• Hey everyone, staff have documented a list of banned content and subject matter that we feel are not consistent with site values, and don't make sense to host discussion of on Famiboards. This list (and the relevant reasoning per item) is viewable here.

Discussion Upgrade vs Next Gen: How to tell we have a Switch 2?

Shawndroid

Shawndroid

Cappy
Pronouns
He/him
When will we know if we have a new generation Nintendo console?

I'm a console boy. I don't like handheld games. I don't like handheld form factor. The Switch works very well as a hybrid console because I feel like I get my TV console games (Breath of the Wild on the big screen, for example). I can understand how people feel it's a portable system: it is one. With many games with quick game play session and easy on the battery games. Like Sushi Strikers or whatever. I have a PC gamer friend who definitely sees it as a portable console, and is weirded out I love things new to TV consoles like sleep and instant-on, no loading times. He's like, the DS had that. I'm like, but I don't use portables. And he says it is.

Now, the thing with portables, is they have constant upgrades. Gameboy, Gameboy Color, DS, DSi, 3DS... New 3DS? Or was it not? I don't know.

There is a lot of discussion over the last 2 years about the Switch Pro vs Switch 2. How will we know when we have a new, different console? I assume that in either case, we will work with Nvidia chips for a hybrid console. I think it would silly to move away from that.

Would it be if new games do not work on the old system? With dynamic resolution and other tricks, it's possible to release one game that works on both systems, but plays much better on the new one. Would that be considered a mid-generation upgrade?

Would it have to lose compatibility with current games?

Would it be based on how much of a leap the specs are?
 
I’m a bit confused on the angle some of the op is going with here or where the point of confusion is , however almost any differences between a midgen refresh and a “next gen console “ is semantic and based on what it gets marketed as and what metrics hardcore fans who care about this stuff want to label things as such .
 
It'll be really obvious when Nintendo announces it, in the same way that the DSi, n3DS and Switch OLED clearly weren't the "next gen" when they came around.

Nintendo going for some half step where there could be any real confusion on the matter is incredibly unlikely.
 
0
To a degree, this is kind of a semantic debate. That said, the most important factor is probably whether or not the system gets its own distinct generation, which is not something that we'll be able to see from launch. Specifically, the system needs to significantly outlive its predecessor.

Personally, though, there is a threshold beyond which a system is kind of too different to reasonably call it a revision, and Dane is well past that bar based on rumors.
 
0
Skittzo said:
There is no credible rumor that had stated such.
Click to expand...
Maybe I am perceiving this wrong but Nate said that it is not a pro model, So I am going off that

famiboards.com

Nintendo General Discussion |ST Oct. 2021|

From what I read Nate no longer supports the theory that the 4K Nintendo Switch is a revision of the current console but rather a successor. Wouldn't this be something like what happened with the DS and DSI? I honestly forgot about the Dsi, But I think both the DSi and New 3ds were just souped...
famiboards.com famiboards.com
 
I believe this is gonna be a situation where there's no way we can ascertain anything without Nintendo actually announcing the product. Once it's announced, we'll know what it is.
 
0
lemonfresh said:
Maybe I am perceiving this wrong but Nate said that it is not a pro model, So I am going off that

famiboards.com

Nintendo General Discussion |ST Oct. 2021|

From what I read Nate no longer supports the theory that the 4K Nintendo Switch is a revision of the current console but rather a successor. Wouldn't this be something like what happened with the DS and DSI? I honestly forgot about the Dsi, But I think both the DSi and New 3ds were just souped...
famiboards.com famiboards.com
Click to expand...
This is pretty damning, wow. "Middle of its life cycle" my furry ass

Glio said:
I don't know why people pretend right now that generations are ambiguous. It will be evident.
Click to expand...
Yep. If Nintendo's flagship games are exclusive to it, it's a successor. If they're exclusive eventually, then it's a successor that had a soft launch. If it is never the primary platform for Nintendo exclusives, it was a Pro.
 
Raccoon said:
This is pretty damning, wow. "Middle of its life cycle" my furry ass


Yep. If Nintendo's flagship games are exclusive to it, it's a successor. If they're exclusive eventually, then it's a successor that had a soft launch. If it is never the primary platform for Nintendo exclusives, it was a Pro.
Click to expand...
Pro and successor also have different branding, marketing, scope, heck, even controllers
 
0
lemonfresh said:
Maybe I am perceiving this wrong but Nate said that it is not a pro model, So I am going off that

famiboards.com

Nintendo General Discussion |ST Oct. 2021|

From what I read Nate no longer supports the theory that the 4K Nintendo Switch is a revision of the current console but rather a successor. Wouldn't this be something like what happened with the DS and DSI? I honestly forgot about the Dsi, But I think both the DSi and New 3ds were just souped...
famiboards.com famiboards.com
Click to expand...
If you actually read his post he doesn't say it's a successor either. He's literally saying (and has repeated it elsewhere many times) that currently nobody knows how Nintendo will market it. It's up to them whether it's a successor or whatever else.
 
Skittzo said:
If you actually read his post he doesn't say it's a successor either. He's literally saying (and has repeated it elsewhere many times) that currently nobody knows how Nintendo will market it. It's up to them whether it's a successor or whatever else.
Click to expand...
Yea i very literally remember the context of these statements being that the semantics of whether it’s a successor or mid gen refresh in his opinion is meaningless right now and bogs down the discussion which could literally just be about the fact new hardware is coming . but here we are once again.
 
Maybe the decision at Nintendo isn’t even made. Remember when they said the DS was going to be a third pillar? How did that go for GBA? They were just leaving the door open in case it didn’t work out.

Of course the situation with a Switch Pro or successor is different, but maybe they’ll wait and see the response to it before they decide to make it the successor and have all the new games be exclusive to it.

Or maybe their plan is set and hasn’t leaked yet.
 
0
You know when it is the successor when it gets the Pokemon games and the base model does not anymore.

in the modern times.

(I'm being a bit facetious)
 
They'll never cut Switch's life so short when it's still successful than ever. Switch still hasn't had that "full revision" model similar to DSi and New 3DS and with that many sold without one, it'll definitely get one.

What possible is, this "full revision" will be more than what DSi and New 3DS were as reports (including Nate's) say there will be some third party exclusives. This could be "same system for Nintendo, successor for third parties" kind of deal.
 
lemonfresh said:
Maybe I am perceiving this wrong but Nate said that it is not a pro model, So I am going off that

famiboards.com

Nintendo General Discussion |ST Oct. 2021|

From what I read Nate no longer supports the theory that the 4K Nintendo Switch is a revision of the current console but rather a successor. Wouldn't this be something like what happened with the DS and DSI? I honestly forgot about the Dsi, But I think both the DSi and New 3ds were just souped...
famiboards.com famiboards.com
Click to expand...

The context there is that Nate got really frustrated sevwral weeks back with a lot of the discourse seemingly revolving around semantics of a label. He doesnt want to argue or discuss about the labelling.

In other words, a lot of folks were getting worked up with the labelling of "Pro" vs "2" but his point was (paraphrasing) "who cares, thats for marketing dept to decide; the concrete pt based on my sources is that it will be more powerful, with DLSS-powered 4K capability".

As such he resolved to just refer to it as simply "Switch 4k" in future discussions and reports.

===

To OP's question, once Nintendo releases games that are either exclusive or substantially improved performance-wise on a new device, thats my cue to buy.

...Or rather, fruitlessly muck about Wario64's twitter hoping to catch a live preorder link before it dies in 10 secs...
 
Raccoon said:
This is pretty damning, wow. "Middle of its life cycle" my furry ass
Click to expand...

Yea, Furukawa confirmed just a couple of weeks ago Nintendo still sees the Switch at the mid point of its lifecycle after 5 years.

There is no way Nintendo will treat whatever new model they announce next year as “a successor” to the Switch. It will be treated as and used as a mid gen upgrade lengthener.

MetalLord said:
When new first party releases are not available for the 2017 switch
Click to expand...

The Pokémon/Zelda/Wario land games on the Game Boy Color didn’t necessarily make it a successor to the gameboy.

Anyhoo, 99% of Nintendo published games in 2025 will still work on the OLED Switch…and will just be enhanced on the 4K Switch. So, it won’t be treated as a successor console.
 
Skittzo said:
How exactly is that damning? Nate is just saying he has no idea how it's going to be marketed.
Click to expand...
I suppose I misinterpeted it. I took "Pro is the wrong word to use" as commentary on the device, rather than commentary on his own coverage of it. Carry on then
 
0
Lord Azrael said:
If the next hardware gets all of Nintendo's support and the current Switch can't play its games then it's a new console. Simple
Click to expand...
Yeah, this is where I draw the line too. I think it'll be pretty qualitatively clear when a new platform is the focus from Nintendo. When Mario Kart isn't coming to the Switch 1, we'll know the Switch 2 is here
 
Lord Azrael said:
If the next hardware gets all of Nintendo's support and the current Switch can't play its games then it's a new console. Simple
Click to expand...
I don't think many would disagree with this. The question though is, will it get Nintendo games the current Switch can't play on day one? Year one?

If not, but it gets those eventually, say year 3, then what is it then?
 
Skittzo said:
I don't think many would disagree with this. The question though is, will it get Nintendo games the current Switch can't play on day one? Year one?

If not, but it gets those eventually, say year 3, then what is it then?
Click to expand...
this is gonna sound like me being cheeky, but genuinely it'll be a pro until it then becomes the succ
 
Raccoon said:
this is gonna sound like me being cheeky, but genuinely it'll be a pro until it then becomes the succ
Click to expand...
That's fair.

Personally in my mind the only two options being "pro" or "succ" is reductive, and considering generations are more or less meaningless constructs it'll be something in between those two.
 
Skittzo said:
That's fair.

Personally in my mind the only two options being "pro" or "succ" is reductive, and considering generations are more or less meaningless constructs it'll be something in between those two.
Click to expand...
I feel that, if the new hardware is as substantial as is rumored, next year will be a pivotal moment for Nintendo. If they do not position it as a successor, they functionally will not be able to create one at any point in the near future.

The rumored hardware represents: a new and highly marketable target resolution; an entirely new rendering pipeline with a massive and highly marketable new feature in DLSS; and, on the development side, the introduction of compatibility layers for software interoperability.

If that isn't the Switch 2, what will be? Nothing in the next 5 years could make that clear of a jump. The rumored hardware can only be reconciled as the start of a new period of technical iteration. For us to get a clearly delineated successor any time soon after a non-successor Dane, it would have to be unrecognizable as a Nintendo Switch in terms of its primary feature.

While the dissolution of the construct of generations as we understand them today is a potential outcome of the coming year, it does not preclude this conversation. Even if generations end up being unimportant to this device, this device is critically important to the concept of generations.
 
Skittzo said:
That's fair.

Personally in my mind the only two options being "pro" or "succ" is reductive, and considering generations are more or less meaningless constructs it'll be something in between those two.
Click to expand...
Yeah if that happens, then at that point it may as well be something entirely new. Neither a pro nor a succ, but a new iteration emulating the smartphone model.
 
0
Wow. So two notes to start with. First, apparently there a lot of discussions about rumoured hardware I was unaware of. And second, some of you are real jerks. I lean away from rumours and lean in to theory. This was a theory discussion and not me commenting on the rumours. I don't know if 'Dane' is a rumour, or a joke, or what.

But as it went on I see mostly great comments that I think are very worthwhile, with only a few comments bewildering to someone who doesn't follow speculation and rumour.

The issue for me isn't exclusivity. Zelda TP & BotW were both non-exclusive. But you have to buy them separately. For me, buying one and playing on both would be a key criterion. And not 'buy it here, get it free there' but a single download from the server that works on both devices that you only have to purchase once.

I started to think about the early comments about 'whatever Nintendo markets it as' by which they mean promote it as. I was thinking that is a good point. But later realized this is really in reference to discussions about rumours I was unaware of. (I know of earlier rumours about DLSS or whatever 4K upscaling from a year ago.)

uncleoptimus said:
To OP's question, once Nintendo releases games that are either exclusive or substantially improved performance-wise on a new device, thats my cue to buy.
Click to expand...

This is good, and in fact also side steps the generation's question. Certainly this will define my life choices.

But given all the discussion that has been apparently happening in speculation, rumour and leak threads, and the great comments about the theory on generations, I see this won't be easy to resolve. Honestly, I think console generations is something that makes consoles just work better, and it does concern me.
 
Console generations will still be a thing but there just won't be a hard start/stop point anymore. At some point Nintendo will have to stop making switch games because Dane is far too powerful and any advancement in game development means either the game gets held back by the switch, or the switch runs it like absolute doo doo.
 
0
It’ll be announced further out from release compared to a revision, which has a shorter announcement to release.
 
0
Shawndroid said:
This is good, and in fact also side steps the generation's question. Certainly this will define my life choices.

But given all the discussion that has been apparently happening in speculation, rumour and leak threads, and the great comments about the theory on generations, I see this won't be easy to resolve. Honestly, I think console generations is something that makes consoles just work better, and it does concern me.
Click to expand...

I totally get it, since that is how consoles have always been portrayed. It makes evaluation and discussion "tidier".

That said, the new paradigm in multi-generational software platforms was set in motion by Apple w/ the iPhone, and Satoru Iwata was paying attention when he was hammering out his company's future course.

This is good for us customers, if it plays out this way, longer software support windows for a given device and smooth transition to the "next step up" hardware device. Everything we are familiar with and enjoyed up to that point just working! Microsoft is on this route for sure, although in a different way since their "ultimate evolution" is Xbox-as-a-service where all you love is accessible anywhere you want.
 
0
Shawndroid said:
Wow. So two notes to start with. First, apparently there a lot of discussions about rumoured hardware I was unaware of. And second, some of you are real jerks. I lean away from rumours and lean in to theory. This was a theory discussion and not me commenting on the rumours. I don't know if 'Dane' is a rumour, or a joke, or what.
Click to expand...
I went back through this thread and looked, but I'm not sure where people are being "real jerks" -- and that's with the acknowledgement that pro-vs-successor talk can really bring out that side in people. Is it that people are discussing rumors in relation to the topic at hand, that they're shoving rumors into your theory thread?

Rumors and theory can coexist. One can direct or propel discussion of the other, and another can explain or make sense of elements of the first. To mention rumors doesn't discredit the idea of theory.

For instance, here
Shawndroid said:
I started to think about the early comments about 'whatever Nintendo markets it as' by which they mean promote it as. I was thinking that is a good point. But later realized this is really in reference to discussions about rumours I was unaware of.
Click to expand...
it sounds as though you thought these comments were good up until the point you realized they seemed to refer to rumors. However, whether these comments came about, rationalized because of rumor discussion, doesn't change how they apply in theory, and generally don't even appear to reference rumors themselves:
Tangerine_Cookie said:
It will be based on marketing, basically. If it's marketed as a switch 2, it's one.
Click to expand...
Pandora said:
I’m a bit confused on the angle some of the op is going with here or where the point of confusion is , however almost any differences between a midgen refresh and a “next gen console “ is semantic and based on what it gets marketed as and what metrics hardcore fans who care about this stuff want to label things as such .
Click to expand...

And the majority of the thread seems to not rely on rumors, perhaps using them as example or illustration or in simply not mentioning them at all. Those instances where rumors are mentioned usually contextualize the statements in some way. And then there are those, as noted above, that don't mention or rely on rumors, and in fact might not be themselves related to such, but cover some of the same ground of those discussions through the interwoven nature of the subjects.

Regardless, it doesn't seem baffling or uncouth that people would mention rumors that have previously fed this exact same pro-vs-successor discussion, especially given the discussion -- often stemming from or related to the rumors -- was mentioned in the first post, with no mention that there is to be no rumor discussion:
Shawndroid said:
There is a lot of discussion over the last 2 years about the Switch Pro vs Switch 2. How will we know when we have a new, different console?
Click to expand...
In any case, discussion about rumors and specifically how they might play out in a pro-vs-successor context has come into a great many threads over time. It's not surprising this would show up in a thread actually about the pro-vs-successor debate.

This probably didn't warrant such a long response, but I'm curious. Am I getting the wrong reading on this?

(PostScript: Dane is the reported codename for the chip indicated to be used in Nintendo's upcoming hardware)

It's an interesting question that I suspect doesn't have a definite answer. Game Boy Color is grouped by Nintendo in with Game Boy, but it also has games of its own; disagreement and argumentation regarding where GBC fits into things runs rampant to this day.

I do expect that, for whatever exclusives it might get from the start, a large selection of Nintendo games for the next hardware will be Switch games with improvements. Eventually, I figure, it will transition to a more equal distribution of games for both and then to primarily games for just the new hardware (though some would likely still be available for the current Switch, if there's no reason they couldn't work on it).
And what do we have then?

Shawndroid said:
The issue for me isn't exclusivity. Zelda TP & BotW were both non-exclusive. But you have to buy them separately. For me, buying one and playing on both would be a key criterion. And not 'buy it here, get it free there' but a single download from the server that works on both devices that you only have to purchase once.
Click to expand...
Even something like this, I don't see having to remain the same. There's no reason cartridges from the Switch absolutely could not work with a successor, with frameworks in place to unlock the improvements afforded the newer hardware, and as such there's nothing saying we absolutely need two separate versions sold; in fact, only selling the one version opens up supply lines and space on retail shelves for more.

As for big games being exclusive to a successor, we already have a number of those announced for the current Switch, games we might have expected to be released only for a successor (Splatoon 3, for example). With these already releasing, new ones are probably a ways out.
If new hardware isn't able to, or simply doesn't for whatever reason, have these exclusively at the start, but then receives exclusive followups later, was it not originally a successor but then became one?


My Tulpa said:
Yea, Furukawa confirmed just a couple of weeks ago Nintendo still sees the Switch at the mid point of its lifecycle after 5 years.

There is no way Nintendo will treat whatever new model they announce next year as “a successor” to the Switch. It will be treated as and used as a mid gen upgrade lengthener.
Click to expand...
To be fair, this doesn't necessarily mean the Switch is only at the exact midpoint of its life as the flagship console, with no successor in sight, just that it's expected to keep selling. Its life cycle doesn't have to, and perhaps outright shouldn't, end as soon as a successor is released. Nintendo is no longer trying to support two disparate product lines and also move into two new successors.
A successor could appear in the next couple years without turning that statement into an outright lie.
 
Supreme Overlord said:
If new hardware isn't able to, or simply doesn't for whatever reason, have these exclusively at the start, but then receives exclusive followups later, was it not originally a successor but then became one?
Click to expand...
it'd be more of a case of the software/hardware landscape changing than anything else. if you can, there's no reason not to include old systems.
 
Raccoon said:
If Nintendo's flagship games are exclusive to it, it's a successor. If they're exclusive eventually, then it's a successor that had a soft launch. If it is never the primary platform for Nintendo exclusives, it was a Pro.
Click to expand...

This is the answer to OP's question
 
0
9-Volt said:
They'll never cut Switch's life so short when it's still successful than ever. Switch still hasn't had that "full revision" model similar to DSi and New 3DS and with that many sold without one, it'll definitely get one.
Click to expand...
3 words: Game. Boy. Advance.
Not even major success prevents a successor.

-----

I actually partly answered this question elsewhere, which expands on the succinct explanation by @Raccoon, so I'm going to copy and paste it here.

A simple way to define things is that a "successor" is both:
  • Technically capable well beyond what was previously possible on prior hardware, whether it be due to:
    • major advances in computational power
    • vastly altered input methods (Wiimote, Gamepad, analog sticks, etc.)
    • the advent of unprecedented additions in capability (example: built-in network functionality, internal storage, etc.)
    • all of the above
  • The eventual primary focus of both internal and external development in its time period
Using this method, PS4 Pro is not a successor, neither is Switch OLED, nor is New 3DS, nor is Game Boy Color, because they each only tick 1 of those 2 items.
Both of these boxes must be ticked to qualify as a "successor". If Nintendo releases hardware that ticks both of these boxes, congratulations, you can 99% expect them to count its hardware and software sales separately from other hardware/software on financial releases, which is the only definitive way to tell if it is successor hardware.
 
Terrell said:
3 words: Game. Boy. Advance.
Not even major success prevents a successor.
Click to expand...
Context is important there, though. GBA shipments continued for 3 years after the DS launched. In Japan, software support from Nintendo continued into 2006. GBA had another revision in 2005, the year after DS first launched. And, ultimately, DS happened when it did because market conditions (struggles in the home console sector but more pressingly the arrival of the PSP) demanded a change in course for the company. And, additionally, Nintendo hedged their bets with DS because they weren't sure if it would succeed.

What pressure is there on Nintendo to move on from Switch, in the current context?

Edit - I think my question here seems a little reductive, but it's meant to be well intentioned and open ended. It's easy, with the benefit of hindsight, to see why GBA and DS played out the way it did.

Much more difficult to establish what Nintendo do now, and whether or not it will succeed.
 
Last edited:
MisterSpo said:
What pressure is there on Nintendo to move on from Switch, in the current context?
Click to expand...
Developer needs, mostly, both internally and externally.

UE5 will be supported for Switch, but may be missing many of its most appealing features, like support for Lumen and Nanite tools, which the absence of would cause major porting hurdles.
In addition to that, maybe 3rd-party devs don't want to make "impossible" ports anymore?

And who knows what constraints Nintendo's internal teams are running up against.
By March 2023, Switch will be 6 years old, and Switch's CPU and GPU will be even older by about a year or two. You eventually have to turn the page.
 
Terrell said:
Developer needs, mostly, both internally and externally.

UE5 will be supported for Switch, but may be missing many of its most appealing features, like support for Lumen and Nanite tools, which the absence of would cause major porting hurdles.
In addition to that, maybe 3rd-party devs don't want to make "impossible" ports anymore?

And who knows what constraints Nintendo's internal teams are running up against.
By March 2023, Switch will be 6 years old, and Switch's CPU and GPU will be even older by about a year or two. You eventually have to turn the page.
Click to expand...
I think that's one context, yes, certainly. I'm too tired to add more detail but I was also thinking about their wider plans for the business and the need to keep the Switch running hot, given it's something like 97% of their revenue.
 
MisterSpo said:
I think that's one context, yes, certainly. I'm too tired to add more detail but I was also thinking about their wider plans for the business and the need to keep the Switch running hot, given it's something like 97% of their revenue.
Click to expand...
I've floated the idea of price drops on Switch hardware and software for budget-constrained consumers and maybe a sub-$100 TV-only model for emerging markets with a really low median wage to keep selling Switch and its software well into 2035, but that's just one idea.
 
0
MisterSpo said:
I think that's one context, yes, certainly. I'm too tired to add more detail but I was also thinking about their wider plans for the business and the need to keep the Switch running hot, given it's something like 97% of their revenue.
Click to expand...
development realities is going to be the biggest page turner. at some point, making ports just because people still buy switches is gonna impact those versions. and then there will be the issue of keeping old production lines open. sure the costs would probably be minimized, but any dollar spent there is better spent on newer hardware
 
0
ILikeFeet said:
it'd be more of a case of the software/hardware landscape changing than anything else. if you can, there's no reason not to include old systems.
Click to expand...
I agree with this, and actually expect a successor would share much of its library with the current Switch at the start, steering more exclusive as it continues but still allowing new releases for the older system when it makes sense.
But with a context of binary pro-vs-successor discussion, where people will want to know right away what the console is, it muddies that a bit.
Changing landscapes don't always fit neatly into current debates, which I guess is kind of the point.
 
0
You must log in or register to reply here.


Back
Top Bottom