How does that even make sense? Phones don't exactly Mario or Zelda caliber titles, go for the same market, nor did most people have phones with better specs at the time, considering that phones can't run at their highest clock speeds before getting too hot
it's not supposed to compete with smartphone VR solutions, this is a basic toy allowing people to play 5 specific nintendo made games after assembling the toycons. with that argument why buy switch at all since you can play games on your phone?
It's absolutely low and like I said, less than ideal, but I wanted to make the DK1 comparison because that'll be about where it is in terms of resolution. Now, it'll be lacking in terms of refresh rate compared to that panel, and as I said, I worry about the motion tracking. But that resolution shouldn't be a deal breaker in terms of 'can it deliver true VR'. It can.
Unfortunately it would suck, because you have to hold the headset to your face. The only real way for it to be playable would be to tilt your head to steer. If it could strap to your head the game would be ideal for it, but as things are it's not really doable.
Tilt controls are part of the series. MK7 had a first person tilt mode, for example.
Except the Switch is about as capable as it could've been for its form factor and price point. It's not a 3DS or Wii U situation, where a gimmick and a poor set of priorities held the hardware back but kept them pricey. The Switch's hardware is actually rather good and appealing. It's far from middle of the road tech
Tilt controls are one thing, tilting your head is something else entirely. I've played VR games that were based around tilting your head, it's not fun, and hard on your neck. Heck, even just holding the headset to your face for three races would be tiring.
what other $300 tablet is out there that's much more powerful than switch and has all its functionalities?
Oh that's a rubber band ok... The trunk being straight in the promo photo gave me the impression it would be limited to up and down.Looking at it more closely, it appears that the "arm" is attached via a rubberband loop that allows it to freely pivot in any direction.
So the tracking pattern is indeed necessary, and it seems the second joy-con's primary purpose is ensuring smoother tracking of distance and angle than the refresh rate of the motion camera can provide. The "wrist" can't twist, but you can still move the entire arm around, and the elbow appears to be a similar joint - so it's less limited than I first assumed. Still pretty limited though.
Why would it be lacking in terms of refresh rate? DK1 had a 720p 60hz-refresh screen, same as the Switch screen. Nintendo's not going to make games/apps that run at lower than that. This should be very comparable to the DK1 experience, which was amazing for anyone without VR experience. Heck, the resolution will be a little higher, since the screen is slightly smaller than DK1 with mostly the same resolution
Thanks for correcting my memory. I thought the DK1 had 75hz but lacked low persistence, but I see now that it wasn't until the DK2 that it got 75hz refresh.
The screen holder is an alternative to the goggles to play in 2d in case you do not have binocular vision or if you are a child under seven for whom it is recommended not to use 3d products like this. Safety cap is probably to reduce impacts from drops / be compatible with connecting to the other accessories
To be fair, it was only being pointed out that comparisons to existing VR tech, and the VR market at large, are widely off the mark in this situation. Cutting edge tech, this is not. And Nintendo aren't pretending it is. Those decrying the screen fidelity and basic tech are just shouting at clouds. It's a toy. A cool toy.
Want to ask how you would all feel about Mario Kart VR.
Mario Kart 8D already had Labo support.
Tech-wise, despite being one of the prettiest games on the system, MK8D on portable mode allowed for split screen 2 players at 720p 60fps.
Mario Kart 7 already had a first person 3D mode
And finally....Mario Kart VR already exists:
I'm not sure if they'll save it for Mario Kart 9 or add it to Deluxe 8, the Mario Kart team has to be busy with something since ARMS finished a long time ago. Will be 3 years since MK8D early next year.
I don't think that's true.
This would never be high quality VR. Won't have the resolution, framerate, or even the right kind of headset. Just a bit of casual fun. Potentially.
In any case I have my doubts the Switch could run MK8D @720p90 in portable mode no less.
Yeah, I believe I've read that the Switch has a slightly higher pixel density than the DK1. 237 ppi vs 215 ppi
It's $40. If you want all the games it's $80.
Or it's like buying a frozen pizza and saying you paid $7 for the box
Even someone like you should know 1080 vs 4K depends on the size of the screen and viewing distance, cmon your better than that.
I think you misunderstand what I was saying, I wasn't talking about my understanding of the technology:
Anandtech said:
I had a DK1 as well. That "800p" screen was 1280x800, so only 80 pixels taller than Switch - basically same resolution, but slightly different aspect ratio. It wasn't low persistence at all, you're thinking about DK2 with its OLED screen stolen from cell phones and hacked by Oculus; DK1 had a standard, off the shelf, cheap lcd display, complete with 20ms latency. A magnetometer is useful for correcting drift over long periods of time or when motion is fast, but this device being handheld enforces that motion will rarely be fast, and Nintendo has gotten pretty good at keeping drift to a minimum.
