This is my personal speculation and design theory, not a leak.
If Ocarina of Time Remake were to introduce a new second-screen peripheral, I don't think its greatest value would simply be “having another screen.”
The most obvious uses for a second screen are maps, inventories, quests, and other information displays. But these are essentially just ways of separating information. They do not fundamentally change how the game is played. The real reason for an additional piece of hardware should be a change in interaction itself. If the second screen is merely a display, its value is limited; if it can become another game space—carrying another character, perspective, location, or even timeline—then it can become a new medium for interaction.
So for the sake of this idea, I will call it SDS (Switch 2 Dual Screen).
I don't think it should be designed as “bringing the DS back,” nor should it be physically combined with the Switch 2 to create a dual-screen handheld. A more reasonable approach would be to make SDS a separate secondary interaction device. Players could use the Switch 2 alone, or place SDS separately in tabletop, TV, or handheld-oriented setups, with the two screens carrying different information.
Ocarina of Time would be an especially interesting game with which to test this concept.
For example:
Switch 2 main screen: seven years later.
SDS: seven years earlier.
The two screens would not simply display the same world simultaneously. They would represent two different temporal states of the same world.
Imagine a boss whose defenses have already become extremely strong seven years later, while seven years earlier it is still absorbing power from the forest. The player could use Young Link in the timeline represented by SDS to alter the source of that power, then return to the Adult Link timeline and see the consequences.
At that point, the player would not simply be controlling a character. They would be interacting with the causal relationship between two different points in time. Adult Link deals with the result; Young Link changes the cause. The two screens would not merely complement each other as information displays—they would jointly form one cross-time interaction.
This is also what would distinguish SDS from traditional two-player games.
In ordinary 2P games, two players usually exist in the same space and work together toward the same goal. SDS could instead allow a player to interact with different times, spaces, and information states at once. Its true purpose would therefore not be to expand the display, but to change the player's relationship with the game world.
This also preserves what was truly valuable about the DS.
The significance of the DS was never simply “it had two screens.” Its importance came from how two screens changed the way players interacted with information. If SDS simply reproduced the DS, it would only be returning to the past. But if that interactive idea were rebuilt around Switch 2 hardware, communication, and modern game design, it could become a new game language.
I also don't think SDS should be mandatory for Ocarina of Time Remake.
The game should remain complete without it. Players who purchase SDS would simply gain another way to play. In other words, it should be an optional interaction extension, rather than a device that makes players feel they are missing part of the game if they do not buy it. That also feels more consistent with the ecosystem Nintendo has built since the Switch launched in 2017: hardware creates new possibilities, but players can decide for themselves how they want to use them.
Of course, this would also involve substantial risks.
The first is cost. SDS would need an independent touchscreen, communications hardware, battery, mainboard, and enclosure, but it should not become “a second Switch 2.” Based on the product concept and the components we previously considered, around $159.99 seems like a plausible range for a premium optional peripheral. This is only a rough estimate based on the concept, however; the actual cost would depend heavily on Nintendo's manufacturing and production strategy.
The second is the player's perception of its value.
If SDS ultimately just puts a map on another screen, it would be difficult to justify a $159.99 price tag. It would need to demonstrate interaction that cannot be achieved with a single screen.
The final risk is third-party support.
If only Ocarina of Time Remake uses SDS, it could easily become an expensive Zelda collector's peripheral. That is why I think SDS should be designed from the beginning as an extensible peripheral, allowing Nintendo's second-party teams and third-party developers to decide whether their games can make meaningful use of it.
For example, a stealth game could use SDS as a second camera, allowing the player to manage two different sources of visual information at once. A horror game could similarly use the second screen to establish another viewing relationship. In that case, SDS would no longer be a peripheral exclusive to Ocarina of Time Remake, but a genuine interaction medium.
So what interests me most about SDS is not:
“Nintendo made another second screen.”
It is:
The DS changed how players interacted with two screens; SDS could take that idea further and change how players interact with two information spaces.
From DS to SDS, this would not be a return to the past, but a way of taking dual-screen interaction itself into the future.