If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.Nintendo's strategy of neglecting hardware has made a lot of games unplayable on the Switch, and surely limited what they can do with their own IP.
Why would they give you software for free when they can sell it to you as a 'remaster' at 4K? It makes more sense that they sell it on the eShop at the exact same price, but offer it at a discount to previous owners as a kind of DLC: 4K texture pack (or something)Or, they simply make it so that starting an OG Switch game off the cartridge does a download/install of the recompiled New Switch game from the eStore, and toggle a bit that says "this game requires the cartridge to be in the slot to start".
Bt audio support has been added awhile ago.Just like most people here, I'm all for an evolution of the Switch rather than some other gamble by Nintendo. Non-drifting controllers, BT audio support, backwards compatibility and an adequate spec update ("good enough" over "high end", like the original switch) would be more than enough to make it a first-day buy for me.
Nah. I'll wait for the Switch 64.
There's zero chance I would buy into it without physical cartridge and digital backwards compatibility. I have 3 kids and we all have Switches (I have an OLED that we dock on the TV for multiplayer games, and they all have Switch Lites). We buy all the couch co-op style games digitally on my Switch for use on the TV, but have gotten into the habit of buying anything single-player in physical media so they can trade around games (the physical games also go on sale fairly often). Without backwards compatibility, there isn't a massive compelling reason not to buy a Steam Deck or clone next time around and just keep the old Switches around to play the old games until they die.Anything other than full Switch compatibility would be an insane own-goal, even for Nintendo.
And with a new Slip 'N Slide coming out next year, why would anyone want to buy the Apple Vision Pro?Apple's Vision Pro coming out next year, why would anyone want to buy a Switch?
Based on history, that software would have to be written by Nvidia. Nintendo has lost engineering chops, and I am not sure they have the source available. See: Nintendo lifting publicly available emulators for their retro devices. And they BUILT the original hardware.Reading the previous Ars article on the subject says it isn’t true. The Switch included a driver stack with every game so back compatibility requires an emulator or at least a GPU driver that presents the HW as if it were the same as found in the Switch.
It’s certainly not impossible, it’s just not obviously simple. For example Rosetta was Apple’s solution for backwards compatible software. Rather than an emulator it was a binary translator that more or less recompiled x86 to ARM. A similar shim would map GPU code from one architecture to another without letting the Switch game know the new GPU exists.
Nintendo has never used a publicly available emulators that was Sony with the Playstation Classic.Based on history, that software would have to be written by Nvidia. Nintendo has lost engineering chops, and I am not sure they have the source available. See: Nintendo lifting publicly available emulators for their retro devices. And they BUILT the original hardware.
This is exactly where I landed. Watching Slay the Spire, which has the graphical richness of a midaughts Flash game, struggle to show decks or animations is not super great. In that case I'm willing to blame poor optimization - it's not a huge operation - and deal, but watching Mario Golf, Mario XCOM, and Breath of the Wild chug is all on the hardware.* The real low point was watching it struggle with Star Wars: Episode I Racer.I don't generally care about backwards compatibility, but there are a few switch games I would like to play on newer hardware due to FPS dips. Age of Calamity is unplayable in co-op mode, hoping to revisit it with my kids on the next system. Would love some auto-upscaling for Nintendo's games as well since several of them I already bought twice on Wii U and Switch.
Super Switch Cube 64 U!one Super Switch please and thanks
No one is forcing you to buy Nintendo games bud...I already moved to the next switch console - the Steamdeck. Great library of games, fully backwards compatible with a long history of PC games. Runs Nintendo switch games much better than the official hardware. I've invested a lot of money into the Nintendo switch digital library - if it does not transfer to the new hardware I'll be skipping this like I did with the wiiU.
I'm happy to buy Nintendo games I dont already own - make new software sales the focus instead of double and triple dipping on the same software. I believe in supporting developers and paying for things I use. I already dislike that you don't really own games anymore - the games are not on the cartridge with patching that substantially changes the experience or it was never fully loaded on the cartridge in the first place.
I want to play Tears of the Kingdom officially on better hardware, but why should I have to buy it twice to do that? I dont have to buy PC games over and over when a new graphics card comes out.
Nintendo is a business, they can attempt to make me restart from zero on my Nintendo game library because profits. As a consumer I can also decide that I am not getting value from my money and go to their competition.
Not sure why this is being downvoted, it seems to be the consensus among everyone I know as well.If they're planning to launch next year then third parties had better have at least preview dev hardware.
You do not want a repeat of the Wii U fiasco, where the console launched absolutely broken (remember the 12+ hour update, if you were lucky, when you plugged in your new console?) and 3rd party support was terrible because they didn't give it nearly enough time (we gotta get it out this Thanksgiving no matter the cost! Well, the cost was that your console was broken and did terribly, though they did eventually fix things).
That they're not targeting a 2023 Thanksgiving launch (thanks in part to the Switch still doing fine) suggests they learned their lesson.
Amazing how you Apple haters find a way to shitpost about Apple on an unrelated topic.Apple's Vision Pro coming out next year, why would anyone want to buy a Switch?
I can deal with poor optimization in some titles. Breath of the Wild plays just fine on Switch. Hob and Risk of Rain 2 do not play very well however.This is exactly where I landed. Watching Slay the Spire, which has the graphical richness of a midaughts Flash game, struggle to show decks or animations is not super great. In that case I'm willing to blame poor optimization - it's not a huge operation - and deal, but watching Mario Golf, Mario XCOM, and Breath of the Wild chug is all on the hardware.* The real low point was watching it struggle with Star Wars: Episode I Racer.
*And the demands made of it, of course, which might be considered an opportunity for optimization, but you know what I mean.
Swiitch.If going in order, the next one would be the Swii?
Nah the WiiU suffered from poor marketing but there was nothing really wrong with it beyond the fact that it was a mild upgrade to the Wii and its unique selling point (the giant controller with integrated touchscreen) was a little bit naff. It still could do everything the Wii did, a little bit better. The Switch is almost the same idea, just made self-contained, and that turned out to be a huge difference.Not sure why this is being downvoted, it seems to be the consensus among everyone I know as well.
My kid recently asked what the best Nintendo console was, and I was like “that’s tough, the NES brought quality games into the home, the SNES expanded it with some of the all time greatest titles, the N64 had insane graphics, GameCube was a multiplayer monster with Smash, Wii revolutionized input and game design, Switch made Hybrid work…. It’s hard to pick a best one my guy, even if we exclude the handhelds.“
So he asks “ok we’ll what’s the worst” and immediately the answer was “Wii U”.
I do think they learned the lesson though, and nothing would make me happier than picking up a new SwitchCube that brings more of what works with that Nintendo attention to detail.
That would indeed be better.Nintendo's digital family model is already pretty greedy, they really ought to at least let you share out your library with your family with the Switch Online subscription. Google is a lot better about this and if I buy a game on the Play Store I can almost always give my family members simultaneous access to it.
The graphics libraries are, would you believe it, statically linked to the game executable. They've built a cross for their own back.
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WH03ht2fVqI
I'm 100% blaming the StS port devs on that. The iOS port is terrible, seemingly locked to 30fps (even though I was playing it on a M1 iPad) and with all kinds of terrible interface decisions. That it wouldn't run well on the Switch doesn't surprise me in the least.This is exactly where I landed. Watching Slay the Spire, which has the graphical richness of a midaughts Flash game, struggle to show decks or animations is not super great. In that case I'm willing to blame poor optimization - it's not a huge operation - and deal, but watching Mario Golf, Mario XCOM, and Breath of the Wild chug is all on the hardware.* The real low point was watching it struggle with Star Wars: Episode I Racer.
*And the demands made of it, of course, which might be considered an opportunity for optimization, but you know what I mean.
I remembered it being an issue for so long I just assumed it still was. Thank you for the correction!Bt audio support has been added awhile ago.
As long as you got low latency sbc bt headphones, it is functional.
I'd argue the opposite. By releasing next year, they could include LoZ:ToK as a release title and tout (hopefully) the better performance etc.Yeah, any move which would obsolete Legend of Zelda: Tears of the Kingdom in barely a year's time would be a bad move.
Of course, it would also be very Nintendo to release a "Super" version that's backward compatible, can play cartridges, etc. at a hefty upcharge over a non-backward-compatible base model.
The 2 compete in similar but different markets. Whilst there is crossover, you'll probably find most are willing to buy both.It's called a Steamdeck.
The hardware of the Switch is far from modest. It's has Midrange smartphone from ~2020 performance specs. Which seems quite silly as for a console to connect to a TV. Just feely stupid to put a 10$ soc in such a system.As someone who keeps their Switch docked to the TV 99% of the time, all I'd really want in Switch 2 is more, faster storage. Internal SSDs can be orders of magnitude snappier than SD cards so it's best to keep games on the internal storage but at 32 GB, you just can't keep much there.
Any upgrades to GPU, CPU, or RAM as well as possibly adding dedicated ML circuits is just gravy. Nintendo's strategy of focusing on gameplay instead of visual fidelity has proven modest hardware is just fine.
Spot on, a giant nothing-burger of an article masquerading as journalism.These reports really underscore how embarrassing the clout chasing leak culture has beccome. The next Switch might have an LCD screen, or it might not. It might be a hybrid, or it might not. It might have backwards compatibility, or it might not, etc.
On top of "new switch model coming this year" rumours that have been prevalent literally since 2018, now we have people riding the fences in every direction possible so they can claim they were right no matter what the next device looks like.
Haven't the past handful of Zelda title's launched on the current and "next" hardware,? I'm honestly surprised Switch2 wasn't to coincide with TotK...Yeah, any move which would obsolete Legend of Zelda: Tears of the Kingdom in barely a year's time would be a bad move.
Of course, it would also be very Nintendo to release a "Super" version that's backward compatible, can play cartridges, etc. at a hefty upcharge over a non-backward-compatible base model.