Powerful enough to develop for it in mind... no. Popular enough to port downgraded games to it... yes.
Nintendo focusing on power stopped long time ago, when they realized they cant get into direct blows with Microsoft and Sony.

Powerful enough for probably 70 to 75 percent of the games in the first few years.

After that, it'll be like the Switch (which isnt a problem since a lot of the games are coming out still on Switch).

They could also port last gen games to Switch 2 that couldnt be released on Switch 1 for whatever reason.

I'm hoping that Kingdom Hearts series becomes playable without streaming on Switch 2.

It depends on the game really.

The big AAA blockbusters that shoot for maximum graphical fidelity will still be made for PS/Xbox, (and sometimes downported to Switch 2) but a lot of indie and AA games, particularly from Japanese devs, will probably be built with Switch 2 in mind.

It's baseline should be high enough that it doesn't overly restrict the kind of games made by smaller devs, while many of them won't have the resources necessary to build graphics beyond Switch 2's capabilities.

Nintendo games are the top games, so yeah

Again. It is irrelevant as there is more to memory bandwidth/throughput than just the black and white transfer rates of the memory bus itself... I already elaborated on this prior so I don't see the need to touch upon it again.

Well. Sony and Microsoft don't design the chips in their consoles. AMD does.
Nintendo has access to that same avenue if it did decide it wanted to "trade blows" with Microsoft and Sony on the hardware front, they all have access to identical technology.

The real limiting factor actually comes down to money.

Nintendo doesn't really like to subsidize it's hardware if it doesn't need to.. And as an entire entity, has much lower quarterly revenues compared to Microsoft and Sony who have other large business ventures in other markets so it's a bit of a risk to do it anyway.

I'm more than happy for you to drop the derailment you started.  Power matters for ports.  Memory bandwidth is the switch 2's biggest bottleneck with ease, hence it flatly 100% matters in this discussion.  

But glad to hear you are dropping it. 

I think this is a very fair and accurate take.  

Yup. Like I mentioned earlier, third parties mostly supported the Switch as if it was a Nintendo handheld, and I think Switch 2 will be no different in that regard.

I hope GTA VI gets ported to Switch 2 in 2026.

Nothing is being derailed, stop with that blatant lie.
The thread is about whether the Switch 2 will be powerful enough to garner ports.

Again, I have already outlined prior why the Switch 2's lower memory bandwidth will be irrelevant to garner ports.

But even if we excuse that potential scenario... We do NOT know what the Switch 2.0's memory bandwidth or hardware capabilities even are, so to blatantly assert it's going to be inferior in any aspect is thus redundant.
The correct answer is... "We don't know".

The fact that 3rd parties supported the original Switch console with a measly 25GB/s of memory bandwidth verses the Playstation 4's 176GB/s or the Xbox One X 325GB/s of bandwidth, it did really well all things considered.

Because again... And I keep repeating this, there is more to hardware than just the black and white numbers you cling to.