Topic: The Nintendo Switch Rumor and Speculation Thread

I guess the big question is will Nintendo take a risk and develop this Switch Pro too soon and kill off the red hot selling switch base or will it be a flop and end up like the wii u with very little to show for it.

@Atomic77 too soon? Five years is more than long enough.

@sixrings
I'm not sure why you're trying to disagree with me. I'm literally arguing that it can't be a "quiet" release like the 2019 revision. With that said, I don't think how it's being reported tells us much about what Nintendo's strategy will be. If you remember back to the 2019 revision there were also leaks about that and they were also reported as if it was a bit of a deal. And it was, but Nintendo didn't market it like that.

This next revision sounds like it'll be a quite bit more than the 2019 revision was but. Which is why I agree with you and am arguing that it won't be as "quiet" a release as the 2019 revision was.

What makes you think a revision would kill off the platform? What's the rationale for that? Every major mid-cycle revision/upgrade in the history of gaming consoles has been to extend the life of a platform. Whether that was the PS4 Pro, XBOne X, New 3DS, DSi, Gameboy Color or even the N64 expansion pak and Super-FX chips on the SNES.

After 5 years I'd be more concerned about Nintendo's outlook on the life of the Switch platform if we weren't hearing murmurs of hardware revision. That we're hearing talk of it, even if it's a 2022 thing, says to me they expect the Switch platform to be around for at least another 3-4 years if not longer.

That makes no sense. A new revision won't kill off a whole platform. In fact, the Wii U failed BECAUSE people thought that it was a revision, so I feel like a Switch Pro would sell better and have the Switch last longer, rather than kill it's current fanbase.

Here's a dumb little theory that will likely make little sense.

What if Nintendo never discontinues the Switch, and instead just makes new revisions of it every few years?

They could either be numbered to act like a full sequel, or just have different surnames per revision like Xbox does with their console (Xbox 360 instead of Xbox Two, Xbox One instead of Three, Xbox Series X|S instead of Xbox Four).

Wouldn't be surprised if they did that. It makes perfect sense seeing how they're hitting two markets at the same time.

This is pretty much what every hardware manufacturer is doing these days so it makes a lot of sense. Although worth noting that having constant revisions and maintaining forward/backwards combability between revisions doesn't mean older hardware doesn't eventually get left behind. Tech improves exponentially and there's always an arms-race in terms of things like security. Eventually the oldest hardware will have to be dropped.

Like how there's a minimum spec for different versions of Windows and eventually support for older versions are dropped. Or how iOS 13 had a requirement for at least 2GB RAM which meant they dropped support for devices that at the time were ~6 years old. I wouldn't be tooo surprised if a few years after the Pro we get another revision and Nintendo reduces support for the OG Switch in some way.

@skywake They should bc the switch is the one if not the best nintendo console ever.

Have we had any details/rumours about how a pro would perform handheld?

I've already got consoles that run 4k on the TV and I'm not interested in buying a new system that can just about manage last gen (ps4/XB1) games.
I only use my switch as a handheld device and there hasnt really been any mention of handheld upgrades beyond a slightly larger screen - do you think it would it still be stuck at 720/1080 or would we at least get into the realm of 1440 if it utilises DLSS upscaling as it looks like it will hit 4k (upscaled) docked.

Would a switch Pro also unlock higher framerates on older games like the Series X does on last gen titles? I'm not expecting 120FPS (Nintendo will still lag behind by a gen) but hopefully games like BotW will get a 60FPS boost along with a visual upgrade.

That's a really good point, the Switch line can just be like a smartphone line in a way, with the Switch 2, Switch 2 Plus, Switch 2 Lite, or even a Switch 2S. Eventually they will then stop supporting older hardware, likely for the better, and still likely letting developers make games compatible with older revisions, like indie developers wanting to support huge audiences, or a big developer willing to take a risk. There might be games exclusive to one revision (and the succeeding revisions), but those would be rare, at least to Nintendo and most developers. Switch revisions would (purposefully) never reach PlayStation or Xbox levels of graphics, but Switch revisions will be close enough to make porting games not impossible.

And if developers are still dumb enough to make cloud versions, make the Switch compatible with SIM cards, not like anyone would use them, but whatever. Nintendo could even stream games made for newer Switch models to older models.

This would likely make the Switch the ultimate backwards compatible system. Once they add GameCube, N64, Wii, 3DS, DS, Game Boy, Game & Watch, Virtual Boy, and Ultra Hand games of course.

_{^{and Nintendo would buy EA}}

Honestly, I can see Nintendo doing most of this.

@Mr-Fuggles777 The screen is reported to still be 720p. Not sure about performance, although it sounds like it's going to be more than just DLSS.

@Mr-Fuggles777 I heard higher frame rates, a few about DLSS, but don't expect a 1440p or even a 1080p handheld screen. I hope I'm proven wrong btw.

Also, this may be a dumb question, but why not buy an mclassic upscaler for your Switch so you could have 1440p quality games?

@GrailUK that will be disappointing, its hardly a "pro" console of it barely hits HD resolution handheld. Especially if they are using the Samsung Oled screen as my Galaxy is 4k, there's no reason to hold it back.

@HotGoomba, hopefully we at least get 1080 or there won't be any reason for me to pick one up. I only play first party games so if its not a significant upgrade handheld, I hope Nintendo continues to support the original and Lite and not release Pro only software.

@Mr-Fuggles777 If you think about it though, it would be dumb to go for higher resolutions in HANDHELD mode. But you have to think about it

@GrailUK why would it be dumb?

I play Xbox games on my phone at a higher resolution than Switch (same screen size) and it looks amazing. It's always a shame when I go back to playing the Switch with such muddy visuals and textures.

Its a hybrid console, why only upgrade the docked version? If I want to play on the TV I will Switch on my Series X that runs games at 120FPS

@Mr-Fuggles777 Batterylife and extra cost for not much benefit etc etc. If folk aren't careful, they will be unintentionally asking for an Atari Lynx haha.

@Mr-Fuggles777
To be blunt, 720p on a 7" screen is plenty. Anything much beyond that is really just a waste of resources. They're much better off targeting a stable 60fps or underclocking it so they can extend the battery life and sticking with 720p. Or even going for 90fps on a 90Hz panel and using VRR to cover any dips.

I'll put it this way. I'm not much of a fan of Apple in general, particularly people claiming they're "innovators" when often they're not. But even I'll agree that they've pushed increasing screen resolutions more than anyone. For example the third gen iPad was basically a 10" 1440p screen back in 2012! But even Apple's flagship phones top out at 1080p, and they only jumped from 720p in 2019. They literally gave the idea of higher resolution displays on portable devices a branding because at the time it was a key point of difference

So don't take my word for it being not really a worthwhile upgrade. Even Apple thinks this. They only just moved from 720p on their phones! Phones that are a good 4-5X the price of the Switch!

@skywake if they can't improve the display handheld the why not just scrap the hybrid function and go for a TV only console for the Pro and really push the specs? - they would be saving money on the screen and could potentially match the Series S, rather than trying to match last gen hardware like PS4 and XB1. It would also be more cost effective for the consumer that way.

720p on a 7 inch screen is "retina", as Apple would call it, at 40cm distance from the eyes, so there is not much of a point going for a higher resolution in handheld, especially for a device that basically only plays games. It is much more important to improve on other things like performance and battery life. My phone has an insane resolution, but no game actually uses it.

Most games on Switch don't even run on 720p handheld, so as long as the Pro allows for 720p 60fps on most games, it will be a huge improvement. Plus, if the rumours are correct, the new panel for the display is far superior, which should provide better colour accuracy and most importantly make the console useable if there is sunlight. The slightest of sunlight coming into my room makes my current Switch really hard to look at.

On the discussion about Switch revisions. Nintendo is Nintendo, it seems obvious that they will continue with the Switch, but they always do the unexpected, so you never know. That being said, I don't see them going back to separate handheld and home consoles and their smartphone venture failed for the most part. So as long as the hybrid approach works for them, it is really hard for them to break away from it.

@HotGoomba even companies that do that like apple has numbers like 10, 10s, 11, 11s, 12. Numbers do sell. And Microsoft now has series. People know that they can still play games on the one and maybe through the cloud but people are basically giving their systems away on Facebook marketplace and kijiji versus the crazy series prices. Again generations sell.

That said I see no reason for a successor to be backward compatible and for some smaller games to be fully playable on both systems at different graphic settings of course. Similar to PlayStation these days.