I never played it, so I would definitely pick it up for the Switch. My brother has over 200 hours on the Steam version, and that is the second platform he has bought it for.

This one is a big maybe and Bethesda needs to see me on it.

My question is to why is it not a launch title and why do we need to wait so long for a game that game out just under 6 years ago by the time of the release of this version. Here's what I'll want to see in the game.

- FULL HD Rumble support
- New features or something that makes this version UNIQUE
- Visuals must be on par or better than the special edition

While I'm one of the few who never played Skyrim. I really am not interested in many things with that series. I ended up getting really bored with Oblivion, but I would be willing to try the series once more. I can see the Elder Scrolls game being far more enjoyable on the go than at home based on my experiences of Oblivion.

Looking back at the NX rumours, we totally expected some crazy things. 

Reminds me of when every thread was about a patent or stupid rumor :P

HD Rumble Support is a maybe but I lean towards unlikely.  Depends on how easy it is to implement. 
New features...I'm not counting on that.  Motion controlled combat is probably the only immediately obvious option here and Bethesda has *never* done motion controls so I doubt they want to try it with Skyrim.
Visuals is a tough call cause I don't know the particulars of how demanding Skyrim Special Edition is feature wise.  I know it is far more stable and efficient than the original engine.  I think the visuals can be close but at a lower resolution probably (900p in dock and 720p out of dock?  Maybe?).  I also wouldn't be shocked if they opt for graphics setting downgrade between dock and undock in order to have the dock mode look the best it can since Bethesda has far more stake in the console space than the handheld space. 

Your expectations are completely unrealistic when it comes to visuals. We are expecting the Switch to be about 150 gflops in gpu performance and fairly low bandwidith shared memory.  Because its a later architecture with an improved feature set plus tile based rendering we can expect that 150 gflops to punch above its weight compared to older systems using earlier architecture. However lets not forget the Xbox 360 had similar memory bandwidth plus a dedicated 10MB of high speed memory ideal for the frame buffer and its gpu was around 250 gflops, ps3 had about twice the memory bandwidth of Switch because it had 256MB video at 25.6GB/s and about 20GB/s for main memory on top plus superior cpu resources. Wii u has 32MB of 60GB/s very high speed memory which adds to its 12.8GB/s of main memory with gpu architecture inbetween Switch and PS3/360 in age. Just to be able to deliver a game as resource hungry as Skyrim in a portable format is an achievement without expecting miracles beyond that. I'm expecting it to perform at about 360 level perhaps a few things worse and a few things better.  The wii u probably wasn't capable of matching ps3/360 for Skyrim because of its low cpu resources which would probably have meant a cutdown inferior version. Just to play Skyrim on a lightweight portable system like Switch is pretty incredible to be honest. I suspect it will give you the absolute minimum runtime of 2.5hrs.

The Switch is about 3x Vita in performance in just about every area which brings it in performance terms about level with ps3/360 but with extra memory and that should be the expected performance level which is still pretty amazing for a portable.

If it's the enhanced edition then yes. If it's the vanilla edition then no.

I got Skyrim for Steam years ago for $5 or $10, but a glitch made the attack button not work. I've been planning to go back to it eventually, since I loved Oblivion. A version with better graphics and the ability to be played on the bus would interest me a lot. But if it's the vanilla version I won't get it.

The footage they showed off at the Switch conference was the enhanced edition. So unless they were engaging in false advertising, that's what it looks to be. The Switch is about 3x the power of the Wii U, which is itself several times more powerful than the Vita (only mentioning this because of the poster above spreading false info). So it should be able to run a game that doesn't push the XB1 or PS4.

How do you calculate its 3x the power of the wii u?

I think people need to remember Switch's primary mode is portable. When docked it still runs the same code as portable just switch's output to hdmi rather than the LCD screen which gets a gpu speed boost enough to generate the same graphics at a higher resolution or add anti-aliasing. It doesn't reboot the game loading new graphic resources. Cpu performance is meant to be the same in portable and docked mode. Docking the console just allows a resolution boost, games aren't programmed to take full advantage of the docked performance level because instantanously they have to run back in portable mode if you remove it from the dock. The portable performance level dictates game peformance except for resolution and anti-aliasing. No games have been announced that work only in docked mode.

I'm under the impression that HD Rumble actually requires some serious coding and will pertain to the software in the event of being done right. If it was a simple implementation then Breath of the Wild would support it and I remember Nintendo said the game will NOT support the function. Some people claim they can feel it while aiming the bow, but I think this is simply a case as the rumble is much more noticeable on the Switch than on other platforms. The PS4's rumble is rather weak and the Wii U didn't use much of it. That leaves only the Xbox One with decent rumble. Considering people like Suda51 wants to take advantage of it the feature. I think it's something that requires fine tuning to get right.

Maybe that's part of the reason why 1-2 Switch is a $50 game instead of a $30 game.

I'm a huge fan of Rumble and honestly this HD rumble was a selling point and made me cream myself. Feeling the recoil of shooting a gun or the clank of Sword clashing will be rather easy to do. The vibration and humming of a lightsaber with motion controls? OMFG GIMME!!! I CAN'T SPECULATE ANYMORE THIS FUCKING HUUUURTSSS!

How do you know that no games will be programmed to scale to the different modes of play?  Scaling the same game with the same code to different levels is an old feature for PCs and has begun to be used for consoles as well with the PS4 pro and  Xbox S.  Do you really think there is never going to be a developer which targets the docked mode and removes features for the handheld mode?  

Looking at the specs for the Switch and the Vita, the difference is much bigger than 3x, and the Switch is comfortably more powerful than the PS3/WiiU even in handheld mode.   And the fact that the GPU is more powerful docked cannot be ignored.   We've already seen that it runs Wii U games at better resolutions and framerates, we've seen sequels that have a marked improvement over their Wii U predecessors.  We know it supports engines which the Wii U and PS360 couldn't.  And we now that when all is said and done, the tehology in it is more modern and efficient than the tech in the Wii U, PS360, or Vita, so even if the specs were exactly the same the actual performance would still be better.

Is vanilla Skyrim really impressive when games like Breath of the Wild and XCX are already on Wii U and BOTW is already running on the Switch portable mode at 720P?  I don't think so.  If the Wii U can run Breath of the Wild then I think it could have run Skyrim if Bethesda had tried.  With Bethesda in particular it's often not a matter of power as the PS3 version of Skyrim showed.