

2 hours battery life is f*cking terrible for a supposed "portable" console

full charge. why, 3d, full volume and nonstop playing. so doesn't bug me.

 

[skywake]

8 hours ago, Pyrii said:

I dunno if it's been mentioned here, but yesterday there were some articles pointing out that the Joycon Grip included with the console doesn't allow for USB charging of the Joycons, instead you have to buy a "JoyCon Chargin Grip" (£25 etc) that allows for this feature. The "JoyCon Grip" that comes with the console is just a simple plastic Joycon Holder.

You can still charge the Joycons on the Switch itself and they have a 20hour battery life. So you can call it adding to the list of complaints if you want. I think it's nitpicking. I really couldn't care less that there's only one out-of-the-box way to charge the two controllers they included.

 

19 minutes ago, RikvE said:

Nope. Zelda confirmed 900p30. Now that is terrible 

When I posted that comment almost a week ago I thought it was 60fps. Since then it has become clear it's running at 30fps. In any case it's running games better than the Wii U did while undocked. You can compare that to a PC or a PS4 if you want and call it terrible. But given it's a portable device I'll compare it to tablets, phones and portable consoles and think the opposite. That way both of us can be correct. 

 

Also every other first party game at the event was running at 60fps. Including Mario Kart which was doing it at 1080p in split screen while docked. Given this is the only way to play Nintendo first party games? I think its hard to complain too much. Nintendo seems to be targeting 60fps. Far from terrible

 

[Dabombinable]

Just now, RikvE said:

Nope. Zelda confirmed 900p30. Now that is terrible 

 

Lets be fair here-the Xbone and Pisspoor struggle to manage even that consistently.

[79wjd]

1 hour ago, Dabombinable said:

Lets be fair here-the Xbone and Pisspoor struggle to manage even that consistently.

But Zelda isn't (at least imo) up to the same quality as AAA titles. 

[LAwLz]

19 minutes ago, djdwosk97 said:

But Zelda isn't (at least imo) up to the same quality as AAA titles. 

Graphically - No

Gameplay wise it seems like it will far exceed the average AAA title.

[cesrai]

6 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

Graphically - No

Gameplay wise it seems like it will far exceed the average AAA title.

That's really subjective  

[Fetzie]

On 01/13/2017 at 9:29 AM, AluminiumTech said:

I think this is kind of what they meant.....

 

2.5 hours of battery for games like Skyrim OR up to 6 hours for games like Mario Kart etc.

If loading screens are anything like the playstation or Xbox you'll get maybe an hour of actual playtime in skyrim if the battery is only going to last two and a half hours.

[Dabombinable]

11 minutes ago, Fetzie said:

If loading screens are anything like the playstation or Xbox you'll get maybe an hour of actual playtime in skyrim if the battery is only going to last two and a half hours.

The loading times should be a lot better-no shitty 5400RPM laptop HDD+optical disc.

[79wjd]

2 hours ago, LAwLz said:

Graphically - No

Gameplay wise it seems like it will far exceed the average AAA title.

I was referring to graphically since there was a comparison made to come/ps4 running at similar resolutions/framerates.

[LAwLz]

2 hours ago, cesrai said:

That's really subjective  

Yes, but my opinion > everyone who disagrees

 

 

 

 

The new Zelda game looks great if you ask me. Both visually and gameplay wise.

I wish it would be 60 FPS and higher resolution, but I don't think it will matter that much if you sit down and enjoy the game.

 

I mean, Ocarina of Time might be my favorite game of all time, and that ran at 320x240, 17 FPS.

 

 

8 minutes ago, djdwosk97 said:

I was referring to graphically since there was a comparison made to come/ps4 running at similar resolutions/framerates.

Yeah I know. I just wanted to say that graphics aren't everything (and it wasn't really directed at you either).

I prefer the cartoony style of Zelda over gray/brown shooters like COD and BF though.

[79wjd]

14 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

 

I mean, Ocarina of Time might be my favorite game of all time, and that ran at 320x240, 17 FPS.

I played a PS2 game, that I used to love, recently, and it looked so bad I lost all interest after a few minutes.

[AresKrieger]

21 minutes ago, djdwosk97 said:

I played a PS2 game, that I used to love, recently, and it looked so bad I lost all interest after a few minutes.

Well then either the game wasn't good due to the gameplay, or your a graphics snob, could also be a game that aged like crap though nintendo with the exception of N64 titles has pretty much avoided that by using stylized graphics. (most ps2 games still look fine to me and I emulate them so....)

[AresKrieger]

Did anyone provide sauce for the 900p 30fps claims? Because I don't see any, and no sauce equals no argument in my mind.

[typographie]

38 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

I wish it would be 60 FPS and higher resolution, but I don't think it will matter that much if you sit down and enjoy the game.

 

I mean, Ocarina of Time might be my favorite game of all time, and that ran at 320x240, 17 FPS.

That comes down to the individual and what you're accustomed to. When I was 14 and playing one of the first 3D action games ever made, I could sit down and "just enjoy the game." I hadn't had the next 18 years of gaming experiences yet, and I didn't have a near-infinite library of PC games also competing for my attention. And even then, I remember being fully aware of the fact that Ocarina of Time felt more sluggish than the 2D games on SNES and Genesis, even if I didn't fully understand or care why.

 

To me, a $299 console + $49 game (+ putting up with all the extra Nintendo ecosystem nonsense) is too much to ask for an action RPG in 2017 that may not even maintain 30 FPS according to some accounts. I'm going to be voting with my wallet on this one, and I'll just hope it gets a re-release in another console generation or two.

 

3 minutes ago, AresKrieger said:

Did anyone provide sauce for the 900p 30fps claims? Because I don't see any, and no sauce equals no argument in my mind.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2017-01-18-zelda-breath-of-the-wild-switch-and-wii-u-differences-outlined

[AresKrieger]

2 minutes ago, typographie said:

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2017-01-18-zelda-breath-of-the-wild-switch-and-wii-u-differences-outlined

Thanks for the sauce, interesting that this is the case it makes me think they kept render distance very far given that the stylized graphics should help some with performance, maybe boss battles were to much to keep stable given Nintendo's propensity toward leviathans as bosses.

[typographie]

8 minutes ago, AresKrieger said:

Thanks for the sauce, interesting that this is the case it makes me think they kept render distance very far given that the stylized graphics should help some with performance, maybe boss battles were to much to keep stable given Nintendo's propensity toward leviathans as bosses.

I don't know… in retrospect it seems like it shouldn't have been so surprising. Apparently Wind Waker and Twilight Princess (neither of which I've played) ran at 30 as well, even their re-releases. I'm actually unsure there has ever been a 3D Zelda game that ran at 60 FPS.

[ARikozuM]

On 1/13/2017 at 4:45 AM, AluminiumTech said:

it is! You need good hardware and game developers to optimize their games to get the performance!

 

Great optimizations cannot save bad hardware.

Good optimization can and has saved bad hardware. Look at the original Doom. The processors of the time had a difficult time rendering 3D graphics and the developer, id Software, was able to get very appealing 3D graphics using a 2D plane.

[AresKrieger]

3 minutes ago, ARikozuM said:

Good optimization can and has saved bad hardware. Look at the original Doom. The processors of the time had a difficult time rendering 3D graphics and the developer, id Software, was able to get very appealing 3D graphics using a 2D plane.

Not to mention I wouldn't even call it bad hardware, its not super powerful but clearly the battery and thermal restrictions of the form factor played a role in that, and given how the form factor is the main reason I want one I think it was a good decision (since why would I want a PS4 for example when PCs do the same things without online fees or steam sales/emulation)

[ARikozuM]

On 1/13/2017 at 8:17 AM, AluminiumTech said:

a 500GB HDD would be really welcomed.

And then you drop the tablet and the platter flies out like a saw blade...

[ARikozuM]

On 1/13/2017 at 8:45 AM, manikyath said:

and you'd need more power to spin a drive while you're on the go than for example eMMC, which seems to be extremely popular for HP to put in their $200 shitbooks

The amperage required to spin the drive to operating speed would probably knock out more than a few minutes of game-time since the bulk of the draw is just spin-up. Kind of how a light bulb requires more energy to turn on than to maintain.

[manikyath]

1 minute ago, ARikozuM said:

The amperage required to spin the drive to operating speed would probably knock out more than a few minutes of game-time since the bulk of the draw is just spin-up. Kind of how a light bulb requires more energy to turn on than to maintain.

idunno man, between running my laptop off a hard drive or off an SD card makes a pretty nice difference in battery life.

 

and the power draw isnt only spinning the drive, there's quite a bit of power going into clunking that head around as well.

[PlayStation 2]

On 1/13/2017 at 3:45 AM, AluminiumTech said:

it is! You need good hardware and game developers to optimize their games to get the performance!

 

Great optimizations cannot save bad hardware.

Tell that to Mario Kart 8 and Gran Turismo 4.

[manikyath]

9 minutes ago, Dan Castellaneta said:

Tell that to Mario Kart 8 and Gran Turismo 4.

mario kart 8 is the game that made me stop and "recalibrate" when i realised the kind of hardware it was running on.

short summary:

- 2GB ram, of which one dedicated to OS functions, one GB dedicated to the game, shared between cpu and gpu.

- 45nm tri-core PowerPC, with a total of a whopping 2MB of cache

- 40nm AMD GPU, with a whopping 32MB eDRAM

 

EDIT: i wanna add, these specs are still "unconfirmed", in case someone is still crying that nintendo isnt measuring meat size against other consoles with their switch.

[PlayStation 2]

2 minutes ago, manikyath said:

mario kart 8 is the game that made me stop and "recalibrate" when i realised the kind of hardware it was running on.

short summary:

- 2GB ram, of which one dedicated to OS functions, one GB dedicated to the game, shared between cpu and gpu.

- 45nm tri-core PowerPC, with a total of a whopping 2MB of cache

- 40nm AMD GPU, with a whopping 32MB eDRAM

Yeah, despite the weird issue where it drops a frame every second or so (which I've never noticed), it not only runs fucking rock solid, it looks the part too.

[manikyath]

1 minute ago, Dan Castellaneta said:

Yeah, despite the weird issue where it drops a frame every second or so (which I've never noticed), it not only runs fucking rock solid, it looks the part too.

i've only seen it on livestreams, but for the amount of shyte going on on screen, i'm amazed even that experience is as smooth as it is, we have $2000 servers crapping their pants trying to encode a game running on a potato