Topic: The Nintendo Switch Rumor and Speculation Thread

I am making the argument in opposition to the view that the people who brought the Switch are not interested in powerful hardware and won't be willing to shell out another $300-400 for a more powerful version of the same thing

I'm saying no. These people probably won't immediately upgrade. They probably won't be the first in line to upgrade regardless of what the Switch 2 is. But that this is not Nintendo's main concern. What I am saying is that Nintendo's primary goal isn't to convince people who have a Switch to get up and upgrade to the Switch 2. It's a side effect but it's not their primary goal. Their primary goal is to convince people to buy into their platforms and for them to remain on their platforms as opposed to spending their money on other platforms

Someone who doesn't upgrade to the Switch 2 but is still paying for NSO and buying Switch games? This isn't an issue. And I don't think it really needs to be stated why this isn't an issue. The concern is that if and when these people decide that the Switch is no longer enough for them that they will buy something other than one of Nintendo's platforms. Or that people who are new consumers will look at available hardware and pick something other than one of Nintendo's platforms

I am not constructing some version of the argument other than the one that was being put forward. I am attacking the argument directly. But it seems that people are unwilling to engage in an actual discussion and would prefer to attack me. Based on things I haven't said and arguments I haven't put forward

Marketing wise you want to capture a fair share of the enthusiast crowd. Most people in the market place are not like us at all but we are tastemakers in this market place who play a key role condensing the “winners” and “losers” from complex and highly nuanced arguments into a simpler “this is the best one to buy now” snaps.

A more powerful Switch isn't really necessary for the mass market - only in so much as it keeps the console in the hands of the enthusiasts and keeps our discourse positive. Most consumers won’t read our internal enthusiast discussions and arguments (& wouldn’t understand them anyway) but they do pick up on our general mood. That’s the power behind a Switch 2 - at least on day 1.

The discussion of generations reminds me how parents were upset that their kid's NES didn't play SNES games.

The CD-i games were all the Zelda main-protag games we need.

@PikaPhantom Has he thought about what her gameplay would be like? Or is he simply thinking Link with a Zelda skin...in which case...what is the point lol.

@PikaPhantom I mean that could be one of this year's games. I kind of doubt it as I don't really see how this fits only a year after their last mainline game, I think seeing ports are more likely.

Also, for those who don't know the capital letters stand for 'This is a hint'. I've heard that PapaGenos knew a lot about NASB2 and something about Super Mario RPG, however I feel like PapaGenos has gotten things wrong before. This seems a lot less likely as this doesn't seem to have an imminent announcement (as the Direct is probably at least a month away). Maybe PapaGenos has some accurate sources and some who might be just guessing? Nothing against PapaGenos, but I don't think this is likely. Unless, of course, PapaGenos just knows about an upcoming Zelda game that's like a Hyrule Warriors or something and Zelda is more main in it.

@GrailUK Ain't his hypothetical premise. Either his source is faulty or it's not, and a Zelda-led game is happening

@PikaPhantom Ah that makes more sense. Just saying we need a Zelda game made none to me lol.

I would love it if this were true. There were all the rumours and incorrect leaks about Zelda being playable in TotK. I didn't end up buying TotK, but I definitely would have if Zelda were the main character.

Is Toadette just a skin of Mario in many games? Yes. Is she nonetheless superior in all possible ways? Also yes.

Not to mention that the series is named after Zelda. Maybe Link has just been a skin for Zelda this whole time.

As for gameplay differences? I imagine similar, but Zelda has more of a personality than Link so could actually speak to help along the plot. Plus Zelda usually has magic so I am sure they could mix things up a bit.

I can more easily imagine some TotK dlc that let's you play as Zelda is more than a standalone Zelda game, at this stage.

Perhaps if they hadn't told us TotK would have no dlc.

If it exists, could just be a warriors game. Or maybe some other spinoff.

@FishyS I feel like they have to pull the old switcheroo on us once in a while, just to keep us on our toes.

If this is real I suspect this is a Switch 2 announcement. Any kind of bold new idea is probably better saved for next gen, especially if it's a AAA, high budget sort of game (and Zelda typically is). Plus they might not have any big Zelda games planned early (maybe 2D Zelda, but it's unclear if it's releasing on Switch or Switch 2 and when), having a big new Zelda spinoff/side series would be a good addition to the lineup with the big main series 3D Zelda not happening anytime soon. There might be some concerns with it being not big enough like what happened with Luigi's Mansion on GC, but I think as a supplement to other big new main series games we're expecting like 3D Mario and Mario Kart I don't think this would be as much of an issue.

I do want Nintendo to start branching out with new IPs and subseries to flesh out their lineup, and I think they might be. It is a good way to help the Switch 2's lineup stand out more and feel like a legitimate evolution as opposed to just sticking to new entries in their tried and true IPs and feeling like a rehash (I do think they need entries in the tried and true IPs as tentpoles to help it sell, but they should experiment with new series as a supplement and a way to find potential new tentpoles). One of the reasons I found the Wii U and its lineup overrated was because there were far too many entries that just felt like they were phoning it in and recycling things from the Wii, DS, and 3DS (especially their platformers, which there were a lot of that gen). This is one thing that they should try to avoid next gen if they want to help limit the inevitable drop in sales (it won't doom the Switch 2 but it probably will hurt to a degree), it shouldn't just feel like the same games all over again. The 3D Mario game shouldn't just feel like Odyssey 2, the 3D Zelda shouldn't just feel like BotW3, the Smash game shouldn't just feel like Ultimate 2, the Animal Crossing game shouldn't just feel like NH2, etc., if we get that much repetition for that many games the lineup is going to be less compelling. Now for the record I don't think we will get that much (some of those above examples already feel like they're not going to be that), but this general vibe is something to watch out for. If the games just feel like the games we already bought on Switch, why buy the new Switch 2 entries? Shaking things up for existing series and coming up with new series (whether it's a new IP, a spinoff/subseries of an existing one, or just an entry of an existing series that plays/feels differently) will help the Switch 2 lineup really feel like a distinct evolution of the Switch rather than a tired recycling of what the Switch did.

I predicted a few months ago about a new Hyrule Warriors taking place during the imprisoning war being a Switch 2 game. That would have Zelda as the main character.

https://www.nintendolife.com/forums/nintendo-switch/next_nint...

It would be cool if it was a Switch 1 game but the better outcome would be if it's a Switch 2 game and Switch 1 gets the Wii U Zelda remasters.

@Grumblevolcano personally I think a Hyrule Warriors would be one of those games that support the Switch when the focus turns to the successor, although that's just what I think. Still leaves room for Zelda WiiU ports at somepoint before.