Had an interesting conversation recently in regards to how would Nintendo follow up the Switch and one point came up in the debate on it possibly seeing the return of the GBC route. For those who aren't aware of what is meant here the GB and GBC is something of an odd case as both are classed as being the same platform but technically they're two separate platforms with one being fully BC, think of the X1 and the X1X only if the latter fully replaced the former going forward correct me if I'm wrong but I think GBC is one of the only cases where pro type model essentially became the successor. This was something of an accident as the GBA ran into R&D problems so the GBC was brought out to extend the life of the GB brand but ended up becoming something of a stand alone platform and the BC gave it a huge library at launch as well as its own games.

Such an approach could actually suit the hybrid Switch brand imo as people talk about how the should be a pro SKU at some point but Nintendo have never really fully committed to that approach apart from with the GBC, yeah we have the DSi and the N3DS but those weren't really weren't pro models so to speak as one had internal storage added while other has a slightly better CPU just to run one particular games. GBC was really the only time they committed to something of the sort and it became a successor of the GB even though they're the same platform classification, that said it's not far fetched for that approach to return again where we see a pro model Switch in future that's maybe base around X1 performance that is fully BC and becomes a pseudo successor in the same way GBC did.

Would be awesome, I'd love to see how nice Breath of the Wild would have looked if it was in colour!

In seriousness though, it would be an interesting route to take and it would probably be based on how successful Nintendo have been with pushing the "New" 2ds and 3ds lines and the games which are exclusive to those systems over the 3DS family of consoles, I think if you look at the 3ds port of Xeno's sales it wouldn't really seem to be massively profitable for Nintendo to focus development on certain games exclusively for one branch of a already 30m selling sales monster.

I think it would an interesting route to take. It would certainly make Switch's 7-10 year lifespan a reality. But it would add so much confusion. I still don't think we have clear numbers on how much the GBC hardware sold. People try to look at dates and estimate. But I don't think the GB was discontinued until 1999, months after the GBC came out.

The Game Boy Colour is the first "Pro" console, now that I think about it. Basically the same console, it can play the exact games that the original version, but it adds an extra that some people might find worth upgrading for (colour for the GB, power for the modern upgrades).

"Nintendo have never really fully committed to that approach apart from with the GBC, yeah we have the DSi and the N3DS but those weren't really weren't pro models so to speak as one had internal storage added while other has a slightly better CPU just to run one particular games. GBC was really the only time they committed to something of the sort and it became a successor of the GB even though they're the same platform classification, that said it's not far fetched for that approach to return again where we see a pro model Switch in future that's maybe base around X1 performance that is fully BC and becomes a pseudo successor in the same way GBC did."

To me, that sounds more true to the "Pro" model idea than the Gameboy Color. You said it yourself, the Gameboy Color was practically it's own platform, the same can not be said for the PS4 Pro and Xbox One X. The New 3DS offers minimal upgrades over the original edition, just as the PS4 Pro and Xbox One X do. The only difference is that the upgrades in the New 3DS are even more minimal, but at least with your description, I feel Nintendo's recent standard of upgraded models actually falls more in line than what Gameboy Color did. 

Anyways, it's an interesting idea, but I don't really see why? Besides making more sales fall under the original Switch, but even then you called it a "successor". So would this basically just be a disappointing Switch 2, or just an upgraded version of Switch that's a bigger difference in terms of power than the N3DS and DSi?

Many of us have been suggesting this for years: but using mobile upgrades as an example.

Each year mobile companies, like Apple and Samsung, release new phones with more power and capability, but they use an upgraded version of the same platform. In the future, older models fall off the back: after 4 or 5 gens Apple no longer mandates support for the device, but many companies still do regardless.

And yes! =)

Given the hardware used, Switch is an optimal console to try this with.

I sure hope for colour on my Switch.

Anyway, official atomic purple pls.

I'm thinking something along the same lines only where as mobiles do it every year Nintendo could do it every 6/7 years.

I personally found the N3DS upgrade to be huge, due to the vastly improved 3D effect. 

I hope not. 6-7 years should be gen 3 or 2 going on 3. NVidea is developing the hardware tech. It takes some burden off of Nintendo. Waiting 6-7 year’s sticks them with the same problem Nintendo always suffers with the year 2/3 peak. If they have a new console out at year 2/3, then there is a new interest for potential purchasers who wanted something newer, and also for existing customers to upgrade, thus maintaining the peak sales level instead of letting it slide off a cliff like Nintendo’s past consoles.

I’d love a new Switch tablet with increased performance on certain games: draw distances, frame rates, and resolution. Other feature upgrades could be battery life. Also left joycons that don’t de sync when someone walks past the screen (seriously, this happened to me). Keep the first gen on the market at a marginally reduced price.