There are other factors to consider though. 

They have to build a userbase for Switch 2/Super Switch/whatever sooner than later. 

No two ways around that. 

The next 3D Mario, Mario Kart, Smash Bros., Animal Crossing, Splatoon, etc. etc. are likely all ear marked for the Switch successor. You want that system to rip its way to 20 million as fast as possible for multiple reasons. One you want to amass a large userbase as fast as possible to prevent any kind of question marks about being able to succeed the current Switch (which is I guarantee the no.1 thing Nintendo is currently preoccupied with internally, not late-stage Switch stuff, Switch is basically done at this point as far as what Nintendo needs to do for it). 

Secondly you want the userbase to be large so that those games have a large install base to sell to.

Scenario 1 (Switch 2 launch in October 2024) by end of 2025:

Switch 1: 144 million install base, Switch 2: 20 million install base

Scenario 2 (Switch 2 launch in September 2025) by end of 2025:

Switch 1: 150 million install base, Switch 2: 7 million install base

Scenario 1 is actually a lot better for Nintendo. The Switch still having positive brand momentum can help the Switch 2, strike while the iron is hot and get those people who would buy a Switch OLED to buy a Switch 2 instead. You'll have them locked in for the next 6+ years to buy Switch 2 software on top of being able to still sell them Switch 1 software. Sony basically did this too, they kinda just took the PS4 option off the table and forced people to essentially buy the PS5. 

Your argument here doesn't give any real ground to why it should release sooner other than that's what you think they should do, Switch isn't done as far as Nintendo is concerned hence why they're still releasing games on it. Your scenario examples ignore the fact that a platform's run is a marathon not some sprint it'll still get to the 20m mark and beyond because a monopoly is leveraged on the platform they effectively already have a userbase built in the Switch itself this is why they're not rushing, many people here predicted a Pro or successor was going to be out by now due to ignoring this factor and it's the main factor here because it gives them a safety net, Switch maybe a hybrid but they're approaching it more like how they handled their portables which had longer phase out periods due to how dominant they were and this is going to continue with Switch.

Portable markets are more accustomed to platforms having longer runs until the next one arrives I think some of you are still looking at Switch in the same lens as a traditional home console where such views are more suited due to the more competitive ecosystem, Switch operates in both markets yes and offers home console level of gaming but business wise is being handled more in the context of the market it and its platform holder are far more dominant in as when you look at the portable market this falls more in line with its predecessors on that side of the market.

You're looking at it through the lens of counting systems, not really from Nintendo's POV. 

Nintendo can make Switch games for another 10 years if they want, that doesn't have to impact Switch 2 at all. 

Switch 2 IS (or will be) a Switch 1 also, I think that's one distinction people here don't get, you guys are still caught up in hardware as it existed 15-20 years ago rather than what it's become today. 

Same way Sony didn't give a crap about pulling the plug on the PS4 even though really they could have sold that system for another 5 years easily. 

From Sony's POV Playstation 5 IS a PS4 ... and PS5 together. Because of the way backwards compatibility is digital today and digital libraries just carry forward, they don't view it as a seperate line in the sand, and I think it will be the same for Nintendo. 

I think for Nintendo, once they can get mass production of Switch 2 up and have adequate enough software titles ready to release (which seems like it could be next year), then they'll release the Switch 2 then and on that basis mainly. That's the determining factor for releasing it, Switch 1 they've already done all the base line work they're required to do, no one can seriously complain at this point Nintendo hasn't given the Switch enough software or gave it too short of a product cycle. There's just no basis in reality for an argument like that. 

There's a fundamental misunderstanding here that if you launch a new piece of hardware and if a person buys that system that it's bad for the older system, because they've bought the new system instead of the older one, but I think if you believe this you have the whole equation ass backwards. It's *better* for Sony and Nintendo when this happens, they are effectively adding someone who can purchase games from the existing ecosystem (Switch 1) but are also locked in now for the next 6-7 years with all the future software they hope to sell. That's nothing but a win for Nintendo or Sony (ie: getting the person who went to the store looking for a Switch OLED or PS4, but walking out spending a bit more to get a Switch 2 or PS5 instead). 

The Switch 2 also by necessity needs to basically have all the future high profile software pipeline going forward. The longer you delay it, the longer you push franchises like 3D Mario, Mario Kart, Smash, Animal Crossing, Splatoon, etc. etc. etc. likely getting their next franchise installments. The sooner it comes, the sooner it can get some of those games out and build a userbase suitable enough for other games on that list (Smash, Animal Crossing, you probably want the userbase to be north of 20-30 million before these next installments ship). 

The new 3D Mario will be the game that ships with the Switch sucessor.

That's what I was saying. The longer they wait, the bigger the trough at the transition between the two systems.

Nintendo is a publicly-traded for-profit corporation. They're not in this for bragging rights. They're in this to maximize profits. Sure, Nintendo could keep stretching things out to squeeze as much as humanly possible out of the Switch, and I'm sure some people that aren't Nintendo shareholders would like to see them do just that. If they did wait until 2025, the Switch could possibly hit the 160M mark, which, even if it falls a bit short of that, would still set a new record a lot of fans were hoping for. But it'd be a bad business move to wait any longer than necessary. A notable user over on IB said "Nintendo's business cycle necessitates a 2024 Switch 2 launch. Switch had a good run, but its sales are now declining sufficiently enough that it can no longer be relied upon to maintain growth moving forward."

I'm inclined to agree. Sure, the Switch's maximum possible lifetime sales will be diminished by a 2024 release, but that comes with the benefit of keeping total sales high. Current projections have Switch hardware at 15M for the current fiscal year, a 48% decline from the Switch's peak year of 2020, while software is projected to be 180M units, a 23.4% decline from the 2021 peak. The longer Nintendo waits, the worse it's going to get. If Nintendo holds back on the Switch 2 until well into 2025 and the Switch drops to, say, 12M next fiscal year, that would make it the fifth-worst year for hardware shipments in the past 30 years. Sure, the Switch would have a higher lifetime total as a result, but I imagine the people who actually have money on the line care less about whether the Switch sells "only" 150M or potentially hits a record-setting 160M lifetime and more about keeping their yearly revenue numbers high.

2024 would be the most opportune time to release the Switch 2. Even with the typical post-replacement drop for a Nintendo system, if the Switch 2 has sales comparable to the Switch's (a reasonable prediction, assuming the same form factor, a reasonable price, good marketing, and enough stock to meet demand) and it does around 16-17M in FY2024-25, total hardware shipments will still end up at well over 20M, far better than the 12M units if they waited until 2025. They should continue with that momentum for the next several years as the Switch 2 matures and reaches the prime.

If the Switch 2 is ready to go next year, then Nintendo is going to release it. They have nothing to gain financially by waiting longer, and could lose billions in potential revenue if they do wait. Those billions are worth a lot more than ensuring the Switch sells as much as possible. Sure, those losses might be incurred in only one fiscal year, but what company is going to take a big hit to their revenues in even one year if they don't have to?

Those Oracle of Ages/Seasons remakes aren't gonna make themselves ! 

I think the other thing people don't get especially with modern platforms is "consumer who buys the next-gen version of console instead of older version =/= a lost sale". 

Some people may not like it, but I'm pretty sure if they could have, Nintendo gladly would've traded 15-20 million off the DS userbase to give to the 3DS (so DS with 135 million LTD, 3DS finishing with 95 million LTD and in particular having more users early in the product cycle). 

That's not a net loss for Nintendo business wise. 

I think Sony is basically doing exactly this with the PS4/PS5 transition ... they are basically forcing late gen PS4 buyers to have to adopt the PS5, which can function as a PS4 also. But they still are leveraging the PS4's 120 million userbase with cross-gen titles, so basically they are having their cake and eating it too. They're not abandoning the PS4's install base (well at least through the first two years of the PS5's life cycle) *for software*, but they're also not so subtly pushing anyone who wants in on the Playstation *hardware* ecosystem to have to buy a PS5 by basically stopping PS4 production. 

Ultimately I think that strategy is smart. The PS5 really hasn't had the greatest library of exclusives at all early on and has had availability problems too, but Sony has sold basically every unit they can make, I think in part that is due to the PS5 basically being the only system they will ship in large quantities and refusing to do the whole "well lets cut the PS4 price and let budget shoppers buy that one and let it hang around". 

The other reason this can work now I think is because the whole "budget console" concept seems to have gone in the crapper. Sony refusing to drop the PS4 below $300 and having a $400 PS4 Pro meant the consumer for it could still be in play for a PS5. Nintendo refusing to drop the price of the Switch and even increasing the price for the OLED model at $350 means they probably could very easily entice a lot of those consumers who are willing to pay $350 for a Switch OLED to buy a Switch 2 at $399.99 instead ... why not, $50 more for a generational leap, I'm sure lots of people will gladly take that. It would be different if the Switch was like $199.99 or less and they were trying to convince that consumer to spend double that for a new system. That's a big difference with how hardware is sold today from previous console generations. Shifting people who were willing to pay $400 for a PS4 Pro or $350 for a Switch OLED into being early adopters for the next product cycle instead is entirely feasible. Even $300 ... if you're willing to drop that much for hardware this late in the product cycle, odds are you can be convinced to spend more to get the next-gen system instead because at $300 you're not really a budget shopper to begin with. 

I am looking at it from Nintendo's POV especially as what I'm pointing out is how Nintendo operated when they were in that situation before for one Sony had to pull the plug on PS4 because they have actual competition otherwise the PS4 would have continued for longer as is clear from how it was still receiving games as recently as holiday last year from Sony, Sony have to contend with MS so whether they like it or not they have to react and make a move as they're on a far more strict timer than Nintendo the two situations aren't comparable as the latter have an entire market to themselves. You've not at all counter my point on that and the reason for it is straight forward in that the is no actual counter right now to it as is highlighted ironically by you bringing up the PS4 that falls into my other point PS4 is a traditional home console and as a result is in a competitive ecosystem something Switch isn't highlighting that you're still trying to apply traditional home console situations to the latter.

The fundamental misunderstanding is therefore on your part as what applies to the PS4 doesn't really apply to the Switch as its market dynamics are far different, Nintendo have done the same with the Switch as the have with prior portables only difference is that Switch has a home console mode which is what's throwing people off in regards to why a successor isn't out by now. Portable markets have often had longer waits and this has never really impacted their transitions because no other viable competitor is in the space, this leverage alone gives Nintendo more time to smooth out the next platform and plans it's not just numbers like you think it's also part of business to take advantage of it.

Explain how a person buying a Switch 2 instead of a Switch OLED next year (if available) is a problem for Nintendo. 

Like what exactly is the problem there that Nintendo would want to avoid? Not only is it not a problem, it's entirely desirable for Nintendo to want this scenario.

The Game Boy product cycle also was never supposed to be that long, I wish people would stop citing that when they clearly don't understand the history of it. Nintendo was done with the Game Boy by 1995 and trying to kill it off for a successor because its sales had fallen off, the only reason that didn't happen is because the company developing the successor (Project: Atlantis) ran into problems with the hardware they were designing and weren't able to meet the battery/size requirements they had promised to Nintendo. 

The GBA they up-ended after 3 years on the market. 

The DS got 7 years before a successor, the 3DS got 6 years. But none of that really even matters, Nintendo operates clearly in a different way, there's never been a Nintendo system where the lead SKU this late in the product cycle is $350. That means they likely have a very good opportunity to simply transition those buyers straight into Switch 2 for $399.99 (as an example) if they want to strike while the iron is hot. The Game Boy and DS/3DS were frankly budget products by the end of their product cycle, the Switch is not. 

The Switch is due for a new product model eventually anyway in 2024, I think the next Switch model will basically just cover both bases. Want a "Switch Pro" ... well Super Switch/Switch 2 (whatever they call it) will be that. Want a Switch successor? Super Switch/Switch 2 will also be that. Nintendo wins either way. 

Stop with the fallacy as it was never said to be a problem at any point it's being highlighted that it's breathing space they can take full advantage of, guess what they learned with the GB? That a monopoly gives you breathing like here which you can make use of and to further highlight this a successor wouldn't have arrived until 96/97 which is 7 to 8 years after the GB release so even then it still fits this scenario fine as Switch is 7 to 8 years in now in the end the GBC model came out in 98 which is 9 years after the GB released so what ever their plans were is irrelevant as the actual situation and what they learned to do with it in future. Your notion that it's being suggested as a problem is incorrect it's being highlighted that they're in a position to utilize the safety net they have.

You know why the GBA the one platform with the highest momentum only got 3 years and this highlights my entire point here? The PSP was coming as in actual hard competition was on the way which forced Nintendo's hand such competition doesn't exist right now in that market this is why the mythical pro model that was meant to release two years ago according to some from back then still doesn't exist and why a successor still isn't out despite the predictions of one arriving by now because the is no massive pressure, 3DS is the odd case out because it was replaced by default of it's home console counterpart failing the platform itself had a run of 9 years with games released even 8 years in.