Thank you for stating that PS4 is the main FOR YOU.  Nothing wrong with that.  I honestly bounce back and forth a lot.  Example I played Uncharted 4, Horizon, God of War, RE7, and Persona 5 over the summer on my PS4.  I had the time to do so.

But in 2017 my PS4 went unused as the portability of the Switch allowed me to play far more.  This continued up to just before God of War came out.  Now as we enter the fall, portability has become a major factor again, and the Switch has all of my attention.

FOR ME, I flip flop and go through spurts.  More often than not though I find myself preferring the Switch due to time constraints.  They both certainly have their place though.

I highly doubt that Octopath had as big budget as SotC, and it would be only because it's a remake.

I don't think that barely anyone would call Just Cause 4 AA. It probably doesn't have as big marketing budget as some bigger AAA games, but it's graphics are AAA, it has huge and detailed map, cutscenes and plenty of dialogue. So it's development costs are  most likely about as big as some other AAA games. And what are those Switch AA games that have similar devolopment costs (not counting marketing costs) as Just Cause 4?

At least 48 of those Switch games are available on PS4 and Xbox, and they are almost all indie games not AA. So were are those AA games with 80-90+ rating?

"2017 had 15 AAA games, 10 of which got 90+ rating. " Where did you get these numbers? Only Persona 5 got 90 or more (and Divinity 2, but it's AA). Horizon Zero Dawn, Nier, Nioh and Wolfenstein 2 got 85-89. And if you think that Just Cause 4 and Detroit are AA, then so are Persona, Nier and Nioh. Why would you count BotW and Mario Odyssey when this should be about comparing PS4/Xbox AAA games?

And 2018 had at least 14 AAA PS4/Xbox games, which almost all got 80+, and 5 got 90 or more (not "about" 90). So how is that diminishing?

Are you just making stuff up to damage control, or what is this?

Yep, it's the beauty of taste and opinions.  I don't care that much about the portability, or even nothing, but my son does care a lot, and he prefers the Switch, he can play it in any place, and you should see how much he is good with Splatoon2...he's only 7 years old; I like the game a lot too.

 Anyway, I'm happy with both, and I'll play the best games on both ;)            XBox? not for this generation, as two consoles are more than enough, and often I don't have the time to fully enjoy the consoles I already have.   I will stay tuned on "Scarlet", who knows, maybe I will own 3 consoles, the next gen :D

I would say I remember seeing much more people saying Switch was their primary or that Switch can be than people saying it can't. So at most this thread would be directed at a very minimum subset of users of VGC that may or may not be in the thread.

You have to look outside of your bubble man.  I will use myself as an example, and there are many many people in the same boat.  It is not rocket science, and it is sad that I have to keep bringing up the same points to counter the same arguments over and over.  It seems nay sayers are desperately trying to downplay the Switch because admitting that Nintendo has a viable primary console is taboo to them.

Like I have been saying, it is all about TIME.  The Switch has more than enough retail games to keep gamers entertained.  There are good titles that will not come to Switch, I have a PS4 Pro AS A SIDE CONSOLE for those games.  By getting the multiplat games that do come to Switch, I have double the time to actually play the games than my PS4 allows.  I own RDR2, but instead of starting it I finished Starlink, Wolfenstein 2, and invested a chunk of time into Warframe.  All of those games are good games and worth my time.  When I have the time to play RDR2  I will.  But right now, Switch is most viable.

It is due to this fact that I, and more people than some of you are willing to admit, buy and play more games on Switch rather than PS4 or X1.  The PS4 having the bigger library has no bearing on people with this situation.  So yes, depending on the needs of the gamer, the Switch is just as viable of a primary console than any of the other to the mainstream.  You do not equal the mainstream, hell the forums do not equal the mainstream.  Many of the people I speak of do not have the time to spend on forums, let alone be tied to a tv.

You can have the biggest library in the world, but without the time to play the games, it is pointless.  To those that do not like Nintendo games nor value portability, it is an easy decision.  There is nothing wrong woth going with the PS4 or X1.  But if you do like Nintendo games and that portability is important to you, like it is to many, then there is also nothing wrong with going with the Switch instead.  The fact that it is selling as well as it is in a slow year should be proof enough of this fact.

I assume you are speaking of western RPGs, because as far as JRPGs go, the Switch is becoming a haven for them.  It is dominating japan after all.

See my reply above for my points on Switch though, because that sums up why the Switch is no less a primary than the others.

I feel bad for anyone who doesn't think it's viable.  It may not be their choice, but there's no argument that it can't be someone else's.

I don't think that anyone thinks like that. But saying that it's equally viable as a primary/only console, is not very valid argument, because majority of gamers would most likely choose PS4 as their primary/only console. But millions would still choose the Switch.

SOTC is a remake of a game that one never had a high budget to begin with and two already had much of the ground work done it even reused the original's code so to suggest SOTC has some high AAA budget is questionable Octopath is a new ground up AA project so would have a budget comparable or even more to such a game being remastered. 

Graphics and content don't make a game AAA you can have games that are exactly like AAA games in what they offer but aren't AAA because they aren't mega mainstream and high budget which JC has neither comparable to actual AAA games like RDR and some of what you listed again you may like these games but that doesn't make them AAA this isn't damage control it's flat fact as even people in this very thread that would tout those games would tell you they're not AAA.

Click

"AAA (pronounced "triple-A") is an informal classification used for video games produced and distributed by a mid-sized or major publisher, typically having higher development and marketing budgets"

You don't have even 14 AAA games that's the point otherwise if we went by your own logic it proves that things have diminished even more because it would mean 2007 had 50 AAA titles if we used your metric which further backs what you're arguing against.