What the hell are you going on about?

Nobody is "apologizing" for "shortcomings", they are pointing out that they are completely different devices in terms of specs, features, size, price, etc. so a sizable gap in visuals/performance is expected.

Switch is significantly cheaper than high end phones and has just as good of battery life when playing demanding games so i dont think bringing them up supports your argument.

Nobody? Ok ok, sure.... all criticisms deflected but no defense...

Defending by bringing up valid points is not the same as "apologizing for shortcomings" or "deflecting critism".

Why do you get so offended anytime somebody brings up the portable aspect of Switch?

Can't say. Wasn't able to find a full priced Doom downgraded in both graphics and framerate and released several months later with less content than the original on the Xbox One X.

I get offended when people flip flop between it being HH or console depending if they need to show strong points of it being HH instead of console (like saying well I can play it on the go so it being weaker isn't even a concern) but back to being a console if they want to compare sales... then it is more of a console when battery life or price of games is pointed at.

I perfectly accept Switch as a HH that can be plugged to the TV a little more streamlined than PSP or PSVita, but shenanigans as "I have always been a playstation fanboy, but haven't bought a PS4 because it doesn't have 5 must have games... hey I bought Switch because Skyrim on the go is like a totally different game". Of course pretending there aren't other systems that were HH and could be used on the TV and that Nintendo created the switch as if not an improved NVidia Shield.

There is a big difference between saying "I don't care much about graphics, but love portability" to "graphics doesn't matter". Nintendo decision to be low powered isn't due to portability, is something they have been doing since Wii. At the time the apologies where the type "but it's fun", "it's novel", "it have motion controller" as if those couldn't be achieved if the system was stronger...

And of course when ports doesn't go to switch it is because devs hate Nintendo, not because of Nintendo own choices.

That's kinda like telling a PS4 gamer "you could code your own PS4 emulator from the ground up and play Horizon Zero Dawn at  4K/60fps, why bother playing it on PS4?" Even if a gyro mod exists for PC, (does it even exist? Cos I sure as hell don't know why to make one) that would require me to fork out cash for a powerful gaming PC and go through all the hassle of modding which is frankly beyond my limited technical expertise, why go to all that trouble and expense when I'm already quite happy with the gyro-powered Switch version?

So Xbox 1 X use a small mobile chip? Who would have though? LOL. Vita must be as strong as ps3, damn. Every tech analysis guy should learn again

Yeah, you can buy a GAEMS Vanguard and that is already enough to play ps4/xbox 1 games on the go everywhere you want, even when you are walking. Buy this system and you can play any game on this system without have to purchase any other system to play game on it while a lot cheaper than Switch and last 4 hours for AAA games, brilliant

What the hell are you going on about?

Nobody is "apologizing" for "shortcomings", they are pointing out that they are completely different devices in terms of specs, features, size, price, etc. so a sizable gap in visuals/performance is expected.

Switch is significantly cheaper than high end phones and has just as good of battery life when playing demanding games so i dont think bringing them up supports your argument.

Call again in 10 years. 

Doom on Switch has its instances where it drops hard on several major firefights in Nightmare difficulty, not so much anymore after the patch, but it's still noticeable. I've always to be tempted to make a chart to include all the firefight sequences in the game and state which ones make the Switch to drop really hard, which shouldn't rise to 30%. But I mean, it's worthless. All in all, I'd argue the game is completely playable even on a system that only allows it to peform at 27.7 FPS in average (don't remember the exact number stated in Digital Foundry's latest video). 

Image quality is another story, but it still looks good, especially on portable mode, where all the drawbacks are pretty much taken away thanks to the smaller screen. At the very least, the game never ever drops to this, even with its agressive anti-aliasing:

Just bring 6 of these https://www.amazon.co.uk/PowerWalker-2200-LCD-IEC-1200W/dp/B00O636RRC/ref=sr_1_6?ie=UTF8&qid=1523345933&sr=8-6&keywords=ups+power+supplies they give about 30mins of use with 100w draw... so as long as you have a slim PS4 it should be okay to give you 3 hours of doom and match the Switches battery life!

If there is interest on the idea there will be modders making it on the games, it doesn't really have to be you. Kinect had several mods to play on PC, PSVR work on PC, so if people liked the idea of gyro aiming on Doom they could make a mod.

But it's funny that you compare making a mod to put gyro controls on Doom to make a full working emulator.

Still haven't seem where did I say you have to do it.

Where did I say X1X use a small chip?

And what mod can you make for Switch to play games on a better resolution?

Nobody? Ok ok, sure.... all criticisms deflected but no defense...

What an ugly PS2 game.

Not acceptable, only switch can play console games on the go (notebooks never existed in this reality).

The Switch version has nothing to do with how well the Xbox One X version performs when played on the bus. Were you able to find an Xbox One copy, hook the Xbox One X and a television up to a generator and test it out? Science needs to know, man.