Was Nintendo right to opt out of the graphics arms race?

[Chrkeller]

Hardstuck-Platinum said:

Chrkeller said:

Weaker power means cheaper software development costs.  Nintendo makes a living on selling Mario, Zelda, Fire Emblem, Metroid, Pokemon and Animal Crossing.  Keep development costs down via weaker hardware is worth far more than having those titles.  And to be fair, those might come anyway.  Games are scalable as crap.  People can game on a 2050 up to a 5090...  games scale.  Porting isn't what it used to be.

edit

speculation, but GTA6 minimum is supposed to be a gtx 1660, the Switch 2 fairs well against a gtx 1660.  Sure GTA 6 on the Switch 2 will be 30 fps and low resolution, reduction in crowd density + draw distance.  But it is doable.  Nobody is making games that aren't compatible with weaker hardware.  Steam is loaded with stuff like 2050, 3050, etc.    

I don't agree with this. I don't think people realise just how much money Sony makes off of third party software and MTX's. It also puts a burden on Nintendo to keep making games which is expensive, whereas Sony can just sit back, do nothing and let their platform be the first choice for all third party developers. At this point Sony could literally close all of their first party studios and do just fine, and surely that's cheaper and easier than being forced to keep making games to keep your platform alive. 

Maybe, but with stuff like MK8, amiibos and the Mario movie...  it ain't like Nintendo is struggling.  Their franchises are worth a fortune.

Edit

The biggest barrier for the switch 2 ports is storage space, not the ability run cut back versions.  

Last edited by Chrkeller - on 02 January 2026