Another week, another fresh batch of Switch rumours. The most recent include renewed whispers from the Wall Street Journal concerning potential hardware revisions for your favourite ‘homeheld’. The paper reported back in October last year on Nintendo’s potential plans to introduce a smaller, portable-focused model in 2019 – a rumour to which Nintendo issued the standard “nothing to announce” statement back in February – but sources now suggest that two new SKUs (say that quickly five times) are on the cards.
If these rumours turn out to have real substance, that would mean three different versions of Switch available to purchase. On the surface, that might seem like a bad idea - while consoles invariably see updated iterations across their life cycle, three variants of a handheld that's only just celebrated its second birthday is surely going to confuse the general public. Of course, Nintendo has form when it comes to marketing upgraded/downgraded versions of handheld hardware, as evidenced by the convoluted 3DS family tree and its confusing mixture of 'New' prefixes, 'XL' suffixes, and numbers that go down instead of up. It's fine for people like us who keep on top of these things, but it's not immediately obvious to a non-gaming parent that the original 3DS is technically inferior to a New 2DS. That's a problem that needs to be managed carefully. The long-rumoured Switch ‘Mini’ – a cheaper model without detachable Joy-Con or HD rumble – would presumably be aimed at the exact market that the 2DS theoretically caters for at the moment, so it's imperative that Nintendo doesn't muddy the waters too much.
That said, a smaller, more durable SKU continues to make eminent sense, especially now that it’s finally safe to say that 3DS has left the building. While the portable loitered around the exit for a good while, launch sales of Bowser’s Inside Story were abysmal and Switch’s popularity seems to be crossing over into the younger demographic. In addition to Nintendo’s usual line-up of family-friendly software, things like Labo are explicitly targeting that audience and a 3DS under the tree this holiday season could well result in Christmas tears (although we’d be more than happy with one of those Super Nintendo XL models, if you're reading Santa).
The 3DS will continue to exist as a sub-£100 option for families on a budget, but unless it lurches back in classic zombie style for one last swing, it looks like Kirby’s Extra Epic Yarn will be the handheld’s final encore. A new, smaller Switch around the £180/£200 mark – with a more robust design to better withstand being dropped in the footwell on a long car journey – would take over its role very well. Just – whatever you do – don't stand in front of a mirror and say "New Nintendo 2DS XL" five times.
Central to making the console more ‘childproof’ (and smaller) would be the rumoured integration of the Joy-Con into the main housing. Presumably you’d still be able to dock the console and link standard Joy-Con wirelessly; many games like Super Mario Party require detachable Joy-Con and we highly doubt Nintendo would create new hardware that prevented you from playing (and more importantly, buying) existing software.
The removal of the HD rumble motors could reduce the form factor of the casing while keeping a similar sized battery – a sensible option for a portable-focused variant. Having the controllers permanently attached should also save juice that would otherwise be used for wireless communication. Assuming this smaller version could still connect to a TV, it might require an ‘adaptor’ to work with the existing dock, but then Nintendo has never shied away from charging for extra plastic accessories. Cha-ching!
There are plenty of other ways Nintendo could make a cheaper model even more attractive – how many iterations of the 3DS did you go through? There’s no reason to think we won’t see multiple colours or perhaps even detachable plates like the non-XL New Nintendo 3DS, especially if it’s marketed as a model for younger gamers. We never did get our hands on those beautiful hanafuda card faceplates.
All that’s well and good, but it’s this second supposed SKU that gets our pulses racing. Rumoured to have ‘enhanced features targeted at avid video gamers’, it’s this version that will apparently appeal to the enthusiasts. What exactly could ‘enhanced features’ mean, though?
Well, we’ve looked before at potential improvements that we think any revision could benefit from – including a reduced bezel and better screen – but WSJ’s sources state that this ‘Pro’ model is more than a ‘New Nintendo 3DS’-style revision. Now, the New 3DS did still get a minor specs boost which resulted in better performance and a very small selection of exclusive titles that wouldn’t run on an original model, but the main Nvidia chip that powers the Switch – the Tegra X1 – was getting a little long in the tooth when the console launched. The logical upgrade would be to replace that with a chip based on the X2, or something even newer.
So, how could this effect games? Could an upgrade to the main chip make, for example, 4K output possible? With the falling price of Ultra High-Def TVs arguably making them the default purchase when buying a new television nowadays, there are certainly gamers – us included – who would be very interested in a Switch ‘Plus’ that incorporated upscaling to output an image that looks better on 4K displays. While we’d argue that native 4K rendering is still out of Switch’s league for the time being, we’ve seen checkerboard rendering solutions produce excellent results on PS4 Pro when the content itself is output at sub-UHD resolutions.
To be clear, we’re talking about some sort of baked-in solution that would apply to all software – we’re not suggesting for one moment Nintendo are working on a portable to rival the power of PS4 Pro or Xbox One X. The WSJ article states explicitly that parts suppliers and developers who have seen the prototype hardware confirm it will not be as powerful as Sony and Microsoft’s more hardcore offerings. That sort of performance from a mobile chipset simple isn’t practical in 2019, certainly not at consumer-friendly prices, but we don’t think it’s unreasonable to speculate that the extra juice from an upgrade could be used to make your Switch library look a less jaggy when blown up on an 2160p display.
In addition to a larger screen with a reduced bezel around the edge, a potential Switch ‘Pro’ might offer ‘docked‘ performance in handheld mode, making a 1080p screen viable for the portable. Other upgrades could be applied to ‘Pro’ or ‘Plus’ versions of the Joy-Con – how about analogue triggers to use with (crosses fingers) GameCube games or an in-built microphone? Sticks that don’t drift would be a start, and obviously any upgraded controllers would be compatible with the existing Switch.
Rumours suggest this new hardware will be announced at E3 this year – and with signs that Microsoft are looking to ‘go big’ at the event (and with details on PS5 surely coming this year), it makes sense for Nintendo to maintain its current momentum with its hybrid console. Whatever happens, segregating the player base with these potential revisions would be unwise – fragmenting the audience between those who can guess the number of ice cubes in their Joy-Con and those who can’t even remove their Joy-Con would be a mistake, only stalling the progress the console is making. For that reason, we expect any new hardware to integrate fully with existing software and accessories.
But, hey, Nintendo is capable of pretty much anything. Whatever the company has up its sleeve, it looks like it’s going to be an exciting (and expensive) year, but it will take some careful messaging to differentiate between its offerings, especially if the Nintendo Switch 'family' is going to look anything like the 3DS equivalent.
Which of these two revisions would you prefer to see become a reality? Share your thoughts on these rumours below.
As long as they communicate the differences clearly and don’t fragment the player base by making games exclusive to any machines, this could work. But otherwise they’re wading into dangerous territory.
See how the exclusive "new" 3ds family failed at sales because the smaller installed base, Nintendo should encourage developers to makes their games escalable enough to run on the base and "lite switch" but also running on a "Pro" Switch and using the graphical boost to use better textures, more resolution, etc... (just like some Xbox One X games)
With the major success of the DS and 3DS, I'm sure having a cheaper and more beefy option of the Switch,will for sure do good for Nintendo.
Feels like a cash grab. I wish Nintendo would spend this energy making new games.
I'm ready for an upgrade so long as there's additional 3rd party software. Really want some more fps on the go, Doom's good but I could use a CoD or Battlefield game.
@RetiredR A Switch that doesn't offer handheld mode isn't a Switch.
That'd be the worst possible thing to happen. The more powerful version should just run games better both handheld/tabletop and docked. No skipping out on anything.
@RetiredR @Blizzia I'm completely fine with them releasing a home-only version, eventually - though I wouldn't buy it. I do agree that making the more powerful version home only doesn't make a ton of sense. I think there would be an even bigger market for the more powerful version to be able to run games at a proper 1080p handheld.
4K output? The new Yoshi game can't even manage to output 720p in the dock!
Unless the Pro model is a pretty extensive hardware upgrade, then I don't care about it. And if it is, that's going to make third party ports troublesome, because you know they'll start designing games around the specs of the newer ones, leaving the OG model with unoptimized experiences. I don't really want a Pro model yet.
Assuming they can cut costs enough, though, a handheld-focused budget version of the Switch is an excellent idea. The 3DS is pretty much dead at this point (not to me, as I've already bought multiple titles for the system just this year, but in general), so, with a bunch of big-on-handheld games coming in 2019, it makes sense to market a new model alongside them to convince people to truly make the Switch a one-per-person system. This is their chance if they can hit an attractive price point.
I only need one lol
"Sticks that don’t drift would be a start"
This. Yes, I've got a pro controller, and an 8bitdo. I also play in handheld sometimes, with the joycon. Drift happens.
I'd honestly be happier with nipping that issue in the bud, along with some system/UI changes, than a new model that just loads BotW 2.3 seconds faster.
I know the Switch plus is going to make it tough on me, but I'm going to try my best to focus on the games with my original Switch system. Whenever Nintendo makes a very strong iteration I'm usually on board.
1. Switch with Clam design like 3DS.
2. Backward compatible with 3DS & NDS games ALL region.
3. Upper screen can be removed and docked while lower screen will working like Wii U gamepad.
4. 64 GB internal storage.
5. Reversible cover plates like New 3DS.
6. WHITE color available as default bundle.
7. Can interact with 3DS Local play.
8. Enable to back up save data like 3DS.
9. Youtube as default app.
10. Enable to buy 3DS eshop games on Switch.
I still have not yet jumped on the Switch bandwagon, as at the moment I am happily catching up on my 3ds backlog. Plus I travel a hell of a lot so the durability of the 3ds vs current Switch has made me reluctant to jump ship
Saying that, the Mini version that is portable friendly but able to dock into the tv via an accessory is certainly a purchase I will make.
@roadrunner343 I'd be outraged if they did that honestly. It's like taking the most brilliant idea they've ever had (a hybrid device) and scrapping it for another disastrous home console.
As long as the core concept of the Switch sees zero changes, any revision is fine. Be it power, size, design or otherwise.
But if the core concept is tampered with, it's a disaster.
The Switch is unique because it's a hybrid. If you remove the hybrid part, you might as well buy a more powerful home console (and yes, I know that such a thing wouldn't have Nintendo games on it, which kind of defeats the point... But then again so does making a home-only version of the console.)
@RetiredR The switch could definitely use a more powerful variant that maybe doesn't offer handheld mode.
I thought the Switch's biggest selling point was that you could play games 'on the go'?
Not the mini for me. But I think I can day one buy the "plus" one if it's under 600€ and if it's really worth. Rumors said it may incorporate 512 cuda cores and something like that... If it's a really powerful upgrade than I'm in. Otherwise I'm fine with my switch.
I can easily seeing a Switch Mini happening, but I'm quite skeptical about this "upgraded" model. I can't help but suspect it will simply be that newer systems will now feature 64 or 128GB of internal memory.
The new 2ds has no stereoscopic 3d, so obviously technically inferior to the 3ds.
The Switch family of systems is obviously an inevitability (and a much more convenient and elegant solution than having separate home and handheld consoles/libraries/eshops/online systems, etc. at this point imo). However the "releasing both new versions (Mini/Pro) in the same year" rumour seems baffling to me. Most people aren't going to put down the money for two consoles in the same year, so why not spread them out to maximize the impact of both. Though to be fair, compared to the ridiculous amount of iterations the 3DS had, I suppose Nintendo have shown remarkable restraint (by their recent standards) by having the Switch on the market for two whole years without a new version.
@Blizzia It's a fine argument to say that from a marketing perspective, they should stick to the hybrid. However, I'm not sure what there is to be outraged about if they didn't. Just don't buy the new revision. As I said, I have absolutely no interest in a home console only version, but should they release one for those that are interested, it doesn't impact my ability to play my current Switch. I would be interested in a cheaper, smaller, portable only console - though I agree with you that if they do make a cheaper/smaller system, it should (and will likely) remain compatible with the dock.
@RetiredR Exactly what I'd like.
Why do we assume that updated models will cause confusion?,phones get updated models that run alongside existing versions and have no issues.
Switch mini will sell to each person in a family. Switch Beefy will be for someone who mainly plays on the TV. The original Switch will remain the best version for most.
Switch Mini has clear requirements, but Switch Beefy could go a number of directions and I'm not sure where Nintendo will settle.
I'd love to see it ditch the screen or have an optional screen ideal for setting up anywhere (real solid stand for instance) — geared at setting up with comfortable controllers (Pro) and easy to transport but not great for portable play... but that is weird and probably not the way it will go.
I doubt we will see a more powerful version of the Switch launching any time soon. Imagine 'Pro' features to be 128gb of storage, a left Joycon with a D-Pad, a bigger battery and a better stand. Maybe bundled with the Pro Controller and a 3-month NSO sub.
Like I've been stressing for nearly a year when this topic first came up, Nintendo is going to release revised hardware. Even though the Switch is technically a "home console" it's still a portable machine, and if there's one thing Nintendo does, its revise portable consoles. They've been doing it since the Game Boy, and there's no reason to think they won't do it again on the Switch.
The 3DS is nearly done, so they'll want to replace it with something comparable, and Sony and MS will announce their new platforms, most likely this year too. If Nintendo wants to keep conversations on the Switch, they're going to have to make a splash again, and I'm sure they'll do just that. What they need to avoid is what they did with the "new 3DS" and fracture the install base. It's fine to have a more powerful machine, but don't say that only some games are going to work on it. It was an odd turn the new 3DS took, and I never quite understood why they did it; but worse, they hardly released anything that utilized the hardware anyway.
A more powerful Switch, maybe featuring docked-performance when in portable mode, would be cool. But then again, I think this would only makes sense if it's only marginally more expensive than the original, or if the original gets a price cut and the new one occupies the original's price bracket.
I guess a pro model wouldn't be targeted at the general masses but mainly at more hardcore players, but still, the original still sells for $400 in Canada, an updated model costing $500 would be commercially DOA, especially considering its lesser power when compared to the competition. The Switch over here is the priciest of the "base" systems. Doesn't prevent it from selling relatively well, but I still hear (and read) a lot of people saying they would buy one if the price would come down to something more in line with other (PS4, XB1 - $250-$300). So getting out a more expensive model priced higher would not help, even if in line with PS4 Pro and XB1X prices...
I mean, production price for the Switch has surely fell down a bit since its release, I'm pretty sure an updated model could replace the original in its original price bracket, and keep the console slightly more future proof in the process.
Well, maybe there is nothing to be outraged about for you, but for me, Switch saved gaming. I don't have all the free time I used to, and mobile gaming is just a bunch of waiting and microtransactions, so where does that leave someone like me? Nintendo Switch (and formerly 3DS). Downright amazing idea, and I can even do home console gaming when I get a rare chance.
I'd be outraged not because it is a terrible idea for Nintendo (though I do believe it to be), but because it would be a terrible idea for me. It'd show that Nintendo were at the moment still considering going back to home consoles as their own thing, despite having several options.
Whether I would buy the new revision or not, it's existence would represent a Nintendo I'd rather not see return.
It's not likely for them to abandon the hybrid effort, what with its success, but it could happen. And now that all my favorite franchises are effectively landing on what Nintendo seems to consider a home console that you can play on the go (but me and anyone I know consider a handheld that you can put on the big screen if you want to), there's a chance another split might happen in the future, and who knows where they'll go once the devs have experienced the extra power of the home console.
Either way, as long as the concept remains the same, I can do nothing but look forward to a Switch pro/Switch/Switch lite future (if that's what they're going with).
I suppose I just can't wrap my head around that line of thinking. That's fine, we can move on if you'd like - we seem to be primarily in agreement. I fully agree with your first paragraph - sounds like we're in similar places in our lives when it comes to gaming, and I love the switch as a hybrid. But I have seen plenty of people post here that they use it exclusively portable or exclusively docked. For those people, if Nintendo chose to launch cheaper home/portable versions, I wouldn't care in the slightest - I would just continue using my current switch. I also agree that it is likely a bad idea to drop the hybrid concept, primarily due to marketing reasons, but I could see them doing something like that late into the generation or perhaps next.
Edit: Oh, and we agree on the big debate the Switch is clearly a handheld that can be played on the TV. I despise the hybrid marketing mumbo jumbo.
@Faucet Their line up of games this year is amazing, Luigi's mansion, animal crossing, yoshi, fire emblem, pokemon, mario maker, and links awakening, all in the same year!
And if they're successful enough (NES, SNES, Wii) they've brought out revised versions of their home consoles too.
If they bring a 4K Switch with 1080p, I'd pay $400 for that.
A fair point, that's true.
@RetiredR Not sure about the other dude, but I'm as chill as I've been the entire time
Either way, I think that's what we all do. We just want to play the games. (Or so I say but I'm still fretting jumping into Octopath Traveler every time I turn it on - that game is pretty tough)
@Dethmunk In fairness, Sony made sure that games would still run well on the base PS4 hardware. I think Nintendo should adopt a similar approach with a "Switch Pro." Optimize it to run well on the base hardware. So many games have dynamic resolution scaling that they'll just automatically look nicer on the Pro model anyway.
@NintendoFan4Lyf I'm aware of that, since even the Xbone X struggles with the native 4K thing on a lot of games. Heck, the PS4 Pro is using reconstruction techniques most of the time, and, when implemented poorly, the Pro versions of games can actually look and/or perform worse than the 1080p versions on the base hardware. The PS4 Pro's specs are barely at the point where it can be called a 4K-oriented console, and a Switch Pro wouldn't-- couldn't-- even match that system's specs currently. 4K isn't in Nintendo's wheelhouse this gen.
But, yes, a system with less aggressive dynamic scaling in certain, more demanding games would be ideal in a couple of years. I don't see them replacing the D-Buttons, though, considering their heavy emphasis on being able to take off the joy-con controllers and play with people at any time.
I personally won't bite if they do this. I kept up with the latest 3DS systems as they came out mostly because I played them so much. I still play the 3DS more than anything else these days. As for the Switch, I played mine a lot around tge time I got it, but these days I barely touch it unless I want an off screen for Netflix or if a game comes out that I especially want to play (which these days, isn't often). With that in mind, I can't see myself buying another Switch console at all when I don't use the one I have that much.
@NintendoFan4Lyf I'm guessing that won't happen, considering the Switch is the most aggressively video game-focused console I've owned in years (as opposed to delivering multi-media experiences, that is). It's kind of nice, though: I like the simplicity of turning on a console to play games, instead of having apps and advertisements cluttering my home screen.
I'm still baffled by the lack of themes and organizational tools, though.
I always assumed a Switch Pro would be something with a high frame rate and resolution optimized for VR. But now I think they may just end up putting all their VR focus into the Labo.
@RetiredR You don't need a redesign just to play the games.
Either way I'm buying a pro model but if it's docked only I won't have a problem. What matters is 1080p minimum on my 4k TV.
Please, while you update your system Nintendo, put a headphone plug on a pro controller.
Nintendo's plan as always has been to use one card which would be suitable for any console they make.
So would one card hold all the info needed for two Switches. If we get a more powerful Switch Pro equivalent to say, PS4/5 will the extra data needed fit on a card that can also be used for the existing Switch?
I think a Switch Pro,s games will be download only. And a Switch mini could look like an updated 3ds that is compatible with Switch cards and 3ds cards, better graphics and retains 3d.
In a few years version 2 will be foldable just like a Samsung phone.
Nintendo is about to win BIG if this is true. There is room for all three because the games will sell them easily! I'm sure all games will play on all three but like the PS4 Pro, there will be performance enhancements on some games in the most beefy one.
What we have to remember is that Nintendo primarily markets to families, and I think a majority of families will be too strained financially to afford a 4K TV. With this in mind, it might not seem worth it for Nintendo to invest in 4K just yet. Furthermore, despite WSJ claiming the Pro version would be for the avid gamers, the difference in power between the Mini and Pro versions would have to be massive to accommodate for 4K. However, I wouldn't be surprised if Nintendo thinks 4K is what the hardcore gamers want since it was so trendy last year.
From all the comments and testimonials I've read over the past two years from Switch owners, you mostly have two kind of people:
1) Primarily handheld gamers who still appreciate the once-in-a-while home console experience
2) Solely home console gamers who really don't care for the portable experience
3) [exceptions to the rule] The tiny fraction of home console gamers who appreciate the portability, the tiny fraction of handheld-exclusive gamers who don't care for home console at all, and all the other tiny fractions of the pie
Based on this, it almost makes sense to make the Pro version home console exclusive, but any sort of significant power over the Mini would divide the base, not only with games, but also with mindsets.
I myself am primarily a handheld gamer, so I personally would not want the Mini to be fragmented into the inferior experience. Right now the handheld mode is virtually identical to the home console experience minus a bit of resolution or frame rate based on the game, and I would hate to see my player base pushed to the wayside by developers who poorly optimize for the Switch Mini and then shrug the complaints away by pointing to the Pro version.
Sigh, I was gearing up to buy a Switch some time next month. Now I have to wait for that Pro version.
They have everything to gain from this approach. Love it. The only thing vanilla / mini Switch owners will miss out on are a couple of third party games that couldn't be condensed to fit on them. SO if they were not possible on current Switch, I don't think that gives anyone the right to moan about them coming to a slightly more powerful one. I can't wait to see the new designs they have come up with.
The smaller cheaper option has always made sense, but the pro version with enhanced performance still doesn't sit with me very well. As someone pointed out on another thread, there's already two different specs for developers to work with (docked and undocked). Introducing another model with another two specs is a development minefield.
There is no chance that Nintendo is making a download-only Switch anytime soon. Extra data from large-sized games will simply require you to buy additional storage i.e. SD cards.
I would buy a more "handheld" focus design in a heart beat.
Forget the "PRO" (and the hybrid nonsense). That will barely get them where "home console" were 6 years ago. When the PS5 comes out, they back to where they are now.
Sell a TV Dock/Joycon bundle on the side for the people who want it.
I've been waiting for a proper portable Switch for two years. A smaller, but still 720p, screen, fixed joycons, something that fits in your pocket - what's not to like. If the internals are exactly the same, but with better battery life and bigger memory, the games will run on both without any problems. Yes, it won't be "Switch"able in the orginal sense, but there's a huge post-DS market for a portable only console.
@Yas a non switchable Switch. Doesn't sound right.
I can only see improved hardware refreshes (better battery life; improved Joy-Con and Pro Controller designs---looking at you, Pro Controller D-pad!) and nothing more; anything else and you risk fragmenting the market like @thesilverbrick mentioned, especially for a hybrid console that's relatively expensive.
They could certainly sell the console without the dock if they want to make it a little more inexpensive. (They do that already in Japan, so...)
Personally, I think Nintendo nailed it this time around with the combination of portability and quality of the system's capabilities (minus the design quirks but that's what hardware research and development is for). Refinements are certainly welcome as they were when they redesigned the DS and 3DS a few times.
Do the WSJ rumors say there must be 3 skus on the shelf at once? Maybe the new more powerful model will simply replace the current model at the same price point. Or maybe there is no "Pro" and the 3rd sku is simply the current Switch but without the dock. I don't work in retail but I'm pretty sure a Switch w/o the dock, grip or hdmi cable would have it's own sku.
Switch Home - or whatever they would call it - just a box next to the tv, is something I've always wanted for the right price. Maybe Nintendo would build one to cross market it with Apple, put Apple Arcade, Apple News+ and Apple TV+ on it. There was no sign of Mario Kart Tour yesterday but it has been delayed until summer so who knows. I don't think Switch Home will happen, not this year anyway, but 3 or 4 years from now maybe. They did sell that gimped Wii Mini after all.
Switch Pocket has always been inevitable. Only real question is if it will come in a clamshell design like Gameboy Advance SP. I don't need one but my kids going off to college do. They won't need a dock in their dorm rooms.
@aaronsullivan If they name it Switch Beefy I may have to buy you one. 😂 Though I think you may have offended someone with that name, you got a thumbs down vote. Unless I hit it by accident while trying to hit reply. 😝
I'd say more but I just said it all in the post above this. 😁
Makes sense. The 3DS line is nearly over. The Switch library already has over a thousand games. Why wouldn't Nintendo make a budget model Switch priced at $149-$179? That would help the Switch reach that target goal of "one per person" (roughly 200 million+ worldwide) rather than "one per household' (80-100 million worldwide) that was mentioned in a meeting overview two years ago.
@pingua08 Do you have a source for your "failed" comment? I'm seeing each N3DS as an incremental purchase that would not otherwise have happened...
Apologies for the length of my reply here. What can I say? These are exciting times!
My ideal scenario would be for a "Switch Mini", and a "Switch Pro dock" that is compatible with both the original and upcoming miniaturized core units, and for that "pro" dock to have enhanced hardware that the system can utilize to improve the visuals and performance over the current system when docked. If that happened, I would buy both a Pro dock (or even two), buy a mini, take the mini with me everywhere, and then give the original Switch to a family member, so it's still in the family, and still in regular rotation, but not in my personal use as the pairing of the mini and the pro would outmode it.
Now, four important things that I realize going into this:
1) it's not feasible to go for high four and six teraflop caliber performance like the PS4 Pro and XB1X respectively given the state of mobile, ARM-based technology in 2019, so I know this thing won't rival the pro models of those systems. But would the base model-caliber spec PS4/XB1 be within its reach? I think it could be. If memory serves, both the base PS4 and XB1 each hovered somewhere just a little bit north of 1 teraflop of performance, and then the pro models saw something like a 3x boost for the PS, and a 4x boost for the XB. If we see something like a 3x boost for Switch, it should put us somewhere in the ballpark of the original consoles, and a 4x boost would put it a bit ahead.
I know we'll not get PS4 pro or XB1X level PERFORMANCE out of Switch Pro. And I'm okay with that. I really am. But what I AM hoping for is PS4 pro or XB1X levels of GAIN over the original model. That probably won't be something that a Tegra X2 can realize. But a newer chip? Maybe? Aren't they up to X4 in the Tegra line now? What about that chip? Nintendo can afford to make a Pro model more expensive and aspirational if they have cheaper points of entry further down the product line, so I hope they will do this and go big.
Also, I do hope the pro will be a dock, rather than another handheld core unit to compete with the mini though. Because when it comes to the current Switch, though I love it, though it's my favorite system of the current crop by a wide margin (and possibly even my favorite of all time), and while I routinely focus on its positives over its negatives, let's look at a couple of the negatives for a minute: as a console it's underpowered, and as a handheld its way too big and bulky and difficult to pocket. A mini would take care of the latter problem and a pro would go at least some distance towards solving the former problem. But if they're each separate systems, then I have to manage two different systems, worry about cross save, and whether I need to rebuy something, have to make sure downloads and updates are kept up twice. It's just messy. I mean, I could make it work if I had to, just keep the pro docked at home, and keep the mini in my pocket as I go about my day. And then if I was taking an extended trip, like an out of town situation, or setting up for a game night somewhere, then throw the Pro in my backpack and take that one with me instead. There would even be some benefit that way to playing on a bigger 1080p screen Switch on a plane instead of a smaller 720p screen. But on balance, I think using the mini as my only "core unit", and not having to worry about "managing" two systems, and then just slipping it into a "pro dock" when I get home, or taking the dock with me to the game night or the hotel room would be so much better. They did say to expect the unexpected, and not assume the pro will just be a beefier base unit, didn't they? So, I'm hoping that the deviation will take the shape of a dock.
Lastly for this point, and I might be the only person in the world who cares about this angle, starting with Wii/360/PS3, Nintendo has been profoundly behind PS/XB in power. It dropped behind by about a generation's worth. But using the metaphor of walking down a sidewalk, it might have dropped back a generation, but since that point has not fallen any further behind. It's back there a ways, but it's keeping pace. What do I mean? Well, Wii was just a touch more powerful than GameCube. It was about equal to the original XB, making it roughly a generation behind PS3 and XB360. Then the WiiU was about a generational leap in performance over the Wii, making it roughly performance equal with PS3/360....which in turn put it about a generation behind the PS4/XB1. All three together moved forward a generation from where they were previously. Now we have the PS4 Pro and XB1X, which are about a half generation ahead of their base models. And of course, the Switch, which is about halfway between the PS3/XB360/WiiU and the PS4/XB1 in terms of performance, making it roughly a half-generational improvement over the WiiU in terms of power, or roughly to WiiU what PS4 Pro is to PS4. So, all three again move together about a half-generation from where they were before. This would also make Switch about a full generation behind the PS4 Pro and XB1X, or about a half-generation behind their core units. So, Nintendo has more or less kept pace, neither gaining ground, nor losing it.
But with PS5 and whatever the next XB will be called right around the bend, if Nintendo wishes to keep pace at about a generation behind, and not lose even more ground (and have to fight even harder for big ticket 3rd party games and at least that aspect of "relevance"), then it will need to sufficiently upgrade the Switch Pro hardware enough to make it roughly equivalent with the base PS4/XB1 to do so leaving it once again right at about that one generation behind mark once the 5 and the ___ launch. Again, maybe I'm the only one on Earth who cares about this angle, or is even thinking about things from this vantage point. And though it was painful and frustrating at the time, I have since made peace with Nintendo falling a generation behind, and have been satisfied with them keeping pace from that position since then. It would be pretty bitter, though, if they fell even further behind, and I had to go through making peace with that whole thing all over again, now finding themselves 1 1/2 generations behind [or further] and coping with that, as well as seeing an even greater number of big 3rd party titles / studios leave them out.
2) it will introduce technical challenges in terms of docking and undocking because now you're having to switch CPUs, GPUs and RAM, whereas with the original set up, all one was doing was either speeding up or slowing down existing RAM and GPU, and flashing the screen for the new visual settings to take effect. Handing off to different hardware would involve a lot more work, and it is virtually impossible to expect it'll be as seemless or elegant an experience. If we're lucky, it'll translate to just a longer period of blackout / flicker before it pops back up on the big or small screen and that's it. If we're unlucky, direct handoff might be altogether impossible, and then we have to go for a weird sort of crossplay thing like PS4 and Vita had. Yuck!
3) it would require the creation of a whole new graphics layer for new and existing games that developers would have to spend the time and money to make - work that might not yield any extra dividends for them at all, or even worse, create a "behind the pay wall" situation for us to get to them. Right now, there are two layers, docked and undocked. PS4 and XB1 have this two layers thing too between base system and pro system. And we see that while many developers certainly do put love and care and time into creating worthwhile Pro / 1X / Dock enhanced software layers for the given systems, we see many, many others who neglect the second layer by either doing it half-heartedly, or by not doing it at all. How many PS/XB games only support base spec, and run identically on pro and core models? Likewise, how many Switch games run the same whether the system is in the dock or not?
Though I realize that not only are the performance levels, but also the performance vectors are much shallower between Switch undocked and docked than between PS4/Pro and especially, between XB1/1X, the principle itself is the same in terms of having two spec targets developers have to accommodate through software layers. In this regard at least, having a Switch and a dock is like having a PS4 and a PS4 Pro in one. If they did release either a Switch Pro system or a Switch Pro dock, there'd now be not two software layers developers have to worry about, but now three, and that would either drive up the price of games, only further reduce developer involvement beyond what the second layer is already experiencing, or both. So that's concerning.
It also introduces the possibility of another software situation like the "NEW" 3DS / 2DS exclusives library - or for more retro examples, the Genesis 32X or the Atari 7800. Even if the games are not outright exclusives requiring the beefier hardware, such as "NEW" 3DS/2DS, 32X, and 7800 all were, but would run in lesser form on the baser hardware, it might still create the same effect of way too few games taking advantage of the new hardware to justify it, which is only so much better, and only so much less frustrating.
Of course, on the flip side, if the pro does catch on well enough, and offers a sizeable enough performance boost to draw the attention of the developers who snubbed it either entirely, or by withholding key franchises (COD, anybody), then it could turn into a great big boon by seeing those games arrive on Nintendo shores. Of course, this has risk too, because if they release a version of a game that will run well in pro spec, but then is not also further downgraded to run on Switch's current hardware (docked and undocked), then it would create "pro exclusives" which would bifurcate the library and the player pool, and I don't think that would be good for Nintendo at all. And more scary is that even with as banging as Switch is right now, if the developers still don't have sufficient incentive to do the necessary legwork to properly down port for the Switch, what is going to motivate them to do so for non pro models when the pro is in play? Even if we saw bigger ticket games start showing up in higher quantities on the Switch after the pro, I'm afraid most of them would be pro only, and that's the worst.
4) there's a big risk here: the more Nintendo expands and enhances the Switch lineup, there is greater and greater risk of muddying the waters and clouding the message, which would also be terrible, and momentum killing....and is so prevelent that it's even showing up right here in my response despite my being warry of it. I don't know how much more they can do while keeping the message so pure and clean like it is now.
Anyway, that's where I see things. Sorry for the long-winded.
@thesilverbrick how so? the wii had the wii remote plus and that console did well, targeting different types of buyers is good for business, it caters to what they want and everyone can still enjoy the same games regardless.
@gungho_trucker and the ps4 pro and xbox one x has done well with a mixed market also, not sure why some people are so concerned about it really.
@huyi the base PS4 doesn't already have two different performance specs for developers to manage.
If they're going for an undockable, handheld-only cheaper model to replace the entire 3DS line, I think it's possible that the higher end "Super" version will be docked ONLY, or will simply replace the switch dock with an external graphics processor and more computing power. That's my sincere hope, as I REALLY don't want to buy all new equipment a mere two years into this system's life.
All I want from a Switch Pro is better performance. I'd kill for higher/more stable FPS, consistent resolution, and better textures. I'd sacrifice handheld mode for this as well, since I wouldn't really see this difference in handheld anyway. If we're getting a cheaper mini, that and the base model will have portable covered for those that want it. I know I'll get skewered for this, but it's just how I feel about it.
Some other features I'd like, if we're gearing this to core gamers anyway.
I know a lot of powergamers would welcome this. A lot of whom may have been prefering other games on other platforms up to this point.
@gungho_trucker i'm talking about the ps4 and the pro, that is 2 different markets to cater for with different resolutions.
In an ideal world, a Pro Switch would have no exclusives, but instead boost all Switch games to resolutions and framerates better than the OG Switch can do, and that's it. Once people start designing specifically for the newer hardware, then it becomes an issue.
How easy would it be to hibernate until June? That way I can fast-forward to E3 and thus drift closer to all the gaming news.
A Mini and a Pro would be nice if theu can share savegames. In that way you can play on in the bus or train and go on back home.
I play almost exclusively docked - so - I could go for a more powerful version of the Switch.
I'm more surprised that they're (allegedly) coming out simultaneously rather than they are coming at all. I'm part of the "handheld-only" camp / a 3DS user waiting to upgrade but I'm probably skipping the "Mini" in favor of the "XL", if the reports are true.
And that's what I expect from the revisions:
1. "Switch Mini" = A Nintendo Vita, no joycons, no dock, sturdy build, multiple color variations / special editions, and a sub-$200 price tag.
2. "Switch XL" = As in, just the screen bezels have been trimmed. It's powerful enough to bump up performance on some games (like New 3DS did to, say, Monster Hunter 4) and maybe get 1 or 2 exclusives (3rd-party only) but that's about it. No 4K on TV. No 1080p on handheld. More than anything, it's an excuse to move past the original's hardware issues with the joycons, the dock scratching the tablet, connection ports, battery life etc, plus probably tackle hacking as well.
@zool A 2D 3DS didn't sound right either! Was bought in large numbers though.
A Switch Mini/budget version is very reasonable. Sell one without a docking station for those that play handheld only and maybe make the joycons fixed to reduce price. A pro version is a bit trickier. I think the idea of having a more powerful console with exclusives (see N3DS) is bad as is a stationary console. The Switch is a brillant design and Nintendo should not go back to console only. A pro version should focus on better battery life, blutooth support and a better docking station (more usb ports, integrated lan port, etc.)
I think this would be a mistake. The switch is rocking it right now. They should focus on bringing on good games. If it ain't broke don't fix it.
I would not even consider buying a smaller version of the switch especially with the terrible right joystick placement
@Medic_alert Graphical improvements are a big reason. The Switch has some games with incredible art, but in terms of post processing effects there basically aren't any. Running my Switch through external post processing with my projector's image enhancements and a Darbee 5000s and there is a big difference. More power allows for more effects to be rendered natively, which improves the picture without changing the gameplay. Games would run on every version of the Switch, but the more powerful version would have more effects enabled. It would be like changing the graphics settings on PC games; some games run on a potato but the graphics look like a potato while the same game can look dramatically different with more powerful hardware that allows more effects, post processing, and better texture rendering. Look at the Cemu comparison videos of BotW for an idea of the difference a more powerful Switch could make.
@thesilverbrick flipside would be that I wouldn't want them not to fully make use of more powerful hardware fully for fear of how it would preform on the other versions or because it's not worth working on notable uses because the only reach a portion of the audience. A balance definitely exists, but it could also easily go the other way where were given powerful hardware that served little purpose beyond frame rate for a few games or shorter loading times. On the note of exclusives one could also argue ports should be exempt from that if they wouldn't be feasible on the device otherwise but that could also end up undermining efforts and creative solutions to make stuff workable, as companies just see it as an easy out.
@roadrunner343 personally I hope the hybrid remain as a primary model with the other models specifically as more niche- targeted production runs that wouldn't overtake the primary model and thus run less risk of muddying up the scene.
I think a worry there is exactly that which wasn't present with the 3ds because neither later 2DS or New 3DS were really such a change on the form factor but the Switch's unique nature and selling point a lot of changes in models could be a major risk.
Like maybe I'm over worrying but I don't want Nintendo to end up snatching defeat from the jaws of victory you know?
@huyi The Wii Motion Plus was an accessory that could be added to an existing Wii system at a relatively low cost, creating parity without requiring the consumer to buy a new console.
Making certain games exclusive to a brand new, potential $300 or more “Switch Plus” would only fragment the user base and punish recent adopters of the console, forcing them to scrap their old console and buy a new one or else miss out on the latest games. Iterative hardware in a single generation only works when software is universal.
@Medic_alert Yeah, I've seen that it's pretty cheap. Luckily, the last time I replaced the units, I got a one-year warranty. I'm using that today and grabbing a set of yellow neons. It's easy enough to spend $5 extra and just swap.
The biggest issue with a Mini is the GPU and cooling system that can only shrink so much to point where it doesn't return a benefit.
@Ralizah Hey there, I noticed your comment and I'm very confused by it. What do you mean that the new Yoshi game can barely dock at 720p? I looking at the footages and it looks like 1080p.
Apparently Nintendo finally responded to the rumors: https://gonintendo.com/stories/331661-new-info-on-nintendo-s-rumored-switch-redesigns-plus-nintendo-co
While saying they have nothing to announce is standard corporate stuff, I find the wording they used this time rather peculiar:
""We have made no announcements and we do not comment on rumour and speculation."
The fact they had to specify do not comment rumors and speculation make me want to take a step back from this rumor again. It sound almost... peeved? Like the kind of tone I've very much see someone using when hype is building for something... that may not exist.
In hindsight this isn't the first time these rumors pop up and last time, 7 months ago, someone pointed out the last person behind these rumors wasn't perhaps the most reliable: https://gamerant.com/nintendo-switch-4k-rumor/
"It should go without saying that this rumor should be taken with a massive grain of salt. Sellars may have been accurate about some leaks in the past, but he’s also been known to leak unverified information that has been fed to him by users trying to out him as a fraud. A lot of his “leaks” have also been proven false, like his claim that Black Ops 4 would be on the Switch, for example."
And thinking about it I'm starting to feel like this rumor is kind of... a reccuring thing? Like timing wises it feels like ever since the Switch got release we see rumors of new models coming up every 6 months. I'm starting to wonder if this one might again be less subtantiated than we think.
I could well be wrong but this seemed pushed so often that it feels a bit pointless to worry all that much. It's becoming almost the Switch's equivalent of the "boy who cried wolf" I'm tempted to say.
Of course like the tale ending with a wolf showing up for real long after people stopped believing the boy, we might end up by being surprised by Nintendo finally releasing new models for real after nobody will believes anymore they were coming.
But seeing the tone about "rumors" and "speculation" from Nintendo's response this time... I can't help but wonder. It's not the first time investors types seem to force things to happen a certain way just for the sake of market shares or something.
I would prefer if Nintendo continues its the current switch as it is. Focusing all efforts into what really really matters... GAMES. and into lowering the cartridges manufacturing prices so developers can't have an excuse and give us full physical games. not half download like Wolfenstein, starlink, LA Noire, Resident Evil collection, Megaman x Legacy, and others.
@Medic_alert same could be said for PS4 Pro and One X. Neither has exclusive games and sold just fine. People who want the latest & greatest will upgrade and there will also be buyers new to Switch willing to pay extra for the enhanced version.
The Switch "Pro" just needs to happen. It's the nature of technology and the video game industry anymore. The current iteration of switch cannot last for much longer and remain competitive and desirable (either this, or they need to drastically reduce the asking price).
The lite version of switch being proposed, may not even be called a "switch" at all tbh.
"Like a number of other Switch titles we’ve seen, Yoshi’s Crafted World has a dynamic resolution. When docked, expect resolutions of around 576p and 675p. Portable mode reduces things further to roughly 396p and 495p. These numbers may lower further or increase depending on what’s happening on screen."
It seems like the game is pretty much always sub-HD. It does look ridiculously good for such a low-res game.
@Yas maybe a 3ds (3dSwitch) is not so out of left field. Depends on whether Nintendo really have given upon 3d. A 3ds with 720 graphics a larger screen and a face-lift, that can take a Switch game card is all we need, and the ability to display 3d graphics for some games.
A shrunken Switch won't work, it can't fold.
If this rumor was true, why would it leak via a business journal newspaper that serves investors primarily? This (like the last time WSJ broke the Pro rumor) smells more like pump and dump scheme than something close to reality. Journalism standards are so bad (especially in gaming journalism) that most sites/blogs run with the story just because WSJ published unknown sources commenting on mystery SKUs. No one else has attempted to fact check the sources or been able to confirm anything. Plus it runs counter to statements made by the Nintendo CEO that both rumored models are unnecessary.
Essentially everyone else's story they are running with is, "I heard from my uncle's friend that works at Nintendo that they are making Super Mario Bros 4, and he said he's played it so it must be true."
I actually think it'd be pretty rad if they consolidated the DS/Switch into one thing, since the Switch is meant to be portable anyway, the distinction between the two (and which systems get which games) is mostly arbitrary at this point.
The "portable-only" one could just be the successor to the DS series, while the "pro" one could be the successor to the Switch for people who mostly game on their TV (I assume it'll still have the option of portability too, but probably less focused on that if it's heaver/has worse battery life due to more power).
I'm all for a more powerful unit or at the very least a unit that supports basic, industry standard features. True Dolby surround sound, Ethernet port, proper headphone and mic support etc.
However, considering I just bought one last week, this news irritates me.
So long as Nintendo and their retail partners offer up a reasonable trade up program for people like me who got shafted on old hardware then I'm all for it.
New Model 1: White
New Model 2: Blue
@Medic_alert Depends on if they're targeting repeat buyers or new buyers. New buyers bring all the profit because they need to also buy games and accessories, repeat buyers only increase primary hardware sales, which isn't a metric Nintendo likes to use for growth. Nintendo focuses on software sales to indicate the strength of a platform. Having more options increases the playerbase of new buyers, which is a more diversified approach. A smaller Switch version obviously is targeted at new, young players, a more feature-rich Switch would target the opposite, the older, more discerning player. Assuming this is designed for current Switch owners, and thus placing the bar quite high to meet a replacement threshold, isn't realistic because it's not based on the actual purpose of diversifying the product line. Future software and accessory sales are Nintendo's focus, not keeping current Switch owners perfectly happy. In that context such incremental improvements (more portable with less cost and more powerful with more cost) makes sense.
I’m still calling BS on this rumour for 2019
Nintendo is making a mini-Switch for one reason, and one reason only...and that reason sells them 5-7 million units every time a new game is released in this franchise #Gen8
Still not sure why this causes so much consternation.
If you don’t want a more powerful Switch, don’t buy it.
If you don’t want a cheaper, 2DS replacement don’t buy it (though Nintendo really need one).
People will have no issues with different configurations in the same family, it’s what mobile manufacturers have been doing for years. Nintendo have iterated on Consoles in the past, now so have Sony and MS.
I feel like a smaller, kid-focused Switch model makes the most sense, especially for the launch of a new Pokemon game, maybe with fixed controllers, so a d-pad, etc. But I'm not sure about the premium model and how that will affect games. I kind of hope there isn't one, or it isn't faster to the point that then we get games that only work on that one like the few New3DS exclusives. I feel like the current Switch is aimed at older gamers already, and I'm quite happy with it...
i'm not sure a lot of the people commenting here realize this, but nintendo is in a special position here—with a more powerful switch, capable of playing more contemporary titles, they could effectively turn the conversation away from the ps5 or xbox two. the lack of mobile hardware from the competition has dramatically killed the energy around the playstation and xbox in the last year. the fact that everyone else is turning to streaming on mobile platforms suggests that they realize this is the only way to compete with nintendo—and the cheapest way to do it without inventing their own mobile hardware.
@RetiredR That's just a home console then. I don't think Nintendo would turn their back on the key selling point of the Switch.
I think the Switch had two excellent years on sales, but Nintendo has so many ideas for the future of Switch, so it's not surprising for me that we are getting two new models this year.
First of all, the "Mini/Lite" portable-only model could be a perfect choice for players who want play-and-go experiences like Animal Crossing, indie games and the most important focus; a younger audience. A cheaper price is the main feature, and I suppose it will remove HD rumble to prioritize form factor and battery life. And of course, it should also include a stylus for games like Super Mario Maker 2 and maybe even a new Style Boutique or Art Academy game. It's also the perfect opportunity to implement a proper D-Pad on Switch! I wonder what it's final name will be, however. The 2DS was named like that because it removed 3D, a main selling point of the 3DS. So if it's really portable-only, then a slightly altered "Switch" name would make sense.
Then the "Pro/New" model comes and that's when things get interesting. It's clear (Reggie said that many times) that Nintendo wants the best content to be on Switch, but the "limitations" of the base model are holding back that desire. Even if Nintendo and some developers like Panic Button know to make the most of the Switches' unique hardware, there are still some issues.
On handheld and tabletop mode, the Pro model will be surely impressive, but what about TV play? That is the main reason some want Switch to have more power, if it was only a portable console it wouldn't be a problem. But the hybrid setup (something that Nintendo is heavily promoting to reach that sales target) means TV play could be the more promoted play style of the 3 (handheld, tabletop and docked). While I doubt the mobile modes will reach next-gen levels, it needs to be powerful enough to at least impress a base PS4. Now I'm not sure what kind of improvements the docked Pro model will offer, or if it will even be a TV mode (Eurogamer isn't sure, apparently), but Nintendo still has a two-decade relationship with Nvidia right? And finally, the Pro model needs to have improved battery life and resolutions on the portable modes too (I doubt it will be native 4K, but upscaling might be possible for the TV mode) a bigger screen for improved resolutions and a much improved stand for tabletop play. Not very likely, but there may be some exclusive games on the revision like the New 3DS (especially if developers don't know to optimize). I know it might sound too ambitious and can have many drawbacks, but if Nintendo is really aiming at the core gamer with this, then it has to deliver. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lBS80HA07pM
To simplify: the Mini/Lite model would be the best way of playing Switch as a traditional portable console, the base model would be the cheapest and most affordable way to play single or local multiplayer games on tabletop and docked mode, and the Pro revision would be the best but most expensive way to immerse yourself on all modes (but with marketing more focused on TV/tabletop play).
Furukawa says they aren't considering a Switch successor or a price cut for the base model (but of course, there are always new ideas), so it makes sense they are expanding the Switch family. I see the Switch as an evolving hybrid console rather than a traditional portable/home console. If a Switch successor ever exists, it needs to have an innovative and unique concept that distinguises it from Switch. But right now, Nintendo seems to be very confident in the hybrid console, and those unique ideas might translate to Switch peripherals like Nintendo Labo. We'll see later what Nintendo has up its sleeve.
I mostly use the switch in handheld mode. However, I will definitely get the pro version if it has larger screen.
@pingua08 Agreed. Whether or not anyone likes mid-generation hardware revisions that are more than just cosmetic, they're here and likely here to stay. Making games exclusive to these revised versions is just stupid though. A "Pro" version of an existing console might sell enough to justify its own existence, but it'll never sell enough to support exclusive software and no third-party developer will ever release a game that only a fraction of the user base can even play.
Long time reader and first comment! I had to weigh in on this.
Here are things I think a Switch Pro could include that would make it worth buying (for me anyway) and other value add items that could coincide with a console hardware refresh cycle:
Switch Pro console upgrades wishlist:
-Better processor, more RAM
-Built in mic on the console
-Better wifi antenna as current one is weak
-Longer lasting battery (bonus if removable)
-Larger internal storage
-Truly conform to the USB-C industry standard
Other value add items coinciding with a hardware refresh that all Switch versions could support:
-Release of a new AAA first party title
-Ability to cloud backup save data for all games, no exceptions
-Ability to message friends through the console
-Ability to record gameplay for longer than 30 seconds
-Support for Bluetooth headsets
-Native voice chat (no one likes the phone app, most use Discord)
-A new Pro controller that has built in mic and/or headphone jack
-Fix Joy-Con/Pro controller drifting issue
-SNES/N64/GameCube games in Nintendo Switch Online
-More apps on the Switch (e.g. Netflix, Spotify and others)
-UI update where we can create folders to store game icons
-If already an online service subscriber, one free month for buying a new Pro/Mini console
Lastly, while I'm not a target for a Switch Mini, I would support its existence.
@Dr_Awkward you're right, i should not used the term failure, but let me try to emphazise it in another way... Xenoblade on the New 3ds sold more or less half a million copies worldwide, i am absolutely sure that those numbers could be much higher if the game had come to every 3ds system.
@pingua08 I'd argue that's not a hardware failure (as more hardware means more install base for non-exclusive software), but instead a software failure, or poor decisionmaking to move ahead with that game.
OTOH, I bought XC for N3DS, so no complaints from me.
@Dr_Awkward i had the original 3ds, and i wanted to play Xenoblade as i missed the Wii game,but so late in the life-span, i couldn't bring myself to buying another 3ds just for one game... Oh well
@subpopz I don't want to see any 'Pro' exclusive games either - all Switch games should run on all Switch versions (current, Pro, mini or any Switch hardware Nintendo decides to bring to market).
Specifically, to clarify my better processor and more RAM wishlist item, I'd like to see this as it will contribute to reducing lag and increasing FPS. I've experienced noticeable FPS drops in some sequences of games - for example in Zelda BotW. While BotW is certainly playable on the current Switch (and it's also my favorite game), more hardware horsepower could provide the "best experience" possible for this game (and many others) that I would expect from a 'Pro' Switch.
I would prefer that Nintendo does not allow for console version exclusive games (i.e. no games should be exclusive to a ‘Pro’, 'Current' or 'Mini' version) - that's a slippery slope especially considering that most buy Nintendo products for first party games. I wouldn't want anyone to be left out on the fun due to the console version they have.
@Medic_alert "See that isn't going to do it. The PS4 still out sells the Pro which in turn outsells the X1X. Graphical power and post processing are not reasons your average punter buys a console for."
This. The only people that care about adding all that grunt are people who frequent comment sections like this, a microcosm. Most of the people playing Mario or Zelda or FIFA or GTA don't know or even care what a teraflop or GPU is. That's trainspotting territory.
@Faucet what aspect of new hardware development would take away from new software development? you realize that the people that make the games don't make the hardware, right?
@NOOGA when I say,"energy"I mean cash. Money is the fuel. And Nintendo employees work on both,hardware and software.
Tap here to load 105 comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...