Switch 2 will be backwards compatible with Switch

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.

> 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-fantas... and how Grand Theft Auto 5 ended PS3 support - https://www.ign.com/articles/gta-online-support-ending-xbox-...

It's not a guarantee, but I'd expect something similar for Fortnite.

> 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.

"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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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".

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.

There's also the fact that their games keep leaking a week or 2 head of release, so people can play them earlier and with better performance by downloading the leaked game and playing on an emulator.

I think Nintendo has a case to make that Switch emulation is costing them real money.

Mig Switch should work then.

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!

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.

I don't game nearly as much anymore but my understanding is that Nintendo may be the last console maker to regularly produce physical games. Newest Xbox doesn't even have an optical disk drive, I believe?

Nintendo also seems to be the least price gouge-y, in terms of lootboxes and microtransactions and other bullshit. Now I wish that didn't come with the tradeoff of them being completely anal when it comes to people posting OSTs online but I guess I'll take it.

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

"Every console since the wii" and "except the switch" is two consoles. The other 4/6 were not backwards compatible.

Rumour mill has been an NVidia SoC (derived from their automotive line) and manufactured by Samsung on a non-bleeding edge process.

https://www.eurogamer.net/digitalfoundry-2023-inside-nvidias...

The basis for the rumour is basically Linux kernel code and other leaks/hacks for a "T239" SoC that seemingly has all the streamlining and features you'd want for a mobile gaming processor (as opposed to a automotive SoC like the T234 it's supposedly derived from).

The Samsung fab is based on T234 being fabbed by Samsung using a ~5 year old process, and Korean industry rumours (https://m-mk-co-kr.translate.goog/news/business/10999380?_x_...).

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.

Nintendo optimizes for cost, not maximum performance and almost always selects older technology. AMD Z2 chips go into $600+ bulky low margin PC gaming handhelds whereas Nintendo likely will want to hit $300-350 while keeping a healthy margin.

This also means that the Switch SoC doesn't use an expensive cutting edge manufacturing process. And it probably won't be made in TSMC factories at all. Leaks pretty clearly indicate an Nvidia Ampere based SoC built on Samsung's 8nm process, so it's the same tech as Nvidia's consumer line circa 2020.

As usual with Nintendo products, they will not use the best / fastest chips available, but older ones where the production capacity is not that constrained.

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 ?

The Switch SoC is now built on a 16nm process, so there's no need to go for the cutting edge to achieve a sizable improvement. The Samsung fabs Nvidia relied on until very recently could do the job.

Why wouldn't they just use an emulation layer? There have already been several Switch emulators that run on x86 in the wild.

Having a modern SoC isn't a priority for Nintendo or the vast majority of their customers.

Good news for you :)

- Almost every first-party multiplayer Nintendo game on the Switch that I know of has offline local multiplayer. The only exception which comes to mind is Splatoon.

- The Switch has a cartridge slot, and leaks suggest the Switch 2 will too.

- And you can connect two (possibly more with a hub) Pro controllers with a true wired connection: https://en-americas-support.nintendo.com/app/answers/detail/...

Fingers crossed that the Switch 2 maintains this pattern.