I bought a New 3ds XL and, while I thought it was a significant improvement in terms of form factor, screen size, and while I loved having access to Xenoblade for the first time, I found it otherwise to be a disappointment (granted, I kind of knew what I was expecting). I'm beyond the point where I get a Nintendo enhanced device just for the heck of it (only if I had someone else in my family that wanted their own device), so this OLED one is a hard pass for me and I'm glad Nintendo made it a hard pass. Now I won't feel frustrated buying a pro edition and then a brand new device comes out 2 years later like history.

A Switch 2 launching in 2023/2024 should have better shaders and effects work over PS4 (Pro) and Xbox One (X) due to being a decade more modern, just as Switch has better shaders and effects work over PS3 and 360.

Personally I am happy to trade in my old device for a refreshed device.. When there are tangible benefits.

The Xbox One X for example allowed older games to maintain steady framerates... And many games that deployed a dynamic resolution but sat around 720P automagically got upgraded to full 1080P. - And that was when a game wasn't enhanced for the hardware.

For backwards compatibility it made a big difference as well.

The Switch isn't like the New 3DS XL, many games do deploy a dynamic resolution/uncapped framerate... And any iterative updated console would allow those games to be better.
Doom/Wolfenstein for example.

Even first party games like Links Awakening and Breath of the Wild would be more fluid experiences eliminating those stutters/frame drops.

Plus an iteratively updated console will be using more modern components so can theoretically provide other benefits like faster load times, lower power consumption... And possibly better reliability.

Considering the Switch is based on Maxwell, it already has a few advantages over the base Xbox One/Playstation 4 older GCN derived hardware anyway. - Just the Xbox One and Playstation 4 have far more hardware to play with and can brute force their way through things.
The Playstation 4 Pro and Xbox One X don't really shift the effects feature set forwards to much, because they still need to get games built for base hardware, the One X uses a derivative of Polaris however and that has a few advantages. (And is really good at asynchronous compute)

But if Nintendo goes with Pascal/Volta derived Tegra, then the Playstation 5 and Series X should have the better hardware from a feature/effects perspective.

The Switch 2 could be a wild card, Samsung are deploying Radeon graphics in it's SoC's and Qualcomm have very impressive GPU capabilities in it's ARM/Adreno (Radeon based also) SoC's whilst nVidia hasn't been pushing that aspect for a very long time... The goal posts on SoC's has definitely moved on from nVidia.

But Nintendo isn't a consumer like we are, it has lucrative contracts and may contract Orin or the likes from nVidia.

No mid-gen upgrade to date has fractured their userbase with exclusives, so your irrational fear of that happening holds no water. And I'll include New 3ds in that bunch even though it wasn't much of a leap in power to the OG model comparatively to other mid-gen upgrades to their OG models.

If someone already said this, I apologize for not reading all 20 pages, but I recently tweeted this and wanted to say it here, too:

Wait, are Nintendo apologists proud of NOT expecting a more powerful Switch? Is your bar set so low that you expect virtually nothing and think that's a WIN?!

EDIT: I did NOT think the emoji was going to be that large on the copy-paste lmfao

EDIT2: Hold up, are emoji really THIS high-res this wholeass time?!?!

What you're saying doesn't make a lot of sense especially considering this past gen and how modern games are extremely scalable. PS4 Pro and Xbox One X didn't fracture their userbase and cause games on their base model to be poorly optimized. Including Switch and PC there were six profiles third party developers worked on and no evidence suggests that just because of Pro/One X existing, the OG model versions of games suffered. I had a PS4 slim all gen and had no need to upgrade to pro, the games that ran on the slim would've ran that way with or without a pro and the Sony games I played ran fine. And there were no Pro and One X exclusives.

If there's a "pro" variant of Switch you can carry on like you have been doing not caring about performance and play Link's Awakening and Age of Calamity in all it's stuttery and frame dropping glory. But for the people for which that unstable performance of such games effects the enjoyment of, the "pro" variant would be for them.

First off don't talk about my genitals, funny you'd use that expression to a trans person 🙄

Secondly that's not "my logic" and what I was saying at all. If a developer can't get their games to run at a stable performance from the jump from the hardware THEY MADE. Either they're a shitty developer or their hardware is too weak to fully realize the games they want to make. I don't think Nintendo is a shitty developer, I just think their hardware is too lacking to continue on as is and it's effecting the enjoyment of their games.

I honestly don't like mid-gen upgrades all that much because most of the time I feel it's just a pointless cashgrab, like with the Pro/ One X because they were already very powerful, capable machines for that gen. But I believe it isn't pointless if a mid-gen upgrade serves a vital purpose that software updates and optimization can't fix. I have an Xbox Series S for my next gen fix atm, I don't need the Switch to be a powerhouse (and frankly idc if consoles are "super powerful") but you can't ignore the reality of the situation just because you'd fear being left out.

All I'm saying is more options for those who want it is good both for Nintendo fans and for those that are on the fence about it's future.

No mid-gen upgrade to date has fractured their userbase with exclusives, so your irrational fear of that happening holds no water. And I'll include New 3ds in that bunch even though it wasn't much of a leap in power to the OG model comparatively to other mid-gen upgrades to their OG models.

Just because I'm a Nintendo fan and I like their games doesn't mean I'm going to like or agree with everything they do, especially if it's interfering with my enjoyment of said games. They're not above criticism and I can choose to continue to play their games and still criticize their lack of stable performances and voice my opinion of wanting their games to be more stable and how I think they can easily accomplish that if they can't do it on the software side.

After the Pro and X came out last gen lower resolutions became more common on the base models, and look no further than Cyberpunk for a game that clearly wasn't optimized for the 2013 consoles, or Hyrule Warriors on 3DS were the base model was 20fps and it only ran okay on the New model. And the New 3DS did have games not on the base model at all; Xenoblade, FE Warriors, Minecraft, Binding of Isaac, even the SNES virtual console.

Just as you're free to "carry on" about the current Switch's performance level, I'm free to "carry on" here and now that it's satisfactory to me personally. I'm playing through Astral Chain on it now for instance and it looks and runs just fine. Clearly most folks are happy with the current model given its flying off shelves at $300 more than four years after its release.

Considering the Switch is based on Maxwell, it already has a few advantages over the base Xbox One/Playstation 4 older GCN derived hardware anyway. - Just the Xbox One and Playstation 4 have far more hardware to play with and can brute force their way through things.
The Playstation 4 Pro and Xbox One X don't really shift the effects feature set forwards to much, because they still need to get games built for base hardware, the One X uses a derivative of Polaris however and that has a few advantages. (And is really good at asynchronous compute)

But if Nintendo goes with Pascal/Volta derived Tegra, then the Playstation 5 and Series X should have the better hardware from a feature/effects perspective.

The Switch 2 could be a wild card, Samsung are deploying Radeon graphics in it's SoC's and Qualcomm have very impressive GPU capabilities in it's ARM/Adreno (Radeon based also) SoC's whilst nVidia hasn't been pushing that aspect for a very long time... The goal posts on SoC's has definitely moved on from nVidia.

But Nintendo isn't a consumer like we are, it has lucrative contracts and may contract Orin or the likes from nVidia.

I'll be happy if Switch 2 is to PS5/XS as Switch 1 is to PS4/Xbone in terms of graphics, personally. I don't need my games to look cutting edge, I'd just rather it be an appropriately substantial leap over its predecessor, which shouldn't be difficult given how old Tegra X1 will be by 2023/2024 when I'd prefer a Switch successor to launch.

Considering that Tegra X1 was already "old" when the Switch launched... And was further castrated in order to fit a low thermal envelope, I think it's definitely showcased what nVidia's very efficient architecture (Maxwell) was able to achieve... And thus has held up rather well.
Helps that Nintendo leans heavily on art direction.

In saying that, I am hoping the next chip is more cutting edge, I like things to be pushed, we get more hardware for our coin, better looking games, smoother experiences... It's a massive win for all consumers.

But I agree. The next device doesn't need to match the Xbox Series X and Playstation 5... That is simply not happening in a handheld at that time frame.