Is the Nintendo Switch Slowing Down the 4K Revolution?

Microsoft and Sony know how valuable it is to convince people that 4K really is the future of entertainment as they no doubt prepare to release 4K next gen consoles sometime in the near future.

Meanwhile, Nintendo is off living in their own little weird corner of the world as they have done for many years now. Rather than try to convince people that 4K is the future, they are banking on the possibility that the desire for high-end media is shrinking in the modern world while the desire for high-quality portable gaming and social experiences is going up.

[ApocalypseShadow]

Wouldn't it be more:

"Are television manufactures slowing down the 4K revolution with high prices and lack of 4K content to need a 4K television?"

[GrantPatterson]

This, all damn day.

[Gunstar75]

The prices of sets aren't high, but lack of content is an issue. Also 4k blu rays are stupidly expensive at the moment

[Razzer]

And the high bandwidth requirements of 4k content.

[Gh05t]

High Prices? You can get decent 4K with HDR TV's 55-65 inches for $700. Samsung, LG, Vizio, and TCL all make decent entry level 4K tvs.

Do you not remember when flat panel Plasma and LCD Screens showed up? I paid $2000 for my first flat panel tv 42 inch and that was a few years into it, Even huge projection big screens where $2000 before that. I bought the last Plasma screen I could find on the market for $800 5 years ago for a 50 inch. TV prices are a steal right now unless you want the very latest technology like OLED in which case yeah its $2500 minimum for a nice big one but please be realistic here, TV prices are not high. I still remember buying a (large at the time) 32 inch tube TV off brand for $450 as an upgrade.

People walk around with $700 cell phones and bitch about a $1000 65" 4k HDR TV... smh.

[Psychotica]

I agree but the problem I have is that I already have a perfectly fine 65" tv that isn't 4k. I can't justify the expense of a new 4K tv just to play video games.

[one2thr]

Any recommendations for a low latency 4k HDR tv? (Serious Inquiry, currently on a 40in Toshiba Regza I bought back in 2010)

[4Sh0w]

Psychotica,

-That may be true for you but that has nothing to do with Nintendo slowing down 4K (the story) or tv manufacturers slowing down 4K, thats just a personal problem because with every technical advancement most peoples old devices/ tv's worked fine yes still worked fine. Consumers adopt new tech because they want a BETTER experience/finer detailed picture. I solve that problem by rotating the 4 tvs I have in my house, 1 that has the latest bells and whistles in the living room, 1 older in my bedroom, 2 of the oldest tvs in my kids room, when I upgrade I change out the oldest tv.

-I don't believe Nintendo needs to do anything but be Nintendo, hell I'd like them to create some more IPs besides the usual Mario, Zelda, Metroid stuff, would love something more gritty from them but hey Im the exception so they are well within their rights to stick to what they know best.

- The clear problem holding 4K tv's is not price, it's content for sure.

[Cobra951]

Never use "decent" and "Vizio" in the same paragraph.

[Gh05t]

@one2thr

I recently bought a TCL 55p607 for my office, reviewers have said it has super low latency in gaming mode ~17ms. I think rtings finally got one and reviewed it recently but I got one as soon as they hit the US Streets, so far so good, cant complain for the price it is pretty awesome and since its in my office it is the perfect size.

Has built in Roku OS, 72 FALD, HDR10 and Dolby HDR for $650

Here is that rtings review, havent read it all myself, it wasnt out when I bought mine and I havent had any issues with mine.

http://www.rtings.com/tv/re...

My two largest cons if I had to nit pick would be angle viewing and reflection on dark scenes. But I played some Zelda:BotW yesterday on it (just got my switch finally) and it was great. 4K content looks as one would expect.

Read some reviews, they are pretty much the same "For the price the value is great." I might wait until they hit retail stores so if you get some that have lots of bleeding a return and replace is easy. I bought mine off amazon.

Its all just a matter of how much you want to spend and what else is out there for that price. I wanted sub $1000 for my office tv, and for the price this thing worked out for me.

[343_Guilty_Spark]

I justified an HD tv for the 360

[one2thr]

Ghost, 343 thx 👍🏽👍
27997;👍🏽

[Rude-ro]

I would not recommend cheap 4k tvs unless someone really does their homework..
The latency alone is a huge factor, but I would not walk in and buy a $700 4k tv over 42" without doing your homework.

[Uken12]

$700 for a TV just to play video games on isn't really "Cheap".
For the TV it is cheap. But it is still $700+!

PS4 Pro = $400
That's $1,100 for 4K gaming that truly isn't 4K. XB1X is at least $1,200. It just isn't worth it at all for most people.

[Allsystemgamer]

Toshibas don't have full 4k resolution. They use an additional line in their pixels. They add in a white to the RGB to make it RGBW. This makes the pixels slightly larger therefor making the pixel density on the panel smaller. The white line serves as a brightness increasing mechanism and not for increasing sharpness.

Search "feaux k" to get a better explanation. Sharp and insignia do the same thing.

Samsung entry levels are a smarter choice.

[Cobra951]

Couple that with all the people who couldn't care less about more pixels, and the result is only a little more enticing than 3D TV.

[dumahim]

It isn't the manufacturer's fault there's a lack of content.
Also, prices are not high at all unless you want a nice one. Which is usually how it is with electronics.

[ApocalypseShadow]

Lack of content is separate from TVs. I threw them both in the same sentence to shorten my comment.

[_LarZen_]

Lot's of 4K content now. And what high prices? There are plenty of cheap 4K alternatives now.

[ApocalypseShadow]

If you want a good 4K TV with HDR, it's not cheap. And not worth spending the extra money for extra pixels to see thick make up and pimples.

[_LarZen_]

A good 4K HDR TV is not expensive today. And it's totally worth it.

[ocelot07]

I much rather have fun games than 4K graphics to be fair. So Nintendo can go as slow as they please.

[SirBradders]

Sony fan through and through this gen but having seen all the Zelda reviews i couldn't help but pick a Switch up and i must say enjoying the hell out of my Switch albeit the lack of games, but they will come.

[Istolla]

You should try some of the indie games. I recommended Graceful Explosion Machine, Snipperclips (for multiplayer), and Mr Shifty.

[TheOtherVitaOwner]

Did the Wii slow down the HD "revolution"?

[Rai]

Thought the same thing....these opinion articles are so dumb.

[Razzer]

No, the number of flying Wiimotes that destroyed TV screens actually insured HD's future.

;-)

[Gman32]

i dont think nintendo is slowing down 4k movement but it would help if they would get on board with it i mean i would love to see games like zelda,pikmin,mario in 4k

[Cobra951]

I'd much rather see them at a rock-steady 60 fps. If they can also do 4K after that, I have no objection.

[EddieNX]

No not all. 1080P can co exist with 4k for years. 4k hasnt even begun yet in gaming. Most ps4s and XB1s are the vanilla 1080p models and will be for bout 3 years.

[InTheZoneAC]

Compressed 4k streaming and data caps are slowing down any advances

[Kosic]

I don't really understand how these articles that blame MS for slowing down VR and Nintendo slowing down 4k.

As others have mentioned, the library of 4k is lacking, the cost to enter the 4k era is still fairly high (Ok ish 4k tv is around £400, and again for the ps4 pro with a game or two).

I've recently gotten a 4k tv, and I've decided not to get a Ps4 pro, because the lack of 4k patch content games is low, that I won't benefit much over my standard PS4.

So, no. Nintendo aren't holding back 4k, it's the rest of the market, there's no content, and where there is content. It isn't worth the trade off.
It's the same for Ms with VR. If a company doesn't join the hype, it doesn't mean their holding it back.

[Number-Nine]

I'd rather have 1080/60fps than 4k

[DaFeelz]

Yes, Nintendo and the awesome power of the Switch are single-handedly slowing the advance of the 4K tv market. Who will stop these fiends? Or, could it be more of what Apocalypse Shadow said above?

[davand114]

There is no 4k revolution. The thing that slowing down the 4k revolution is that consumers don't care about 4k right now. Most channels don't stream their content in 4k and the move from 1080p to 4k isn't significant enough for people to make the jump. Also streaming in 4k uses a fuck load of bandwidth and cable companies are not trying to spend that much money to stream their shows. Most cable companies still stream in 1080i.

[mamotte]

Are M$ and Sony slowing down the portable revolution?

[Miss_Weeboo]

Oh, come on! Nintendo is selling a product and people are buying it.

[Scatpants]

Nope everyone else can do whatever they want. That's like saying is a Texas Instruments graphing calculator slowing down the 4K revolution.

[CobraKai]

More like 4K evolution. I think HDR is more revolutionary than increasing resolution.

[bluefox755]

I'm really not a fan of the Switch, but I admire them for not jumping on the ridiculous 4k bandwagon. I'm not sure this obsession with 4k is healthy for the industry.

[King_Lothric]

4K is just not here yet. Just like it happened with 1080p. It will slowly be adopted when prices go down.

[RhymeNorReason]

There's no "Revolution" it's just new tech slowly coming into its own. That's like asking was 360 and Wii slowing down the Bluray revolution? No.

[oldmess]

There's not even a "4K revolution" to begin with...

These authors/bloggers love to draw parallels between the past and the present. As if the 4K upgrade is anything compared to the HD revolution! That one truly deserved to be called as a revolution: TVs had been stuck at 480p or less for a long time, they had a drastically different screen tech (CRT vs LCD) and the image ratio was also quite different (4:3 compared to HDTV's 16:9). Even then – when the jump was actually noticeable to the mainstream consumer – the Wii still managed to be the highest selling console on the market and it did not support HD resolutions (not even 720p, then dubbed 'HD ready').

The cold hard truth is most consumers can't tell difference between a 1080p and a 4K panel, unless they're sitting very close to the TV (not unlike a desktop screen, where these resolutions make sense) or really big screen sizes (think 60'' and above). Both examples are outliers in the grand scheme of things. Nintendo risked skipping HD with the Wii, and in the end the lower price of its console payed off. With the Switch, they're not even risking by skipping 4K: they're doing the smartest and most logically sound strategy possible.

[XStation4pio_Pro]

not at all. they compete in the casual space. ps4 and x1 are more technical and "higher end" for lack of a better term and thats ok for all of them.

[iofhua]

I'm happy with my 1080p display. I probably couldn't tell the difference between 1080p and 4k.

My 1080p display is 32 inches. I bought it for $350. If I can get a larger 4k set for cheaper I will upgrade.

[Chumdiddy]

I hope it is. We should be focused on maxing out 1080/60 this gen (with the upgraded console models). Leave 4K for next gen when, I dunno, more than 5% of console gamers actually have or can get a 4KTV.

[filchron]

4x1080p is NOT a revolution. A REVOLUTION in gaming would be Glasses free multiscopic 3D at atleast 1080p per eye or full on holographic lightfield displays. 2D screens will eventually be replaced when high quality 3D displays become cheap and widely available, and yes, they will look way better than Nintendo 3DS' garbage ass 240p 3D..

[thexmanone]

First its MS holding back VR and now this. These articles got to go.

[wonderfulmonkeyman]

If anything, the push for 4K is holding gaming back in general.
For every game that places graphical fidelity as one of its highest priorities, we, the gamers, get a game with a combination of gameplay, music, VA,framerate, and/or a variety of other categories that are given less attention/quality control than they could have otherwise had.
A few jaggies are worth it if the extra money spend smoothing them goes into making sure that everything else is stellar.

[Knushwood Butt]

So what happened with 1 2 3 Switch?

[wonderfulmonkeyman]

No clue. There's obviously going to be cases where a game is just going to be bad due to the concept of it not resonating with gamers, or with the other bits of it in general just being poorly done to begin with regardless of how the graphics are, but pushing for graphics first and foremost just makes it more likely that an otherwise stellar game won't reach its full gameplay potential.

Honestly, I dunno how it managed to sell what it did despite not being a pack-in title, because I've kept hearing lots of disdain for it.
Apparently there's a few games on there that are actually worth playing a lot with friends, but I wouldn't know as I haven't researched into it too deeply; I don't play party games much anymore.
If I were to get a party game at this point, it would probably be Jack Box Collection, because I have a lot of fun memories of the You Don't Know Jack series back in my high school days.

[Knushwood Butt]

I agree that a poor game is a poor game whichever way you look at it, but I don't agree that 4K is holding back gaming.

I've yet to make the jump to 4K, but still have fun

[wonderfulmonkeyman]

Right now it's just too much expense on both the consumers and devs, that's all.
In a few years when we've got higher grades of tech, maybe 4K will become the accepted standard, but right now it is most definitely a luxury choice, and not something worth focusing in on for gaming consoles that still have issues getting frame-rates down perfectly, let alone forming a good formula for pleasing the ever-changing tastes of gamers, which requires sooooo much more work than just prettying up a few million pixels.

All I'm saying is that both gamers and devs should not be placing so much importance on 4K when it's still so young and unimportant compared to getting a game's quality control up to a certain level.

[feraldrgn]

I'm still fine with 1080p to be honest.

[enya64]

Agreed with Nintendo on this one. Base PS4 and Xbox One is more often than not sub 1080p, but unless groups like Digital Foundry didn't point out every single pixel or fps drop absolutely no one would even notice. Current gen games look gorgeous, but the current game companies' marketing department and the media are hard at work trying to be magicians by specializing in "misdirection". Ignore the important thing (multi-platform titles generally look the same and there is diminishing returns of graphic fidelity between console generations) and instead focus on pixel counting and unnoticeable/occasional variances in frame rate. If they weren't telling everyone to notice constantly and exaggerating its importance, no one would care because they too busy having fun to pixel count.

Even with my 1080ti, I don't play my PS4, PS3, 360, or Wii U any less. And Zelda on my Switch gives me the same visual treat as Forza Horizon 3 in 4K on my PC. Current 4K gaming vs 1080p is not by any stretch of the imagination a game changing leap, and I'm glad Nintendo is separating themselves from that silly way of thinking.

[Tko1111]

Gamers not wanting to spend more than 399 for a system is what's holding up 4k. Pc market struggles with 4k because consoles dictate a majority of game engines and publishers are lazy

[TheOttomatic91]

Not really Ninty has always been a step behind hardware power wise and it didn't really stop high quality graphical consoles, TV and games being released on other consoles.

[3-4-5]

4K Tv's are only in about 15% of households right now per a recent report that I don't feel like finding...I think it was even on N4G at one point...anyways...

With that little 4K Tv's it's not a need right now.

Next gen, 4K tvs will be like HD are now and so more like 50% of people will have them and so it will make more sense for them to move towards 4K along with Microsoft & Sony.

Nintendo isn't holding anyone back...if anything they are always experimenting and tinkering...they help move things forward....sometimes they stumble, but they fail forward and then succeed again.

[Silly gameAr]

Here we go with this. Nintendo pretty much said the truth. People just have to be dramatic and hyperbolic about everything.

[Realplaya]

Nintendo is smart if you think about it they sell devices that some would say about a gen behind when it comes to he and 4K. In actuality what they have done is bought years. After 4K for consoles what more is there?

[About30Ninjas]

Don't blame Nintendo for this shit blame the consumer for not buying enough 4k TV's and beside we all knew it was gonna take a 3-4 years before 4k become the standard

[Bjorn-c-blocker]

There is no revolution.

[chris235]

the switch is not part of the competition, so it is slowing down nothing.

[inxine]

4k revolution? where? what?

[blawren4]

My problem is that my 720p set still works fine. Damn thing won't die.