Your kids are anecdotal, they aren't everyone.
Many have complained, documented and recognized the issues Pokemon Scarlet and Violet have showcased... The fact you are happy to excuse them because "sales are good" is disingenuous to that end.

Even Nintendo itself has recognized it is full of issues... And I quote:
"We are aware that players may encounter issues that affect the games’ performance. Our goal is always to give players a positive experience with our games, and we apologize for the inconvenience. We take the feedback from players seriously and are working on improvements to the games."

So if Nintendo recognizes it, why can't you?

Digital Foundry have empirically demonstrated the issues, as noted in the video I posted prior.
Many gaming circles, even Pro-Nintendo sites have also documented the issues like:
https://www.nintendolife.com/news/2022/11/pokemon-fans-vent-frustrations-online-about-scarlet-and-violets-technical-issues

*********

Besides, Cyberpunk sold 20+ million copies. That game was also a technical clusterfuck, just like Pokemon Scarlet/Violet. - But by your logic the game would be a perfect AAA title because it sold 20 million copies?

In the end, most of Cyberpunk's issues were pretty minimal once you played it on more powerful hardware... Ironically, the same situation Pokemon Scarlet/Violet finds itself in, where it's a far better experience on an overclocked Switch or emulated on PC.

Those are the real facts.

I can't keep going around with you, especially since you are moving goalposts.  Thus this will be my last post.  

"Pokémon is 25 to 30 fps"

"Pokémon is a technical mess and is unplayable"

The first statement is a fact.  The second is an opnion.  Here is the reality, you posted a bunch of opinions, got called out on it and have done nothing but move goalposts.  It would be better to admit your "need" comment was incorrect.  It wasn't a need, but a want.  The switch absolutely 100% does not "need" a pro model.  You simply want one.  

Feel free to have the last word.

At this point I would definitely prefer a next gen system in the next year or so to an incremental upgrade this year. I’m excited to see what Nintendo has in store for us and a Pro model would guarantee to just be a bit faster and maybe 4K. That’s a pretty meh thing to get hyped for. If it had released in 2020 or 2021 I would feel differently.

I completely buy the idea that they had a Switch pro in the pipe, and then somewhere during development they came to the conclusion that the Switch was already selling so well and the parts shortages were enough of a hassle that there was no point to trying to launch a new product when the old one was doing just fine

The average gamer cares for performance, but the Pokemon players are not the average game, they are Pokemon fans

It's a game that sold more than 15 million copies in EVERY entry regardless of the platform it was released. It's clear a game that have a subculture of fans that will buy it no matter in whatever poor state the game is. As long the gamr can run without crashing all time Pokemon fans are going to enjoy it

They are just too passionate about the BRAND. Focus on the keyword here: The brand. Does it have Pikachu in the cover? They will like it

What goal posts have been moved? The game is a mess. Those are the objective facts... And a lot of those issues would be resolved with superior hardware as overclocked Switch consoles have factually proven.



Pokemon between 25-30fps is "common". - It spends majority of that time under 30fps whilst traversing the terrain.
And you WILL get dips down to 10-15fps.





Digital Foundry also states that you will get "extended periods of gameplay" where the game runs at only 20fps. - I have Nintendo 64 games that run better.

Skip to: 7 minutes for that specific quote.

***************************

However... Frametime is the other denominator which you have conveniently ignored, which is the time it takes to display a frame... Aka. 100-150ms is not uncommon.
To put that into perspective, 30fps is 33.3ms per frame.

That's right, you can wait upwards of 3-5 equivalent frames for the next frame to get displayed.

And that my dear-watson is how stutters and frame dips become exacerbated, even if you had a solid frame rate.
It makes the gameplay jerky, unresponsive.

*****************************

And to add to that, the games actual animations, be it Pokemon, Character, Objects and more... Is tied to the framerate, so when the framerate drops, the entire world slows down... And some animations are as low as 2fps.

- Add crappy draw distances.
- Poor texturing.
- Terrible Shadowing/Lighting.
- Basic Geometry.

Add the plethora of bugs... Which you can find a short list here encompassing things like falling out of the game world, invisible barriers, lighting glitches, game crashes.
https://wegotthiscovered.com/gaming/list-of-bugs-and-glitches-in-pokemon-scarlet-and-violet/

The game is a technical mess.

IS the game enjoyable? That isn't the point.
Has the game sold well? That also isn't the point. (See Cyberpunk 2077 with 20+ million copies sold.)


********************

I think it is indeed time for you to "leave" this discussion, I have provided plenty of evidence to backup my claims, you have only provided opinions.

I have also played (And returned) the game on my own Switch, so I am not talking out of my ass.

The problems with Pokemon are not in any way based on the hardware perfomance of the Nintendo Switch. The game has a lot of problems because Game Freak is not in any way capable to make a game that meets the demand of the hardware. Game developers who develop a game for multiple console-targets or PC with almost endless combinations of hardware would love to have a single target to optimize their game against to achieve a good result and Game Freak isn't able to achieve even one optimized target. The Pokemon Engine had a lot of problems in previous games…even their first game had a lot of bugs, some of them still known to gamers as MissingNo.

This could be a direct result of a) their software development process being deeply flawed or/and b) the development being underfunded in a big way. I think it is a combination of both flaws and it shows in their games with simple things not fitting together. They could use a texture-library directly from the GameCube which was made to fit in the 40MB Ram that device had, but please for the love of god go with a uniform texel density. They do not even pick the low-hanging-fruits.

If they need better hardware to achieve better games then why is the Switch not the perfect Pokemon console? A bigger generational jump will not happen for a long, long time, if ever. They came from the 3DS and got the Switch. From 128MB Ram to 4096 MB Ram. From a 268Mhz-Dual-Core-Processor to a Quad-Core-Processor with 1000 Mhz. From a fixed-shader-GPU right to Nvidia Cuda Cores. I'm already interested in the ways they fuck up the next hardware with DLSS. If Nintendo could achieve a PS5 in a Switch Case without melting the device and having more than five minutes of battery life tomorrow…Game Freak would find a way to present us with a bad performing highly flawed game and it would still sell ten millions in the first week.

I really want the next Switch Hardware to be here sooner than later, but Pokemon is in no way, shape or form a valid argument. Please stop using it, you are hurting my software developer profesional honor.

That isn't what I am claiming.

I am claiming that the current problems can be resolved with better Switch hardware. - There is a difference.

Well, the Nintendo OLED wasn't needed either. There was no demand for it but Nintendo created demand by advertising it, by making it appealing. That's what companies do, they sell you things you don't need and especially Nintendo has a strategy of not necessarily selling you what you want but selling you what you didn't know you want. Of course this could go into a philosophical discussion about what is really needed in life, aren't most of our problems just luxury first world problems? But then again, we were born in the first world, so we have a right for first world problems... .

On the issues with Pokémon Scarlet/Violet: Obviously, the game had to be out for the holidays season and they didn't have enough time to polish it. I'm sure it would have been a better game if they wouldn't have had a (strict) deadline. But in any case if I look at their past Pokémon games I don't think Game Freak is a very capable developer. I wonder sometimes if it would be better if Nintendo takes the development of Pokémon games in-house. After all, it is their biggest money maker. Nintendo owns 32% of The Pokémon Company (and in turn of Game Freak). It is also known that Nintendo owns 100% of the Pokémon brand. So, Nintendo has quite the saying in this matter.

But I agree with Pemalite, even a lousy programmed game would still run better on better hardware.

I think a better example than Pokémon is Bayonetta 3. Platinum Games took enough time to get the best out of the Nintendo Switch hardware. They aimed for smooth 60 fps but still having appealing graphics and lots of action on screen. It ended in a compromise and surely would be a better game on a Switch Pro (with at the very least more constant 60 fps and higher resolution).

While Bayonetta 3 would have benefitted from stronger hardware, I feel like it's not the most optimized game either; Platinum's game usually have performance issues, all the way back to the original Bayonetta on PS3/360.
With 3 I got the sense they bit off more than they could chew and that it was a trouble production. I think it could have looked and run better than it does on the standard Switch.