I agree with all this.

Theres so many benefits to this concept, it would be a waste to not use it.

If this isnt what nintendo is already planning, I hope one of their guys in charge reads this thread, because this needs to happend.

"A fusion platform would also have one indirect effect, they'd have to push it with everything as it would be their sole pillar for gaming, unlike the Wii U where they dilly dallied with no market for the first 2 years they'd would be forced to take things more seriously like they did when the 3DS had issues."

^ this is a good thing. Focused marketing (instead of splitting it in 2), means you get greater returns on investments.

"- One userbase to focus on with out having to balance focus on two platforms."

If this concept goes though, the NX (next) nintendo consol will not be lacking for games, like the Wii U is.

Digital game revenue is higher than physical one. Why would Nintendo get the option fir less revenue, no dlc revenue and alienate developers. Next gen might be the last gen to use physical games as "primary" media.

Fusion is going to happen, I think people just need to get to terms with it.

There's not a chance in hell Nintendo would be able to support a distinct PS4+ level console and a XBox 360-ish portable next cycle with completely distinct software libraries released at any kind of reasonable rate unless they like doubled or tripled the current size of the company, and Nintendo will never do that because it would destroy the culture of Nintendo which is very tightly controlled and managed. They are a small company and they WANT to be that way, too many people on the internet do not understand how much Nintendo values their company culture.

But they cannot keep that and continue to have ever increasing technically more demanding separate hardware and handheld lines.

They're clearly buckling under the strain as is, they aren't able to deliver Wii U and 3DS games consistently as is, yet there is a contingent here who thinks "well ho hum, now gimme an even more powerful console and handheld". The days where the Game Boy/GBA line was clearly secondary on the development front to consoles and portable games could be made with just 10 people are over for Nintendo. That setup isn't workable anymore when Nintendo's portable games require large resources. 

Fusion is the only way Nintendo can have multiple hardware lines (home console and portable) just from a PRACTICAL standpoint. Otherwise they are going to have to chose one, and portable only likely has to be the choice simply because their portables have been more successful than their consoles for 20 years running. Fusion isn't an option for Nintendo, it's likely the ONLY option they have if they want to continue with multiple hardware lines (a portable + home version). 

Im not getting that type consol (all digital). Im pretty sure Im not alone in that way of thinking.

Im also not getting any consol that "streams" the game to you, and you dont own the game, just buy "time slots" for playing a game.

I want to own a physical copy of the game, when I buy it.

Im not settleing for a "digital" only consol, or one that doesnt even do that, only streams it to you.

If one or two, consol makers go this route, im going with the 3rd.

If they all go that route, I ll be on PC then. That ll be the Death of the consols, in my book.

PC is the most digital centric of the "main" gaming home platforms, like barely no one buys physical PC games anymore. It's all about Steam. 

What makes u think they will get rid of digital content by using game cards? 3DS uses them and all or most games are available digitally while many games have DLC as well, I'm not sure how u came to that conclusion.

I somewhat agree with this, portable development is catching up in scale to home console development, it will be much harder to approach the two as separate pillars, the whole unified structure between the lines is hinting this.

I'll add one thing that makes this more of a case of an only option in the long term future, in the portable market the's no other dedicated gaming platform that can stand up to them, PSP put up a brave fight, so even if people are only buying the hardware for the handheld side of things that's going to be about 20-30m sales minimum a gen consistently, something their consoles have an issue doing.

The days where Nintendo could "look off" the handheld because it could only handle rudimentary 2D games is also over. 

Today, Nintendo has to give their portable all their core franchises. It has to have a 3D Mario. It has to have a 2D Mario. It has to have Smash Brothers. Animal Crossing. Mario Kart. Etc. 

By next gen, the handheld will also have to have the mainline Zelda 3D games too (not just spin-offs). The majority of the Nintendo audience plays on handhelds, that's simply just a fact, not having all the staple Nintendo IP on handheld is a non-option now. 

Often times during the SNES and N64 era, the Game Boy really only got 1 or 2 big releases per year aside from Pokemon. Largely due to the fact that you simply couldn't make say a 3D Mario or 3D Zelda on a handheld. That isn't the case anymore. 

Now that Smash has gone portable, the 3D Zelda series (non-remakes) is the only console-specific big franchise that Nintendo has left, and I'd say the next Nintendo is pretty much a lock to get a "real" new 3D Zelda too. 

To be honest support the Wii + DS even basically pushed Nintendo to their development limit and they sorta "cheated" that generation by basically re-using the GameCube chipset and not having to deal with HD development and also DS had very basic/rudimentary 3D capability which kept DS development costs/resources low. Even there though you would notice that when the DS got lots of support it tended to coincide with Wii droughts and vice versa. 

With the Wii U and 3DS we've seen them have far more trouble. Push the envelope even further with a PS4 level console (or better) and a X360 level handheld and it becomes an impossible situation. 

Ironically Fusion would also bring a mainline Pokemon to consoles, I can't see any other way in the long run that doesn't have a fusion like platform.

But is the tie ratio discrepancy big enough to overcome the additional handheld units that are sold? Not to mention that handheld development is cheaper and faster, although admittedly the difference for Nintendo's purpose is probably not controlling. Essentially, I'm wondering whether the home console is actually more important to Nintendo than the handheld.

I think Nintendo's actions show the assumption here isn't as strong as it first looks. When the Gamecube was going through hell, Nintendo still took its time to create the Wii. When the handheld dominance was potentially challenged, Nintendo rushed the DS to market to meet the challenge, notwithstanding that the GBA was doing great and was barely at the traditional console peak. Doesn't this imply Nintendo itself values its handhelds more than its home consoles? I fully concede there are other factors involved in both areas, but I do have to question the assumption.

The part about the Wii-DS tie ratios admittedly does shed some helpful light on the subject. I wonder though if that's an aberration: so much (about both systems) was.

All that said, I do agree that they'll continue to cater to both markets for the foreseeable future.