I can't see a situation in which Nintendo would allow developers to release software that did not run on a base Switch only two years after release.
Well, it could be like a mid-cycle revision like the 1X and Pro were. They both still run the same games but much better. Switch could benefit from that.
Based on commentary over the last year, it really seems like the biggest factor by far is the cost of larger game cards. Regardless of system power, $15+ for a 32GB card is untenable.
Well, if Nintendo does one thing well, it is to sell at Full price. Nintendo customers usually are tuned to buy at full prices of 299$ or 60$. So, a 399$ revision won't be the worst thing ever if the base Switch drops to 249$.
Ehh, I don't know, there's always one more step we can imagine that might make things much better. Back in the Wii days it was "It's not just that it's underpowered, but if only it wasn't so dissimilar to the other machines ports would be viable", and Switch is closer to its competition than that imaginary machine would've been.
I feel Switch has shown enough in its first 18 months that it is here to stay and 3rd parties will want to take advantage of it. Imagine COD selling at 60$ for 6-8 months on Switch whereas selling at half the price on Xbox or PS. There is a big opportunity there since there are more units in customer hands. So, 3rd parties will definitely bring their AAA games if the Switch was 30-40% more powerful in my opinion.
I feel like switch is a different case from the wii for a couple of reasons. I actually expect a big increase of 3rd party support next year. Call of duty at least
I would take Doom and Wolfenstein as the performance metrics for COD on Switch, it does run reasonably after all the patches but 60 fps is very hard, so a more powerful Switch would be beneficial if it can do 720p at 60 fps.