Ahh so you think Nintendo is going to go back and add handheld mode support to all games that require Joy con use. Are they going to force third parties to do the same?

And to be clear, you think Nintendo has no problem with the idea of offering a device that doesn't fully support Switch's primary accessories out of the box (as they cannot be charged) and requires an additional accessory in order to charge them? You also think that Nintendo has no problem offering a "Switch" that could not be used with an existing Nintendo Switch dock. Is that correct? Lastly, do you think Nintendo choosing the name "Switch" was a poor choice if they intended on creating a model that, by its very nature, doesn't actually "switch" play modes at all?

Initially, I thought there'd be issues shrinking Switch down and making it compatible with current docks - but looking at my model, it'd be fairly easy to make something smaller, which fits in the current dock but isn't as tall or as wide as the Switch with joycons attached (it would obviously need to stick out of the dock - which could be achieved). A system with circle pads instead of analog sticks and ZL/ZR buttons alongside the L/R buttons rather than underneath would be changes that could work. The overall dimensions could be a similar size to a joycon-less Switch, I guess.

It's not nonsensical just because you say so.

A portable, joycon-less Switch is, by its very nature, not a Switch. It's a subset of a Switch. I don't believe Nintendo will make that since its play-mode versatility is the Switch's biggest selling point, and as much as you want to downplay it, it would confuse the consumer market about the Switch. "You know all those things the Switch does in every commercial and ad we've put out  in the past two years? This new portable Switch does hardly any of it unless you spend far more than you're saving on the cost of a regular Switch".

I just don't think Nintendo would do that. You can think it's obvious Nintendo would all you want, but at the end of the day, you're basing it on your feelings as much as I am which means I am no less credible than you about it. So please, stop acting like I'm being ridiculous just because you don't like my argument.

It's not like saying that a dock less Switch is not a Switch as it's still compatible with a Switch dock. It can still be used like any other Switch. A mini Switch wouldn't be compatible with Joycons, and wouldn't be compatible with a dock. It would require new/additional accessories to be compatible with both. It is incompatible with existing joycons because it would not be able to charge additional joycons. It is incompatible with the dock because it would not be able to be removed from the dock due to the way it was designed. It seems strange to me that Nintendo would have the foresight to know that they planned on making a portable, joycon-less, dockless Switch mini within a few years of launch but not have the foresight to design the joy cons or dock that would be compatible with it. It just doesn't seem like a very Nintendo thing to do if you ask me.

As for market confusion, this is the same market that in general thought the Wii U was a tablet accessory for the Wii. So, I think you are overestimating the markets education and thought process behind game consoles, and overestimating how easy concepts are to convey. If Nintendo had tremendous difficulty conveying to the general public that the Wii U wasn't even the same console as the Wii, how confident can you possibly be that conveying the idea of "this portable Switch doesn't do any of that Switch stuff" is going to be easily accepted by the general public?

I didn't name any other games that require Joy-Cons because it doesn't have any relevance to my point. But again, you insist to adopt the concept that one's refusal to address a point is a tacit agreement that your point is correct. Stop trolling users with this silliness. If you're more interested in "winning" than you are in actually having a conversation, then I'm not interested in engaging with you.

The mindshare for Wii U was really low, anecdotally the avg person had no idea what it was. Peoole KNOW the Switch

Ahh, so now Nintendo is going to make a Switch-mini specific dock that charges joycons.  So now we have multiple docks for multiple switches. We have Nintendo creating branding so that Switch owners don't buy Switch Mini docks and vice versa.  We have Nintendo re-labelling already published and future games so that mini switch owners don't buy games that won't work on their Switch mini without purchasing additional accessories.  This just keeps getting more and more convoluted, and you think they can just show a few scenes in a commercial and bingo. People will get that.

It's great that you reject that Wii U failed because of market confusion, but again, your opinion isn't fact, and I won't be treating it as such. You can assert things all you want but you can't expect other people to accept them. Here's what the former head of Nitnendo's indie program has to say.

"Wii U is not selling as well as it deserves to. It has a lot to offer with great games you can't get anywhere else," Adelman said, answering a question about whether Nintendo was to blame for the "mess" it's in. "The value of the GamePad hasn't been justified. But the name Wii U is abysmal. I think that cut sales in half right there."

https://www.polygon.com/2014/8/5/5970787/wii-u-nintendo-bad-name

I mean, you'd have to be pretty arrogant to claim to know more than one of the former heads of Nintendo what would have access to all of the market research you could only dream of, right?

The mini you are talking about, to be clear, doesn't exist. It's hypothetical. You make it sound like it's a slam dunk Nintendo makes this, but again, that's just your opinion, literally based on no facts. Tell me, was there ever a game that worked on the Game Boy  and not the Gameboy color? Advance and not the Advance SP?  DS and not the DS Lite? DS Lite and not the DSi?3DS and not the 3DSXL or 2DS? It's like this is not the same thing at all as the market accepting those, is it? Besides the target audience you're talking about can easily be addressed by just making a "Switch Lite" that does everything the switch does, is slightly less wide (say cut down on the size of the bezel on the sides of the display), uses a newer version of the tegra that is more energy efficient, has a higher battery life, and costs less to produce. They could even sell it without the dock with no issue as it would be compatible with the existing dock. Imagine that. I just thought of a Switch revision that addresses the market your hypothetical device with none of the limitations or confusion.

Nah, I don't back up points that don't need backing up. I don't care what you assert. I don't care if you want to convince yourself that I accept your points if I don't refute them. I do have a sincere interest in a conversation, but that doesn't mean that I have to have the conversation you want to have in the way you want to have it. You don't set the rules, and I won't follow them just because you want me to. If you don't like me not following the rules you set, just stop replying to me.

- USB-C extenders allow compatibility with the dock.

- A HDMI wire is enough for a HH Switch to mirror to the TV. With a long enough wire(s), the system can be the controller.

- Portable docks are already a thing

- Streaming (unlikely but this is how most smart devices output to tv)

Switch can keep on switching just fine.

1. It's not a herculean task, of course not. But it is more difficult to market and sell, and make your product more difficult to educate consumers on. this is obvious.

2. It's not an appeal to authority since Nintendo spends tens of millions of dollars every year on market research which the heads of Nintendo would clearly have access to. I'm appealing to the data which the head indirectly shared. Do you have any data that would refute that? No? It's just your armchair anonymous internet message board user opinion? Okay. They know more about the market than you do. They know more about why products sell and don't sell than you do based on data that you do not have. If you knew half as much as you think you do, you'd be making a comfortable living off of your experience and authority. Instead you're posting on a message board making paranoid narratives in your head about how the mods conspire against you instead of taking the time to actually look at the facts. When it comes to why Nintendo products did or did not sell, I'll defer to the heads of Nintendo and their data, not you, since you know, they have credibility.

3. The product I proposed is a smaller form factor than the switch. Hence "mini" still applies, doesn't it? In fact, doesn't the word "mini" and not "portable" imply smaller unit with complete Switch functionality and compatibility instead of a limited portable device? Why is it a problem if the only dimension that can be made smaller is width? A smaller switch is still a smaller switch. Heck, maybe they're fine with it looking like a Switch with the NES joy cons attached. It doesn't stand to reason that we automatically lose joy con attachment ability just because the Switch is made smaller. You're just asserting that it must be because you don't like the other possibilities as much as you like the one you've settled on.

Just take a good look at a Switch with joy cons in a switch dock. Notice how the limiting factor is actually the ridges on the back of the joy cons, and they aren't all the way to the edge of the joy con. You actually have about a quarter inch on either side of the Switch dock where the switch can be made smaller and it still fit in the dock, of course, they could also make it marginally thinner.

4. I can back up the point just fine. I can easily list the games. Again, you keep asserting that because I don't address every single one of your points, I am conceding the points I don't address to you. This is not the case. I'm just not willing to play your games where you get hung up on some nit-picking nonsense that doesn't matter. We've been through this before and you clearly haven't learned that just because I'm not playing your games doesn't mean I can't answer your questions, it just means I wont.  So, I don't care if you think I'm conceding the point to you. if that's what you gotta do to feel better about yourself, have at it.

Such elegant solutions. I'm sure Nintendo would be proud to display a Nintendo Switch portable with a wire running from the bottom of it into a dock, and just... laying next to it. That just screams "quality, well thought out product".

- "portable docks" are a thing because Nintendo didn't design the dock particularly well, so people take the guts out of a dock and put it into a new case, and again, many of them aren't exactly elegant solutions. Can you imagine if a handheld with a cable going from it to the tv was considered a "hybrid console"? That would be interesting times.

- Smart devices don't care about latency. Game consoles do.

ARMS is playable, dosent mean its the preferred way to play it.This is one game that being playable is not good enough, at least in my opinion.

But wasnt the entire point of making a handheld only SKU is to have a more acessible model for the more casual market?(What the user refered as the kids market)The games I just listed are some of the most casual there is, not to mention multi million sellers.Even if Lets Go is playable, you are taking away an important playstyle out of it, which kids or casual might gretly enjoy.And if you are one of them, and in order to enjoy those games fully, you would have to buy a 70 dollars pair of joycons and/or an 80 dollars dock, then you are killing the whole point of having a cheaper model.Assuming the mini dosent outright stop you from docking the system.

This Switch mini idea is full of holes.