BootsLoader
Banned
I can see that FP32 discussions happening again.
When you consider most AAA games run better on ps5 then NVDA equivalent GPU'S then yea i call BS. of course diminishing returns are a real thing and many people can look at ps4 and say it looks like the ps5 version, but if it's anything like final fantasy 16 switch version won't even be close when you look at technically."FF7R looks and runs like a PS5 game on Switch 2 devkit."
Not sure why a statement like this would trigger 'bullshit' tbh.
PS5 FF7 can run at 4k or 60fps performance mode, cut out those two and with the rumours of what Switch 2 specs is like, and with DLSS, yeah, it could 'LOOK' like the PS5 version(it's not like he went all D. Foundry and started listing off the technical details that are a 1:1 match for the PS5 version or something).
It is SE as well, and it's not like they can't make gorgeous looking games on any kind of hardware.
LOL i remember that, same story with same results then reality hits them in the face.I can see that FP32 discussions happening again.
"Looks like" can mean a lot of different things. I see a lot of people say console games 'look like' their PC counterparts running at max settings when they were not(or they can 'look similar' if you don't actually look too closely).When you consider most AAA games run better on ps5 then NVDA equivalent GPU'S then yea i call BS. of course diminishing returns are a real thing and many people can look at ps4 and say it looks like the ps5 version, but if it's anything like final fantasy 16 switch version won't even be close when you look at technically.
When you consider most AAA games run better on ps5 then NVDA equivalent GPU'S"
I mean since the wii Nintendo hardware has been massively disappointing in terms of power, and we always hear these BS rumors specs that don't come close to reality and the tear down comes and it's the lowest out come possible."Looks like" can mean a lot of different things. I see a lot of people say console games 'look like' their PC counterparts running at max settings when they were not(or they can 'look similar' if you don't actually look too closely).
That comment is far too nebulous for anyone to claim 'bullshit' on tbh, especially given that we don't actually know how well the Switch 2 can perform with DLSS(and Nintendo itself has been using adaptive resolutions, so they may have invested more into this), and the fact that PS5 has different modes, and the leaker never even specified which one it 'looks and runs like'. Well, we don't even know how the Switch 2 performs at all really, we have leaker numbers and some specs, but that doesn't exactly translate directly into what we will see in a closed system.
When DF gets their hands on it, we'll know what's up and it likely won't be able to match the PS5, but it should look decent enough if DLSS and the spec leaks are true, and I trust SE to make a gorgeous looking mainline game on any half-decent hardware.
This statement below I don't know how to answer to. At what settings and resolutions? Which 'equivalent GPUs' are we talking about here? The 2070 seems closest? But that's like 2 gens behind current Nvidia GPUs no...?
What could the 3rd protag be for VII Rebirth? I've played the games (VII original, Remake) but not sure if this means Zack ?
People believe that if Nintendo had the options of selling a PS5 equivalent handheld at 399 at profit vs a little less powerful than PS4 at same price and profits, they'd opt in for the latter "because they're Nintendo", WTF? If technology is good and cheap enough to fit their target price, they will go for it, and not necessarily they'll go for profits first, the reason why Nintendo did so for Switch is because they came from Wii U and 3DS, they needed it, they can go back to little too no profits strategy on hardware at the beginning and count on other factors like keeping price for the whole device life span, economy of scales and models redesigns for big margins anyway, they are not begging for money as they did before the Switch, they're not strangers to loss leading tacticsIf people think it's a miracle that Switch was stronger than a PS3, or that Switch 2 will be comparable to a PS4, then that speaks volumes about people not understanding Nintendo.
Nintendo has not been”little to no profits” company since the time of Wii. It’s not coming back.People believe that if Nintendo had the options of selling a PS5 equivalent handheld at 399 at profit vs a little less powerful than PS4 at same price and profits, they'd opt in for the latter "because they're Nintendo", WTF? If technology is good and cheap enough to fit their target price, they will go for it, and not necessarily they'll go for profits first, the reason why Nintendo did so for Switch is because they came from Wii U and 3DS, they needed it, they can go back to little too no profits strategy on hardware at the beginning and count on other factors like keeping price for the whole device life span, economy of scales and models redesigns for big margins anyway, they are not begging for money as they did before the Switch, they're not strangers to loss leading tactics
Exactly, people act like Nintendo handle every platform like the Wii, which is just not true.People believe that if Nintendo had the options of selling a PS5 equivalent handheld at 399 at profit vs a little less powerful than PS4 at same price and profits, they'd opt in for the latter "because they're Nintendo", WTF? If technology is good and cheap enough to fit their target price, they will go for it, and not necessarily they'll go for profits first, the reason why Nintendo did so for Switch is because they came from Wii U and 3DS, they needed it, they can go back to little too no profits strategy on hardware at the beginning and count on other factors like keeping price for the whole device life span, economy of scales and models redesigns for big margins anyway, they are not begging for money as they did before the Switch, they're not strangers to loss leading tactics
Wii U sold at lost iirc, even then things can change, they could compromise other things in order to avoid the console being emulable so early in the generation which may also bring them advantagesNintendo has not been”little to no profits” company since the time of Wii. It’s not coming back.
Not gonna lie, that would be amazing.Also, if Switch 2 graphics start competing against PS5 due to DLSS type tricks, this forum will have a goddamn meltdown. I hope it's true just for that.
Didn't specify, so we have no real ideaWhy is this topic all about resolution and not one word about assets?
Not really 'BS rumour' specs. The Switch 2 leaks were directly from Nvidia iirc, and not like some overhyped fanboy theory. It should put Switch 2 around PS4 power, which isn't something that is hard to believe. And it's not like S2 is going to try and run PS5 games at PS5 fidelity, resolutions and framerates. So a S2 version of the game 'looking like' a crossgen PS5 game isn't out of the realm of possibility if it's at PS4 power and using DLSS.I mean since the wii Nintendo hardware has been massively disappointing in terms of power, and we always hear these BS rumors specs that don't come close to reality and the tear down comes and it's the lowest out come possible.
Imagine the DF comparison threads.Also, if Switch 2 graphics start competing against PS5 due to DLSS type tricks, this forum will have a goddamn meltdown. I hope it's true just for that.
we been hearing these rumors of a switch pro for 2 years now, so imo they are BS. i would not be surprised if Nintendo switched to another chip maker to save money.Didn't specify, so we have no real idea
Not really 'BS rumour' specs. The Switch 2 leaks were directly from Nvidia iirc, and not like some overhyped fanboy theory. It should put Switch 2 around PS4 power, which isn't something that is hard to believe. And it's not like S2 is going to try and run PS5 games at PS5 fidelity, resolutions and framerates. So a S2 version of the game 'looking like' a crossgen PS5 game isn't out of the realm of possibility if it's at PS4 power and using DLSS.
Paying Nvidia for several years to build you a custom SoC, and then scrapping it to go with someone else is the opposite of saving money.we been hearing these rumors of a switch pro for 2 years now, so imo they are BS. i would not be surprised if Nintendo switched to another chip maker to save money.
Didn't specify, so we have no real idea
yea we been hearing for several years switch pro coming for sure yet nada. until something is confirmed i'll take rumors just as rumors.Paying Nvidia for several years to build you a custom SoC, and then scrapping it to go with someone else is the opposite of saving money.
It's not based on rumours, it's based on documents literally stolen from Nvidia.yea we been hearing for several years switch pro coming for sure yet nada. until something is confirmed i'll take rumors just as rumors.
according to DF they cancelled the switch pro probably looking for a better deal, just watch when switch 2 is announce and it won't be backward compatible with a intel chips lmao.It's not based on rumours, it's based on documents literally stolen from Nvidia.
DF said they recalled the first dev kits. New ones have since been sent out but there are no indications they are with a different manufacturer.according to DF they cancelled the switch pro probably looking for a better deal, just watch when switch 2 is announce and it won't be backward compatible with a intel chips lmao.
until i get confirmation i'm gonna assume Nintendo is gonna Nintendo. Expected a switch pro years ago and nintendo did what they do to save money. i would not be surprised if they find some crazy deal with another company and thats the reason pro never came out.DF said they recalled the first dev kits. New ones have since been sent out but there are no indications they are with a different manufacturer.
Its fair to wait for confirmation. What is "Nintendo gonna Nintendo" mean in this particular case? What power level do you expect from Switch 2?until i get confirmation i'm gonna assume Nintendo is gonna Nintendo. Expected a switch pro years ago and nintendo did what they do to save money. i would not be surprised if they find some crazy deal with another company and thats the reason pro never came out.
Over 9000 for sure. Not sure honestly. nintendo has pulled some crazy shit hardware wise to save money, and seeing how switch is selling i would not be surprised if its on par with steam deck or even much weaker.Its fair to wait for confirmation. What is "Nintendo gonna Nintendo" mean in this particular case? What power level do you expect from Switch 2?
Can’t wait!LOL i remember that, same story with same results then reality hits them in the face.
Of course they will opt in for the less powerful machine. Because they are Nintendo.People believe that if Nintendo had the options of selling a PS5 equivalent handheld at 399 at profit vs a little less powerful than PS4 at same price and profits, they'd opt in for the latter "because they're Nintendo", WTF? If technology is good and cheap enough to fit their target price, they will go for it, and not necessarily they'll go for profits first, the reason why Nintendo did so for Switch is because they came from Wii U and 3DS, they needed it, they can go back to little too no profits strategy on hardware at the beginning and count on other factors like keeping price for the whole device life span, economy of scales and models redesigns for big margins anyway, they are not begging for money as they did before the Switch, they're not strangers to loss leading tactics
That actually happened around all industry, many studios broke, the change from old 3D programming paradigm to shader based paradigm was as disruptive as it could get. A change like that won't happen again for a while if ever.Of course they will opt in for the less powerful machine. Because they are Nintendo.
Did you know that Nintendo had trouble making HD games back in the WiiU era? Go and search what Miyamoto said. It was a big change for them and they had to spend a lot of money because their engines were not optimized for HD gaming.
They will prefer a less powerful machine all day and night because that is saving them money on video game production, don’t have to mess with updating their engines etc. It is not as simple as you think.
It could mean anything really, unless I missed the memo and this guy is a technical director or someone who actually knows about graphical details. Seeing a game running on a monitor and saying it 'looks like' the PS5 version doesn't actually tell me that much to make me call bullshit.I guess technically not but when reading "ps5 quality" my brain goes to "overall image quality plus framerate" not simply resolution. Resolution alone is meaningless in a like for like comparison.
The leak was was from Nvidia, just checked. Not sure why you'd think they'd be BS just because you heard about them years ago, how long do you think they work on these chips to get new hardware ready?we been hearing these rumors of a switch pro for 2 years now, so imo they are BS. i would not be surprised if Nintendo switched to another chip maker to save money.
This whole discussion is pretty silly since no one has seen the game running on switch 2.It could mean anything really, unless I missed the memo and this guy is a technical director or someone who actually knows about graphical details. Seeing a game running on a monitor and saying it 'looks like' the PS5 version doesn't actually tell me that much to make me call bullshit.
If he was saying, 'the graphical details/settings are on par with PS5, running at 60fps in native 1440p', then yea, I'd definitely be calling bullshit. But as it is, 'looks like'? Yeah sure.
To me it seemed that Nintendo had a harder time adapting to new technologies than other companies, plus other companies are pushing graphics and technology in comparison with Nintendo that plays it safe and want to get bigger margins from their sale (which is not a bad thing, I just mention that).That actually happened around all industry, many studios broke, the change from old 3D programming paradigm to shader based paradigm was as disruptive as it could get. A change like that won't happen again for a while if ever.
One could say that this gen with SSD, SFS, geometry shaders etc would be that moment but devs are going slow, probably to avoid a similar situation, but they're evolutions of current technology, not an absolute flip of the table as it was from 6th to 7th gen.
If someone with graphic programming existence could second or correct this, if appreciate it.
Nintendo will be looking for the right balance between cost, power and battery life. The power consideration won't be for their own titles, but for third party titles.Of course they will opt in for the less powerful machine. Because they are Nintendo.
Did you know that Nintendo had trouble making HD games back in the WiiU era? Go and search what Miyamoto said. It was a big change for them and they had to spend a lot of money because their engines were not optimized for HD gaming.
They will prefer a less powerful machine all day and night because that is saving them money on video game production, don’t have to mess with updating their engines etc. It is not as simple as you think.
The discussion was never about anyone here personally seeing it running, but about someone saying the Sw2 version of the game 'looks like' the PS5 version. Which I contend was too nebulous a statement for people to be calling 'bullshit' over.This whole discussion is pretty silly since no one has seen the game running on switch 2.
We already see the difference between this game on ps4 vs ps5.Just throwing this out there like I did in the other thread but with modern architecture comes modern shaders. Most likely this means it's just using modern forms of lighting and shading, so it looks closer to what the PS5 renders vs PS4.
To me that makes sense whether the rumored Orin specs (which uses Ampere) are true or it'll be based off of Tegra Thor which uses Lovelace. It'll use newer shaders than whats in the PS4. I don't think it's saying it's going to match the PS5 version.
Homie... You seem to have misinterpreted me both times so I'll try to be clear. The whole discussion was started over some leaker saying the switch 2 version "looks like ps5 quality" I'm saying no one's seen this phantom port at all because it doesn't exist yet. I didn't say anyone here did or didn't see it. This "leaker" is just clout chasing by leaking wholly unverifiable bs. Square just announced the Ff16 PC port is now in development, the odds that they're developing ff7R part two for an as yet unannounced console are near zero. This is all to say that this story is stupid and I don't know why anyone is falling for it.The discussion was never about anyone here personally seeing it running, but about someone saying the Sw2 version of the game 'looks like' the PS5 version. Which I contend was too nebulous a statement for people to be calling 'bullshit' over.
It's entirely possible for a SW2 version of a FF7R to 'look like' a PS5 version, given what we know about the SW2 from the leaks, but without any further technical details, that statement barely tells us anything. We'll eventually know what's up by next year I'd imagine.
the odds that they're developing ff7R part two for an as yet unannounced console are near zero.
My mistake but I still contend that if they announced the 16 port had begun development they would announce a switch port. But I see the difference.I think the hypothetical port is of Final Fantasy VII Remake, not Rebirth, so it's not that unbelievable.
That was funnyMaybe via sephiroth.
I said in one of my many “Sony doomed” posts that once Nintendo had the hardware, the defacto PlayStation exclusives would go away.