Anyone holding out for Upgraded Switch?

[Orphalesion]

I'll get the Switch together with the Pokemon game (no it's not the only Switch game I want, but the rest can wait until then, I've lived this long without it, I can stomach a few more months)

So if there's an updated version by then, I might get that one, if not, I'll get the one that's on the market.

 

[JohnLynch]

The fact of the matter is that right now, there is no "upgraded Switch." Rumors and Reddit and Reddit rumors and rumors about Reddit and Reddits about rumors about Reddit are all well and good (they are not actually well and good, it's all trash) but anyone waiting for an "upgraded Switch" is right now waiting for something that for all intents and purposes does not exist.

That can change and it can change very rapidly, obviously, but it could just as easily - perhaps more easily? - not change any time soon. And if it does change, it's unlikely to be an "upgraded Switch" - that is, a Switch with capabilities beyond the current model - and more likely to be a Switch with some or all of the console/dock components removed and more focus on use as a handheld.

seems much more likely now: https://www.theverge.com/2019/3/25/18280482/nintendo-switch-2-new-model-release-date-wsj

I will not be buying a new Switch. I am quite happy with my current one and I expect GameFreak to keep performance on the Switch mini high meaning my current switch should be more than good enough for it.

 

[DSDark]

I have a switch already but if an upgraded version comes out I will probably trade in my old for the upgrade

 

[SoulRebel726]

seems much more likely now: https://www.theverge.com/2019/3/25/18280482/nintendo-switch-2-new-model-release-date-wsj

I will not be buying a new Switch. I am quite happy with my current one and I expect GameFreak to keep performance on the Switch mini high meaning my current switch should be more than good enough for it.

Probably good news for me. I just need a Switch to play Pokemon, and maybe stuff like Mario Kart and Smash for when I have some friends over to drink. A cheaper model works just fine.

 

[BCVM22]

seems much more likely now

In and of itself, not especially. All of the “updated Switch” rumors have come from ostensibly reliable sources like American and Japanese business newspapers, and yet we still sit here. There’s nothing that makes this latest rumor to be tossed atop the pile any more or less significant.

 

[JohnLynch]

Wall Street Journal claims that they have spoken with people who have first hand knowledge of the new Switches. Now you can claim that the WSJ is completely lying about this and is simply reporting on rumour, but the more likely scenario to me is that they’re telling the truth.

I’d be willing to bet $1 that a new Switch is announced before the end of the year.

 

[Zoruagible]

I had considered waiting solely to get a current Switch at a cheaper price as I don't particularly care much for "New upgraded version of current console!"(In fact the 'upgraded' Wii sucked, my OG broke and the new one couldn't play Cube games -.- ) but gave up as I wanted to play Pikachu, and Gamestop was offering $25 gift card on purchase so I technically saved money as I pre-order games there all the time.

And honestly the Switch is expensive enough right now, I don't think I've gotten my money's worth yet. Not until Shield/Sword anyways. Paying $400 for a console is just absurd especially when you're a multi-platform player like myself, thank god Microsoft/Sony actually have the decency to lower prices after a year or so. What would be the selling point of an upgraded Switch? More storage? I prefer physical, thanks.
At least with Microsoft and Sony, you know the console will last a good 8-10 years before having to buy the next version. Nintendo killed the Wii too soon.... :/
I hope the Switch can have a good run like the 3DS

 

[Wulava]

I plan on buying a Switch this year. If an upgraded model is announced and released this year, I'll buy that instead.

Guess I'll be purchasing the better version that comes out, assuming the Pro and Mini Switch are indeed real.

 

[BCVM22]

Now you can claim that the WSJ is completely lying about this and is simply reporting on rumour, but the more likely scenario to me is that they’re telling the truth.

"Unnamed sources"
"Further details unknown"
"Cannot confirm"

I am not outright saying the report is wrong, but reporting on rumor is... exactly what they're doing. To the letter. They are literally reporting on a rumor.

 

[JohnLynch]

So your saying that despite claiming to have sources that have first hand knowledge of the devices, that they are simply reporting rumors?

Before it was reddit and reports of rumors on reddit. Now your sticking to the position "its just rumors" when WSJ is claiming they have sources who have first hand knowledge.

Feel free to not believe the WSJ. But simply say you dont believe them rather than try to misrepresent what they are reporting.

 

[BCVM22]

"The report doesn’t have any firm details on the higher-end model, but one source implied there was more to the revision than a simple performance boost," writes The Verge.

"People familiar with the matter said..." writes the Journal.

"WSJ is claiming they have sources who have first hand knowledge," writes you.

Again, in what way is that NOT reporting on a rumor? In what way is that not taking information that is alleged but not confirmed - the very definition of a rumor - and reporting on it, and in what way am I misrepresenting what they're reporting?

 

[JohnLynch]

Either you're cherry picking your quotes or you haven't read the article. Here's some more quotes from the WSJ that you seemingly missed:

according to parts suppliers and software developers for Nintendo who have access to a prototype of the machine

Nintendo’s suppliers and game developers have been talking with their investors about the new Switch machines for several months. People who have used the devices

according to Nintendo suppliers

If you haven't read the article, then that's okay. You don't have to back up your claims of rumor you can just say "I haven't read the full article". But if you have read the full article then the sole quote you chose to cherry pick from it is simply dishonest.

 

[BCVM22]

First of all, I can't read the full article, because paywall.

Second of all, you haven't answered my repeated question: in what way is it not reporting on a rumor to publish a story based on everything you just quoted to me? That is the purest, most textbook definition of a rumor. The dictionary is screaming "that's what inside of me!"

I have no idea what you're arguing at this point beyond that. Am I supposed to say that "parts supplies and software developers" who will not/cannot put their name on the record, for obvious reasons, makes it official and that's just as good as an announcement from Nintendo? Again, what part of any of this is not a rumor in the strictest possible definition? In what possible way is this not "reporting on a rumor" in the most literal possible fashion? I have zero interest in this discussion at this stage beyond an answer to that question, because otherwise we're going in circles.

So answer the question: defining a rumor as information that isn't yet official, in what way is it not a rumor when the sources are supposed unnamed suppliers and developers?

 

[JohnLynch]

defining a rumor as information that isn't yet official, in what way is it not a rumor when the sources are supposed unnamed suppliers and developers?

Actually, the definition of rumor is:

a currently circulating story or report of uncertain or doubtful truth.

or you can use this defintion if you feel it supports your position better:

be circulated as an unverified account.

WSJ clearly has multiple sources and it has cited those sources to correlate which information came from which source. They're unnamed sources, but they are sources and the WSJ clearly thinks they're credible sources to have written this article. If someone of uncertain or doubtful truth was claiming this, I'd say it's a rumour. But an article from the WSJ where they've clearly verified information from multiple sources is not the same standard.

Again, feel free to argue that everything is rumour. But the fact your arguing about a news article you haven't even read suggests your going to argue for the sake of arguing. I feel I've made my point. If you have anything new to say feel free to post and I'll reply if I have anything of value to add. Otherwise I won't be engaging in any further with you constantly repeating the same points and saying "nuh uh" anytime anyone says differently.

 

[BCVM22]

No point in continuing the discussion if the punchline is “nah, no one has ever passed along or published questionable information from anonymous sources before, this is all clearly verified and that’s good enough for me.”

 

[JohnLynch]

As I said before

Feel free to not believe the WSJ

I don't know how you can call the source unreliable given the WSJ indicates they've got multiple sources. But you're welcome to stick to your guns and call the WSJ unreliable. And yes. I am willing to say that the WSJ have verified their sources and that is good enough for me.

 

[shoz999]

Honestly the way I'm hearing from the reports sounds less like an expensive/cheap version of the Nintendo Switch and more like a more home console-leaning/handheld-leaning version of the Nintendo Switch.

 

[PrinceOfFacade]

I already own a Switch, and I don't need a new one to play Sword and Shield.

Besides, I doubt whatever the upgraded Switch has will be worth spending another 300 bucks.

 

[LilligantLewis]

I already own a Switch, and I don't need a new one to play Sword and Shield.

Besides, I doubt whatever the upgraded Switch has will be worth spending another 300 bucks.

I think this thread was targeted at people who don't have Switches.

 

[WhiteBlair]

My only concern ever would be if the new(?) Switch would have better performance rate in Sword and Shield. Might be wrong, but many players cited the difference of lag input between old and new 3DS when the Sun/Moon Demo launched in '16.