The 99% part wasn't really about viability, i think all three current consoles have enough games to keep 99% of people going. Viability for being a primary console comes down to gane preference. I should have made that more clear.

I don't think that many people realistically care a huge amount about specs, frame rate, resolution etc. When choosing a console. If that were the case every Nintendo handheld would have failed.

I think what games people are looking for is a big factor. Many things can go into why someone plays one console more than another. A big reason why I play my switch more than my ps4 Is convenience. I can play it on the tv, i can play it as a portable, I have 2 docks so I can easily switch tv's if I want. The switch tends to be much faster at turning on and getting into a game. The big advantage the switch has for me is adaptability. I'm sure I'm not the only one that feels this way.

If you are going to include 3rd parties on your list, you must do so with Switch.

Diablo 3

Warframe

Smash

Octopath

Xenoblade Torna

Dragonball FighterZ

Valkyria Chronicles 4

Wolfenstein 2

Ys VIII

Just to name a few.  These are all very good games and if they can play more of them due to portability, the Switch is a viable option.  There are plenty of games for the average gamer even without the ones you mentioned.

And again, look at the sales data for those games you say do not mean anything.  Seems awful high for a game that "means nothing" to the mainstream.

Nintendo fans alone can buy like 5m of a Mario/Kirby/Yoshi stuff. Nintendo doesn't need average buyers to have million sellers. Bringing sales has no point here.

One could argue that the average gamer does not buy CoD games.  A large portion of those sales are from people who ONLY play CoD.  In fact, just about every game you listed has a fanbase that can account for the majority of sales.  Watch those double standards man.

If you sell 1m octopaths, it doesn't mean that octopath traveler is as mainstream as COD.

No, but again many of those CoD sales are just CoD fans buying every game.  Nothing wrong with that, but it is a poor comparison.

Octopath and Ys? Are you saying that games like Octopath and Ys are as valuable to the mainstream average casual console buyer than COD, Read Dead, GTA, Spiderman, Battlefield? It's not.

Breath of the Wild, Mario Odyssey, Splatoon 2, Smash, and Mario Kart are.

Xenoblade? You're bringing up niches of the niches that even though can be million sellers they're just far from being mainstream to the random bloke that goes to a Walmart to get a modern current gen console.

Not if that random bloke likes jrpgs.  Random blokes have certain tastes as well.

Don't get me wrong, we here are gaming enthusiasts. I myself have 150h of XCX on Wii U. I don't have that on any COD, but if we're trying to find the console that could work as main/only console for the average player, well, it's very hard to be switch.

All boils down to if they benefit from portability or not.  If not, of course the PS4 is the way to go if they do not like most Nintendo games.  But if they do, then they would be more than happy with the games the Switch offers.  Time to play the games is essential after all, otherwise all you have is fodder for list wars.  Also as someone already pointed out, most average gamers only buy a few games a year anyway, if you really want to talk about average gamers.

If we're talking about fans and experienced gamers, well, now they can have whatever console as main console as they like. Even 3DS is the main console of many Pokemon fans out there. I've got friends that have 999h in several Pokemon games.

Holy shitballs that is a lot of time lol

That is not the point at all. Quantity of games has nothing to do with viability here. It is personal preference that dictates a consoles viability. The ps4 may have more exclusives but if a person has no interest in most of those games it will not be viable for them. The point of this thread appears to be that the switch should not just be dismissed as a persons primary or only console. The console has more than enough games to keep 99% of people going for years.

I think this is where the confusion is occurring. You are saying that the Switch has more than enough games to keep 99% of people going for years. At the same time though, you say that quantity of games has nothing to do with viability. So by that logic, even though Switch has enough games to keep people busy, if they aren't the games that people prefer, than is that really a viable option?

Ultimately I think that Switch is great for certain people and obviously could be their only console. I just tend to believe that if a person is only able to choose one console, Switch has less appeal due to technical specs and third party support. For those that are not interested in AAA games, FPS/resolution, or those who only want to play Nintendo's own AA/AAA games, Switch is a viable option.

Personally I am glad I don't have to choose just one.