I have already answered that very specific question, just go back in the thread and find it. It's not even very far back, sorry, I don't mean to cut you short, but repeating the same thing over and over again becomes a drag.

Oh okay, I got it! So in order to play BOTW you'll need to wait two generations for a Nintendo system to release that's even further behind in tech than what you claim the Switch is today. Got it, all makes sense now. 

I don't know, you are assuming that two generations into the future the divide between actual state of the art video games tech and whatever home system Nintendo will put on the market then, will widen.  We don't know of course, but I was hoping the "gap" was now as big as it will ever be. Of course considering how Nintendo fans are lenient in regards to this gap when it comes to Nintendo systems, the problem could get worse, but hey beyond my realistic approach I'm trying to be optimistic. I want to believe that things will get better and not worse. What can I say, sue me for wanting to believe 

I don't think it's about people being lenient when it comes to Nintendo, they aren't exempt from criticism as history has shown. Nintendo does however consistently churn out meticulously polished software, and for the most part people can overlook less ostentatious hardware if the software delivers. 

I agree at least historically speaking that Nintendo has a reputation of polishing their software. I don't remember back in the days I had Nintendo systems, to have suffered bugs the way we see nowadays in the industry, that part is definitely a plus on Nintendo's balance.

However, the software will go as far as the hardware can take it, and I don't mean bugs as these being present or not have nothing to do with powerful or weak hardware. I'm talking about other issues like effects, HD assets, filters like anti-aliasing filters for example. The more poweful these filters are the heavier they weigh on the GPU. As an example BOTW suffers from aliasing NOT because the devs are lazy and don't want to polish the game but because implementing these filters would weigh on the weak GPU of the Switch and doing so means sacrificing other parts of the game, like frames per second or complexity or depth... Such sacrifice would not have been needed had the hardware been more powerful.

And my hopes are that in the future the next gen systems will be more powerful, at least powerful enough to have such implementations not demanding any graphical sacrifices or as little as possible. It's only my hope, I have no guarantee of that of course, but I'm taking the chance and I'll wait it out. If that's what happens, then I win as I will have some better version of this game in the future with the DLC's probably included and hopefully at a lower price. If this does not happen cause they don't release this game in future hardware or the future hardware's tech gap widens and I decide not to buy it then, as someone else said, it's my loss and I'm fine with it. And that's all there is to it 

I can see your justification for Ocarina of Time, given that the N64 was strong hardware at the time, but I can't find any post where you explain why Twilight Princess specifically gets a pass when it was more technically outdated in 2006 than Botw is in 2017.

Oh man I don't remember whether I answered that or not, but if I did not, here goes:

Just to be clear, I never said BOTW is outdated, I only meant the HARDWARE and I wouldn't say it's outdated, just weak.

As for Twilight Princess I don't remember it as being outdated or suffering of weak hardware issues (with the exception of the Wii having a low def 480p output which showed but I was ok with it).

Maybe because my standards were lower back then. Remember that the farthest back in time you go, the more simple things were and video games are no exception. As an example I'll tell you that as a kid in the 1980's I knew next to nothing when a new game was released. All we knew about it was when a friend at school talked about it or when we saw a commercial on TV. Then at the store I just looked at what was written in the box of the game for information and of course the stuff on the box was all praising the game "go on an amazing adventure, with this fantastic game, blah blah blah...

As a consumer, my standards were as low as they could ever be because it was how things were back then. Then as time passed and as I grew up, my standards began evolving more and more with each passing generation. There was more and more info, magazines, TV programs about video games, reviews, then the internet came everywhere and more complex reviews, analyses, trailers, discussions, opinions etc. And this evolution naturally increased our standards and our demands, at least for hard-core gamers.

Anyway, long story short, you cannot hold a 2017 system (or anything else for that matter) to 2006 standards because things were different and what people expected back then is not what they do nowadays. So EVEN IF Twilight Princess was outdated which did not strike me as such back then, does NOT mean that one should be just as lenient nowadays cause things are more complex now and using the past as an excuse is a cop-out in my opinion.

I'm not talking about holding a game/system from 2017 to 2006 standards, I'm talking about holding Switch to 2017 standards and Wii to 2006 standards since that is when they released, and Wii was more outdated in 2006 than Switch is in 2017.

I meant comparatively holding it to past standards.

Again, the farther back you go the less demanding our standards. Simply cause a wooden cart pulled by horses 200 years ago was OK according to those days' standards does not mean that if they make a crappy car today that people does not have the right to call the makers on the flaws of that car. And if the maker of the crappy car says: Hey, 200 years ago people were happy with a wooden cart pushed by horses, my crappy 2017 car is WAY better than that wooden cart, so if people were okay with that wooden cart, you have no right to complain about my crappy car...

That would be a cop-out. Just cause standards were lower back then does not mean you must accept a poorly designed modern car today.

In other words EVEN IF Twilight Princess was not good technically (which I keep insisting that game did not stike me as outdated back then), but for argument's sake, let's say even if, does NOT mean I cannot hold the Switch to 2017 standards, it's a 2017 system with 2017 standards and 2017 competition and 2017 level of information for consumers. Therefore a 2017 level of criticism on it is justified.

If we're going to hold Switch to "2017" standards, should we not also hold it to the standard of what it is as hardware? That is, a portable device, not a dedicated home console like PS4 and Xbox One.

Now, you've said that you'll hold it to home console standards because that is what you would use it as, but maybe this disconnect between your needs and what they provide suggests that Nintendo itself is simply no longer for you. There's nothing to suggest they are going to go back to making powerful dedicated home consoles in the foreseeable future, because there is so commercial incentive to do so; the market cannot sustain three similar traditional consoles, Nintendo's only real success in the past two decades has come from non-traditional systems that avoid direct competition with MS and Sony.

Sometimes, like relationships, our love for game makers isn't forever. I myself used to be a diehard fan of Rare, but the company drifted away from what made me love it and eventually I had to make peace with the fact that it was over and I had to accept that and move on. Maybe that time has come for you and Nintendo.