I get that you still feel burned by the Wii U, and that you want to protect yourself from a repeat disappointment, but I think at this point it is safe to put aside any fears of Switch being weaker or on par with PS3/360/Wii U.

The specs and the games clearly show it's a step above. We're talking about a GPU a decade newer plus 6-8 times as much RAM.

Fact that some multiplatform games were performed below PS3/360 is not prove that Wii U hardware is weaker, simple because devs learned to use most of PS3/360 hardware in 2012, while devs in 2012. were just started working on Wii U hardware and they stilld didnt learn to proparly use it not to mentione to use most of them. Just compare PS3/360 multi platform games from their first year 2005/2006 with multi platform games from 2012/2013, or Wii U multiplatform game from 2012. with  those PS3/Xbox360 games from 2005/2006. and you will get picture, we talking about night and day difference here (for isnstance CoD 3 from 2006. and CoD Black Ops 2 from 2012). And fact is that Wii U is more capable than PS3/Xbox360, Wii U has less capable CPU, but has more modern and capable GPU and 2-4x more RAM, so used in right way, Wii U hardware could achive more. Evrething we saw until now tells us how much more capibile Switch is compared to PS3/360/WiiU (again, Switch currently hardly has any game that runs at 720p (they are 900p-1080p in most cases), while only few were above 720p on PS3/Xbox360 and we actualy had plenty of sub HD games, that fact also tells you what is difference in power, and devs yet need to start taking out most of Switch hardware). Rayman Legends is heavily compressed on Switch and that's actually only game that has some miniuses compared to PS3/360/WiiU versions of games.

Nintendo definitely has some VR/AR plans with Switch, what exactly it remains to see, they definitely have lotsa a interesting ideas and patents.

Again, you're forgetting the huge number of games on PS3/360 that were sub-HD.

Obviously wii u too had sub HD games compared to PS3/360 like Sonic Racing which was close to ED on wii u. Also the issue of missing detail on some wii u games.

Not some, almost all and the learning curve for wii u with a simple 3 core CPU arrangement without multi-threading and well documented radeon gpu is not going to be hard. It's a mute point anyway the wii u is done and so we can see exactly how it performed for its whole life cycle and that is it performed very badly.

I get that you still feel burned by the Wii U, and that you want to protect yourself from a repeat disappointment, but I think at this point it is safe to put aside any fears of Switch being weaker or on par with PS3/360/Wii U.

The specs and the games clearly show it's a step above. We're talking about a GPU a decade newer plus 6-8 times as much RAM.

You don't get anything sadly. I bought and enjoyed my wii u but the farcical nature of the fanboy nature has always annoyed me. I have all 3 consoles; ps3, 360 and wii u and the defence of wii u when clearly it is performing to a lower level than the previous consoles overall has always annoyed me. Missing detail, slow loading, churning disc drive, inferior sound, lower frame rates for many games and a poor controller with important missing features like analogue triggers and yet many claim it to be superior. There are some fantastic games on wii u despite the hardware and there are games which utilise the later gpu feature set but the overall picture is of a weaker struggling console for many games.

Again you are making assumptions here. The Switch is a two tier system, one is its portable performance level and another is docked. Despite some shortfalls in cpu performance and memory bandwidth its clear the docked performance level is superior to 360/PS3 however for the portable performance level there is obviously a severe drop and the need to conserve battery power. Also cartridges and limited flash memory means there is pressure to downsize and highly compress data which are other factors and that applies to both portable and docked modes.

How many Switch games are going to get the amazing 7.1 high quality soundtracks that the ps3 had. That is pretty obviously zero because its limited to 5.1 channels. How many Switch games are going to get hours of high quality 1080p fmv? again zero, not that many would want it but for some games where you have an unfolding story and the fmv is very high quality it can be enjoyable. How many games on Switch will benefit from the subtle control of analogue triggers for driving and guns, again zero it doesn't have them.

I'm just making the point for many games the Switch will not be able to offer the same experiences as 360 and PS3 even though there will be many games on Switch that would not be as well done on PS3 or 360.

The Switch gaming experience is a slightly different one from 360 and PS3.

However again this is premature, we will get a full picture of how the Switch performs in portable mode  for these games when we see the reviews of retail code and digital foundry does its comparisons.  

Lets not forget unless Nintendo have changed the timings in their firmware the last concrete information we have from developer documentation is it runs 3 Arm A57's at 1020mhz for game code and has a performance of 153-157 gflops for portable mode GPU. If it strays from that battery life will decrease, any sort of boost mode or not enabling power saving will drop battery life considerably. Also from what has been discussed elsewhere on neogaf the Switch utilises the cpu for wifi processing and the wifi chip itself is pretty power hungry. Doom for example is a very multiplayer focused game. You don't want players droppring out of the game all the time because their battery needs charging. It will be interesting to see how ID and Bethesda approach portable performance of that game. Nintendo claims the minimum playing time of 2.5 hours for Switch and we have seem 3 hours for Zelda which is a single player experience. Doom features much heavier use of detailed textures, lighting, much faster pace gameplay, lots of rapid scene changing with requirements for hd feedback constantly. It's a killer for battery life on gaming laptops. I'm geniunely intrigued to see how it performs on Switch in portable mode. I'm expecting a nice playable 60fps version docked though unless they try to get close to PS4/Xbone visually and end up at 30fps which will be very disappointing. Docked is a different ball game, it takes all the restrictions off except for cartridge size limitations.

Anyway I wasn't wrong about wii or wii u and don't expect to be wrong about Switch portable mode but will be more than happy to be wrong. 

How many Switch games are going to get the amazing 7.1 high quality soundtracks that the ps3 had. That is pretty obviously zero because its limited to 5.1 channels. How many Switch games are going to get hours of high quality 1080p fmv? again zero, not that many would want it but for some games where you have an unfolding story and the fmv is very high quality it can be enjoyable. How many games on Switch will benefit from the subtle control of analogue triggers for driving and guns, again zero it doesn't have them.

I'm just making the point for many games the Switch will not be able to offer the same experiences as 360 and PS3 even though there will be many games on Switch that would not be as well done on PS3 or 360.

However again this is premature, we will get a full picture of how the Switch performs in portable mode  for these games when we see the reviews of retail code and digital foundry does its comparisons. 

Lets not forget unless Nintendo have changed the timings in their firmware the last concrete information we have from developer documentation is it runs 3 Arm A57's at 1020mhz for game code and has a performance of 153-157 gflops for portable mode GPU. 

You don't get anything sadly. I bought and enjoyed my wii u but the farcical nature of the fanboy nature has always annoyed me. I have all 3 consoles; ps3, 360 and wii u and the defence of wii u when clearly it is performing to a lower level than the previous consoles overall has always annoyed me. Missing detail, slow loading, churning disc drive, inferior sound, lower frame rates for many games and a poor controller with important missing features like analogue triggers and yet many claim it to be superior. There are some fantastic games on wii u despite the hardware and there are games which utilise the later gpu feature set but the overall picture is of a weaker struggling console for many games.

Again you are making assumptions here. The Switch is a two tier system, one is its portable performance level and another is docked. Despite some shortfalls in cpu performance and memory bandwidth its clear the docked performance level is superior to 360/PS3 however for the portable performance level there is obviously a severe drop and the need to conserve battery power. Also cartridges and limited flash memory means there is pressure to downsize and highly compress data which are other factors and that applies to both portable and docked modes.

How many Switch games are going to get the amazing 7.1 high quality soundtracks that the ps3 had. That is pretty obviously zero because its limited to 5.1 channels. How many Switch games are going to get hours of high quality 1080p fmv? again zero, not that many would want it but for some games where you have an unfolding story and the fmv is very high quality it can be enjoyable. How many games on Switch will benefit from the subtle control of analogue triggers for driving and guns, again zero it doesn't have them.

I'm just making the point for many games the Switch will not be able to offer the same experiences as 360 and PS3 even though there will be many games on Switch that would not be as well done on PS3 or 360. The Switch gaming experience is a slightly different one from 360 and PS3. However again this is premature, we will get a full picture of how the Switch performs in portable mode  for these games when we see the reviews of retail code and digital foundry does its comparisons.  

Anyway I wasn't wrong about wii or wii u and don't expect to be wrong about Switch portable mode but will be more than happy to be wrong. 

Lol, of course it doesnt mean, its no so simple, that 2x slower CPU automatically means 2x slower FPS. Again, why some game that are on PS4/XB1 30FPS on Switch are also 30FPS!? Offcourse that 30 FPS PS4/XB1 games will not run at 15 FPS on Switch, so like I wrote, it's up to devs and their priorities.

Again, I used Skyrim like example of one of AAA Switch games, yes it's remaster of last gen AAA game, but still is one of 3rd party AAA games that Switch has.

All of those games will have some downgrades, if that will be only graphic downgraded or FPS also we will see, and it's possible that some of them will have cutted some feature. Non of games until now dont have different gameplay mechanics, they are some games that missing mod, or some feature, or 30FPS instead 60FPS, but those things are not different gameplay mechanics.