nVidia’s response to miners was pretty funny.

To answer your question, for one, there is no ‘Pro’ model. There’s only mention of the updated OLED model in the Bloomberg report that might support 4K output, and people do what they do, and make assumptions that this is the ‘Pro’ model.

Those phones also sell for more than any console on the market. Nintendo’s going to do what’s cheap and easy to make, and building an $800 tablet to sell for $600 isn’t what’s going to happen, especially when the console is still selling well. Every time the ‘Switch Pro’ comes up, it turns into a fantasy land of…

Maybe it’s selling so well because of the $300 price point. Who’s going to shell out double the Switch for something that plays the exact same Mario games in 4K?

If you want the near-free performance gains on a tablet with a low power budget and a very limited number of resources to allocate for the tech, yes it does.

Yeah, I’m still not convinced they’re going to use an expensive SoC like that.

There is no way in hell Nintendo is going to put a GPU with tensor cores in its Switch. It’d balloon manufacturing costs.

I mean, there’s a reason the PCSX2 project hasn’t been pushing for 64-bit builds for a long time; as far as I understand it, just porting the code base to x86-64 doesn’t really provide any performance benefits without rewriting a good chunk of its code base. There’s been a renewed push for that last year, though, but…

I feel the same way. PS5 backwards compatibility isn’t as robust as it is on Xbox, but it at least in its state if can play a good chunk of last gen games at a locked 60fps. Certain exclusives like God of War and Last Guardian were meant to be played on this console, though it’s a shame some of them have yet to be…

This is the sort of reason I opt for the console versions instead, if I can get the same or better baseline experience. I’ve long since ran out of patience jumping in and out of games to apply some community patch or ini tweak on a per game basis.

Given that it’s Activision, I’m surprised they’re not outright asking you to buy the game again. But it’s fine, can’t expect every company to just eat the costs of a free upgrade.

I expected at least one more update to fix the PS5's graphical bugs, but hey, I can’t complain.

Supposedly the source files for the DLC are corrupted, forever lost to the wind.

I finally got my PS5, gonna spend a good while watching Spider-Man Remastered go brrr, cycle through my PS4 games to see how better they look, and test out the PS4 games that got a PS5 version upgrade. So far tried out No Man’s Sky, and nope, still don’t like the game.

Can’t be disappointed if I never had confidence in the game.

If we’re talking Borderlands 1 Roland, who didn’t seem as stoic and whatever like he was in B2, sure, I can see that working.

The remake was originally under the purview of Team 1, the group responsible for the much-maligned Warcraft III: Reforged, before the project was eventually handed over to Team 3 sometime last year.

We’re at a pretty low bar here. At this point, anything’s better than the retailer just putting them up as-is. Not so much to our benefit, but may as well make it harder for scalpers and miners to snatch up all the stock.

I think Obsidian is running around 6 different projects now. If that deal ever does happen, it’s probably off the table until some manpower frees up.

Basically Adam Badowski’s response: