Hybrids will be a though sell simply because the consumer clearly wants diffrent experiences on different occasions. To cut it short, handhelds are for short burts of single-player gameplay ( "in the same room"), while home consoles are for more prolongued sessions of gameplay (with multiplayer or not).

A great example of why this is the case is the Vita. That console failed because it wanted to be a portable home console. It fell short on that because if you wanted a home console experience, you would actually buy a home console (at the same price btw - PS3 was also at $250).

So no, a hybrid console would be a terrible idea. At least at the current state of technology.

Yes, he talked about unified OS, architecture and services, but he specifically mentioned that no, not all of their games will be on both consoles (if we do get 2 and not 3 for example). The games will only be shared in what platforms it makes sense to (ex: Pushmo, DKC, etc.).  

No the exact opposite of COD or Madden. Read the OP. You would have your base Mario Kart 8 game and it would get SUPPORT throughout the entire generation. New tracks, new modes, characters, etc. etc. So with Nintendo's new approach I think the idea of a console "generation" might get blurred a little bit, but I think a base of 3 or 4 or 5 years, depending on the game, would be good.

I think this approach makes sense for IP like Star Fox and F-Zero where they can make a decent looking engine for the games once, sell that digitally for say a low price of $29.99, and and then release new content on a yearly/bi-yearly basis.