I don't see it, Sony is already going gung ho with VR starting this year, so it won't be anything new by the time Nintendo does it. 

If the rumors are true then yes, Nintendo gave up.

If they can be downgraded to PS4 and XB1, then why not put it on the NX?

A headset attachment is basically Sony's way of saying, "we are going VR but not leaving traditional gaming behind" and I see NX as Nintendo's way of saying the same thing. You do not have to see it, they have to go in a different direction VR or not if they make a new home console to give people a reason to own both NX and their next home console.

If Nintendo markets it correctly, they can say they are, "fully committed" to VR and maybe win some core gamers. Also, since when does Nintendo care if another company is, "gung ho" on something. If they feel they can make it work and have properly invested in it, they will do it.

I did not expect anyone to believe me or buy into it. I said Wii U would not require a television to be play games and I was slaughtered over that as well. It is my idea for the vision going forward. Nobody else said it in this thread so if I am correct, I can take a big W with me, again.

VR on a Tegra X1 wouldn't work great, it doesn't have the horsepower, VR barely does well on a regular PS4. 

It's just too non-Nintendo of a concept for other reasons too. It alienates the player from others, which is against Nintendo's philosophy of gaming in terms of gathering people together and getting the whole family/friends group playing together. 

Also grown adults still report getting motion sickness from VR, now imagine Mom/Dad come home to find little 45 kg Davey has puked all over the living room carpet because he was playing his Nintendo VR more than he should have. 

I could see the NX having motion/hand sensors though ... Nintendo has already patented that. 

In a way I think NX is Nintendo's answer to "anti-social" gaming that VR and even regular phones/tablets present (people staring down at their phone zoned out of their surroundings). NX will be something I think designed to get people to gather around and play together, more like a board game philosophy, it's the anti-VR. 

I don't know. Could be. Maybe Nintendo does a smart thing because they recognised how irrelevant the arms race is. Seems as if the competitors also stopped trying to make new consoles, since they instead go for minor upgrades. Might be that all three have considered that we reached a point where new consoles don't surprise anybody anymore because the objective differences in graphical output vanished some time ago. If you think ahead, what is there that could differentiate your new from your old console? What's the point of new hardware when you could rather harvest profits of your current with almost no effort at all?

We do know however that Nintendo always strifes for new ways of gaming, for innovative input methods, for a higher interaction between the game and the player, and therefore reach a higher immersion. Because they like to question the status quo. They shake things up while others rest on established concepts. Funny how they are still considered to be a very traditional company, btw. In fact, so tradtional that they reject the business they are most associated with - console gaming.

Anyway, Nintendo has always defined the direction of each generation they participated in. Yes, even the current gen. Up till the Gamecube it had been arms races between them and Sega or Sony. The innovations made were mostly in regards to the controls (shoulder buttons, rumble, analog stick, Z-trigger). All of those were copied shortly after. When they shook things up with the Wiimote, others followed quickly. When they tried to introduce tablets to the gaming world, others had their respective projects ready just shortly after. Just in case it was as hot as the Wiimote. You don't want to fall behind when Nintendo shakes things up. So, when the NX hits the market and becomes a big hit (let's just assume this), others will follow. If the NX is the next revolution in gaming, there might be no PS5 or Xbox2. Yes, they have THAT much influence. And the interesting thing is that Nintendo knows this. As soon as they reveal it, others will start copying it. And that is the single reason why they hestitate to show anything currently. And it's also the reason why there are these iterational console upgrades from Sony and MS. They need to react somehow to Nintendo since they don't want to have them leap away, but they have no idea what they are supposed to react to, and they don't want to fuck their current user bases besides, so they try to resell you the same consoles again. Nintendo forces them to do something, while they rather wanted to ride on with what there is. The handling of the NX is extremely strategic as it could be another turning point in the entire industry. And because of this strategic importance we still don't know shit about the NX. As painful as it might be, we still have to be patient before anything ca be said or done.

These are my thoughts about the current situation. Of course someone might differ, but for me, it's very clear that Sony and MS shit their pants when they think about Nintendo. Finally, my answer to OP's question: I think they haven't.

1) it wont get multiplat AAA games.
2) it wont matter, because like the Wii U that isnt the point of the system
3) Nintendo first party games will look great (they always do)

"Has Nintendo Given Up On Home Consoles?"
They gave up on getting 3rd party.
They gave up on trying to compete in terms of graphics.

why not on a PS2? why not on an SNES? why not on an Atari 2600? Why not on a Texas Instruments calculator?

because being underpowered is only 1 of the reasons, the main reason is different architectures would require the developers to dedicate a specific team to code the game in specific for this exotic architecture that no one uses.

it's all about cost/benefit.

also, it's not 'downgraded' to ps4/xb1, the games are made specifically for those platforms, and then, given what we know, taking advantage of the better performing machines, those should get stuff like higher res textures, better AA, better shadowing, better frame rates possibly.

just thing of these machines as you would of a gaming pc. just because you can have different components inside, because the main architecture is the same, the games don't need a special port for each of the configurations each person may have. it's a very simplistic way of putting it, but should get the basic idea behind "why not put it on the NX?"

Well you seem to already think the NX is a failure. If it sells well, then why not put their games on the NX? Cant be that hard or expensive.

I could see some multi-plats like maybe Batman (though a late port) and Dragon Quest XI and maybe even Final Fantasy VII Remake. 

I think Japanese devs will be more willing to do the work of downscaling for a NX version because the upside is much larger for Japanese devs since NX is likely going to be the market leader in Japan. So there's obvious incentive to want your biggest games available to the biggest game audience. 

Western devs though ... yeah. Nintendo's probably in tough there. I could see maybe Activision trying with COD for a year to see how it goes.