That doesn't make any sense? People will upgrade to play new games. They won't release games for the Switch forever, and when the next Zelda, Mario Kart, Animal Crossing, 3D Mario, and other games release only on the successor then people will upgrade

I mean, people did upgrade to the PS5, and there's still lots of games still releasing on the PS4 to this day. If they don't do some Wii U levels of fuck up a iterative Switch 2 can still easily sell 100m+ imo.

They have to treat fan right?  Lol, this is Nintendo.  I love their software but they aren't exactly consumer friendly.

VC games didn't carry over from the Wii U, Switch hasn't had a price cut since launch, straight up ports of Wii U games at full price, rarely drops the price of their games.  

Nintendo isn't consumer friendly.  I would argue they are pretty anti consumer as a whole.  I think, could be wrong, you still can't post videos of their games on YouTube without permission. 

With all of Nintendo's resources and software output now focused on a single device, which will almost certainly be portable, the chances of another Wii U disaster are minimal.

Even if they shoot themselves in the foot again, it's much more likely to be another 3DS; they sell around half of the current Switch, but still enough to turn a healthy profit and keep themselves relevant until they can regroup and try again with the next one.

Yes. But at a lower resolution.

Tegra has come a long way and nVidia's GPU technology is far more advanced than AMD's, especially in regards to efficiency.
Where AMD has some key notable advantages is actually on the CPU side of the equation.

In saying that... It would not come cheap, you will need a bigger battery to drive the TDP and other costs will blow out.

The real question is... Can it be done affordably? The answer to that is a no...
But Nintendo doesn't have to, cutting back on resolution will significantly reduce those demands.

I have provided evidence, you haven't.
So this discussion is entirely in my favor. You don't have a leg to stand on.

No one is claiming anything to the contrary.
The device isn't even out yet, making any such comparisons useless anyway.

The fact is... Mobile handhelds with a less efficient Radeon GPU and 100GB/s of bandwidth are playing Playstation 5 games.
You do need to come to terms with that, because it's reality... And it's something to be excited about.

Anything is possible.

But Nintendo had the opportunity to present the Switch in more form factors and sell more hardware units but didn't.

...I still want my Switch TV... No dock, no display, no joycons, no battery... Just a simple and small device that can play Switch games.

So there are some extra opportunities available, should be interesting to see how it all plays out.

It will never get *all* or even *most*.

Rockstar couldn't even port GTA5 despite it being a 7th gen game ported to 8th gen and 9th gen consoles... The Switch is capable of running it and has a massive audience to sell games to.
...But for whatever reason, they never made it happen.

There is more to porting than just games or the size of a userbase... Company politics plays a big role as well.

Lol, nothing is in your favor.  You view is from random people on the internet.  My view is from hundreds of hours over dozens and dozens games.  Tough luck for you.  Sorry, I will always stick with my hands experience with playing switch, ps4, ps5, xbox, 3050, 4070 and 4090.      

I don't suspect in 3-5 years my 3050 is going to run AAA third party.  100 gb/s being enough today isn't on topic to my point.  I am questioning if it will be enough 5 years from now.  Time will tell, but games (IMO) are only going to get more demanding.  I do think you are blatantly missing my point.  I am questioning what 100 gb/s will be like for MGS6 and RE10/11.  I'm not worried about today, I am worried about further into life cycle.    

I also think it is funny how you changed your position.  In one of the other S2 threads you posted concern about the S2 being future proof with third party via the rumored 12 gb...  but yet have done a 180 and think it is impossible that is struggles halfway through life cycle.  I agree with your original position.  I think 12 gb at 112 gb/s, 5 years from now, will be a difficult position.  Some developers will put in the efforts, other won't.  That is ALL I am saying.  And the big news flash, I am not wrong with my concerns. 

Hopefully this clarifies and lays this stupid conversation to rest.  But somehow I don't think it will.  Clearly you can't handle someone disagreeing with you.    

Has the publisher or a developer come out and said that Rockstar couldn't get GTA5 to work on the Switch? You say that, then in the same post say that company politics play a big role as well.

As far as I know, Rockstar has never addressed why GTA5 isn't on Switch. We can't automatically blame that on the hardware, especially when the game could be ported up from older hardware.

OP did mention "top games" in the title. While this is vague, it is clear they were implying AAA or bigger AA titles from the initial post.

There is a point in which the profit-incentive dominates "company politics." If the projected sales (and profit) potential exceeds that point, then it becomes the dominant factor. Besides, Nintendo of 2024 is a very different company from say Nintendo of 2004, and certainly a different company than Nintendo of 1994 in terms of their willingness to work with third parties and share their platform with them. 

I would expect many, or even most, japanese third party games to get Switch 2 ports. Western games less so, but if the publisher is willing to put in the effort, I reckon it would be easier to do ports than any time since the Gamecube.

What's with the sudden doom & gloom from some peeps ? Are we running again with the "historical repetition points to Nintendo f*ing up again" without understanding why the reasons of those failures to begin with ?

Like someone said, the actual worse case scenario for an ITERATIVE successor of the Switch, would be a result similar to the 3DS which arguably began its run on the worst foot with it's price and the software drought at the beginning and ended up in a fair position with 75M+ sales.

But Nintendo aren't stupid to repeat mistakes like these once they face them once and have already acknowledged those in their recent interviews.

Anywoo, like the Switch, I imagine it won't be set to receive all the possible third party games (western ones mostly) but I imagine it will be less complicated to actually have most of them without any trouble of Frankenstein-ing a version from scrap which will definitely allievate the cost-opportunity in any case.