You posed this idea and wanted to know what people's thoughts were:

My thoughts are that you got seduced to buy several games for cheap, have locked yourself into them for the foreseeable future for no reason (you don't actually have to be ashamed of a backlog, but you want to act like you have it under control), and are now trying to use this to prove why 3rd parties don't work on Switch, even though it's an extremely subjective case.
I wouldn't know of many busy people who would own a Switch, two PS4s, a Vita, be willing to buy all their games in bulk for an entire year to save a bit of money, even though they can easily afford full price games, and then have to schedule all those games throughout the year even though they have several other priorities in their lives.

If that's how you want to live your life it's fine, but I just don't think you represent many people.
Those are my thoughts, I'm done with this thread.

1. Just because I am not hurting for money does not mean I cannot choose to go with a better deal.

2. I layed out how I have time to play at home, 53 hours a month minimum, just not as much as I would like.  But I see you chose not to include that in your rebuttal.

3. HDR makes a HUGE difference for one.  And for two, even a game at 1440k upscaled to 4k is noticeably sharper than their base PS4 counterparts.  Just look at any comparison on YouTube (using a 50" or greater 4k display) and it is easy to spot.  That is even with compressed youtube videos.  Downplay all you want, noticeable is noticeable.  Not required, but nice to have.

4. See point number 2...the VITA just gives me more playtime on games I want to play when I am away from home.

5. To me, that is a huge backlog (and yes I included the new games when I said huge).  As someone who makes it a point to beat every game I buy, they fact I have not played them bugs the shit out of me.  But what can I say, I had games that I would rather be playing then, just like I do now.  Your view on the matter is subjective.

6. There are not contradictions, you just do not take into account things I have already answered in previous replies (some to other users) into consideration.  There really are not contradictions so much as you refuse to take into consideration that I may have a point.  Other users who prefer Switch have acknowledged it, why can't you?

7. My Wife got it for me for my Birthday...and before you ask, no I did not request one.  In fact, I made it clear I would rather wait for the PS5 to drop to upgrade.  But what am I gonna do, refuse a gift from my wife?  No, I am going to enjoy the hell out of it despite what nay sayers think about it.

I know it is subjective, however I am saying sales are reflecting that not enough people prefer these games on the go at the current price point based on the fact that I, someone who has defended 3rd party games on Switch for the past year and a half, recently found myself not choosing the Switch version.

If not enough people buy the games, devs will not make them.  That is the problem.  I never said they "do not work" on Switch.  I said they do not sell, and the late port/price has a lot to do with that.

Devs will port the games that make sense, but I doubt we will see the new DOOM or Wolfenstein on the current iteration of Switch due to lack of sales.  It is a problem for 3rd party games that exists and regardless of how well they work, people need to buy them or they will cease making them.

Price is kind of an issue in your twenties when you're not likely to have more than 20K in the bank, and likely have a low income. When you get closer to 40 and have a nice little nest egg and investment of a few hundred K and an income of over 80K in salary, capital, and other income streams, price isn't really an issue - it's time. Whether it's 20, 40, 60, or whatever - if you're putting in 20+ hours it's worth the price of entry. What you don't want to do is spend any kind of money on stuff you'll never play, that's just throwing it in the toilet. Also, what appeases your family. When you have a number of people in your family (all gamers), the Switch's portability factor is a major plus, it allows for far more opportunity and time to play games - and in greater comfort.

This is basically why I was almost purely a handheld gamer for the past 15 years (aside from Wii), because the whole single player TV-console which doesn't deal much with multiplayer hasn't fit my lifestyle for a long time now.

BUT, if you are a younger person, say 12-24 or so, and don't have much of a life, then a console like PS4 which hooks up elusively to the TV for single player and online action, is easily the better choice. But if you're more social, prefer local multiplayer, and need the freedom to play - then there really is no alternative to the Switch; as you can still have your TV/console setup for your game, and then pick it up for on the go - no transfer, nothing, 2 seconds.

I can agree with most of what you said, it is the reason I am bought 3rd party games out the butt on Switch during year 1.  However the games I bought were games I wanted to play anyway and most were not on Switch.  I am picking up what I missed out on during year 1 of the Switch.

Now back to my point, how many people in this world do you know that make 80k, have investments, etc etc?  I can promise you that is the minority, and we revisit the problem where it is not that Switch ports are not worth it for some consumers, it is that there are not enough people willing to buy them for devs to keep making them unless they are sure hits.  I feel this is why the new DOOM as of now is not coming to Switch for example, or why 2k said WWE2k19 will not be coming due to backlash from 2k18 (seriously though, screw them).  It is a major factor in the grand scheme of things that negatively affects Switch port in the future, there is no escaping that.

Also I make over 100k (not even factoring the wife's income) a year and have a retirement fund and 4 kids at 31 years old.  Many would say I am well off, but not rich.  Given that I still choose to save money points to the fact that just because I CAN afford the extra cash, does not mean it is ideal in my eyes.  Not everyone who is well off will automatically be ok with paying more.

Where are you coming up with these games not selling well enough?

DOOM switch -340k (Next DOOM and RAGE  another bethesda shooter, not coming to Switch possibly due to poor sales)

WWE 2k18 -180k (2k's fault for shit port, but they are still using sales and backlash as an excuse for 2k19 not coming over)

Wolfenstein 2 PREDICTION (I have a feeling its sales will be similar to DOOM, however if proven wrong when we get sales numbers I will retract this statement and admit I was wrong)

Ys VIII PREDICTION (no sales numbers, but it does seem like the general consensus is to get it on PS4 instead.  However like the above, I will admit wrong if it turns out that way.  To be honest I expected this one to do well, but all I see is negativity across the net on it.)

NBA 2k18 - 370k (this is debatable as 2k19 is coming to Switch.  This was released day and date with PS4 and X1 however, yet it is where most devs would consider too low)

Resident Evil Revelations 1 and 2 - 130k (older port, but two for one and capcom stated they were looking to how this game sold for Switch sales potential)

Not all of them sell bad and these are a few examples from VGChartz (not 100 perc acurate, but enough to make a point).  Given these sales numbers and the fact that 3rd party devs keep skipping Switch (many games I feel would have been easy to port even).  I am not saying they are terrible, but I feel like it is enough to scare devs off without even trying.

I suppose part of this is prediction in a sense...safe prediction...but prediction none the less.

compare things like

Just Dance 2018

Lego City Undercover

Sonic Forces.

you know... 3rd party games which launched on all 3 platforms at the same time.

Doom, Wolfenstein and WWE2k18 (at the time the second lowest rated game on the Switch) all launched up to a year after their X1/PS4 counterparts.

Heck even looking at the rather weak port of LA Noire on the Switch sold 100k more units on the Nintendo system than the X1 and only 180k short of the PS4 version with that systems 80m strong installbase of players (less than 1/4 the number of Switch owners to PS4)

Cars 3 driven to Win on Switch sold as many copies as the PS4/X1 combined.

Rime, on par with PS4 and 3x the number of sales on the X1

Disgaea 5 launched in 2015 for the PS4 and has sold 350k The switch version came out middle of last year... has so far sold 300k

So yeah, you can pick out places where 3rd parties games haven't sold (physically at least) as many as their years later ports on the Switch have, but you can't look at the total sales as to how those games have done in the last year and think they aren't doing better than at least the X1 in terms of numbers in a lot of places and that system has more than double the install base as the Switch still.

Thank you for proving my point.  When priced equally and released day and date, they do well.  The problem is most of them come late and are priced more.  Those devs will see Switch as not worth the time.  That is the entire point of this topic.

http://www.argos.ie/static/Product/partNumber/7594313/Trail/searchtext%3ELA+NOIRE.htm

http://www.argos.ie/static/Product/partNumber/7596823/Trail/searchtext%3ELA+NOIRE.htm

http://www.argos.ie/static/Product/partNumber/6734088/c_1/1%7Ccategory_root%7CVideo+games%7C14419738/Trail/searchtext%3ELEGO+CITY.htm

http://www.argos.ie/static/Product/partNumber/6735290/c_1/1%7Ccategory_root%7CVideo+games%7C14419738/Trail/searchtext%3ELEGO+CITY.htm

Don't make me slap you for trying this.

Those games did not launch at the same price on the Switch / X1

I know you are grasping for some strange justification here, but I really can't see what the end goal is.

Do you want people to just come in the thread and drop a thumbs up for you getting "free" games for the PS4 over the Switch?