18 months later, how do you feel about the Switch's power compared to Wii U's?

maybe read.

im saying that to me the experience that I get from the Switch is just a suped up WiiU (with a better controller instead of the garbage that was the pad). Nothing special but expected when they chose to be portable.

feel bad for anyone who only has the Switch for a gaming device, its great for portable play, damn awful for a dedicated home console specifically if its your only choice.

(plus this thread is about how we feel about it, I feel its pretty lame unless you play it on the go which is what I do)
Don't.
 
I'm happy with it considering its form factor, like being able to play games like BotW and Xenoblade2 on the go is godsend.
Having said that, I won't hesitate for a second on buying a more powerful Switch 2.0, since games like Xenoblade2 on the go could become a lot better with more power.
 
Its not a bad chip, but I find it a bit disappointing its just an unmodified off the shelf chip from 2015. I think at least shrinking it down to 16nm ff would have done wonders. Upgrading to a72/ 73 as well would have made it amazing.
 
I can put it in my back pocket and play Zelda, I'm cool with it. But I do wish it was more powerful, cause i hate the framerate drops on BOTW.
 
In a perfect World I would love Nintendo to offer the choice between a dedicated console, a dedicated portable and the hybrid we have now and I do think that will eventually be the case with time.

As it is I think the Switch is a great piece of kit especially when you look at what was available at the time of it's R&D (people seem to think consoles are thought up the day before they go into mass production lol) and it's price point.

Visually I still don't think we've seen what it's capable of from Nintendo yet. BotW, MK8D and SMO are all fantastic looking games but I feel like if they've given it a much bigger budget than the other first party games then Metroid Prime 4 will be the graphical showcase for the system.

Some of the current gen ports are a little iffy in terms of resolution, especially on a large 4k screen but if you're reading this forum there's a very good chance you also own an XBO or PS4 on top of Switch for either better versions of those ports or the big name AAA third party games like RDR2. It is nice to have the option of some of the ports on the go though!
 
for $300 it's about the best you could hope for with the form factor. it's not an enthusiast system

bigger issue is, assuming it has about another 3 years left in its lifespan, how much mileage its current specs will give it. IMO part of why wii's latter years were so abysmal is because devs were simply tired of working within a limited framework and just moved on, though it could be apples to oranges with how things play out here, who knows
 
It doesn't bother me but I can only imagine how BOTW would look on a more powerful console but the balance between handheld, heat, power and battery life is what it is.
I applaud Nintendo for that.
 
/shrug

when the player base doesn't even get the 3rd party games that do make it to the platform on time with the others its just a damn shame. Switch is a nice side piece for on the go games but man what a dreadful platform to have as your one and only option.
In my personal case, I have a fairly capable computer that, though it's not high-end, can play any modern PC game I may be interested in. But I'm not, because neither PC nor the vast majority of AAA gaming doesn't suit my style. I rarely take a handheld when I leave the house, so the Switch's portability is not much of a factor for me. I just enjoy the games that are available for it and the odd surprise or too. I've got plenty on my plate to satisfy me for a long time to come. No need for any concern on the part of others.
 
In my personal case, I have a fairly capable computer that, though it's not high-end, can play any modern PC game I may be interested in. But I'm not, because neither PC nor the vast majority of AAA gaming doesn't suit my style. I rarely take a handheld when I leave the house, so the Switch's portability is not much of a factor for me. I just enjoy the games that are available for it and the odd surprise or too. I've got plenty on my plate to satisfy me for a long time to come. No need for any concern on the part of others.
then consider my concern not towards you.

altho its not really concern as if im worried what you spend your money on, i couldn't care less, its more like, "damn, you are missing out on some great games, oh well".
 
What are the odds for a Switch Pro on Tegra X2 in Spring?
I think it will happen. It probably won't have an off the shelf x2 though because Denver cores are useless to Nintendo. Probably something like a die shrunk x1 with some x2 features. If we are lucky double bandwidth.

Basically what many hoped would be in the original switch.
 
maybe read.

im saying that to me the experience that I get from the Switch is just a suped up WiiU (with a better controller instead of the garbage that was the pad). Nothing special but expected when they chose to be portable.

feel bad for anyone who only has the Switch for a gaming device, its great for portable play, damn awful for a dedicated home console specifically if its your only choice.

(plus this thread is about how we feel about it, I feel its pretty lame unless you play it on the go which is what I do)
Lol, you feel bad for me then.

Let me tell you I'm particularly happy in life and have PLENTY to play with (still holgind myself to buy a few titles because I wouldn't have the time beside already playing quite a big amount of time during beside work and family time.
It's actually already becoming one of the system with the biggest number of game I have.
And it's only in year 2 of its lifespan.

So, feel sorry for your problematic opinion instead.
 
then consider my concern not towards you.

altho its not really concern as if im worried what you spend your money on, i couldn't care less, its more like, "damn, you are missing out on some great games, oh well".
Just this past week, my Switch got the first legit fighting game in one of my favorite anime franchises and the 11th mainline entry in my all-time favorite game series. I'm not missing out on anything.
 
This is true, I remember Xenoblade X looking a lot better on Wii U than XB2 on Switch but again i'm playing that one portably and not a fan uneven artstyle of XB2.

I got both version of BotW and there isn't much difference to be honest. The system feels like WiiU+ but it's portable so that's neat
your memory is joking with you
 
Support for engines and middleware is basic need. Glad that Nintendo saw this.

These are the reasons why the Vita got soooo many games. Now Switch is also enjoying these kind of games.

Nintendo forgot those import engines and middleware with wiiu and 3ds.

Now they got Vulcan, gamemaker, unreal 4, unity, hummingbird, cri middleware, gradia, havoc, RAD etc.
 
It doesn't bother me but I can only imagine how BOTW would look on a more powerful console but the balance between handheld, heat, power and battery life is what it is.
I applaud Nintendo for that.
botw is a wii u game converted 1:1. switch is far more capable than that visually so just wait for the next zelda.
 
It’s not possible for them to compete in terms of power because they have to construct a portable device with an acceptable battery life (although this point could be argued as well). I don’t really hold it against Nintendo; this was the best device they could reasonably make. However, I still do wish we could have a Nintendo console that can play games of similar graphical fidelity as their competitors.

I don’t think of Switch as a lesser platform by any means, though, and I don’t think it’s unfathomable for a person to be wholly satisfied with having only a Switch.
 
I'm very pleased with it, I didn't expect we would get a handheld that's more powerful than the Wii U.

I'm also at a point where I just think most games look pretty, I rarely see ugly games these days. I can't even think of one at the moment.
 
It runs DOOM that's more than enough. Lets hope they target 1080p ultra graphics+ 60 fps for switch 2. I would really like to see some extra power in next iteration.
 
As someone who game on PC in 4k (majority 60fps) and seen all the graphical effects of modern gaming.... i love the Specs on the switch. I play it in handheld mode and i'm satisfied for what it offers. I'll give it a pass for 30fps in undock mode. I wont touch docked mode.
 
for $300 it's about the best you could hope for with the form factor. it's not an enthusiast system

bigger issue is, assuming it has about another 3 years left in its lifespan, how much mileage its current specs will give it. IMO part of why wii's latter years were so abysmal is because devs were simply tired of working within a limited framework and just moved on, though it could be apples to oranges with how things play out here, who knows
Since 1998 Nintendo’s released new handheld architecture updates every 3-4 years, be they platform refreshes or new platforms entirely. I doubt Switch breaks that trend.

1989: Game Boy
1998: GBC (GB refresh)
2001: GBA
2004: DS
2008: DSi (DS refresh)
2011: 3DS
2014: n3DS (3DS refresh)
2017: Switch
20XX: ‘Mariko’ (Switch refresh)
 
I disagree with a lot of people here and I think it is a great console as well. in fact, I probably use it as a console more than a handheld:

- Pro controller is my favorite controller out there.
- minimalist UI design and great booting speed makes starting a game a very easy process.
- Nintendo's games are very colorful and have a great art style. I never felt that a game like Splatoon 2 or Super Mario Odyssey looked bad compared to other systems.
- I love 2D games and Japanese games, both of them have very strong presence on Switch. I used to play indie games on my laptop, but now I'm playing 2D games on a TV screen regularly for the first time since the Sega Genesis days o_O

I understand it is not ideal at all for more realistic/demanding games and online games, but even then a traditional powerful hardware won't solve this problem and would never make people leave their Sony and Microsoft systems.
 
I’m satisfied with the power. When you consider what was available when it launched and the price point they were targeting, I don’t think it’s realistic to expect more.

A Switch 2 in a few years could be very very interesting. With PS5/X1-2 likely to target 4K a Switch 2 could likely run all multiplats at a minimum of 1080p depending on when it releases. All 3rd Party games being able to run on a Switch 2 could be a pretty important with the convenience of being a portable hybrid.
 
Its not a bad chip, but I find it a bit disappointing its just an unmodified off the shelf chip from 2015. I think at least shrinking it down to 16nm ff would have done wonders. Upgrading to a72/ 73 as well would have made it amazing.
I use my Switch only as handheld and a 2015 chip is several step above what you could historical expect from Nintendo.
 
Well, could've shipped with an X2 instead of an X1. More power, similar battery (due to reduced die size, optimisation). Who knows the cost difference though, those figures are nowhere. Even if it was $10 extra a unit, I'd happily absorb that.
I'm wondering how feasible more commonplace "flagship" mobile chips were for Nintendo vs. what they went with from Nvidia. Could they have used something like a Snapdragon 8xx series? I'm fairly sure that would have been a big bump in performance versus what we eventually got with Switch.

I don't know. I wish it wasn't so underpowered. I wish Switch wasn't some ways behind, even compared to smartphones.
 
The Wii should have supported 720p, had a dual core CPU and been at least twice as powerful as it was, with 256MB of DDR3 onboard next to the 35MB T1SRAM. Release for $299 holiday 2006 with Wii Sports.

3DS should have used a Tegra 3 chip, release holiday 2011, have a 360p display (3DS has a 240p display currently) it should have dropped the 3D and just been a pure successor to the DS. With a launch price of $199.

Nintendo should have rode the Wii and 3DS until Holiday 2016, they could have revealed the NX in the same way, but they should have put the Tegra X2 inside of it. Launch it with Zelda in November 2016, Xenoblade X in December, Paper Mario Color Splash in early January, Pokken in February, Star Fox Zero in March 2017 (obviously no 2 screen gimmick), In september 2017 instead of Pokken deluxe, they could release Tokyo Mirage Sessions #FE and Metroid: Samus Returns (on both Switch and 3DS), everything else would play out like it has. W101 could have released on the more powerful Wii listed above, lots of games the Wii missed would have come to the system, but most importantly, as a Wii U owner, I wouldn't have had to waste my time.

The Wii U was a mistake, it was Nintendo diving into a gimmick, looking for inspiration and expecting the 3DS to be successful out of the gate, instead Nintendo had to shift resources from Wii U first year software, to boost 3DS in late 2012 and throughout 2013, this meant that Wii U had the worst software lineup Nintendo has ever had for the majority of the first year, only ending with Super Mario 3D World, and from that point on, while titles came, the underline OS and hardware was rushed and of unusually bad quality.

Nintendo merged their hardware divisions right after the launch of the Wii U, but the reality is that, the handheld division absorbed the console division and they moved forward with the Switch, this meant that further support for the Wii U was never coming, OS updates were there after this period, not to improve the experience, but to lock out vulnerabilities, the truth is, the Wii U was an attempt to coast through a generation, and when it wasn't working, they very quickly dropped the Wii U early for it's successor, and with it came some hardware compromises, but had they of simply skipped the Wii U generation, the Switch could have been a slightly higher PPU, allowing for a parity with current gen base consoles, that would have seen it as a much clearer shift in the industry to a new form factor.

The Switch is, a shift to something new, a better device and all the tech existed in 2016 to give it a forward compatibility that would never see the device outdated, thanks to a USB-C port that could absolutely have supported an eGPU, easier ports from XB1/PS4 and even a less prone to manufacturing defects that has appeared on the Switch. Having said that, what Nintendo did give us with the Switch is the most forward thinking gaming device that has ever hit store shelves, and they still could easily pull off a shift in the industry, thanks to the demand of this new form factor.

Everyone is on borrowed time though, Smart Phones with some sort of dock or wireless HDMI technology, will outdate the console form factor, heck if Samsung announced a Galaxy Gaming dock, that houses a RTX 2080 for $400, alongside the PS5 and XBnext, the reality is that Samsung could easily see the same level of multiplatform support as Sony or Microsoft, while offering a portable experience with some sort of $20 gaming grip for their galaxy phones, that they could even bundle with such a device.
I'm actually impressed how almost every single point made in your post is wrong.

Nintendo were never going to do anything with the Wii that wasn't in the final product we got. Support for HDMI, increased specs and going toe to toe with the 360? The Wii was the controller and everything about it was designed to facilitate the Wiimote at a price that would undercut the 360 and PS3. If you'd said Nintendo should've released a Super Wii in 2010 I could see your point but at launch? What we got was the most cutting edge it was going to be.

Same with the 3DS. The machine Nintendo designed was with the expectation that market trends would continue to push 3D and the content would be there. Even Sony dabbled so its not like Nintendo were alone, its just they committed hard and launched just as it became clear it wasn't going to break into mass market adoption. What you're proposing wouldn't have launched at that price either and who knows how that fight with the Vita would've turned out.

The Wii was never going to last ten years, the cutting edge tech wasn't in the console so how was it supposed to be feasible for modern titles? Can you imagine the Wii up against the PS4 and Xbox One? Even if it was your suggestion, there's nothing that you've put forward that means the Wii720p would have been able to receive ports of current or next gen titles.

The Wii U being a failure has little to do with the viability of the tech in 2004-6 and everything to do with a design philosophy Nintendo committed to once they embraced the switch to HD.

You talk about things that are available at different points of Nintendo's design but you ignore exactly what drove Nintendo to make the decisions they did. I'd argue strongly that the decision not to leave the door open for eGPUs is rooted in their belief that the experience as a handheld should not be compromised and to simplify the experience for owners. They're not interested in parity, three consoles in a row should scream that loudly now. They believe that art and technical design will bridge that gap, which freed them from the technical arms race.

Nintendo released the machines they did to fit the tech and price philosophy they chose. A lot of people would find it a lot easier if they just accepted that.
 
I do wonder if we would even get more games if the maximum file size of a game could exceed 32 GB. I am very happy with the power of the Switch, you gotta compromise for some portability. I do wonder what would be possible with the Tegra X 2 chip. I think very demanding open world games like Fallout 4, Witcher 3 or Assassin's Creed would not be possible on the Switch, but a lot of games with distinct levels seem to be no problem. If DOOM and Valkyria Chronicles 4can hit the Switch, I expect games like Prey or Dishonored to arrive on the Switch very soon, too.

And yes, handheld resolution is lower than on TVs, but it's not really a problem because a smaller screen doesn't need the highest resolution. I still remember how much better I liked Final Fantasy X on the Vita than my PS3.
 
Its not a bad chip, but I find it a bit disappointing its just an unmodified off the shelf chip from 2015. I think at least shrinking it down to 16nm ff would have done wonders. Upgrading to a72/ 73 as well would have made it amazing.
An A72/73 would give it better single core CPU performance than PS4 Pro or XBOX even. As is though CPU isn’t Switch’s bottleneck really, it’s probably the best balanced console on the market from that perspective.

I wouldn’t be surprised if ‘Mariko’ was simply a die shrunk X1 to 16nm FinFET though, with proportional clock increases and maybe some other improvements in terms of core counts, memory, etc. Or maybe a move to TX2 if full software compatibility can be preserved.
 
The specs are fine for the type of games I like playing on Switch (indies, retro games, Nintendo games). 1080p docked is sweet too, though I mostly play handheld.
 
Should have been first post.

Also there was nothing bizarre about WiiU's computing power. Wii already was a lower powered machine. It allows for smaller consoles, with way lower power consumption, which in turn allows for minimal cooling systems.

I know it's not a popular opinion, but the WiiU is actually a very good piece of hardware.

Same could be said for Switch if it weren't for the abysmal battery life.
Brilliant post. Ditto the one you quoted. I wish I could quote you both a billion times because each word is on point.
 
Top