28 ms·

Switch 2 will be backwards compatible with Switch

361 points by ashitlerferad 2y ago

dmonitor 2y ago
This shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone. Nintendo has had a trend for the past couple decades of releasing "sequel" consoles that are essentially a modernized version of the old one with extra features, compatible with everything that released on the predecessor. With all three major console manufacturers prioritizing backwards compatibility, and the rise in PC gaming (universally backwards compatible), people are starting to catch on to the fact that old games don't "expire" after 10 years. I wouldn't be surprised if backwards compatibility just becomes the standard for all gaming consoles going forward. Tangential, but I'm also interested in seeing how games that released on old consoles and are continued to be played, like Fortnite, will support aging hardware. I don't like that Epic can one day announce the game just no longer works on that console, rendering your purchases null and void until you upgrade your hardware, but I can't expect them to update that version of the game forever.
- maxsilver 2y ago
  > I don't like that Epic can one day announce the game just no longer works on that console, rendering your purchases null and void until you upgrade your hardware, but I can't expect them to update that version of the game forever. Traditionally for these "Live Service"-type games, they announce cutting support for a console, but let you carry your purchases in that specific game (subscription, add-on items, etc), forward to the same game on the next gen of that console. For example, how Final Fantasy 14 ended PS3 support - https://www.gamedeveloper.com/game-platforms/-i-final-fantasy-xiv-i-ending-ps3-support-this-week https://www.gamedeveloper.com/game-platforms/-i-final-fantas... and how Grand Theft Auto 5 ended PS3 support - https://www.ign.com/articles/gta-online-support-ending-xbox-360-ps3 https://www.ign.com/articles/gta-online-support-ending-xbox-... It's not a guarantee, but I'd expect something similar for Fortnite.
  - dmonitor 2y ago
    It's definitely the case for Fortnite, but it still doesn't sit well with me that a service bought on specific hardware can just be taken away with no recourse. I'm not sure what if anything can or should be done about it, but it's weird knowing that many of the most popular PS4 games will be straight up unplayable in a few years
  - jonny_eh 2y ago
    It's like how mobile games can stop supporting old phones. e.g. Hearthstone
- jerf 2y ago
  Games don't have the generational differences they used to. They're mature now. Tech is rarely the blocker anymore. The Switch was "underpowered" at release and is even more underpowered now but the space of "games that would run well on the Switch" is still fairly unexplored, not because anybody is bad but because the space is so big now. That hardware can no longer compete with platforms that don't throw away their entire library on every release is probably one of the first impacts of games finally maturing. My "next console" was a Steam Deck for partially this very reason, the fact that it came preloaded with years of previous acquisitions. We're also just seeing the leading edge of the game industry having to deal with the fact that it now has to compete against itself. There's been a number of articles about how $NEW_GAME never even reached a peak player count of something like Skyrim. I think that's currently being written as a sort of a "ha ha, that's sorta funny", but it represents a real problem. It is not unsolvable; Hollywood has always faced this issue and it has historically managed to make money anyhow. But I think AAA gaming is only just beginning to reckon with the fact that they aren't going to get a "free reset" on every console generation. $NEW_GAME really is is competition with Skyrim now, along with a lot of other things. It's not a joke, it's an emerging reality the industry is going to have to grapple with.
  - spwa4 2y ago
    Either that, or you've gotten older. The young always want to play that one specific NEW game. Currently that usually means PS5, either Fortnite or Call Of Duty (and yes that one specific version). PS5 only has PS4 backward compatibility, and it isn't going to be emulated any time soon.
    - jsheard 2y ago
      Fortnite and Call of Duty are not great examples given they both still run on the PS4. Even the latest Call of Duty iteration that launched barely two weeks ago still runs on last generation consoles, because there's still so many players who haven't felt the need to upgrade to the successor generation after four years. I don't think there's ever been a console generation before where the last generation was still getting big new releases this deep into the next one. The PS5 Pro is out now and the PS4 is still getting new games.
- qwytw 2y ago
  > prioritizing backwards compatibility Backwards compatibility is very "cheap" these days though? With no arcane architectures and chip designs. PS5 and Xbox are basically just generic PCs running a restricted OS and Switch is just a phone/tablet.
  - DanielHB 2y ago
    It is cheap only if you don't change CPU or GPU architectures. This is why the PS4 doesn't have PS3 compatibility. When apple switched to ARM even with x64->ARMv8 translation layer (NOT emulating) it was still noticeably slow in a lot of software. Even though some x64 games worked on ARM macs they still lost A LOT of performance. The backwards compatibility of the PS2 was due to the PS2 literally including an extra PS1 CPU (technically PS1-like CPU underclocked to match the original PS1 CPU when running PS1 games). On PS2 games this PS1 CPU handled only I/O so it wasn't completely wasted when running PS2 games. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PlayStation_2_technical_specifications#I/O_processor_(IOP) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PlayStation_2_technical_specif... The PS2 CPU is a MIPS III while the PS1 CPU is a MIPS I. I am not an expert but I think but I think MIPS III is only backwards compatible to MIPS II, not MIPS I
    - mmaniac 2y ago
      MIPS II got rid of the load delay slot, so any software relying on that wouldn't work. The PS2 EE also had a nasty bug which would cause some loops to terminate early. There's a decent chance any random MIPS code would satisfy this bug's conditions. https://lore.kernel.org/all/d59a6bef6541d35d4460b966c0fe651aac507730.1567326213.git.noring@nocrew.org/ https://lore.kernel.org/all/d59a6bef6541d35d4460b966c0fe651a...
  - kimixa 2y ago
    Depends on the level of hardware access. If the GPU access is through a relatively "thick" API like DX/Vulkan and shaders stored in an intermediate representation like DXIL or SPIR-V, sure, swapping out the hardware implementation is relatively easy. But if they're shipping GPU ISA binaries as the shaders, you'll have a much harder time ensuring compatibility. Same with things like synchronization, on both the CPU and GPU (and any other offload devices like DSPs or future NPUs). If they use API-provided mechanisms, and those are used /correctly/, then the implementation can likely be changed. But if they cycle-count and rely on specific device timing, again all bets are off. Things like DX12 and Vulkan have a large number of sync points and state transition metadata to allow different implementations to be "correct" in things like cache or format conversions (like compression). Not all those transitions are required for every vendor's hardware, and we regularly see issues caused by apps not "correctly" using them when the spec says it's required, as the vendor's hardware they happened to test on didn't require that one specific transition that another implementation might, or they happened across some timing that didn't happen to hit issues. I guess my point is Compatibility is hard even if the APIs are intentionally designed to allow it. I have no idea how much the idea of such compatibility has been baked into console APIs in the first place. One of the primary advantages of consoles is to allow simplifications allowed by targeting limited hardware, so I can only assume they're less compatibility focused than the PC APIs we already have Big Problems with.
- AlwaysRock 2y ago
  "Nintendo has had a trend for the past couple decades of releasing "sequel" consoles that are essentially a modernized version of the old one with extra features, compatible with everything that released on the predecessor." Isnt it pretty much just the Wii and Wii U? I guess you could play GameCube disks on a Wii but calling the Wii a modernized version of the GameCube is a real stretch.
  - aurareturn 2y ago
    Wii, Wii U, GBC, GBA, DS, 3DS all had backwards compatibility.
    - estebank 2y ago
      Technically, so did the SNES with the NES, it was just never really exposed. SMB all-stars started as SMB3 running directly on SNES. And you had the Super GameBoy, but that was little more than a GameBoy in a cartridge.
      - simondotau 2y ago
        The Sega Mega Drive (Genesis) had backwards compatibility with the Master System. Unlike the Super Game Boy, the Power Base Converter was barely more than a cartridge pass-through adapter. The Mega Drive’s 68000 is idled and its Z80 sound co-processor takes control as the main CPU. https://segaretro.org/Power_Base_Converter https://segaretro.org/Power_Base_Converter
      - derefr 2y ago
        > Technically, so did the SNES with the NES, it was just never really exposed. I've always wondered how true this is — I feel like if it was literally true, we'd see a lot of NES ROMhacks that involve editing the ROM's layout and metadata bits just enough that it's now a SNES ROM, and then taking advantage of SNES capabilities in the mod. But I don't believe I've ever seen something like that. I do understand that the SNES CPU is basically a "very extended" 6502; and that the SNES PPU's default-on-boot graphics mode is compatible with drawing NES-PPU-formatted CHR-ROM data; and that there's a "legacy compatibility" joypad input MMIO in the right place in address space to allow a game that was programmed for the NES to read the "NES subset" of a SNES controller's buttons. But is the SNES's (variant) 65C816 ISA a strict superset of the NES's (variant) 6502 ISA? Or would they have had to effectively go through the assembly code of SMB3 with a fine-toothed comb, fixing up little compatibilities in the available instructions here and there, to get it to run on the SNES? (Though actually, even if they did have to do that, I imagine it would be still be possible to automate that process — i.e. it would be theoretically possible to write a NES-to-SNES static transpiler. In fact, it's so seemingly-tenable, that I'm a bit surprised to have never heard of such a project!)
- starquake 2y ago
  Although the handhelds have been backwards compatible, only the Wii and the Wii U had backwards compatibility. The SNES, N64, Gamecube and Switch did not have backwards compatibility.
  - dmonitor 2y ago
    I said "past couple decades" for a reason. The N64 is pushing 30
  - drrotmos 2y ago
    The SNES and the Gamecube did have the Super Game Boy and Game Boy Player respectively though, but I'd probably count that as sideward compatibility rather than backward compatibility.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- 14 2y ago
  Lucky for you Fortnite is and always has been a free game. If you were foolish enough to pay to dress up your characters well then thank you for supporting that business model so I can let my kids play for free. Power to you if you can afford to drop money on digital clothing for a game you spend on what ever you like. But I just see it as bad a smoking. Kids are like junkies wanting to buy clothing for a game mean while them and their parents are living in rags. It’s an addiction and kids are put up against their peers or will be on the outside if they can’t get the latest skin. So stupid it went that way and any game that has kids playing it should not allow in game purchases like that.
  - iknowstuff 2y ago
    babe. there were so many stupid toys and collectibles for kids until the 2000s. chill out lol
- causi 2y ago
  Shoot, they don't need a hardware generation to do that. ActiBlizz told everyone who spent $40 on Overwatch "Fuck you, go play a different game".
- pjmlp 2y ago
  I always find interesting the issue regarding PC gaming on the rise, because in the Iberian Penisula game consoles never were that big. We grew from the 8 bit home computers, lived through 16 bit home computers and settled in PC gaming. Nintendo was mostly about those game & watch handhelds, naturally SEGA and PlayStation became relevant, replaced by XBox and PlayStation, but always on the shadow of PC gaming.
- inasio 2y ago
  The Mac is a weird counter example here, the move to 64 bits resulted in many games with official Mac ports (e.g. most of Valve's: Half Life, Portal, etc) no longer being able to run on modern versions of OSX
  - lloeki 2y ago
    I'm certainly not blaming game makers in general because of the situation of Apple dropping 32bit Intel support, but I think Valve is a different story: - They've been very diligent in the past about keeping their games up to date. - Valve owning Steam means their flagship games are a strong signal about macOS support on Steam. - If they really wanted, they could; they certainly have the resources to do so should they want to+; which means, they don't want to, which is a signal in the other direction: they stopped caring about macOS. + HL1 has a FOSS engine that apparently supports it, and more: https://github.com/FWGS/xash3d-fwgs/blob/master/Documentation/ports.md https://github.com/FWGS/xash3d-fwgs/blob/master/Documentatio...
  - numpad0 2y ago
    macOS is actually notorious for lack of binary compatibility. Most commercial apps are online distributed, and most non-commercial are open source, so they're quickly updated and compatibility issues are less often noticed.
- CM30 2y ago
  It definitely shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone, and should be the obvious choice to make on Nintendo's side too... But it's probably worth noting that it's Nintendo we're talking about, and the games industry as a whole. They have a tendency to make questionable decisions that people could immediately tell were questionable decisions, either for anti consumer reasons or just not knowing the market. So while the odds of the Switch 2 being backwards compatible were really high, and we all knew it was the obvious choice to make, there was still always a worry that it wouldn't happen for some ridiculous reason or another.
- evoke4908 2y ago
  Part of it is that consoles are just PCs now. There is absolutely no excuse to not be backwards compatible in the current day. But by the same token, consumers are realizing that consoles are just a less useful version of a gaming PC. The real deal has infinitely more utility for not much more money. Console makers are trying to sweeten the pot (or staunch the bleeding) by artificially expanding their library with prior generation games. At least until they get bored and decide to black hole all those same games, Sega. Frankly I don't see any point to consoles anymore apart from the Console Experience(TM). A PC does it better, faster, cheaper, with literally more games than your entire extended family can play in their combined lifetimes. It also does literally anything else you could want. A console plays games and streams Netflix and that's about it. It has an artificially limited number of titles, and after a point will never get more and will become a stupidly expensive paperweight. A gaming PC can be useful for over a decade with no upgrades. Especially since couch co-op is no longer a thing game studios are interested in, there's just no point. I don't expect to ever buy another console.
bladderlover21 2y ago
And this reveals the real reason Nintendo came after Switch emulators - to buy some extra time before Switch 2 gets properly emulated.
- jsheard 2y ago
  The hard part of emulating the Switch 2 probably isn't going to be the actual emulation, but breaking the security so that the games and firmware can be extracted and decrypted. Nintendo pretty much nailed their software security with the Switch 1 but were undone by catastrophic hardware bugs, so we'll have to see how well they learned their lesson on the hardware front next time. Microsoft and Sony have demonstrated that hardware security can be more or less perfected, neither of their systems have been compromised via hardware attacks for several generations now.
  - farseer 2y ago
    Microsoft and Sony have successfully prevented their systems from being jtaged or mod-chipped. Not sure you can prevent dumping the actual game binary on the internet. That has lots of software and hardware attack vectors and only needs to be done once by a professional enthusiast.
    - jsheard 2y ago
      The game binaries are encrypted, sure you can image the Blurays and put them online but they won't do anyone much good without access to the keys buried in the firmware, which are also a moving target since they can be rotated via mandatory firmware updates if they get compromised. In the case of the Switch, you also have to contend with the proprietary carts requiring a crypto handshake before they'll let you even read the encrypted game data.
      - gcr 2y ago
        What on earth do you mean? How does a physical blu-ray’s encryption keys get rotated? Do you mean that the protection on the firmware gets refreshed with updates, but the secret it protects always stays the same?
vunderba 2y ago
They're being purposely coy though on what this actually means. Backwards compatibility with digital/e-games, or backwards compatible with the physical carts?
- antonyt 2y ago
  I'd be shocked if it doesn't support physical carts, given Nintendo's history with backwards compatibility. And given the rough equivalence of digital games and carts on the Switch, I'm hoping that means digital purchases transfer too - but that would be a first for Nintendo, I think. Fingers crossed!
  - hbn 2y ago
    From what I understand, people are much more into physical media in Japan. Nintendo also actually finishes their games and gets a working build ready before release so the carts actually have a game on them that don't require a patch, which is unfortunately not standard across the industry.
  - mattl 2y ago
    You could transfer your digital games from the Wii to the Wii U, but it wasn't done for you.
- tastyfreeze 2y ago
  There isn't a technical reason to change the cartridge format. I don't see why they wouldn't just use the same carts if backwards compatibility is the goal.
  - WhereIsTheTruth 2y ago
    there always is: - smaller - energy efficient - cost saving and they are all valid reasons, it's a handheld, the form factor will evolve until perfected
    - micromacrofoot 2y ago
Macha 2y ago
Huh, I'd been assuming the Switch 2 would be AMD Z2 based. I guess they've managed to convince nVidia to make them another SoC. A little surprised, would have thought nVidia would want to use any spare fab time for AI chips, though maybe they have some older process capacity?
- mywittyname 2y ago
  I imagine something like the Switch is a great revenue stream for nvidia. It's relatively easy work and they'll be minting Switch 2s, thus paying licensing fees, well into the 2030s. Even if they don't need that money, it's still good to deny the competition of such a lucrative contract.
  - qwytw 2y ago
    There are some hints that Nvidia wants to seriously enter the ARM CPU market (again)? Switch guarantees high demand/volume regardless of anything else. Not clear how lucrative the contract is on its own, though. Presumably it will reduce their current gross margins (which won't necessarily look great in their quarterly report. Nvidia's total revenue is only ~20% higher than Intel's was back in 2021 despite the insane valuations (in large part due to their obscene margins).
    - rsynnott 2y ago
      > There are some hints that Nvidia wants to seriously enter the ARM CPU market (again)? Fourth time lucky? (Poor ol' Nvidia has had an unfortunate history with this, arguably largely through no fault of their own. The Zune, the Kin with Tegra 1, the Motorola Xoom with Tegra 2, a variety of less-beloved tablets and weird phones with Tegra 3. I think the only successful use-case besides Nintendo and car infotainment stuff was Nvidia's own Shield.)
- 486sx33 2y ago
  I’ve got to assume that fab capacity for SoC ships verses H100s are two different things. With the automotive industry down there could be spare capacity ?
486sx33 2y ago
I really love when backwards compatibility is incorporated in new products. I’m pleasantly surprised because Nintendo has been bit so many times. For example GameCube compatibility on Wii is why we had hacked Wii so quickly.
bdcravens 2y ago
So another six years of fractured marketing, where you need a spreadsheet to know if the game you want to buy will run on your device. Is it for the Switch, the Switch 2, the Switch 2 Advanced, or the Switch 2 Advanced S AI Cloud VR?
- pipe01 2y ago
  For all the things Nintendo does wrong, I feel like this isn't one of them.
  - AdmiralAsshat 2y ago
    The Switch thankfully avoided this, but there when the "New 3DS" came out, there were a handful of games that only worked on that hardware revision.
- tapoxi 2y ago
  There wasn't a Switch Advanced/Pro or anything like that though. There's the Switch and Switch Lite, the Lite can't attach to a TV and the controllers are fused to the system.
  - holycrapwhodat 2y ago
    But, you can still pair most types of extra controllers to it (including a set of Joycons), and the eShop is aware of games the few games that can only be played on a tv and warns of incompatibility.
  - jamesgeck0 2y ago
    Plus the Switch OLED, which was the Switch but switchier.
- bilekas 2y ago
  I think Microsoft suffer worse for this, not only with the bizarre console names, but also their cloud gaming packages.
- nerdjon 2y ago
racl101 2y ago
Cool cool.
ekianjo 2y ago
How practical to include some emulator once you shut down all the other emulators
- pipeline_peak 2y ago
  Who said anything about emulation?
thebruce87m 2y ago
Lego City Undercover with a higher framerate/resolution would be fantastic - even if only AI upscaled. Bonus if they invent an AI that can fix the crash bugs in the binary.
LinAGKar 2y ago
It would really be surprising if it wasn't backwards compatible. The Switch breaking backwards compatibility was exceptional, apart from that every Nintendo console since the Wii on the stationary side and the GameBoy Color on the handheld side had at least one generation of backwards compatibility.
- BHSPitMonkey 2y ago
  That's an oddly cherry-picked version of a pattern. There was no compatibility between the NES, SNES, N64, or GameCube. Wii and Wii U each supported their predecessor's games, but the Switch did not. Those 2 out of 7 were outliers
  - BudaDude 2y ago
    You are forgetting the handheld line Gameboy Color supported OG Gameboy games GBA supported GBC games DS supported GBA and(?) GBC games - Could be wrong about that 3DS supported DS games.
    - Dwedit 2y ago
      DS did not support GBC games.
      - deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
    - ihuman 2y ago
      The GBA (original and SP) also supported OG Gameboy games, but the Gameboy Micro only supported GBA games The 3DS also had games from other consoles for sale in the eShop, but they were emulated (GB, GBC, Game Gear, NES, SNES). If you bought a 3DS before the price drop, you could also play some GBA games. These are also running natively, not emulation https://en-americas-support.nintendo.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/423/~/what-is-the-nintendo-3ds-ambassador-program%3F https://en-americas-support.nintendo.com/app/answers/detail/...
pipeline_peak 2y ago
Pro: We won’t have to repurchase games. Con: Assuming native compatibility, this likely won’t be a very exciting console.
- BudaDude 2y ago
  A beefier Switch is what everyone wants. The number 1 complaint I hear about it is how game X looks worse on it than the Xbox/PS version. Hopefully Nintendo learned its lessons from the Wii U.
  - pipeline_peak 2y ago
    A beefier iteration is the Xbox PlayStation way. To many people what makes Nintendo special is that they often avoid that. Wii, Switch, snd DS being successful examples. >Hopefully Nintendo learned its lessons from the Wii U. That’s my concern, Nintendo doesn’t like incremental titles like “Switch 2”. They’d rather call it something weird like “Switch Me” which only confuses non informed customers.
    - digging 2y ago
      If they were on their game it would just be "Big Switch".
  - internet101010 2y ago
    Yeah playing emulated Switch games is a much better experience on a Steam Deck than it is on the Switch. Nintendo is in a weird spot now because the competitive landscape is much different.
  - vunderba 2y ago
    Agreed, a lot of people were expecting a bump in processing power in the OLED refresh, but it's pretty clear now that they were saving that for the Switch 2.
  - StephenAmar 2y ago
    The only thing I want is to be able to play totk without horrific fps drops. That’s all
breakfastduck 2y ago
You'd hope so, but this is likely a move to placate detractors so the army of Nintendo fans buy whatever insanely underpowered and overpriced device they eventually release.
- endemic 2y ago
  Nintendo has fans because the software is good. Sure, the Switch was "underpowered", but if it plays the games I want to play, then who cares? Also, I think the $700 PS5 Pro wants a word with you.
sfmz 2y ago
I would be more excited if they released it in console form instead of an iPad with a docking station; N64 was basically the perfect form factor -- load games manually (tactilely) and no fussing with bluetooth or controller charging; and prioritize local co-op games instead of online play.
- chollida1 2y ago
  The N64 was significantly limited by its form factor. Many games were not ported to it because it used a cartridge that couldn't hold near the data of a CD ROM like its peers. The controller was amazing though.
  - vunderba 2y ago
    The controller was amazing though ... What? The thumbstick was super shoddy and was prone to mechanical failures, the ridiculously tiny d-pad was literally made for ants. The N64 was a lot of things, but I don't know anyone who's giving out accolades for the controller design. The GC controller (outside of the HUGE shoulder bumpers that were used as analog in a grand total of like 4 racing games) was a vast improvement on it, and I would say that the Switch Pro Controller ranks up there as one of Nintendo's best though the cost of $60/$70 kind of stung.
- vundercind 2y ago
  - No cords is really nice. - Battery life isn’t really a problem on full-sized controllers (and the failure modes are “walk the dog around the block while it charges enough for a couple-hour session” or “it becomes a wired controller for a few minutes”) including the Nintendo ones, just the damn joy-cons. Those do suck, but the basic idea of wireless controllers has proven to be really good, not like the old Wave Bird days. - The Switch is easily the best local multiplayer modern console AFAIK, including lots and lots of co-op options.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - 2y ago
yapyap 2y ago
Well yeah, I damn hope so. It literally has switch in it’s name
stiltzkin 2y ago
[dead]
cubefox 2y ago
Unfortunately it looks like they will again use a very outdated SoC, likely one that doesn't even match a several years old Steam Deck. Probably an 8nm chip, based on Nvidia's outdated Ampere architecture. See e.g. here https://www.reddit.com/r/GamingLeaksAndRumours/comments/1fjyril/die_size_estimations_for_the_switch_2_soc_put_it/ https://www.reddit.com/r/GamingLeaksAndRumours/comments/1fjy... Which would mean the SoC is even more outdated than the Switch 1 SoC was at launch. Reason is probably that Nintendo originally wanted to release the new hardware significantly earlier. I really don't understand why they are planning those chips apparently many years in advance, when some other manufacturer (AMD, Qualcomm, Intel, MediaTek) could have supplied a more modern SoC without many modifications in a relatively short timeframe at a better price than Nvidia. This would have made backwards compatibility more difficult, but I don't think this is that big of an issue anyway. Nintendo often didn't have it in the past, and few people complained. After all, old games can still be played on the old hardware.
- Narishma 2y ago
  Having a modern SoC isn't a priority for Nintendo or the vast majority of their customers.
  - cubefox 2y ago
    The fact that the Switch 1 SoC is so outdated now is the main reason the console is replaced with a Switch 2. E.g. there a fewer and fewer cross-platform releases that come to the Switch. So having an outdated SoC means shaving of years of the console's potential life span.
causality0 2y ago
Knowing Nintendo, this will just be straight backwards compatibility with no enhanced visuals, resolution, or framerate.
_imnothere 2y ago
Friendly reminder: any penny spent on Nintendo product could be used to go after those community developer :)
masfoobar 2y ago
Unfortunately I cannot access this site. Despite this I am interested in what their next console will be. If it's backwards compatible, I guess it will still be cartridged-based... or will they save on the pennies with a cartrige-less system (perhaps one with a cartridge slot.. another without)? I mean it can still be backwards compatible for online purchases. Anyway - I look forward to a proper unveil of the system. I guess it will be announced after xmas to not affect sales on the switch one last time. Will the new system be a handheld+tv system? Its very likely due to the success of the Switch. What new ideas could they be doing? I am expecting some new things. I wouldn't be surprised if it comes with some headstrap for VR. :-) Sadly the only "issue" I have with Nintendo's new systems is that they make out its current gen, but it isn't long before it struggles to gain the same quality and performance of newer games down the line. How will be compare with the latest current gen systems, let along the new ones.

361 points by ashitlerferad 2y ago

This shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone. Nintendo has had a trend for the past couple decades of releasing "sequel" consoles that are essentially a modernized version of the old one with extra features, compatible with everything that released on the predecessor. With all three major console manufacturers prioritizing backwards compatibility, and the rise in PC gaming (universally backwards compatible), people are starting to catch on to the fact that old games don't "expire" after 10 years. I wouldn't be surprised if backwards compatibility just becomes the standard for all gaming consoles going forward. Tangential, but I'm also interested in seeing how games that released on old consoles and are continued to be played, like Fortnite, will support aging hardware. I don't like that Epic can one day announce the game just no longer works on that console, rendering your purchases null and void until you upgrade your hardware, but I can't expect them to update that version of the game forever.

maxsilver 2y ago
> I don't like that Epic can one day announce the game just no longer works on that console, rendering your purchases null and void until you upgrade your hardware, but I can't expect them to update that version of the game forever. Traditionally for these "Live Service"-type games, they announce cutting support for a console, but let you carry your purchases in that specific game (subscription, add-on items, etc), forward to the same game on the next gen of that console. For example, how Final Fantasy 14 ended PS3 support - https://www.gamedeveloper.com/game-platforms/-i-final-fantasy-xiv-i-ending-ps3-support-this-week https://www.gamedeveloper.com/game-platforms/-i-final-fantas... and how Grand Theft Auto 5 ended PS3 support - https://www.ign.com/articles/gta-online-support-ending-xbox-360-ps3 https://www.ign.com/articles/gta-online-support-ending-xbox-... It's not a guarantee, but I'd expect something similar for Fortnite.
- dmonitor 2y ago
  It's definitely the case for Fortnite, but it still doesn't sit well with me that a service bought on specific hardware can just be taken away with no recourse. I'm not sure what if anything can or should be done about it, but it's weird knowing that many of the most popular PS4 games will be straight up unplayable in a few years
- jonny_eh 2y ago
  It's like how mobile games can stop supporting old phones. e.g. Hearthstone
jerf 2y ago
Games don't have the generational differences they used to. They're mature now. Tech is rarely the blocker anymore. The Switch was "underpowered" at release and is even more underpowered now but the space of "games that would run well on the Switch" is still fairly unexplored, not because anybody is bad but because the space is so big now. That hardware can no longer compete with platforms that don't throw away their entire library on every release is probably one of the first impacts of games finally maturing. My "next console" was a Steam Deck for partially this very reason, the fact that it came preloaded with years of previous acquisitions. We're also just seeing the leading edge of the game industry having to deal with the fact that it now has to compete against itself. There's been a number of articles about how $NEW_GAME never even reached a peak player count of something like Skyrim. I think that's currently being written as a sort of a "ha ha, that's sorta funny", but it represents a real problem. It is not unsolvable; Hollywood has always faced this issue and it has historically managed to make money anyhow. But I think AAA gaming is only just beginning to reckon with the fact that they aren't going to get a "free reset" on every console generation. $NEW_GAME really is is competition with Skyrim now, along with a lot of other things. It's not a joke, it's an emerging reality the industry is going to have to grapple with.
- spwa4 2y ago
  Either that, or you've gotten older. The young always want to play that one specific NEW game. Currently that usually means PS5, either Fortnite or Call Of Duty (and yes that one specific version). PS5 only has PS4 backward compatibility, and it isn't going to be emulated any time soon.
  - jsheard 2y ago
    Fortnite and Call of Duty are not great examples given they both still run on the PS4. Even the latest Call of Duty iteration that launched barely two weeks ago still runs on last generation consoles, because there's still so many players who haven't felt the need to upgrade to the successor generation after four years. I don't think there's ever been a console generation before where the last generation was still getting big new releases this deep into the next one. The PS5 Pro is out now and the PS4 is still getting new games.
qwytw 2y ago
> prioritizing backwards compatibility Backwards compatibility is very "cheap" these days though? With no arcane architectures and chip designs. PS5 and Xbox are basically just generic PCs running a restricted OS and Switch is just a phone/tablet.
- DanielHB 2y ago
  It is cheap only if you don't change CPU or GPU architectures. This is why the PS4 doesn't have PS3 compatibility. When apple switched to ARM even with x64->ARMv8 translation layer (NOT emulating) it was still noticeably slow in a lot of software. Even though some x64 games worked on ARM macs they still lost A LOT of performance. The backwards compatibility of the PS2 was due to the PS2 literally including an extra PS1 CPU (technically PS1-like CPU underclocked to match the original PS1 CPU when running PS1 games). On PS2 games this PS1 CPU handled only I/O so it wasn't completely wasted when running PS2 games. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PlayStation_2_technical_specifications#I/O_processor_(IOP) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PlayStation_2_technical_specif... The PS2 CPU is a MIPS III while the PS1 CPU is a MIPS I. I am not an expert but I think but I think MIPS III is only backwards compatible to MIPS II, not MIPS I
  - mmaniac 2y ago
    MIPS II got rid of the load delay slot, so any software relying on that wouldn't work. The PS2 EE also had a nasty bug which would cause some loops to terminate early. There's a decent chance any random MIPS code would satisfy this bug's conditions. https://lore.kernel.org/all/d59a6bef6541d35d4460b966c0fe651aac507730.1567326213.git.noring@nocrew.org/ https://lore.kernel.org/all/d59a6bef6541d35d4460b966c0fe651a...
- kimixa 2y ago
  Depends on the level of hardware access. If the GPU access is through a relatively "thick" API like DX/Vulkan and shaders stored in an intermediate representation like DXIL or SPIR-V, sure, swapping out the hardware implementation is relatively easy. But if they're shipping GPU ISA binaries as the shaders, you'll have a much harder time ensuring compatibility. Same with things like synchronization, on both the CPU and GPU (and any other offload devices like DSPs or future NPUs). If they use API-provided mechanisms, and those are used /correctly/, then the implementation can likely be changed. But if they cycle-count and rely on specific device timing, again all bets are off. Things like DX12 and Vulkan have a large number of sync points and state transition metadata to allow different implementations to be "correct" in things like cache or format conversions (like compression). Not all those transitions are required for every vendor's hardware, and we regularly see issues caused by apps not "correctly" using them when the spec says it's required, as the vendor's hardware they happened to test on didn't require that one specific transition that another implementation might, or they happened across some timing that didn't happen to hit issues. I guess my point is Compatibility is hard even if the APIs are intentionally designed to allow it. I have no idea how much the idea of such compatibility has been baked into console APIs in the first place. One of the primary advantages of consoles is to allow simplifications allowed by targeting limited hardware, so I can only assume they're less compatibility focused than the PC APIs we already have Big Problems with.
AlwaysRock 2y ago
"Nintendo has had a trend for the past couple decades of releasing "sequel" consoles that are essentially a modernized version of the old one with extra features, compatible with everything that released on the predecessor." Isnt it pretty much just the Wii and Wii U? I guess you could play GameCube disks on a Wii but calling the Wii a modernized version of the GameCube is a real stretch.
- aurareturn 2y ago
  Wii, Wii U, GBC, GBA, DS, 3DS all had backwards compatibility.
  - estebank 2y ago
    Technically, so did the SNES with the NES, it was just never really exposed. SMB all-stars started as SMB3 running directly on SNES. And you had the Super GameBoy, but that was little more than a GameBoy in a cartridge.
    - simondotau 2y ago
      The Sega Mega Drive (Genesis) had backwards compatibility with the Master System. Unlike the Super Game Boy, the Power Base Converter was barely more than a cartridge pass-through adapter. The Mega Drive’s 68000 is idled and its Z80 sound co-processor takes control as the main CPU. https://segaretro.org/Power_Base_Converter https://segaretro.org/Power_Base_Converter
    - derefr 2y ago
      > Technically, so did the SNES with the NES, it was just never really exposed. I've always wondered how true this is — I feel like if it was literally true, we'd see a lot of NES ROMhacks that involve editing the ROM's layout and metadata bits just enough that it's now a SNES ROM, and then taking advantage of SNES capabilities in the mod. But I don't believe I've ever seen something like that. I do understand that the SNES CPU is basically a "very extended" 6502; and that the SNES PPU's default-on-boot graphics mode is compatible with drawing NES-PPU-formatted CHR-ROM data; and that there's a "legacy compatibility" joypad input MMIO in the right place in address space to allow a game that was programmed for the NES to read the "NES subset" of a SNES controller's buttons. But is the SNES's (variant) 65C816 ISA a strict superset of the NES's (variant) 6502 ISA? Or would they have had to effectively go through the assembly code of SMB3 with a fine-toothed comb, fixing up little compatibilities in the available instructions here and there, to get it to run on the SNES? (Though actually, even if they did have to do that, I imagine it would be still be possible to automate that process — i.e. it would be theoretically possible to write a NES-to-SNES static transpiler. In fact, it's so seemingly-tenable, that I'm a bit surprised to have never heard of such a project!)
starquake 2y ago
Although the handhelds have been backwards compatible, only the Wii and the Wii U had backwards compatibility. The SNES, N64, Gamecube and Switch did not have backwards compatibility.
- dmonitor 2y ago
  I said "past couple decades" for a reason. The N64 is pushing 30
- drrotmos 2y ago
  The SNES and the Gamecube did have the Super Game Boy and Game Boy Player respectively though, but I'd probably count that as sideward compatibility rather than backward compatibility.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
14 2y ago
Lucky for you Fortnite is and always has been a free game. If you were foolish enough to pay to dress up your characters well then thank you for supporting that business model so I can let my kids play for free. Power to you if you can afford to drop money on digital clothing for a game you spend on what ever you like. But I just see it as bad a smoking. Kids are like junkies wanting to buy clothing for a game mean while them and their parents are living in rags. It’s an addiction and kids are put up against their peers or will be on the outside if they can’t get the latest skin. So stupid it went that way and any game that has kids playing it should not allow in game purchases like that.
- iknowstuff 2y ago
  babe. there were so many stupid toys and collectibles for kids until the 2000s. chill out lol
causi 2y ago
Shoot, they don't need a hardware generation to do that. ActiBlizz told everyone who spent $40 on Overwatch "Fuck you, go play a different game".
pjmlp 2y ago
I always find interesting the issue regarding PC gaming on the rise, because in the Iberian Penisula game consoles never were that big. We grew from the 8 bit home computers, lived through 16 bit home computers and settled in PC gaming. Nintendo was mostly about those game & watch handhelds, naturally SEGA and PlayStation became relevant, replaced by XBox and PlayStation, but always on the shadow of PC gaming.
inasio 2y ago
The Mac is a weird counter example here, the move to 64 bits resulted in many games with official Mac ports (e.g. most of Valve's: Half Life, Portal, etc) no longer being able to run on modern versions of OSX
- lloeki 2y ago
  I'm certainly not blaming game makers in general because of the situation of Apple dropping 32bit Intel support, but I think Valve is a different story: - They've been very diligent in the past about keeping their games up to date. - Valve owning Steam means their flagship games are a strong signal about macOS support on Steam. - If they really wanted, they could; they certainly have the resources to do so should they want to+; which means, they don't want to, which is a signal in the other direction: they stopped caring about macOS. + HL1 has a FOSS engine that apparently supports it, and more: https://github.com/FWGS/xash3d-fwgs/blob/master/Documentation/ports.md https://github.com/FWGS/xash3d-fwgs/blob/master/Documentatio...
- numpad0 2y ago
  macOS is actually notorious for lack of binary compatibility. Most commercial apps are online distributed, and most non-commercial are open source, so they're quickly updated and compatibility issues are less often noticed.
CM30 2y ago
It definitely shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone, and should be the obvious choice to make on Nintendo's side too... But it's probably worth noting that it's Nintendo we're talking about, and the games industry as a whole. They have a tendency to make questionable decisions that people could immediately tell were questionable decisions, either for anti consumer reasons or just not knowing the market. So while the odds of the Switch 2 being backwards compatible were really high, and we all knew it was the obvious choice to make, there was still always a worry that it wouldn't happen for some ridiculous reason or another.
evoke4908 2y ago
Part of it is that consoles are just PCs now. There is absolutely no excuse to not be backwards compatible in the current day. But by the same token, consumers are realizing that consoles are just a less useful version of a gaming PC. The real deal has infinitely more utility for not much more money. Console makers are trying to sweeten the pot (or staunch the bleeding) by artificially expanding their library with prior generation games. At least until they get bored and decide to black hole all those same games, Sega. Frankly I don't see any point to consoles anymore apart from the Console Experience(TM). A PC does it better, faster, cheaper, with literally more games than your entire extended family can play in their combined lifetimes. It also does literally anything else you could want. A console plays games and streams Netflix and that's about it. It has an artificially limited number of titles, and after a point will never get more and will become a stupidly expensive paperweight. A gaming PC can be useful for over a decade with no upgrades. Especially since couch co-op is no longer a thing game studios are interested in, there's just no point. I don't expect to ever buy another console.

bladderlover21 2y ago

And this reveals the real reason Nintendo came after Switch emulators - to buy some extra time before Switch 2 gets properly emulated.

jsheard 2y ago
The hard part of emulating the Switch 2 probably isn't going to be the actual emulation, but breaking the security so that the games and firmware can be extracted and decrypted. Nintendo pretty much nailed their software security with the Switch 1 but were undone by catastrophic hardware bugs, so we'll have to see how well they learned their lesson on the hardware front next time. Microsoft and Sony have demonstrated that hardware security can be more or less perfected, neither of their systems have been compromised via hardware attacks for several generations now.
- farseer 2y ago
  Microsoft and Sony have successfully prevented their systems from being jtaged or mod-chipped. Not sure you can prevent dumping the actual game binary on the internet. That has lots of software and hardware attack vectors and only needs to be done once by a professional enthusiast.
  - jsheard 2y ago
    The game binaries are encrypted, sure you can image the Blurays and put them online but they won't do anyone much good without access to the keys buried in the firmware, which are also a moving target since they can be rotated via mandatory firmware updates if they get compromised. In the case of the Switch, you also have to contend with the proprietary carts requiring a crypto handshake before they'll let you even read the encrypted game data.
    - gcr 2y ago
      What on earth do you mean? How does a physical blu-ray’s encryption keys get rotated? Do you mean that the protection on the firmware gets refreshed with updates, but the secret it protects always stays the same?

vunderba 2y ago

They're being purposely coy though on what this actually means. Backwards compatibility with digital/e-games, or backwards compatible with the physical carts?

antonyt 2y ago
I'd be shocked if it doesn't support physical carts, given Nintendo's history with backwards compatibility. And given the rough equivalence of digital games and carts on the Switch, I'm hoping that means digital purchases transfer too - but that would be a first for Nintendo, I think. Fingers crossed!
- hbn 2y ago
  From what I understand, people are much more into physical media in Japan. Nintendo also actually finishes their games and gets a working build ready before release so the carts actually have a game on them that don't require a patch, which is unfortunately not standard across the industry.
- mattl 2y ago
  You could transfer your digital games from the Wii to the Wii U, but it wasn't done for you.
tastyfreeze 2y ago
There isn't a technical reason to change the cartridge format. I don't see why they wouldn't just use the same carts if backwards compatibility is the goal.
- WhereIsTheTruth 2y ago
  there always is: - smaller - energy efficient - cost saving and they are all valid reasons, it's a handheld, the form factor will evolve until perfected
  - micromacrofoot 2y ago

Macha 2y ago

Huh, I'd been assuming the Switch 2 would be AMD Z2 based. I guess they've managed to convince nVidia to make them another SoC. A little surprised, would have thought nVidia would want to use any spare fab time for AI chips, though maybe they have some older process capacity?

mywittyname 2y ago
I imagine something like the Switch is a great revenue stream for nvidia. It's relatively easy work and they'll be minting Switch 2s, thus paying licensing fees, well into the 2030s. Even if they don't need that money, it's still good to deny the competition of such a lucrative contract.
- qwytw 2y ago
  There are some hints that Nvidia wants to seriously enter the ARM CPU market (again)? Switch guarantees high demand/volume regardless of anything else. Not clear how lucrative the contract is on its own, though. Presumably it will reduce their current gross margins (which won't necessarily look great in their quarterly report. Nvidia's total revenue is only ~20% higher than Intel's was back in 2021 despite the insane valuations (in large part due to their obscene margins).
  - rsynnott 2y ago
    > There are some hints that Nvidia wants to seriously enter the ARM CPU market (again)? Fourth time lucky? (Poor ol' Nvidia has had an unfortunate history with this, arguably largely through no fault of their own. The Zune, the Kin with Tegra 1, the Motorola Xoom with Tegra 2, a variety of less-beloved tablets and weird phones with Tegra 3. I think the only successful use-case besides Nintendo and car infotainment stuff was Nvidia's own Shield.)
486sx33 2y ago
I’ve got to assume that fab capacity for SoC ships verses H100s are two different things. With the automotive industry down there could be spare capacity ?

486sx33 2y ago

I really love when backwards compatibility is incorporated in new products. I’m pleasantly surprised because Nintendo has been bit so many times. For example GameCube compatibility on Wii is why we had hacked Wii so quickly.

bdcravens 2y ago

So another six years of fractured marketing, where you need a spreadsheet to know if the game you want to buy will run on your device. Is it for the Switch, the Switch 2, the Switch 2 Advanced, or the Switch 2 Advanced S AI Cloud VR?

pipe01 2y ago
For all the things Nintendo does wrong, I feel like this isn't one of them.
- AdmiralAsshat 2y ago
  The Switch thankfully avoided this, but there when the "New 3DS" came out, there were a handful of games that only worked on that hardware revision.
tapoxi 2y ago
There wasn't a Switch Advanced/Pro or anything like that though. There's the Switch and Switch Lite, the Lite can't attach to a TV and the controllers are fused to the system.
- holycrapwhodat 2y ago
  But, you can still pair most types of extra controllers to it (including a set of Joycons), and the eShop is aware of games the few games that can only be played on a tv and warns of incompatibility.
- jamesgeck0 2y ago
  Plus the Switch OLED, which was the Switch but switchier.
bilekas 2y ago
I think Microsoft suffer worse for this, not only with the bizarre console names, but also their cloud gaming packages.
nerdjon 2y ago

racl101 2y ago

Cool cool.

ekianjo 2y ago

How practical to include some emulator once you shut down all the other emulators

pipeline_peak 2y ago
Who said anything about emulation?

thebruce87m 2y ago

Lego City Undercover with a higher framerate/resolution would be fantastic - even if only AI upscaled. Bonus if they invent an AI that can fix the crash bugs in the binary.

LinAGKar 2y ago

It would really be surprising if it wasn't backwards compatible. The Switch breaking backwards compatibility was exceptional, apart from that every Nintendo console since the Wii on the stationary side and the GameBoy Color on the handheld side had at least one generation of backwards compatibility.

BHSPitMonkey 2y ago
That's an oddly cherry-picked version of a pattern. There was no compatibility between the NES, SNES, N64, or GameCube. Wii and Wii U each supported their predecessor's games, but the Switch did not. Those 2 out of 7 were outliers
- BudaDude 2y ago
  You are forgetting the handheld line Gameboy Color supported OG Gameboy games GBA supported GBC games DS supported GBA and(?) GBC games - Could be wrong about that 3DS supported DS games.
  - Dwedit 2y ago
    DS did not support GBC games.
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
  - ihuman 2y ago
    The GBA (original and SP) also supported OG Gameboy games, but the Gameboy Micro only supported GBA games The 3DS also had games from other consoles for sale in the eShop, but they were emulated (GB, GBC, Game Gear, NES, SNES). If you bought a 3DS before the price drop, you could also play some GBA games. These are also running natively, not emulation https://en-americas-support.nintendo.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/423/~/what-is-the-nintendo-3ds-ambassador-program%3F https://en-americas-support.nintendo.com/app/answers/detail/...

pipeline_peak 2y ago

Pro: We won’t have to repurchase games. Con: Assuming native compatibility, this likely won’t be a very exciting console.

BudaDude 2y ago
A beefier Switch is what everyone wants. The number 1 complaint I hear about it is how game X looks worse on it than the Xbox/PS version. Hopefully Nintendo learned its lessons from the Wii U.
- pipeline_peak 2y ago
  A beefier iteration is the Xbox PlayStation way. To many people what makes Nintendo special is that they often avoid that. Wii, Switch, snd DS being successful examples. >Hopefully Nintendo learned its lessons from the Wii U. That’s my concern, Nintendo doesn’t like incremental titles like “Switch 2”. They’d rather call it something weird like “Switch Me” which only confuses non informed customers.
  - digging 2y ago
    If they were on their game it would just be "Big Switch".
- internet101010 2y ago
  Yeah playing emulated Switch games is a much better experience on a Steam Deck than it is on the Switch. Nintendo is in a weird spot now because the competitive landscape is much different.
- vunderba 2y ago
  Agreed, a lot of people were expecting a bump in processing power in the OLED refresh, but it's pretty clear now that they were saving that for the Switch 2.
- StephenAmar 2y ago
  The only thing I want is to be able to play totk without horrific fps drops. That’s all

breakfastduck 2y ago

You'd hope so, but this is likely a move to placate detractors so the army of Nintendo fans buy whatever insanely underpowered and overpriced device they eventually release.

endemic 2y ago
Nintendo has fans because the software is good. Sure, the Switch was "underpowered", but if it plays the games I want to play, then who cares? Also, I think the $700 PS5 Pro wants a word with you.

sfmz 2y ago

I would be more excited if they released it in console form instead of an iPad with a docking station; N64 was basically the perfect form factor -- load games manually (tactilely) and no fussing with bluetooth or controller charging; and prioritize local co-op games instead of online play.

chollida1 2y ago
The N64 was significantly limited by its form factor. Many games were not ported to it because it used a cartridge that couldn't hold near the data of a CD ROM like its peers. The controller was amazing though.
- vunderba 2y ago
  The controller was amazing though ... What? The thumbstick was super shoddy and was prone to mechanical failures, the ridiculously tiny d-pad was literally made for ants. The N64 was a lot of things, but I don't know anyone who's giving out accolades for the controller design. The GC controller (outside of the HUGE shoulder bumpers that were used as analog in a grand total of like 4 racing games) was a vast improvement on it, and I would say that the Switch Pro Controller ranks up there as one of Nintendo's best though the cost of $60/$70 kind of stung.
vundercind 2y ago
- No cords is really nice. - Battery life isn’t really a problem on full-sized controllers (and the failure modes are “walk the dog around the block while it charges enough for a couple-hour session” or “it becomes a wired controller for a few minutes”) including the Nintendo ones, just the damn joy-cons. Those do suck, but the basic idea of wireless controllers has proven to be really good, not like the old Wave Bird days. - The Switch is easily the best local multiplayer modern console AFAIK, including lots and lots of co-op options.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- 2y ago

yapyap 2y ago

Well yeah, I damn hope so. It literally has switch in it’s name

stiltzkin 2y ago

[dead]

cubefox 2y ago

Unfortunately it looks like they will again use a very outdated SoC, likely one that doesn't even match a several years old Steam Deck. Probably an 8nm chip, based on Nvidia's outdated Ampere architecture. See e.g. here https://www.reddit.com/r/GamingLeaksAndRumours/comments/1fjyril/die_size_estimations_for_the_switch_2_soc_put_it/ https://www.reddit.com/r/GamingLeaksAndRumours/comments/1fjy... Which would mean the SoC is even more outdated than the Switch 1 SoC was at launch. Reason is probably that Nintendo originally wanted to release the new hardware significantly earlier. I really don't understand why they are planning those chips apparently many years in advance, when some other manufacturer (AMD, Qualcomm, Intel, MediaTek) could have supplied a more modern SoC without many modifications in a relatively short timeframe at a better price than Nvidia. This would have made backwards compatibility more difficult, but I don't think this is that big of an issue anyway. Nintendo often didn't have it in the past, and few people complained. After all, old games can still be played on the old hardware.

Narishma 2y ago
Having a modern SoC isn't a priority for Nintendo or the vast majority of their customers.
- cubefox 2y ago
  The fact that the Switch 1 SoC is so outdated now is the main reason the console is replaced with a Switch 2. E.g. there a fewer and fewer cross-platform releases that come to the Switch. So having an outdated SoC means shaving of years of the console's potential life span.

causality0 2y ago

Knowing Nintendo, this will just be straight backwards compatibility with no enhanced visuals, resolution, or framerate.

_imnothere 2y ago

Friendly reminder: any penny spent on Nintendo product could be used to go after those community developer :)

masfoobar 2y ago

Unfortunately I cannot access this site. Despite this I am interested in what their next console will be. If it's backwards compatible, I guess it will still be cartridged-based... or will they save on the pennies with a cartrige-less system (perhaps one with a cartridge slot.. another without)? I mean it can still be backwards compatible for online purchases. Anyway - I look forward to a proper unveil of the system. I guess it will be announced after xmas to not affect sales on the switch one last time. Will the new system be a handheld+tv system? Its very likely due to the success of the Switch. What new ideas could they be doing? I am expecting some new things. I wouldn't be surprised if it comes with some headstrap for VR. :-) Sadly the only "issue" I have with Nintendo's new systems is that they make out its current gen, but it isn't long before it struggles to gain the same quality and performance of newer games down the line. How will be compare with the latest current gen systems, let along the new ones.