Topic: What if: Your Switch physical collection won't be backwards compatible with the Switch successor.

i will probably go ahead and buy another switch in case my current one breaks down or nintendo stops their production ;-;

@MarioBrickLayer I'm indifferent. It would be preferable for the Switch successor to have backwards compatibility. I would be compelled to purchase a Switch successor at its launch if it did. But Nintendo is a corporation like any other, profits take precedence over customer satisfaction.

I wouldn't be shocked if Nintendo asked physical collectors to start from scratch.

But that's assuming the Switch successor will support physical media. It could be all-digital instead.

I can't think of many things Nintendo would do to make me buy a new version of the Switch games I own, so I don't think I'd see it as 'starting from scratch'. I'm really happy with the Switch library as is, so I'm unless I come into a lot more money I won't be buying a new version of Witcher 3, or Pokémon Violet, or any of the other Switch titles supposedly let down by performance. I've got enough Switches to be able to play my Switch library for as long as I want.

The reason I re-bought the Wii U games ported to Switch is because Switch is portable and has sleep mode. Switch 2 needs to bake in something special to add much value to those games now. A 4k version? Doubt, maybe a few special cases if the textures are upgraded too.

Consoles as a whole being unpredictable in what will and won't be backward compatible is a big factor in why I don't buy much for consoles. If something is available on PC, I will (almost) always get it there because I know it's going to work on future hardware. I pretty well stick to just console exclusives.
And I went with Switch because I love Nintendo exclusives.

I'd be disappointed for sure, but it's not going to discourage me from buying the next Nintendo console. All digital is the only thing that would infuriate me, but I'd still suck it up eventually. I'd just do a lot of preparing to get as much memory for it as possible.

DLSS requires specific hardware that the Tegra X1 doesn't have, so no. They'd need to move to a new generation of Nvidia hardware for that.

I suspect he just threw that out there as an option if Nintendo want something that's more of a mid-generation refresh - like the PS4 Pro was - to tide the Switch over for a few more years until they're ready for a genuine successor.

I don't think for a fact Nintendo would want to loose market shares by force people to not have backward compatibility built in. The lost of 160million buyers would not be a good report of market shares or would invite the wrath of inventors loosing Billions in the process and shutting down of Nintendo. Having a new hardware with Ubber GPU and software updates to go with or software Developers already have games on-cart that will use the Ubber GPU to improve game performance. And the DLC S&V already mentions software updates to update graphics and game play for current games. So one wouldn't think others Software Developers haven't thought of this yet. Another Fact Nintendo awhile back asked Developers to make their games 4k capable so did no one not read this part and think wait why would Nintendo ask of this??

One story: You can search and read more about this was already coming from Nintendo but seems to be lost when the mere mention the Switch would have 4k/dlss option and no one remembers this news.

https://www.nme.com/news/gaming-news/nintendo-is-reportedly-a...

https://www.ign.com/articles/nintendo-reportedly-asking-devel...

I doubt they can wait much longer for a new Switch as games are coming out and pushing it hard already - waiting isn't a waiting game Nintendo should try as they only have the Switch as their sole console not like PS4 and PS4 pro model to choose from. They will as what I seen on YT and leaked rumors and some with more credibility then others posting on here seems to be going for a announcement in late 2023 and holiday release 2023. And all the news of them shutting potential leakers would indicate something is going behind backdoors and most likely would be that production has already begin far in advance of this news and they want to prevent disasters' leaks that could spoil their 2023 Holiday release of the nextGen Switch console until their ready to announce it. They most likely had hardware coming but needed to keep a lid on production and the TOTK oops didn't help and most likely forced their hand to block all leaks as one of those could be the New Switch itself as it's in production stage. The longer they wait the farther setback they will become waiting isn't a winning strategy for Nintendo here. They don't have a Pro and Standard next Gen Switch as it most likely is one console and the v2 would be firmware patched to improve the GPU to handle the updated games and Games would have updates to insure they can utilize the new Firmware update to improve the current GPU levels. How they go about it would be something to see what happens in Leaks if there is any considering Nintendo Ninja are going after leaks and banning another leaker would indicate they know something is coming but want to keep it quiet until they are ready. Leaks of the Switch 2017 was bad enough I don't think they want that happening agian.

Dare I say this, but why wouldn't they?

After all, that's precisely what they did with the Switch. 70+ million 3DS and 10+ million Wii U users were left with no means of bringing their games forward when it launched.

More generally, Nintendo have made a pretty solid business out of zigging when the games industry zags, so we should at least entertain the possibility that the eventual Switch successor will also be a radically different platform where backwards compatibility makes little sense.

I'd think that if what we're getting is essentially an improved Switch with a better SoC in a similar form factor, there will be some effort put into backwards compatibility. If it's not that though, all bets are off.

@Yannis Me too! I still have my original Switch, Ideally if there was a big reduction when they are selling off the last unts I would like to pick up a couple.

@Magician I think the same. I'll still be playing my Switch for years to come, I have loads of games to play or replay. Would you go digital only on the next platform if there wasn't backwards compatibility?

@gcunit I agree with you, with a few exceptions, if they did remastered (Metroid Prime style) Mario games (Sunshine, Galaxy etc) I would buy them. But without a Bowsers Fury style add on, I'm not buying Mario Odyssey again.

@Matt_Barber I think the best case is they put an X1 chip in the Switch 2 alongside two cartridge slots, one for current Switch games and one using a new style of cartridge to reduce the production cost and enable higher capacities.

@SwitchForce The only way to fix the issue your describing would be to make every future game playable on the Switch, which won't happen. They will want titles exclusive to the new system to drive sales of that system. For the average gamer I don't think backwards compatibility will be a system seller. @TheBigBlue is right!!!

@MarioBrickLayer I have no qualms about being all-digital for any platform. I used to own a PSPgo, Sony's old digital-only handheld. There were dozens of us. Dozens! lol

But it all comes down to the games. I still haven't made an effort to purchase either a PS5 or an XSX because there hasn't been a next-gen game that has convinced me to spend the money. Well, to be fair, Final Fantasy XVI might be the tipping point.

That sounds more like the worst case for me, at least beyond not having any backwards compatibility at all, as I wouldn't want a handheld device carrying the dead weight of an extra SoC and cartridge slot that provide no practical function when running new games.

Rather, if they can do it all in software, even if that requires patches for individual games, I think they should. If they've got to do it with hardware, they should be implementing the necessary features of the Tegra X1 into the new SoC. They've had six years to plan this, so there should be no need for last minute bodges unless they've messed up terribly somewhere along the way.

I particularly doubt that we'd see a second cartridge slot. The problems with Switch cartridges being relatively low capacity, slow and expensive - in comparison to things like SD cards at least - are nothing to do with the external design. It's far more about the internal technology, where they'll be locked in by existing contracts, but should have an opportunity to update things for the next generation.

As such, I'd think that it'd be more like going from the DS to 3DS or GB/GBC to GBA where they re-used the same slot for different cartridges. The only time they had dual slots was the DS, where it just wasn't practical to keep re-purposing the GBA one, and that was deleted by the time the DSi came out.

I think it will, but assuming it doesn't, I buy all my games digitally also.

But assuming even digital isn't BC either, then I'll just keep my Switch OLED to play them.

After all, I'm at three full 1 TB micro SD cards, with a 1.5 TB Micron micro SD on preorder from a wholesaler. I simply don't have room. And if I can't even contain all my Switch games on my Switch, I doubt even more I'll be able to contain all my larger Switch 2 games on my Switch 2, much less also fit my 3 TB of Switch games.

If it is BC, I'll probably just download 250 GB of the best games that get genuine upgrades running on the next system, and reserve the rest of the space for Switch 2 games. Leave all my other Switch games on Switch OLED. If I absolutely must, I can devote a 1 TB micro SD to Switch 2 that exclusively contains Switch games.

But ya. If it's not BC, then I'll just continue to use my OLED to play them as needed. Not that I expect to spend too much time playing Switch games once Switch 2 is out. Then again, I've got a backlog that could last a decade so, maybe I'll fall back on it after all.

As do I, as I can't see Nintendo creating a brand new format for the Switch 2. Switch cartridges are already as small as they can practically be without being too easily prone to loss (but trust the kids to manage that feat). We already know that they are capable of higher capacities, but publishers almost never use 32GB capacity cartridges as it is (and Nintendo have only NOW dipped their toes with their first 32GB release SIX YEARS after the launch of the console). I predict that Nintendo will continue to use Switch cartridges (or repurposed variants thereof) for as long as they continue to produce physical media for the foreseeable future, unless of course some new-fangled technology comes along that allows for significantly faster read speeds or other benefits that cannot be achieved with the form factor of Switch cartridges in their current state.

BUT, I did theorise a little while ago of the possibility of the Switch successor having a second cartridge slot that could be used for A. Simply having a second cartridge on board, and B. For physical releases of DLC where the base game is not on the cartridge and both cartridges will need to be inserted in order to utilise the content.

Of course, there's really no point in having two cartridge slots merely for the convenience of having two physical releases in one's console at any given time, but it would be an added convenience if it can also be used for game expansions.

I strongly doubt that it will happen though, but as an overwhelmingly physical gamer, I would appreciate the option to be able to tangibly own the DLC in lieu of revised all-in-cart releases (though I would also overwhelmingly prefer the latter as opposed to amassing a bunch of DLC-only carts where I would need to insert two cartridges to play certain games; and all-in-one cart releases also usually have all software updates baked into the cart as well).

And with that said, I can't see Nintendo making a "digital only" Switch successor either as the cartridge slot(s) would cost peanuts to include as opposed to the Ultra HD Blu-ray drives included in competing consoles.

If they don't have backwards compatibility, then it's just another reason to add to the list of why I should no longer bother with Nintendo.

@Matt_Barber @Sisilly_G Let me word it another way, the new Switch should support two types of cartridge, it could be one slot capable of handling two types of card.

If they want to do backwards compatibility properly then doing it in hardware is the best option as I guarantee if games needs to be patched, some developers won't bother, plus that would mean games which are complete on cartridge for the switch, won't be on the new model.

I understand the reason why the 32GB cartridge isn't used is due to the cost and that their are security issues across all capacities. A new type of cartridge could solve both of those problems.

I don't think the Switch successor will be digital only either, will the Switch 3 or Switch 4 be digital only? maybe.

Not sure why anyone is commenting on this thread TBH, was a bit of a troll thread when it was first raised and wasn't really based on anything. Just an idea being thrown out there with no real rationale. As I said when I first commented in this thread, there's no real reason for Nintendo to drop Tegra. Infact we know with some degree of confidence that they're sticking with Tegra. There's also no real reason to change the cartridges given capacity and physical size aren't really concerns

Also it's worth noting in a kind of high level sense most storage devices behave the same way, a Switch cartridge is no exception. You have pins for power, ground, clock and data. Usually some additional pins for checking if there is something connected. You give it power, you give it a clock for timing, you put some commands across some pins, it sends back data some pins

Could they make new cartridges that run at a higher clock or have a larger bus? I mean sure. But they could easily do that within the same form factor. All they'd need to do is have some kind of notch, detection pin or different response to some command. Then from that point in compatible hardware they could run it at a higher clock or whatever

If there's going to be a compatibility problem it'll be with the SoC which, again, unlikely given they're still going with Tegra. If there's no BC somehow by some complete dropping of the ball on Nintendo's part? There'll be no digital or physical BC. I don't see a scenario where digital games carry but physical games don't

@skywake If you watch the MVG video that @magician linked to earlier in the thread he explains that it looks fairly certain that Nintendo are moving away from the current Tegra architecture, but if they stuck with it and overclocked it, you don't get DLSS as @Matt_Barber posted previously or the performance improvement most people are expecting.

The bottom line is, backwards compatibility comes with a cost in one way or another.

@skywake

The idea for the thread wasn't a troll in the slightest.

It's a genuine question posed to the community to gauge how'd they feel.

But, the only Nintendo console to have backwards technology is the Wii being able to play Gamecube games. So why are we talking about this?
Yes I know the DS could play Gameboy Advanced games and 3DS the normal DS games. But we are talking consoles here.
But really they don't HAVE to do backwards tech, looks at the Playstation, the PS2 had backwards tech, then only the first iteration of PS3 had it. It's not a given thing.
But I will still play on my switch with my physical games as the backlog will probably last me for 10 years

It's Nintendo so realistically nothing is ever off the table entirely.

All that said I really don't see a situation in which the next Switch doesn't have BC. Might there be technical hurdles? Well of course just about everything that you do with any piece of new technology presents technical hurdles. The benefits of overcoming those hurdles are just too big in this case for Nintendo not to address them.

I know that a lot of people on threads like this take the attitude of "oh but they'll want to scam us by forcing us to pay full price again for DKC:TF and there's no way they'll turn that opportunity down" but I think that the people advancing that line of argument are being a little blind to the ongoing residual sales of first party games. Combined together those now 5+ year old second tier Nintendo games like Yoshi's Crafted World, NSMBU etc. continue to sell millions of units a year under the radar just because there's so many of them now on Switch. That's before we talk about games like MK8 DX or Smash Ultimate.

I just honestly don't think they'll want to scrub the decks and start from scratch this time unless the challenges to BC are really insurmountable technically.