Well the rumor is out there that 50 series cards will be getting price drops, as if Nvidia gives much of a shit about 50 series sales anyway. It's maybe 3%-5% of their total company revenue at best, that's nothing to them.

AI server sales are what their company is all about now, AMD wants the same thing. 

If Nvidia doesn't gives a shit about the 50 series sales... why are they forced to price cuts then? Who forces them?

You also wrote that "no one is buying the 50 series GPUs", which is also wrong:

Their gaming revenue of the last 6 months was much higher than in the years before that:

In the Steam survey, the 50 series also grows much faster than the 40 series, the 30 series and the 20 series.

Last but not least: PC gaming didn't "crater after the crypto and COVID lockdown booms":

Historically high-end GPU's like the 5070/5080/5090 class GPU's sold lower volumes than the 5030/5050/5060 class GPU's... That is no longer the case, which likely highlights a substantial volume of GPU's going towards Crypto, A.I and Professional users these days... But overall the volume of GPU's being sold to gamers have largely remained static.

And that is where the higher revenue is coming from, higher average selling prices of more lucrative parts to other users that aren't gaming.

So yes, higher revenues, but same amount of GPU's being sold into the channel.

It also doesn't help that for the "volume users" of PC gaming. I.E. 5030/5050/5060 class users... There really hasn't been a significant need to upgrade in several generations, the Geforce 3060 12GB in some instances when compared against the 5060Ti 8GB in memory demanding scenarios can provide a better experience. (I.E. No degraded texturing etc')

We also can't ignore the fact that nVidia has often sold more GPU's at the expense of AMD and Intel as well.

This; launch window titles rarely show a system at its best due to devs not being super familiar with the hardware yet, tools often being a work in progress, much of development being done on non-final or substitute hardware, deadlines, etc.

Games pretty much always look better over the course of a system's life as devs and their tools improve.

Bloober Team likely got kits earlier than other studios too as they worked directly with Nintendo on Project: M for Switch 1. 

That's probably why that Cronos game looks really polished on Switch 2 and is able to launch day and date with the other versions.

Aside from shifting the goalpost, you're just randomly rambling at this point mate - DF has 1.5 million subscribers, let alone that is part of Eurogamer that has much higher readership...and then on top of that, when DF does their analyses, a lot of other gaming outlets/channels quote them.

I enjoy watching DF myself, but as a channel focused on graphical analysis, they do cater to tech enthusiasts rather than the average joe.

Most people don't care all that much about technical minutiae, if they did the Switch 1 wouldn't be one of the highest selling systems of all time despite being behind the power curve from day 1, and the highest selling games would be stuff like Avatar Frontiers of Pandora or Hellblade II rather than stuff like Roblox, Minecraft, and Mario Kart.

Nintendo has the biggest audience cause they cater to everyone and dominate Japan. Saying most people don't care based on sales doesn't make sense because PS5,xbox and PC is still the biggest audience for gamers by far.

Donkey kong DF review has the second most views only behind IGN review so i would say they are pretty big.

The biggest Audience is mobile. I.E. Android and iOS.
Then the second biggest Audience is PC.
Then... Nintendo who beats out Microsoft and Sony. (But that changes from one generation to the next anyway.)

I'm not sure why Digital Foundry is catching all this heat lol. Everything they said is true

The difference between S1 and 2 is that these Witcher style "impossible ports" will be way more frequent and possible, which is a credit to the system. It's a step closer to being a robust platform for AAA games, doesn't mean the average gamer will prioritise playing these games on Switch 2 when the downgrades are as noticeable as they are in motion... Because Outlaws looked pretty rough in motion. And if we take Witcher 3, its cool that it runs on Switch but I doubt many of you would recommend it as a way to first experience the game unless you had no other options. Of the games 60m units I doubt more than 2m are from Switch.

Identifying the gulf in quality is not digital foundry being out of touch imo. The Outlaws clips look impressive in the sense that they've managed to port it over but its running mostly in the mid 20s like it's an N64 title, cutscenes in the low 20s and is a quite a clear downgrade overall. This isn't a major criticism of S2, it's just a reality which will ensure PS5 remains safe as the primary sales console platform for AAA 3rd party titles. The average audience for this type of title does in fact notice and the S2 version will be sought after by Nintendo/Portable tech enthusiasts and kids. Nothing wrong with that.

It's the AA space and tight scope games (sports/fighting etc) where I think we'll be seeing S2 taking leaps and bounds, potentially eating a lot into Playsations marketshare... And arguably those bracket of games are more common compared to the cutting edge AAA titles like Outlaws.