None but its a completely different situation.  3rd party games were built from the ground up to run on the base xbox and ps4. Cross platforms games come to the Switch if they can run on the switch. With a more powerful pro model there will be a huge number of games that can now run on Switch. Sony and Microsoft also had policies against making exclusive games for their pro models which Nintendo has a history of not doing. The 3ds had no such policy.  Nate Drake on restera has already confirmed that there will be 3rd party games that come to the pro model and not the OG switch.

And the article is irrelevant to my question about PS4 and X1, which you still can't seem to acknowledge. I ask Question A, you give me Answer B so you can completely pivot everything around Question B.

How about you just don't quote or reply to me directly since that seems to be a real problem for you?

I have a hard time believing that any major/AAA third party games would come exclusively to a pro model that can't sell to 80+ million existing users. I know the wording is "3rd party games", which carries a very wide range, so that could just as easily mean obscure indy titles that made up the majority of N3DS exclusivity.

There is no way that games like Final Fantasy VII and Cyberpunk is going on it exclusively, except that Nintendo ensures publishers that the Switch 2 will also play them natively without any extra work necessary, and isn't that far off.

Nintendo and other publishers are the only ones that can confirm this. Not saying Nate Drake is wrong or spreading misinformation, but until an official source says it or shows it, or Nate Drake obtains some indisputable evidence, it's a rumor.

GBC had exclusives, DSi had exclusives, New 3ds had exclusives (not only Xenoblade, but also SNES classic and Fire Emblem Warriors, even Minecraft), Switch Pro will be the same, just like all the previous Ninterndo systems.

So there's this thing called reading comprehension...

The question was never whether previous Nintendo consoles had exclusives. I know damn well they have. I originally asked, quite sincerely, if the PS4P and X1X had exclusives. Somehow, you made it all about the 3DS. Somehow, you are still making it all about previous Nintendo consoles.

But since we're on the subject, fine. Thank you for proving my point for me.

GBC exclusives: awesome. There was no digital market back then, and games were far cheaper to make and produce on technology that was outdated when it debuted a decade prior. GTA2 being available on the GBC but not the regular GB isn't even close to making RDR2 exclusive to a Switch Pro but not Switch in terms of the the time, funds and manpower it would take to make it happen.

DSi exclusives: see above, but the main factor is that the DS didn't have an online shop, so it was impossible to put digital only games on the market for it. Power wasn't the main factor here. There were maybe half a dozen games released on a physical game card, and none of them were big, ambitious titles that absolutely could not have been done on the DS.

New 3DS: you don't know what an exclusive is, do you? Xenoblade isn't an exclusive, it's a port of a Wii game. SNES Classic is a mini console, not a game. And the SNES Virtual Console is not a 3DS exclusive We're talking 15-20 year old ROMS, not modern day big budget titles. How many N3DS exclusives were there that didn't come from Nintendo, besides any SNES ports? If you bothered to read the rest of the thread instead of trying to shitpost me, you'd see that this is what the discussion is about.

Wait, you forgot one...

N64 Expansion Pak exclusives: three first/second party games, all of which were sold with the Expansion Pak at launch to help customers out. Not a single third party game that used the Expansion Pak required it. Perfect Dark didn't even require it to run the game completely, you just couldn't play the Story Mode.

So as you can see, the further time goes on, the less third party publishers are willing to risk putting their games on a mid-gen refresh that fractures the player base. Not a single third party took a chance on an N64 game that required the Expansion Pak. The vast majority of the games in the DSi shop would have came to the DS if the DS had a digital storefront, but it didn't. All your N3DS examples save Fire Emblem Warriors are ports of old games, most of them being 15-20 years old ROM dumps, and the only ones that aren't came directly from Nintendo.

So what makes you think that third parties will suddenly start putting bigger, more costly, games that require more man hours and resources on a base-splitting stopgap console that is leaps and bounds beyond any Nintendo handheld before it?

Back on topic, I think we have to wait until the exclusive PS5 and Series X games release before we really see the Switch's library dry up. The next Apex legends can't come to Switch, even if the PS4 ported version can. Any game that takes advantage of the new CPU or SSD power, can't be ported. Period.

So there's this thing called reading comprehension...

The question was never whether previous Nintendo consoles had exclusives. I know damn well they have. I originally asked, quite sincerely, if the PS4P and X1X had exclusives. Somehow, you made it all about the 3DS. Somehow, you are still making it all about previous Nintendo consoles.

But since we're on the subject, fine. Thank you for proving my point for me.

GBC exclusives: awesome. There was no digital market back then, and games were far cheaper to make and produce on technology that was outdated when it debuted a decade prior. GTA2 being available on the GBC but not the regular GB isn't even close to making RDR2 exclusive to a Switch Pro but not Switch in terms of the the time, funds and manpower it would take to make it happen.

DSi exclusives: see above, but the main factor is that the DS didn't have an online shop, so it was impossible to put digital only games on the market for it. Power wasn't the main factor here. There were maybe half a dozen games released on a physical game card, and none of them were big, ambitious titles that absolutely could not have been done on the DS.

New 3DS: you don't know what an exclusive is, do you? Xenoblade isn't an exclusive, it's a port of a Wii game. SNES Classic is a mini console, not a game. And the SNES Virtual Console is not a 3DS exclusive We're talking 15-20 year old ROMS, not modern day big budget titles. How many N3DS exclusives were there that didn't come from Nintendo, besides any SNES ports? If you bothered to read the rest of the thread instead of trying to shitpost me, you'd see that this is what the discussion is about.

Wait, you forgot one...

N64 Expansion Pak exclusives: three first/second party games, all of which were sold with the Expansion Pak at launch to help customers out. Not a single third party game that used the Expansion Pak required it. Perfect Dark didn't even require it to run the game completely, you just couldn't play the Story Mode.

So as you can see, the further time goes on, the less third party publishers are willing to risk putting their games on a mid-gen refresh that fractures the player base. Not a single third party took a chance on an N64 game that required the Expansion Pak. The vast majority of the games in the DSi shop would have came to the DS if the DS had a digital storefront, but it didn't. All your N3DS examples save Fire Emblem Warriors are ports of old games, most of them being 15-20 years old ROM dumps, and the only ones that aren't came directly from Nintendo.

So what makes you think that third parties will suddenly start putting bigger, more costly, games that require more man hours and resources on a base-splitting stopgap console that is leaps and bounds beyond any Nintendo handheld before it?

I think you're overthinking this a bit, it isn't about rules or past practice. If the new system is a big enough improvement to allow new games to come to it that couldn't come to the old Switch, it might happen, as there are not many downsides to allowing it. If it sells well enough that there is a big enough installed base of the new model, it will happen, regardless of the OG Switch's install base. A new addressable market means new money to be made. At the end of the day, there is a HUGE gap between an OG Switch game at 720p/30hz and playing the same game at 4k/60. Even without improving the visuals to PS4 level, just playing Switch games at 4k/60 would take up to 18 times more performance. There's a big gap there between the OG Switch and a theoretical 18x faster Switch for things to happen, still have most of the same games, but also provide a gap to allow better performance in the same games if you want to release on both systems. If you're the number one selling console, at is possible.

Back on topic, I think we have to wait until the exclusive PS5 and Series X games release before we really see the Switch's library dry up. The next Apex legends can't come to Switch, even if the PS4 ported version can. Any game that takes advantage of the new CPU or SSD power, can't be ported. Period.

Exclusive here mean something the original model didn't have.

GBC is 2 times stronger than GB, DSi is 2 times stronger than DS, New 3ds is 3 times stronger than 3DS, many games for those systems utilized the extra ram and extra cpu power to run. Want it or not, Switch Pro will be way stronger than Switch, and there will be at least 3-4 games (1st or 3rd party) that using the extra power of the pro, hence they won't be on Switch but will be on Switch pro.