You may well be right.  I think we all just reflexively point to mobile as the killer or handhelds.  We could be wrong, at least to some extent. 

I think its a certainty that mobile gaming has had a negative impact on handheld sales.  But, I don't guess it is possible to know exactly how much impact.  It is certainly possible that a stronger 3DS launch would have resulted in much higher LT sales.  And, yeah, I have no idea about Vita.  

As to your other point about mobile's impact on home consoles......  That's a great point, and something that will be interesting to see over the next decade or two. The thing is though, there does not seem to be any end in sight to the power gap between portable and stationary hardware.  So, as long as there are gamers that care about "power", there will be demand for home consoles and/or PCs for gaming.   It will be interesting to see if the percentage of people that value portability over power shifts significantly though.  

For the record, I don't see any of the possible shifts as necessarily bad for gaming.  Changes happen, and the world still turns.  

Yes. I only realized when portable game sequels started to get announced for it.

I am pretty sure that everyone was seeing how the Switch was gonna do before putting all their eggs on it. Even Nintendo themselves.

But sure, we can pretend this was always a sure thing.

I'll ignore you ignoring my post as I'm sure we all know why you did that, so now I'm only curious why you think the "Zelda effect" will disappear next year specifically. What's stopped it from disappearing sooner? What's suddenly gonna stop it next year, especially when it's selling like an evergreen title? Since it's supposedly the only killer app on Switch thus the highest selling game, you have to also be saying that proven evergreen series like 3D Mario, Splatoon, and Mario Kart are also gonna suddenly stop selling. Otherwise, they'd well overtake Zelda and cleary prove it's not the only killer app, heck not even the biggest one (though MK8D is gonna do that regardless).

It was, sadly some people just wasn't smart enough to see it.

1:1 Switch:3DS is too simplistic an analysis. Reasoning: the Switch drives higher hardware revenue and software per unit tie-in due to the increased multi-user potential it has over the 3DS. Not to mention software, on top of selling higher numbers, drives higher revenue per unit.

In other words, 1 Switch is probably closer to the value of 2 or 2.5 3DS units. Similar to how the Wii had more users and generated more revenue and profits in the books than the DS, despite not selling as well.

Killer app does not mean the same thing as evergreen title.  I am sure there is a correlation between the two, but they are not the same thing.

The term "killer app" is a simple way of explaining the microeconomics behind hardware and software.  The vast majority of customers do not value hardware by itself, save for a few tech enthusiasts.  The vast majority of customers only value software.  When someone owns a console then they will buy a new game if they value it at $60 or higher.  If they value the software at below $60, then they will buy it used or not at all.  However, if the person does not own a console, then they need to value a game at $360 or higher.  They need a game that fans will be very passionate for.  (And of course this is a bit of a simplification, because three games valued at $160 or more still function like a killer app.  You still need games that fans are exceptionally passionate for.)

Evergreen titles just need to be valued at $60 or more.  Mario Kart is an evergreen title that is not really a killer app.  On the Wii it sold 37m, and on the Wii U it sold 8m.  The sales numbers swing so much based on the install base of the console.  Pokemon games are all killer apps.  You always see a big increase in hardware sales when the first Pokemon game comes out for the system.  Also Pokemon sales figures don't swing so much like Mario Kart.  They always sell within a few million of each other.

Zelda is unique in that sometimes it is a killer app, and sometimes it isn't.  Ocarina and earlier Zeldas were killer apps.  Then they stopped being killer apps.  Breath of the Wild made Zelda a killer app again.  

Unfortunely, i don't care about what you have to say as you just have an agenda against me due to a past discussion. Refrain from quoting me. I don't care what you think nor want to talk to you. I'm sure you can find better things to do with your time.

You didn't answer any of my questions... Just gave definitions that make little sense as Mario Kart is in no way anything but a killer app. It's always a top selling game on every Nintendo system, therefore a major reason why people buy the system. Evergreen title is a game that sells well for years, and these terms usually go hand in hand with Nintendo games. You try to bring up some numbers but your argument is still clearly based on personal bias rather than cold hard numbers, I mean you're trying to say BotW is a killer app while MK8D isn't despite it selling just as much ltd and tracking ahead of it. But whatevs, I'll just let the Switch and it's inevitably great 2018 sales do the talking for me.

Killer app = software that sells a significant amount of hardware

Evergreen = software that sells a long time

These are the simple definitions I use.  What definitions do you use?  These two words do not mean the same thing even though their is a correlation between them.