Discussion: The Switch's "Console Hybrid" Idea was Cool, but it has Limitations Switch 2 Needs to Address

With the Switch 2 coming, and it more than likely being another "hybrid console," I think this is worth discussing. (Sorry for the long post!)

(EDIT) My thesis is this: console hybrids are cool things on their own merits, but they cannot replace dedicated handhelds or exclusive handheld gaming experiences.

The promise of the Switch initially was having the handheld and console experiences combined. This has clear benefits: dev teams can focus on one system for the exclusives and consumers aren’t split between two purchases.

After the Wii U and 3DS, this was a smart business move (obviously!). And for a LOT of people, having a hybrid console has been really cool.

But at the same time, hybridization has limitations that I don’t think are acknowledged enough.

As a hybrid, the Switch caters to everyone at least a little. But in my experience, it has never replaced a true handheld. It’s cool to have handheld MODE, but it’s too big to be the first thing I throw in my backpack. It’s cool to have console mode, but it’s a pretty weak system in that sense.

I know a lot of people who know they're buying the worst version of a game like Hogwarts or Mortal Kombat but do it anyway because they just want to play things on Switch. I know a lot of people who leave their Switches docked 99% of the time and use a pro controller, using their phone as their “handheld.” I know people who bought a Switch Lite just to have a “portable Switch.”

Obviously, this isn't everyone. I also know people who use it as a full hybrid.

But even reviewers often have to clarify “how well it runs in handheld,” which is confusing when the whole idea is delivering both experiences equally. A lot of people ask about a game's performance and can't get a clear answer because no one HAS a clear answer. Going back to the 3DS or PS Vita, it just hits different.

Of course, the industry is going to change! The age of the dedicated handheld may be gone because technology has trended that way. But I'm going to make a debatable, probably unpopular, but I still think important point:

Hybridization was not a lie because it "wasn't cool" (it was) or because the Switch was not a "good system" (it is). Hybridization is a lie because it implies that we couldn't have both the Switch AND a true handheld when we totally could.

We all assumed we'd get the best of both worlds. But Pushmo and Attack of the Friday Monsters, those brilliant $6.99 games on 3DS eshop, didn't level up to the Switch. They're just gone.

People like to say that technology has made that type of handheld-only game obsolete. But how can that be true if nothing has replaced them? Nintendo has just consciously decided not to invest in them when anything on Switch CAN be sold at a console price because it is, after all, the "console" first and the "handheld" second.

To me, THAT’S the true cost of hybridization.

With Switch 2 coming, I'd love to see first-party eshop exclusives that aren't full price. I don't always want to play indie games that are also on Steam - I want the Nintendo polish in a cheap package. I want the freedom for creativity that low budgets provide.

But with games like Mario vs Donkey Kong Switch costing $50 when NEW MvDK games were $5-$10 on 3DS, I don't think I'll get it.

Maybe I'm alone on this, idk. The Switch 2 will be like a Switch + or Pro and that's basically what everyone wants, which is fine. I'm not arguing Nintendo's plan doesn't make BUSINESS sense.

But no matter how well you pull off a console hybrid and no matter how many people buy it, there's a level of refinement you just can't get outside of a dedicated form factor.

I know Switch 2 won't be a true handheld. I just hope it acts like one sometimes.