Is 2.5 hours to 6.5 hours, why are some people always trying to make it look worse than it is? That's a way better battery than the one on my 700$ laptop lol

I would take a normal console that is far more powerful amd yet still cheap.

Reasonable for the company producing it is no concern for the consumer. Don't forget there are also console manufacturers who sell their consoles at a loss at launch. Nintendo decided to not go that route even though they could afford it.

Of course. But if Nintendo thinks they'll sell a lot of consoles at that price, Nintendo wouldn't do otherwise. From a consumer perspective, it's obvious than the less, the better. But it doesn't make sense from a company perspective if they could sell the device more expensive.

No cos I already have ps4 for better graphics. Switch is for portable Zelda and skyrim etc

I'm not being aggressive, i'm simply saying that you trying to say "Switch can't run these games" as though it's a fact is dumb, since nobody knows what the specs of the Switch are.

The reason why my post may read as aggressive is because there have been plenty of threads and posts of this type of thing and each one always comes down to "So what proof do you have that these games can't run". There is no proof. Nobody outside of some insiders possibly or people that worked on the system what the specs are. Some people always try to act like THEY personally built the system themselves and know exactly what is in it and what it is capable of, and that's what you're acting like too. 

You cannot try to say "We know that the Switch can't get proper third party support, it's too weak and won't get these games" when you have no idea what the specs are. We've also had plenty of leakers and insiders saying that the hardware in the switch won't be a problem for third party support and that it's powerful enough.

The example you listed (Dragon Quest Heroes on Switch compared to PS4) is faulty as that is not a good/proper representation of what ports on the Switch would look like. In one of the screenshots it looks like Square Enix just simply ported the Vita version to Switch and increased the resolution in an effort to save time and money. (Though that's not confirmed, i'm simply just saying that looking at the screenshot comparisons it looks like that. We know the Switch is capable of much more than a vita just like any console is). 

I listed another example of a different game called Snake Pass, which is a PS4 also coming to the Switch. The developer Sumo Digital even had a live stream a week and a half ago to show off the game running on Switch and it looked great. 

The fact of the matter is that we won't know what the Switch is truly capable of until well after launch, just like how we won't know how ports will look on the Switch until we see one that actually started development on PS4/XBO/PC/Switch at the same time. 

There is no discussion to be had if you're just going to keep trying to say "Nah, it's not powerful enough" despite what anyone else says or what is shown to you.

When you start off your thread like that, it just makes it seem like you wanna try to take false jabs at the Switch for no reason. I'm fully willing to have a normal conversation if you want to about this, but the way you started this thread makes it seem like you are not willing to. 

And cool, I hope you have a great vacation. :) Like I said, i'm not insulting you or trying to be aggressive in my posts towards you or anything, but seeing threads like this are just tiresome when it's always the same thing when there's no proof. 

And to answer the actual question of the thread, nah I wouldn't buy a stronger Switch. I'm not into buying upgraded versions of consoles. I bought my PS4 back in November of 2015 and i'm fully fine with it, the games look great still. I don't need a PS4 Pro, if I wanted better graphics or framerate I would just use a gaming PC. Mid-generation upgrade consoles seem pointless. Why pay $300-$400 for an upgrade of a console I already have when there will probably be a new generation in a few years after that anyway such as the PS5 or Xbox 2. (Whatever they wanna call it after Xbox One). The only time I would ever consider buying a mid-gen upgrade console is if I didn't already own that console. For example, if I wanted to buy my first Xbox console this year I might as well wait for the Scorpio instead of getting a XB1S, since I don't already own the console so it won't be just a mid-gen upgrade for me it will just be the base console. 

No I'm ok with how it is now, plus it would probably be more expensive and that's a scary thought.

No, I'd just stick to my standard Switch. I don't buy revised consoles, unless my current one breaks or goes missing. I'm not really fond of the idea of mid gen upgrades anyways.

Also, I don't think a revised Switch is going to come just 1 year later...

If it costs me more, which it will, then no, not really :/

Because when asked how long Zelda runs portable, they said about 3hours.

The avg normal demanding game, like zelda, will not run 6hours. Some will run less than 3hours.

Only very little demanding indie games will run 6hours.