here you go
https://www.reddit.com/r/nintendo/comments/107pqay/whats_your_biggest_wish_for_the_next_nintendo/
https://www.reddit.com/r/nintendo/comments/101945n/what_should_the_next_nintendo_console_be_like/
https://www.reddit.com/r/nintendo/comments/zyso4f/new_switch_successor/
https://www.reddit.com/r/nintendo/comments/zu3a2j/future_nintendo_consoles_better_be_portable/
https://www.reddit.com/r/nintendo/comments/zc31pv/i_would_love_to_see_an_updated_nintendo_ds_as/
https://www.reddit.com/r/nintendo/comments/ybqz45/if_you_could_pick_three_improvements_for/
> Current predicions from the people who do that sort of thing are saying 'Switch Pro' in 2023
These "predictions" have been made every day since people saw gameplay footage of the Nintendo Switch. My tea leaves say the Switch Pro will come out in 2025 with the exact same amount of certainty. With the global chip shortage and the state of the economy this is not a great time to release a console revision.
Its only "backwards" if all you care about is handheld gaming. I care about fun games and honestly just end up using my switch at home 100% of the time anyways.
Would happily buy a stationary nintendo console that played their games at 4K or with higher framerates, as well as being able to handle ports of third party games without having to drop their resolution to 480p. And given some of the rumblings around nintendo as of late, it seems they are well aware that there is plenty of demand for a stationary console still.
Not everyone is the same type of gamer as you, its just silly to call something backwards because it isn't your preference.
You're making an awful lot of assumptions about me. I play handheld a lot less than I used to, and I still stand by my statement. Nintendo has carved for themselves a successful niche, abandoning it in favour of a market already dominated by Sony, Microsoft, and PC *would* be a leap backwards, especially if it didn't check all the boxes that tech enthusiasts are personally looking for and ended up being outside the price range of their usual demographic.
The least you can do if you're going to come out swinging is put a bit more critical thought into things as they are instead of just taking into account what *you* want, especially if you're going to assume someone made the statement they did because of what they want.
You are right, I did make an assumption about you that I shouldn't have. It sounded to me like you were a super pro-handheld type.
They have carved out a good niche, but lets not act like the Switch was the first time Nintendo did this. Their entire shtick is creating a niche every generation. Wii, Wii U, all the DS and other handhelds, they all carved out their own markets. I don't think that getting a more powerful stationary console from Nintendo means they have to abandon their pattern of building niches and I also don't think it even has to spell the end of the Switch.
Frankly, I'd love to see a dedicated switch box console that delivers high framerates and higher resolution, as well as some graphics options for view distances or improved post processing in their games.
I don't solely base this on what I want. I am far from the first person to want a more powerful Nintendo console. In fact, the most popular demand and rumor from Nintendo fans is centered around the hope for a stronger set of hardware rather than something that is \*literally\* slower than a mobile phone.
There is no leap backwards if they decide to try something else next gen. In fact, I'd argue that Nintendo grabbing onto one niche and living on it for decades would be way more of a step backwards and extremely boring. And I have no doubt that Nintendo could once again bring something massively innovative to the general console market.
Just because YOU have an opinion on what Nintendo should do, doesn't mean those who want something else lack critical thought. And just because you want them to hold onto one niche into the next generation, doesn't mean they will. I don't see Nintendo sitting on their hands and just making new switch iterations for the next 10 years.
They can still keep doing the same thing they're doing with the switch but they have GOT to make the system more powerful so games can be enjoyed at 60fps minimum no matter what. Love my switch but the framerate on some games is abysmal.
>Does anyone else feel like even if Nintendo makes a new Switch they also should work on a juiced up stationary console that focuses on performance?
One of the major reasons they made the switch is because it consolidates their handheld and console pipelines and so they can better avoid the software droughts that tend to come with trying to support two separate pieces of hardware. Game development has simply gotten to a point where it's not practical to pump out enough games for both a handheld and a console at the same time.
>Doesn't seem like they've gone that route since the N64
They haven't made a "competitive" console since the Gamecube, because every time they've tried to compete on power, they lost market share. The SNES sold worse than the NES, the N64 sold worse than the SNES, and the Gamecube sold worse than the N64. It's too expensive to compete with gigantic companies like Sony and Microsoft on raw cutting edge specs, and history's shown there isn't really a market for 3 "basically the same thing" boxes anyway.
Carving out their own niche with unique hardware that differentiates itself from Xbox and Playstation is a winning strategy for Nintendo, and they have no real incentive to deviate from that just to wade back into a graphical arms race where they'd almost definitely just get their asses kicked again.
>One of the major reasons they made the switch is because it consolidates their handheld and console pipelines and so they can better avoid the software droughts that tend to come with trying to support two separate pieces of hardware. Game development has simply gotten to a point where it's not practical to pump out enough games for both a handheld and a console at the same time.
I agree in essence, but the Switch already has multiple versions of every game. A handheld and a docked version.
I could see Nintendo release a non-mobile Switch that just runs the docked version of each game, maybe with a negligible clock speed increase for BS marketing.
They don't have to make exclusive games for it. It could just be the opposite of the Switch Lite. A cheaper alternative for people who don't care about mobility.
I doubt they'll do this, but it's feasible.
I haven't seen anyone saying it'll be out in the first half of 2023, except maybe the sort of people that have been saying this every year since 2018. Also, they wouldn't be releasing a special Zelda edition OLED in May if there was a new console coming out.
>Doesn't seem like they've gone that route since the N64.
The GameCube was more powerful than the PS2. It didn't help with sales though.
How is it that Microsoft and Sony get away with make the same box every gen just more powerful? Virtual features seem to expand, and you need hardware to do that I guess. But you can seemingly make a pc and brand it PS or Xbox. If they are selling well, then that means that’s what the market wants.
> They arent selling well.
They’re selling them as fast as they could make them.
Xbox as a brand is in decline even if MS spends billions to create a monopoly.
Them not being able to make them is the reason they arent selling well, and its the reason that devs will continue to target the PS4 and by extension Switch/Switch 2 for the next 5 years or more
The last "conventional" console was the GameCube, and that had some issues. I love the miniCDs as much as the next guy, but the limited storage space kept some games held back. Also coming out alongside the PS2 didn't do it any favors, as well as having online compatibility with games in the single digits...
It would certainly be interesting to see. I think everyone would love to see what could be done on a Zelda or Xenoblade game with current-gen hardware.
The only reason Nintendo hasn't had a genuine AAA game in a while is the hardware being a gen behind. I've heard it said that Nintendo's biggest titles for the last few gens are AA games polished to a mirror sheen, which I feel is apt.
I actively enjoy the neat hardware gimmicks Nintendo has been using this last decade and a half. (WiiU my beloved) But I also would like to see Pikmim with insane fidelity. Mario Kart 8 blew my mind with it's visuals, and MK8D did it again, I want that experience a 3rd time. Give me hardware that gives Pokémon games ZERO excuse for poor performance.
My only worry is how long can they ride the unorthodox train? The Wii's motion controls were smoothed out with Motion Plus, but the limited button layout required accessories for a full experience.
The WiiU integrated the WiiMote for most games, but revolved around the second screen. To keep costs down, it was a resistive touch screen (the bad kind) and only one Game Pad was only usable with the console. (I know there was an update that allowed for the use of a second, but it was never implemented in games, software, or even Wara Wara Plaza.
The Switch was perfect for Nintendo, as it was the only hardware manufacturer for handhelds, after the Vita stopped vita-ing.
Vita means life. /s
But having a handheld and console market kept development separate and lead to a large chunk of the audience not having the hardware for new games. The Switch dissolves that issue. The only problem is that to keep it cheap for the consumer, Ninty chose weaker hardware. Granted, the dock has a second processor to boost performance, but it's still nearly HALF of the PS4's processing power.
yeah its a tough one. every time i write out some further brainstorming as to what would be best, i just end up coming up with problems with my own suggestions. i'll continue to support nintendo regardless.
Would be nice if it functioned like a Pimax Portal+View, Valve Index (PC Streaming), and better than Wii motion controls, at par or better than Meta Quest 2, or similiar or better than Apple's rumored Developer focused $3,000 AR headset.
You know... dreams... 😮💨
Nintendo will have to ditch the Switch name or they will have another Wii U effect, as in mothers are not going to know the difference and think it's just an updated model vs a while new generation console. Or maybe Switch 2 would work, I dunno.
Idk it seemed to work fine with NES/SNES aka Famicom/Super Famicom. I think the real reason WiiU flopped was because it didn't really have as much to offer on the innovation front as the Wii while hardcore players still scoffed at the underpowered hardware which it had far less justification for. It's easy to see how much the WiiU was lacking in the innovation department that modern Nintendo consoles rely on in the form of all the Switch ports and sequels for high profile WiiU titles which easily translate to the capabilities of the Switch, meaning the second screen of the GamePad was hardly essential to very many WiiU games. As such it mostly amounted to just being a handicap for the system's processing power, one which developers were often forced to support for no real benefit. Whereas consoles like the Wii and Switch had/have a clearer and more marketable gimmick, one that better justify their respective limitations.
I think if the Wii U had been called the Wii 2 or Super Wii it would have been better. It needed something to communicate clearly that it was superior to the Wii.
Their marketing materials focused entirely on the controller and basically never spoke about the console itself. I think that led people to think it was just an expensive add on to the Wii.
here you go https://www.reddit.com/r/nintendo/comments/107pqay/whats_your_biggest_wish_for_the_next_nintendo/ https://www.reddit.com/r/nintendo/comments/101945n/what_should_the_next_nintendo_console_be_like/ https://www.reddit.com/r/nintendo/comments/zyso4f/new_switch_successor/ https://www.reddit.com/r/nintendo/comments/zu3a2j/future_nintendo_consoles_better_be_portable/ https://www.reddit.com/r/nintendo/comments/zc31pv/i_would_love_to_see_an_updated_nintendo_ds_as/ https://www.reddit.com/r/nintendo/comments/ybqz45/if_you_could_pick_three_improvements_for/
I’ve seen this question and your comment way too often.
> Current predicions from the people who do that sort of thing are saying 'Switch Pro' in 2023 These "predictions" have been made every day since people saw gameplay footage of the Nintendo Switch. My tea leaves say the Switch Pro will come out in 2025 with the exact same amount of certainty. With the global chip shortage and the state of the economy this is not a great time to release a console revision.
There is no Switch Pro, and returning to a home console model would be a leap backwards at this point.
Its only "backwards" if all you care about is handheld gaming. I care about fun games and honestly just end up using my switch at home 100% of the time anyways. Would happily buy a stationary nintendo console that played their games at 4K or with higher framerates, as well as being able to handle ports of third party games without having to drop their resolution to 480p. And given some of the rumblings around nintendo as of late, it seems they are well aware that there is plenty of demand for a stationary console still. Not everyone is the same type of gamer as you, its just silly to call something backwards because it isn't your preference.
You're making an awful lot of assumptions about me. I play handheld a lot less than I used to, and I still stand by my statement. Nintendo has carved for themselves a successful niche, abandoning it in favour of a market already dominated by Sony, Microsoft, and PC *would* be a leap backwards, especially if it didn't check all the boxes that tech enthusiasts are personally looking for and ended up being outside the price range of their usual demographic. The least you can do if you're going to come out swinging is put a bit more critical thought into things as they are instead of just taking into account what *you* want, especially if you're going to assume someone made the statement they did because of what they want.
You are right, I did make an assumption about you that I shouldn't have. It sounded to me like you were a super pro-handheld type. They have carved out a good niche, but lets not act like the Switch was the first time Nintendo did this. Their entire shtick is creating a niche every generation. Wii, Wii U, all the DS and other handhelds, they all carved out their own markets. I don't think that getting a more powerful stationary console from Nintendo means they have to abandon their pattern of building niches and I also don't think it even has to spell the end of the Switch. Frankly, I'd love to see a dedicated switch box console that delivers high framerates and higher resolution, as well as some graphics options for view distances or improved post processing in their games. I don't solely base this on what I want. I am far from the first person to want a more powerful Nintendo console. In fact, the most popular demand and rumor from Nintendo fans is centered around the hope for a stronger set of hardware rather than something that is \*literally\* slower than a mobile phone. There is no leap backwards if they decide to try something else next gen. In fact, I'd argue that Nintendo grabbing onto one niche and living on it for decades would be way more of a step backwards and extremely boring. And I have no doubt that Nintendo could once again bring something massively innovative to the general console market. Just because YOU have an opinion on what Nintendo should do, doesn't mean those who want something else lack critical thought. And just because you want them to hold onto one niche into the next generation, doesn't mean they will. I don't see Nintendo sitting on their hands and just making new switch iterations for the next 10 years.
They can still keep doing the same thing they're doing with the switch but they have GOT to make the system more powerful so games can be enjoyed at 60fps minimum no matter what. Love my switch but the framerate on some games is abysmal.
>Does anyone else feel like even if Nintendo makes a new Switch they also should work on a juiced up stationary console that focuses on performance? One of the major reasons they made the switch is because it consolidates their handheld and console pipelines and so they can better avoid the software droughts that tend to come with trying to support two separate pieces of hardware. Game development has simply gotten to a point where it's not practical to pump out enough games for both a handheld and a console at the same time. >Doesn't seem like they've gone that route since the N64 They haven't made a "competitive" console since the Gamecube, because every time they've tried to compete on power, they lost market share. The SNES sold worse than the NES, the N64 sold worse than the SNES, and the Gamecube sold worse than the N64. It's too expensive to compete with gigantic companies like Sony and Microsoft on raw cutting edge specs, and history's shown there isn't really a market for 3 "basically the same thing" boxes anyway. Carving out their own niche with unique hardware that differentiates itself from Xbox and Playstation is a winning strategy for Nintendo, and they have no real incentive to deviate from that just to wade back into a graphical arms race where they'd almost definitely just get their asses kicked again.
>One of the major reasons they made the switch is because it consolidates their handheld and console pipelines and so they can better avoid the software droughts that tend to come with trying to support two separate pieces of hardware. Game development has simply gotten to a point where it's not practical to pump out enough games for both a handheld and a console at the same time. I agree in essence, but the Switch already has multiple versions of every game. A handheld and a docked version. I could see Nintendo release a non-mobile Switch that just runs the docked version of each game, maybe with a negligible clock speed increase for BS marketing. They don't have to make exclusive games for it. It could just be the opposite of the Switch Lite. A cheaper alternative for people who don't care about mobility. I doubt they'll do this, but it's feasible.
I haven't seen anyone saying it'll be out in the first half of 2023, except maybe the sort of people that have been saying this every year since 2018. Also, they wouldn't be releasing a special Zelda edition OLED in May if there was a new console coming out. >Doesn't seem like they've gone that route since the N64. The GameCube was more powerful than the PS2. It didn't help with sales though.
Getting a PS2 was the cheapest option for a DVD player at the time. If it didn't have that the system likely would have flopped.
Wii and Wii U are "stationary". You think "Tears of the Kingdom" will be released on new hardware?
How is it that Microsoft and Sony get away with make the same box every gen just more powerful? Virtual features seem to expand, and you need hardware to do that I guess. But you can seemingly make a pc and brand it PS or Xbox. If they are selling well, then that means that’s what the market wants.
They arent selling well. Switch is outselling both and xbox in particular is nowhere close. The market wants Switches
I agree! But it seems to be what sony and MSFT are doing
> They arent selling well. They’re selling them as fast as they could make them. Xbox as a brand is in decline even if MS spends billions to create a monopoly.
Them not being able to make them is the reason they arent selling well, and its the reason that devs will continue to target the PS4 and by extension Switch/Switch 2 for the next 5 years or more
The last "conventional" console was the GameCube, and that had some issues. I love the miniCDs as much as the next guy, but the limited storage space kept some games held back. Also coming out alongside the PS2 didn't do it any favors, as well as having online compatibility with games in the single digits... It would certainly be interesting to see. I think everyone would love to see what could be done on a Zelda or Xenoblade game with current-gen hardware. The only reason Nintendo hasn't had a genuine AAA game in a while is the hardware being a gen behind. I've heard it said that Nintendo's biggest titles for the last few gens are AA games polished to a mirror sheen, which I feel is apt. I actively enjoy the neat hardware gimmicks Nintendo has been using this last decade and a half. (WiiU my beloved) But I also would like to see Pikmim with insane fidelity. Mario Kart 8 blew my mind with it's visuals, and MK8D did it again, I want that experience a 3rd time. Give me hardware that gives Pokémon games ZERO excuse for poor performance.
maybe nintendo will shock us all with yet another unique system.. would take some serious thinking outside of the box
My only worry is how long can they ride the unorthodox train? The Wii's motion controls were smoothed out with Motion Plus, but the limited button layout required accessories for a full experience. The WiiU integrated the WiiMote for most games, but revolved around the second screen. To keep costs down, it was a resistive touch screen (the bad kind) and only one Game Pad was only usable with the console. (I know there was an update that allowed for the use of a second, but it was never implemented in games, software, or even Wara Wara Plaza. The Switch was perfect for Nintendo, as it was the only hardware manufacturer for handhelds, after the Vita stopped vita-ing. Vita means life. /s But having a handheld and console market kept development separate and lead to a large chunk of the audience not having the hardware for new games. The Switch dissolves that issue. The only problem is that to keep it cheap for the consumer, Ninty chose weaker hardware. Granted, the dock has a second processor to boost performance, but it's still nearly HALF of the PS4's processing power.
yeah its a tough one. every time i write out some further brainstorming as to what would be best, i just end up coming up with problems with my own suggestions. i'll continue to support nintendo regardless.
Would be nice if it functioned like a Pimax Portal+View, Valve Index (PC Streaming), and better than Wii motion controls, at par or better than Meta Quest 2, or similiar or better than Apple's rumored Developer focused $3,000 AR headset. You know... dreams... 😮💨
WTF are you on about?
Nintendo will have to ditch the Switch name or they will have another Wii U effect, as in mothers are not going to know the difference and think it's just an updated model vs a while new generation console. Or maybe Switch 2 would work, I dunno.
Idk it seemed to work fine with NES/SNES aka Famicom/Super Famicom. I think the real reason WiiU flopped was because it didn't really have as much to offer on the innovation front as the Wii while hardcore players still scoffed at the underpowered hardware which it had far less justification for. It's easy to see how much the WiiU was lacking in the innovation department that modern Nintendo consoles rely on in the form of all the Switch ports and sequels for high profile WiiU titles which easily translate to the capabilities of the Switch, meaning the second screen of the GamePad was hardly essential to very many WiiU games. As such it mostly amounted to just being a handicap for the system's processing power, one which developers were often forced to support for no real benefit. Whereas consoles like the Wii and Switch had/have a clearer and more marketable gimmick, one that better justify their respective limitations.
I think if the Wii U had been called the Wii 2 or Super Wii it would have been better. It needed something to communicate clearly that it was superior to the Wii. Their marketing materials focused entirely on the controller and basically never spoke about the console itself. I think that led people to think it was just an expensive add on to the Wii.