• 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.
  • Do you have audio editing experience and want to help out with the Famiboards Discussion Club Podcast? If so, we're looking for help and would love to have you on the team! Just let us know in the Podcast Thread if you are interested!

Pre-Release Backward compatibility won a recent IGN poll for most requested/demanded feature on Switch 2. Do you agree?

What do You Most Want From Nintendo's Switch Successor?

  • Keep that hybrid design

  • Give me 4K

  • Better be backwards compatible

  • Virtual reality

  • Something else...

Results are only viewable after voting.
Hero of Hyrule

Hero of Hyrule

Frieren the Slayer
Pronouns
He/Him
image.png


An IGN poll embedded in their article about analysts and developers discussing the next generation Switch got nearly 10,000 votes, and the one thing that people want in the Switch 2 more than any other in the Switch 2 is backward compatibility, well ahead of even the hybrid design.

It makes sense! The Switch has developed an impressive library of ~10,000 games spanning all generations, across multiple publishers and IP, several of which had never been on a Nintendo system before. The Switch also has an incredibly high digital attach ratio, plus the console is coming in an era where every other electronic device - not just the other two consoles, but also smartphones, tablets, computers, ereaders, music players, watches, TV boxes - all support backward compatibility and continuity with purchases of new hardware. The expectation here is - almost should be - the default.

So my question: do you agree with the emphasis being placed on BC here? Would it make or break the bank for you?
 
0
I'd take a hybrid console with no backwards compatibility over a console that only goes on the TV but can play Switch games too.

It has to be hybrid for me. Absolute must.
 
I will be actively angry if the next Nintendo console is not backwards compatible. To the point that I probably would not buy one and would just get a Steam Deck instead.
 
Hybrid form factor is extremely important but if Nintendo orphans my library on the Switch, then my investment in their ecosystem will drop to almost 0 (nothing except their first party games), and probably become all physical.

They cannot afford no BC for the next gen, IMO
 
Need the hybrid design so that Nintendo can stick with one ecosystem easily, but Nintendo skipping out on backwards compatibility would be the worst self own that they could pull, IMO.
 
Cubs017 said:
I'd take a hybrid console with no backwards compatibility over a console that only goes on the TV but can play Switch games too.

It has to be hybrid for me. Absolute must.
Click to expand...
I cant really see them ever moving away from the Hybrid concept, for a multitude of reasons.

They've combined their handheld and console development teams, it would be a logistical nightmare to seperate them again. Plus, once a gimmick sticks, Nintendo holds on to it with an iron grip. The Switch still has a touch screen (in a more limited capacity, but it's there), and they still try to cram in the occasional motion control. The hybird model is arguably their most successful gimmick ever to the point where it's almost disengenious to even call it a gimmick
 
0
I've been gaming since the early 90s, even started as a Sega kid, but can confidently say the Switch is my favourite console of all time.

Bought it day 1, after almost a decade of only buying Sony-MS consoles (Nintendo lost me after N64, which was my childhood favourite system).

Having said that, if Nintendo's next console is NOT backwards compatible, I'm selling my Switch, all my physical games and accessories and never ever buying anything Nintendo does again. Yes, it's that visceral to me.

On the other hand, if it does have backwards compatibility with Switch 1 games (and it's presumably more powerful) I'm there day 1 and ready to pay up to 500€ for it.
 
I guess hybrid and modern performance are the real most important features, but I just take this for granted in a 'Switch 2'.

BC is the one that could be skipped, so people are most antsy about that one.
 
0
Switch is the first time outside of PC i have a sizable investment in digital releases.
The moment they Annonce no backwards compatibility, my budget for digital only switch games plumets to 0. On PC i can be confident, that 5-10 years from now, there is a way to play my games, even portable. If nintendo does not deliver the same experience, then all of my indie and non physical purchases are PC only going forward. Its that easy.

Also: the hybrid concept is Key.

meaning Hybrid / BC > 4k > rest
 
I wouldn't be that upset if it wasn't backwards compatible, because I would just have the original Switch next to the new Switch at all times, like I had my 3DS next to my Switch for the first couple of years it was out. So, yeah, I suppose it has to be a hybrid again. Loved not having to game on my TV.
 
0
Resolution above all else, though I'm expecting close to 4k with dlss when docked and it being hybrid anyway.
 
0
I think the VC issue is already the most challenging thing for Switch 2. Switch OG benefited considerably from all of these games being on a HD handheld for the first time, but they wont benefit from that again.

That said, I think it should be BC. If devs charge a small fee to financially benefit from the games being upgraded, then so be it.
 
0
If they don't have BC I'll never buy a third party game on a Nintendo system again.
 
No joke, if this next console doesn't have backwards compatibility then I'm absolutely done buying third party non-exclusive stuff on their consoles for good.
 
Don't care for hybrid as it's plugged on my TV all the time. The only thing I want is playing my library without problems. I still don't buy third-party on Nintendo console because I still don't trust them in this sense.
 
0
BC is the most important feature for me, as I only buy physical games for the Switch.

There are games I own that I'd like to keep playing on the next Nintendo console without having to buy them again.

I assume that eventually the cartridge slot will be replaced for a different and newer format in 2 more gens, but at least let me know in advance.
 
0
The fami poll and the IGN poll are super similar, percentage-wise. Neat.

I don’t personally need BC. If I had to choose between those poll options, I’d take the hybrid form factor.
 
0
I don't see the hybrid design going anywhere, it will be the defining feature of Nintendo's hardware from here on out. As for BC I think the fears are unfounded since Nintendo has always been pretty good about including BC when applicable and Miyamoto mentioned not too long go how modern architecture made BC easier then ever.

The only reason I voted for BC in the poll was because I never made use of the hybrid nature of the Switch (it has always been a handheld to me), following that 4K would be pointless and I don't care for VR so that leaves BC as the most important feature of those listed.
 
Hybrid is the most important, obviously. If the switch 2 isn't a hybrid, it's going to crater in appeal and the relative sales will also fall off a cliff meaning we get only a fraction of the software in the future because of the reduced sales potential.

People might vote on a meaningless online Poll that BC is more important, but when it comes time actually selling the product, the market will sing a very different tune.

Besides that, my metrics are telling me that it doesn't matter what the IGN audience think.
 
Last edited:
Jahranimo said:
I agree 100% and voted that as well. I didn't vote hybrid because that is pretty much a foregone conclusion while BC is not.
Click to expand...

Backwards compatibility is just as much a completely forgone conclusion as well, and it's downright insane that anyone has deluded themselves in to thinking otherwise.
 
Linkstrikesback said:
Backwards compatibility is just as much a completely forgone conclusion as well, and it's downright insane that anyone has deluded themselves in to thinking otherwise.
Click to expand...

Yes though I'm remaining cautious because this is Nintendo lol. Still waiting for the one silly thing they will do that will be the head scratcher for the Switch 2.
 
It's a nice feature to have, but it's not among my most wanted features.

But I'm not worried, it's going to be BC.
 
0
Out of those options, keeping the hybrid design would be most important for me, with backwards compatibility in second. Luckily, I see both those things definitely being on the cards.
 
0
Hybrid > BC > new gimmick > Wii like motion and pointer controls > OLED > 4K >>>>> AR >>>>>>>>>>> VR, for me.
But I think hybrid and BC is a given, so I hope there will be an interesting new gimmick
 
Last edited:
0
You can justify porting games like Odyssey & BOTW to a new platform, but imagine how long it would take to bring just the major games in the Switch library over based on how long Wii U took. And minor titles like Tokyo Mirage Session or Sushi Striker would likely get left behind in the transition to new hardware. Simple fact is it's not sustainable to hit the reset button every generation at this point, Xbox & Sony likely know this, and I'm sure that's why there was such a push for it this gen compared to last gen. Nintendo if they haven't already thought of that, really need to start thinking in the same vain. I hope we have at least get the highlights of GCN, Wii, DS, & 3DS available at retail again in the not to distant future, and backwards compatibility would really help free up resources to accomplish that.

Hybrid technically would be a higher priority for me sure, but then duel analog and four face buttons would be even more of a must on the next Switch than hybrid. As far as I'm concerned hybrid functionality is a must as long as Nintendo lacks a true home console. and I don't see Nintendo ever going back a duel ecosystem.
 
0
Backwards compatibility. And don't kill the OG Switch eShop!
 
0
We know the system will be stronger, but backwards compatibility isn’t a given so it would make sense to be specifically concerned with that.
 
This will be unpopular, but I'd rather it be a new playstyle gimmick that we haven't seen yet that has games built exclusively around it, even if it needs to sacrifice BC to do it.
 
0
I'd say most of those are guaranteed so I'm personally not really worried here. Like this is a company that handicapped their last system in large part because of BC and generally try to have it in all of their systems when possible. The only one that isn't is VR and that'd be purely for cost reasons
 
Last edited:
0
This might sound extreme, but at this point if its not bc, that would be a major slap in the face
 
0
Wait hybrid is an option? Hybrid is even more assumed guarantee to me than BC is.

BC is important, but if Hybrid is an option than it’s absolutely that. Walking back would be devastating.
 
0
Both hybrid form factor and backwards compatibility are all but guaranteed. But if I had to pick from the poll it would absolutely be the hybrid form factor. It’s the main way I even get to play games nowadays.
 
0
No BC wouldn't be a complete dealbreaker to me but it does mean I'll buy a whole lot less games on Switch 2 or whatever it's called (IE: anything digital or third party would be purchased on PC). I just don't see Nintendo owning themselves that bad so I guess I'll go with 4k docked since I'm expecting hybrid and BC to be a given.
 
Last edited:
Phantom Thief said:
Most people take the existence of the hybrid design as a given.

Most people do not think the same for BC.
Click to expand...
Which is really strange imo.

Edit: given Nintendos history of BC when possible, and given they are working with the worlds biggest gpu company again on the successor. The suggestion that there's some sort of technical insurmountable hurdle for BC is absurd.
 
I'm not concerned that the next Switch is going to be a major departure from the current Switch. Regardless. Handheld or I'm skipping. Always had a Nintendo handheld since the GBC. Haven't had a solely docked since the Gamecube. BIggest appeal to me is playing lying down on a couch/bed, playing in the kitchen. Backwards compatibility, until they say it's not, I'm assuming it will be. If it's not, I'll buy one like 3-5 years from now when the library is filled out with enough Nintendo first parties for me to be comfortable buying it. It'll be expensive. The games don't go down in price much if at all. A lot are worth more. I'd bet print runs continue to get smaller next gen and being a late entrant in the console to be super expensive to play a lot of 3rd party physical games. At least Nintendo usually keeps printing carts so you can get games for like $40-50 sometime after release. But then games are $70 now so it'll probably be in the $50-$60 range a year out from initial release

No BC and I'd buy all third parties going forward on Steam and get an aging PC handheld. Steam Deck will be almost 3 years old end of 2024
 
0
I expect backwards compatibility though it isn’t a dealbreaker for me. I’m keeping my OG Switch with the BootROM vulnerability either way for science and whatnot.

I buy most AAA third party games on PS4 anyway so those aren’t going anywhere. I typically buy indie games on Switch, but I’ve spent less than $10 each on them. Not a big deal if I can’t transfer the purchases as I’ll still be able to play them on the OG Switch, just hugely and stupidly inconvenient.
 
Last edited:
0
Going by IGN metrics surely backward compatibility is key, considering how we are not gonna get any Pikmin 5
 
My Switch has been the console I've bought the most games for out of any, so I'm really hoping so :/
 
0
I expect hybrid design and more power to be hard locks, but I’ve invested so much in the Switch ecosystem Backwards Compatibility is far and away the most important feature to me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


Back
Top Bottom