If a 'Switch 2' would not be backwards compatible that would be a big mistake.
Let's dive in.
The groundwork and the Pokémon patch
First, got
to set the table. Hardware sales are curving downward. Sales of
the Switch have been going down for the last few quarters. In their last
quarter, as of this article Q3 of their fiscal year 2023 (FY23), sales for the Switch were down 21.3% compared to that same period. Without a really enticing
mid-generation refresh, the discussed to-death 'Switch Pro', there's no 2nd
wind to boost sales and extend the lifespan by a year or two, three. Stuff like the
Switch Lite and the Switch OLED are nice but don't set the charts on fire.
Software-wise,
Switch games are still selling well but even that is dropping. They were down
in FY23 by 4% compared to FY22. Charts-wise, Nintendo is still the top dog in
its native Japan but when you look at the UK for example, the time it had 6,7,
sometimes even all 10, of the top-selling games that week this year that is no
longer the case. At least, not as consistently as in the last few years.
What people
are also pointing towards as a sign that Nintendo has started the generational
shift is the software lineup for this year, for 2023. Beyond The Legend of
Zelda: Tears of the Kingdom Nintendo has no "blockbuster" in the
pipeline. No new big Mario or the like. What we do have are
smaller titles. Fire Emblem Engage, Bayonetta Origins and Pikmin 4 etc. Also: lots of DLC. From the Splatoon 3 expansion pass to the
Xenoblade Chronicles 3 DLC and the Pokémon Scarlet & Violet 'Treasures of
Area Zero' content.
Speaking of which: the Pokémon Scarlet and Violet DLC is what set off this talk of a Switch 2 and backwards compatibility. Ussually, when stuff ´leaks´ to 4chan there´s no truth to it. Like, at all. This time, however, the leaker got everything they said right. The 2 DLC as well as
Walking Wake and Iron Leaves, names and all. At
the very end of the post, they mentioned they were also working on a
performance patch for the DLC to be released with the next Switch model(s).
Is this true? Who knows but this is what opened the floodgates.
Why backwards compatibility could be difficult...
Now to the
meat and potatoes of this post: the backwards compatibility. As a result of
this Pokémon Leak, some prominent folks within the gaming community have given
their thoughts on the next Switch and the possibility of backwards
compatibility. One video that has gotten quite a bit of traction is the video of Modern Vintage Gamer; a programmer who actually works in the industry. He
knows what he's talking about.
In his
eyes, backward compatibility is possible for the Switch 2 but some effort would
need to be put into it. I won't repeat the details, I'd recommend you to watch
his video for that, but the gist is that if Nintendo moves away from the NVIDIA
Tegra X1 chips, which MVG and other developers he knows think they'll do, the
games won't work on the new hardware without recompiling them to run on the new
infrastructure.
The
solutions to this are:
1. Make
patches for each game to run on the new hardware; a lot of work for each and
every title would be required.
2. Emulate
Switch games on the new hardware. Emulating Switch games is possible but it
requires a lot of power and is still very unstable. Not a very good solution.
3. Include
the parts of the current Switch chipset necessary to play the games. Nintendo
has done this before by including the GBA slot in the Nintendo DS and the
GameCube board in the Wii, just to name two. It does make the console more
expensive though.
4.
Customize the new Tegra X1 chip so Switch games can run on it natively. Again,
that would require work and make the console more expensive.
Whichever
way they´d go about it, I do think they should put the work in. Yes, market
research says that backward compatibility doesn´t have a significant effect on
sales. People are looking forward more to new experiences than old ones. For example: Shantae, which reviewed, well when it first released on the GBC in 2002, came
out after the GBA launched sold poorly. The game could be played on the GBA but
no one was giving GBC releases a 2nd glance in 2002.
...but is the smart thing to do!
Even with
this in mind, I still think backward compatibility is something a ´Switch 2´
needs. It boils down to what they want to do with their legacy content, NSO, as
well as the Switch brand and getting current Switch owners over to the new
hardware. It'll make the purchase easier for their dedicated Switch gamers, for starters. It's something many of us want after all.
If Nintendo
uses the Switch branding then it's a matter of expectations. When people will hear bout the `Switch 2´
they´ll instantly know what the console is and what to expect from it. Playing
all games that say ´Switch´ is a part of those expectations. Just like you can
migrate your setting and apps from one iPhone model to the next, I think the
general consumer will expect the same with the Switch.
And in a
way, that´s a mindset that Nintendo themselves is setting up. With NSO, they´ve
repeatedly stated that they switched to the current subscription model over the
´pay per title´ one so that they can have one system to ´deliver legacy
content´ across multiple consoles. They are going to migrate NSO over to the next
console, that´s for certain. Wouldn´t it be weird though to a general consumer
they could only migrate over this 1 part and not the rest? I think so.
This can
also help with bringing people over from the old hardware to the new. The
Switch is a big success with over 120 million systems sold. Just like the Wii
motion controls opened up an entirely new market of gamers, so has the hybrid
nature of the Switch. However, this doesn´t mean all those people will migrate
over to a Switch 2. The Switch 2 wouldn´t have the same appeal because, well,
people know the trick. The concept isn´t new so you need something else to
entice beyond the games themselves.
Maybe they don't want to drop another 400 bucks in
a new system for just one or two cool-looking games. Feel it's too expensive
for that. However, you could get them in another way. The Switch is over 6
years old and a hybrid. The chances it's going to get banged up are high.
Someone might not want to buy the Switch 2 for one or two new games but to
replace their banged-up Switch so they can keep playing what they already have?
Now, you have one more person to sell those 2 new games to that you wouldn't have
had without backward compatibility.
...........
You know, I
just realize that this post could make me look very stupid in a few years.
Current Nintendo President Furukawa has stated he doesn't want to start over
from scratch and lose the 100+ million Switch user base. Chances are high that
backwards compatibility is coming to the 'Switch 2'.
Even so, we don't know if that will be the case as of writing. Nintendo likes to do its own thing, zig instead of zag, so it's not out of the question that there won't be any backwards compatibility to speak off. There might not even be a Switch 2 to speak off! They might make a completely different console with a new gimmick at its core. Whatever ends up coming our way in the next 2-3 years, I think it should be backwards compatible because it'll make the console a much easier sell to the dedicated fans and casuals alike. I mean, I will replace my Switch with a backwards-compatible Switch 2. One device for both libraries will be so convenient and make an early purchase a lot easier.
For me, the reason I would want a more powerful switch is because of what emulation has showed us. Several of their games are already ready to look so much better. Pokemon Violet/Scarlet is one example (ignoring the devs being terrible at optimization) and BotW with a higher resolution and better framrates would look awesome.
ReplyDeleteI agree. I think it would be a great idea for Nintendo to optimize their first party games for a 'Switch 2'. Gives it another selling point: not only will it play you're old Switch games but it will do so better! And yes, Scarlet & Violet needs it the most.
Delete