But now they have the ability to use the cloud for those impossible ports. It is very likely that the percentage of users with an internet connection good enough to play Cloud Versions is higher than that of users who are going to buy Switch Pro. And more importantly: It's easier.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Switch owners, would you be ok with it if a switch revision had software that could not run on the 2017 model?
- Thread starter Marano
- Start date
Again, there's no either/or here, publishers can and will do both. Hell, maybe even bundled, say for example if you buy RE3 on Switch you can use the cloud version on the OG or Lite models while you could download a native port if you have the New/Pro/Deluxe model? All this does is give publishers more options.
Also I'd cast some doubt on Cloud being easier, or more importantly cheaper, than native ports.
But in the cloud you can make more powerful games than in Switch Pro. You would have to design a Resident Evil 3 Cloud Version and a Resident Evil 3 Pro Version, with different graphic options for both. That's time and money. (Unless you knowingly limit the Cloud Version to Switch Pro specs.)
Never upgrading launch GBA to GBA Lite is worse, frankly. Have you tried playing a launch GBA recently? :S
It's an inevitability and I feel like if the jump is significant enough, people will go for it.
Even with merely a Switch Pro, I see third parties pulling some "only playable on the Pro" stuff anyway.
Even with merely a Switch Pro, I see third parties pulling some "only playable on the Pro" stuff anyway.
Given how Nintendo have been behaving lately, people might want to prepare themselves for anything. I doubt the Switch Pro won't be able to play older games at all, but I would not be expecting any enhancements to make use of the extra features/power.
New 3DS games are a pure example of what your are asking, exclusive New 3DS only games, and SNES games were part of them. Do i want that? No, but who knows the numbers of those ´exclusive games'? Was it a sucess and Nintendo wont hesitate to do it again With The New Switch?
Cloud releases are running off PC hardware in all cases so far afaik (RE7, Control, PSO2, ACO) but the cost there isn't in the customized build/port, it's in infrastructure and maintenance. I doubt that'd change even with native SDX ports.
You keep bringing these cost/resource arguments but frankly they're strawmen. It's pretty much irrelevant as those considerations are entirely contextual based on the game. Something like a native RE7 port wouldn't break the bank if Switch Deluxe specs up enough (say boosting clocks by 50-100%, 6-8GB RAM, etc) and I'd argue there'd be enough interest there to make a port commercially worthwhile even alongside the Cloud release.
Honestly the better argument for Cloud versions is storage rather than visuals imo. That's why PSO2 makes sense as a cloud release only, even though Switch as is could run the game natively in it's sleep.
I'd personally be OK with a GBC-like situation where we have a year or so of transition before they start releasing Pro-only games. But then, I got a launch day Switch and have now had the better part of 4 years of enjoyment out of the machine.
I think Nintendo themselves will probably continue to release cross-compatible games, and that meets the needs of many Switch owners. But we're already seeing the Switch straining to manage acceptable ports of high-spec last-gen games. Third parties are going to have to make a tough decision here as they transition to next-gen: skip the Switch entirely, make big cuts to hit the broader install base, or embrace the hypothetical new model and try to help push it to success.
Ironically, Microsoft might be helping keep Nintendo in the third-party game here. The existence of the Series S means that the next-gen jump won't be quite as huge as it might otherwise be, assuming devs work to accommodate it. The CPU power gap is going to be the biggest factor, the Series S CPU is leaps and bounds beyond the one in last-gen machines, obviously including the stock Switch.
(Curveball thought: Nintendo could push the 2019 Mariko Switch revisions to greater heights if they really wanted to. But I doubt it would be enough to keep them in the next-gen game and they've already shown that they prioritize battery life over power here.)
I think Nintendo themselves will probably continue to release cross-compatible games, and that meets the needs of many Switch owners. But we're already seeing the Switch straining to manage acceptable ports of high-spec last-gen games. Third parties are going to have to make a tough decision here as they transition to next-gen: skip the Switch entirely, make big cuts to hit the broader install base, or embrace the hypothetical new model and try to help push it to success.
Ironically, Microsoft might be helping keep Nintendo in the third-party game here. The existence of the Series S means that the next-gen jump won't be quite as huge as it might otherwise be, assuming devs work to accommodate it. The CPU power gap is going to be the biggest factor, the Series S CPU is leaps and bounds beyond the one in last-gen machines, obviously including the stock Switch.
(Curveball thought: Nintendo could push the 2019 Mariko Switch revisions to greater heights if they really wanted to. But I doubt it would be enough to keep them in the next-gen game and they've already shown that they prioritize battery life over power here.)
Every Nintendo Handheld revision that had improved specs had exclusive games. There wont be a ton of them because leaving 80-90m playerbase out of games doesn't make sense unless that title had no hope of running. But yeah there will be exclusive games likely only from third parties. That doesn't bother me. I don't feel like I missed out on much from the DSi. I had a new 3DS but the exclusive software wasn't a massive deal.
It's more likely most will opt to port games to the base Switch and use the newer model for improved performance of graphics. There were quite a bit of new 3DS enhanced games. Even third parties I expect them to put in more effort porting games over they may not have just due to the section of users who buy the enhanced version being willing to buy games that push hardware more.
Also, a Switch Pro may only be a Mariko chip using full power so you may only be looking at 393Glops -> 650-700Gflops, 1GHz CPU -> 1.8GHz CPU, 4GB RAM -> 6-8GB RAM and like a 30-50% increase in memory bandwidth. This is a notable improvement but it wouldn't be new generation of games notable.
It's more likely most will opt to port games to the base Switch and use the newer model for improved performance of graphics. There were quite a bit of new 3DS enhanced games. Even third parties I expect them to put in more effort porting games over they may not have just due to the section of users who buy the enhanced version being willing to buy games that push hardware more.
Also, a Switch Pro may only be a Mariko chip using full power so you may only be looking at 393Glops -> 650-700Gflops, 1GHz CPU -> 1.8GHz CPU, 4GB RAM -> 6-8GB RAM and like a 30-50% increase in memory bandwidth. This is a notable improvement but it wouldn't be new generation of games notable.
There is a key difference now. The Switch is a cash printing machine. You think Nintendo would alienate this newly acquired massive user base now? It would be too stupid for even Nintendo standards.
Game Boy and DS weren't cash printing machines with massive userbases?
I'm going to buy the switch pro so it wouldn't affect me, but that's not the business decision I would make if I was Nintendo.
Releasing a Switch 2 in 2021 with only 4 years of Switch 1 seems like a good way to piss off buyers.
Have you seen the percentage of sales of PS4 Pro, Xbox X or New 3DS compared to their OG? Only the most dedicated core fanbase does that.
...and publishers considering there's a bunch of 2021 games that have been in development for the entirety of the console's life.
Imagine all the effort Capcom has had with Monster Hunter Rise and suddenly had to compete with games exclusively made for Switch 2 in 2021 that would look a thousand times better. It is pure madness.
It wouldn't impact me personally but I would be upset for those among us who cannot dish out for the newer hardware. I'd be miffed on their behalf.
You have this exact situation with late-gen PS4 games that came out this year (Ghost of Tsushima and Last of Us Part 2) in advance of the PS5. The stop-gap solution would appear to be making sure late-gen games can take advantage of new hardware to push better image quality and better framerates. Particularly when it comes to action games, offering a smooth 60fps on the new hardware is a massive upgrade.
I would assume that Capcom knows about any upcoming revisions and has accounted for them in their plans. They took advantage of the New 3DS' extra hardware to give Monster Hunter 4 Ultimate better textures and a higher framerate, for instance:
Actually, I could see them timing the launch of the game around the hardware so that people are tempted to pick up the game and the hardware together. They did exactly this for MH4U.
I want a Switch 2 with full BC. I don't want a Pro or Plus or New model. I want a sequel. Even better if it can work with previous controllers but I don't want a Pro model that runs what we have better that will then be the target model going forward so new games run even worse on mine.
If it's an improved model, like the New 3DS and some things only work on it but it's not a big enough leap graphically to be a "Switch 2" then I'm not interested.
If it's an improved model, like the New 3DS and some things only work on it but it's not a big enough leap graphically to be a "Switch 2" then I'm not interested.
I am kind of expecting a Switch 2 with backward compatibility here too. I am not really seeing the point of a "Pro" version when they could move on to the next gen (granted, if they released a Pro version, they would surely be able to sell it like hot cakes... so, yeah, they will probably go for that route).
I honestly don't see how there's room for a debate here - call it whatever you want, give it any generation number you want, but the ground truths are the device's physical dimensions, battery life and price point.
Those were decided by Nintendo and unless you're trying to argue they should have designed a different system - which is an entirely separate argument - performance is dictated directly by that ground truth.
Calling Switch an "embarrassment" at this time and in its current form is basically saying "I would have preferred a different strategy from Nintendo that produced a more powerful device, based on different design parameters and/or a different pricepoint."
It's a non-argument when the system is clearly a hit among consumers.
No, though I'd expect Nintendo would get away with it.
If they want to do these short generations while maintaining a constant gap in power, they need to commit to carrying all of their games forward... which they won't.
Theoretically if a Switch revision came out, and BOTW 2 couldn't run on the original hardware, they would need to make a version that would run on the original hardware.
If they want to do these short generations while maintaining a constant gap in power, they need to commit to carrying all of their games forward... which they won't.
Theoretically if a Switch revision came out, and BOTW 2 couldn't run on the original hardware, they would need to make a version that would run on the original hardware.
I voted no. I don't buy consoles to have to replace them after just a few years to play new games, I want to get a full length generation out of them. If/when a Switch Pro does release, I won't be buying one anyway since I already have a Switch, and if there are exclusives I guess I just won't play them.
Considering the 'no' vote is winning on an enthusiast forum, I would guess the general public would be even more against it.
The difference in a GBC-like situation is the Gameboy had already been on the market for 9 years before the Color came out. It could have almost been its own console if it hadn't been quickly replaced by the GBA.
Considering the 'no' vote is winning on an enthusiast forum, I would guess the general public would be even more against it.
The difference in a GBC-like situation is the Gameboy had already been on the market for 9 years before the Color came out. It could have almost been its own console if it hadn't been quickly replaced by the GBA.
I feel like everyone bringing up the past console patterns are living in the past. We're long past the point of affordable upgraded revisions, as those upgraded revisions have increasingly been getting marketed as more premium items with the price to match. No developer is going to risk making an exclusive on a revision where the install base is tiny and miss out on the mass majority who own the OG and lite models. And if Nintendo themselves does it I will rightfully call them stupid and watch their game reach next to no one like those 3DS exclusives.
And if you're thinking in the phone model of quick successors, forget it. That is not how things are run and nobody would accept that sort of model. And the only times I've seen people wanting it are weird people in threads and investors who know nothing about the game industry and how it operates.
And if you're thinking in the phone model of quick successors, forget it. That is not how things are run and nobody would accept that sort of model. And the only times I've seen people wanting it are weird people in threads and investors who know nothing about the game industry and how it operates.
Last edited:
Only if that is the "next gen" console. Moving forward with perfect backwards compat would be fantastic, but if it was just a Switch Pro with exclusive software then a few years later we get a proper new console that would be garbage.
However, what exactly is the difference between a next-gen console fully compatible with Switch vs. Switch pro with exclusive titles though?
Switch has had a pretty crazy few years in terms of sales. I doubt that Nintendo can split the user base without generating some bad will, especially for those who jumped on this year with AC thinking the console still had a good few years in it.
I've had a Switch since launch, and honestly I'm pretty keen for an upgrade. But it would have to be a pro model with no exclusive games I think. You would of course have games better optimised for Switch pro, and some games (like BOTW) could actually benefit quite a bit from this. (I.e. Korok forest frame drops, increased resolution for an already good looking game etc.)
Its either that, or wait for Switch2 probably.
I've had a Switch since launch, and honestly I'm pretty keen for an upgrade. But it would have to be a pro model with no exclusive games I think. You would of course have games better optimised for Switch pro, and some games (like BOTW) could actually benefit quite a bit from this. (I.e. Korok forest frame drops, increased resolution for an already good looking game etc.)
Its either that, or wait for Switch2 probably.
Pro consoles don't replace next-gen releases, so a Switch Pro would still imply a Switch 2 is on the horizon like how we still got the XSX and PS5 despite Pro XBOs and PS4s existing. The Pros have offered refinements to existing platforms and not major upgrades the way next gen consoles have. If for some reason Nintendo released a Switch Pro that was a substantial enough upgrade to warrant exclusive software it would be kinda crazy not to just make it a real successor system.
I mean, I would understand it. The Switch is probably about to fall even farther behind in AAA third-party support as next-gen comes around. While I am very happy with how good the software looks on Switch, I expect to see 1 million hot takes about the graphic fidelity of BotW 2 next year. Nintendo's first party studios could realistically get the most out of the Switch's hardware for another couple of years (Replicating the lifespan of a normal console generation), but if they can get the jump on a Switch Pro that is essentially a next gen system with perfect or near-prefect backwards compatibility, I can't say I would be too upset.
This being said, I bought my Switch in 2017, so I will be going on 4 years with the console. Obviously my PS4 took me through 7 years, so to look at something similar with the Switch, Nintendo would be dealing with a console that struggles to run PS4 games all the way through 2024, where the PS5 will be well into its prime. It's just unreasonable at that point, and I'm sure Nintendo knows that it makes more sense to have an upgrade within the next 2 years that is going to offer, most likely, some third-party games at the very least, that won't run on the original Switch.
But will Nintendo release this console that is the only way to play something like Mario or Zelda? No, that is clearly not going to happen. The Switch's install base is insane and with the software sales that Nintendo has seen thus far, it makes no sense to limit these games to what would be a significantly smaller install base.
This being said, I bought my Switch in 2017, so I will be going on 4 years with the console. Obviously my PS4 took me through 7 years, so to look at something similar with the Switch, Nintendo would be dealing with a console that struggles to run PS4 games all the way through 2024, where the PS5 will be well into its prime. It's just unreasonable at that point, and I'm sure Nintendo knows that it makes more sense to have an upgrade within the next 2 years that is going to offer, most likely, some third-party games at the very least, that won't run on the original Switch.
But will Nintendo release this console that is the only way to play something like Mario or Zelda? No, that is clearly not going to happen. The Switch's install base is insane and with the software sales that Nintendo has seen thus far, it makes no sense to limit these games to what would be a significantly smaller install base.
In 2022, sure. Not in 2021, though. I expect to wait at least 5 years before having to upgrade at a minimum, but I have no problem upgrading every 5 years.
As I said elsewhere, I think Nintendo themselves will continue to release games compatible with the OG Switch for a good long while. They can happily target that spec in development, they don't have to march to the beat of anyone else's drum. But I think that when it comes to 3rd parties, it may quickly become a case where your choices to get a next-gen game running are a Pro-exclusive version or nothing. We've seen some near-miracles in getting AAA games running on the Switch, but I just don't see 4GB of RAM and 4 ARM cores from 2015 stretching to something that was originally built for the PS5 spec.
Of course, maybe they just won't bother in the first place. EA is still crapping out "legacy" versions of FIFA and similar rather than try to put any effort in on their Switch ports.
I think many 3rd parties just won't bother bringing games to the switch, and its not like its already getting a large amount of big 3rd party games. I'm sure there's a few that can be scaled down, but the vast majority just won't come to the the system.
I don't think it really matters because 99.9% of Nintendo's 1st/2nd party output would simply just work on the regular Switch too so would 99% of indies, which is the reason pretty much anyone owns a Switch.
If there's some 3rd party port that simply isn't possible on the old model but the new model allows it, well you wouldn't be getting that game period on the old model either way.
Beyond that though I think Switch Pro/Plus will be mainly focused on allowing for a resolution boost + increased frame rate for games, not really for allowing exclusive titles that are locked out from the Switch base.
If there's some 3rd party port that simply isn't possible on the old model but the new model allows it, well you wouldn't be getting that game period on the old model either way.
Beyond that though I think Switch Pro/Plus will be mainly focused on allowing for a resolution boost + increased frame rate for games, not really for allowing exclusive titles that are locked out from the Switch base.