Topic: Is The Switch 2 Worth It???

By this logic, the 3DS was a "DS Pro," because it still had a whole library of DS games that it could play and got support at the end of it's life. Give it a few years. The Switch 1 isn't going to last much longer.

A generation is not anti-consumer. In fact it used to be the opposite. You bought an N64 to play games literally not possible on a SNES. Not just "not possible because it would run worse", but not possible because you literally could not make a SNES render N64 games.

A new console generation was the promise that if you buy this new device, you now get access to new entertainment not possible before. Today, all they promise us is "this device plays the same kinds of games slightly better than your last one". Nothing inherently wrong with it, but I for one would rather we get hardware that did unique things than this incremental, barely-noticeable improvement over 8 year old hardware treadmill.

And no it's not only about graphics. A Wii was graphically not much different from a GameCube, but its hardware supported new modes of play via motion controls literally not possible on GameCube, requiring new tech that wasn't just about visuals. The 3DS produced graphics vastly superior to the DS, but it also had stereoscopic 3D and cameras, allowing for AR and creative new ways to design games and interactions. It featured an internet browser and a proper online store for full releases.

Just like the Switch 1 literally can't render games like Donkey Kong Bananza, Cyberpunk 2077, Star Wars Outlaws, etc.

And no it's not only about graphics. A Wii was graphically not much different from a GameCube, but its hardware supported new modes of play via motion controls literally not possible on GameCube, requiring new tech that wasn't just about visuals.

Just like Switch 2's mouse mode and camera/microphone support enables modes of play thay weren't possible on the Switch 1.

I don't think it's unfair to label the Switch 2 more like a Switch Pro at present. The atmosphere around the console is certainly like that in the sense that it remains, for the most part, an optional upgrade that improves performance but isn't totally necessary to play the latest games, although I believe it won't remain like that forever.

The situation for me isn't unlike the PS4 > PS5 transition and I assume Switch 2 is going to be used for full potential when Nintendo starts leading and releasing more exclusive games. It'll come but it's a slow, gradual change as they try to assess if/when the Switch 2 userbase is exclusively big enough for it.

Right now I suspect the answer is a very boring one. I assume they're worried because they know that in any meeting with shareholders them saying we're limiting our potential sales to a userbase of only Switch 2 owners is going to be met with backlash. Of course you'd question that if you had vested financial interests.

Let it grow and in a couple years I imagine the situation will be different as more Switch 1 owners adopt the console.

Not quite. When you played DS games on the 3DS it trimmed itself down. You were playing in a DS sandbox. When you play Switch games on a Switch 2 the game still has that additional spec of the Switch 2 available to it. Also games are being released for Switch and getting modes, paid or otherwise, that open up additional features and performance on Switch 2. In this sense it kinda behaves like a "Pro" model more than a traditional "Successor"

But this behaviour is a good thing. And it doesn't negate the fact that we're also getting the significant boost in specs and features which comes when you have a more sizable "generational" transition. We're getting both here. Both is good

It has always been anti-consumer. Just because it there wasn't any practical way to avoid it doesn't mean it was ever a good thing. It has always been bad for consumers

Ok, so the argument in this thread currently is that the Switch 2 offers nothing to gaming over the Switch despite the massive technological gulf between the two. Absurd as that is lets run with this as a premise. Because sure, there are certainly titles that do not need the additional power on tap. And in that sense it's "like a Switch Pro". And you're taking issue with me saying that the Wii was more "Pro" than the Switch 2 is

But lets consider the Wii as a transition over the GameCube. Mostly what the Wii offered was the new controller. Technically the GameCube could have had that as an accessory if they wanted to, it had a ~30Mbps serial port which is WAY more than Bluetooth needs. It could have been done. But even if not, there are plenty of Wii games that didn't need it. To the point where back in the day I had a literal GameCube controller plugged into my Wii U which at points was used more than the WiiMote itself

I look down the list of Wii games I played and sure, there are some that used motion controls. But there are also plenty that could've been GameCube games. Animal Crossing, Rhythm Heaven, DKCR, Mario Kart, Metroid Prime 3, New SMB, Smash Bros. I imagine a mid-2007 OmnitronVariant would have been on Digg complaining about how the Wii is just two GameCubes duct-taped together and other than Wii Sports, which is for retirement homes, all it has is a waggle version of Twilight Princess and Super Paper Mario which could've just been a GameCube game

And frankly..... 2007 OmnitronVariant would have been more correct than the 2026 version

Took a few days off from the thread and wow, some of these arguments against the SW2 are a stretch, at best. It's okay if the SW2 is not worth it to you, can't argue your personal value of the console. However, there's a few arguments that can really be used against almost any new console, especially the PS4/PS5 console generations.

How is this different from the PS4 to PS5? Isn't this what each new console generation does (since the PS3 era)? It has games that run a bit better and look a bit better... along with games that cannot possibly run on the previous console. There's no way Cyberpunk, DK, MK World could have possibly run on the SW1. Even if DK/MK World marginally look better - those games only work with the additional power. Nintendo tried to develop DK for the SW1, and it didn't work.

With comments about the SW2 being a Switch Pro... the Switch Pro doesn't exist. The bottom line is the new console plays old games better, and new games that wouldn't be possible. A Pro model wouldn't have introduced new games not possible on the SW1, it would have only existed to enhance games that could run on the original console.

What do the Naysayers want out of the new Nintendo console? They were always going to release the hybrid model...so do you want PS5 power? That would have costs so much higher than we are seeing. No Game Key Cards? Physical games would be more expensive due to memory costs and loading games on 60gb+ cards. Should games be on a BlueRay disk? For those who are still not finding value due to the price tag - that's fair. Value will come in time, as more first party games/exclusives are released.

@OmnitronVariant
I love seeing someone give up their own values to win an argument on the internet lol

In most cases, I suspect they want a unicorn. Which is to say, they don't know or care about technical or economic realities, and they don't really care about the existence of other people with other preferences either. They want a specific list of features, and if those features are impossible in the world that exists than its the world that is at fault.

@metaphysician
I think you're being generous. They don't want a unicorn, what they want is attention. And if they want anything out of the Switch 2 what they want is for it to fail, be disliked and be crap. Purely so they can say "I told you so". I'm not particularly envious of their task given how short a shelf life this Schick will have

In any case, to repeat my earlier point, their current line of criticism would have been more valid during the Wii era. As much as I loved that platform, there's not a whole lot it could do that the GameCube could not have done. Even the controllers were possible (early Wii prototypes were literally modded GCs). And there was not really much of a spec jump anywhere else

But the Wii was still a great platform. And no, the fact that Metroid Prime 3 wasn't available on the GameCube did not add to its greatness

@metaphysician 100% - I've yet to see anything against the Switch 2 that could not be said for any other console that has been released in the last 15+ years.

@skywake - I would have been onboard with the arguments being made against the Wii, like you I loved it, but you are right. At the time, I was bummed that it was not HD, especially after getting my hands on the XBOX 360 and PS3. It was very apparent how far behind the console was, even at launch, apart from the motion controls. I mean, I really wanted to love Red Steel

This was a slightly silly thread from day 1 and now here we are, 373 posts in 😆

Here's the elephant in the room I think many on both sides miss.

Nobody who is arguing NS2 isn't worth it is going to change a single mind by persuading someone to not purchase it.

Nobody who is arguing NS2 is worth it is going to change a single mind by persuading someone to purchase it.

People just think they're making some contribution for/against sales with pages and pages of endless bullet points and arguments. When in reality, the only ones agreeing with either side are those who already felt that way beforehand.

And even if by some chance they managed to convince a random member reading the thread to buy or not buy, it would be single digits compared against the HUNDRED MILLION+ the console will sell over the coming years.

Basically, all that arguing to convince others it isn't worth it won't change anything. Might make some feel better by thinking, "ya, I really got em with that last one, I bet a whole bunch of people will decide not to buy it now!" but it's all a delusion.

And to be fair, not a person here could argue its merits and NS2 would still do just as well regardless. Cause the system sells itself. It doesn't need a case to be made for it. People see it, see what games it offers, see the benefits of running NS1 games on it, see the improvements like Gamechat, Gameshare, mouse mode, improved rumble, rear mappable buttons, etc, and decide accordingly. Consumers aren't coming to this thread to be persuaded one way or the other.

So with that being said, what's even the point of engaging? There is none, tbh. Aside from entertaining oneself with some intellectual jousting. And I think some here know that. By no means am I implying motivations across the board wholesale.

@JaxonH I'm not changing anyone's mind - just having some fun in this ridiculous thread. I know I'm contributing to the problem, but rather than letting myself get annoyed with these conversations, I wanted to play along. Probably my last time posting in this conversation, I don't know

@FishyS Slightly silly to outright silly

Well, I think we can safely say at least the Japanese believe the Switch 2 is "worth it." lol

Already surpassed lifetime Gamecube sales in Japan before a full year is up. Crazy.

@JaxonH
FWIW my intent in posting is never to get someone to buy the thing or change their mind. If anything I go to lengths to express that it's clearly not for some people and that's ok. I've even annoyed several people, on both sides of this, by being highly dismissive of this obsession with sales performance and general console warrior behaviour

When I post here it's mostly to:

• highlight what I think are silly arguments
• be perplexed at how deeply invested people who profess to be not interested are

This is awkward because I was about to open my post with 'FWIW ...' but Skywake's post immediately above renders that impossible.

But now that's out of the way, FWIW, in June I was in the camp of 'Too expensive, too big, too short battery life - I'ma wait until v.1.1', but in November, after the price decrease in UK, it meant I could get the MKWorld bundle for £385, and I decided that was good enough a compromise for me to jump on.

And my verdict?

It was worth it. Even just with me right back into Animal Crossing, at the expense of DK Bananza, Trails in the Sky 1st, MK World and Cyberpunk, it's worth it to have Animal Crossing at 1080p handheld.

But DK Bananza seems awesome, MKWorld is beautiful, and Trails in the Sky gives me 1080p Scherazard too, so I'm pretty pleased with caving when I did.

tl;dr? Defo worth it.

Is anything ever actually "worth it" these days at these prices?

@Polvasti

I'm sure the Switch 1 could do Cyberpunk. You see people running it on very weak PC hardware in a so called potato mode. Some of these computers have less than 200 Gflops of GPU performance and these aren't optimised versions for a fixed platform. The Switch 2 has roughly three times the CPU performance of Switch 1, a passmark score of about 2000 compared to 600 and that would be the main limitation. I've seen games converted to PS Vita and 3DS and they are ok. So yes it would be possible but of course it would be visually inferior and simplified to allow for lower CPU resources. An example of a game that had high PC requirements that came to Switch is I guess ARK: Survival Evolved. You can wander around defecating on Switch just like other formats. Yes texture quality and resolution is heavily reduced and I would say its not the full fat experience but it works and is playable. I remember when Half Life 2 came to the original Xbox. I loved it, it wasn't as good as PC but it was still a great game and all done in just 64MB of system memory. The Switch is 6x as powerful as the original Xbox in CPU performance and about 20x as powerful in docked GPU performance and not forgetting it has 64x as much memory.

I actually feel with the increase in pricing Nintendo may put more focus back on the original Switch. If Nintendo are forced to raise Switch 2 pricing and that limits the user base and Nintendo makes more of its money from software sales I feel a few games may come to Switch 1 that perhaps wouldn't have originally unless we had this RAM and storage chip crisis with hyper inflation.

I don't think the Switch will die with a wimper, I think we will see its death throes going on for perhaps another 3 years or more especially for smaller developers where their game is still a perfect fit.

I personally don't see mouse controls as a good thing, I don't like them. Just about any hardware can use them even the original Switch if running Linux or Android but I've never liked it myself much preferring a controller. I know they can be good for competitive multiplayer shooters but that isn't for me.