I completely agree.  A major AAA title will look and run better on the PC/ps5 compared to the switch 2.  And I would rather see triangle strategy 2 over a FF16 port.  

The point I'm trying to illustrate is people are super hyped about all these ps5/Xbox ports....ports.....  not sure how it will work on the switch 2 given storage limitations.

Cartridges will be a significant increase to CoGs compared to disks and digital.  And as pointed out before standard read speeds are not fast enough, so those cartridges are going to see an additional increase to CoGs to the high speed versions.

The cost of the cards is what worries me and track record of 3rd parties. I want to play sports games on the go, however I do not want a meaningless physical copy that needs 85% download. Even just dance that would be cool for the kids, but again the shop said download code only lol.

One would hope that the performance of Switch may sway more publishers t want to release game son Nintendo again i.e. more AAA games on the system but that is being optimistic based on how well the Switch did (or wishful thinking I guess if history has anything to do with it lol). Personally i would love to see some of the Rare franchises that Microsoft owns end up on he next Switch, and perhaps with COD coming under the new deal hey may be more willing to jsut get software revenue then rely on hardware sales. 

"PS5 visuals" feels a whole lot like "PS4 visuals on steroids".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M_bxKfITrdg

A small sample of comments on Spider-Man 2, this year's "big" PS5 exclusive release:

"Not quite the generational leap we were expecting."

"Graphics are not the huge improvement there, but level of detail and gameplay is."

"I definitely hope there’s a lot of last minute polishing because honesty it felt like not much of a step up over MM on PS5 and that does look fantastic but I honestly expected more from a game no longer being held back by being designed for PS4."

"The improvement is minimal in graphics , gameplay and camera movements are significantly amped up though"

"no no no. It can't be. Looks like ps4 game"

"Graphically this is barely an update from the remastered version. Insomniacs last game looks way better than this graphically but its not open world like this. Either way this game is gonna be friggin awesome."

"The graphical jump is not big, but I dunno what it will take now for graphics to be considered a big jump"

"Not too much of an upgrade graphically imo. Was hoping for more. Should still be a great game tho."

And there's a lot more of that sentiment. Devs are just either hitting up against a wall of taking graphics up a real huge notch or they don't want to because the cost of doing so is astronomical or because diminishing returns is kicking in hard. Either way, it's a win for Nintendo. 

Switch 2 was always going to have better 3rd party support than the Switch 1 because 3rd parties know it's a big success (Wii U and 3DS did too to start with frankly, they just then proceeded to sell much less than their predacessor which put a ki-bosh on their support, 3DS was alright I guess).

I would look for Madden NFL to return, mainline Final Fantasy games, Elden Ring, Monster Hunter World 2, Street Fighter VI, Call of Duty to arrive on Switch 2, just as Switch brought many IPs hadn't been on Nintendo platforms before or for the first time in a long time like Elder Scrolls, Witcher III, mainline Mortal Kombat, Diablo III, Overwatch, Persona, DOOM, Fortnite, Wolfenstein, Red Dead Redemption, Civilization, Nier Automata, Alien: Isolation, BioShock, Portal, FIFA/FC with FrostBite engine, first Dragon Quest with console tier graphics on a Nintendo system that wasn't an online only game in a long  time. 

It's more incumbent on Nintendo proving the Switch 2 will be a 100+ million unit seller. If they do and they have a reasonably solid piece of hardware with good internal flash storage, they're going to get a ton of 3rd party support. I also think Switch 2 will handle PS5 ports better than the Switch does PS4 ports. The above situation is part of that (PS5/XSX games not really looking like a big generational leap to begin with) and Nvidia really upping their game on the feature set side with things like DLSS and RTX ray tracing helps Nintendo a lot. 

I wholly don't understand the ps5 looks like ps4 argument. Rift crushes R&C graphically. The textures, lighting, sharpness and performance is a massive upgrade. Same with Demon vs Souls 3.  Shadows, textures, etc.  Makes me wonder what kind of panel quality folks are using.  I do think panel quality is a bottleneck with high end hardware.

Personally I thought ps4 to ps5 was a bigger jump than ps3 to ps4. To each their own.

I would prefer a long battery life over grfxx-bling-bling and ginormous screen sizes any day of the week. I want a Nintendo console to play Nintendo games, and those are top notch no matter how weak the hardware may be. I have no doubt that this will stay that way in the future. I don't give a flying flamingo about 3rd party games on Nintendo. If I want to play those, I have my PC and PS5 for that.

Power doesn't matter for a Nintendo console and I really hope that they go once again for a efficient setup rather than some Steam Deck clone with a whiny little fan and a battery that dies after 50 minutes when pushed to the limit. Don't get me wrong, I love my Steam Deck. But it's not what I'm expecting from a Nintendo console.

It might look better than the previous Ratchet game sure, but I don't think anyone was using the previous Ratchet game on the PS4 as the measuring stick for PS4 top end visuals. 

Miles Morales PS4, God of War PS4, Horizon Forbidden West PS4, The Last of Us Part II, Final Fantasy VII Remake, Cyberpunk 2077, Elden Ring, etc. etc. are the games people want to see topped and there's nothing really close to being something that looks like a full blown huge generational leap past those games. 

Something like Soul Calibur on the Dreamcast totally blew away anything on the N64 in the Dreamcast was only 2 years newer than the N64. The generation leaps of today (especially considering this is what you get for hardware 7 years apart) is underwhelming. 

This is more like a PS2 getting a game, and the XBox (the first one) getting a port of the same game with better graphics, but no one ever considered those systems to be in like a different generation back then. Generational leaps aren't what they used to be. 

And the thing is it's not even like there's anything in development that is miles better looking in development. Maybe GTA6 will be it because they should have the biggest budget in the history of gaming, but other developers, even big ones, can't just compete with that without it having serious financial consequences. Making games for $150, $200 million is getting into an insane level of budget, and when you are at that budget you're looking at sky high development time too. 5 years is soon going to become a short dev cycle for some of these kinds of games, which is insanity.

My suggestion is to play Rift.  It isn't cross gen and was designed for the ps5 and shows.

Cross generation games were performance boost and spider man 2 is likely using an old system to speed up development.

Demon also showcases the ps5 power.  The lighting is amazing. 

It is my opinion you are under selling the ps5 improvements.  On a 55 inch OLED the textures, lighting and shadows are glaring improvements.

Because they refuse to learn from history. (And even go as far as quoting Youtube comments from average gamers in an attempt to prove a point. See above.)

Current PS5 games may not look all that amazing, but it's par for the course on PS consoles that the generational leap takes time to be realized and that this is taking longer with each passing generation due to the ever-increasing development times. It doesn't matter how the games of today and the past two years looked like, because it will be about how they look at the time Switch 2 launches and that's still a year away. The launch of Switch 2 will coincide with the timeframe of PS5 games finally looking like PS5 games instead of mostly being prettier PS4 games.

The default stance of a lot of third parties happens to be that the Nintendo system will fail, so Switch's success doesn't provide much of a default advantage for initial third party support on Switch 2. What will play a bigger role is PS's failure in Japan, meaning that small and mid-sized Japanese third parties have no choice but to support Switch 2; even then, it's more realistic to expect that they'll rather take a wait and see approach while putting out games for the original Switch until at least through 2026, many of which will be cross-gen and as such not really an argument to buy Switch 2 hardware.

I hope Nintendo does not take success for granted. Their own preparation should include a year 1 first party lineup that rivals Switch, because relying on third party support to lift the boat is extremely risky.

I have played it. It certainly looks better than the previous RC game, but it isn't like an earth shattering generation leap. 

The current PS4-PS5 leap reminds me a lot of getting a launch day GameCube (US) and XBox, and seeing Star Wars: Rogue Squadron II and Halo for the first time. 

They definitely looked a definite notch better than anything on the PS2 debatably, certainly way better than the PS2 launch games from a year prior, but it also wasn't like "well your PS2 is now obsolete" either. 

We will have to agree to disagree.  Rift at 60 fps in 120 hz was a sight to behold.  The lighting and textures with that level of performance was amazing.

I don't believe games are ever made obsolete.  I'm playing Grandia 2 on the DC now and it is still a great game.  

I love my ps5.  Playing RE4 with that level of detail and lighting while maintaining 60 fps was superb.  

I've never had to loom for improvements, they are glaringly obvious.