I think those are just Nintendo's token once a every year/two year "core" game. Honestly in hindsight if Nintendo knew the Wii U was going to struggle like this, I don't think they would've agreed to finance Bayonetta 2 at all. It's almost certainly going to lose them money. 

In general I think it's dawning on Nintendo that the concept of a $200-$300 "Nintendo box" that sits under the TV is one that has very little appeal when it's not attached to a once-in-a-lifetime gimmick. The next "Nintendo console" IMO will just use the same architecture/chip as Nintendo's next handheld (which will be the primary driver of sales, the "console" will merely be a home companion that's optional). 

I don't know what to think about this.

Well, we sorta knew this was going to happen. It all becomes important when you consider how it's implemented.

Wait, you honestly believe they will create some sort of single nonsense device that will represent what was once their separate console and handheld (instead of two hardware units there will only be one)? That will be waaayyy too expensive, even if they were to put it around Wii U levels, there will be no way Nintendo will ever be as successful this way considering how most of their profit comes from hardware. Unless this "hybrid" can move as much units as both a console and handheld can, then Nintendo would be stupid to do this. They will combine the platform, in a sense that their devices will share the same infrastructures, OS's, UI, etc. But only one hardware product? That sounds too much like nonsense.

It will be like the iPad and iPhone. Those are two seperate hardware products. 

Both use the same exact OS, run most of the same apps, and even use the same chipset more or less. 

I think actually the console box will be more like just a cheap accessory for the handheld (which will be the MAIN platform). The console will just be a duplicate with a mobile ARM CPU + GPU, maybe clocked a little higher than the handheld counterpart. If you want to play at home on your TV you can. 

That doesn't sound too good of an idea. They should still create separate hardware lines, but sharing the same OS, architecture etc, like they have been saying all along. Simply "clocking" a little higher won't do much in a way of making sure whatever their handheld displays (I'm expecting <720p resolution) will look nice on modern TVs. That would essentially mean this "handheld" successor of Nintendo's consoles will be a downgrade of Wii U to the people. As far as we're all concerned, while Nintendo isn't all about specs, I'm pretty positive they won't simply limit themselves to "just around Wii U power" for 2016 and beyond. The console can share the same architecture and OS's, however it MUST have more shaders, more FLOPS more raw power and more RAM than the handheld, otherwise it won't be a very appealing product to buy. They'll probably see their lowest hardware revenue ever with only one "main" console. I could see both the handheld and console working together however, if they want to continue the whole Gamepad thing, the handheld can actually work like the gamepad itself, while the console is its own independent console. 

The other thing that I think could be possible is the concept of a "stackable" chipset ... meaning the handheld and "home dock" could connect together and share hardware resources. Wired connections like Thunderbolt are incredibly fast these days.

I think something (combined HH + home dock) in the range of a

Quad-Core ARM CPU (becomes an 8-core CPU when linked)
Dual-Core SGX PowerVR Series 6 (200 GFLOP approx, 400+ GFLOP when "linked")
2GB RAM (becomes 4GB RAM when linked)

Plays games at Wii U+ fidelity on handheld at about 480-540 resolution on the go. But when you have the home dock you can play at home at full 1080p resolution.

I can see that. Handheld for $200, home dock for $120 or so.

The fitness/quality of life stuff will become Nintendo's second pillar. I'd bet this setup would make more money than the dated current Nintendo console that only Nintendo fans want + old fashioned Nintendo handheld setup which has lost them money for 3 straight years (probably going on 4). 

I think they can go higher than that...Tegra K1 (clocked at 950MHz) has 365 GFLOPS, about the same texture fill rate as X360, though less bandwidth.

How long would the battery life last though in the handheld version? 400+ GFLOPS I think is a plenty for Nintendo. Plus the PowerVR chip is probably cheaper (it's the same one Apple uses in the iPhone/iPad, just at x2, but they probably could get it for dirt cheap). 

Nintendo Fusion?