Ludovsky

@Not_Soos Tbh this one's inspiration seem more visual than gameplay.
Considering it seem to be stated to be more of an adventure game rather than stating itself as an RPG I suspect it would have more in common with modern Paper Mario games than 64/Thousand Years Door.

@ArcadeEighty Honestly, I definitely don't expect it to do BOTW numbers for a lot of reasons(the fact it's a platformer Metroidvania title for one) but I still expect it to surprise a certain level of folks.

To put it simply, the Switch is closing onto the Wii at this rate in term of total consoles sold but with one core difference: It's also a much more traditional console at the end of the day in term of gameplay/control schemes/etc and as a result, a lot of people who buy Switch buys a much wider variety of games(and a wider variety of games is available, too) than a lot of those who purchased Wii.

To put it simply: people who buy Switch have bought it for more than Wii Sport and it's led to a lot of games that would have been mostly niches to generally have surprising success.

Or to put it simply: If it releases on Switch, and is a first party Nintendo title, chances are it's not unlikely it'll be a franchise best-seller just on virtue of being a Switch title, even if it doesn't attain BOTW level of success.

Honestly, I don't know if it would be a "massive" success but I can see this selling "more than acceptable" amount of copies.

The main reason being summed up here:
"The Switch continues to thrive and sell in significant numbers, and we've already seen how that interprets into giving franchises renewed sales growth; perhaps unlike the days of the Wii, as an example, there's clearly a significant attach rate of Switch owners buying a variety of games, especially anything first-party."

The thing is, the Switch is on track to catch up with the Wii at this rate nowdays but there's one core difference: while the Wii had LOT of success with casual gamer and non-traditional gamers... there remains a lot of people who didn't really buy more than the starting Wii Sport discs and the like.

The Switch however, for all the talk about it's own "gimmick" or lack of "power", nonetheless remains a very traditional console but oddly enough(perhaps because it's not looking to compete with other consoles' horsepower), it is so in a way that a lot of "traditional" game(platformers/2D metroidvanias, for one, which haven't really been well served by the push for "AAA" gameplay and graphics which oft favor open worlds and FPSes) that would be overlooked even on other consoles can still see decent to surprising amount of success on the tiny console.

So while I don't expect Metroid Dread to be a BOTW-grade success, I definitely expect it to be on the range of something like Paper Mario or Luigi Mansion, both of which on Switch are "smaller" successes than BOTW but nonetheless became the best-selling titles of their respective franchises if I recall.

@AG_Awesome Thanks for your responses about your experiences. It does seem some of the "screen auto-dimming/etc" settings may indeed be a great thing to keep turned on with this console at least.

@YoungLink64 I definitely hear a lot of good about Forza!

This said, if something with a more stylicized setting(say, a return of F-Zero) got made, I could see it's scifi aesthetic used well for some impressive racing courses even on something like the Switch with proper use of shapes/colors and palettes to some spiffy neon-future aesthetic, just looking at what's already been done on stuff like Astral Chain and others.

It wouldn't be a realistic racing game, but could still come up with unique visuals.

@YoungLink64 Honestly I'm kind of mixed mind. On one hand it can be a bit tiring to see the games that clearly struggle with it.

On the other hand, the fact that the switch is a popular "underpowered" console makes me sometimes feels it's one of the few things that cause some publishers to try and optimize their games at all rather than just thinking "the new console's horspower" will do the job of carpeting unoptimized graphics for them.
It's been a common refrain amongst many devs to realize -themselves- how much their games could have been better optimized/cleaned up only when they attempted to make a Switch port... which often resulted in performance boosts for all other versions of the game.

So in a way it might not be every gamer's niche, but I kind of feel it's a niche that currently "needs" to be there. Especially since there's a crowd who often go that it's "gameplay that matter, not graphics" and with some Switch games, I'm inclined to agree but also extend with "graphics are more than just texture resolution, framerate and polygon count"(as I'll get into later).

Plus it's always interesting to see how the "underpowered" nature of the console often see some devs compensate not with "crummier" graphics but instead with "more unique artistic direction" by trying to create a visual style that look extremely good without needing massive amount of horsepower to "run". It's not all of them that do, especially in the west where we seem to have a thing for "the most realistic-style graphics we can"(though I often feel that every games going for "realism" often lead to all of them looking the "same" after a while), but it's interesting to see the results when devs and publishers put effort in art direction over texture realism/polygon count/etc.

But there's a lot of these artistic experience I feel might not even be attempted with more powerful hardware because... why try to compromise with an art style that look good with "underpowered" hardware when the current hardware can runs the most "cinematographic realism" just fine?
It reminds me of people who analyzed composers' work in the MIDI era and how it sometimes felt better than later composition(when better tech was available than MIDI) because the restrictions forced them to be even more imaginative than if they had more "freedom". I feel that's something that's a bit lost sometimes when we depend purely on the "possibilities" offered by the "best hardware that is". Sometimes the best works have to be done under compromise and restraints, and the imagination to get around such.

(Of course it might be the past art history student that I am who is still amused at being able to recognize the use of impressionism in Skyward Sword and the other painters who may have inspired the art style of Breath of the Wild and the like).

@YoungLink64 It just means that ultimately you're not the mainstream market for it shrug.

That's the thing to be aware of too. A lot of us who're terminally into gaming will notice this stuff(it's why I'm able to really notice the issues in areas like Kakariko village) but not everyone who's mainstream necessarily will. And if the average player isn't really one who notices all that much performance "issues", then why should they really care?

And even if they do notice there'll still be the matter of this other question: Is it the whole game? Or only the one area that form a tiny portion of the entire game. You might visit Kakariko village and Korok Forest somewhat often, but ultimately they're just a tiny portion of an entire map who otherwise runs very smoothly.

So for the average person, this is very much an acceptable compromise ultimately.

Also ultimately we might rant and rave about the Switch's performance compared to home consoles but ultimately we have to recall it's ultimately an handheld. There's always only so much one can do or put in such a small form factor without starting to deal with matters as simple overheating(and nobody wants to hold a console that's overheating in their hand which become a major comfort issue factor) even if better components were/are available. It's also another reason why the Mariko chip of the 2019 refresh was in itself an improvement; the console not only had more battery life but ran cooler

It's a bit the same issues than laptop; often you can have either one of three. You can have a laptop who runs cool and cheap but has limited power, a laptop who has power and is "affordable" but runs hot... or a laptop that is powerful and remains somewhat cool but can likely cost a heckton more than the average person is willing to throw at.

And ultimately that's the matter.... when it comes to "portable PS4 performance" we... still aren't at the stage we can say "Runs powerful and cool and actually is affordable". And Nintendo's not going to start a new production line(especially in a context of worldwide scarcity of chips and even silicon in some case) for a product purely aimed at a "premium" crowd when production has a difficulty to keep up for just the base model.

@Bizzyb The thing is... from what I'm reading about Stories 2 it seems to be the same case here.

It's not the whole game where performance are truly "poor". Only the one area or two that ultimately are but very small portions of the entire game.
If anything the bigger "issue" is just the uncapped FPS rate, so even if the fluctuation is only 30-60FPS(i.e.: all within "acceptable" FPS rates), it'll still feel weird because it fluctuate. Something that could be likely fixed by simply asking Capcom to cap FPS rate at 30FPS on Switch or at least making it an option in settings.

@kalosn To be honest, the Switch being an handheld and thus supporting local wireless multiplayer(something not available on other consoles) allows to play without an internet connection a lot of multiplayer games one would normally have to log on the internet to play even on the "bigger" consoles.

So in a way it's one of the boon of having multiple consoles even in the same household/etc.

@YoungLink64 Ultimately, probably something summed up by "Whatever is the closest to current Switch in performances".

This is the "Lateral Thinking with Weathered Technologies"((iirc the quote) company after all.
It's kind of why OLED might have existed since a long time, it's only now that we're getting a Switch with an OLED screen. They'll use tech only long after it'll have made it's proof/be affordable to use without selling their product at a loss like other consoles do.

And that's the thing, ultimately other consoles can likely only afford to "push tech" the way they do because they always initially sell at a loss, meaning they're technically subsidizing the true cost of that hardware rather than seeing consumer pay it themselves. If gamers truly paid the "true" cost, they'd likely never buy a Xbox or Playstation.

Nintendo tried to make ONE console that sold at a loss on release and, well, that was the WiiU and we saw how that went.

@kalosn When it comes to Nintendo though, ultimately, you have to remember one thing.
The main motto guiding them is "Lateral Thinking with Weathered Technologies" iirc. Weathered not just meaning "used/worn" but specifically "Well-used".

"Cutting edge" is simply... not their thing. They'll use tech only long after it's been used, re-used and made it's proof a long time ago. And then they'll see if they can't find a way to make this tech worth it by using it in a different fashion. It's kind of why we're only now getting an OLED Switch despite the tech having existed well before the first Switch.

That's why you saw stuff like motion control on the Wii but ultimately it being a console weaker than it's contemporaries. Or nintendo DS/3DS having the dual screen but never really more powerful(often even weaker) than it's Playstation Portable contemporaries.

Or why they decide to turn things up with the Switch basically being... an handheld you can finally plug into your TV without an hassles of special settings or separately purchased cable accessories. Everything being bundled in the base package and then the process made seamless as possible. It's never really been about performance, just comfort(since playing purely handheld, holding the entire console in your hands in front of your face, can get tiring after a while).

And that's the other thing... "performance issues" have existed since day one.

You can see them even on stuff like the original Breath of the Wild struggling in some areas like Korok Forest.

But ultimately? It doesn't matter. People know of these issues yet still buy the game. For some, that it's just in these couple of locations while the game still offer plenty to enjoy is simply... enough.
And that's the thing, the game didn't just sell a boatload of copies. It keeps selling more.

So in many ways... for Nintendo the Switch is ultimately not broken(or else it wouldn't sell anymore/wouldn't sell games)... so why "fix" what's not broken in their eyes?

And if they can keep selling so many copies not just to niche fans, but to the mainstream(you don't achieve 13 millions sales without becoming mainstream) it also show another, crucial, thing:
Us hobbyist might care about things like performances... but the general public? Doesn't. As long as it's "Good enough"(and that has a very wide definition), it'll sell. Our "unbearable" ultimately remains plenty enough of people's "Good enough".

If there's ever a stronger Switch in my eyes, it'll thus be what the 3DS was to the DS. Not a new model, but simply the new generation proper of the line. Kind of like Gameboy went from Gameboy->Gameboy Color->Gameboy Advance before finally giving way to the DS->3DS lines which has now given way to the first "generation" of the Switch line, assuming the next is indeed another "Switch". But considering how more streamlined Nintendo's handheld lines have been thus far, another Switch generation is not too unlikely.

@Preposterous The irony is BOTW already has some performance issues(Kakairko village seen from some angles but Korok Forest in particular) and yet it STILL sells copies by the boatload even to this day.

It's the crazy part. These folks see ANY games(particularly third parties) having ANY performance issue as signs that a Switch Pro must happens... but nintendo has first party games with issues of their owns that still have their "not always the smoothest" moments and that didn't hinder them.

The "Switch Pro must happen or Nintendo will be left behind" grossly overestimate the population of folks truly bothered by "performance issues" on Switch I suspect.

@bimboliquido Honestly, considering how even BOTW had it's unoptized area(Korok Forest) yet still sold a buttload of copies(in fact, STILL sells copies to this day).... I suspect a lot of the "Switch Pro must come out or Nintendo will be doomed to be left behind" crowd grossly overestimate the true demand for a Switch "Pro".

Especially re: considering the fact that a game with it's own unoptimized bits STILL sells copies to this day, to the point of still remaining among the more popular Switch games out there.

@Jooles_95 Yeah, I don't need them(I'm getting the game on Switch anyway. RPGs like that are definitely a thing where I like handheld support) to but I would like it if they would.

@nessisonett I'll be curious to see how trends evolve once that Switch is out, especially if it turns into the next base model(which sound likely if the SoC in current Switches indeed does get discontinued before the end of the year).

I can see the new kickstand definitely be an improvement(to not add how likely more durable than the old one**)

**Mine can barely stay in place anymore, though I'm glad the ball-bearing based design means I can at least still sort of insert it in it's slot compared to a plastic-only design that would likely have snapped off a long time ago.

Either way, alongside longer battery life and proper LAN connection support with the dock, I guess that's another reason I might be tempted to upgrade from my 2017 original. It still work well, but that low battery life is starting to show in handheld mode when it comes to the games I enjoy playing. Even undemanding ones barely getting 4 hours of play before a recharge kind of leave to be desired, so that 4.5-9 hours of battery life on newer models like the OLED might be a boon getting me using handheld more often than tiny bursts at home when others are watching the living room TV.

@Madao If I can say, I wonder if the performance issue on this one are being overstated.
I played the demo a lot and I felt the biggest issue in term of performance wasn't how low FPS would drop(it always felt very manageable) but rather the level of fluctuation compared to how high it could "rise".
I recall similar criticism alleviated to Rise's demo but the main issue there was that FPS setting in the demo were unlocked meaning there was a lot of crazy fluctuation. The final version of the game meanwhile was locked at 30FPS. It still experience some fluctuation, but they're something closer to jumping between 24FPS and 30FPS which isn't as noticeable than, say, jumping from 24FPS to 60FPS which is what would feel close to my experience with Stories 2's demo(especially jumping in and out of the menu due to the 60FPS-like smoothness of the animation in the menu).

I wouldn't be surprised if the Switch version(it IS a multiplatform game) was to get a day 1 patch(something that would thus not have happened yet since the game only releases Friday) or something of the like that could lock FPS rate to a maximum of 30FPS like with Rise.

People talk about how optimized Rise is but they forget that the max FPS it can achieve is 30FPS, which makes it's minor drops all the more unoticeable. I don't think I've seen anything in Stories 2 dropping beyond what I may really have seen in Rise, but the fact it can rise to such high FPS means that even a fluctuation between 30FPS sequence and 60FPS sequence would definitely feel jarring. If it were locked to 30FPS like Rise, I feel the issue of "performance" may not has been as noticeable or jarring.

So I kind of hope they do end up releasing such a patch to make the experience and visual flow more streamlined/unified and remove a bit of that jarring effect.

@Jooles_95 Honestly considering the genre of the game, and the fact it still score 8/10 here, I feel some people might focus a bit too much on performances.

Plus having played, there's never been a sequence where FPS drop was truly "dire"? The issue seem to come more from the fact that FPS settings are unlocked, unlike Rise which is locked at 30FPS and do have some minor drop.
After all a 24-30FPS fluctuation would always be less severe than a 24-60FPS fluctuation which is what I suspect's happening with Stories 2. Apparently Rise's demo was the same(re: unlocked FPS) and it's the full release(perhaps only even literally after the day one patch) that saw FPS locked to the current 30FPS rate.

I half wonder if the same might happen with a day one patch for Stories 2.

@Just_2_milky Tbh I wonder how much the "performance stuff" will truly be noticeable. I played the demo and it was.... fine?

I suspect the reason it's more "noticeable" is that unlike Rise(which is locked at 30FPS max), FPS in Stories 2 seem to be "unlocked". Meaning there's times it can easily rise up to 60FPS which makes any dip then feel more noticeable afterward.

For comparison, even if Rise experience occasional dip, fluctuations between 24FPS to 30FPS means it's much easier to ignore or not even notices when it dip.

Stories 2 meanwhile.... I don't think I've seen anything major that would feel as bad as below 20FPS, but even if it would fluctuate "only" between 24FPS(like, say, whatever is Rise's lowest), the fact it can then rise up to a whopping 60FPS makes it feel rather jarring at times(especially since the menus definitely are in the 60FPS category so I do recall it feeling weird when switching in/out of menu before reading the demo had unlocked FPS).

This said, I wonder if there's something like a day one patch(which a review version of the game might lack, especially for a multiplatform game). I recall report of FPS being unlocked in Rise's demo, just like Stories 2, and some people feeling similarly jarring experiences before the release of the full version of the game which saw FPS getting locked to 30FPS.

@Rubashov I pretty much expect the same re: Swtch Lite OLED. Sadly since a revision of the Switch Lite likely will ALSO lead to more SKU needing to be made(since due to changed hardware, it WILL likely need to be updated as a "different" model) and supply lines/logistics stuff, I can already start seeing the rumors/hype machine again because a segment of gamers seem to have convinced themselves that Nintendo "must" release a Switch Pro at some point even if sales/logistics and now what seem a clearly established trend with the Switch OLED clearly seem to point in a different direction.

@rjejr Heh, tbh they still technically "needed" the ad if indeed they're replacing the base model with this***, they'd still need to make an ad going "hey, the Switch console we're making is going to be -slightly- different come October so here's what changed" announcement... and well, this was it. People are only disapointed because just like the processor chip "update" in 2019, they convinced themselves that changes news from suppliers side/etc meant a new model was on the way rather than the base model being updated to make up with components being discontinued and thus needing to create a new "model" with as close of a component they could find/negotiate and continue production with.

***(The reason I'm saying this is that it heavily sounds like the SoC, "System on Chip", component used in the 2017's Switch, 2019's Switch and Switch Lite is being discontinued by nVidia by the end of the year so like with the processor chip of the 2017 Switch being changed for the Mariko processor chip in the 2019 Switch, they needed to update the SKU/etc and "base" model just to keep producing the console while retaining capabilities close to what they were to ensure cohesion on the software support/etc front. Also since the SoC being discontinued is also likely used on the Switch Lite, you can already likely expect more rumors on the supplier/components/SKU front since that likely will need to be updated with a "new" model soon).

@Cathousemaster Yeah. This basically follows the trend that Nintendo has kept to ever since 2017.
Every Switch revisions/models ultimately keeping to the same goal of retaining the same performances(or as close to) than the last when a component need to be changed

And when something truly new(like the Lite) is being made, it's not as an upgrade but a budget "sidegrade"; keeping the same performances but specializing itself to a specific market(the Lite being handheld only).

The closest I can picture to an actual new Switch model that's not a revision would be just another sidegrade: again a Switch that would limit itself to the same performance than before but would become TV-only and be sold at slightly lower price. It would be more likely to be as small a box they can manage to create with at best maybe just more optimized cooling or such but no changes in performances I suspect.

And I suspect that the proportion of people who play only in handheld plus that of people who play varying degrees of handheld+docked(but still indeed use both modes however) is nonetheless much higher than those who play exclusively only docked(without ever touching handheld mode) thus even that side-grade feels unlikely.

If there's even a "Switch" with higher performance... I don't expect it until the Switch is ultimately "out" or 75% into it's lifespan(in which case the two generations might overlap). But with the Switch reportedly only at 50% of it's lifespan, it's still a matters of very much years before that even happens. I.e.: probably not until 2023 at the very earliest I suspect, and that's assuming the intent to overlap both gens, and the new gen might need to be retrocompatible with Switch cartridge anyway if they want to ease the transition.

@kalosn I wouldn't hold my breath on it tbh. Fpr a "Premium" model that is. Price cut might happen in the future, especially if supply lines/logistics improves but that remains to be seen(production of chips component IS strained currently because of many different reasons).

IMO it's 2019 all over again. People saw production leaks talking about a "new" Switch model being made with a "new" processor chip and instantly began to speculate it HAD to be a Switch Pro. But what happened in 2019 was nVidia discontinuing the processor chip found in the original 2017 model, so they made a revision with the Mariko chip with the same performance but lower power consumption just so they could keep making Switch consoles to sell. Which is why a Switch bought in 2019 or later can play something like BOTW for almost twice as long in handheld than a 2017 Switch could.

This time around, it sounds like the SoC*** found in current switch models(2017, 2019, Lite if I'm to hazard a guess by what was meant) is getting discontinued toward the end of the year. Which might explains why OLED is being made to release in October, it probably already include the new SoC component.

The only difference is that this time they updated the form factor a bit.

If there's any other announcement, it might be to announce the Switch Lite line receiving a similar update since it's also one of the consoles whose SoC is getting discontinued and thus might need a revision with a new SoC to keep production of the line ongoing.

So far the trend with Nintendo has been clear: every models are all meant to follow the same level of performances and new models were introduced only as revisions(2019, OLED) or budget version meant to cater to specific segments(Lite, handheld-only without TV support).

IMO, we're more likely to see a budget TV-only Switch(as a counterpart to the Lite featuring the same performance than any Switch in Hanheld mode) that features the same performance than any docked Switch but without the handheld mode support than we are to see a "premium" Switch. And even if they intended to release a Premium, the way they seem to allocate development and production ressources(since the issue of supply line logistics is a real one and base model Switch struggle to meet demand as-is, premium would just splinter those efforts), they would be more likely to keep/allocate the ressource that could go for a "Switch Pro" and use them only for a "Switch 2" instead in... 3-5 years from now if we're to go by their claim the Switch is "halfway" into it's lifespan now.

So even if they intend to have the Switch's lifespan continue a little into the lifespan of it's true successor(like, considering the Switch "done" two years past the release of it's successor), it's most likely there's still years before they'll release said successor and that any "Switches" until then will continue to do what they did all along: keep the same performance than the 2017 model or as close as they can whilst ensuring they can keep making more when some previous components become discontinued.

***SoC is the abbreviation for "System on Chip", the definition I could find being "a single-integrated circuit (chip) composed of all the components of an electronic system. A SoC is heterogeneous, in addition to classical digital components: processor, memory, bus, etc.; it may contain analog and radio components. The SoC market has been driven by embedded computing systems: mobile phones and handheld devices."

@Rubashov Technically the original 2017 Switch has "already" been discontinued, due to the original processor chip made by nVidia having ceased production around 2019, thus leading Nintendo to need to replace it in 2019 with the Mariko chip that had the same performances whilst being much less power hungry(allowing BOTW to be played in handheld for almost twice as long than before, going from 2-2.5h to 4.5-5.5 hours of playtime in handheld before needing to recharge).

More people just didn't noticed because they otherwise kept the exact same form factor format, so the only difference between a 2017 Switch and a 2019 one were internal and the exteriors were the same.

It's suspected the same might be happening since this console release only in October but nVidia is reported to discontinue the SoC used in current(2017, 2019, Lite) Switch models. The difference this time is they allowed themselves more changes such as taking profit of the fact OLED has become a mature/weathered*(and thus better understood/more affordable) technology to update the screen among other tweaks.

So my suspicion was indeed that this might just be the next potential "standard" model to merely ensure continuity of production

@YoungLink64 It's basically what the DS lite was to the original DS.

Same features, different form factor and some minor improvements(mainly to stuff like battery life/etc).

It probably would have been seen as a more marked upgrade had the processor chip not already been replaced in 2019 for the Mariko due to nVidia discontinuing the original chip.

Since apparently nVidia is about to discontinue another component used in the current Switch, I suspect this is what happened here as well to allow the console to continue being made. They just added a few other improvements as a bonus this time around.

@YoungLink64 The thing is I don't think "people who didn't like what they saw" really matters in regard to Switch owner. It's not meant to be a Switch which you'll replace your current one with.

It's just most likely the next baseline, like the 2019 revision was. Wouldn't be surprised if it featured a new SoC since the one supplied by nVidia used in the 2017/2019/Lite models apparently cease production this year. At least if the claims are to be believed. But the 2019 revision itself happened because nVidia ceased to produce the processor chip in the 2017 Switch, so Nintendo made a revision with the next closest thing.

@kalosn I can semi-predict that it might become the standard model when it might be itself revised once/if nVidia stops producing that SoC that's supposedly featured in all current Switch model(2017/2019/Lite).

@dkxcalibur Have you ever tried to contact Nintendo support? When drift happened to me, they simply replaced mine for free.
Like, even the cost of mailing the joycons to them was covering by them due to the way it was setup if I recall.

And if somehow yours are out of warranty, I've discovered it might simply be much much cheaper to replace the joystick yourself by ordering repair kits(which include replacement joysticks) online than order a new set of joycons.
There's plenty of repair kits out there and I've found the replacing the joystick surprisingly easy to do once I understood the tutorials for them as at some point I had a set of joycons with did start to drift years after their warranty expired.

And unlike the joysticks on a gamepad pro, the model in a joycon doesn't require any soldering whatsoever to replace(meaning that it's ironically much easier to repair yourself a joycon whose warranty has expired than a Gamepad Pro whose warranty has expired).

@Andigaming Tbh considering how much the previous model sold just the last year, it's best that way.

I have friends who would have been pissed off to find themselves having purchased the "wrong" console if a stronger one had to release only months after.

Considering the matter of component supplies logistics, this is probably just another refresh(like 2019) purely to ensure the continuity of production, in case some components were aout to stop being produced by the suppliers, while retaining capabilities as close to the original as possible.

@dkxcalibur Tbh, except for maybe some of the 2017 owners like me who still have the pitiful battery life of only 2.5~ hours when playing BOTW. Plus the larger screen and improved kickstand clearly feels like improvements aimed at the Switch's purposed of supporting local multiplayer on the go.

The Switch is ultimately still selling like hotcake so it's aimed at new rather than existing owner. Which is likely why it's NOT stronger so as not to create a divide between future and existing users, particularly the many who're not ready to upgrade or might have just gotten a Switch this year(that include multiple friends of mine already who would have pissed for a Pro to be released as "the" new Switch just after they got a Switch for the first time this very year).

And judging by how many Switch were sold this year and the last already, that would have been a lot of players pissed off at having purchased the "wrong" version of the console.

@Gamecuber Similar battery life, but larger screen and better kickstand which seem to be at least partly intended to improve the kind of tabletop local multiplayer on the go the console was originally advertised as capable of.

@Toshiro_Baloney I just might but that's because I'm still using the 2017 model with the pitiful battery life from back then(barely over two hours playing BOTW, unlike the 2019 model which can get 5.5 hours like this new model seem to have, and even more with less demanding games).

And this coming with a built-in ethernet port in the dock might allow me to kill two birds with one stone and not have to worry about getting a LAN adapter. Meanwhile I could easily gift my old Switch to a relative or friend.

The larger screen and improvement kickstand however definitely feel they could be an improvement for those people doing local multiplayer on the go via tabletop mode, something that kind of fell by the wayside in advertising but seem to be pushed forward again.

@BornInNorway81
I was. Since from the beginning. As soon as people again began hyping themselves up for another rumored "Pro", I knew it'd be 2019 all over again.

I'm glad the new model does seem to have the same higher battery life than the 2019 refresh however. And the built-in ethernet port might be a boon as well, so I'm low-key considering this upgrade since I'm still using an OG switch from 2017 with the pitiful battery life in handheld mode and still don't have a LAN adapter for it.

So getting this might allow me to kill two birds with one stone and potentially allow me to gift my old Switch to someone else.

Like. 4+ year for me to finally refresh my Switch is something I'm okay with.

@Bizzyb It still doesn't make sense.

Why would the physical version, where at least SOME data need to be on the cartridge, require a download LARGER than the digital version of only 13.2gb? Which is very much within the scope of the most basic Switch cartridge afaik.

There's something weird going with that warning.

Even the great mother of all Day One Content Update couldn't possibly something as massive as 15gb because then even the digital version should get such a warning.

@nhSnork It's so weird. Like... the only way this could be possible is if it was the grandmother of all Day One Content Updates, but then again the DIGITAL version should also get such a warning if that was the case or see it's size updated.

@Curbie iirc in this case it was literally the case of a site that actually offered a special subscription for faster/easier access to ROMs.
So not just a big site, but one which was actually attempting to make money (however directly/indirectly) from said ROMs.

Edit: also I see you mentioning wishing that Capcom bring SOS join requests? I... thought that's what "join request" in Rise already was, just under a different name and with the visual of sending your cohoot instead of a flare. You can even set your quest as open for anyone outside your hub to join straight from when you post the quest? Meanwhile you can go to the quest board itself to join just anybody(not just those in your hub) online by picking either random or specific quests to try and find active groups online rather than just monster targets(iirc how the old SOS board functionned). So the mechanic is very much there still?

@Rayquaza2510 To be honest though I feel it's kind of hard to compare any of the games (as they are released now) to "Ultimate" editions and say "G-Rank DLC like Iceborne fixed" World because ultimately.... "Ultimate" editions were themselves basically glorified DLC before that was actually a thing.

It's just that ever since 3U(iirc?) we only got the Ultimate edition of the game and it took until Generations on 3DS before we got a non-ultimate edition of a game(and Generations Ultimate on Switch was when we thus got the Ultimate "DLC" for Generations.... just one we had to play on a completely different console for as a full game purchase).

I do expect us to get a Iceborne equivalent for Rise as well, but it's also why I find it harsh to compare the game to non-DLC versions of the title.

Also quest-wise a friend noted that the "mistake" Rise did was that a lot of the sometimes optional/essential quests of past titles were turned into "side-activities" type of quests done outside the traditional quest menus but instead as activity that can be done alongside an existing quest(akin to bounties in World/Iceborne).

This is mostly notable with egg deliveries quests being almost entirely turned into this optional bounties system and side-"quests"(quotation mark for a reason) you tackle not through the quest menu itself but through this "bounty" system that require you to do them during your other quests or expeditions.

I recall they were many player's most disliked quest types so I can see why they might tried to figure out a compromise where they're still a gameplay mechanic but also not as "mandatory" as before.

Such stuff definitely likely contributed to Rise feeling smaller. This said on map sizes I'm a bit undecided.... maps in World definitely felt larger, especially in term of "layers"... but that primarily applied to the Ancient Forest and often the size played more in the almost "hallways" nature of connection between "rooms" of the maps whereas the actual rooms of the map were often restrictive compared to many past maps. Plus a lot of the artificial boundaries of the terrain often applied.

In pure x/y/z coordinate sizes, Rise maps are indeed smaller but much much more of their space is actually "useable" than World's maps I felt. Literally with the mobility mechanics, usually, if it's within the confine of the maps it can be visited.... even if it would seem to be only background when seen from the bottom of the "room" so to speak. And while some maps have a smaller number of "rooms" than World's, I feel that overall most rooms are more spacious than those seen in World which feel kind of easier to maneuver in, kinda closer to older games which is probably why some of them are actually remakes of maps from 3U in fact(Sandy Plains/Flooded Forest).

Of course a lot of this can be a matter of personal tastes.

And honestly with how both World(especially that later with Iceborne) and Rise technically introduced their own hunting styles(all the integrated clutchclaw/slinger weapons moves in Iceborne, and the silkbind/wirebug mobility in Rise) mechanics, I feel like that's something the franchise intend to play upon a lot. Not for future titles to "replace" previous titles but instead just become a different flavor of Monster Hunter such that older titles all remain just as valid due to their own unique flavors of maps, mechanics and monster selections.

In fact it's having played World and Rise and THEN seeing videos of Generations Ultimate in action that made a friend tempted to try that one someday since "it's older than the newer titles but gosh the fighting just look like it was still already there".

@TimGibsonPBS That was always kinda the case though iirc. I think I recall hearing the backgrounds were literal physical paintings then rendered to digital at resolutions useable by the game.

I mean that change little about the pixel characters but yeah.

@Hyrule_Rainclouds I mean, most of my comment re: time/dimension travel was that a lot of people were implying the "sky" was somehow set in the "past" of Hyrule which... I kinda doubt.

However the way Link is shown accessing the sky reminds me of the mechanics of past Zelda games which had their world set in a dual dimension of sort(light/dark world, past/future, etc) and the way they've recurently tried to echo that theme but couldn't always do so for technical reason.

But the seeming seamlessness of travel between surface and sky in the trailer, and the differing outfits that seem exclusive to either locations make me suspect we may indeed see a return to that mechanic of having two "worlds"(from a mechanic sense, but both the skies and surface seem to act as distincts fully realized open worlds) to explore so to speak.

The title stuff definitely has me veeeeeeery curious however and indeed if Triforce(or even stuff like the goddesses that have always been tied to it) is somehow included I could see why that could be a major spoiler.

Also gosh, thanks for pointing out the flamethrower scene seem to be shown in an underground environment as well. I didn't catch on that, but it's true that "undergrounds" could be a perfect excuse to add furthermore weird monsters.

@Rayquaza2510 Tbh while Rise does have less content than World+Iceborne... it actually has more content already that World did at release.
Just as much maps overall in general(bar maybe "boss arenas" that are restricted to a single monster like World's Confluence of Fate being the are where Xeno J'iiva is exclusively fought... and only Xeno J'iiva iirc is fought there for that matter).
And already much more monsters than World did even after all it's pre-iceborne update(and that's including crossover monsters like Behemoth and Leshen which weren't neccessarily all appreciated because of their origins outside the Monster Hunter universe).

If I'd say Rise has any "issues" it's mostly that the removal of tracking made hunts a BIT too fast, but at the same time the lenghty process is a thing that rubbed a certain amount of players the wrong way. The only other is, proportions wise, perhaps being a BIT too generous in Low-Rank distribution of monsters. On one hand I actually welcomed low-rank feeling meaty again after world, but on the other it did come at the cost of High Rank feeling more sparse even with the inclusion of returning Elders Dragons in the 2.0 and 3.0 updates.

Now it remains to be seen what event quests will be like, since it does seem this summer's quests will bring back the tradition of some event quests introducing new themed gears. And them taking pre-World games' approach of being permanently available once introduced rather than cyclical "you must absolutely do the quest within this time period or else you need to hope it returns the next season" of World. I wouldn't also be surprise if we saw some (in individual fashion) additional monsters return after the summer as well, once Stories 2 has been given a run to install itself and when Rise could try to to use the "refresher" such updates could bring as well.

All of this said I personally like Rise a lot, I've just done a hiatus on it because one of my friend is taking a pause(not because of content: the intensity of Monster Hunter combat is just not something he can do over long stretches and he's migrating from using mouse+keyboard on PC to gamepad for the first time) amongst other things.

However I'm also REALLY looking forward to Stories 2. I loved the first on 3DS and what it did to the monster "collection" genre in term of battle mechanics(treating your monster as a bona fide companion you need to listen to yourself, to better synergize attack with them, rather than a minion who mindlessly follow all of your orders like a drone). So getting a sequel expanding on that system is something I've been looking forward since a while.

@Hyrule_Rainclouds I do suspect it's "just" Link in the Sky, but the fact his clothes are always different there from shots shown on the surface make me suspect that both "Surface" and "Sky" Link will be forced to make use of different gears.

Also I suspect the sky is not "just" the sky but I'm not ready to say it involves time travel as others are thinking. If anything, it gives me more of an "invisible sacred realm" vibe, and a lot of the "Sacred Realm of the Triforce" talk in past games implied that it looks like islands floating in the skies(though said sky was implied to still be quite otherworldly in A Link to the Past even before it's corruption into the Dark World), something A Link Between Worlds even play a bit upon when we get a glimpse of the Sacred Realm in the epilogue if I recall.

So if I have a main suspicion, is that BOTW's sequel might bring the Triforce back to the forefront of the story after it's strange absence in the original BOTW where it was present only in imagery and (very indirectly) through the fact there are springs of courage/wisdom/power(the "virtues" associated with the Triforce).

@Bulborb Tbh dual worlds were a bit thing the series tried to play upon in both A Link to the Past(the World of Light/the corrupted Sacred Realm, aka the Dark World), Ocarina of Time(Young Link era/Adult Link era, switched between using time travel).

A Link Between World was just an echo of A Link to the Past in that regard.

I'd also argue that while there's only three games with dual worlds, almost all others also tried to draw from that concept in ways that made me suspect they tried to implement it but ran out of time/development resources or encountered technical limitations(even Ocarina had stuff that encountered limitations: they originally intended to have travel between young/adult era as smooth as dimension travel of A Link to the Past, but coordinates stuff proved to be harder to do in 3D so instead they worked through more fixed portals).

Wind Waker had the Great Sea but implied the entire realm of Hyrule slumbered under it's waves... which we do get to but sadly the version seen is just a glorified road from Hyrule Castle to Ganon's Tower. I suspect it was planned to be larger but had to be cut down to the version we got.

Twillight Princess tried to play on the idea of another dimension hard with the Twillight, but seeing as in that game it's applied as more of an "overlay" to the world which can then be "cleansed" and getting to the actual Twillight Realm is a trip limited just to the royal castle or such... again I suspect a development hurdle happened or that plans were made to make the game shorter(games before Wind Waker/Twillight were notable for the sheer amount of dungeons in them).

Skyward Sword... well, it's obvious the Sky and Surface are meant to be two separate "world" in a fashion, and I recall hearing the Surface was originally meant to be much larger(i.e.: original plans sounded like a proto-BOTW, albeit with traditional progression formula) but iirc they'd encountered tech/performance issues on the Wii that prevented them from making a game of the scale they originally intended.

It sounds like that the BOTW sequel might try to bring a dual "worlds" mechanic back but this time, in real rather than just thematic. Especially looking at Link's upward "dive" and the different outfits he seem to always been shown wearing in the sky sequences(I'm starting to suspect that "Surface Link" and "Sky Link" might literally have their own set of gears indepedent from each others... since Sky Link's gear is different in some scenes but always keep that "sky" thematic)

@westmeadow Honestly, bar a very vocal minority, I feel the majority of the Switch fanbase is exactly as you are. They're fine with the Switch-as-is.

Like even the 2019 revision didn't change anything for performances beyond battery life and, not only that, was only made because the original chip from the 2017 original Switch would no longer be made by nVidia.

And with another whopping 20 millions consoles sold iirc this last year, 4 year into the Switch and starting a fifth... if performance of the Switch had REALLY been an issue there wouldn't have been so many sales again and everyone would have just waited for the "next" Switch.

As it is, I don't see Nintendo wanting to release a pro Switch that would be the only way to "truly" enjoy future games(be them "Pro Exclusives" or just to "get good performances at all because devs/publishers didn't bother to optimize or even try developping for base Switch") for 80millions+ people who already own the original Switch(with 15-20 millions in the last year alone iirc).

Sales aren't slowing, so there's no real reason to release a "pro" console especially one that could be used to "replace" the regular Switch unlike the Switch lite which was for people who were either uninterested in the regular Switch or buying a Lite in addition to a regular that served as the "family/local multiplayer" console.

@sixrings I mean, it doesn't look that much better than BOTW. More vibrant textures in the sky sure, but that's more of a choice of colors than performance thing really.

So framerate is honestly most likely simply going to be: Pretty much the same than BOTW1, both smooth and less smooth moments".

Even the sky stuff where you can see the surface from above will likely be handled okay because that's something even BOTW1 did: Vah Medo where you can see the surface from above when on the Divine Beast that's itself soaring above the cloud. And similarly I assume that the "surface" will be used as only a background rather than a place to "go" to when you'll be in the sky.

Thus rather than have to worry about smooth transition and performance when traveling from the sky to the surface I assume travel between the sky and the surface will be done via fixed portals(at least for surface to sky... I have my thoughts about one way they could handle sky to surface but they don't change the current point), kinda how dimension travel was handled in Zelda A Link to the Past when traveling from the world of light to the dark world.

Meaning both worlds are actually likely loaded(and thus active) separately rather than at the same time.

@sixrings Honestly, seeing the graphical style of BOTW2 and looking at what's ALREADY on Switch in terms of graphics(Astral Chain in particular but there's also something to be said about the environments of Luigi's Mansion sometimes looking out of a Pixar movie).... I don't think you'll ever need a Switch Pro for BOTW2.

For one the graphics still look very close to BOTW1 and even the sky stuff has, in my opinion, likely done a thing that would likely render moot issues about performance(the key point being how we see a shot of link somehow 'teleporting' to the Sky, which tells me that it exists as it's own separate open world from the surface, the world below not being a place you can seamlessly go to but instead just a low detail version of it used as background and thus likely travelling between surface and skies done likely via loading screens or something similar to keep things easy on performance).

So if any is coming, it could literally come -after- BOTW2 rather than as a prerequisite for it.

@Baker1000 Tbh with how they keep selling more consoles than ever and such, I think they have cold feet about an upgrade that might run a risk of "obsoleting"(or giving the perception of it) the consoles of 80+ millions of Switch owners(which could mean a lot of angry people tbh).

Plus with chip shortages affecting the more powerful consoles the most while demand remains sky high for even just the current Switch, there's the matter that a Switch Pro could be coming only... to lack supplies at all because everyone's competing for the materials of high performance components already.

Why ship a model you wouldn't be able to produce that could ALSO peeve off your massive existing userbase when your current style of model still sell a heck ton and make plenty of the userbase perfectly happy.

I'd see the cloud gaming a bit as the other way around in fact; it's less about Nintendo needing those games(they sell consoles and games of their own by the boatloads already as it is) but more because those developers trying to pierce into the massive userbase of the Switch... especially moreso as PS5 and it's likes are still floundering because of the chip shortage, lack of supplies and scalpers.

Cloud stuff feels a lot like a compromise from devs(or at least, publishers) who try to have it both way: trying to get a presence on Switch but without wishing to make the effort of optimizing a title or making a new title that is designed for Switch in the first place while still trying to make games meant for the benefit of surplus hardware performance of the larger consoles.

@Coxula tbh the lack of grid with cover can be simply resolved: cover "hitzones" that are highlighted when you put the character close to cover, allowing you to instantly get into "in cover" mode. Also I need to check but while movement was gridless, environment still was very square shaped on the battle map. So the grid 'layout' of cover may well remain as is, in which point gridless movement is a bit more moot if cover still follow the same axis.

I think you can see a good example on this screenshot: https://www.geekgirlauthority.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/MRSH_screen_bobomb_1206_10.10pm_CEST-4951160c3b5520406f8.50991290.jpg

@Optimist80 My own theory about "Sky Link" is not time travel oddly enough... but close.
We know that the hero is a reincarnation, just like the princess. So while there's been "other" Links.... as a reincarnation they're ultimately all the same individual, just their appearance for a new era.

Meanwhile the sky islands have... an invisible sacred vibe to them. And the teleportation seemingly the mean to access them make me think they're not as much in normal space that it is.

So when you're there I suspect that you don't as much travel in time than simply appear, due to the sacred realm-like influence of the place, as your "true" self. I.e.: you're not the Link of any era, but rather what the "OG Link" at the start of the reincarnation chain could have looked like.

Kind of like the Dark World of A Link to the Past but instead of a bunny you appear as the "true" self of Link to the metaphysical eyes of the world so to speak.

Of course it's not a theory without flaw; "Sky Link" seem to be able to get his own specific sets of gears so to speak.

This said... I might expect some time travel from this game. Just not the kind people expect.

This look like a VERY powerful Ganondorf. Maybe beyond the peaks we've seen in the past titles. With aeons of hatred borne from imprisonment and his lifeforce slowly leeched((I have a theory that the "ancient energy" ancient sheikah tapped into originally without realizing it might have been the real trapped Ganondorf all along))... his hate and thus power is even stronger than even.
Demonic even.

And there's the other thing; a lot of asian mythology and cosmology see time not as a linear line, but as a circle or wheel which turns in cycles. So I half wonder if time travel might not play in BOTW2's ending.... by facing a Ganondorf now too strong for the reincarnation of the goddess to seal anymore... but perhaps still not powerful enough to face the actual goddess... in the past.

Thus ergo the sealing of Ganon in another fashion: by sending him in the past, to face Hylia herself. And in the doing... becoming Demise, creating a perfect circle cosmology. Demise is the one who reincarnate in Ganondorf... who might end up being sent from the very end of the Zelda timeline(BOTW2) to the very start(pre-Skyward Sword) to become Demise in the first place.
The beginning would be the end and the end would be the begining.

Mind you it's a fair stretch but lots of folks are noting how Luminous stones look like unrefined version of Skyward's Timeshift stones that were capable of localized timeshifts. Meanwhile the Temple of Time had the biggest refined timeshift stone in Skyward Sword implied to be the reason for time travel in Ocarina of Time. And there IS still a Temple of Time in BOTW.

@roboshort Well whatever caused the Castle to rise up seem to have created a massive earthquake doing so. Judging by the many ruined structures and bridge in BOTW, I can at the very least expect a few to collapse. The Great Tabantha Bridge, rickety wooden misrepaired mess that it is, in particular feels like a likely target of such change/collapse.

So that will likely force some players to explore at the very least alternate routes they weren't used to take when they played BotW to reach some of these regions.

There's also the possibility of stuff 'unearthed' by that quake. Or other malice-infested area because of that mess spilling out of the hole.

I also suspect the breach of Demise, that weird bonelike canyon, will be a target of Some Changes. Especially with all the ties to Skyward this game seem to be throwing(am I the only one who noticed that Lich Ganon's long waistcloth and long unbound hair gives a proto-Demise look?).

@Beermonkey To second your statement: if WindWaker and Twillight were announced some might have complained about there TOO MUCH games with Mario Golf/Monster Hunter Stories2/Warioware/Advance Wars remakes/Metroid Dread/Shin Megami Tensei V/Pokemon Diamond&Pearl and then not one but two Zelda ontop of that in a timespan probably just before Pokemon Legend Arceus next January?

Like.... I want Windwaker again but also I'm low-key glad it's not this year because I'm starting to have troubles pacing out my purchases and having to really "choose" which one I'm interested in(I might get Mario Golf of all things because my library is stock full of singleplayer/coop game but has only like... Mario Kart/Smash Bros pure pickup&play multiplayer wise)

@UndoControl Honestly, expecting the announcements before the release of Skyward was kind of a fool's game so you're onto something there. They could easily be an holidays release(iirc except pokemon remakes in November, which are a Pokemon Company thing, Nintendo doesn't have a whole lot lined up after Dread and I could see some Zelda surprises in December, half a year from now).

Plus they could be used, after Skyward did it's sales, in 2022 itself to create a gradual lead-up of anticipation for BOTW.
Or plenty of other things.