New Switch model coming in second half of 2019, reports Japanese WSJ

UltraMagnus · Oct 5, 2018

Clefargle said:
If you want to talk recent history, the N3DS was a spec bump and had an exclusive title. And it was still compatible with all prior software

I don't think any of it matters compared to the future.

Nintendo's new management is very clearly much more focused on profit, they are even doing things like Dragiula (the smartphone app) which clearly go against what Iwata was talking about even just three years ago. They are making a lot of money off Fire Emblem too using the same monetization policies they just a few years ago said they would never do. They are doing paid online. They are loading up on paid DLCs.

$$$$$$ talks. I think what Nintendo learned from the Wii U/3DS era is they need to stop being stubborn and simply get on that money train.

Multiple hardware lines make companies money, even the DSi I think is not really the full extent of what they are looking at, I think the plan probably always has been an Apple like line of products.

Dark Cloud · Oct 5, 2018

This ain't Iwata's Nintendo too. He did set foundations up, but how things proceed have been from Kimishima and Furukawa now.

ShadowFox08 · Oct 5, 2018

z0m3le said:
Don't expect these sorts of performance levels. Compared to a XB1, it should be capable of 35% (very roughly) currently, it could be a super tiny upgrade to 42% (again rough) and as much as 84% of an XB1, if they doubled the Cuda cores.

16nm is an estimated 60% iirc.

I'm not expecting this at all.. I don't want a half ass upgrade like PS4 PRO Yeah, 16nm is 50% more efficient than 20. But 20-->16-->12-->10-->7nm

I remember I went to a site months ago that showed the power and watt efficencies.. I don't know where it is now.

NateDrake · Oct 5, 2018

K Samedi said:
Carts will probably be solved in 2019 where a price drop in 32gb carts are expected and 64 gb carts will be made available. As for software sales, I dont think there is anything to be concerned about. We've seen software from all kinds of genre's do well on Switch and with publishers like Square and Bethesda backing Switch as much as they can I dont see any reason for concern

The issue with the Bethesda example is that Nintendo help fund publishing costs. Skyrim and Doom sold well, don't misunderstand, but the risks involved for Bethesda were considerably lower.

K Samedi · Oct 5, 2018

NateDrake said:
The issue with the Bethesda example is that Nintendo help fund publishing costs. Skyrim and Doom sold well, don't misunderstand, but the risks involved for Bethesda were considerably lower.

Sure, I can see some problems for bigger software titles that need to sell a million or more to be profitable. Those usually sell a lot more on PS4 because of the graphical advantages. A Switch pro could close that gap a little, though.

UltraMagnus · Oct 5, 2018

Switch isn't that far off from being able to handle PS4/XB1 ports fairly comfortably. A 2x jump would probably allow a good number of games, but a 3x jump would be the ticket full stop.

I bet Nintendo has been told that by third parties repeatedly too.

Nvidia internally is likely light years past the X1, the X1 will be almost 5 years old by fall 2019 and it was never that expensive of a processor to begin with, Nvidia was selling the Nvidia Shield for $199.99 in spring 2015.

Iceman83 · Oct 5, 2018

Well, I was planning buying one for the kids this Christmas. Crap.

Clefargle · Oct 5, 2018

UltraMagnus said:
I don't think any of it matters compared to the future.

Nintendo's new management is very clearly much more focused on profit, they are even doing things like Dragiula (the smartphone app) which clearly go against what Iwata was talking about even just three years ago. They are making a lot of money off Fire Emblem too using the same monetization policies they just a few years ago said they would never do. They are doing paid online. They are loading up on paid DLCs.

$$$$$$ talks. I think what Nintendo learned from the Wii U/3DS era is they need to stop being stubborn and simply get on that money train.

Multiple hardware lines make companies money, even the DSi I think is not really the full extent of what they are looking at, I think the plan probably always has been an Apple like line of products.

Yes, multiple hardware lines. But they clearly are trying to build a shared ecosystem and not repeat the branding mistakes of the past. (Wii U, Wii motion +). The value add of the switch only makes sense if it "switches" and shares components (dock, joycon). They are finally on a single system ecosystem. Why would they fragment that? A pro model wouldn't fragment it, a handheld/TV only model would.

UltraMagnus · Oct 5, 2018

Clefargle said:
Yes, multiple hardware lines. But they clearly are trying to build a shared ecosystem and not repeat the branding mistakes of the past. (Wii U, Wii motion +). The value add of the switch only makes sense if it "switches" and shares components (dock, joycon). They are finally on a single system ecosystem. Why would they fragment that? A pro model wouldn't fragment it, a handheld/TV only model would.

I think no matter what they do all the base Nintendo games will play on every Switch model, just at different settings at least through 2021 or something like that I would imagine.

What might be different is a hypothetical Pro might enable some 3rd party games that are impossible on the current Switch, but I think that's perfectly reasonable. Anyone who's going to be angry about that simply isn't being reasonable, such a chip would have been impossible for a product made in 2016 using a 2015 processor.

SMD · Oct 5, 2018

Clefargle said:
Yes, multiple hardware lines. But they clearly are trying to build a shared ecosystem and not repeat the branding mistakes of the past. (Wii U, Wii motion +). The value add of the switch only makes sense if it "switches" and shares components (dock, joycon). They are finally on a single system ecosystem. Why would they fragment that? A pro model wouldn't fragment it, a handheld/TV only model would.

You're wasting your breath, people have been banging on about the dockless Switch, the mini version with fixed joycon, that weird clamshell one - it doesn't matter if you spell it out that Nintendo are going to stick with the general design of the Switch. You've still got people banging on about Gamepad-less Wii Us and Wii HD.

Pancakes R Us · Oct 5, 2018

SMD said:
You're wasting your breath, people have been banging on about the dockless Switch, the mini version with fixed joycon, that weird clamshell one - it doesn't matter if you spell it out that Nintendo are going to stick with the general design of the Switch. You've still got people banging on about Gamepad-less Wii Us and Wii HD.

Never say never, buddy. Who would've thought we'd go from 3DS to 2DS? Why is a Switch light, ala 3DS impossible?

Deleted member 6730 · Oct 5, 2018

Even if there's this Switch Pro that does get a major spec bump, devs would still have to make games for the base model in mind. The "Switch Pro" (god that's a terrible name) wouldn't do jack to help third parties anyway.

UltraMagnus · Oct 5, 2018

Spyder_Monkey said:
Even if there's this Switch Pro that does get a major spec bump, devs would still have to make games for the base model in mind. The "Switch Pro" (god that's a terrible name) wouldn't do jack to help third parties anyway.

It would open the door to games that simply aren't possible today on the Switch, providing Nvidia can make the chip easy to work with, which I think would be a pretty safe bet.

Ubi Soft could put the actual Assassin's Creed Odyssey, Capcom could put the actual Resident Evil 2 Remake.

Because the alternative right now is to stream those games and I don't see what's so great about that.

Deleted member 6730 · Oct 5, 2018

UltraMagnus said:
It would open the door to games that simply aren't possible today on the Switch, providing Nvidia can make the chip easy to work with, which I think would be a pretty safe bet.

Ubi Soft could put the actual Assassin's Creed Odyssey, Capcom could put the actual Resident Evil 2 Remake.

Because the alternative right now is to stream those games and I don't see what's so great about that.

So basically you want a whole new system even though this is just simply a hardware revision.

dcx4610 · Oct 5, 2018

If I were Nintendo, I wouldn't even make any other consoles going further. Just treat the Switch as their iPhone. Upgrade it every few years with more powerful hardware but keep it backwards compatible.

UltraMagnus · Oct 5, 2018

Spyder_Monkey said:
So basically you want a whole new system even though this is just simply a hardware revision.

No, it would be the same system, same OS, just some 3rd party games that can't run on 2015 Tegra chip for reasonable reasons could run on a 2019 Tegra more reasonably.

Nvidia's use pretty much ensures a very nice existing ecosystem.

More like Steam, some people just have a higher end PC and can play some games at better settings or some games won't work on a lower end PC. But it's still one product family.

I don't consider someone who owns a higher end GPU as owning a "completely different system". No one flips out or freaks out if their 4 years older GPU can't run the same game in some cases as a GPU that's four years newer.

Clefargle · Oct 5, 2018

Pancakes R Us said:
Never say never, buddy. Who would've thought we'd go from 3DS to 2DS? Why is a Switch light, ala 3DS impossible?

2DS is still a Dual Screen system

z0m3le · Oct 5, 2018

UltraMagnus said:
Switch isn't that far off from being able to handle PS4/XB1 ports fairly comfortably. A 2x jump would probably allow a good number of games, but a 3x jump would be the ticket full stop.

I bet Nintendo has been told that by third parties repeatedly too.

Nvidia internally is likely light years past the X1, the X1 will be almost 5 years old by fall 2019 and it was never that expensive of a processor to begin with, Nvidia was selling the Nvidia Shield for $199.99 in spring 2015.

A 3x jump shares no relationship with the Switch, it just becomes a waste of power, because if you target 720p for portable and the current Switch is suppose to do that too (even docked), you only need 2.25x to reach 1080p, sure you can turn on a couple things, but you want to keep this simple so that you aren't loading a bunch of new assets and shaders into ram when you move from handheld to docked.

2.4x that I've been mentioning is fine, xb1 and ps4 can't do mixed precision, so Switch would be more powerful than the xb1 when that's in place, but sit under the xb1 normally, just not by a large amount, launch xb1 to Xb1s

SMD · Oct 5, 2018

Pancakes R Us said:
Never say never, buddy. Who would've thought we'd go from 3DS to 2DS? Why is a Switch light, ala 3DS impossible?

The 3D effect was never crucial to any game. The fact that the 3DS had an option to turn off the 3D from the get go and Super Street Fighter IV had a performance mode at the cost of switching off the 3D effect should be a clear indicator that the 2DS was just an admission it was a luxury rather than a necessity.

People always focus on the 3D and not the DS part of the name. Every version still retained the dual screens, the real feature that couldn't be compromised. It's a Switch. It's designed to be docked, portable and everything in between. The joycon are a fundamental part of the design and appeal. Nintendo will just drop the price once the cost of manufacturing comes down and push out the Switch Pro or whatever it is. I wouldn't be surprised if the Switch Pro was exactly the same size. The joycon at least will stay the same, maybe they'd do some weird design to accommodate a bigger or smaller screen but honestly the dimensions are fine. It's smaller than an iPad or Kindle Fire but not too small. Smaller joycon would be a nightmare for those of us with big hands.

If the Switch was a failure then maybe there'd be an argument for a complete redesign but it's not so best bet is some tweaks and optimisations here and there.

Deleted member 6730 · Oct 5, 2018

UltraMagnus said:
No, it would be the same system, same OS, just some 3rd party games that can't run on 2015 Tegra chip for reasonable reasons could run on a 2019 Tegra more reasonably.

Nvidia's use pretty much ensures a very nice existing ecosystem.

So no. More like Steam, some people just have a higher end PC and can play some games at better settings or some games won't work on a lower end PC. But it's still one product family.

I don't consider someone who owns a higher end GPU as owning a "completely different system".

You do realize those games would still have to be made for the base model right? There's no exclusive PS4 Pro or Xbox One X games.

Actually this whole thing reminds me of the Neo/Scorpio discussions on the old place so much so that the mods even called it the start of a new generation when it was clearly not.

UltraMagnus · Oct 5, 2018

z0m3le said:
A 3x jump shares no relationship with the Switch, it just becomes a waste of power, because if you target 720p for portable and the current Switch is suppose to do that too (even docked), you only need 2.25x to reach 1080p, sure you can turn on a couple things, but you want to keep this simple so that you aren't loading a bunch of new assets and shaders into ram when you move from handheld to docked.

2.4x that I've been mentioning is fine, xb1 and ps4 can't do mixed precision, so Switch would be more powerful than the xb1 when that's in place, but sit under the xb1 normally, just not by a large amount, launch xb1 to Xb1s

Whatever the number is, honestly I don't even care. Getting the games on there would be the important part it's no longer really a dick measuring contest over specs. Just about running the game reasonably well and if a revised Tegra chip can do that at whatever ratio, great. 3x just seems like a nice clean number and gives some overhead just in case.

DharmaBum · Oct 5, 2018

As long as they call it the Switcheroo instead of Switch Pro or Plus. Maybe the Switch Up.

BlueManifest · Oct 5, 2018

I want 7 inch screen, Tegra X2, better wifi, and a game card slot without a remove by hand cover

I hope this isn't too much to ask

And I want the name to be super switch

Pancakes R Us · Oct 5, 2018

SMD said:
The 3D effect was never crucial to any game. The fact that the 3DS had an option to turn off the 3D from the get go and Super Street Fighter IV had a performance mode at the cost of switching off the 3D effect should be a clear indicator that the 2DS was just an admission it was a luxury rather than a necessity.

People always focus on the 3D and not the DS part of the name. Every version still retained the dual screens, the real feature that couldn't be compromised. It's a Switch. It's designed to be docked, portable and everything in between. The joycon are a fundamental part of the design and appeal. Nintendo will just drop the price once the cost of manufacturing comes down and push out the Switch Pro or whatever it is. I wouldn't be surprised if the Switch Pro was exactly the same size. The joycon at least will stay the same, maybe they'd do some weird design to accommodate a bigger or smaller screen but honestly the dimensions are fine. It's smaller than an iPad or Kindle Fire but not too small. Smaller joycon would be a nightmare for those of us with big hands.

If the Switch was a failure then maybe there'd be an argument for a complete redesign but it's not so best bet is some tweaks and optimisations here and there.

Why does the Switch being a portable and docked option have to be a necessity? Because it's called Switch? So what. 3DS had 3D in the name.

I vaguely recall a Nintendo parent from a few years ago or Nintendo mentioning that Switch could come in various forms. Why couldn't it be a mini form like the 3DS? Because joycons won't work? That's fine, it won't need joycons if it has built-in controls. This version will be mainly for one-player people and hopefully a slightly cheaper version to hit the portable gaming market with. If you don't like it, don't buy it.

Edit: it's nice to have options.

Elfotografoalocado · Oct 5, 2018

UltraMagnus said:
No, it would be the same system, same OS, just some 3rd party games that can't run on 2015 Tegra chip for reasonable reasons could run on a 2019 Tegra more reasonably.

Nvidia's use pretty much ensures a very nice existing ecosystem.

More like Steam, some people just have a higher end PC and can play some games at better settings or some games won't work on a lower end PC. But it's still one product family.

I don't consider someone who owns a higher end GPU as owning a "completely different system". No one flips out or freaks out if their 4 years older GPU can't run the same game in some cases as a GPU that's four years newer.

Many games that don't come to Switch don't come because of the storage, don't forget that. The moment bigger carts are available things will be different, and assuming that scenario the Switch Pro will simply improve the same titles.

Dekuman · Oct 5, 2018

Carts are same as procesors. Capacity increase means discounts on prior capacity tiers due to process shrinks and more chips per wafer.

The biggest thing will be getting 32gb to near the current 8gb price range

Gobias-Ind · Oct 5, 2018

I really wonder what the "Nintendo wouldn't possibly fragment the user base by releasing a device that is capable of running games that the OG Switch can't" crowd thinks that third party support for the OG Switch is gonna look like in 2020.

Pancakes R Us said:
Why does the Switch being a portable and docked option have to be a necessity? Because it's called Switch? So what. 3DS had 3D in the name.

Also, I agree with this. I've always thought that there were going to be several different devices in this ecosystem over the next decade and that they won't all necessarily conform to the Switch form factor or even all be named "Switch."

I think they'll have a line of devices in different form factors that all run the OS and 95% of the same software, same account system and are supported by the same services. I don't think this will be any more confusing to consumers in 2018 and beyond than iPhone/iPad/Apple TV is.

Mr Swine · Oct 5, 2018

Gobias-Ind said:
I really wonder what the "Nintendo wouldn't possibly fragment the user base by releasing a device that is capable of running games that the OG Switch can't" crowd thinks that third party support for the OG Switch is gonna look like in 2020.

Well the games are going to be run at dynamic resolution with aggressive LOD and probably wonky frame rate....

Skittzo · Oct 5, 2018

I really think people need to give up on this idea of a revision launching next year getting exclusive games. By the time this thing launches if the WSJ is accurate the install base will be over 40M and maybe approaching 50M. From the developers' perspective it makes absolutely no sense to put out a game that can't be played by one of those millions of people unless they buy a >$400 device or however much it'll cost.

I can see a revision launching in 2021-2022 or so getting exclusive ports from next gen consoles thus kinda overlapping with the Switch 2 in 2022-2023 but not one releasing next year.

Deleted member 6730 · Oct 5, 2018

Gobias-Ind said:
I really wonder what the "Nintendo wouldn't possibly fragment the user base by releasing a device that is capable of running games that the OG Switch can't" crowd thinks that third party support for the OG Switch is gonna look like in 2020.

We'll see... it hasn't been running the highest end games in the first place but as long as sales keep up it'll be fine. People forget that third party devs are more attracted to sales than power. Otherwise tons of systems that got a lot of third party support would be dead. Fragmenting the userbase is something Sega did and that ultimately became their downfall. Gee, wonder why more companies don't do that.

NateDrake · Oct 5, 2018

skittzo0413 said:
I really think people need to give up on this idea of a revision launching next year getting exclusive games. By the time this thing launches if the WSJ is accurate the install base will be over 40M and maybe approaching 50M. From the developers' perspective it makes absolutely no sense to put out a game that can't be played by one of those millions of people unless they buy a >$400 device or however much it'll cost.

I can see a revision launching in 2021-2022 or so getting exclusive ports from next gen consoles thus kinda overlapping with the Switch 2 in 2022-2023 but not one releasing next year.

Could it get a select few exclusive games akin to the New 3DS? Maybe. I suppose if Capcom wanted to release a digital/physical copy of RE7 on the new device and leave the Cloud version for the other Switch, that's a direction they could take -- though I can't imagine that actually happening.

GuEiMiRrIRoW · Oct 5, 2018

UltraMagnus said:
I don't think matching PS5/XB2 is really something Nintendo should give much of a fart about.

PS4/XB1 tier is the magic ticket, if they can get a chip that can more easily allow for ports of any PS4/XB1 they are going to see an enormous flood of content from 3rd parties.

And IMO PS4/XB1 will be supported for years to come even with PS5/XB2, developers are not gonna be keen on ditching the old systems, cross-gen titles will likely be even more common place for a lot longer this gen.

Then by 2023, Nintendo can look at maybe an even higher end Switch as development more aggressively shifts over to the next-gen platforms.

I tottaly agree with that. Ps5 will take a long time untill it gets mass appeal. Games will become overwhelmingly expensive and complex next gen.

Dracon · Oct 5, 2018

Now I am feeling insecure to buy one this year.

Thanks WSJ.

Pai Pai Master · Oct 5, 2018

Switch Deluxe

RPGamer · Oct 5, 2018

Spyder_Monkey said:
You do realize those games would still have to be made for the base model right? There's no exclusive PS4 Pro or Xbox One X games.

Actually this whole thing reminds me of the Neo/Scorpio discussions on the old place so much so that the mods even called it the start of a new generation when it was clearly not.

Nintendo isn't Sony or Microsoft and the Switch is in a different position. Most games would come for both systems, probably all nintendo games. but if there are games that aren't possible on Switch or don't make sense on the old Switch, i don't believe Nintendo would forbid publishers to release only on Switch 2/Pro/New Switch (the name doesn't matter)

Gobias-Ind said:
I really wonder what the "Nintendo wouldn't possibly fragment the user base by releasing a device that is capable of running games that the OG Switch can't" crowd thinks that third party support for the OG Switch is gonna look like in 2020.

It will look fine when it comes to japanese games and ports of smaller games or graphically not so demanding games. In fact i believe it will look much better than now. But it wouldn't hurt if the stronger version (if there will be a stronger version) would get some western AAA blockbusters on top.

Dracon said:
Now I am feeling insecure to buy one this year.

Thanks WSJ.

You don't have to, it's a very good system with great games and you don't have to buy a revision on day one. You could also sell it if it gets clear that you want the revision later on. As i will sell my Switch if the revision is stronger (we don't even know that). I bought a PS4 Pro a few weeks ago and there is the possibility of a PS5 in 2019. I won't loose much, i lost 20 Dollars on my PS4 Slim that i played for 2 years lol.

QuiteSomething · Oct 5, 2018

So people want Nintendo to make a new Switch every 2-3 years? With some software only running on the Switch Pro?
Strange move

Deleted member 6730 · Oct 5, 2018

RPGamer said:
Nintendo isn't Sony or Microsoft and the Switch is in a different position. Most games would come for both systems, probably all nintendo games. but if there are games that aren't possible on Switch or don't make sense on the old Switch, i don't believe Nintendo would forbid publishers to release only on Switch 2/Pro/New Switch (the name doesn't matter)

Expecting companies to develop exclusively for a niche system is a rather laughable proposition. Just because there would be a more powerful spec bump doesn't mean that those very expensive AAA games that would still be heavily compromised anyway (just even less so) would sell. It'd be a waste of money and resources making something that would reach maybe 20% of the install base at best. And that's not even getting into how confusing it would be for the general consumer, something Nintendo would like to avoid. That's why there were so few exclusive N3DS games and those that did come sold like shit.

Like it or not, Nintendo and third parties are tied to the base model for the rest of the system's life and no spec bump is going to fix that.

RPGamer · Oct 5, 2018

Ruslnis said:
So people want Nintendo to make a new Switch every 2-3 years? With some software only running on the Switch Pro?
Strange move

Not all people want it, but in fact the older version wouldn't loose anything. Also this is what i expected since Iwata talked about NX. Will be interesting if it happens.

Pooroomoo · Oct 5, 2018

Gobias-Ind said:
I really wonder what the "Nintendo wouldn't possibly fragment the user base by releasing a device that is capable of running games that the OG Switch can't" crowd thinks that third party support for the OG Switch is gonna look like in 2020.

At that point there may be 50 million Switches or more in the wild, so unless Switch owners stop buying 3rd party games, support will at the very least be as good as it is now, most probably better.

Even after PS5 and XBnext come out, it will take time until they have enough of an audience. PS4 and XB1 will still be supported for quite a while at that point, at the very least for 2 more years (and that's pessimistic), for nearly all games. So no change in that regard.
Switch is even now not getting most of the major western AAA games. Those same games will be the ones that will at some point (not 2020) be optimized for PS5 and XBnext, so the situation in that regard won't change either - Switch is not getting them now and it won't get them then. :-)

Many/most developers not optimizing only for PS5 and XBnext will probably want to also target the Switch market, that in 2020 will be far bigger than PS5 and XBnext... It will be a while before most developers target only PS5 and XBnext.

Skittzo · Oct 5, 2018

NateDrake said:
Could it get a select few exclusive games akin to the New 3DS? Maybe. I suppose if Capcom wanted to release a digital/physical copy of RE7 on the new device and leave the Cloud version for the other Switch, that's a direction they could take -- though I can't imagine that actually happening.

Nintendo were the only publisher to put out new 3DS games right? Them putting out some exclusive ports made sense in order to make upgrading more appealing. But in this scenario Nintendo doesn't have a more powerful console with games that can't run on the Switch, third parties would be the only ones who can bring in exclusive ports.

And I don't see the business logic in doing that if software sales are already a problem on a >20M user base.

Steverulez · Oct 5, 2018

I'd buy it, love my Switch. I think the first revision will focus on trying to match undocked with docked, or get closer to it, then later on a Switch Pro

QuiteSomething · Oct 5, 2018

RPGamer said:
Not all people want it, but in fact the older version wouldn't loose anything. Also this is what i expected since Iwata talked about NX. Will be interesting if it happens.

What do you mean by "older version wouldn't loose anything"? Some games will not come to the original Switch. Thats a great loss

Anyway I agree that it will be interesting to see what Nin is planning.

RPGamer · Oct 5, 2018

Spyder_Monkey said:
Expecting companies to develop exclusively for a niche system is a rather laughable proposition. Just because there would be a more powerful spec bump doesn't mean that those very expensive AAA games that would still be heavily compromised anyway (just even less so) would sell. It'd be a waste of money and resources making something that would reach maybe 20% of the install base at best. And that's not even getting into how confusing it would be for the general consumer, something Nintendo would like to avoid. That's why there were so few exclusive N3DS games and those that did come sold like shit.

Like it or not, Nintendo and third parties are tied to the base model for the rest of the system's life and no spec bump is going to fix that.

I'm not demanding anything, i just said that i don't believe Nintendo would forbid it. And if the new model has sold a few millions and someone wants to put a game on it that wouldn't run on the normal Switch why not? If a new Switch has a better CPU and a better GPU i don't think there would be much compromises. And if no one does it that's also fine.

Personally i want a stronger Switch for better looking Nintendogames (in both modes).

skittzo0413 said:
Nintendo were the only publisher to put out new 3DS games right? Them putting out some exclusive ports made sense in order to make upgrading more appealing. But in this scenario Nintendo doesn't have a more powerful console with games that can't run on the Switch, third parties would be the only ones who can bring in exclusive ports.

And I don't see the business logic in doing that if software sales are already a problem on a >20M user base.

It's still a different situation. There are games that publishers probably would like to put on Switch but aren't able to because of specs. And if the new model sells i wouldn't say it's impossible.

ILikeFeet · Oct 5, 2018

the whole cart issue is such a catch 22 when sales are thrown into the equation. if they wait for lower cart/licensing prices, they run the risk of self-fulfilling prophecies of low selling games. but if they publish how, I guess they'll either be saddled with higher licensing costs or being forced to make a game partially downloadable

then again, for these publishers, not selling on switch at all wouldn't bother them since they'd make so little revenue from the system compared to the XBO/PS4/PC

Deleted member 6730 · Oct 5, 2018

RPGamer said:
I'm not demanding anything, i just said that i don't believe Nintendo would forbid it. And if the new model has sold a few millions and someone wants to put a game on it that wouldn't run on the normal Switch why not? If a new Switch has a better CPU and a better GPU i don't think there would be much compromises. And if no one does it that's also fine.

Personally i want a stronger Switch for better looking Nintendogames (in both modes).

I'm saying it's flat out not happening. This is the same shit that came up with Neo/Scorpio, with the idea that they would get exclusive games and the base models would have little to no focus (all turned out to be bullshit) and this is mostly an excuse to project people's hopes and dreams on a rumored product.

test_account · Oct 5, 2018

skittzo0413 said:
Nintendo were the only publisher to put out new 3DS games right? Them putting out some exclusive ports made sense in order to make upgrading more appealing. But in this scenario Nintendo doesn't have a more powerful console with games that can't run on the Switch, third parties would be the only ones who can bring in exclusive ports.

And I don't see the business logic in doing that if software sales are already a problem on a >20M user base.

Someone mentioned it earlier, but there are other exclusive New 3DS games as well, like Minecraft. I also believe that Unity (developement tools) are exclusive to New 3DS when it comes to 3DS. Which is why simpler games like Brick Race is New 3DS exclusive.

Pooroomoo · Oct 5, 2018

RPGamer said:
I'm not demanding anything, i just said that i don't believe Nintendo would forbid it. And if the new model has sold a few millions and someone wants to put a game on it that wouldn't run on the normal Switch why not? If a new Switch has a better CPU and a better GPU i don't think there would be much compromises.

Why do you think Sony forbade 3rd parties from having games that run only on the Pro, and kept emphasizing that all games running on Pro will also run on OG PS4, from the moment they announced the Pro? Take a guess. It's not called fragmenting your audience, it's called alienating your audience, MS learned their lesson of what happens when you alienate your audience after their initial XB1 announcement, and Sony took note.

RPGamer · Oct 5, 2018

Spyder_Monkey said:
I'm saying it's flat out not happening. This is the same shit that came up with Neo/Scorpio, with the idea that they would get exclusive games and the base models would have little to no focus (all turned out to be bullshit) and this is mostly an excuse to project people's hopes and dreams on a rumored product.

Yeah i understand what you are saying. And i say it's a different situation. The games the publishers make are able to run on the vanilla PS4 Xbox consoles, they would be dumb to not bring it to them. They also have the same CPUs and are made to put the sames games on the screen with a higher resolution. When i'm talking about a stronger Switch it could be a system that would be able to run PS4 ports the Switch simply can't. If the publishers decide to make those ports is a different question, most probably not, but who knows?

UltraMagnus · Oct 5, 2018

Ruslnis said:
So people want Nintendo to make a new Switch every 2-3 years? With some software only running on the Switch Pro?
Strange move

That's gonna become the new normal for everything I think. There's going to be a significant "new" XBox, new Playstation, new Switch hardware model every 2 1/2-3 1/2 years from here on out. That genie is out of the bottle and never going back.

dom · Oct 5, 2018

skittzo0413 said:
Nintendo were the only publisher to put out new 3DS games right? Them putting out some exclusive ports made sense in order to make upgrading more appealing. But in this scenario Nintendo doesn't have a more powerful console with games that can't run on the Switch, third parties would be the only ones who can bring in exclusive ports.

And I don't see the business logic in doing that if software sales are already a problem on a >20M user base.

The Binding Of Isaac

New Switch model coming in second half of 2019, reports Japanese WSJ

One Winged Slayer

User requested account closure

User requested account closure

One Winged Slayer

User requested account closure

One Winged Slayer

User requested account closure

User requested account closure

DF Deet Master

User requested account closure

▲ Legend ▲