Topic: Report: Nintendo To Launch Two Switch Revisions In Summer?

[Shaymin]

One for Pokémon and one for Astral Chain.

http://www.nintendoworldreport.com/rumor/50095/report-nintendo-to-launch-two-switch-revisions-in-summer

After reporting a Switch revision was in the works for 2019, sources have indicated to the Wall Street Journal that there may in fact be two Switch revisions.

The report (subscription required) posits that the revisions would be announced at E3, and release later in the summer. One revision would be a less expensive option and would serve as an upgrade path for the 3DS, but would omit HD Rumble. The other would be a "Pro" Switch that may be more powerful than the current model, though not at the level of a PlayStation 4 Pro, and would include features more appealing for core gamers.

Reported in the same article is that Sharp is bidding to be the display supplier for the revisions, replacing a combination of three firms. Sharp previously was the display supplier for the 3DS.

[Lemonade]

I would really need to see official details before thinking about getting a new model Switch. I use it docked most of the time, so a more powerful docked version would be nice. But a more portable smaller version would also be nice. I currently much prefer the 3DS as a portable system.

[nickmitch]

There's a quote in there from someone who's (allegedly) used the new models that I found kind of odd.  The quote said the new models were not similar to what Sony did with the PS4 Pro and also not "just a cheap alternative" that looks like a Vita.  Not sure if the second part is just a form factor comparison, and also totally unsure of what they meant by the first part.  Is Nintendo doing more? Less? Something unexpected?

I think I'm mostly just surprised they're doing two models.

[Ian Sane]

Isn't the HD rumble within the Joycons?  So what does a model without the feature mean?  Does it not support it outright or does it just not come with rumble capable Joycons and that you could connect a pair of rumble Joycons to it?  That would be a good deal if you were planning on buying an additional pair of Joycons for multiplayer anyway.  You can save a few bucks by relegating your friends to using the rumble-less Joycons while your experience is uncompromised.

Don't like the Pro model idea though I'm not surprised to see it.  It's a part of the current console gaming market right now that I can't stand since it goes against the whole point of consoles.  If there are different hardware configurations then we might as well use PCs.  I already need a PC for other purposes and have the flexibility to really customize it.  The spread of "Pro" consoles essentially combines the worst elements of consoles and PCs into one:  the rigged inflexibility of consoles with the moving goalpost hardware of PCs.

[nickmitch]

Isn't the HD rumble within the Joycons?  So what does a model without the feature mean?  Does it not support it outright or does it just not come with rumble capable Joycons and that you could connect a pair of rumble Joycons to it?  That would be a good deal if you were planning on buying an additional pair of Joycons for multiplayer anyway.  You can save a few bucks by relegating your friends to using the rumble-less Joycons while your experience is uncompromised.

I assume there wouldn't be detachable joycon in the lower end model.  Two types on joycon on the market would create confusion, unless Nintendo abandons the feature altogether, though that's not something Nintendo would normally avoid.

[ShyGuy]

It sounds good as long as you can put it in the dock and still pair regular joy cons with it.

[Shorty McNostril]

Now I'm no programmer so for all I know this idea is completely unreasonable, but I hope that devs are instructed to tune their games for the current Switch until Nintendo are ready to move over to a full new generation Switch.  The extra grunt in the 'Pro' model can be utilised by squeezing more frames out of it.

As we learned with 'New 3DS'/DSi there have been examples of devs tuning their games to the specs of the upgrade whilst leaving horrific performance on the standard model.  Sure technically it is compatible, but it's a far inferior and sometimes essentially unplayable experience. 

If Nintendo dictate that new and upcoming titles must be tuned for the current model then current users can still get a good experience from their current hardware, and the enthusiasts who shelled out for the Pro can enjoy higher framerates. 

Or something along that idea anyway.

[ShyGuy]

But what if you run into a situation where something big and anticipated like Beyond Good and Evil 2 could come to the Switch Pro if the target it, but it won't come if it has to target the original Switch?

[nickmitch]

As someone more likely to buy a Switch Mini than a Switch Pro, I would almost rather it not come to the system if I couldn't play after buying two versions of the console.

[broodwars]

Sure, sounds like a typical Nintendo move. Their software is a bit lacking right now, so out come the hardware variants.

Perhaps it was foolish, but I was hoping Nintendo might have a bit more respect for the console audience than to try to pull the same cash-grabbing stunts they routinely pulled with their handhelds. Perhaps they still do. I suppose we'll find out at E3.

[NWR_insanolord]

Sure, sounds like a typical Nintendo move. Their software is a bit lacking right now, so out come the hardware variants.

Perhaps it was foolish, but I was hoping Nintendo might have a bit more respect for the console audience than to try to pull the same cash-grabbing stunts they routinely pulled with their handhelds. Perhaps they still do. I suppose we'll find out at E3.

Between the PS4 Pro and the Xbox One X, this is apparently how consoles work now.

[Shorty McNostril]

Perhaps it was foolish, but I was hoping Nintendo might have a bit more respect for the console audience than to try to pull the same cash-grabbing stunts they routinely pulled with their handhelds.

This is why I suggested the above.  I don't really have any problems with them doing this as long as it doesn't compromise the current product.  At least until Nintendo formally move to a new generation.  That way those who have a bit more cash to splash around, or the enthusiast who values improved performance will have a system catered to them.  As long as those who buy or choose to stay with a regular Switch don't have a poor experience with new products.

[BlackNMild2k1]

"Lite" Switch is cool
but I need more info on the Switch "Up".

extra power (TegraX2 chips?) is expected, but what kinda new features are we talking about here?

Is there a camera on the device? A front (and rear) facing camera could be useful for chat and AR games.
what kinda features would you guys expect that would appeal to "Core Gamers"?

[nickmitch]

"Lite" Switch is cool
but I need more info on the Switch "Up".

extra power (TegraX2 chips?) is expected, but what kinda new features are we talking about here?

Is there a camera on the device? A front (and rear) facing camera could be useful for chat and AR games.
what kinda features would you guys expect that would appeal to "Core Gamers"?

Built-in voice chat that doesn't require a phone app.

Sure, sounds like a typical Nintendo move. Their software is a bit lacking right now, so out come the hardware variants.

Perhaps it was foolish, but I was hoping Nintendo might have a bit more respect for the console audience than to try to pull the same cash-grabbing stunts they routinely pulled with their handhelds. Perhaps they still do. I suppose we'll find out at E3.

Between the PS4 Pro and the Xbox One X, this is apparently how consoles work now.

Don't forget the Xbox One S.

[Ian Sane]

Shorty's suggestion of limiting what the devs can do with the Pro tech has the side effect of making a Pro model essentially useless to those that do want to buy it.  If you use the improved tech considerably then you're flipping the bird to every existing owner that reasonably expected their console to last longer than two years but if you don't make good use of it then you're ripping off the Pro customers that expect some justification for buying a more expensive model.  No matter what approach you take you're going to upset some segment of your customer base.  In short this approach SUCKS and there's a reason why consoles worked the way they did for 40 years and why they've been able to co-exist in a market with other devices that can play games but aren't specifically designed for that purpose.

What's annoying about this is that the moving goalpost approach to console hardware has already existed.  Isn't that what the Sega CD or N64 Expansion Pak essentially were?  The difference there is that existing users could upgrade their existing hardware.  Now on a handheld that's not a very feasible idea so we get things like the DSi and New 3DS and to have access to a very small amount of games that need the updated tech you have to buy a brand new system.  At least those were more affordable than a new console.  The Switch is pretty damn expensive to upgrade as are the PS4 Pro and Xbox One X.  The Switch has the excuse that as a hybrid it would lose it's portability by offering an upgrade to existing hardware but the PS4 and XB1 in theory could have been designed to allow that.

At least with a PC you can upgrade your RAM or swap out a CPU or graphics card.  You don't have to replace the whole damn PC for minor updates.  The goalpost moves but you have to ability to make minor tweaks to accommodate that.

[Arbok]

Isn't that what the Sega CD or N64 Expansion Pak essentially were?  The difference there is that existing users could upgrade their existing hardware.

The Sega CD when it launched cost $299, versus the Genesis that cost $189 at launch.

You could see it as an upgrade, but it cost more than the system it was "upgrading". I'd argue that was overall much worse than what's likely to be done here. At least this approach is friendly to new consumers, as it's not like they would have to buy a Switch and a "Switch Pro" to use the latter.

The N64 Expansion Pack works much better in this example, and I thought was handled very well by Nintendo... but times have changed.

[pokepal148]

"Lite" Switch is cool
but I need more info on the Switch "Up".

extra power (TegraX2 chips?) is expected, but what kinda new features are we talking about here?

Is there a camera on the device? A front (and rear) facing camera could be useful for chat and AR games.
what kinda features would you guys expect that would appeal to "Core Gamers"?

Built in Twitch Streaming would be a good one.

[Ian Sane]

Isn't that what the Sega CD or N64 Expansion Pak essentially were?  The difference there is that existing users could upgrade their existing hardware.

The Sega CD when it launched cost $299, versus the Genesis that cost $189 at launch.

You could see it as an upgrade, but it cost more than the system it was "upgrading". I'd argue that was overall much worse than what's likely to be done here.

I'm not saying the Sega CD was a good idea.  Great idea compared to the 32X.   But if they didn't make it an upgrade then the alternative would be an improved Genesis model that cost $500.  My feeling is that if you're going to split the userbase at least provide the option for users to transition to the improved model.

The Turbo Duo is a big flop in America so it's not a great example but the PC Engine was quite successful in Japan.  You could buy a Duo as a newcomer as a single purchase and have an up-to-date system or you could take a base unit and upgrade it with the CD drive and the Super System Card.

I don't think having console upgrades is a good idea either.  But I think it's a lot more consumer friendly than the current approach of having to buy a whole new system for a half-step upgrade.  The hell with the concept in general... but if we have to endure it this is the approach I would prefer.

[Shaymin]

Don't forget the Xbox One S.

That's a slim rev at the same power level, isn't it? Unless the ability to play 4K BR counts as a power bump.

[stevey]

From the sounds of the rumor that said "it's not going to be like the PS4 Pro" makes me believe that Nintendo is going to stick a Tegra X2 in it but downclock it to X1/Switch levels so that they can lower the power used and improve battery life dramatically. Only a few games will be allowed to have an Extended Battery Life <-> Hi-Resolution toggle in their menus on games that let the resolution fluctuate (Mario, Zelda, Doom).

I'm just hoping for a 3DSwitch with full backwards compatibility but I know I'm in the minority on that.

Shorty's suggestion of limiting what the devs can do with the Pro tech has the side effect of making a Pro model essentially useless to those that do want to buy it.  If you use the improved tech considerably then you're flipping the bird to every existing owner that reasonably expected their console to last longer than two years but if you don't make good use of it then you're ripping off the Pro customers that expect some justification for buying a more expensive model. No matter what approach you take you're going to upset some segment of your customer base.  In short this approach SUCKS and there's a reason why consoles worked the way they did for 40 years and why they've been able to co-exist in a market with other devices that can play games but aren't specifically designed for that purpose.

What's annoying about this is that the moving goalpost approach to console hardware has already existed.  Isn't that what the Sega CD or N64 Expansion Pak essentially were?  The difference there is that existing users could upgrade their existing hardware.  Now on a handheld that's not a very feasible idea so we get things like the DSi and New 3DS and to have access to a very small amount of games that need the updated tech you have to buy a brand new system.  At least those were more affordable than a new console.  The Switch is pretty damn expensive to upgrade as are the PS4 Pro and Xbox One X.  The Switch has the excuse that as a hybrid it would lose it's portability by offering an upgrade to existing hardware but the PS4 and XB1 in theory could have been designed to allow that.

At least with a PC you can upgrade your RAM or swap out a CPU or graphics card.  You don't have to replace the whole damn PC for minor updates.  The goalpost moves but you have to ability to make minor tweaks to accommodate that.

We're living in the smartphone era where everyone thinks it's perfectly normal to throw out your $600-1K phone every year or two and buy a nearly identical new one. Frankly, it's weird that Nintendo didn't release a 2018 Switch encased in glass with no headphone jack, non-user-replaceable battery, and minorly thinner bezels/depth.