Topic: Nintendo Switch 2 Predictions

Keep the tradition of having generation-old power, in the case of Switch 2, base PS4 power. Backwards compatibility with my Switch 1 physical collection. Anything else seems superfluous. My only hope for the Switch 2 is for it to have a memory bandwidth of 100 GB/s+ (slightly more than the Deck's 88 GB/s would be nice) to make those PS4-to-Switch 2 ports perform better than expected.

But that'll depend on what amount of RAM Nvidia and Nintendo decide to cram in there.

Got the sneaky suspicion Nintendo will go cheap with 12GB.

I just got a TV that supports HDR. It definitely makes the colors look more vibrant so I'd be happy if Switch 2 supported it, but I'm not big on graphics so it's not something I'd consider an absolutely necessary feature. I want features that open up new gameplay possibilities first and foremost, not features that make the graphics look prettier. So I'd be much more interested in things like the return of dual screens, VR, AR, etc. Something that would actually open up new MECHANICS.

@skywake I think it's only interesting in so much as the fact that those 7-9 inch tablets are still a "thing" for a certain category of consumer.

Just a quick search suggests that there were 128 million tablets sold in 2023. Almost more in one year than Switch's sold over the life of the console. Now that includes a lot of very distinct devices - some are commercial devices (PoS, museum displays etc.), others are genuine productivity devices, some are teaching devices and some are up sells into an ecosystem (about 48 million of that figure are iPads). Switch probably can't/shouldn't look to replace those devices but if even just 5-10% of those devices are pure gaming and streaming content consumption then that's a huge market for which a Switch 2 could be a better piece of technology.

What really makes those consumers tick, could the right device with the right features and marketing could capture a market that we've pretty much written off entirely without a second thought.

I would agree that the sorts of marketing steps necessary would confuse its messaging as a gaming platform and the technical steps that would be necessary are probably trivial to the point of being entirely uninteresting.

@Magician
Worth noting that the Steam Deck has overheads and on-top of that games aren't optimised for it. 12GB on a Switch 2 would be plenty when put next to the 16GB on the Deck and 8GB on the PS4/XBOne. Also notably the One X had 12

I'm not sure there's a huge argument for 16GB for what's essentially a single function device. Especially given they're not going to be pushing native 4K outside of some very light titles

@Bolt_Strike
I don't disagree but at the same time I think the Switch as it is is functionally pretty spot on. Other than maybe adding more haptics and more analogue inputs I'm not entirely sure what they could do to open up new gameplay. As far as the Switch go by far the most significant weakness is the fidelity of games. And sure, addressing that might not open up new gameplay..... but it's still the one thing they really need to address

Again, of they add AR/VR and tricksy gloves with wheels and gizmos but the output is still 1080p, 60Hz, no HDR, no VRR, barely any fidelity jump.... that'll be pretty disappointing. For the majority of games that don't need or don't use those tricks you'd have to ask what the point was

Trying to use WiiU and how it failed to compare a Switch 2 is clearly biased and making bad assumptions . The Switch has nothing hardware wise like the WiiU since it's a totally different hardware and does what WiiU couldn't do become a truly hardware portable console that has outsold and outbested all the NintenDoomed deniers. So if one wants to compare Switch there isn't nothing out there like it and will ever best it. The only bad predictions is looking like a March 2025 release date that just ruins those waiting for a more powerful system.

@SwitchForce
Nobody is doing anything remotely along those lines. There was a comment that it should not use the Switch brand to avoid a "Wii U incident" which I shut down and others generally agreed with. Because it's very clear that the Switch is not in the same space the Wii was and the landscape Switch 2 will face at launch is also entirely different

The Wii branding soured significantly by the time the Wii U launched. That's not true of Switch to anywhere near the same degree. And to the extent that it has soured, i.e. low power, new hardware will fairly easily close that gap

Nobody here is "Nintendooming", so calm ya farm

Somehow never received a notification for this post.

Traditional sticks and buttons can only provide a limited range of actions. There's only a finite amount of buttons on the controller and just pressing a button (even an analogue button) limits you to a more scripted action. Whereas with motion/touch controls in VR/AR, you're only limited by the what the human body can do. And there's a LOT of benefits to that. You don't need to memorize obtuse button combos to do something that would be simple IRL because the game has more actions than a controller can fit. You don't need to worry about a context sensitive action failing because you wouldn't need to use context sensitivity to squeeze in multiple actions. And it would just plain feel more immersive and realistic to perform an action in game the same way you would IRL. And almost if not all genres of gaming would benefit from those kinds of improvements, it's not some gimmick that only applies to a handful of specific game ideas. Any kind of improvement in that area (provided that it's well-executed) would be a far more compelling than trying to sell a console based on improved graphics which at this point amounts to exploding budgets and dev times for the sake of making each blade of grass look extra shiny.

After playing Astros Playroom, I really want Nintendo to make the HD rumble, they promised with the Switch. Even if the controller makes weird sounds, like the PS 5 controller.

@Bolt_Strike
A couple of things. Firstly I'm not opposed to gadgets and gizmos. Earlier in this thread I even backed the scroll wheel triggers you brought up and also the idea of bringing back the camera in the OP. I think I might even be the only person in this thread saying these are good ideas. So yeah, stuff like that could well add some new opportunities

But at the same time the inputs available already are fairly versatile. Two sticks, two bumpers, two triggers (though the should be analogue), face buttons, D-Pad, gyro, accelerometers, linear actuators for decent feedback (aka HD Rumble), an IR camera and touchscreen. That's a fair amount to play with

And frankly most of the comments here, and the ones I was replying to, weren't even really about adding to the above. They were about things like themes, music, the eShop, Netflix..... meh....

So yeah, my general view is that the Switch as it is is pretty great. But it is old hardware that's not particularly good value for money for the level of performance you get. It could be better, they could have something far more capable. And for me that'd be enough. Of course I'm not opposed to more than just a hardware jump but without that hardware jump it's basically just the same hardware with a new Controller and eShop redesign. And that'd be a skip from me

Basically, the fact that the Switch is woefully underpowered is the elephant in the room. It seems odd to me that some don't want to address it

I think Switch is almost perfect as it is.
A PS4 level power, more storage, same screen and battery life as Oled, and an affordable price, and it would be the perfect gaming machine.

@GeneralFulbright This 100%, I just basically want the Switch as it exists today - but with PS4 level power, more GB storage, backwards compatibility.

I only need those simple metrics to guarantee my pre-order!

I defer to you when it comes to the computer science, I'm a citizen in that sphere of knowledge. But when it comes to the overhead, do you feel that the Switch 2's OS will be the tipping point for Nintendo deciding between 8GB and 12GB (or hopefully between 12GB and 16GB)? 500MB of Switch 1's 4GB of RAM is reserved for the OS, yeah?

Kind of, but it feels like we've reached the limit of what those things can do. If you're trying to sell a new hardware generation expanding on control options seems like the best way to provide a convincing upgrade.

The performance issues feels like an artificial problem. Most of the "current gen" games feel like they even need the performance upgrades for those concepts to work, it kind of feels like we largely reached the limit of what performance upgrades can do to facilitate new gameplay ideas back in like... 7th gen or so. Really the third parties and Microsoft/Sony seem to be pushing for performance upgrades less because they seem to have ideas that won't work with the current specs and more because they want an excuse for you to buy their shiny new box/game in a few years and pushing for flashy hyper-realistic graphics is a gimmick to get your attention. So yes, Nintendo does need to upgrade performance because that's what the third parties want and their third party support is going to fall off a cliff if they don't, but the higher specs are really showing almost nothing in terms of providing a convincing reason why we need them. Really they're showing the opposite right now, that they're too expensive and time-consuming leading to game droughts and layoffs (and this market does seem primed to implode on itself with the above factors making this strategy unsustainable and gamers seem to be catching on), so long term I don't think this is something Nintendo should continue to chase, but short term I could see some logic in the upgrade.

Oodles of RAM quickly becomes useless, especially for a console that is pretty much just gonna be doing one thing at a time.

The only reason they’d need more than 12 gigs is if they want the UI to do some crazy multitasking stuff, which I just don’t see them doing beyond maybe bringing back a Miiverse kind of thing that can run in the background.

I went with “only” 16gigs RAM on my current gaming PC (built it two years ago), and it’s been just fine even when streaming video on the second monitor while playing a game on the other monitor.

Honestly, I can easily see them going 8 gigs for some easy cost reduction, though RAM is nowhere near the largest offender when it comes to price.

@rallydefault
It's worth adding that on a gaming PC you have system RAM and VRAM. On these consoles that memory is shared. And how much is enough depends on what you're doing

My work PC has 32GB of system memory and 6GB of VRAM, 6GB of VRAM is overkill given I only play Civ and Cities Skylines on that machine but 32GB of System Memory is just barely enough for Visual Studio, IIS, SQL server etc etc

The PC I use for gaming has 16GB of System Memory and 8GB of VRAM. 16GB is plenty because all that's ever running on it is Windows and one game. But 8GB of VRAM is.... somewhat limiting if I want to push the settings... which I tend to do given it's connected to a 4K OLED...

If they have 12GB of shared memory? Let's say they have 1GB reserved for the OS. The game itself steals maybe 4GB for general game logic. That leaves 7GB to feed the GPU. Plenty for what's generally going to be a console running games at 1080p. If they cut it to 8GB? Suddenly there's a fairly restrictive RAM budget at play.....

16GB would be nice, 8GB would be pretty restrictive and unnecessarily cheap. I think 12GB seems about right

@skywake
Interesting.

Yea, I think 12 sounds nice, which is why I think they'll go for 8 lol

Considering if moor laws is dead and someone from Nvidia said hardware is done since 2022 they delay just doesn't add up unless they are trying to sell out v2 OLED switches before announcing a New Switch. That's the only logical sense and to have Devs with ready games to wait until 2025 March isn't helpful to their cost as they spent time and manpower and need to make returns on their investments this is the part that is also missed. And should be talked about delaying games Devs not from in house Nintendo can have a ripple effect causing them to loose funding or closing shop until they can find funding to keep going.

@SwitchForce
Several things. Firstly the fact that the SoC is done doesn't mean that the console was ready to launch. Case and point the original Switch is based on the Tegra X1 but it wasn't the first product released with that SoC. NVidia themselves released the Shield TV with the exact same SoC in May 2015. A few months before that Nintendo announced the development of their new console the NX, which later became the Switch

In other words the Switch "hardware" was "done" when NX was revealed and they sat on it for another 2 years. Pretty much the exact same timeline we're seeing now. I'd also note that the Zen 2 CPU architecture that the PS5 and XBox Series use was released in the PC space in mid 2019. By the time they launched Zen 3 had been out for a month. And those are consoles that were, for consoles, relatively high end for consoles at launch. Consoles are always launching with "old" hardware, it's just how it goes

And the reason is fairly obvious. What good is releasing a new console if there's not a huge amount of reason to buy it? They need software for it. Software takes time. Software needs hardware first. Now I for one have no doubt in my mind that Nintendo could've launched "Switch 2" last year. It probably would've even done relatively well with an enhanced cross-gen versions of TotK, Super Mario RPG HD with HDR, 4K mode for Super Mario Wonder etc. But you know what'll do even better? A console that launches with a new 3D Mario, Metroid Prime 4, Mario Kart 9

Lastly, on your last bit about studios supposedly sitting on Switch 2 games and potentially going under from this "delay". For one thing the "delay" as reported is from Q4 2024 to Q1 2025. You can trot out the line that it's been "done since 2022" all you want but I think we can be super confident that no developer has been sitting on games developed specifically for this thing for 2 years. I'd also note here that the most reputable leak of third party developers seeing hardware was late last year. And even then they were talking late 2023

Another thing to consider re "developers sitting on games" is the fact that this new hardware will be architecturally fairly similar to the Switch. Backwards compatibility is pretty much assumed at this point, cross-gen games are likely. It's also technically very possible that you won't be required to re-purchase games to get a "Switch 2" version of the same game. Whether or not they do that or not is a good question but it won't be a technical hurdle. In any case, I'd imagine if you were a developer you'd be wanting to also release on the OG Switch to capitalise on that larger install base

For example if RockStar were planning on having a GTA5 port for Switch 2's launch? Without question they would also be planning on having it compatible with the original Switch. And if they were truly intending on a release in August that Nintendo has now denied them? Well, I'd imagine they'd just release the game anyways and then patch it later/allow users to upgrade for the Switch 2. Which also happens to be what they did for the game originally in the transition from 360/PS3 to XBOne/PS4

Any chance it launches this Fall/Winter? or will it be like Switch and release in March(‘25) like it did in ‘17

@mike3 The rumours /possible leaks say it was going to be late this year but got delayed to early next year. So... that's all we really have to go on until Nintendo says something official. Best guess is we will hear more news sometime this Spring. There is a Nintendo financial meeting May 7 so it would make a lot of sense if Nintendo at least acknowledged the existence of upcoming hardware by or around then.