In the wake of the Nintendo Switch 2’s success, several publishers have opted to support the console with previously released games. Games not imagined to be releasing on the original Switch, are now viable to join the new library. Some of the biggest games around launch happen to be third-party releases. These initial ports were stellar, proving the Switch 2 to be capable of technically challenging gameplay. Quality rereleases include Street Fighter 6, Yakuza 0, and the accomplished Cyberpunk 2077, seemingly uncompromised. This is to be expected, as the Switch 2 was allegedly delayed in the first place: allowing key publishers to prepare for launch. Everyone wants a piece of that Nintendo Switch 2 hype, considering the immense success of the original Switch.
Rushed Switch 2 Ports
With the Switch 2 now being the biggest launch in history, several third parties are rushing to port games. While the initial releases by the bigger publishers got to be launch titles, the rest had to fend for themselves. The overall impression of the ports is this: a few are amazing, most are as expected, but select titles are pretty disappointing. This varies on who is experiencing the game, as players have already gotten used to the Switch’s poor performance. But for the Switch 2, the standards have definitely risen as its increased capabilities is part of Nintendo’s sales pitch. Why get the system that looks nearly identical to the old one if it doesn’t give you a better experience?
The issue with Switch 2 ports currently is not only that select titles are poorly done, but that the ordinary port is not as impressive as thought. The major compromise for most: the games are capped at 30 frames per second (FPS). This means that in one sense, the game will perform only half as well as versions on other consoles. A generalized way to pinpoint the strength of the Switch 2 is that it is more powerful than the PS4. There’s technical jargon that compares the real differences, but that really is the bottom-line: if it can perform well on base PS4 or Xbox One, it can definitely perform better on Nintendo’s premium device.
It is embarrassing when a game that should perform well, ends up not doing so. As it would contradict all the compliments by various developers about how surprisingly “capable” the new console is. The developers believe the games should perform well, why shouldn’t we?
Poor Optimization
One recent example of poor optimization is the surprise announcement of Tomb Raider (2013) released for both Switch and Switch 2. It was released with more compromises than the original release in 2013, on the Nintendo Switch. This isn’t very unexpected as the Switch has always had issues providing a smooth experience from even Xbox 360 era games. Though that can be explained by some technical jargon, perhaps, considering that development is never quite so simple.
The distaste arises from the fact that the Switch 2 version isn’t actually that much different from the Switch version—the only difference being that it achieves 60 FPS. Digital Foundry, one of the most reputable game tech reviewers, finds this also to be disappointing. The site found that the Switch, and by extension the Switch 2 version, lacked features available to the PS3 version—a 19-year-old console. That’s worse than the aforementioned baseline of the PS4. Ports like these have issues that simply can’t be ignored.
The Nintendo Switch Compromise
Compromises were absolutely an expectation on the Nintendo Switch: as long as the game worked. Doom (2016) is a good example of a great port that while graphically downgraded, performed very well. But that was part of the Switch pitch then—that you can have great games on the goal, with reasonable compromises. The dissonance with the Switch 2 is that users now expect the same but itching on the side of having fewer compromises. After all, the system costs $450 dollars so it could include modern technologies like DLSS and raytracing. What is the hold up? The audience won’t expect 60 FPS on everything, but the game should keep a consistent framerate and good graphics for that tradeoff. “It’s a mobile system; it’s a bit complicated.” That wouldn’t explain away a game releasing with 30 FPS and compromised graphics on a current-gen system.
The issues pose a question: Why is this happening, and is it going to continue? The short answer is that most of the problems can be blamed on publishers, including Nintendo. For the future, it continues to depend on who exactly is doing the port.
The Devkit Situation
Firstly, the outlook of Switch 2 ports at launch wasn’t looking very good. According to media, such as Digital Foundry and the Kit & Krysta YouTube channel, developers revealed at Gamescom 2025 that several of them have not received Switch 2 dev kits to work on ports. It seems that Nintendo has been handpicking games and publishers to work on the console, in an act of hubris. Some third parties hadn’t even received the kits before launch, which is why we are now seeing them now just announce ports. This explains why some games that we would expect have been omitted during the first months. And why there are so many rushed jobs, as are apparent now. Nintendo themselves manufactured the entire situation.
Yet, some developers that have an appropriate amount of time just aren’t turning out a good quality. For particular games, it is obviously a cause of port-focused developers who never worked on the original game, doing what they can—but not enough. However, for developers like Bethesda and FromSoftware, the issue is their technical ineptitude. These two developers created some of the most popular games of recent times—yet they are known for mixed quality on ports.
Studios’ Technical Expertise
In general, FromSoftware ports for weaker generation hardware aren’t particularly optimized, as seen with games like Elden Ring on the base Xbox One and PS4. This extends with the game on the Switch 2 as demos of it at recent gaming conventions are reportedly unoptimized. The first demo for the Switch 2 had people online rampant about its quality and imminent release. It is an extension of FromSoftware’s continuing issues of technical expertise. Fortunately, for this Switch 2 title, it has been delayed to next year for performance improvements. Each new demo is showing good signs of it becoming performant by the time it actually releases. Unfortunately, Bethesda cannot say the same for their port.
Shadow-dropped recently on the Switch 2 is an improved graphics version of Skyrim with added mouse control support. Considering that Skyrim was the star port at launch for the original Switch, there’s a level of expectation. Yet, the new version released with poor reception, the fault being its severe input lag. While the first port already had a significant amount of lag compared to other versions, it was tolerable. But this worsened that lag to an unplayable level. On top of that, the game is capped to 30 FPS, to the distaste of some players. Admittedly, the game is very much improved graphically and holds 30 FPS very well but does not match expectations. In response to this, Bethesda has promised to continue working on the game to improve things.
The Scalability of Games
With these mixed results, another question is posed: is the Switch 2 not powerful enough? In terms of development, the answer is not so simple, as it depends on the game individually. Games often have different goals, gameplay styles, environments and technical expertise; each would have different requirements. This much is apparent on the frequently compared handheld system, being the Steam Deck. It is a handheld PC, literally speaking, and is representative of PC settings and modes for games.
Within the “ports” for games on Steam Deck, the issue is not whether the hardware is strong enough a lot of the time, but whether the game “scales” well with weaker hardware. When looking at the hardware capabilities and tools available on Switch 2, it shows that most games available to Steam Deck should—in theory—perform just as well or better on Switch 2. As long as the game is developed with various kinds of hardware in mind, then it should perform well. You’re not going to see the most demanding current-gen exclusive games suddenly make their way to Nintendo’s console—at least not without big compromises.
The Necessary Work
This points to the differentiating factor being the developers. Do they have the expertise, and have they made the game scalable? That is what players should be asking with every announcement of a port. The reason for the quality of Skyrim and Elden Ring is summarily that the developers hadn’t done enough work. It could be that the game needs to be vastly remade, or that they are incapable. In that case, players would hope to either delay the port or hand it off to a more suitable studio. Better yet, it would be best if developers had the future in mind and made the game modifiable for multiple platforms. This is the case with the comeback of Cyberpunk 2077, and why we are seeing it succeed on Switch 2.
The Outlook of Switch 2 Ports
However, for the immediate and foreseeable future, rereleases will continue to be unstable, as the development resources are yet to be managed properly. Next year will likely be a repeat until both Nintendo stops gatekeeping and studios build experience with porting to the console. The ones that seem to suffer the most are the third-party releases that aren’t handpicked or well-supported by Nintendo. It results in Persona 3 Reload releasing at an inconsistent 30 FPS with disappointing graphics and a similarly compromised DRAGON BALL: Sparking! ZERO.
This is bad for the diversity of games on Switch 2, when you can’t always expect a good result. Hopefully, this isn’t an extension of Nintendo losing their grip on quality control. I have a feeling that the momentum of Switch 2 is going to convince everyone to try a little harder to give players what they’re asking for.
