Why isn't this literally handheld console that costs 300 dollars and has a built-in screen and is powered by batteries...

Why isn't this literally handheld console that costs 300 dollars and has a built-in screen and is powered by batteries rather than a mr. fusion not a full PS4

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tegra#Tegra_X1
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

Shit is Nintendo's signature move

Are you talking about a Vita?

It's Nintendo. They can't do anything right anymore

It needs to be DOUBLE the power of the Scorpio at $200 to have any chance of competing

They have never done anything right

And this is a pixel c, it runs the same hardware as the switch except it isn't underclocked to run at half power, it also sports a 2560x1800 screen instead of 720 and has support for things other than games.
It's also thinner, and has a better screen:surface ratio, it also comes with 32GB of storage and only costs $100 more.

no one cares autist

>pixel c
>$499

You're fully stupid

So laden with buzzwords it's nearly illegible. Apply yourself.

>only costs $100 more.
Let's not get carried away. The Switch will probably be $250

I know noone cares, the problem is still that the switch is an entry level $100 tablet, not a $300 gaming handheld that it pretends to be.
The fact it's nowhere near as strong as the ps3 let alone the ps4 is just icing on the cake.

Theres a deal right now selling it for $400, use your fucking brain for once nintendrone.
Yeah fucking right.

but that's not even true retard

The pixel c costs double the Switch's projected cost and has no controller.

>sales don't exist for consoles, only for tablets

And doesn't have a dev platform for studios beyond stock android horsepiss

>Yeah fucking right.
Miyamoto said the Wii U's biggest problem was the price, and it launched for $300, being the most expensive Nintendo console ever. $249 has been their norm, and considering it's the same technology as in the Nvidia Shield, which is only $200, I could easily see it being $250 or even less.

The Google Pixel C is a much more capable device, of course it costs more.

>Miyamoto said the Wii U's biggest problem was the price
but they always sell at a profit so it's unlikely they'll go for the cheaper option

Is it a PS4 I can play while I ride my bicycle because if it is not then you can go piss up a rope

Wii U was sold for a loss at launch. They could also sell at cost, which is neither profitting nor losing.

>piss up a rope
what does that mean

try it

Anyone who's ever actually used a Pixel C for gaming knows it's garbage. There are no games at all, controlling them is fucking garbage without one of those shitty external controllers, and the thing is so fucking gigantic, you can forget about fucking carrying it around.

The Pixel C is fucking 1.5 times the width of the fucking Gamepad, two whole inches wider. The Switch is an inch less wide than the Gamepad.

The Pixel C is 1.5 times larger than the Gamepad, which you already can't easily carry around, and it's about twice as big as the Switch. Calling it a fucking viable handheld gaming alternative is retarded beyond belief.

And that's with the fucking joycons attached. When you take them off, the Switch is a FUCKING QUARTER OF THE SIZE OF THE PIXEL C.

>lol the pixel C is stronger
NO IT ISN'T YOU RETARD. It starts out stronger, sure, but within an hour of playing your framerate's going to be half of what it started as, because the damn thing can't dissipate heat fast enough and automatically underclocks its GPU so it doesn't fucking melt. And it just keeps getting worse.

SO PLEASE FUCKING TELL ME HOW THIS MASSIVE FUCKING MACHINE, WHICH COSTS ~TWICE AS MUCH AS THE SWITCH WILL, WHICH IS FUCKING TWO TO FOUR TIMES AS LARGE, WHICH ISN'T EVEN STRONGER THAN THE SWITCH AFTER AN HOUR OR TWO OF PLAY, IS ANY BETTER THAN THE FUCKING SWITCH AT ALL

YOU FUCKING

RETARD

surely it would be easier to piss down a rope?

But I don't have any rope nearby.
I suppose it would end with me pissing on myself.

you guys should hook up

it means go pound sand

This just makes it more confusing

Calm down user, OP was just a salty shitposter. There's no need to be this upset.

...

great rebuttal, you sure owned him!

Nintendo's development platform is so shit they've driven away every single third party developer that's ever worked on anything not directly under contract for them.
Meanwhile android has millions of apps and thousands of developers, all in the span of 2 nintendo consoles.

>There are no games at all, controlling them is fucking garbage without one of those shitty external controllers, and the thing is so fucking gigantic, you can forget about fucking carrying it around.
You just described the switch I hope you know
>non-portable portable system
Check
>shit controllers
Check
>gigantic
Check
>no games
Check
Meanwhile the pixel has the entire android library at it's disposal, so bare minimum atleast it has games.

prove that it's less powerful than ps3

The Cell-powered PS3 is a super-computer!

>>non-portable portable system
>Check
With controllers detached, it's smaller than a Vita and about the same size as a 3DSXL.
>>shit controllers
>Check
The joycons don't look comfortable, but the charger/controller-grip for them and the pro controller look fine to me
>>gigantic
>Check
See above
>>no games
>Check
Games are expected to be announced january, though a few are confirmed already such as dragon quest and seasons of heaven.
>Meanwhile the pixel has the entire android library at it's disposal, so bare minimum atleast it has games.
Kek

Babbys first nintendo console has no creativity or 3rd party games. It's always okay when Nintendo does it literally cannot put it in my pocket. Nintendo needs to hurry up and go 3rd party because I'm tired of playing games with gimmicks. Underpowered childish Nintendrones only play mario games. Switch is Nintendo's last console.
T B H

It's already been confirmed to be less powerful in handheld mode than a PS3
It's 157 gflops

even when stating a baseless rumor you got the fucking rumor wrong lmao

It's a PS2 Pro.

It's a PS1.5

what did I get wrong?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tegra#Tegra_X1

256 cuda cores x 2 x 1000mhz = 512,000 mflops (512 gflops) for the vanilla
256 cores x 2 x 307mhz for handheld mode = 157,184 mflops (157 gflops)

the ps3 is 228 gflops

So this is what internet does to people's reading comprehension

why do you seem to think the switch is using the tegra x1

1 hertz isn't automatically 1 flops. I'm 90% sure you are trolling though. Because if you know enough to calculate that you probably also know that 1 hertz doesn't automatically translate to 1 flops.

it's been confirmed by multiple independent sources
the most striking of which is the fact that nvidia cancelled their tegra x1 tablet right before announcing partnership with nintendo, who they are making a tablet for. gee i wonder what's inside

The real question is why it's not as powerful as the wii u.

Because it is a handheld.

it's not, it's actually 2
a shading core can calculate AT MOST 2 operations per clock cycle so the theoretical maximum floating point performance of a GPU is: shaders x 2 x clock

it's not a real world peformance metric, which will always be worse, since some floating point calculations require more than a single clock obviously

regardless it gives us the only objective way of comparing two chips of differing architectures, which is surprisingly accurate. how well developers will take advantage of either architecture will always be a huge factor, but "all other things being equal", we would assume the same developer would write equally optimized code for both platforms

The issue with that pic is it also applies to the reverse.
Bottom-line is we should all wait for january 12th.

>it's been confirmed by multiple unnamed people who apparently know exactly the clock speeds but couldn't offer any more info
no it hasn't and you don't know what you're talking about. don't give in to rumors. would a x1 be able to run Vulkan? would it be able to run Dark souls 3? use your fucking brain

When has nintendo ever exceeded our expectations hardware wise?

>would a x1 be able to run Vulkan? would it be able to run Dark souls 3?
yes to both, maxwell is a vulkan supported architecture, and DaS 3 is a 7th gen game

could it run it at 4k at 60 fps? of course not, but if they reduce the resolution to 720p and you accept 25-30 fps with possibly reduced geometry here and there, you'll definitely get DaS3 working on the switch, no magic involved

It'll run but it'll be an unplayable disaster just like batman armored edition.

>why it's not as powerful as the wii u
bullshit again
if zelda runs better on switch there's nothing to worry about

>ITT

Predicting the downfall of something doesn't mean they're immediately supposed to die

With the exception of 1 outlier in both of Nintendo's markets, their trend has been down. And that outlier was a result of targetting a non-gamer demographic, something that is unlikely to happen again, especially with the Switch which is targeting exclusively gamers

I like how you missed out VB, wii and DS so you argument kinda sorta works. too many outliers would make you look like a retard

It's a weird thing, Games work fine on the Nvidia branded ones, but whenever Nvidia chips are in other companies devices for some reason the devs seem to forget to tick a box that says "yes, this is compatible"

Theres a bunch of games that are inexplicably incompatible with my Nexus 9 using a slightly earlier Tegra.

Fucking android, at least the Switch won't be fucking android powered. I hope.

>DaS 3 is a 7th gen game
No it isn't, and maxwell couldn't run Vulcan stop stop stretching this argument so much. Even if you're right which you're not, the maxwell shit is still a baseless rumor

The VB wasn't either handheld or home console. Are we going to include PSVR as one of Sony's consoles?

The DS and Wii are explainable as to why they're outliers. Using logic we can see that the same factors that allowed them to be hugely successful are not present again for the Switch

Nintendo's handheld and console markets are performing so poorly that they have merged them into a single market, and they have already crafted their exit strategy. If you haven't noticed, they're making games for mobile, something they said they'd never do.

Well current expectations are low so they could exceed that. I personally fail to see how the hardware is really relevant given that people get nintendo systems for Nintendo games, as their third party support has been historically abysmal, as has their graphical fidelity.

>the maxwell shit is still a baseless rumor
It's a stretch to call it a rumor but i'll give you that, but it's anything but baseless. It is the far most likely outcome

All 900 series cards can run vulkan. You're just blatantly wrong

>GBA before N64
>no GBC

I suppose the data does look better when you arrange it the way things didn't happen though

The most likely outcome is that the switch is using a more up to date custom GPU like they did with the Wii U. But the fact is we won't know until Nvidia themselves say something or someone strips it down when it comes out. I'm not going to believe some unnamed source who apparently only said "m-m-axwell.." and stated the clock speed and nothing else

>Maxwell
It's going to be Kepler. Screencap this!