“But I promise that you’re going to be blown away by the promising I’ll be doing in the future. My promising will be authentic, intuitive, life-like and indistinguishable from the real thing. This is promising like you’ve never experienced before, and these are promises they will still sound assuring twenty years after they’re made. I’m so proud of the team for the work they’ve done on this and I’ve promised them a pay rise, holiday in Bora Bora and a blowjob from a $10000-a-night hooker with a mouthful of warm honey. That’s the kind of promises I’m talking about, promises that will change the way we think about promises and, if you have a moment, I’d like to make you some promises too…”
Maybe this time it’ll ship with an Ethernet port and joycons that last more than 6mo!
Jokes aside, very curious what changes they’ll make. Incredibly unlikely they are going to target 4K but hopefully we will see a stable 1080p @60 across the board.
I just don’t see Nintendo making the jump tbh. They always lag behind resolution and FPS by a pretty large margin. Maybe we’ll see 1440p on TV’s and 1080p handhelds, but I’m also throwing darts at the board here lol
The games shouldn’t be designed with upscalers to be used to hit desired performance. We’re already seeing it with UE5 (Remnant 2) where performance without upscaling is abysmal.
If they go this route, the hardware will age incredibly quick. It’s not sustainable, especially since DLSS is tied to hardware. It would be better if FSR were implemented since it can run on anything, but the main point is that games should not require upscale tech to hit minimum performance. That leaves zero room for improvement over the life of the product and gives the user less reasons to adopt it.
My opinion though. I thought Nintendo handled the switch great for what it was. I have high hopes for the switch 2 regardless.
Does the NVIDIA Tegra line support DLSS? I guess it could be based on the “Orin” line of ARM CPUs, but I can’t find anything suggesting they can do DLSS.
I have to ask… why? The only device I’ve connected to hardwired Ethernet is a desktop PC in the same room as my router. I’ve not used ethernet for any portable device for eons. Why would you need it?
Latency on wireless controllers isn't a big deal (and a lot of Smash players are using wired Gamecube controllers anyway), but it's not a big deal on wi-fi either. The problem with wi-fi is packet loss and not being able to send and receive at the same time, which feels like latency in fits and starts, because it has to wait until the packet sends successfully. Ethernet helps with Smash, but it still sorely needs rollback netcode regardless. Even on a wire, you're still on delay-based netcode.
they do use bluetooth. However, it should be noted that not all BT devices are created equally. Check out this table from RTINGS.com of reviews of wireless bluetooth headsets. You can see that the very worst headsets have 300+ milliseconds of latency, while the very best have almost 0 ms of latency. I imagine that the Joycons hit a similarly low latency.
Because they’ve been standard for literally decades and Nintendo has released/probably will continue to release games that depend on streaming, such as Kingdom Hearts, which is unplayable over wifi.
Most people who have a switch do not have an OLED switch. I do hope they carry over the ethernet port for the next iteration. They’ve added and removed it before!
Update to a newer SoC; NVIDIA's latest chips at this thermal displacement are like 4x as fast + would easily run PS4 games
Upgrade the controllers to be more reliable + feel better
That's pretty much it; the OLED model is fine as far as physical design + screen, it just needs more competitive performance and to fix the Joy-Con drift nightmare
I agree, hall effect joycons SoC to something that's less than two years old and maybe a little thicker for enough battery to match runtime and a tiny quiet fan.
They did. It’s called the Vita and it’s still amazing even after Sony dumped it. I have one a friend cracked for me, and any game I could possibly want to play runs at a crisp 50 fps with no fluctuation. If only they had marketed it better.
I have one as well, but let’s not overpraise it. That handheld isn’t a “ps4 as a handheld” (obviously since the vita came out 2012 or 2011 cant remember which). And sadly it struggles to play its generation’s games (i.e. Borderlands 2 (one of my favs on vita) runs at 20-40 fps).
There are great games that showcase its abilities auch as the killzone game, but that was made for that system.
And let us not forget that it wasn’t a successful handheld. There is a reason sony hasn’t made a new handheld device since.
eurogamer.net
Najstarsze