Talk:Nintendo Switch 2/Archive 2

Hello. So I am writing this because of an edit I just did that got reverted by the user 'Masem'. I admit my edit had a lot of excessive information about the Switch 2 release prices around the world. But if you put that aside I could notice just how strongly there is this focus on a few territories around the world and not just Switch 2 but many other game console related pages here.

Aside from the USA (which is a given as it is the largest English speaking country) we always get info on Canada, Europe, UK (at least with currency where it differs from 'eurozone') and Australia. But this needs to change because this is a very outdated and limited way of presenting information. English is spoken widely across the globe. Needless to say lots of people from other places also access the English Wikipedia including none other than places like Singapore, Malaysia, Hong Kong, India, Philippines, South Africa... where English is widely understood and make use of this website as a public resource.

Let us also not forget that this isn't the older days where consoles would generally only get an official and wide distribution in Japan, Western Europe and USA+Canada only. In today's world lots of territories all around the world have immediate official access to consoles and such high tech products, including none other than the largest country of the world China.

I think along with this, English Wikipedia gaming needs to change as well. A page like this needs to also list Hong Kong Dollar, Singapore Dollar, Malaysian Ringgit, South African Rand etc. which is of interest to many readers. And it deserves to also see a mention of release details for countries like Brazil, Mexico and Philippines that are some of the biggest in the world, and even a country like Poland (which is way bigger in population size than Australia and where it uses a non-Euro currency like UK does, thus making it distinct from a catch-all "Europe"). Schwampl (talk) 16:34, 23 June 2025 (UTC)

The problem is that, if we list every single country, we end up with these massive, unwieldly, overwhelming lists/walls of text. So we generally narrow it down to the major regions of the industry.

Additionally, your addition contained a lot of unreliable/unusable sources. Nintendo Soup is one of them. Unreliable per WP:VG/S. Sergecross73 msg me 16:46, 23 June 2025 (UTC)

I never said we should list every country, but that we shouldn't limit ourselves to the very outdated shortlist stated above.

Ok if I replace the 'unreliable' sources like Nintendo Soup will my edit be ok and not be reverted? Because what I have done is add a ton of global release information as well as clarifying the territories of that June 5 date specifically. These are not merely trivia. Schwampl (talk) 17:02, 23 June 2025 (UTC)

The point is, we need to draw the line somewhere, and I disagree that you're drawing the line at the right point. The amount of English readers searching for what a Switch 2 costs is Malaysian Ringgits is comparatively much lower than the items currently listed in the article. Wikipedia is also not a buyers guide, nor is it a catalogue. We list a couple to get a feel for the price, but it's not meant to be some sort of all-inclusive pricing guide. Sergecross73 msg me 17:10, 23 June 2025 (UTC)

Well I disagree with the current line for sure as it is very 'Western' biased. Also the argument doesn't apply to the release schedule dates and information I added too. Schwampl (talk) 17:14, 23 June 2025 (UTC)

Understood. But now you need to follow WP:BRD and WP:CONSENSUS, which says that challenged information stays out of the article unless/until there is a consensus for including it. As is, 2 separate editors oppose it, and only you support it, so it needs to stay out until further discussion changes this. Sergecross73 msg me 17:16, 23 June 2025 (UTC)

In addition to what's been said, WP is not a catalog or shopping guide. The prices selected reflect the majority markets for these products and give a rough metric of the retail price across the globe accounting for any national issues (like Australia's higher costs due to imports). We also don't need a full list of release date dates outside of these major markets, because that starts bordering on trivia. Masem (t) 17:17, 23 June 2025 (UTC)

Ok then I'll put the pricing aside, but release dates are important. At the very least will you allow the clarification of the 'global' June 5 release? Because there is currently no information about that and 'global' could imply the entire world or so. I added the list of about 10 regions part of the 'global' release and at least this should remain. Also ommitting information on the China delay, with China being the world's largest economy, is also not wise and again has that 'Western' bias. Schwampl (talk) 17:23, 23 June 2025 (UTC)

I'm personally okay with including a mention about China, as its not uncommon to make a note about their often different details of things like timeframes of availability. Sergecross73 msg me 17:26, 23 June 2025 (UTC)

Yes, China release info is reasonable give the size of the gaming market there. But like, getting into sone of the nation states of the SE Asia, or within the EU, is just too fine a detail. Masem (t) 17:29, 23 June 2025 (UTC)

Fair enough. I have just now added China and its delay, but also the 'global' release territories (since the China delay is basically in that context, as it was originally scheduled to be June 5). Schwampl (talk) 17:38, 23 June 2025 (UTC)

One thing that can be done is that you can create data tables at Commons in its Data: space where you could list all known regions of release, release date, and prices, as that information is public domain. We then could include a link in a box to point to that if readers wanted more information. Masem (t) 04:14, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

Here's a better question: why even bother including the pricing information (regardless of regions) at all? After all, you said it yourself that Wikipedia is not a shopping guide, and so anyone looking for it would be better off elsewhere. — NotCory (talk) 06:16, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

It is ok for Wikipedia to list general prices for anglosphere countries plus Europe plus Japan, (that is how i will collectively refer to them) but that's about where we draw the line. After that it is much easier to google '$400 dollars in (insert currency here)' than us having to put every country's currency in to make a ridiculously long infobox. Theeverywhereperson (contribs) 06:37, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

Not every currency, it would be ridiculous putting in every single english speaking country's currency in. Theeverywhereperson (contribs) 06:38, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

Please read WP:PRICE and WP:NOPRICE. In a general sense, the subjects (high) price gets commentary from third party reliable sources, so it would be an oversight to omit it completely. But we're also not a buyers guide or a catalogue, so it shouldn't be some massive comparison guide. This is all like Wikipedia 101 stuff here. This is how this sort of thing is commonly handled. Sergecross73 msg me 10:55, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

I'd prefer that the pricing information be limited to just mentions of it being higher than the original Switch, and that the Japanese region-locked units are sold for less, along with necessary commentaries for them without mentioning the prices themselves. Anyone can just search for "switch 2 price in [country]" on a search engine of choice or go on Nintendo's website of regions where they sell the consoles online to look up for the prices. Having them mentioned on the article, even for limited set of regions and having third party sources discussing about them, seems pretty counterintuitive. — NotCory (talk) 11:12, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

Look at any mass-produced consumer electronic product, like iPhones. Price points (more specifically, MSRP) in major release are ubiquitious in these, because they are the subject of discussion from reliable sources. Masem (t) 12:00, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

That doesn't comply with WP:NOPRICE, nor can you reasonably convey price commentary without mentioning it at all. Sergecross73 msg me 12:18, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

The console has been out for a few months, surely there is something we could put for how it was received reviewed, and how it performed in terms of sales QueenElizebethlll (talk) 14:11, 10 June 2025 (UTC)

Well, there may be a little bit to add, but 1) it only released a couple days ago, 2) they haven't announced any official sales figures yet and 3) I've read from multiple publications that they didn't get a Switch 2 ahead of launch, so many publications are still working on their reviews. Sergecross73 msg me 14:13, 10 June 2025 (UTC)

With a quick Google search I was able to find some reviews

https://www.theverge.com/nintendo/682075/verge-staffers-react-nintendo-switch-2

https://www.eurogamer.net/a-review-of-the-switch-2-as-much-as-you-can-review-a-new-console-after-a-weekend-in-its-company

https://www.theguardian.com/games/2025/jun/10/nintendo-switch-2-review-more-than-good-enough

And using the same tactics, it appears that people on social media say its sold over 3 million units QueenElizebethlll (talk) 18:56, 10 June 2025 (UTC)

Those reviews all come from reliable sources and could be added to the article, no problems there. Not the 3 million sales report though, that comes from "a Youtuber's anonymous sources", which is very much so not a reliable usable source on Wikipedia. Real sales figures are almost certainly on the way, so we can add that when they come. Sergecross73 msg me 19:26, 10 June 2025 (UTC)

Whereas for games we can at lease drop in a metacritic score to seed a reception section, it's probably best to get more hardware review sources as to have an idea how best to structure the reception section. Likely in a week we should have enough and can go from there, and as WP is not in a rush we can wait to do it as best as possible the first time. Masem (t) 19:29, 10 June 2025 (UTC)

Absolutely, it won't be very comprehensive right now, and will almost certainly be completely rewritten in the very near future, but one could start it up with stuff like that. I wasn't planning on it, but I won't stand in anyone's way if they can write something coherent and complete. Sergecross73 msg me 19:32, 10 June 2025 (UTC)

@Sergecross73 well I did start creating the reception section about the release. But unfortunately it got removed recently because apparently we have to wait for more reviews to write a more coherent reception. Sponge123 (talk) 03:00, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

You also had a completely unsourced paragraph as well in there. I just feel its hard to judge where it is right now because it seems no early units were shipped to critics to review before release. Masem (t) 03:08, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

I put the reviews section back in a hidden comment so that it can be workshopped and then unhidden once it's up to standard.

The main issue I see with the current text is that it frames a lot of the opinions in Wikipedia's voice without ascribing them to any particular writer or publication. It would be fine to say "The Guardian liked the updated Joy-Cons" or something like that, but generalizing it to Enhanced Joy‑Con 2 controllers... have also garnered acclaim, without compelling evidence that that is the widely held consensus among critics, is a bit much.

Still, I'd say it's a decent start. Once there's more reviews to work with, it can definitely be copy edited and fleshed out. silviaASH (inquire within) 03:29, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

I agree. Not good. Have scrapped it in favor of a structure as follows:

• Social features (and maybe something else?)
• Hardware commentary
• Games software, like availability and performance.

BarntToust 20:37, 15 June 2025 (UTC)

The added reception section, while now using multiple sources, is extremely weird on how its written, pulling a point or two from each review rather than any type of narrative that can be followed. It needs to be written from a more broad perspective, not nitpicking on aspects, unless that is a common element of the reviews. Masem (t) 02:06, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

I mean, I tend to only note something if it shows up in two or three reviews. A few specifics here and there, but I'm not sure where you are coming from. I'm modeling this section structure on a couple of articles, The Last of Us season 2#Critical response and The Last of Us season 1#Critical response. The latter is a good article. This style should be acceptable. BarntToust 02:10, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

The first paragraph is explicitly signposted with "this is the one you're going to read things regarding the communication features". Paragraph two pretty clearly jumps around the major hardware aspects, being broad in what is discusses but plural in what it covers. Paragraph three discusses several aspects of the system's games. Not sure how this is nitpicking on anything if it goes to numerous, major places. Also not sure how it can get any broader if it does not stay in one particular place for too long. BarntToust 02:23, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

Here's some more specifics:

• Far too much use of the word "praised". That's an edge weasel word, and that its repeated so often makes it stand out.
• There's a lot of short sentences that can be combined at least in the communication paragraph. We dont need to namedrop every review source.
• Some of the points that are focused on are trivial and would be better with bigger picture topics. For example, "...Edge agreed that the increased size of the SL and SR buttons was a useful improvement" seems absolutely unnecessary when it could be said that the design of the updated Joy-Con were generally favored by critics.
• And in reverse there are topics that probably need more expansion, like on the Virtual Game Card stuff, which was commented about before release.
• The ordering is very odd, as I would think as being a new piece of hardware, the hardware aspects would lead off the reception section. Moving from hardware into the built in software (including communications) and then into the launch title lineup would seem to make the most sense.

Try to think more higher level, how would a non-gamer who has never had a Switch learn about how the unit was recieved? Like, I would want to know, up front, how the unit was recieved compared to the Switch in the first place. I haven't surveyed the sources enough to know the general sentiment about it, but my reading of what I've seen so far is that there is a general idea that the Switch 2 has improvements on the original Swtich but not revolutionary, and presuming that's correct, that's where the reception should lede (and then narratively explaining what changes were seen as a positve or negative) Masem (t) 04:08, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

Definitely agree with Masem's thoughts on ordering. Sergecross73 msg me 04:11, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

Now that you explain it in a level of detail I definitely respect you for taking the time to delve into—yeah.

I remember seeing two prevailing ideas—communication features is king, hardware update is king (NYT). Think hardware arrangement first is great tho. BarntToust 04:48, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

About critical/public concern for system transfer being... ehh... IGN did a piece on an instance of it screwing up for a user. IDK if it's due yet to include. if this sort of thing happens like three separate times with different media publications reporting on it, I think it could be noted in Reception. Right now, it's one rando's incident, one RS. BarntToust 19:44, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

Yes, I would be careful of one-off complaints. If it was the scale like the red ring of death, then that would be appropriate, but not at this point.

Going back, you're probably not wrong that a common point of praise was the communications aspect, and that should be a focus of the review summary. And you said you agree with the swap between HW and communication paragraphs, so just to build on that, I would try to follow the order of the topics presented in the body of the article, though we don't need to cover each aspect nor do we need to stick to the absolute order.

But I would also start with a broader statement saying what the consensus is of the Switch 2 being an improvement but not a revolutionary step over the OG Switch. Here you'd not have to get to details of the specifics of hardware or software, but just the general feel (eg this review gets to this point at the start). Then you can have a breakdown on the specific shared comments about the HW, and then about the software (where communications would fall in), and then the launch lineup of games. The elements are there but it just needs to be tightened up better. Masem (t) 03:26, 17 June 2025 (UTC)

I fail to see how maintaining a single sentence but adding some quotes is "getting too detailed for the talk page consensus". This is directly combating vague language, is short and to the point. Helper201 (talk) 11:55, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

Quoted text has to be attributed to a speaker, and we also try to avoid using single-word quotes like that. Masem (t) 12:01, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

"and we also try to avoid using single-word quotes like that", per what exactly? Helper201 (talk) 12:49, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

Generally, the purpose of direct quotes is to convey information/ideas/concepts that can't be accurately conveyed through paraphrasing. Can you really not paraphrase concepts simple enough to be conveyed by a single word direct quote? Sergecross73 msg me 13:00, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

In this context it works best with the quotes. Helper201 (talk) 13:01, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

I do not agree. Sergecross73 msg me 13:04, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

I do not agree either. saying the battery was criticized for being sub-par can be conveyed without making several quoted words. BarntToust 16:22, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

All I see here are the personal opinions of others not liking the way this looks. Helper201 (talk) 22:28, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

Seriously? You're going to say that to the people who are responding to the comment "In this context it works best with the quotes". Come on. Sergecross73 msg me 23:20, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

All I see here is someone trying to present among the most shallow rationale for an unsatisfactory content-writing style, following it up with "I have spoken" as if this makes them right. BarntToust 23:53, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

I'm following be bold and combating the vagueness of simply stating that the battery life has been criticised. Wikipedia guidelines are specifically to avoid vague^[vague] language. As seen here, I've provided Wikipedia specific rational for what was added, something not used by those opposing this change. Helper201 (talk) 23:58, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

Just how in the name of Jeremy Clarkson's britches is it unclear to say that the "reduced battery life of the console was criticised". That gives you all you need to know. A low battery on a device is unsatisfactory, that much is clear from those words. Don't need quotes to describe that sentiment. BarntToust 00:02, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

something like a battery being reduced is pretty inherently being "unimpressive" and "a disappointment", which are words that add little value to imparting the idea that something being reduced was criticized, because—as being 'reduced' says—of it being downgraded. Also, calling something a "downgrade" is already taken care of by the word 'reduced'. BarntToust 00:09, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

FWIW, there probably should be a larger quote that captures the sentiment of why the battery life is consider poor on the switch 2, since numerical the switch 2's battery has larger capacity (but likely consumes more power in use) Masem (t) 00:27, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

I consider that also a great idea. Without integrating Helper's WP:OQ, more detail would serve well. Quote bananza isn't the answer to bringing detail, keeping that in mind. BarntToust 01:46, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

Guys, if the 3.5 million sales figure is there, then it stays until we find more up to date data. Justhereforresearch 08:55, 23 June 2025 (UTC)

No one is proposing removing it. The "3 million" figure originally opposed at the beginning of this discussion was an unverified claim from some Youtuber. But the "3.5 million" figure eventually released is official, and has remained in the article without opposition. Sergecross73 msg me 13:23, 23 June 2025 (UTC)

Ok fine then. But which Youtuber? Anyway please update me when new data comes out. Justhereforresearch (contribs) 16:05, 23 June 2025 (UTC)

oi bruv, WP:SIGPROB—change your signature to something closely resembles your username (posting something in a notice on the top of your user page that you use a "different name on talk pages" is not good enough, and there is no good reason for you to mislead like so). BarntToust 16:22, 23 June 2025 (UTC)

well I don't care. Theeverywhereperson (contribs) 06:31, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

This is getting out of hand. If you want to talk about my signature and stuff just do it on my talk page Theeverywhereperson (contribs) 06:32, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

Change your signature. Nobody here will converse with someone who deliberately misleads. I have spoken. BarntToust 11:59, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

I just decided to change my username. Theeverywhereperson (talk here) 15:17, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

(They submitted a request to change it at least. FYI.) Sergecross73 msg me 15:20, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

@Sergecross73 I think that we can discuss about my signature and how I am going to change it on my talk page (or yours, preferably mine) Theeverywhereperson (talk here) 15:38, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

Oh sorry I mean my username Theeverywhereperson (talk here) 15:38, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

Agreed. I was just clarifying because you while you said you decided to change your username, you technically hadn't yet. No need to discuss here any further. Sergecross73 msg me 15:40, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

Aggregate reception source

• https://www.gamesindustry.biz/nintendo-switch-2-critical-consensus - in case anyone wants to implement. Sergecross73 msg me 13:10, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

> have lead to people who pre-ordered the cancel

s/lead/led/ s/cancel/console/ 172.59.160.134 (talk) 23:51, 29 June 2025 (UTC)

I've removed the section entirely (the second editor to do so now.) The commentary is not from a reliable, and even if it was, speculating about manufactured scarcity isn't really reception of a product anyways. Sergecross73 msg me 01:30, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

I will note that I used one good source from IGN that spoek specifically of what Japanese stores had to resort to, but that's up in the pre order section, without adding speculation on global supply issues. Masem (t) 04:08, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

Sounds good, that makes sense. It just didn't make sense in the reception section because its...not reception. But it is an interesting thing to note about the launch. Good call. Sergecross73 msg me 13:16, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

This edit has been made by multiple editors. It's unacceptable as is. It suggests that one can get banned for simply using a Switch 1 game in a Switch 2. That's not true. Please read your own source:

To understand why this happened, it's important to note that Nintendo attaches unique codes to its Switch game cartridges to prevent piracy. However, bad actors can copy games onto a third-party device, like the MIG Flash, and then resell the physical game card. Once Nintendo detects two instances of its unique code being online at the same time, it will ban any accounts using it. Anyone pirating Nintendo's software understands this is a potential consequence, but it would come as an annoying surprise to oblivious second-hand buyers.

If you insist on adding this to the article, please add the proper context. Sergecross73 msg me 00:05, 13 July 2025 (UTC)

In your edit summary you said "it was that they were unofficial game cards bought off of Facebook Marketplace" which is not what the edit at the time said, nor the source. I'm happy with Masem's edit, that seems to clear it up nicely, but can we remember to assume good faith? Saying passive aggressive things like "if you insist on adding this..." doesn't help keep the conversation constructive. Darkage7_[Talk] 02:06, 13 July 2025 (UTC)

As I said, the version you restored misrepresented the situation and lacked important context (that Masem has thankfully added.) The source says what I said - A Switch 2 user claims to have been banned thanks to used Switch 1 cartridges bought off Facebook Marketplace. The only difference is that I said "unofficial", because I had interpreted it that they had bought the duplicate, which I now read that it could be that they have the original but someone used the duplicate first. Regardless, crucial context was missing either way, and that was the one thing I (rightfully) accused you of, so I'm not following your attempted lecture on AGF. Sergecross73 msg me 02:21, 13 July 2025 (UTC)

Should we change the console developer at the infobox into Nintendo PTD, the hardware development division of the company?

I previously did the change, but was reversed and being told "require reliable sources". But meanwhile we listed NS2 as PTD work on that division's own page–also without any RS. So if we require RS here, then we should also require RS on Nintendo PTD page. Awdqmb (talk) 12:28, 8 July 2025 (UTC)

There is no source for that at the PTD page so it should be removed there until it can be sourced. Masem (t) 12:34, 8 July 2025 (UTC)

Seconded. A big claim like that absolutely requires a source. Which is fine, just "Nintendo" is plenty fine for now. Sergecross73 msg me 12:53, 8 July 2025 (UTC)

It appears that it has been added again to the PTD page, and without any source too... 2A01:CB08:900C:D800:9025:52D4:A8BF:1215 (talk) 11:44, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

Removed as unsourced again. Sergecross73 msg me 13:44, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

Thirded, Nintendo is sufficient. Akeratos (talk) 13:45, 8 July 2025 (UTC)

There seems to be a bit of confusion on this, so just to clarify: The 5 million sold number was unofficial - the 3.5 million is the only official figure we have right now. See https://thegamepost.com/nintendo-denies-switch-2-sold-5-million-units/ for details. (I'm sure some will doubt this still, but its the official word, and they're due to release new sales figures soon enough, so it'll be a moot point soon anyways.) Sergecross73 msg me 16:24, 22 July 2025 (UTC)

Update, they released new sales figures. I don't have the time to implement at the moment but wanted to post here since there seems to be a back and forth between two parties who can't seem to bother to find sources themselves. https://www.ign.com/articles/switch-2-sells-more-than-6-million-in-the-7-weeks-since-launch-nintendo-says-demand-has-surpassed-our-expectations Sergecross73 msg me 01:44, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

I have done the proper update using Nintendo's own financial update (sales to June 30) along with the extended sales through July, following how we did that for the Switch. Masem (t) 17:25, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you, I appreciate it. It's exactly as I would have done, I've just had limited availability at the moment. I'm surprised there was so much back and forth on it, every gaming website under the sun was reporting on it. Sergecross73 msg me 17:35, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

I have a switch 2. It doesn't use LCD, it has a Mini-LED display. LEDs are not liquid crystal. Also, both joycons are mouse controls. You can use either one or both at the same time. I plugged in a normal PC mouse and keyboard into the top USB-c port with a generic USB-C USB 2 dongle. The physical keyboard can be used for searching and scrolling inside the eShop, but it doesn't work on the launcher screen. I tested my generic PC mouse with Mario Paint and it worked fine. BTW, I used to own the original Mario Paint. The emulation is a little bit off. The original hardware cartridge was way slower especially when saving your artwork or a custom drawing. From memory, it took close to 20 minutes to save in Mario Paint because of the insanely slow flash memory. 2607:FEA8:9281:D400:30E4:1967:F4A2:7C96 (talk) 18:37, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Every source says LCD. We can't make our own judgements on the tech, particularly when Nintendo themselves say its LCD . Masem (t) 19:54, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Also, I don't see where we are saying only one Joy-Con has mouse controls. (Remember that Joy-Con is both singular and plural). Masem (t) 19:56, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

https://www.bloomberg.com/features/2025-nintendo-switch2/?embedded-checkout=true

Interesting source. Reports that the systems release was delayed and 3rd parties were frustrated by it. Thought it was interesting, as it's the first time it's been reported and not just speculated on forums and social media. Could provide some interesting reception info too. It keeps cutting off before I can read it all. Not sure if it's a wonky paywall or the website struggling. Sergecross73 msg me 02:03, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

ITs the paywall, but the usual archive sites have the paywall-bypassed copy. Probably should point this out at the main Nintendo article too.

Also, regarding the delay, I did previously include the reports out of Gamescom that Nintendo was not sending out SDKs and encouraging developers to make OG Switch versions, already. May be related, but can't look at it immediately. Masem (t) 04:13, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

As the subject says. By most counts, this appears to be true. The last time I asked this question, I was told that it was too early. Is this still the case? Man-Man122 (talk) 18:47, 6 September 2025 (UTC)

Here's the original question: Talk:Nintendo Switch 2/Archive 1 § Fastest selling Nintendo console. Also pinging @Masem who said that it was too early.

Many sources say that it is definitely the fastest selling Nintendo console including Nintendo themselves. The sources , , and say that it is the fastest selling console of all time.

Here are more recent sources I found: this source published on August 27 that suggests it being the fastest selling console in the US using a market research company. IGN posted the same kind of article on the same day. Justjourney (talk | contribs) 02:50, 7 September 2025 (UTC)

I found out that the article already mentions that it is the fastest Nintendo console, but the IGN source attached to that claim doesn't say that it is the fastest of all the consoles. Justjourney (talk | contribs) 02:59, 7 September 2025 (UTC)

Except for the The Verge, all those only confirm the fastest selling Nintendo console. The Verge one, citing Niko Partners, claims it is the fastest of all time. That would be fine to add it, but it would need to be attributed to Niko Partners. Masem (t) 04:55, 7 September 2025 (UTC)

Nintendo, or any major hardware manufacturer for that matter, has always had the right to 'brick' or take any action against modification of said hardware written in their user agreement. There is no update, the change in the agreement was just added for clarity. 2600:8801:AF28:800:952E:295F:BFBD:D6A7 (talk) 16:50, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

The redirect NS2 (video game console) has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 September 21 § NS2 (video game console) until a consensus is reached. Less Unless (talk) 10:35, 21 September 2025 (UTC)