This is bad. Because,
a. Switch 2 can get bricked when Nintendo wants you to upgrade to the “Switch Tree.”
b. If you discover a purely unused switch 2 decades later it will be useless. It’s bricked unless you get that Switch 2 update.
c. It all ties to that Nintendo bricking terms of service terms.
All consoles have similar clauses for years, Nintendo has come to the party much later. Not that this makes any of it right.
As for the requiring the day-1 update, I can understand them not wanting anyone playing it before actual release date, but I am not sure that is worth the annoyance everyone will feel who doesn’t have proper internet access. The number of people with the issue is probably not that high, specially in US and most parts of Europe, but still could be an issue for some.
As for bricking the system to upgrade to next console, I don’t think that makes much sense. They will just stop supporting the previous console and it will eventually phase out. At most, they will kill the access to eshop and online servers (from their side, without requiring any bricking on consoles), but I doubt even that will happen until before Switch 4 or 5.
Idk which “all consoles” you’re talking about, but fwiw I worked as a dev at Sony during the PS5 launch, and for the disk version, it was a heavy priority that the barebones “put in a disk and play a game” use-case should work from day 1 offline forever.
I should’ve been clear, that was about point c, the clause to brick the console. It has been present since PS3 / PS4 era and is still present for PS5, same with Xbox.
As for the ability to use console without connecting to internet, I don’t support that move by Nintendo, so didn’t give any examples for that, but Xbox One had that, so at least half of other consoles have this precedence, but it was a stupid move by Xbox then, and it’s a stupid move by Nintendo now.
The number of people with the issue is probably not that high, specially in US and most parts of Europe, but still could be an issue for some.
I wonder if the Switch 2 actually work with Hotel or similar networks that require sign-in. I’ve always had trouble getting the Switch online while travelling abroad because of this.
I’ve bought games and consoles during work trips and it would suck hard not being able to play them until I got home.
It’s pretty bad that it doesn’t work out of the box. I suspect someone will always find a way to hack them into being usable when Nintendo inevitably ends support for them, but it’s still shitty.
It’s pretty bad that it doesn’t work out of the box.
In particular for a handheld console.
I’ve bought consoles during business trips where I didn’t have reliable internet (and the goddamn Switch can’t even do sign-in to most hotel networks) and I would be pissed if I could not play it until I got home.
Let’s hope this is only for the first batch and that later ones will work out of the box.
That sucks, but I wonder if future games will have the needed firmware update on cart?
A lot of Switch 1 games require your system to have newer firmware, but then it’ll ship the update on cart so you never have to go online. PS4 and 5 do that too. Up to now, only Xbox One (and I assume Series does it too) has required me to do periodic system updates online.
I’ve wondered about that. Even Wii had embedded updates on discs if I remember correctly so it’s definitely not new.
However even if they go that way, would all cartridges have at least the basic update needed for the console to work? Not sure about that.
Good question. I always assumed the updates were cumulative (as in, a later version would contain anything needed from older versions) and that pretty much every cartridge required some firmware that was newish at time of release… such that yeah, each cart would have a version of firmware update on there.
But there are a lot of assumptions on my part there. And the Switch 2 situation could be a totally different kind of thing for all we know.
It will probably only concern the first batch. Nintendo does not want leakers to spoil the fun for everyone 2 weeks before its release.
That fact it’s possible to brick customer owned hardware this way leaves way too much room for false positives and malicious intent. No thanks.
I agree with the general sentiment, but it’s a bit weird that there’s anything to leak.
That’s the hope. Perhaps maybe on a newer switch 2 model or something they’l have the required update on the newer Switch. Knowing how Nintendo is and how they keep moving the goal post though I am skeptical.
FWIW it’s pretty common for subsequent production series, even of the same model, to include updated firmware out of the box. That’s why we see various jailbreak options which might only work on devices made before a certain date, because later releases already include patched firmware.
I wasn’t in danger of getting one anyway, but this internet requirement shit is garbage. It bespells doom.
Isn’t the thing with this that the Switch 1 compatibility layer isn’t on the factory firmware since it was a later developed piece of software? That’s probably why it’s asking for an update, as these units were made months ago (firmware 19.0.0 according to that leak out of Russia, and we’re on 20.1.0 on Switch 1 at the moment). I remember on the box they showed on the Nintendo Today app, there was something in the fine print about needing a system update both to use Switch 1 games and to use MicroSD Express cards. Very few if any people have a Switch 2 with a Switch 2 game cartridge at the moment, so they’re going to run into this when they run a game. The only way to rule this out is to put in a Switch 2 cartridge into one of these systems on the factory firmware, but as far as I know even now if you put the cartridge in it will run the game.
Edit: Can confirm that it is the case you need the Day 1 update to play Switch 1 games from one of the crunchiest images on the internet (it was the best one I could find of the box)
I’m waiting for somebody showing a Switch 2 running SteamOS on June 4…
Please, might make it worth buying
Wrong architecture, switch is on arm, steamos is on x86
Box64 takes care of the architecture, SteamOS is just well-packaged Arch Linux which has ARM distributions, and people have gotten Steam+games running on the Switch 1 under Ubuntu Switchroot. Nvidia open-ish source drivers exist for Linux and work more or less.
And pretty sure SteamOS only works on AMD GPUs
I think that would be pretty easy to solve. Just install arch nvidia drivers?
Yeah I dunno how locked down SteamOS is, but if they let you, then it could probably work
I can dream
Isn’t it rumored that Nintendo has been manufacturing Switch 2 hardware for years? Those early manufactured consoles are not going to have a fully functional OS. Makes sense that they have a basic firmware that can connect to the update servers and fetch the released OS once it is available.
No, that doesn’t make sense. I’ve never heard of another console needing a day-one update to be usable.
And why would an old release of a new product be sitting there in outdated packaging like that.
It makes sense but it’s intentional on Nintendo’s part to make the consoles unusable… The less usable they can make their older consoles usable to the normal consumer that is not modifying their consoles is the point. It started with games servers going offline after their expiration dates, and now they are starting to do similar with the console itself.
Then don’t buy one.
Also, the panicky “Nintendo will break your Switch 2 to make you buy a Switch 3”… sigh. Just think for a second before writing stuff like that.
Why on earth are peolle posting stuff in a Nintendo sublemmy when they obviously think the worst of the company? This is worse than reddit.
Its good to be hyper critical of megacorporations
And I never said the contrary.
Not really. People on Lemmy are paranoid. Not saying that corporations are not assholes looking to maximize how much of your money they are getting but they are not out to hurt you. Believe it or not, corporations actually want consumers to like them. Most corporate actions are not evil, they are caused by workers being lazy and cutting corners.
What seems more likely? Nintendo testing remote bricking of systems on customers instead of QA or Nintendo OS developers not having firmware ready by the time manufacturing started (and IT scrambling last minute to bring up update servers in time for launch).
Considering they have never done this with any of their previous consoles, and the fact that the original switch launched in March 2017, they have no excuse in terms of “being rushed.”
someordinarygamers had something to say about this early Nintendo Switch 2 bricking if you think I’m blowing things out of proportion.
