←back to thread

Nintendo announces the Switch 2 [video]

(www.youtube.com)
781 points HelloUsername | 4 comments | 16 Jan 25 13:08 UTC | HN request time: 0.001s | source
Show context
sigmoid10 ◴[16 Jan 25 14:15 UTC] No.42725360[source]▶
Huh. I guess updated ergonomics / QoL stuff and confirmation of backwards compatibility counts as enough of an update over the last hardware refresh. But zero info on anything that could actually make this worth a buy. Granted, this feels like Nintendo who will do anything to not get dragged into PS/XBOX flops discussions. But without any real upgrade or even games announcements, I suppose most people will keep holding off their purchase decisions for now.
replies(12): >>42725386 #>>42725389 #>>42725405 #>>42725427 #>>42725480 #>>42725509 #>>42725559 #>>42725722 #>>42725909 #>>42726506 #>>42727045 #>>42728721 #
pjmlp ◴[16 Jan 25 14:24 UTC] No.42725480[source]▶
The great thing about how Nintendo approaches games is that it is about game design, not triangles per second.
replies(2): >>42725527 #>>42725558 #
pebble ◴[16 Jan 25 14:28 UTC] No.42725558[source]▶
Coming from a modern console, the first hour of Tears of the Kingdom felt painfully sluggish.
replies(1): >>42725610 #
pjmlp ◴[16 Jan 25 14:30 UTC] No.42725610[source]▶
One complaint from a catalog of how many games?
replies(2): >>42725922 #>>42726685 #
Hasu ◴[16 Jan 25 14:49 UTC] No.42725922[source]▶
Tears of the Kingdom is far from the only Switch game with performance issues. Off the top of my head, the newest Pokemon games (and the next newest, to a lesser extent) run like shit on the Switch. I've heard complaints about other games too.

It was underpowered when it was released in 2016, so it really shouldn't be that surprising.

replies(1): >>42726523 #
pjmlp ◴[16 Jan 25 15:26 UTC] No.42726523{3}[source]▶
Again, from how many?

And if we are going to start counting frame drops as argument against focusing on gameplay instead of triangles per second, there is no safe platform then.

replies(2): >>42726762 #>>42732509 #
1. Hasu ◴[16 Jan 25 15:42 UTC] No.42726762{4}[source]▶
I don't think the number of games in the catalogue matters in this discussion? There are hundreds of Switch games that perform great, and I don't care because I will never play them.

When I play a game and there are frame drops, stuttering, lag, dropped inputs, etc., it reduces my fun just as much as if the game were poorly designed. Maybe that's not the case for you, maybe you don't care, but I do, so do others.

I don't think Nintendo should make a console that rivals the best machine money can buy. I do think they took too long to refresh the hardware in the Switch lineup and their customers are worse off for it.

replies(1): >>42726854 #
2. pjmlp ◴[16 Jan 25 15:48 UTC] No.42726854[source]▶
So better not buy any computing device.

Having been through the demoscene and home computing days since their birth, I can only laugh when calling Switch underpowered.

replies(2): >>42727985 #>>42728082 #
3. Hasu ◴[16 Jan 25 17:11 UTC] No.42727985[source]▶
> So better not buy any computing device.

I don't have this issue on other computing devices. My PC runs all the games I want to play on it very well. I can also upgrade the hardware whenever I want, unlike in my Switch.

> Having been through the demoscene and home computing days since their birth, I can only laugh when calling Switch underpowered.

What does this have to do with the fact that the Switch has performance issues with first party Nintendo games? Hardware power only makes sense when talking about the software you want to run on it. The Switch is underpowered for software released exclusively for it, by the company that makes it. It's not underpowered for NES games, sure, but neither is an NES.

4. stnmtn ◴[16 Jan 25 17:18 UTC] No.42728082[source]▶
The Switch 1 is certainly underpowered compared to what it's competing with in the market with right now. That's why Nintendo is making a switch 2.