Nintendo has competed with “superior” handhelds since Gameboy and they never had any meaningful impact.

Atari Lynx (1989)

Game Gear (1990)

TurboExpress (1990)

Sega Nomad (1995)

Game.com (1997)

NeoGeo Pocket (1998)

WonderSwan (1999)

N-Gage (2003)

Tapwave Zodiac (2003)

PlayStation Portable (2004)

Gizmondo (2005)

PlayStation Vita (2011)

Nvidia Shield (2013)

GPD Win (2016)

Not only did none of them hurt Nintendo, with the exception of PSP, none of them were even successful and I don’t see Steam Deck, Rog Ally, Legion Go breaking that trend.

I don't think so, but I guess it's too early to say for sure? I mean, we don't know even the name of the thing yet. Or when it's launching. Or the price. Or what games are coming for it and when they are coming. I'm going to say no because 140m+ is difficult to top but eh, who knows.

Can't really form an opinion until the reveal.

No way. Switch was the first hybrid, and launched with a game that blew the industry away. I don't see how next gen they would generate that sort of buzz as the thing everyone needs to own. Also Covid helped boost sales for a couple years as well.

Now of course Nintendo could have sold a lot more Switch's if they'd pushed it more aggressively like with price cuts and more models (a cheap Home model for example), and price cuts on games, but they went for the selling 150m systems without a price cut strategy, which is a truly astounding feat.

So next gen Nintendo COULD be a lot more aggressive to try to keep up closer to Switch sales, but let's be honest they aren't gonna do that.

I'd say as long as they do the basics, ie. don't really screw up like price it at over $400, or tack on and try to push some useless unnecessary gimmick (think 3DS, WiiU), and as long as its backwards compatible, and they keep pushing the bounds of plenty of their IP, then it will probably still sell like 110m.

At this point their goal should be to emulate playstation sales. They have a very popular game system design now (hybrid play), they need to keep consistent with that, barring any revolutionary advances in ways to play games the next few decades, and just keep putting out better more refined versions of that while pushing their IP and always keeping everything affordable. They do that and they can be like Playstation after the PS2 (which was of course Playstation's huge 150m+ selling system), after which they've done 86m, 117m, and looking like probably another ~120m this gen. Which is to say, consistently easily over 100m and even when you really screw up you still sell over 80m. That's what Nintendo needs to try to do. Stay consistent with system design, consistent with great games that push gaming and try out new game experiences, and consistent with 100m+ sellers.

The Switch was the first.... and it stood out, the 2nd wont as much (if its just more powerfull hardware, which is all it needs imo).
It could, nothing is impossible, but its a tough ask.

Still it should be another 100% chance of doing 100m+ console sales, for the Switch 2.
If it plays its cards right, with price/avaliablity... and game library... its going to be another sales monsters.

The appeal of a 2 in 1, device is high.
Its a good strategy. I hope nintendo sticks with it, and does a easy name for the next console.
Dont f*** around with name/brand (dont do another wii->wiiU, situation).
Just name it the Switch 2.

Keep it simple, aim for high investment into bang-4-buck, in terms of hardware performance compaired to the last gen switch.
It should be a guaranteed success.

The only way this flops, is if nintendo does something wildly unnessary, which massively inflates its price.
Does a stupid name pick, and then when sales dont go well, abandon all marketing, like with the Wii U.

Nintendo cant be that dumb, its done something like that once before.... and that should be enough to learn from it.

So I dont expect the Switch 2 to automatically beat the first one.
However if they can just retain, like 95% of its current users, that would be fine too right?
Another console from them, that eventually ends up at like 150m.... Nintendo would be happy.

I'm actually of the opinion that an eventual successor to the Switch could probably outpace it's predecessor first three years on the market due to the software library and the momentum coming from an excellent generation.

Still, for the love of the universe, don't do the PlayStation bland strategy of naming it after a number. Just name it the Super Nintendo Switch and will be alright with it !

No way. I feel like there is a lot more ways to play nowadays and it takes a PERFECT run to get to where the Switch is right now. It hit so many targets right. It had the new factor of the system, i would say a lot of people discovered some Nintendo franchise for the first time. The successor will all be about pushing the limit of what they did with the Switch but i can't imagine they can sell more with a higher price point during a recession and with less of a "new" factor.

I still think they could manage a 110-120 millions lifetime with similar highs of the Wii bc of the Switch brand being so strong but without fading so quickly. 

It all comes down to games... I suspect that there'll be a very long period where games are on both Switch 1 and Switch 2.

So, it'll work out more like the OLED Switch vs original Switch. People won't upgrade until there is a reason.

Exactly. Nintendo needs to keep kookiness and gimmicks to optional control schemes and their software, not forced like it often has been.

N64 and GCN were up to par in specs but held back by bizarre game mediums (Cartridges, miniDVDs) that focused on anti-piracy measures instead of storage or being dev-friendly. 

Wii was a home-run, to say the least. But it is annoying that there isn't more GameCube and Classic Controller support. 

3DS had enjoyable 3D that you could slide around, but it never reached its full potential. Midway through the 3DS's life, some major software didn't even support 3D anymore. 

The Wii U forced the tablet to even setup the console, and some games required it. Quite simply, it scared most devs and publishers and added to the cost of Wii U.

Switch thankfully only has a small number of games that force you to use the JoyCons. 

Statistically, history would say no, since most of the time, the "winner" becomes the "loser" the gen following their "win". But who knows? It has happened.