[HN Gopher] Switch 2 will be backwards compatible with Switch
___________________________________________________________________
Switch 2 will be backwards compatible with Switch
Author : ashitlerferad
Score : 240 points
Date : 2024-11-06 14:32 UTC (8 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.videogameschronicle.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.videogameschronicle.com)
| dmonitor wrote:
| This shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone. Nintendo has had a
| trend for the past couple decades of releasing "sequel" consoles
| that are essentially a modernized version of the old one with
| extra features, compatible with everything that released on the
| predecessor.
|
| With all three major console manufacturers prioritizing backwards
| compatibility, and the rise in PC gaming (universally backwards
| compatible), people are starting to catch on to the fact that old
| games don't "expire" after 10 years. I wouldn't be surprised if
| backwards compatibility just becomes the standard for all gaming
| consoles going forward.
|
| Tangential, but I'm also interested in seeing how games that
| released on old consoles and are continued to be played, like
| Fortnite, will support aging hardware. I don't like that Epic can
| one day announce the game just no longer works on that console,
| rendering your purchases null and void until you upgrade your
| hardware, but I can't expect them to update that version of the
| game forever.
| maxsilver wrote:
| > I don't like that Epic can one day announce the game just no
| longer works on that console, rendering your purchases null and
| void until you upgrade your hardware, but I can't expect them
| to update that version of the game forever.
|
| Traditionally for these "Live Service"-type games, they
| announce cutting support for a console, but let you carry your
| purchases in that specific game (subscription, add-on items,
| etc), forward to the same game on the next gen of that console.
|
| For example, how Final Fantasy 14 ended PS3 support -
| https://www.gamedeveloper.com/game-platforms/-i-final-fantas...
| and how Grand Theft Auto 5 ended PS3 support -
| https://www.ign.com/articles/gta-online-support-ending-xbox-...
|
| It's not a guarantee, but I'd expect something similar for
| Fortnite.
| dmonitor wrote:
| It's definitely the case for Fortnite, but it still doesn't
| sit well with me that a service bought on specific hardware
| can just be taken away with no recourse. I'm not sure what if
| anything can or should be done about it, but it's weird
| knowing that many of the most popular PS4 games will be
| straight up unplayable in a few years
| jonny_eh wrote:
| It's like how mobile games can stop supporting old phones.
| e.g. Hearthstone
| jerf wrote:
| Games don't have the generational differences they used to.
| They're mature now. Tech is rarely the blocker anymore. The
| Switch was "underpowered" at release and is even more
| underpowered now but the space of "games that would run well on
| the Switch" is still fairly unexplored, not because anybody is
| bad but because the space is so big now.
|
| That hardware can no longer compete with platforms that _don
| 't_ throw away their entire library on every release is
| probably one of the first impacts of games finally maturing. My
| "next console" was a Steam Deck for partially this very reason,
| the fact that it came preloaded with years of previous
| acquisitions.
|
| We're also just seeing the leading edge of the game industry
| having to deal with the fact that it now has to compete against
| _itself_. There 's been a number of articles about how
| $NEW_GAME never even reached a peak player count of something
| like Skyrim. I think that's currently being written as a sort
| of a "ha ha, that's sorta funny", but it represents a real
| problem. It is not unsolvable; Hollywood has _always_ faced
| this issue and it has historically managed to make money
| anyhow. But I think AAA gaming is only just beginning to reckon
| with the fact that they aren 't going to get a "free reset" on
| every console generation. $NEW_GAME really _is_ is competition
| with Skyrim now, along with a lot of other things. It 's not a
| joke, it's an emerging reality the industry is going to have to
| grapple with.
| spwa4 wrote:
| Either that, or you've gotten older. The young always want to
| play that one specific NEW game. Currently that usually means
| PS5, either Fortnite or Call Of Duty (and yes that one
| specific version). PS5 only has PS4 backward compatibility,
| and it isn't going to be emulated any time soon.
| jsheard wrote:
| Fortnite and Call of Duty are not great examples given they
| both still run on the PS4. Even the latest Call of Duty
| iteration that launched barely two weeks ago still runs on
| last generation consoles, because there's still so many
| players who haven't felt the need to upgrade to the
| successor generation after four years.
|
| I don't think there's ever been a console generation before
| where the last generation was still getting big new
| releases this deep into the next one. The PS5 _Pro_ is out
| now and the PS4 is _still_ getting new games.
| godzillabrennus wrote:
| Yeah but the only discernible difference to most gamers
| from last gen to this gen is load times... the ps5 pro
| side by side to a ps5 screenshot of an enhanced game vs
| the unenhanced version is crazy.
| goosedragons wrote:
| From what I've heard only about 4% of CoD: BO6 buyers
| were on PS4. It might finally be getting to the point
| where it just no longer makes sense to craft an entirely
| different version for the older consoles. Perhaps Switch
| 2 getting CoD will keep the PS4 version on life support
| however.
| andy81 wrote:
| League of Legends and Minecraft came out ~15 years ago and
| never left the top 10 most played PC games.
|
| It's hard to release new live-service games too. Many
| people will just be happy to play LoL for the rest of their
| lives.
| fendy3002 wrote:
| Uh no you're wrong. They'll play LOL for the rest of
| their lives indeed, but not happily. /s
| kbar13 wrote:
| fortnite battle royale came out in 2017... hardly new at
| this point i think
| fmbb wrote:
| > PS5 only has PS4 backward compatibility, and it isn't
| going to be emulated any time soon.
|
| But that compatibility is not achieved with emulation,
| right?
|
| The PS6 can hopefully keep compatibility with PS5 and PS4
| in a similar way. Unless we are nearing some sort of ARM
| horizon for consoles, that is.
| jsheard wrote:
| > Unless we are nearing some sort of ARM horizon for
| consoles, that is.
|
| The documents accidentally leaked from the FTC vs.
| Microsoft trial revealed that Microsoft was at least
| considering switching to an ARM CPU with the next Xbox
| generation, but they hadn't decided yet at the time those
| documents were written. Either way they would still use
| an AMD GPU, so it would be AMD+AMD or ARM+AMD.
| ChocolateGod wrote:
| Microsoft has been working on perfecting x86 emulation on
| ATM so it's not far fetched to think they could still
| keep backwards compatibility.
| hajile wrote:
| RISC-V makes the most sense. It means they wouldn't be
| locked into one CPU supplier. Requiring a GPU based on
| RISC-V (or a separate open GPU ISA) could further
| insulate them from the current AMD lock-in.
| pjmlp wrote:
| Most folks now play one, or a couple, of live service games
| and that is about it.
|
| A platform inside the platform.
|
| That is why console sales are so bad, in comparison with
| previous generations growth sales.
| jerf wrote:
| "The young always want to play that one specific NEW game."
|
| And people want to see that specific one NEW movie, too,
| not even just "the young". Even now, after all that has
| happened, Hollywood can still put butts in theater seats
| for a new movie, even though the attendees probably average
| several dozen movies at home and probably still have
| literally hundreds of movies they would enjoy as much or
| more than the one they are watching in the theater. A
| lengthy essay could be written on why, which I'll let
| someone else write.
|
| But I can promise you from personal experience that a 2024
| gamer has an easier time picking up and enjoying a 2014
| game than a 2004 gamer would have picking up a 1994 game,
| to the point that it is not even _close_.
|
| Checking a list of games from 2014... heck, I've got
| personal proof, my young teen recently started Shadows of
| Mordor. While it didn't "stick" (we got Skyrim somewhat
| after that and that has stuck, however, while initial
| release is 2011 on that the history is complicated and I
| won't complain if someone wants to forward-date that at
| least a bit), he wasn't like "oh my gosh this looks so bad
| and the QoL is so terrible I can't play this anymore".
| Others from 2014 include Super Smash Bros Wii U, Assassin's
| Creed IV: Black Flag, and The Last Of Us: Left Behind.
| Really not _that_ dissimilar from what is being put out
| today.
|
| Whereas 2004 to 1994 is the delta between Grand Theft Auto
| - San Andreas and Sonic 3 and Knuckles. That's _huge_. Yes,
| I 'm old enough to have been there and I can you from
| personal experience that in 2004 "Sonic 3 and Knuckles" was
| very definitely _legacy_ in a way that The Last Of Us: Left
| Behind is not. If you tell someone today that you just
| started the latter, they might wonder why you 're late to
| the party but they're not going to think anything more of
| it.
| senko wrote:
| Case in point: I just bought Diablo 3 (released in 2012)
| on Switch the other day.
|
| I'm sure D4 is more modern, but the difference from D3 is
| nowhere near D2->D3 for the same time span (12 years).
| otabdeveloper4 wrote:
| You must have some very old young.
|
| The young I know play free mobile games they downloaded
| from clickbait ads.
| jay_kyburz wrote:
| or roblox
| glenstein wrote:
| >not because anybody is bad but because the space is so big
| now.
|
| I completely agree but I would actually extend this principle
| even more aggressively. Even if, for whatever reason, we were
| hard capped technologically at Windows 98, even that space
| could be fruitfully explored practically without end,
| creating new genres, new stories, new games.
|
| Fiction writing carries on just fine in books, and music has
| certainly benefited from new tech and new methods but there
| would always be music even if that weren't the case, and same
| with cinema. I would put tabletop games in this category too.
| Its continued future viability, independent of future tech
| advancements may be an important factor in settling whether
| its art.
|
| Full credit to Nintendo for recognizing they had plenty of
| unused creative space to play in, and choosing to play by
| different rules.
| wbl wrote:
| Factorio on a Pentium pro sounds very tricky to do
| effectively. Half Life still is great but the graphics in
| HL2 make it more immersive. That's slowed but I wouldn't
| cite 98 for that.
| the_duke wrote:
| It's true that the progress in games is much slower now, but
| I believe in the console world the main factor is hardware.
|
| Consoles used to have very bespoke architectures, but now are
| switching to customized versions of relatively off-the-shelf
| components. Both the PS5 and the last XBox use x86 AMD
| CPU+GPU combos, probably a variation of their regular G
| product line.
| fxtentacle wrote:
| You're absolutely spot-on!
|
| I've been organizing LAN parties with my friends for 26 years
| now and around 2010 to 2016 was the time when games became so
| good that stopped making sense to upgrade in-between LAN
| parties.
|
| - Left 4 Dead 2
|
| - Killing Floor 2
|
| - CS:GO
|
| - Grid 2
|
| - GTA V
|
| - StarCraft II
|
| plus nowadays there's stiff free competition, e.g.
|
| - Rocket League
|
| - Brawlhalla
|
| - Dota 2
|
| - LoL
|
| but also from OpenRA, which modernizes Red Alert.
|
| Plus, it's challenging to tell based on screenshots if you're
| looking at Assassin's Creed III (from 2012) or Assassin's
| Creed Mirage (from 2023) and there's been 7 !!! other
| Assassin's Creed games in between.
|
| And looking at the Switch, I'd say the situation for new
| games is brutal. There's lots of evergreen games with great
| replay-ability and thanks to the cartridges you can easily
| borrow them among a group of friends. It's been a while since
| I last bought a new one because there just wasn't anything
| different enough from what I already have and like.
|
| My biggest wish for the Switch has been that it'll one day
| drive my screen at 144Hz to make movement smooth. And it
| looks like Nintendo is going to deliver exactly that: More
| powerful hardware for the same old games.
|
| I wonder if Nintendo will also eventually be forced to
| implement a subscription model and/or if they will start to
| aggressively push older games without updates out of their
| store (like what Apple does) because otherwise I just don't
| see many openings for developers to build a new Switch game
| and make the financials work. Currently, you're competing
| with a back catalogue of 4,747 games, so good luck finding
| anything where you can stand out by being better.
| dmonitor wrote:
| Backlog doesn't seem to intimidate people off of Steam, so
| it's not a huge concern for smaller publishers. It's the
| big publishers trying to break into multiplayer that have
| hurdles to jump through. Just look at Concord: an "okay"
| game with few glitches and high quality graphics that
| probably would've done well had it not come out after a
| half dozen games did it better.
| thaumasiotes wrote:
| > I've been organizing LAN parties with my friends for 26
| years now
|
| > - StarCraft II
|
| I thought Starcraft II didn't allow LAN play?
| raydev wrote:
| > the space of "games that would run well on the Switch" is
| still fairly unexplored
|
| That's not true at all, many games don't bother with the
| Switch at all because of dev costs, and Fortnite, one of the
| most popular games in the world, is struggling on the Switch.
| I know because I play FN on Switch occasionally, and you can
| quite literally see all the pain that went into making all
| that complexity work at approx 25fps.
|
| Even Nintendo can't make the latest Zeldas run at >30fps, and
| they're relatively low fidelity.
| thaumasiotes wrote:
| > That hardware can no longer compete with platforms that
| don't throw away their entire library on every release is
| probably one of the first impacts of games finally maturing.
| My "next console" was a Steam Deck for partially this very
| reason, the fact that it came preloaded with years of
| previous acquisitions.
|
| This was something that confused me about the concept of
| consoles in the 90s. The nonexistent value proposition of a
| console hasn't changed since then.
|
| I assume they serve two purposes:
|
| (1) They're marketed as toys you might buy for someone as a
| gift.
|
| (2) You might own a console if you don't want to own a
| computer.
|
| Purpose (2) seems to have withered and died.
|
| > There's been a number of articles about how $NEW_GAME never
| even reached a peak player count of something like Skyrim. I
| think that's currently being written as a sort of a "ha ha,
| that's sorta funny", but it represents a real problem. It is
| not unsolvable; Hollywood has _always_ faced this issue and
| it has historically managed to make money anyhow.
|
| One major aspect of copyright law is making it difficult for
| people to consume media from the past.
| qwytw wrote:
| > prioritizing backwards compatibility
|
| Backwards compatibility is very "cheap" these days though? With
| no arcane architectures and chip designs. PS5 and Xbox are
| basically just generic PCs running a restricted OS and Switch
| is just a phone/tablet.
| DanielHB wrote:
| It is cheap only if you don't change CPU or GPU
| architectures. This is why the PS4 doesn't have PS3
| compatibility.
|
| When apple switched to ARM even with x64->ARMv8 translation
| layer (NOT emulating) it was still noticeably slow in a lot
| of software. Even though some x64 games worked on ARM macs
| they still lost A LOT of performance.
|
| The backwards compatibility of the PS2 was due to the PS2
| literally including an extra PS1 CPU (technically PS1-like
| CPU underclocked to match the original PS1 CPU when running
| PS1 games). On PS2 games this PS1 CPU handled only I/O so it
| wasn't completely wasted when running PS2 games.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PlayStation_2_technical_specif.
| ..
|
| The PS2 CPU is a MIPS III while the PS1 CPU is a MIPS I. I am
| not an expert but I think but I think MIPS III is only
| backwards compatible to MIPS II, not MIPS I
| kimixa wrote:
| Depends on the level of hardware access.
|
| If the GPU access is through a relatively "thick" API like
| DX/Vulkan and shaders stored in an intermediate
| representation like DXIL or SPIR-V, sure, swapping out the
| hardware implementation is relatively easy.
|
| But if they're shipping GPU ISA binaries as the shaders,
| you'll have a much harder time ensuring compatibility.
|
| Same with things like synchronization, on both the CPU and
| GPU (and any other offload devices like DSPs or future NPUs).
| If they use API-provided mechanisms, and those are used
| /correctly/, then the implementation can likely be changed.
| But if they cycle-count and rely on specific device timing,
| again all bets are off.
|
| Things like DX12 and Vulkan have a large number of sync
| points and state transition metadata to allow different
| implementations to be "correct" in things like cache or
| format conversions (like compression). Not all those
| transitions are required for every vendor's hardware, and we
| regularly see issues caused by apps not "correctly" using
| them when the spec says it's required, as the vendor's
| hardware they happened to test on didn't require that one
| specific transition that another implementation might, or
| they happened across some timing that didn't happen to hit
| issues.
|
| I guess my point is Compatibility is _hard_ even if the APIs
| are intentionally designed to allow it. I have no idea how
| much the idea of such compatibility has been baked into
| console APIs in the first place. One of the primary
| advantages of consoles is to allow simplifications allowed by
| targeting limited hardware, so I can only assume they 're
| less compatibility focused than the PC APIs we already have
| Big Problems with.
| Taylor_OD wrote:
| "Nintendo has had a trend for the past couple decades of
| releasing "sequel" consoles that are essentially a modernized
| version of the old one with extra features, compatible with
| everything that released on the predecessor."
|
| Isnt it pretty much just the Wii and Wii U? I guess you could
| play GameCube disks on a Wii but calling the Wii a modernized
| version of the GameCube is a real stretch.
| aurareturn wrote:
| Wii, Wii U, GBC, GBA, DS, 3DS all had backwards
| compatibility.
| estebank wrote:
| Technically, so did the SNES with the NES, it was just
| never really exposed. SMB all-stars started as SMB3 running
| directly on SNES. And you had the Super GameBoy, but that
| was little more than a GameBoy in a cartridge.
| simondotau wrote:
| The Sega Mega Drive (Genesis) had backwards compatibility
| with the Master System. Unlike the Super Game Boy, the
| Power Base Converter was barely more than a cartridge
| pass-through adapter. The Mega Drive's 68000 is idled and
| its Z80 sound co-processor takes control as the main CPU.
|
| https://segaretro.org/Power_Base_Converter
| derefr wrote:
| > Technically, so did the SNES with the NES, it was just
| never really exposed.
|
| I've always wondered how true this is -- I feel like if
| it was _literally_ true, we 'd see a lot of NES ROMhacks
| that involve editing the ROM's layout and metadata bits
| just enough that it's now a SNES ROM, and then taking
| advantage of SNES capabilities in the mod. But I don't
| believe I've ever seen something like that.
|
| I do understand that the SNES CPU is basically a "very
| extended" 6502; and that the SNES PPU's default-on-boot
| graphics mode is compatible with drawing NES-PPU-
| formatted CHR-ROM data; and that there's a "legacy
| compatibility" joypad input MMIO in the right place in
| address space to allow a game that was programmed for the
| NES to read the "NES subset" of a SNES controller's
| buttons.
|
| But is the SNES's (variant) 65C816 ISA a strict superset
| of the NES's (variant) 6502 ISA? Or would they have had
| to effectively go through the assembly code of SMB3 with
| a fine-toothed comb, fixing up little compatibilities in
| the available instructions here and there, to get it to
| run on the SNES?
|
| (Though actually, even if they did have to do that, I
| imagine it would be still be possible to automate that
| process -- i.e. it would be theoretically possible to
| write a NES-to-SNES _static transpiler_. In fact, it 's
| _so_ seemingly-tenable, that I 'm a bit surprised to have
| never heard of such a project!)
| jtsnow wrote:
| In addition to supporting GameCube discs, the Wii had
| physical ports for plugging in GameCube controllers and
| memory cards. So, not much of a stretch.
| user_of_the_wek wrote:
| The Wii Hardware was also basically a beefed up GameCube.
| Plus the Wiimote.
| extraduder_ire wrote:
| They even released a version of the wii without the
| gamecube ports or compatability (before the wii mini) which
| immediately supports gamecube games again if you solder the
| ports back on.
| scrame wrote:
| yeah and the DS had a GBA cartridge slot.
| bitwize wrote:
| That's exactly what they called it when its internals became
| known: an enhanced Gamecube with waggle controls.
|
| The graphics chip was even fixed-function, like the
| Gamecube's, not shader-based like the Xbox 360 or PS3.
| gjsman-1000 wrote:
| > The graphics chip
|
| The graphics architecture was even the same between Wii and
| GameCube - ATI's Flipper, just with 50% higher clocks on
| the Wii.
| monocasa wrote:
| And in fact bug for bug compatible.
| red_admiral wrote:
| GB/GBc/GBa, DS/3DS (we don't talk about DSi) come to mind if
| you count them as consoles. You can even play GBa in the
| original DS, but not in the 3DS as far as I know.
| tripplyons wrote:
| The 3DS actually has a GBA CPU that was used when Nintendo
| gave some free GBA games away to early 3DS buyers after
| they lowered the price, as a sort of refund for the
| difference in prices. You can access it now buy
| jailbreaking your 3DS, but if you have a New 3DS, emulation
| on the main CPU is more convenient.
| jamesgeck0 wrote:
| Similar situation with the Wii U. It was technically
| capable of natively running GameCube games, but Nintendo
| locked out the functionality. It can enabled with
| homebrew.
| SkyBelow wrote:
| >(we don't talk about DSi)
|
| New 3DS crying in the corner because it didn't even get a
| side mention, which about matches the number of exclusives
| it had.
| Lammy wrote:
| DSi XL (LL) is actually my favorite way to play DS games
| because the screen is huge (and IPS!) but is in the native
| DS resolution of 256x192 pixels. DS games on 3DS-
| derivatives look like blurry garbage because they get
| scaled up to 320x240px for display on the 3DS's 800x240px
| (400x240px per eye) panel.
| jsheard wrote:
| If you hold down the start button while booting a DS game
| then the 3DS will render it with 1:1 pixels instead of
| ugly scaling, but then you're not using the whole display
| so a DSi XL is still better.
| derefr wrote:
| I'm surprised there isn't a 3DS mod to bodge in a fancy
| modern panel with enough DPI to hit the lowest common
| multiple of those screens' resolutions, such that it can
| pull off a full-coverage integer-scaled mode for both DS
| and 3DS games. (There certainly exist enough mods that do
| this for GB/GBC!)
| causi wrote:
| Incorrect. The Wii is far more similar to the Gamecube than
| the WiiU.
| starquake wrote:
| Although the handhelds have been backwards compatible, only the
| Wii and the Wii U had backwards compatibility. The SNES, N64,
| Gamecube and Switch did not have backwards compatibility.
| dmonitor wrote:
| I said "past couple decades" for a reason. The N64 is pushing
| 30
| drrotmos wrote:
| The SNES and the Gamecube _did_ have the Super Game Boy and
| Game Boy Player respectively though, but I 'd probably count
| that as sideward compatibility rather than backward
| compatibility.
| 14 wrote:
| Lucky for you Fortnite is and always has been a free game. If
| you were foolish enough to pay to dress up your characters well
| then thank you for supporting that business model so I can let
| my kids play for free. Power to you if you can afford to drop
| money on digital clothing for a game you spend on what ever you
| like. But I just see it as bad a smoking. Kids are like junkies
| wanting to buy clothing for a game mean while them and their
| parents are living in rags. It's an addiction and kids are put
| up against their peers or will be on the outside if they can't
| get the latest skin. So stupid it went that way and any game
| that has kids playing it should not allow in game purchases
| like that.
| iknowstuff wrote:
| babe. there were so many stupid toys and collectibles for
| kids until the 2000s. chill out lol
| causi wrote:
| Shoot, they don't need a hardware generation to do that.
| ActiBlizz told everyone who spent $40 on Overwatch "Fuck you,
| go play a different game".
| pjmlp wrote:
| I always find interesting the issue regarding PC gaming on the
| rise, because in the Iberian Penisula game consoles never were
| that big.
|
| We grew from the 8 bit home computers, lived through 16 bit
| home computers and settled in PC gaming.
|
| Nintendo was mostly about those game & watch handhelds,
| naturally SEGA and PlayStation became relevant, replaced by
| XBox and PlayStation, but always on the shadow of PC gaming.
| inasio wrote:
| The Mac is a weird counter example here, the move to 64 bits
| resulted in many games with official Mac ports (e.g. most of
| Valve's: Half Life, Portal, etc) no longer being able to run on
| modern versions of OSX
| bladderlover21 wrote:
| And this reveals the real reason Nintendo came after Switch
| emulators - to buy some extra time before Switch 2 gets properly
| emulated.
| jsheard wrote:
| The hard part of emulating the Switch 2 probably isn't going to
| be the actual emulation, but breaking the security so that the
| games and firmware can be extracted and decrypted. Nintendo
| pretty much nailed their software security with the Switch 1
| but were undone by catastrophic hardware bugs, so we'll have to
| see how well they learned their lesson on the hardware front
| next time.
|
| Microsoft and Sony have demonstrated that hardware security can
| be more or less perfected, neither of their systems have been
| compromised via hardware attacks for several generations now.
| farseer wrote:
| Microsoft and Sony have successfully prevented their systems
| from being jtaged or mod-chipped. Not sure you can prevent
| dumping the actual game binary on the internet. That has lots
| of software and hardware attack vectors and only needs to be
| done once by a professional enthusiast.
| jsheard wrote:
| The game binaries are encrypted, sure you can image the
| Blurays and put them online but they won't do anyone much
| good without access to the keys buried in the firmware,
| which are also a moving target since they can be rotated
| via mandatory firmware updates if they get compromised. In
| the case of the Switch, you also have to contend with the
| proprietary carts requiring a crypto handshake before
| they'll let you even read the encrypted game data.
| gcr wrote:
| What on earth do you mean? How does a physical blu-ray's
| encryption keys get rotated?
|
| Do you mean that the protection on the firmware gets
| refreshed with updates, but the secret it protects always
| stays the same?
| jsheard wrote:
| I mean the keys can be rotated _for future game
| releases,_ so extracting the keys from firmware X doesn
| 't allow you to decrypt all new physical games in
| perpetuity, because past a certain point they'll start
| using a key that only exists in firmware Y onwards. Key
| rotation was moot in the case of the Switch 1 since the
| early models were so thoroughly broken that Nintendo
| couldn't do anything to stop the new keys from being
| extracted every time, but it worked for Sony and
| Microsoft whose systems generally only get one-off
| software exploits that can be closed forever via firmware
| updates.
| downrightmike wrote:
| MSFT largely did this by building the xbox platform
| basically on a local hyper-v system that they can control
| and not have to worry about hardware.
| kregasaurusrex wrote:
| The main hardware security bugs[0] were very low hanging
| fruit associated with taking over the boot chain at ring 0-
| it's more likely that Nintendo themselves were in a rush to
| get the product on the market after the perceived failure of
| the Wii U. Even with a secure software stack, people found a
| way to defeat the Xbox 360 hardware[1] by physically drilling
| into a chip that enforced a software lock, and George Hotz
| became known for his work in finding ECDSA flaws in the PS3.
| Companies can design these locks to last for a few years of a
| console's lifespan, but I think people now are determined
| enough to dive into these difficult problems that they're
| unlikely to be secured forever.
|
| [0] https://www.gamesindustry.biz/unpatchable-hardware-
| exploit-l...
|
| [1] https://gbatemp.net/threads/scanned-drilling-
| template-16d4s-...
| jsheard wrote:
| There's a reason why you have to go back to the 360 and PS3
| for those examples, Sony and Microsoft stepped up their
| hardware security dramatically after that generation.
| Neither the PS4, PS5, Xbox One or Xbox Series systems have
| ever been compromised via hardware attacks, and those
| earlier ones are over a decade old now.
|
| The Xboxes have held up extremely well on the software
| front as well, and although the Playstation software isn't
| so robust (they use FreeBSD and routinely get owned by
| upstream CVEs) their secure boot has never been broken,
| which limits how much you can do with a software jailbreak.
| PS3 jailbreaks had continuity where you could upgrade an
| exploitable firmware to a non-exploitable one while
| retaining a backdoor, but the PS4s secure boot put an end
| to that.
| pjmlp wrote:
| Also a note that the XBox security CPU, Pluton is a
| requirement for more recent PC hardware architecture
| designs.
|
| And for Rust fans, its firmware has been rewriten.
| realusername wrote:
| That's not the only reason, Microsoft and Sony did
| improve their security a lot but their console are also
| much less juicy targets than in the past as well. The
| Xbox and the Playstation have way less exclusive games
| than in the past and the difference with the PC is much
| smaller nowadays
| blharr wrote:
| I mean, it is a classic example. If you have access to the
| hardware and the dedication to do so, you could break
| almost any security. That's a hilarious example to
| physically drill into a chip, though
| audunw wrote:
| This could be "famous last words", but as someone who has
| worked with chip security I'd be very surprised if anyone
| breaks this generation of hardware at the chip level.
|
| A decade ago the engineers designing these chips knew
| there were several angles of attack but there just wasn't
| enough resources put into closing these holes.
|
| Now every know angle of attack is closed. Even if you
| delid the chip and reverse engineer every single gate and
| can probe individual metal wires on the chip, it'll still
| be nearly impossible to break the hardware security.
| Power supply and EM glitching is also protected against
| (can't speak for Switch 2 but I'm speaking in general
| about chips going forward)
|
| Could be bugs and mistakes that allows someone to bypass
| security, of course. Both in hardware and software. But I
| don't think there will be general purpose angles of
| attack that can be used to bypass security going forward.
| jsheard wrote:
| > Power supply and EM glitching is also protected against
| (can't speak for Switch 2 but I'm speaking in general
| about chips going forward)
|
| Microsoft talked openly about implementing those
| safeguards in the Xbox One, and they've held up for a
| decade or so now.
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7VwtOrwceo
| Lammy wrote:
| > it's more likely that Nintendo themselves were in a rush
| to get the product on the market after the perceived
| failure of the Wii U
|
| Perceived failure of the Wii U _and_ the total reboot of
| the Switch project itself:
| https://mynintendonews.com/2020/12/22/nintendo-leak-shows-
| sw...
| akira2501 wrote:
| > can be more or less perfected
|
| When it comes to video games. That's not much of a
| demonstration in the grand scheme of things.
| ashconnor wrote:
| Mig Switch should work then.
| hbn wrote:
| There's also the fact that their games keep leaking a week or 2
| head of release, so people can play them earlier and with
| better performance by downloading the leaked game and playing
| on an emulator.
|
| I think Nintendo has a case to make that Switch emulation is
| costing them real money.
| Macha wrote:
| Huh, I'd been assuming the Switch 2 would be AMD Z2 based. I
| guess they've managed to convince nVidia to make them another
| SoC. A little surprised, would have thought nVidia would want to
| use any spare fab time for AI chips, though maybe they have some
| older process capacity?
| mywittyname wrote:
| I imagine something like the Switch is a great revenue stream
| for nvidia. It's relatively easy work and they'll be minting
| Switch 2s, thus paying licensing fees, well into the 2030s.
|
| Even if they don't need that money, it's still good to deny the
| competition of such a lucrative contract.
| qwytw wrote:
| There are some hints that Nvidia wants to seriously enter the
| ARM CPU market (again)? Switch guarantees high demand/volume
| regardless of anything else. Not clear how lucrative the
| contract is on its own, though.
|
| Presumably it will reduce their current gross margins (which
| won't necessarily look great in their quarterly report.
| Nvidia's total revenue is only ~20% higher than Intel's was
| back in 2021 despite the insane valuations (in large part due
| to their obscene margins).
| rsynnott wrote:
| > There are some hints that Nvidia wants to seriously enter
| the ARM CPU market (again)?
|
| Fourth time lucky?
|
| (Poor ol' Nvidia has had an unfortunate history with this,
| arguably largely through no fault of their own. The Zune,
| the Kin with Tegra 1, the Motorola Xoom with Tegra 2, a
| variety of less-beloved tablets and weird phones with Tegra
| 3. I think the only successful use-case besides Nintendo
| and car infotainment stuff was Nvidia's own Shield.)
| 486sx33 wrote:
| I've got to assume that fab capacity for SoC ships verses H100s
| are two different things. With the automotive industry down
| there could be spare capacity ?
| tw04 wrote:
| Why wouldn't they just use an emulation layer? There have
| already been several Switch emulators that run on x86 in the
| wild.
| Someone1234 wrote:
| Because it is a mobile console, therefore battery life is a
| limitation and adding an extra layer of indirection (and
| therefore, work) will drain that battery faster.
| tw04 wrote:
| I hate to break it to you, but battery life will be at the
| bottom of the list of Nintendo's concerns when giving you
| backwards compatibility. If Yuzu was able to get 2.5-3
| hours of battery life on the Steam Deck (which isn't that
| far off from what it gets playing a lot of "native" games)
| essentially flying blind, Nintendo should be able to do at
| least that.
| Rohansi wrote:
| The Steam Deck also has a significantly larger battery.
| The_Colonel wrote:
| As usual with Nintendo products, they will not use the best /
| fastest chips available, but older ones where the production
| capacity is not that constrained.
| vvillena wrote:
| The Switch SoC is now built on a 16nm process, so there's no
| need to go for the cutting edge to achieve a sizable
| improvement. The Samsung fabs Nvidia relied on until very
| recently could do the job.
| icegreentea2 wrote:
| Rumour mill has been an NVidia SoC (derived from their
| automotive line) and manufactured by Samsung on a non-bleeding
| edge process.
|
| https://www.eurogamer.net/digitalfoundry-2023-inside-nvidias...
|
| The basis for the rumour is basically Linux kernel code and
| other leaks/hacks for a "T239" SoC that seemingly has all the
| streamlining and features you'd want for a mobile gaming
| processor (as opposed to a automotive SoC like the T234 it's
| supposedly derived from).
|
| The Samsung fab is based on T234 being fabbed by Samsung using
| a ~5 year old process, and Korean industry rumours
| (https://m-mk-co-
| kr.translate.goog/news/business/10999380?_x_...).
| DCKing wrote:
| Nintendo optimizes for cost, not maximum performance and almost
| always selects older technology. AMD Z2 chips go into $600+
| bulky low margin PC gaming handhelds whereas Nintendo likely
| will want to hit $300-350 while keeping a healthy margin.
|
| This also means that the Switch SoC doesn't use an expensive
| cutting edge manufacturing process. And it probably won't be
| made in TSMC factories at all. Leaks pretty clearly indicate an
| Nvidia Ampere based SoC built on Samsung's 8nm process, so it's
| the same tech as Nvidia's consumer line circa 2020.
| vunderba wrote:
| They're being purposely coy though on what this actually means.
| Backwards compatibility with digital/e-games, or backwards
| compatible with the physical carts?
| antonyt wrote:
| I'd be shocked if it doesn't support physical carts, given
| Nintendo's history with backwards compatibility. And given the
| rough equivalence of digital games and carts on the Switch, I'm
| hoping that means digital purchases transfer too - but that
| would be a first for Nintendo, I think. Fingers crossed!
| hbn wrote:
| From what I understand, people are much more into physical
| media in Japan. Nintendo also actually finishes their games
| and gets a working build ready before release so the carts
| actually have a game on them that don't require a patch,
| which is unfortunately not standard across the industry.
| tastyfreeze wrote:
| There isn't a technical reason to change the cartridge format.
| I don't see why they wouldn't just use the same carts if
| backwards compatibility is the goal.
| WhereIsTheTruth wrote:
| there always is:
|
| - smaller
|
| - energy efficient
|
| - cost saving
|
| and they are all valid reasons, it's a handheld, the form
| factor will evolve until perfected
| micromacrofoot wrote:
| they could have made them smaller the first time around,
| but I have to imagine they intentionally chose not to -- we
| have to remember that they're also optimizing these things
| for children... so smaller isn't always better for things
| like swallowing (which is why they add a bitterant to the
| current cards)
| vundercind wrote:
| Even at the size they are, I wish they were closer to GBA
| --cart sized.
| taikahessu wrote:
| You wouldn't vacuum a cartridge.
| toast0 wrote:
| The carts are already plenty small. Yes, they could be
| smaller, but any smaller (without being downloads only) and
| they'd be difficult to handle.
|
| For cost, they could likely reduce the pincount for new
| cartridges, by changing the number of data pins, but that
| doesn't preclude using the same slot. Reducing cost of
| cartridges is more effective than reducing the cost of the
| console. Reducing pin count would probably save more money
| than shrinking the small amount of plastic case.
|
| For energy efficiency, maybe they can eliminate 3.3v and
| only keep 1.8v for new carts, maybe redesign the insertion
| detection pins to detect old and new.
| mkjonesuk wrote:
| There are now cart dumpers that can copy and store multiple
| Switch games on an SD card. If the same form factor is used
| its likely these will still work for original Switch games.
| jerf wrote:
| I would be unsurprised if the cartridge has the same form
| factor but has internal differences for Switch2-only games.
| If they want to try to lock Switch2 cartridges down more,
| there's plenty of ways to do that while maintaining a
| similar enough form factor for Switch1 compatibility.
| CountHackulus wrote:
| Because they can get more money by selling the same game
| twice. But they can still claim backwards compatibility with
| download-only games.
| CatWChainsaw wrote:
| I don't game nearly as much anymore but my understanding is
| that Nintendo may be the last console maker to regularly
| produce physical games. Newest Xbox doesn't even have an
| optical disk drive, I believe?
|
| Nintendo also seems to be the least price gouge-y, in terms of
| lootboxes and microtransactions and other bullshit. Now I wish
| that didn't come with the tradeoff of them being completely
| anal when it comes to people posting OSTs online but I guess
| I'll take it.
| 486sx33 wrote:
| I really love when backwards compatibility is incorporated in new
| products. I'm pleasantly surprised because Nintendo has been bit
| so many times. For example GameCube compatibility on Wii is why
| we had hacked Wii so quickly.
| bdcravens wrote:
| So another six years of fractured marketing, where you need a
| spreadsheet to know if the game you want to buy will run on your
| device. Is it for the Switch, the Switch 2, the Switch 2
| Advanced, or the Switch 2 Advanced S AI Cloud VR?
| pipe01 wrote:
| For all the things Nintendo does wrong, I feel like this isn't
| one of them.
| AdmiralAsshat wrote:
| The Switch thankfully avoided this, but there when the "New
| 3DS" came out, there were a handful of games that only worked
| on that hardware revision.
| tapoxi wrote:
| There wasn't a Switch Advanced/Pro or anything like that
| though. There's the Switch and Switch Lite, the Lite can't
| attach to a TV and the controllers are fused to the system.
| holycrapwhodat wrote:
| But, you can still pair most types of extra controllers to it
| (including a set of Joycons), and the eShop is aware of games
| the few games that can only be played on a tv and warns of
| incompatibility.
| jamesgeck0 wrote:
| Plus the Switch OLED, which was the Switch but switchier.
| bilekas wrote:
| I think Microsoft suffer worse for this, not only with the
| bizarre console names, but also their cloud gaming packages.
| nerdjon wrote:
| Unless they choose some stupid name other than "Switch 2".
|
| People understand Playstation 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 just fine so that
| simply isn't true.
|
| Also consumer confusion is not a good excuse to ignore having
| backwards compatibility.
| drooopy wrote:
| I can just see them snatching defeat from the jaws of victory
| by calling this thing something stupid like "Switch U" or
| "SwIItch" confusing the hell out of consumers again.
| racl101 wrote:
| Cool cool.
| ekianjo wrote:
| How practical to include some emulator once you shut down all the
| other emulators
| pipeline_peak wrote:
| Who said anything about emulation?
| thebruce87m wrote:
| Lego City Undercover with a higher framerate/resolution would be
| fantastic - even if only AI upscaled.
|
| Bonus if they invent an AI that can fix the crash bugs in the
| binary.
| LinAGKar wrote:
| It would really be surprising if it wasn't backwards compatible.
| The Switch breaking backwards compatibility was exceptional,
| apart from that every Nintendo console since the Wii on the
| stationary side and the GameBoy Color on the handheld side had at
| least one generation of backwards compatibility.
| BHSPitMonkey wrote:
| That's an oddly cherry-picked version of a pattern. There was
| no compatibility between the NES, SNES, N64, or GameCube. Wii
| and Wii U each supported their predecessor's games, but the
| Switch did not. Those 2 out of 7 were outliers
| BudaDude wrote:
| You are forgetting the handheld line
|
| Gameboy Color supported OG Gameboy games
|
| GBA supported GBC games
|
| DS supported GBA and(?) GBC games - Could be wrong about that
|
| 3DS supported DS games.
| Dwedit wrote:
| DS did not support GBC games.
| ihuman wrote:
| The GBA (original and SP) also supported OG Gameboy games,
| but the Gameboy Micro only supported GBA games
|
| The 3DS also had games from other consoles for sale in the
| eShop, but they were emulated (GB, GBC, Game Gear, NES,
| SNES). If you bought a 3DS before the price drop, you could
| also play some GBA games. These are also running natively,
| not emulation https://en-americas-
| support.nintendo.com/app/answers/detail/...
| Sakos wrote:
| The important part is that backwards compatibility became a
| focus after the Gamecube and it has been ever since. Like,
| this is just a fact. The Wii supported Gamecube games and
| controllers. Even the WiiU had the internal capability to run
| GC games, it just lacked the disc drive for it, and it ran
| Wii games just fine. The same goes for every single of their
| portable consoles (GB games work on the GBC, GB and GBC games
| work on the GBA, GBA games work on the Nintendo DS, etc).
| echelon wrote:
| CPU and GPU architectures used to wildly change from one
| generation to the next. Backwards compatibility wasn't always
| practical or feasible.
|
| Now we've arrived at a fairly locked in set of architectures.
| ClassyJacket wrote:
| "Every console since the wii" and "except the switch" is two
| consoles. The other 4/6 were not backwards compatible.
| mminer237 wrote:
| The DS and 3DS were.
| pipeline_peak wrote:
| Pro: We won't have to repurchase games.
|
| Con: Assuming native compatibility, this likely won't be a very
| exciting console.
| BudaDude wrote:
| A beefier Switch is what everyone wants. The number 1 complaint
| I hear about it is how game X looks worse on it than the
| Xbox/PS version.
|
| Hopefully Nintendo learned its lessons from the Wii U.
| pipeline_peak wrote:
| A beefier iteration is the Xbox PlayStation way. To many
| people what makes Nintendo special is that they often avoid
| that. Wii, Switch, snd DS being successful examples.
|
| >Hopefully Nintendo learned its lessons from the Wii U.
|
| That's my concern, Nintendo doesn't like incremental titles
| like "Switch 2". They'd rather call it something weird like
| "Switch Me" which only confuses non informed customers.
| digging wrote:
| If they were on their game it would just be "Big Switch".
| internet101010 wrote:
| Yeah playing emulated Switch games is a much better
| experience on a Steam Deck than it is on the Switch. Nintendo
| is in a weird spot now because the competitive landscape is
| much different.
| vunderba wrote:
| Agreed, a lot of people were expecting a bump in processing
| power in the OLED refresh, but it's pretty clear now that
| they were saving that for the Switch 2.
| Retr0id wrote:
| Consoles have had architecturally unexciting hardware for a
| while now, what kind of thing were you expecting?
| pipeline_peak wrote:
| I was / (am still sort of) expecting Nintendo will make a
| product that's exciting. Not a Switch 2 we can look back on
| and say "man this company hasn't made a significant console
| since 2016".
|
| To be fair, I predict a Netflix of gaming in the future so
| maybe this is a safe move, idk.
| Retr0id wrote:
| The Nintendo DS was "interesting" relative to the GBA (if
| you ask me), but still had native back-compat.
|
| I agree that the Switch 2 will likely be "more of the
| same", but I don't really see how that relates to back-
| compat?
| breakfastduck wrote:
| You'd hope so, but this is likely a move to placate detractors so
| the army of Nintendo fans buy whatever insanely underpowered and
| overpriced device they eventually release.
| endemic wrote:
| Nintendo has fans because the software is good. Sure, the
| Switch was "underpowered", but if it plays the games I want to
| play, then who cares?
|
| Also, I think the $700 PS5 Pro wants a word with you.
| sfmz wrote:
| I would be more excited if they released it in console form
| instead of an iPad with a docking station; N64 was basically the
| perfect form factor -- load games manually (tactilely) and no
| fussing with bluetooth or controller charging; and prioritize
| local co-op games instead of online play.
| chollida1 wrote:
| The N64 was significantly limited by its form factor.
|
| Many games were not ported to it because it used a cartridge
| that couldn't hold near the data of a CD ROM like its peers.
|
| The controller was amazing though.
| vunderba wrote:
| _The controller was amazing though_
|
| ...
|
| What?
|
| The thumbstick was super shoddy and was prone to mechanical
| failures, the ridiculously tiny d-pad was literally made for
| ants. The N64 was a lot of things, but I don't know anyone
| who's giving out accolades for the controller design.
|
| The GC controller (outside of the HUGE shoulder bumpers that
| were used as analog in a grand total of like 4 racing games)
| was a vast improvement on it, and I would say that the Switch
| Pro Controller ranks up there as one of Nintendo's best
| though the cost of $60/$70 kind of stung.
| vundercind wrote:
| - No cords is _really_ nice.
|
| - Battery life isn't really a problem _on full-sized
| controllers_ (and the failure modes are "walk the dog around
| the block while it charges enough for a couple-hour session" or
| "it becomes a wired controller for a few minutes") including
| the Nintendo ones, just the damn joy-cons. Those do suck, but
| the basic idea of wireless controllers has proven to be really
| good, not like the old Wave Bird days.
|
| - The Switch is easily the best local multiplayer modern
| console AFAIK, including lots and lots of co-op options.
| lynndotpy wrote:
| Good news for you :)
|
| - Almost every first-party multiplayer Nintendo game on the
| Switch that I know of has offline local multiplayer. The only
| exception which comes to mind is Splatoon.
|
| - The Switch has a cartridge slot, and leaks suggest the Switch
| 2 will too.
|
| - And you can connect two (possibly more with a hub) Pro
| controllers with a true wired connection: https://en-americas-
| support.nintendo.com/app/answers/detail/...
|
| Fingers crossed that the Switch 2 maintains this pattern.
| extraduder_ire wrote:
| As well as local multiplayer, there's a feature to sync game
| updates without an internet connection. So even if people
| start off with different versions of a game and have no
| internet connection they can still play together.
|
| I am a little disappointed they don't have anything like the
| DS's download play feature though.
| Lammy wrote:
| > The only exception which comes to mind is Splatoon.
|
| It does, but it's hidden behind an unlisted button
| combination (Zl + Zr + L3 for Splat 3) and every player needs
| their own console and copy of the game:
| https://splatoonwiki.org/wiki/The_Shoal#LAN_Play
| yapyap wrote:
| Well yeah, I damn hope so. It literally has switch in it's name
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-11-06 23:01 UTC)