Mad penmanship, yo! And bribery.

I'm being on my best behavior lol. The only fact is that Nintendo already said what it is. A home gaming device. Nintendo didn't say it was a third pillar. They said it was a home gaming device. If you're disappointed that you're not being forced to keep it at home, then I'm sorry you feel that way. If you're disappointed that this is what Nintendo chose to replace the Wii U with, then I'm sorry that this is the product that disappointed you. But this product wasn't made to replace the 3DS. It was made to redefine gaming platforms. Making a home console portable does that.

Switch at home can be used like real console (playing on TV with separate controller, for playing local multiplayer on TV) same like it could be used like real handheld. Basically its successor to Wii U and 3DS. Nintendo itself calling it "portable console".

Reality is that GB died shortly after DS arived, same will be for Wii (Wii U is already dead) and DS after Switch arives. Don't expect another Nintendo home console in near future, actualy I think in 2-3 years first we will see Switch Pocket, smaller Switch whitout dokc and controler.

It was made to salvage what's left of Nintendo's declining hardware line by throwing everything into the portable basket (the only hardware Nintendo has been consistently good at for the last 20 years), and mitigating damage to Nintendo's as a corporation by sparing them another failed console versus Sony/MS.

The only Nintendo console that's done great in the last 20 years was the Wii, and that had a controller gimmick, now obviously Nintendo doesn't have that this time (or last time) because if they did they would've used it obviously. So they had no choice in a lot of ways but to make a hybrid system. 

They could not go on forever having games like Splatoon locked away from 80% of their own audience because even Nintendo fans weren't buying their consoles anymore and they could no longer go on supporting two seperate platforms. The portable line basically won out in the end, but the "console" gets a token nod with a cheap plastic dock and the "home console" moniker being kept around (which I bet they will drop in about a year once 3DS sales completely fizzle out). 

I am in no way disappointed with this product. Not at all. I am probably going to own two (one for me and one for the girlfriend) but most definitely will own one.

If you do not think a console that has all of its processing in the hand held unit, uses mobile technology, cartridges, is being released in March (instead of near holiday), and gains nothing more than a tv out from the docking station is a home console, then I hate to see how you would label my oven since I use it to toast my bread.

I called this console being a hand held and was slaughtered for it. Now, the people that are afraid to admit I was correct will run from me, slam me, or try to discredit me. I do my work, I pay attention, and most importantly, I do not post bullshit. I get that you disagree with me, but the simple truth is, as I stated with my example of Nintendo saying DS was not replacing Game Boy (third pillar lol), this console is (when broken down) a hand held with awesome features. It is not a hybrid, and it is most definitely not a home console. To think someone that writes for a website would not pay attention enough to see this is laughable. Maybe this site could use one more contributor. Maybe someone with a wider array of knowledge and understanding of progression instead of limited and arbitrary views of the present... or maybe someone with the sensibility to know better than to respond to a person that he knows has the drop on him. Again I see you refused to talk to me on the merit of my debate points. I did you a favor and gave you more argument points to worry about refuting. Better work hard because every article you write that I read, I will be paying close attention.

As I stated once before, I love this console. I am a Nintendo die hard fan (born in '82 and own every major Nintendo console ever produced... even a Virtual Boy) so when I speak on this topic, do not think I am saying these things from a place of disinterest or pain. I love what I am seeing, but I do not see Nintendo bowing out of the dedicated home console realm yet. Especially not with a hand held that can do video out. We all know they would need to do better than that.

I suppose I can make my argument here for why I consider this to fall more into the console space with only some bleed over into the handheld space.  Something of an 80% home console and 20% handheld. 

1) First off, size.  The Switch unit is a bit large for a handheld traditionally.  The biggest and most distinct feature of a handheld obviously is the high convenience of portability due to being able to slip right into a pocket or a pouch in a handbag, satchel, or purse.  The Switch really can't in most cases.  There are extremes: the Game Gear was oversized (also failed btw) and some people could fit the Switch into those things.  But for most, the Switch unit is large.  And that's before you factor in the Joy-Cons, which are mandatory to use it at all.  Not only do those make it even larger, they also have full analogue sticks that would give you a real issue trying to pocket this or put it in a standard satchel.  This is something you will need a more substantial case or to just carry.  Cause it is mostly meant to be portable for short contextual periods or taken to a specific place and setup (airline tray, party table, etc).  Not be available at a moments notice at any time anywhere like handheld. 

2)  Second, it is (apparently) actively cooled.  This also ties into number one cause this seriously changes the convenience of portability.  It means this thing will run at a higher temperature that will make pocketing it unwise for comfort's sake if nothing else, not to mention you would want it to cool and breath.  Again, need a carrying case.  Also, the vents and empty(ish) space around the fan area to facilitate cooling compromises the structure.  It will still be plenty strong, but you would definitely not want to subject it to the pressures of a pocket or overly full purse/satchel.  Unlike a handheld which is traditionally pretty dang dense and thus, again, convenient to pocket since it can take those stresses exceptionally well.

3)  Third, handhelds have physical inputs integrated into the device and are not reliant on any peripherals.  It's simple:  handhelds have controls built in, consoles rely on controllers.  The Switch unit is not capable of any use as a system to our knowledge without a controller, either a Joy-Con or the Pro.  This runs directly contrary to handhelds which are built to have literally everything needed to game integrated into a single piece of hardware with no need for aditional physical addons.  Consoles need controllers, handhelds do not.  And the Switch needs controllers.

4)  Fourth, a major distinguishing feature of home consoles is integrated same-system local multiplayer capability.  In short, since handhelds have physical inputs entirely puilt into the device, they cannot support true same-system local multiplayer.  That is, any multiplayer that require simultaneous inputs.  This is the whole reason why golf games found a big audience on handhelds for quite a while, it's one of only a few ways to have any true local multiplayer because of this inherent design limitation of handhelds.  The Switch, obviously, relies on controllers.  And so we see already, it has support for true same-system local multiplayer.  That is, splitscreen.  That's a major distinguishing feature of consoles vs handhelds. 

For those reasons, I regard this as primarily a home console with mild overlap of handhelds.  People look at this and say "oh it's a handheld that has evolved to somewhat overlap with consoles" when in reality, it is the evolution of this:

That is, it is aiming to be - from launch - a home console that is easily and conveniently portable with the option to play on the go.  And I would say *that* is the word Nintendo is really latching on to:  convenience.  It's literally in every aspect of the design.  The Joy-Cons allowing for local multiplayer with no new controllers, the use of cartridges to allow playing off the physical media for modern games to avoid dealing with installs and get back to plug and play, the size allowing for portability, the battery and integrated screen allowing for playing if there is no TV.  All centered on the original console selling point of convenience.  Will it bridge handheld and consoles for them?  Probably, once they can get a smaller and cheaper version out, it's a bit big and pricey now.  But from a design philosophy perspective, I see a lot of home console design elements here that run contrary to handheld design philosophy.  Basically, just cause you can pick up the core unit and it has a screen doesn't mean it is a handheld, there's more to it than that.

Edit:  Oh, and using mobile tech has nothing to do with a console being handheld or not.  Some mobile tech is used in the Xbone and PS4 as well.  Where the tech comes from doesn't matter, it is the design that matters.

Edit 2:  I guess I could say that the Switch is the same thing laptops are to computers, an in between between a true computer and a handheld computer.  Well, back in the day when "handheld computers" weren't just phones :P .  Basically, a device built to give you most if not all functions of a computer in a more portable form while the handheld computers (and now phones and tablets) are their own beast, with the portability aspect being the only thing they kinda share. 

There are many things wrong with your post:

1) You clearly have no vision for the future of video gaming. Instead, you think you may have a vision based on what you see in the present while neglecting the past and lacking imagination for a future.

2) Calling this console a successor to both Wii U and 3DS is fair from your prespective because of your lack of vision for the future. This makes arguing your point here moot at best. However, a hand held with cool features is still a hand held. Just because the stuff is packaged in is not a reason to call this console something it is not. If 3DS came out with a docking station that gave video out to the television and the console saw controller add-ons today, would that really change the fact that 3DS is a hand held? No. Now there is also the rumor that the screen is touch... if that is true, docking the hand held to the station actually TAKES A FEATURE AWAY FROM THE HOME CONSOLE SIDE. Now, I understand that this is a rumor but if it ends up true, how in the world can you say this is a home console when it sees all of its potential and features utilized while it is used as a mobile? Another point the guy that tends to agree with you should be prepared to debate.

3) See my DS being called the, "third pillar" argument because it could have been suicide if they admitted to replacing the Game Boy line at that moment. We have watched this happen before (if you were actively following gaming in 2003).

 4)Game Boy Advance was Nintendo's best selling console at the time. I am not going to revisionist history this with you because it is very, VERY clear you have no idea what you are talking about. Gamecube was dead, not Game Boy Advance. People were saying Nintendo should make a new home console back then. Just like Wii U is dead NOW, not 3DS so people are hoping and praying that Nintendo rush to replace that instead of replacing their money making hand held line. This is history repeating itself. Nintendo does not do what the common video gaming pubilc thinks they should do (replace the struggling home consoles first), they do what they want to do. And when it comes to Nintendo, using your typical progressional logic is a failure as history has shown us. Also, taking Nintendo or any company literally is suicidal. These compainies are politicians which means they will say anything to cause minimal scare (see DS being, "third pillar") while taking risks.

5) Not only do I expect another Nintendo home console, I expect it reasonably. They tend to stick to five to six year cycles and I would be surprised if their next console is not at least hinted at in that time frame.

Lol, so many people trying to say otherwise, but It's a handheld that you can plug to your TV.

When you create a hardware so that it can be played without being plugged into anything, it becomes a handheld.
All the specs are designed so that it can be a proper handheld, and the software will have to use these specs as main references so that the games runs properly on the console when it's not plugged.

If tomorrow, the Vita was getting a TV dock and a wireless controller, would you call it a home console? Lol no.


The only important part in defining if it's a handheld or a homeconsole, is its position in the market, will it take the position of the WiiU? The 3DS? Both? That's the important question here, but we won't know until at least 2018.

It's important, and I think there lies the mistake for Nintendo when not defining it properly, the mistake is that if the console doesn't sell more than the 3DS, it will be seen as a failure for Nintendo.

Right now, and until at least 2018, Nintendo is just going to see what happens and act accordingly. Like they did for the DS in 2005.

My vision!?

I talking about facts, not about my visions. Switch is successor to Wii U and 3DS (Wii/DS) platforms, and its hybrid of home console and handheld not just handheld that can be connected to TV.

And not history is not repeating, Nintendo goes for totally new and different strategy, they now have unified platform and product that aiming handheld and home console market in same time.

Do you actually know why Nintendo decided to go with unified platform and product that is basically hybrid that aiming handheld and home console market in same time!? Because Nintendo admited that in modern time they cant anymore support separate handheld and separate home console or two different platforms. We will definitely have some new Nintendo hardware in future, but most likely that hardware will be part of Switch platform.

I like this post a lot. I agree with none of it, however. I will start with your last point first which is about mobile technology. Aside from the fact that Playstation 4 and Xbox One use technology closer to PC's and about as far from mobile technology as they can afford, there is the fact that the use of mobile technology in this console leads to a culture and pattern of philosophical practices. On its own, you can make that argument, but when combined with numerous other facts about the console, it becomes a very strong talking point.

Now, I will go back to the top and work my way down. Again, this is a great post as you did your homework and you showed you really believe in your words. I am not here to say you are incorrect, just express why I, and people like me disagree.

1) You killed yourself with the size point when you mentioned other hand helds not being size friendly (even though the culture has evolved since then). Because companies are pushing the boundaries of size of a hand held, that does not mean it is somehow less of a hand held. Obviously, they are showing that you can take this thing publicly and hedging a great deal on that as a selling point so to say it leans MORE towards console based on this point (even when combined) is silly.

2) I do not understand this point at all and I am not going to pretend like I do. This may not be a mistake on your part, but no matter how many times I read it, I do not understand it. If your argument is that as a hand held, this console is not convenient, that argument does not work because convenience phones are not always convenient and neither are tablets, but that does not make them any less phones or tablets.

3) Now, you are citing traditional hand helds and this is why I both like your argument and disagree with it. My daughter has an ipad and an iphone, your philosophical thinking would tell my daughter that those devices are not tablets and phones, but home consoles. No, no no. There is no simple way to explain this to you except to say, you are incorrect here. I do like the argument, however, this is outright incorrect and when put to scrutiny, you will see it as such.

4) This point would be excellent if and only if that multiplayer was an added benefit of connecting the console to the television. However, because it is tied to the hand held unit just as much, you can get a 50/50 split at best on this point which does not lend well to the 80/20 split you are looking to prove. If the hand held unit can do all the things the home console unit can do (allegedly), then at best you can argue hybrid... at best.

Your last picture... isn't that a console that is 80/20 home console to hand held? Like, you literally slayed yourself posting that. You just showed us all what a portable console (in theory) would look like. This is about as far from what Nintendo is doing as possible.

Again, this is a well developed argument. I like what you contributed.

Yeah, it is clear you have no idea what I am talking about because of our differing views on the future. You think you are talking facts but the truth is, you are talking about your beliefs just as I am.

History is repeating itself, Nintendo is selling you something, telling you it is not exactly what it is, and making moves for their future. It is not my fault you are ignoring the parts of my point that expose this.

I know exactly why Nintendo decided to do this, because it made the most sense. They can get hand held first and third party support and fool people into thinking this is a home console. I am not mad at Nintendo, all of their moves are smart. I do not think you understand that about me. I agree with Nintendo's moves. You are just lacking that final part, the part that I see that you do not. The fact that you think Nintendo's next hardware will be a continuence of the Switch is where we disagree and is where the difference of vision comes into play. And it is OK, but that does not mean we should start calling a hand held a home console.