Handheld version-$199, between Vita & Wii U in terms of power, able to run Wii U engines at a lower resolution.

Console version-$199, slight upgrade over Wii U, extra power is to allow games to run at 1080p.

Nintendo success/failures have never been a direct result of power and Nintendo has no desire to get into a spec war with MS/Sony. Lifetime sales of 3DS+Wii U will probably be around 80 million (3DS-65m, Wii U-15m), 70 million or so when u take into account people who own both.

So why do u believe the console version would get crushed in this scenario? Right now 3DS is about half the price (2DS-$129, 3DS XL-$199, Wii U-$299), has cheaper software ($20-40 vs $40-60) and has a vastly larger library. Of all these were equal then it's certainly possible that sales between the handheld and console would be more similar (30-40 million each) and it doesn't really matter if one does worse than the other because the whole point of this is to increase software output by not having to release software for 2 completely different pieces of hardware,  increase software sales buy not having certain games being hindered by a low install base like Wii U, and ultimately maximize profits by lowering R&D and increased software revenue.

What? Lol, that's not gonna happen. Quite the opposite. I see the next handheld being completely digital, while the console being typical CD. Carts are pretty much obsolete now as is. There's no way Nintendo is going to go back to carts on the next console for very obvious reasons, and they simply can not have the kind of console-handheld relationship they've been talking about with two different physical formats.

While I don't think the versions will be separate per se, I do think that the same game will have exclusive content depending on what you play it on to further highlight the reasons to own both instead of just one. I think that Smash 3DS and Wii U are irrefutable proof that this will be their philosophy on this matter, but working backwards. With Smash Bros Wii U and 3DS, they used the exclusive content to get you to want to buy both games, but with the new systems, they'll use the single cross-buy game as a way to get you to purchase both systems.

Cross platform online play between systems will be pretty much a given, so I see no issue there.

No they dont, 3DS is about to reach 50m in under 4 years with a low-powered device supported by Nintendo games, niche Japanese games and child-friendly licensed games. By the end of its lifetime it will be more like 65m with Wii U selling about 15 million for a total of 80 million units of hardware this generation. Obviously some people own both of those devices so with a unified approach we may see less people buying both devices due to them being virtually the same, so if they can retail these type of sales next-gen that puts Nintendo's unified platforms at about 70 million or so.

Nintendo's next gen hardware will essentially be the next natural step for their handheld. 3DS is somewhere between PSP & Wii, it's successor will likely be somewhere between Vita & Wii U that can support Wii U engines at a lower resolution. The console is just a more powerful version to allow playing games in 1080p. This allows Nintendo to divert all resources to making games for one piece of hardware that is playable on the other device as well. By doing this they can supply much greater software output, meaning no more droughts and certain games won't underperform by being on a low install base device like Wii U. Games like MK8/3D World/Tropical Freeze all would likely be 5-10 million sellers if they had a 3DS size install base.

The idea is basically what Sony did with Vita/Vita TV except Nintendo actually has the games to make it a success, Pokemon/2D Mario/3D Mario/Mario Kart/Smash Bros/Animal Crossing are all games capable of selling 10 million or more. Retain the 3DS audience while offering a TV alternative for people who enjoy gaming on a TV better. Also with these devices being the same price and having the same games, we might see a more equal amount of handheld and console owners. 6040 in the handhelds favor instead of 80/20 like it currently is.

Why couldn't they go with carts? Similar to the way that Vita/Vita TV share a single format, just use 3DS carts but at a higher capacity, 4-16gb should do for pretty much all Nintendo games and the type of 3rd party games Nintendo handhelds typically recieve.

I agree we could see some minor exclusive features depending on which device u play on along with some sort of connectivity similar to what GC/GBA offered. This gives consumers at least some incentive to own both devices.

I don't think Nintendo remaining competitive is the same thing as getting into a spec war. They aren't making another underpowered system. Not for a third time. They'll lose the final amount of fans they have and never be competitive afterwards. The Wii was weak for a very calculated reason. The Wii U is weaker for a very specific reason, the gamepad. The next console can't do that again.

Fusion DS - $199. Decently more powerful than the Vita. Better resolution screens. Right circle pad instead of the N3DS nub.

Fusion Console - $299. Decently more powerful than the PS4. Vita sized Gamepad and refined Pro Controller Plus, both included. (Note - I think they should remove the gamepad, but I don't think they will) The new smaller gamepad would be shaped similar to the Vita when it's in its grip case, so more controller like, and the NFC sensor would be in the screen, just like on the N3DS.

Adding a second, standard controller not only shows support for hardcore gamers who simply want a standard controller instead of the gamepad, but it also shows support for families, as they have multiplayer options right out of the box. It's so stupid that they don't do this already, as Nintendo's brand is so closely tied to home co-op play, and it wouldn't be a useless extra controller to those who live alone.

Because it wouldn't be a competitive home console. What about the console in this scenario does anything to make the people who've passed on the WiiU want to buy one? They'd still have a woefully underpowered console with little to no third party support. Everyone but dedicated Nintendo fans and parents shopping for little kids will just laugh at it and buy a Playstation, Like they did with the PS1 and PS2 and they are doing now with the PS4.

Selling the home console for $199 won't be doable. Not at launch at least. Not only do Nintendo need to pay to actually make the console, but to develop it aswell.

They'll have another gen just like this one, crappy home sales with good handheld sales. They might make more money on them, but the OP claims that they will take over the home console market and leave Sony and MS playing catch up or having to do something to counter Nintendo. Which just won't happen, neither MS nor Sony need to worry about what Nintendo does. They are, for all intents and purposes, an also ran.

- Same content across all platforms is becoming old hat (just cloud gaming). It hasn't helped to sell anything.

- It is a fact that handheld sales are down year on year for a while now. New people move to phones and people grow up and stop buying handhelds meaning the market is only retracting. You say it won't retract but don't have a shred of proof. Look at the numbers and pattern - it is not even negative cyclical retraction, but simply just neative and linear, also know as the worst.

- Volume of games means little. Look at the shovelware for the Wii. Also unless some new IPs actually start coming out, few people will care about twice as many games with Mario and Link in. Also from the looks of it, Nintendo are not very competent and programming as they have not dealt with new techniques for years. Either they will have to hire many more staff (large overheads), or still fire out old fashioned games. This never helps sales.

- New IPs? Like what exactly? (Only post those that have been a large hit).

-Jap games have been stagnating long before the Wii. Even FF has died a bit of a death. The market has shifted towards CoD styled games (which is a shame, but that is how it is).

- Cheaper development is always welcome to any company. However this is assuming that the hardware or extra staff do not leech into this.

-Game streaming has been on the PC for sometime now, and it hasn't been popular. Fact is, people like sitting on their couch, with their mates, watching a big tv and playing on a console. Few people want to do this on the toilet or in their bedroom alone.

- Moores law will/is already showing the problems with consoles and handhelds, and showing the advantage of phones/tablets short product cycle. By 2016, phones will have significantly increased in power (theory says by 100%, reality is a bit less then that). This happens every two years, so phones/tablets will have the best hardware in them, yet the consoles are fixed with very low end hardware which is always dated on release. Now back in the day, doubling performance gave you little return, but that is no longer the case. Doubling performance gives astronomical returns meaning fixed hardware is quickly made obsolete. Now consoles have the advantage of size compared to phones/tablets, but a handheld does not.  

In short; a handheld will date increibly quickly.

- The makret begs to differ on cost etc. Look at the WiiU. Worst performing console - one of the worst selling consoles of all time. By 2016 a handheld should be able to outperform the WiiU. If not, Nintnedo are being cheap with hardware yet again. This does not bode well in a market which does want graphical power as part of the overall package.

The WiiU has very poor graphics. To argue otherwise shows your lack of understanding of hardware. Graphics are not subjective as some people claim, but fully quantifiable and comparable. With 4k tv's coming out, all the consoles will struggle. If you have a new console in 2016 that is not more powerful then the rest.....well we have seen what happens haven't we.

Hi, padib! I wouldn't say it wouldn't be not even close to as bad as Java vs C++ (since Java is much slower because it isn't pre-compiled). I'm talking about something more like Unity: you write one code and it exports native code for several platforms. This way you have native code, pretty fast, and just wrote it once.

The only overhead I can see is that if the idea is: write one code and the SDK will simply export it for the home console and automaticaly export a downgraded port for the handheld, we would have a more high-level abstract code. It would potentially cut the punch of the console at half from what we know it. Basically, let's say that a console like that with a GTX660 wouldn't have advantages compared to a normal low-level console with a GTX650 that would normally give you half the fps a 660 would.

I believe we need to wait for more details about what a single API means. It could mean:

- Handheld and home console will have SDKs with the same programming language and similar APIs, easier to learn, easier to port.

- Both will have an Unity-like SDK that exports automatically the code for them. Developer will have to downgrade the game to run on the handheld and porting would be optional.

- The same as above but with automatic porting. It's a complex thing to do and the result won't be that optimized.

iPhone and iPad are good examples, but pay attention that a lot of Vita games have better visuals, even if the current iDevices use a way more powerful hardware. The last porting of Bioshock really showed a lot of weakness on these devices.

Sony is doomed... I cannot see it staying in the market for much longer anyway!

GPUs aren't devices as simple as that. Double the power and then you double the resolution. It's not the way it works. They aren't like that. GPUs have several bottlenecks and it's hard to determine which one is giving you problems (it can even be more than one). And mobile GPUs aren't nowhere near similar to console/desktop GPUs.

What you are proposing isn't possible from a technical standpoint. You would need manual porting and that kinda defeats the whole Fusion concept.