Nintendo is a fucking bullshit company that platform locks their exclusive games to 12 year old hardware. Fucking hacks...

Switch trumps Xbox 360 in every metric that matters, it has 2 quad core cpus, that while clocked lower are more efficient and far more modern than what the xbox 360, it uses a 3 core setup for games and has one reserved for the OS, Xbox 360 has to run the OS off of the 3cpu cores that the games are using.
The GPU in the Switch is like 6 generations beyond the one in the Xbox 360, on top of that it's an Nvidia GPU, everything the Xbox 360 CPU can do the Switch can do it far faster, the generational gap between them is massively vast, GPUs went through a major rethink between the Xbox 360 launch and the Switch launch.
The memory is the same speed Switch being LPDDR, this is Switch's biggest single bottleneck, but the Switch has 4GB of memory total and 3+GB of that are just for games, Xbox 360 has to share it's .5GB of memory with it's OS, both use a shared memory setup.
Switch's internal and cart storage is significantly faster than Xbox 360s, and it's far better at sustained read/writes by comparison.

Switch has to run off of a battery, what do you expect?

In most elements it's double the WiiU, but it's memory bottleneck makes this hard to discern, a lot of 900p games would be 1080p, and textures would be higher res if memory was faster.

>The switch is holding video games back
>but please Nintendo port your games cause everything else is shit.
????
lost to the PS 2 and the newcomer Xbox
Cherry picked images wow

>even 2022 releases need to be able to function well on a 12 year old hardware that is the Switch
youtube.com/watch?v=lwlduVD_aqc
youtube.com/watch?v=Rt9pfN-2S0k
The quality visually between these games is not 5-6x better in favour of Star Ocean, it's closer to 2x better, entirely on the back of it's higher framerate too, this game is not launching on Switch even though a 30fps lower res version could absolutely run on Switch fine with the kind of optimization effort that Xenoblade 3 is getting, Switch isn't holding back games graphics, the massive bloat in budgets pushing smaller budget titles into the AAA budget range is.

> #
>Switch has to run off of a battery, what do you expect?
So you're arguing that a tablet console has the same power of a consoles released a decade before it despite Nintendo being able to keep up hardware wise with consoles pre-Wii and even being ahead of the curve in some cases hardware wise

Trying to play a platinum action game on switch was aggravating.

Attached: download (9).jpg (500x500, 72.61K)

Compare the budgets and exclusively. Do you have holes in your brain?

Ugh, I could only wish to get a 1080p 60FPS Astral Chain. The game has soul

>cherry picked
I cant even cherry pick a good switch screenshot. Its ports run at 360p

Ah yes, the lazy ports of some random 3rd party studio, the gold standard of care and optimisation.

Not even an argument, I pointed out that it isn't Switch holding back other console games, because it isn't, this game is being held back graphically because of the sheer cost of making HD games, Xenoblade and Star Ocean probably have similar size budgets, controlling your inhouse tech really does pay dividends. Xenoblade even gets an edge here because it completely shits on Star Ocean in terms of art direction.

>third place in a competitive video game market
>made a profit for Nintendo
>failure
Maybe in Yurop or Japan but not in a general sense.

Switch is about as powerful as it could have been at the time, what hardware are you proposing they shouuld have used to have the product enter manufacturing by mid 2016, release in early 2017 and have dev kits available in 2015?

I was thinking this yesterday. This game deserves far better.

>360 has stone buildings
>switch has a satellite dish
When is Xbox going to enter the modern age?

Game wouldn't even exist if it wasn't for Nintendo.

Are you daft? Maybe something as similar as the PS5 and XBS?

Are you daft?

Switch is literally the Wii U with a bit more RAM. Nintendo's competitors already had the PS5 and XBS consoles solidified once Switch released

I'd perhaps propose that trying to run real video games on mobile hardware is a fool's errand and that trying to smash together the sales of the 3DS and the WiiU is a very cynical market-focused way to prevent future failures which will probably have the consequence of making games run like shit.

Even Sony has started to bring their old exclusives to PC so people would double dip, when will Nintendo get the memo and get free money by porting their older games?

The switch is not remotely "literally" the wii u with a bit more RAM. If you used the word "literally" you'd have to follow it with a statement like that it's a rebranded nvidia shield 2, or a google pixel C.

>NOOOOOO STOP MAKING GAMES FOR SWITCH OWNERS TO PLAY, NINTENDO! THIS IS FUCKING BULLSHIT
Why are Snoys so utternly unable to make any kind of sense?

They probably lack the expertise.
Japanese pc ports are a relatively recent innovation and its mostly being spearheaded by capcom.
I remember dsfix.

Probably never I expect Sony is doing this because they sell their games at bargain bin rates and as such have to double dip. Nintendo on the other hand keeps most of their games at launch price for a while.

>Nintendo is a fucking bullshit company
yes
idk what you said in the rest of your post and i don’t really care, i just wanted to agree with this

Never? Nintendo has spent the last 30 years building the strenght of their IPs. That's why they're able to sell 30 millions of them at full price.
Porting them to PC would devalue their IPs.

...

I heckin love playing 30 fps games built on decade old hardware and that dips to 20 fps on a ""modern"" console in 940p!!! Because I can also play it on the bus!? It just works,.ok!?

Attached: pain.jpg (2390x3474, 1.24M)

Nintendo makes money of their consoles, Sony doesn't. So there a lot less appeal in porting games for them.

>has to run at 12 off of main power
>similar to ps5 and xbs
Much of what is in those consoles only existed in labs in 2017, remember this tech needs to be able to be produced in limited volume mid to late 2015 for dev kits, going back to 2015 you're basically asking developers to make games for hardware that exists on paper.

Switch is more than double the WiiU, you can even look at things like memory, like storage speed and see that it's literally double, things like GPU, well it's AMD vs Nvidia so you're already looking at an advantage for the Switch, but it's best to just look at games, Fast RMX runs at like 4x the resolution and includes a bunch of other graphical features, other games aren't anywhere near simple, so a ported 1st gen Switch game isn't really going to compare to a late gen WiiU title where the hardware has matured considerably and developers have figured out how to get a lot out of the hardware.
Breath of the Wild 2 would be a good showcase, if the game was releasing, but it's nowhere to be seen, Super Mario Odyssey is a 1st gen Switch game, but it completely dunks on 3d World graphically.

>I'd perhaps propose that trying to run real video games on mobile hardware is a fool's errand
Switch can run PS2 games with ease, are these not real games? The Switch is already moving to outsell the PS4 in a shorter timeframe, it's already outsold the 3ds and WiiU combined, how is that foolish?
>is a very cynical market-focused way to prevent future failures
It's not at all cynical, it's giving people what they asked for, people didn't like buying 2 consoles to play all of Nintendo's consoles, the whole idea clearly resonated with consumers or else it wouldn't have been the success it was.
>will probably have the consequence of making games run like shit.
Switch is slightly less powerful than what would have been ideal, but you could octuple Switch's power and games would still run like shit, devs are lazy and greedy.

Bloodborne runs at 24 fps on the PS4 whats its excuse?

But Sony is also releasing AAA console games that are utilizing modern innovations and so that look nice on PC.
As are other third party companies. For example, we will never see Elden Ring on a Nintendo console for at least 10 years. The Switch only recently received Dark Souls 1, which released in 2011

youtube.com/watch?v=QeJMK7Ph_ho
This is Astral chain in 4k/60fps.
I'd argue that due to excellent art direction most Nintendo published games already look excellent as is, and a generational leap would be best used to boost resolutions/framerates/texture resolutions and make games more stable rather than chasing that "AAAA" meme that western and large Japanese developers are all too happy to chase to their own demise.
The only things I'd like to improve other than obviously the texture res is better reflections.

Cope.
>Link related youtu.be/9yFON2UON3k

It's more their reliance on targeting a certain market demographic with their hardware design, and in terms of power and unit price.
Once you're making competent pc ports why be a hardware manufacturer, it'd just be incentive to give up all the innovative potential you've relied upon to remain competitive.
They've really separated themselves from their competitors by trying to provide a dedicated games console, almost a toy, rather than a media hub, and they enjoy the advantage of having that distinction.

Like you should really pay attention to the fact that this generation they've chosen to consolidate (heh) the home console and the portable console.

Nintendo are very heavily invested in hardware, that's why you're incredibly unlikely to ever see first party legit pc ports.

>Game developed for the Wii U runs better on the Wii u
Shocking

>Still holding the torch for an exceedingly average game like AC and portbegging for first-party exclusives
Only fucking roaches I swear

Attached: 740343499713100.jpg (1024x576, 52.55K)

>we will never see Elden Ring on a Nintendo console for at least 10 years
We will never see it on a Nintendo console, Dark Souls only came over because of the re-release on other hardware, Personally I don't think we will ever see Fromsoft make a game on Nintendo hardware in the future.

>this late gen wiiu title optimized to hell and back around the quirks of the wiiu hardware compared to the switch port is a totally accurate comparison
Wait for Breath of the Wild 2, that will be the accurate comparison, even Xenoblade 3 looks to be a big leap over Xenoblade 2.

the gamecube was far weaker than the ps2.

It was more powerful where it mattered in terms of graphics, and the programmable shaders gave the Gamecube an edge in terms of what developers could do visually compared to the PS2.

Yeah if only Nintendo released a console with hardware that could support Astral Chain in 60 fps and 1080p or 4k and then this thread wouldn't exist. So I hope you see the point. There are good games on Switch that are incredibly gimped by the Switch hardware because Nintendo has only been chasing gimmicks instead of trying to be ahead of the curve

Trying to be ahead of the curve would have put them in the same position Sony's in now.

That would have bankrupt them lol. Their not sony or xbox that have a big daddy company to bail them out if their consoles fail.

Switch 2 next-gen patches for your current games will save the day.

Anyone who's played f zero gx knows this but people will still argue about it.

Games dont even need patches user, just better hardware.

>implying they'll release a Switch 2 within the next two years
Chips are still on somewhat shaky ground, especially with China constantly looming over Taiwan.

Astral Chain is easily one of Platinum's best games.

Attached: 1568155136216.jpg (1961x1200, 287.74K)

There's this 1 guy who posts an image about how the devs of Burnout couldn't get it to run on the GC, implying that it's an issue with the GC being underpowered, but it's actually because the GC doesn't have dedicated vector processing like the PS2 or the raw power of the Xbox to handle the collision system, games like Star Fox Adventures which were like year 2 in the GC really show the kind of power the hardware has, that game runs at 60fps and has all kind of ridiculous effects running at the same time.

Because they've made like, what, 2 or 3 good games besides it?

Attached: 1-58994c4ceebe23e497a3ab888476c090937d1e9a487e7616c6cf340be93e813c.png (438x486, 87.77K)

The reasons more likely gonna be the switch hasn't had a full lifespan yet. Its only in its 6th year.

51% of all microchips by value are made in the US, multiple Taiwanese fabs are already putting facilities outside of Taiwan, Switch 2 APU is using Samsungs 7nm process.

Attached: 1644979196202.jpg (1000x706, 786.66K)

Nintendo funded Astral Chain themselves. What's wrong with only releasing a game that you paid for on your own console?

Its only okay when sony does it.

Attached: 1576725184750.jpg (1280x1868, 345.09K)

>Yeah if only Nintendo released a console with hardware that could support Astral Chain in 60 fps and 1080p or 4k
Will you still be complaining when their next gen hardware is able to do this? you complain about wanting them to port it to other hardware but we know you will complain about Switch 2 games, even if Nintendo follows the route of setting a fps/resolution minimum for games. People like you will be asking for Ray Tracing, or wondering why the character models aren't 120k+ tris, or why the textures aren't 8k.
>because Nintendo has only been chasing gimmicks instead of trying to be ahead of the curve
Being ahead of the curve doesn't make games better, in fact you could argue it makes them worse, games having to have more MTX, having higher costs, I prefer where Nintendo is rather than where their contemporaries are.

it deserves to be thrown in the trash, fucking soulless red rectangular prism void levels with no variation overshadows any sort of care they put into the city's design. it could have been good but they decided to do this retarded shit and spit in their consumers' faces

More than that for sure
Bayonetta
Bayonetta 2
Astral Chain
Nier:automata
Metal gear rising
Wonderful 101
Vanquish

Attached: 1619635897798.jpg (1500x2000, 401.24K)