Future Boy Nemo
Daydream Believer
I agree with you totally ILikeFeet, but we have a term for this, it's called a new console. A new video game hardware device that plays a significant number of exclusive games with more powerful hardware is called a new console. We have many of these releases, like the PS5 for example.
Trouble here is the GBC. Aside from the caveat that it's only 2x more powerful than the Game Boy whereas Drake will punch around 10x over Switch, it's still "more powerful hardware" and "plays a significant number of exclusive games". But Nintendo considers it a revision and bundles its sales figures and place in history with the Game Boy.
If they're afraid of cutting Switch's momentum by releasing Switch 2 too early, but it's too late to stop the train from pulling into the station, then it makes sense to market it as 'We will continue to support other Nintendo Switch models, this is just a new way to experience our great library of games with a few exclusives', then later ramp up those exclusives after a few years when they think the market will be more accepting of a full successor. Start as New 3DS, end up as GBA: that's essentially what happened with the Game Boy Color, though I don't know if it was intentional then.
Revision and successor have definitions, yes, but it doesn't matter if the rest of the world agrees on it if Nintendo never uses either term and just says 'This is the Nintendo Switch Plus, a new model in the Nintendo Switch family of systems,' and follows the life cycle I outlined above. It's all just marketing, and the marketing people don't care about calling a spade a spade, they'll call a spade a 'NEW ULTRA HD GARDENING TROWEL!', then change the color of the rubber handle a year later and sell it as 'Spade 2.0'. Anyone who cares will know, and anyone who doesn't know won't care. The important thing will always be 'Does this new system have enough value in my eyes to be worth the price?' Better performance on old games alone might be enough for some people, while others wait for more exclusives, or a sale below MSRP. I don't think anybody is going to refuse to buy it because they didn't formally call it a successor system and kill the OG Switch's legs for no reason.
Sorry to keep this conversation going, I started writing this post over an hour ago and now it seems a waste to delete it. My personal stance is that TL;DR: Nintendo will position it as whatever they want, but the hardware is too powerful not to end up acting as a succ eventually.
Getting back to technical topics, I'm out of my depth here a bit, but what does everyone think of a hypothetical second TX1 dieshrink, with Nintendo using the power savings to overclock it this time instead of saving on battery life, benefiting games with dynamic res and moving frame-rates?
I remember a couple of pages ago someone mentioned the idea of a Switch TV stick and the idea stuck with me, and a die shrink is the only way I can think of within Nintendo's control to lower the price of the Lite below $200 without losing money. At first I thought the R&D would be too much for a late life revision, but since Drake is likely to be $400 at minimum, a $169 or cheaper Switch Lite or $150 Switch TV USB stick (damn Joycons keeping the price over the magic $100 price point) that can play Switch Sports, Mario, Pokemon, Ring Fit, et cetera could sell several dozen million more Switch systems over several years and become the new PS2 in terms of legs after successor release. Can you imagine that combined with a new line of Nintendo Selects, releasing just in time for the holidays with a big marketing campaign? The increase in software sales would be worth the low hardware margins. But maybe I'm too optimistic about its potential.
small edit: Just realized this is still barely a technical topic, oh well.
Last edited: