I somewhat agree with this as an owner of a high end PC a high powered console from them wouldn't really add much, servicable power would do for multiplatform titles for those who don't have any access to them but power is not what strictly brings multiplatforms over.

Im a graphics lover as much as the next guy and if I did not already own a pc or powerful consoles I'd be wanting a powerful Nintendo console but I do and as such would likely play multiplats elsewhere.

I can see how this would hurt Nintendo only users but he has already said that's not the case with him so it made me wonder why power is the deciding factor for him when it comes to Nintendo.  

It just seemed odd.

And it was also an economic failure. You cant just build a powerhouse console and expect it to dominate the market because of it. There's a fine line of balance to achieve a product that can deliver good price, good value and nice graphics. Finding that is hard and in my mind not yet achieved by anyone except for maybe the PS4 who has decent enough graphics, a bit expensive but not too much but most importantly it is selling extremely well. Which is why I am doubtful about the NEO and Scorpio if they become too powerful they will also cost way too much to find an audience. 

I know power is great for developers so let me rephrase the point.  A system 3x the PS4 would simply recieve suprior versions of PS4 games. A System 1/3 PS4 might require so much effort to port down to that the devs instead think of unique experience they can sell to the NX's userbase. Naturally many of these games will be smaller in budget but thats fine with me! :)

Of course this all assuming the NX is a hit at launch (I think it will be if it can function as a consumer tablet)

Im curious why you need a powerful nintendo console in order to buy it?

You have said you own PC's an xbox one and are buying a scorpio.

xbox one wasn't the most powerful console but you purchased it.

you already have pc's for power.

you are planning on buying a scorpio (presumably for powerful console)

Nintendo isn't going to all the sudden change their art style to ultra realistic just because they make a powerful console so that can't be it.

It would seem you already have better places to play multiplats.

why would a powerful Nintendo console all the sudden help with the purchase?  In your scenario it would seem games would be more important.

Oh, and I already game on PC but, like Pemalite, that doesn't mean that I wouldn't like to see a Xenoblade, Zelda or proper Metroid game that rivals what can be found in other consoles in terms of scale and graphics.

The Wii U is 352 GFLOPS. 176 GFLOPS is less than the 360 and the PS3.

There's considerable debate about that, it's entirely possible for the Wii U to "outperform" a 360/PS3 even at a lower GFLOP rating (not that all GFLOPS all equal) because of a more modern, efficient chip (not to mention double the RAM). 

Because it's called "progress".
It's difficult for me to feel immersed in a games universe if all I can think about is how the game looks last generation.

To put things into perspective though, I find the Xbox One to be horrible in terms of graphics, the NX if it is Tegra powered will be inferior to even that.

And for the record, I want all my platforms to be powerful, I live and breath hardware, I am an Enthusiast.
I don't want a company that is supposed to rival Microsoft and Sony in gaming to be using hardware that is found in a Tablet. Seriously... And neither should you, this isn't the Ouya's successor we are talking about. (That also used Tegra.)

True it was an economic failure, but it's not soley because of the performance of the device and the graphics that it allowed at the time.
The device would have been far more profitable and cheaper whilst retaining the same degree of graphical fidelity if it took an Xbox 360 approach and made the Hard Drive an accessory... Which would have actually brought in profit.

Microsoft could have saved more cash and possibly retained/got more performance if it went with ATI for Graphics and AMD for the CPU.
At the time AMD had the very venerable K7 architecture used in the Duron and ATI had the respectible Radeon 8000 series with a built-in Tessellation unit. (Yes, the PC had Tessellation in 2001, something that didn't become standard untill Direct X 11.)

Besides, the original Xbox made Halo what it is today... And the hundreds of millions of dollars that followed, kinda' makes up for it, don'cha think?

As for the Playstation 4. I considered it to be pretty average, I wanted more hardware, the CPU leaves much to be desired and the graphics processor doesn't even guarentee 1080P gaming in a time where we are slowly transitioning to Quad-HD and Quad-FHD.

Sony could have ditched the seperate ARM chip and the extra 256Mb of Ram and it's associated logic in the PS4 to bolster the CPU and GPU some more.

So what you are suggesting is that PC only receives superior versions of PS4 games?
Well. No. Not exactly.

The PC is often the lead-platform for a ton of multiplatform games... The Playstation 4 for instance typically only has Medium/High detail equivalent PC settings and usually only 1080P or less and only 60fps or less.

The NX if it was superior to the PS4 could likely take advantage of graphics details that are typically usually reserved for the PC (And of course Scorpio and Neo when they drop.)

Besides. If we take a look at the Wii U...
There are currently 779 games, 270 are exclusive, 164 are console exclusive and 384 are multiplatforms.

The Playstation 4 however... Has 1179 games with 107 exclusives, 347 console exclusives and 659 multiplatforms.

The WiiU has a much higher Exclusive to Multiplatform ratio, Nintendo has always had a good number of exclusives... And guess what Exclusives can do? They can utilize the hardware 100% and you don't need to worry about the lowest common denominator. - Unless of course your hardware has multiple performance levels.

Why would I need a powerful Nintendo Console?

Because I would like to play Metroid with 2016 AAA levels of imagry.

I would like to see beads of sweat roll off Mario's brow.

I would like for Zelda to have a fully dynamic, fleshed out world that puts an Elder Scrolls game to shame, which makes you stop and watch the sunset that is being driven by powerfull hardware.

I would like to see StarFox with insane levels of Physics and Particle effects.

Nintendo has experiences that cannot be found anywhere else, Nintendo has some of the best franchises in all of gaming history and I want those games to draw me away from my powerful PC and Xbox.

Graphics does lend itself to gameplay and immersion, it's what drew me to Donkey Kong on the SNES, it's what drew me to Perfect Dark on the Nintendo 64, it's what drew me to Halo on the Xbox, it's what drew me to Crysis on the PC.

As for the Xbox One. I chose the Xbox One due to it's superior media features over the Playstation 4 and Halo.
The Playstation 4 can't even play back Audio discs.
And I am always one of the first people to criticise the Xbox's lack of power.
I will be buying Scorpio, mostly for HDR and 4k Blu Ray and the larger Hard Drive, sure I could purchase the Xbox One S, but I might as well get better graphics if I am going to plonk down another $500+ AUD, huh?

And well, I can't be the only one who has multiple gaming devices, surely? I personally don't believe PC and Consoles replace each other.

There's no need to twist reality to make your point: The GameCube didn't have a DVD unit because Nintendo didn't want to, not because they couldn't afford it.