Topic: What Would You Want In A Switch Pro Update?

@Slowdive
Well it probably would be easier to update the existing system than to come up with something all new and less of a gamble too. If they did do an upgrade it would be the first time in Nintendo history as far as home consoles go. I don't recall anyone asking for an upgraded Nes, Snes or any of their other systems since then. Usually you just wait it out until it's time for the successor and the switch will be about done soon anyway.

Plus those exclusive game rumors knocks another point off. People will say great now i gotta buy another switch to play all the switch games! We'll see what happens but I'm hoping it's all a pipe dream.

Why is everyone calling it the "Switch Pro"?
Doesn't the Super Nintendo Switch sounds much better and nostalgic

For the same reason people in threads called a theoretical Wii successor the "Wii HD" or 3DS successor a "4DS". Or why I jokingly called the Switch before we knew what it was going to be a "Wii U2". We don't know the actual name so we use the naming we have.

@Kaioken Nah, the best name for it is Switch 2 Electric Boogaloo for the win!

Well other than the GC -> Wii -> Wii U transition every new home console generation from Nintendo has been a significant architectural shift. And I think you could definitely make the case that each of those consoles was "a revision" of the previous hardware. The only thing that really brakes the case for those three being revisions were the changes in controllers and the change in storage media capacities. Oh and obviously Nintendo's marketing and firmware restrictions.

You ask why people are wanting a hardware revision? To be blunt, I'm wondering why you want a successor. I see no reason why Nintendo needs to draw a hard line in the sand with the Switch and start again. The Switch is on a very stable, very standard and very scalable hardware architecture. I see no reason for a successor in the medium term.

But I do see value in something with a bit more horsepower and support for more modern display standards.

edit: And in any case, the revision model isn't exactly unusual in 2021. If anything the idea of "console generations" is the thing that's a bit dated. Even the new consoles from Sony and Microsoft are more revision than new platforms

@Zeldafan79 Didn't Nintendo say that we're like only four years into an eight year lifespan?

@skywake I understand, but still, Super Nintendo Switch (SNS) will sound so much better then just pro.

@Slowdive I think Nintendo needs to do their own thing, instead of copying the pro of PS
It's been since the Snes they did that. It would be unique if they brought "super" back to an upgraded version of the console

Well many of us see the switch as an home console, yes, so the upgrade seems strange, but I'm pretty sure Nintendo is applying to the switch the marketing scheme they always applied to every portable console.
The switch lite was a clear hint: the switch will be to this decade what the Gameboy and the DS family were to previous decades.

If you go by NIN naming this would be logic as NES to SNES. My vote would be SNS aka NS to SNS. Sounds better and looks better for it's abbreviated name. Think about it more the NES re-started the gaming in 1985 and the Switch started a new Portable/Docked gaming lifestyle so it would be prudent to call it SNS to give it a higher standard naming.

I would like to see 3ds support added in. That would get me to buy a Pro. Otherwise I am fine waiting for the Switch successor in four or so years.

...Dolby, I want Dolby. I can live without it, I guess, but...I have surround sound speakers, and setting them up to work with the Switch a pain since I have to use a bunch of cords and an adapter and crap. Even then, the audio is...weird when Switch surround sound is enabled. Like, one split-second of silence will cause the speaker audio to stall when audio is played again. It's really annoying...

Just, give us Dolby, Nintendo, everyone else is doing. You're not poor, you're not going bankrupt anytime soon, buy the license and put the stupid thing in the system. >.<

@Slowdive did you mean to tag me? Because your post has nothing to do with I said. So I am assuming you tagged me by mistake.

@Slowdive what? No I didn’t. And your recent reply makes even less sense. “Don’t play games” ? I have no idea what you are talking about or why you said that to me.

Yeah you definitely mixed me up with another poster so I am going to move on.

@Slowdive they said 3DS, not 3rd party.

@Slowdive yeah it was. I never said anything other than 3ds support. It wouldn’t even have made sense for my post to have said 3rd party support and at best if my phone auto corrected it would have said “3rd support” which would have been nonsensical. I think you misread my post. Which is fine, although even with that context it still makes your initial response a bit confusing. Nonetheless since it was apparently a misunderstanding I will keep it moving.

@Slowdive works for me. Although the back and forth has actually made me wonder about your original post now.

So you mentioned that you feel a “Pro” system will bring in 3rd party support that Switch can’t handle now. However, what makes a revision that will only have so much of an improvement vs an actual successor that will have an across the board increase (but will likely still be ARM vs x86) as well as possibly more game engine support (as that and RAM are the major bottlenecks more than GPU) a selling point to these 3rd parties (or gamers for that matter)?

Right now the graphics argument is that the AAA devs aren’t able to put games on Switch (and EA’s frostbyte nonsense but that’s another can of worms). Yet the those games are available on other platforms. How does a revision with nothing but a minor to moderate specs boost do to get a current switch owner to but a new system or even a Nintendo only gamer to invest again in the same platform line rather than taking that money and buying say a ps4pro or a series s (are the one x systems still on the market?) ? Note I am aside from MS citing older systems that are graphically more powerful than switch but actually available to buy.

Many Devs have cited their perception of Nintendo (rather than its hardware) as their reason or when they could get away with it they cited install base. Some in the early days dismissed the system without having owned a dev kit. How is a revision going to combat that?

Honestly I don’t think a successor will combat that... only sales (as in if other companies lose expected sales to Nintendo. Which is not the same as Nintendo gaining sales 3rd parties never expected to garner in the first place such as the animal crossing boom) atrophy will.

So long as devs and publishers that previously ignored Nintendo can afford to continue to ignore Nintendo they will do so. If everyone stopped playing FIFA on every other system but Switch I have no doubt that EA would get the full game running on Switch even if they had to burn it down and start over. So back to my question: what makes you feel that a revision/Pro will pull in these devs vs a successor?

@Joeynator3000
I'd be super happy if they added Dolby but my expectations are low. Maybe the allure of Atmos drags them over the line....

@skywake I don't fully get Atmos, honestly. Maybe soundbars don't do it as well? My newer sound bar has it, but it just sounds like a normal 5.1 sound bar to me. lol

@Joeynator3000
Doesn't make a whole lot of sense except for super high end setups. 5.1 is plenty for most I'd say. But it is the marketing buzzword of today and supporting it requires support of DD 5.1. So I hope they support it because with my current setup I can only get stereo from the Switch (and Wii U before it)

it would be interesting to know from a technician what kind of new custom processor from nvidia nintendo could use to avoid the shortage problem for the upcoming model.
my gues would be...not many right? unless the new processor is made of pancakes? there's too much about volumes and orders of semiconductors that i don't know!!