Switch 2 is a mid shelf product, which is what it should be. Consoles are about value, bang for the buck, etc.

And I have no idea why people are surprised the S2 plays current gen games. Games are scalable. New games still work with GPUs from 2017... of course they run on the S2. If they run well is a personal opinion. Mine is 30 fps can go **** itself and fps by default puts the S2 well below the ps5 version, which is well below the PC versions of games.

Edit

Found one of my comments from 2023....

"Oh yeah, for sure the switch 2 will outclass the steam deck.  No doubt.  And for sure the switch 2 will be able to run modern games, no doubt.  Just not at the fidelity and performance of the ps5.  And most people won't care about the fidelity differences.  So switch 2 will be fine. "

You spent a ton of time saying Switch 2 wouldn't be beyond the base PS4 at all, then over time you gradually had to eat those predictions and modify them later on. At one point I remember you said that there's no way the Switch 2 would be able to even run Final Fantasy VII Remake Intergrade because Intergrade was a PS5 game and that couldn't be possible on the Switch 2 (lol) *let alone* FF7 Rebirth that we now know is confirmed (and Part III also). Pretty sure you would've gone off for ages if I said not only is Integrade going to easily run on Switch 2 but Rebirth and Part III will be on Switch 2 as well. 

If I said that a couple of years ago here I'd be attacked non-stop by a group of posters and I was. 

Then it became no way can the Switch 2 run a game like Ratchet & Clank on PS5, even in its launch window its running a more ambitious game in Star Wars Outlaws *with* ray tracing no less. Switch 2 could run a game like Ratchet & Clank from the PS5, likely with ease. 

You and a few other posters also made a big stink over The Matrix demo running on the Switch 2 story wasting pages and pages of posts about how that couldn't be. Well that looks entirely plausible seeing the final hardware performance today. 

System is more powerful than most people expected because they were hung up on "I'm a Nintendo expert because I know what the Wii and Wii U were". You didn't factor in Nintendo's leadership today is entirely different from even 10 years ago and made a lot of assumptions without looking at facts like that. I said many times the number of CUDA cores (1536) was too high for something that was supposed to be a crap/budget piece of hardware and things like DLSS and being able to program from the ground up would make massive differences and I got attacked for saying that, I was 100% correct on that. 

This is first 3D mainstream video game console that can run pretty much all of the modern gen games, the PSP and Vita (past "high end" portables) could not do that. This is the first Nintendo hardware in some time that outperforms more expensive devices (like $600+ PC handhelds) in some cases ... that is all very notable and frankly I don't care if some people bet their ego against that and now want to downplay it like this is no big deal. Those are significant points. 

Switch 2 hardware tbh by far exceeds what I expected as I expected 2k at most and they blew past that aiming for 4k and 60fps meaning for most games you'd still get parity in fidelity, 30fps in some games is fine for me as every Switch 2 game is also a game I can take on the go or play in table top mode so it's not like the is nothing for this trade off. The games were 60fps matter the most a lot of the time will have it (fighting games, action titles) plus we're having parity right at the start of the platform's life while the other platforms are in their mid to late part of their runs that's a big difference.

Fidelity output isn't much beyond the ps4 pro.  It isn't.  Check out cross gen games.  In terms of resolution and fps, the S2 is much closer to the ps4 pro than the ps5, just like I predicted.  My original prediction years ago was ps4 to ps4 pro.  And ps4 pro is a fair tier.  

The problem is you have never taken the time to understand what people were actually saying.  Remake on the ps5 is 1620p and 60 fps.  Is the S2 getting this?  Nope.  It is getting a port that is striped back in resolution and fps.  All their ports are stripped back, because it is mid tier hardware.  It isnt cheap hardware and it isnt premium either, hence mid tier.  

I always have and always will be in the camp anything can be ported.  Just a matter of sacrifices, like Cyber having a massive reduction in NPCs.

The S2 is a bit stronger than I expected, but it is a ps4 pro with some bells/whistles.  But you foolishly act like it blows the ps4 pro out of the water and it doesn't.  

Now I will concede it is getting more ports than I would have thought, but the S2 is not massively more powerful than most of us predicted.  It is a 900-1080p at 30 fps, which is ps4 tier. 

The people who thought the S2 was going to be a 4k system?  Go ahead and list all the S2 titles (e.g. not S1 ports) that are 4k..  oh wait, there are none.  

For the record ps4 games are still gorgeous.  I'm playing Tsushima on PC, gsme looks great.

I will never understand why ps4 tier is considered an insult.

In terms of being the first portable to play AAA..  one it isnt, the steam deck has been out for years.  Two, game engines weren't scalable back in the day like they are today.  

Edit

Best example is elden ring.  30 fps on the ps4.  60 fps on the ps5.  What is the S2 targeting?  30 fps, e.g. closer to the ps4 than the ps5.  And that should be expected.  The S2, a great system, simply doesn't have the bandwidth to target high resolution and high fps...  lol.  

I also said storage was going to be a weakness.  How you enjoying those key cards?  

You said FF7 Remake Intergrade wouldn't be possible on the system at first and basically no PS5 tier games would be possible. 

Then it moved to "well things like Ratchet & Clank on PS5 will clearly be beyond the system" or some such thing and that also today looks very, very wrong. 

When the Matrix demo rumors were out there you also scoffed at that notion, today most people would probably admit that Matrix demo likely can run on the Switch 2. 

You moved the goalposts about 50 different ways and also said 8nm would cripple the system's performance and this, that, and the other. 

You were wrong, just move on already. You based your arguments essentially on nothing more than "well in the past few hardware cycles Nintendo made underpowered hardware so that means Switch 2 will be underpowered too" and basically nothing else beyond that. You didn't look at things like 1536 CUDA cores sitting in the hardware leaks for the system and properly account for that. That was always a shit ton of graphics cores and I said so many, many times to deaf ears. Nintendo wasn't going to pay for that many graphics cores and then not use them. 

The Switch 2 has far better performance that most of the nay-sayers (a crowd of which you were one of the most loudest and frequent posters here) claimed and it is a significant achievement in video game hardware to have a mainstream portable console that can run all/most of the top 3D games of its time. Previous "high end" portables like the Vita and PSP were not able to do that. 

Beyond that I think even most insiders/tech experts don't actually understand how chipset production/design works beyond things like "this chip is XYZ node and this chip is ZYX node so that must mean this". People did not take into account how much Nvidia and Nintendo could get out of this 1536 CUDA core component with optimization (and we see it is a very optimized part from x-ray scans the graphics cores are for example much smaller than the full size Tegra T234. Too many assumptions made that it would just be a literal Tegra T234 with no optimization. Nintendo 100% I believe asked Nvidia for a component that could run even PS5-tier multiplatform games, Nvidia likely told them they could hit that performance even at 8nm with optimization. 

Yes.  Rift Apart, as is, isnt possible on the switch 2.  It isn't touching 1600p at 60 fps.  Plus lighting and volumetric would need to be cut back. 

Could the game be cut back for a port?  Sure, most anything can be ported.  But as is, no it isn't running on the S2 without massive downgrades. 

I dont know what else to say that hasn't already been said.  You seem shocked games are scalable and you have this odd view that hardware is the same if a game plays on both..  which is silly given a gtx 1660 plays 99% of what a 5090 plays..  despite s 5090 is damn near 500% more powerful.

The S2 sits very close to the ps4 pro in power...  and is massively behind the ps5.  And portables have been playing modern games for years before the S2 launched.

Only thing that surprised me about the S2 is how many ports it is getting, far higher than I would have guessed.  Also I am shocked at how piss poor the screen is.  

Yeah just like Star Wars Outlaws has "massive downgrade" ... not really. It's the same game. Switch 2 could run Ratchet & Clank easily and run a nice looking version of it at that. You were wrong on basically everything, this system can run PS5 tier games without much fuss at an acceptable level of performance, making it the first mainstream portable console that can do that in the 3D era this easily. 

And that's likely by strict design too, not by accident. I think Nintendo told Nvidia they wanted PS5 multiplatform games on this system and Nvidia basically gave them the most cost efficient chip that could meet that performance level. This is not just a happy coincidence. 

And that's notable and a significant achievement in video game hardware. You couldn't do that 10 years ago, the version of console multiplats attempted on system's like the Vita were actually light years below home console versions, today we have a non-fringe console that can actually play big ticket modern games off battery power even in a slim form factor. 

People based most of their predictions on the Switch 2 on Nintendo's most recent past hardware era ... and fuck all else (lol), but now people don't want to own up to that and admit they were wrong. Whatever at this point, every time I said things like Final Fantasy VII Rebirth and Monster Hunter Wilds will be on Switch 2 I got met with a bunch of posters trying to shit talk it down, and welp turns out they were wrong basically every time. 

Having eaten that crow I bet some loud mouth posters here will be a lot more humble when there are Switch 2 Pro and/or Switch 3 rumors coming out. Not every thread will devolve into a lot of bullshit of doomers trying to downplay everything performance wise, they got taught a lesson I think in humility this time around even though they won't admit it out loud. Wii and DS era is fucking over, dead, done, finito, this is a different era. 

@Soundwave

Won't quote any of the posts because they are too big, but I'll point out a big outlier you are trying to push here: Switch 2 can run X PS5 game with ease.

Just stop.

Switch 2 is not running the PS5 game, much less with ease, it's running its own version, it's holding back in many places, which doesn't mean the game looks or runs bad, but it's certainly not "running PS5 games with ease", the PS5 itself isn't running them with ease, it's running as best as it can unless the devs are lazy, which is not that easy to happen as many games are built with the PS5 in mind at its base.

The way you word your posts even sound like you are saying the Switch 2 is stronger than the PS5...

As I said to someone else in another thread, it's a pretty decent hardware considering it's a portable system, even if the specs may not match some portable PCs, it's not what it is supposed to do, that doesn't matter.

Personally I do think the Switch 2 should be $400 instead of $450, it does have many flaws like the screen, battery life and storage capacity, storage capacity alone is something costly nowdays and just 256gb is sad, specially with the game key card massive push. Double the memory alone would make $450 way better.

It is in a way better position than the Switch 1 was tho, it was insane that was $300 and never dropped, but I do agree the screen being worse than it was before makes no sense at all.

Anyway, I don't think anyone should be sad with the Switch 2 right now, it'll obviously fall behind more and more as times goes on and and eventually we have the likes of the PS6, but even so, that's definitely not what you should be expecting from the device, if you are, you should already be investing in a much more expensive portable PC.

Agreed with everything in this post.  Well said.  More articulate then my posts, but yeah, this.  

False, the Switch is not getting "bespoke" versions of any of these ports. Star Wars Outlaws even has the ray tracing intact because they weren't about to go back and create a custom version. 

And Outlaws is effectively a launch window game, it's not some project that took a year to make and came out in the middle of the product cycle. 

These are the same versions of the games on other platforms just with some PC settings tweaked. 

And that is not a random coincidence, IMO Nintendo asked for this exact set of performance, something that would allow them to have PS5 ports and Nvidia and Nintendo likely did a lot of optimization on the chip to get to this point. This isn't like "whoopsie dooopsie! What a happy surprise that it can run Madden NFL and NBA 2K and Star Wars Outlaws and Assassin's Creed Shadows and FF7 Rebirth etc. etc. etc.". 

Personally I don't think you know enough about supply chain costs to making claims about what a system should cost. In this day and age $450 is reasonable for a portable device of this power, even if this was a Sony product this would be a lot of power for a mobile device for 2025. I see you're also oblivious to internal storage costs skyrocketing of late, Nintendo is lucky they didn't go much higher than what they have or they'd probably be getting into loss territory fairly easily. 

This ain't 20 years ago anymore either when companies could do stupid shit like lose $80+ per Playstation console, you try that today and your stock price will bomb harder than a Carrot Top movie, there's too many retail stock investors today who will dump stock at the first sign of a drop in revenue, even Sony won't do that anymore. You have to make a profit off hardware (see also: PS5 Pro being priced out of most people's budgets) nowadays. 

A lot of gamers are frankly spoiled by a lot of things from 20 years ago that doesn't fly anymore and they're now dumbfounded that the AI boom is causing massive increases in cost. The whole "you get bleeding edge hardware for the low low price of $300-$400 forever!!" was never going to continue indefinitely and $50 max for games forever!!!! It's a spoiled attitude frankly that applies to literally nothing else you buy. That can of Coke? You sure as fuck are going to pay a heavy profit margin to the Coca-Cola company and the cost is way higher than it was even 5 years ago thanks to inflation (Coca-Cola ain't eating that cost).