I'm talking about performance, not flops. If you want to use flops so much, just remember that nvidea gpus perform as well as amd gpus with many more flops. Xavier is 1.3-1.4 tflops as far as I know, which should perform like a 2.5-2.7 tflops gpu from amd. That's already around 50% more than ps4. If nvidea makes nintendo a 3-3.2 tflop gpu for the switch 2, it will match the raw performance of an xbox one x's gpu.

Well, if I would guess:
-Not an iteration of switch. Same hybrid concept, but a new product. Different visual branding. Even with different controllers form (focusing more on ergonomy, for different modes of playing).
-VR included optionally, as a new way to 'switch'. Not just a game specific gimmick, but more like the PSVR.
-No more than 1080p screen
-Later, a new dock sold separately with a DLSS chip for super sampling after rendering with AI (like those used in RTX2080)
-Optional smaller joycon for a smaller form factor.
-

With the edit... I'm not really sure what exactly you're predicting. Just kind of seems like you're predicting there will be a follow up to the Switch which kind of seems like a foregone conclusion at this point. I'd be more surprised if there wasn't.

This is what i mean: https://www.neogaf.com/threads/games-that-are-exclusive-enhanced-on-the-new-3ds.1177455/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Game_Boy_Color-only_games

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Nintendo_DSi_games / https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:DSiWare_gamesu

You are welcome again

You are late.  I already admitted to being mis informed about all games working on the base model, and pointed out how that actually helps support my prediction in the end.

Good on you for the links though!  Always happy to see hard evidence in these debates.  🙂

Here is the thing I want from the next Nintendo console. I want them to have a clearer idea of how to handle digital content. Navigating the eshop is a joke. When I got the switch I always assumed it was a temporary storefront that would get updated in the near future. At this point it is clear that it is here to stay. Their digital storefronts have been always been a joke, but it seems like it took a step back.

Also, and perhaps more importantly, Nintendo needs to tie those purchases to the account and not the hardware. I know quite a few people that would buy multiple consoles if they could associate the digital content to an account. I have two ps4’s and can play my content on two TVs at the same time. It is a great feature! (Can’t do more than two which I am fine with, a primary console and a secondary console should be an option though Nintendo!). Also, it makes transitioning to the next generation so much easier. When I got my Xbox one x I had immediate access to all my 360 stuff, which was awesome!

Tell that to all the various upgrades to other Nintendo portables ;p

You're ignoring what Nintendo always does. What benefit did a new 3ds have over the 3ds, the games were already optimized for the OG 3ds. What benefit did the DSi have over the OG DS, the games were already optimized for the DS. What benefit did the PS4 Pro have over the PS4, the games were already optimized for the PS4. What benefit did the Xbox One X have over the Xbox One, the games were already optimized for the Xbox One... See how easy this is?

Sure it isn't guaranteed Nintendo will do what they normally do and release an upgraded version of their portable to keep a high price point for people who want a premium experience while allowing bargain shoppers to finally pick up an OG Switch or even a Lite on the cheap, but it is certainly possible, and likely given their track record of doing exactly that.

That's not really what you said when you started this thread. You said you see not new generations but rather a series of step ups. So you started out by saying you see a series of small incremental upgrades to the Switch line over the years rather than new generations, and now you are saying the opposite. People aren't disagreeing that the next system will be a Switch 2, they are disagreeing with your stated idea that there won't be a next gen Switch 2 but rather incremental upgrades to the original Switch. If you're are now simply saying that the next Nintendo system will be a Switch 2, I think most people assume that will be the case. Don't really need a whole thread to say you think Nintendo will stick with hybrid and the Switch branding next gen.

I'm always curious when people always say the eshop sucks. What features would make it so much better? It seems fine to me. I'm not saying it can't be improved, I'm just wondering why people say it sucks so much? I don't use the search option very often, but you can search by keyword, genre, price, demos, downloadable content, on sale, online games. The search makes the eshop seem pretty fully featured. Are people just not using the search feature? I can see how it can be annoying scrolling through to find a game if you don't use search, but that wouldn't that be the case with any layout? Whenever people say eshop sucks I never see any ideas on how to improve it.

Agreed on purchases being tied to account. I didn't even realize they aren't tied to the account, is that really true?! Actually I just looked it up and it seems you are wrong, purchases are indeed tied to the account (wasn't the case at launch I think). You just can only play from your account on one system at a time, which I guess is why you are complaining. But...why??? In what world would anyone need to be playing two Switch's (or PS4's in your case) at the same time? I can't imagine why you have a double PS4 setup like that, but there is no earthly reason why Nintendo needs to make that possible. At least for a single person. I guess I could see this would be nice for a family that has multiple Switches but wanted to all use the same account so they only have to buy each game once and play all the games freely at the same time on all Switches. But seems obvious why Nintendo doesn't allow this, because then you're basically sharing a copy of the game while only having to pay for it once. If you want to do this just buy physical, and multiple physical copies if you want to play the same game at the same time on different Switches. Since Switch is a portable and it is likely some households will have multiple Switches, from a business perspective it makes sense and is completely reasonable to not allow this.

And since downloads are indeed tied to accounts, what you describe with transitions should indeed be the case, assuming Switch 2 is completely BC with Switch. I guess the thing that aren't saved to the account are save files though. But don't most games have cloud saving with Nintendo Online now anyways, so even that for the most part wouldn't be an issue.

I never said a series of small step ups, that is something people misinterpreted because certain people add words like "incremental" to the topic, when I never said they had to be a series of small upgrades.  If a more powerful Switch 2 releases that can handle games that the Switch 1 cannot 5 years down the line, but is at its core the exact same thing with the same eshop and all with everything carrying over, then it would be part of a "Switch family".

In this sense traditional generations would be gone as each generation in the past used to start from scratch when it came to home consoles.  Nintendo has done this before for example with the GB and GBA for example.  One could look at the GB, GBC, and GBA as a family of devices as they were all step ups of the exact same thing.

GBC had games that the original GB could not run, and the GBA could run bot GB and GBC games while also having its own step up in power.  Aside from that step up, they were the exact same thing at their core and the newest version went all the way back to the oldest in terms of BC.

This trend ended with the DS, which was their first device outside of the GameBoy family in terms of handhelds.

It would also mean that the same eshop and purchases from that eshop would carry over as well, as you would no longer be starting from scratch like we used to have to from gen to gen.  In every sapect outside of power and somr quality of life improvements, it would be the same as the OG Switch.  Nintendo would still innovate and do their own thing, but through add ons like Ring Fit and Labo.  This way they would not need to risk basing the entire device around any one concept, and would be much safer in the long run.

Once again you twist words to misguide what the point is.  The name alone does not make it a family of devices, but what the device does.  I never said the DS and 3DS are part of the same family, so you either need to re read our discussion or stop making things up as you go.  You are trying to derail this thread so hard that you are either putting words in my mouth, or your memory is failing you.  I honestly don't know which.

I specifically said the DS and 3DS are two completely different families because they each had their own eshop where purchases did not carry over.  You had to start from scratch and even though the DS shop was available separately on the 3DS, it was eventually taken down.  The same thing happened with the Wii and WiiU (also not a family of devices).

I brought this up as examples for what would and would not constitute a Switch family of devices after you seemed to have missed the point and implied that I am saying there would be small upgrades over short periods of time, I never said that.  I said the timespan does not matter nor the leap in power as long as EVERYTHING carried over from form factor, physical BC, and purchases from the eshop.  I then predicted that Nintendo will innovate with add ons like Labo or Ring Fit moving forward instead of basing their entire console around it.