Kind of a bummer, but if it comes down to it, I think I'd take portability over 60FPS, assuming everything else is equal and the game is worth buying in the first place.

lol! First, how much CPU power do you think the HD rumble is really eating up? Second, I use the HD Rumble and like it quite a bit, especially in Mario Kart 8 Deluxe, so there goes your "nobody' blanket statement.

Maybe, but I'd have liked to see a more ambitious Sonic game from Sonic team rather than Generations 2 with pretty much the same visual fidelity and scope. Maybe opting to not ball and chain the game to a handheld would have been a start. Yeah, it's going to look graphically better on PS4 and X1 regardless, but in a cross gen up res sort of way.

The Switch is a fantastic handheld, It's going to be must have by the years end, but it remains a 400 GFLOP machince with less peak performance than the PS3, albeit with more advanced graphics shaders amd ram.

HD rumble is a very expensive gimmick. Nintendo had to compensate power because it would make Switch too expensive. HD rumble doesn't use hardware power itself. 

With 'nobody' I obviously mean a very small amount of people that also could've lived easily without it. Nobody really wants or needs HD rumble above power, but Nintendo did it anyway and now they lose even more third party support because the Switch is barely more capable than Wii U. 

The limiting factor with the Switch's hardware power comes down to form factor and power usage. It frankly isn't possible to make a console with PS4 level power with the Switches form factor and power requirements. 

I'm sure you could make it but it would be too expensive and terrible battery life.

OT: Game looks decent.  I haven't played a Sonic game since Sonic Adventure 2 on GC though.

I don't believe that for a second. Like I said previously, Nintendo could've used the Tegra X2. This chip is already more than a year old and specifically designed for mobile-like devices. Infinity Blade (iOS) came out in 2010 with way better graphics and performance than Wii. It is now 7-years later. Now they're working on mobiles that come close to even X1 and PS4: https://venturebeat.com/2016/02/16/mobile-devices-will-be-more-powerful-than-playstation-4-xbox-one-in-2017-arm-forecasts/

Switch could be closer to X1, but is really closer to Wii U. 

Just because the chip is a year old doesn't make it affordable. Have you see how slowly video cards go down? Not to mention R&D on the Switch began well over a year ago

I was googling around for a tablet that uses the Tegra X2 to get an idea of a price comparison, but I can't find one. I can't find any commercially available device that uses the X2 actually.

Not sure of the thrust behind the Infinity Blade comparison. Infinity Blade is really impressive, but looking at what games came out for the Wii in 2010, I'd take the Wii. Mario Galaxy 2 may only run at 480/30, but it is a visually impressive game with a lot going on in it that runs great.

Infinity Blade is cool, but it is a proof of concept more than anything.

There is nothing in the Joy cons of value and the same could be said for most joypads, they all probably cost sub $5 or even $3 to make. The reason they sell at $50 is because they can get away with selling them at that price. Items aren't priced at close to what they cost to make they are priced at what people are prepared to pay.