Topic: Discussion: Switch Successor & Backwards Compatibility

I really think backwards compatibility would be cool and helpful for the many games the Switch has. Another upside to backwards compatibility is that I find it has the chance to save money by making older games playable and reusable on newer hardware, meaning you don’t have to drop more money on a port or remaster of a specific game you want to play on a newer console. I find that the Xbox consoles do this very well, and I would love to see Nintendo’s next console do this too! I also would like for NSO and its games and content to also return as well. There is too much progress I’ve made on the games there. If the “Switch 2” lacked backwards compatibility, I probably would still play it, though there is a chance I would be playing the Switch more than it if that is what happens.

I feel that older games should always be preserved to keep them playable for the many years to come, as well as preserving their history and allowing newer gamers to try them out if they haven’t yet.

@Yousef- : Again, not true. Even the packaging itself states that they're compatible with original Game Boy systems, complete with a monochromatic screenshot. Only Crystal version cannot be played on an original Game Boy.

I'd argue that this view is antiquated. In the past I might have agreed with you given the obvious downsides to backwards compatibility that have existed. The most obvious example being the screen resolution mis-match between GC/GBA/DS/3DS. And also the rapid advancement of hardware making it so you don't necessarily want to go backwards, like playing Mario Kart Wii on a Wii U when you could be playing Mario Kart 8

But I don't think that's as true as it once was. We're hitting a wall in terms of resolution and scope. There are plenty of games that exist on Switch that will still be worthwhile looking at decades from now. And not just through nostalgia goggles. When Switch 2 launches I don't really want to have to carry around a Switch and a Switch 2 just so I can swap between the next 3D Mario and Arms or Super Mario Wonder. And I I don't see what benefit that'd bring

Imagine if there hadn't been a Wii U/3DS/Switch split. Would it have not been nice to have had Samus Returns on Switch in that first year? Maybe it would've been nice to have had Pokemon Ultra Sun/Moon? Or, heaven forbid, maybe Wind Waker HD. Obviously that wasn't technically possible with the Switch transition because of the dramatic differences in hardware but with Switch 2 it could easily be done. And I for one wouldn't be opposed to DKCR HD on an 8" screen on day 1 of Switch 2

In any case, PC has been doing it this way for years. Is it a bad thing that I can still download Portal even though I bought that game something like 5 GPUs ago? I'd argue not. Especially given there are now portable devices I could get and play it on and an RTX remix version. I'd take that over posting in Nintendo Direct threads wondering whether or not they'll put Metroid Prime 3 on Switch.....

It doesn't. I'm surprised someone can be so confidently wrong about this on a Nintendo forum of all places. I'm half tempted to grab my copy and my original clear "Play It Loud" GameBoy from when I was a kid and take a photo to prove it. But because I'm nice I'll just link you to Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_Boy_Game_Pak#Color-enhance...

Ah, I see. Alright, fair play. I’ll own up to it and admit I messed up there. Very poor memory on my part. Humble apologies and sorry if it caused a disturbance.

@skywake
My viewpoint is indeed antiquated, but when it comes to a hobby that has no impact on the wellbeing of human beings, I think that is perfectly fine.

In fact, hobbies are sort of the last bastion of where it’s “ok” to hold antiquated views and do things the old-fashioned way for perhaps a bit more charm and feel.

So yea, agreed - what you’re saying is technically correct. But batter my britches if playing games on the intended hardware and intended controller isn’t the best-feeling way to game for me.

I doubt we're looking at downloading the whole game. Like you say, code is a non issue and there will be a lot of common assets. It's more a case of cartridge space already being a squeeze, so they probably won't find the space for everything both versions would need.

For what it's worth, PlayStation and Xbox games rarely come with both versions on the disc, and some of them will trigger a full download rather than reusing the common assets.

@Matt_Barber
I'd think it'll probably depends on how they go about it. And it might well be a game-by-game thing. For example for a game like Echoes of Wisdom you might decide that the only thing the Switch 2 "version" needs to do different is increase the target resolution and framerate. All assets the same but instead of 720p/60fps (with dips to 30) you let it go to 1440p and allow the CPU to rip giving you a stable 60fps. In which case it's a few lines in the same code

But at the other end you might look at something like BotW and decide that what you actually want to do is significantly improve load times by compressing assets. And also putting assets on faster storage i.e. not a Switch 1 cartridge. Hell, maybe for a cross-compatible TotK they recognise that the video quality of the cutscenes in TotK was.... well.... what it was.... and for a Switch 2 version they'll use AV1 which is more efficient and Ampere supports hardware decoding of. But at that point it's almost more of a remaster than just a cross-compatible game

So it's going to depend I think. But I would say for a lot of cases the difference will mostly be just be a different target resolution/framerate. And for those there probably won't be a need for download, other than possibly a precompiled shader blob which.... shouldn't take up too much space anyways and there might be some other solution for

@rallydefault
Again, I think you're looking at this retrospectively rather than how things are going to play out. I agree with you that original hardware is better in some circumstances. Not all, some. The best way to play DS games is on a DS, the best way to play 3DS games is on a 3DS. Wii and GC I'm emulating those personally but for both, and Wii in particular, I'm using original controllers. I don't think it's always true but it has often been true

However I don't think that's how this Switch 2 transition is going to play out. I suspect that the Switch 2 will be the best hardware to play Switch games on. For a start, plenty of Switch games don't hit 1080p for the TV or 720p portable anyways so the screen resolution mis-match that has often been the issue with BC on Nintendo portables won't be a factor. If anything Switch 2 might improve things in that regard. And then there's the fact that the CPU limitations of the Switch is very often the cause of performance issues. Again, something that Switch 2 will address and almost surely mean that Switch games run better on Switch 2

For controls? I mean, there's nothing controller wise the Switch does which is particularly odd. Functionally speaking. It's just two sticks, two triggers, two shoulder buttons, D-Pad and ABXY. I would assume those will carry. There's also the IR camera, HD rumble and Gyro which may or may not carry bit I would susspect at least the second two will. But even if they don't or you just "like the feel" of the originals, I wouldn't be at all surprised if there's support for the JoyCon/Pro Controllers over bluetooth. It's just bluetooth. I don't think this will be at all like the transition from the Wii/Wii U era to Switch where in the transition you lost the weight of the Wii Mote, the IR pointer and the second screen of the Wii U. So this argument is moot

Also, frankly, I think you have it all wrong. See for me the main reason I want backwards compatibility is so that from day 1 I have games like Hades, Super Meat Boy, Baba is You, Boomerang Fu, Clubhouse Games and so on. All of that plus whatever Switch 2 only games come out on one system. So that I can pick up one system for a games night and it'll be the one with all of the things including a Mario Kart 9 or something. I doubt anyone upon booting JackBox Party Pack 4 will complain (or even notice) that I'm booting it up on a Switch 2. But they probably would complain if I turned up to a games night without Boomerang Fu

I really can't see what valid argument there could be for allowing "console generations" to get in the way of that kind of flexibility. All things being equal. Even if you personally prefer the "authentic" experience, which is flirting with gatekeeping IMO, I don't see why you would be against the option being available. It's not like Switch 2 being backwards compatible is going to brick all OG Switches

@skywake
I think you’re overanalyzing what I’m saying.

I like to play games on the hardware they were designed for. End of story, really. It just feels better to me.

Yea, I mean, if Switch 2 is pretty much the exact same when it comes to the form factor and Joycon and pro controller and stuff, and it doesn’t emulate Switch 1 games but runs them natively, then it will definitely be the best way to play Switch games. But that will be the first time that’s ever happened between Nintendo’s consoles. (I still prefer to play DS games on an actual DS, for instance, rather than a 3DS. There are small differences in the hardware feel.)

I was the kid who never used the Super GameBoy back in the day because it felt really weird to play my GameBoy games with a SNES controller lol

I’m not disagreeing with whatever else you’re saying in terms of practicality and flexibility or whatever. I’m just saying it’s a hobby, and I prefer the original ways of doing things is all.

To be honest they likely will add in backwards compatibility because ever since the GBC they have been backwards compatible.
GB games can be played on a GBC, GB and GBC games can be played on a GBA, GBA ( but not GB and GBC games for some reason) can be played on a DS and so on.
And even the wii and Wii U were backwards compatible with their previous console. The reason why the switch isn’t backwards compatible is because of the change in media (disc based to cartridge based) so if Nintendo is keeping the cartridge format then it’s very likely that the next console will be backwards compatible.

@rallydefault
I think you missed the main thrust of my point there

Again, it has usually been true that backwards compatibility provides a worse experience than native hardware. Or at the very least an experience that doesn't line up with the new hardware. For portables especially the GB(C) had a 160x144 screen, the GBA 240x160, the DS 2x 256x192 and the 3DS had a 320x240 and a 400x240 stereoscopic screen. All had backwards compatibility but, due to scaling, all were compromised compared to the original. So without question yes, in those cases I'd prefer original hardware over the BC that Nintendo offered

Then you look at GC -> Wii -> Wii U. Gamecube games on the Wii? I'm not sure there were any technical issues with that from what I understand. Other than the fact that you needed to purchase optional hardware to take part. Much of a muchness. But with Wii -> Wii U there's that secondary boot you have to wait for which is automatically a downgrade. Plus the fact that the SD -> HD transition wasn't kind on the Wii just generally. The only saving grace was off TV play for Wii games which.... was ok... but most Wii games used the WiiMote which made that awkward anyways. I'd take Mario Galaxy on a Wii on a CRT over Wii U BC

But neither of these scenarios are going to play out for Switch -> Switch 2 I feel. The resolution mismatch, again, won't be a thing because the Switch often misses the target resolution anyways. So assuming there's some sort of hardware level support for it right there it's already better than all of the GB and DS backwards compatibilities. And even if you did this is less of an issue the higher the resolution is. And it also already beats the value proposition of the Wii BC on Wii U because, well, we're already through the HD barrier

So yeah, it's easy to say that it's never good because of reason X or Y in history. But what I'm saying is that all of the reasons why you wouldn't want to use BC on old hardware is just straight up not going to happen this time. You're looking at this retrospectively rather than how things are going to play out

also the Super Gameboy is.... an interesting case. It's almost like a proto-Switch in some ways. Just without the fidelity to back it up. Not ideal. Plus, as much as I loved it back in the day, when you were a kid and you had time to commandeer the TV to play some games? A Gameboy game, which I could play whenever I wanted, wasn't the top of my list

@skywake Uh...no, Wii could run Gamecube games natively, no extra hardware required, at least until the 2010 revision model that removed BC from the platform. You're thinking of the Game Boy Player on Gamecube that let you play Game Boy Advance titles on the hardware.

@WiiWareWave
Yeah, nah. I meant what I said. The Wii could play GC games natively but you needed additional hardware to do it. As in you needed a Gamecube controller and memory cards. Compare that to all of the portables where you got backwards compatibility out of the box. Or even Wii compatibility on the Wii U where while you needed the WiiMote to play most Wii games the WiiMote was also required for some Wii U games. You didn't even need the disc, they put Wii games on the Wii U eShop

But certainly, accessory requirements aside, GC compatibility on the Wii is the gold standard. And then GB compatibility on the GBC is maybe like the platinum standard. What I'm expecting is that Switch compatibility on Switch 2 will exceed both

@RygelXVIII
To be pedantic I said proto not prototype which isn't quite the same thing. I meant it more in the sense that it was primitive, ill formed, not quite there. Like the first stirrings of what would eventually become the Switch. Because what it allowed is the ability to play your portable games on the TV. Which is the core of what the Switch is

Also the Super Gameboy was literally a Gameboy in a SNES cartridge, it did far from "nothing on its own". If anything it was the SNES that was doing close to nothing. And it was doing this in '94 which was a fair while before the PSP

@skywake
Dude... please, stop and listen to me.

I'm not talking about specs. I'm not talking about what is technically better.

I'm just talking about the feel. That's it. It's just how the games feel to me when I play them. And when I play them on original hardware with the original controllers, the games feel right to me. In contrast, when I play GameBoy games on NSO using the NES controller (closest you can get to an actual GameBoy button feel), it doesn't feel right.

That's why I like retro gaming and why I don't use backwards compatibility on consoles that offer it.

It's as simple as that. Sometimes things are just a feeling.

Backwards compatibility won't affect my decision to get the next console. I'm quite happy to keep my Switch and continue playing my existing games on it.

However, a very prominent feature of the Switch era has been ports, remasters and remakes, to the extent that the console is home to a pretty sizeable back catalogue from across the generations. Far from comprehensive, but it's growing all the time. Add to that the hundreds of original games made for the Switch (thousands if you count everything on the eShop) and you have almost certainly the best library of any Nintendo console.

That's why I think BC for the Switch successor is a must, so that this library can continue to expand rather than starting from scratch. Without BC, we'll have to put up with half of those games being slowly ported (and having to buy them again if you want them on the new console) and the other half being left behind and eventually becoming unavailable when the Switch eShop shuts down. We might even get more new releases (at least when it comes to remasters etc) if BC is in place than if it isn't, because developers won't have to spend time and money re-porting everything from Switch to Switch 2.

I don't think there's anything to worry about though. Ideally I'd like the Switch to be the start of an ecosystem that carries forward to all future Nintendo systems, and it's impossible to predict if that will happen, but I'll be shocked if the upcoming console isn't backwards compatible.

I think DK showcases very well the need for backwards compatibility, the DK games since 2010 have been:

• 2010 - DKC Returns
• 2013 - DKC Returns
• 2014 - DKC Tropical Freeze
• 2018 - DKC Tropical Freeze
• 2025 - DKC Returns

@rallydefault
Honestly I'm not sure you're reading my posts if you think I'm making technical arguments here. All I've done is outline the reasons why for previous consoles the backwards compatibility offered has been worse. The non-integer scaling, the partitioned off features, the additional loading screens but also yes, the controller changes. Some of these are technical, most of them are just the end user experience of it

But my point in bringing these up is to just highlight that I don't think these issues will be repeated for Switch -> Switch 2. The Switch often doesn't hit its full resolution anyways and the Switch controller is more or less just a standard modern controller. As long as they don't go crazy with the Switch 2 design and backwards compatibility is handled well? I don't see why this would be something to avoid

You can bring up whatever examples you want of where and when you felt like backwards compatibility didn't feel right. I've brought up plenty of my own also. But what I'm saying is that I don't think this will be like that. This will be far more like playing an original GB game on the GBC or playing a GC game on the Wii i.e. literally the same experience right down to the controller. And I don't think this is wishful thinking on my part, that's just how the Switch has positioned itself

Unless you're particularly offended by the idea of Link's Awakening HD played with literally the Switch Pro controller just now at a locked 60fps I don't see what there is to complain about. Because that's pretty much the only thing that's likely to be different about these games when played through BC

You know as much as this is always cited as a reason I feel like the other side of this is somehow worse. I don't really mind that I've been rebuying these games because the Wii/Wii U/3DS/Switch transition involved all sorts of different hardware capabilities. DKCR goes from the first release, to portable and now portable and HD. It's just natural upgrades. What irritates me slightly more is that there are games like, I don't know, DuckTales Remastered that released on Wii U and because there's no automatic compatibility they just disappear into the ether

I'm split on backwards compatibility. I like the idea of it, but I never use the feature as much as I'd expect. It's similar to emulators for me - I love the idea of a preserved game collection, playable in HD with enhancements.
...have I ever completed a game on an emulator? No. Barely pass the 3/4 hour mark.

With that said, I like the idea of carrying games forward. The PS4/5 transition was definitely blurred and that seemed interesting. The idea of carrying my games over is a nice idea, with possible improvements in performance or resolution. Switch Online is definitely built for it as well with the Virtual Console replacement.

We'll see, there are plenty of Switch games I'd still like to buy. But I was in the same boat with the 3DS and then I never looked back.
I slightly regret it because I can't go back and play those games without paying tons for a physical copy, but I've also had tons of great experiences with the Switch. It's not like I've experienced some gaming drought.
Pro and cons I suppose.

I have a theory that 70$ first party games will be slowly pushed onto us into the switch's successor and beyond. The way I see it, nintendo wants to charge more for their first party games, but know that most people don't want to pay 70 dollars for first party titles. The solution, lock the latest anticipated games in their most profitable franchises behind an increased price of 70$!

They tested this out with TOTK and it sold relatively well , showing that most people will still buy their most inticipated games despite the price increase. And as time goes on they'll probably do it again with games like prime 4 and the next 3D mario. (Though to sweeten the deal for anyone on the fence, they'll probably include previous / future DLC for anyone who buys before a specific date.)

@Kimyonaakuma
Looking back I'd say I'm usually the same with backwards compatibility. It's a thing I always say I want but ultimately it's not something I really used much when it has been offered. But there has usually been some clear reason as to why. Thinking back on the times when I could've used it.....

GB -> GBC: I used it extensively

GBA -> DS: I never had a GBA so I didn't have an existing library. The non-integer scaling stuff I don't think is something I would've been aware of before tipping in so that wasn't a factor but availability was. By the time I picked up the DS (2006) it's not like GBA game were readily available at retail. And in any case, why bother with Super Mario Advance or Super Circuit when I had New SMB, Yoshi's Island DS and Mario Kart DS?

GC -> Wii: I seriously considered this but, again, availability was a factor. I did pick up a WaveBird for N64 VC, because it was certainly better than the CC or WiiMote for that. So in a sense I did do a lot of "BC games" on Wii via VC if that counts. But I never picked up a memory card, mostly because I was just annoyed that a memory card was even needed I think, so I never played any GC games on Wii. Ultimately it came down to availability again. If I could've downloaded GC games on the Wii Shop Channel there's no doubt in my mind I would've bought and played Wind Waker and TTYD at the very least

DS -> 3DS: Early on there weren't many 3DS games so I definitely used it a fair bit. Especially given Pokemon was late to the party. Also I carried around and played Mario Kart DS until 7 released. I certainly wasn't picking up new DS games during that period (other than Pokemon) but this time around it was mostly because of the scaling issues and also that 3DS games could just do so much more visually

Wii -> Wii U: I used it only a few times but mostly just for games that supported the CC and later in the cycle when they opened up off-TV play. I think the only real exception was Wii Sports Resort which I continued to drag out occasionally. Until Wii Sports Club released. I did download the Metroid Prime Trilogy though so there's that. For me the issue with Wii games on the Wii U was mostly that extra loading time and the fact that Wii games already looked awful on a larrge HDTV even before the Wii U launched and it was something I was glad to leave behind

I feel for most of the above yes, what you say is true. It's often not something I've actually used and it's definitely not something I've used in place of new games for the new platform. But I feel that in most cases that has been due to just pure lack of availability. The only real exception to that is the Wii -> Wii U transition where they, eventually, put those games on the Wii U eShop. But Wii games were, well, Wii games and WiiMode was far from ideal

If Switch games just literally sit alongside Switch 2 games in the eShop? If they run either as good or better than they did on Switch? If there is no compromise in terms of controller differences or if they literally let you use the OG controllers? I think I'll end up using it a fair bit. Not just for games I already have either. I see no reason why a fully BC Switch 2 doesn't end with me continuing to pick up "OG Switch" games. And certainly for people who skipped the Switch but will get Switch 2, and they will exist, I'm sure they'll feast