Wii U, Wii, GC, N64

You're asking me if people would prefer a system with BF and GTA to one with Mario Kart and Pokemon?

The fact you're even asking this question tells me you're blinded by your appreciation for Nintendo franchises. It's not about cutting-edge graphics, it's about 3 factors:  Quality, quantity and popularity.

Why do you think Nintendo console sales have been declining steadily since the NES? With 1 outlier in the middle called Wii who still managed to be a dud for software sales compared to the competition. I think the only Nintendo IP I really enjoy is Fire Emblem, but even I recognize they could do amazingly well if they could do what Sony does. Ally their own exclusive quality IPs with 3rd party game release parity across the other platforms and PC. Nintendo fans love to speak about how much money Nintendo has, so if they really want to be making hardware, why not make some serious competitor to the other platforms? Anyway, I hope you enjoy your Switch, because afterall at the end of the day we're all gamers here.

This is annoying I think.

1) he states, what I've been saying, that "multiplatform development will be possible for the new Nintendo console". This means they could use relatively little resources and put the same game on NS allowing for little risk to making profit.

2) He then states they want to make NS versions special. That is what scares me. This is what EA attempted to do with their cartoony bullshit sports games. 

For fuck sake 3rd parties, don't try to be Nintendo. Let Nintendo be Nintendo, they are much better at it anyways. Just take your damn game and offer it on the console. That is what someone with an NS console will want, the opportunity to play the same game without requiring another console.

I don't think different should be considered bad. It's like the old saying "what's wrong being different?" This can mean more unique games that don't necessarily mean AAA type budgets or AAA games with different ways to play.i think we've gotten caught up with this AAA or bust type culture that most gamers don't appreciate other titles that are not GTA, COD, Battefield, etc.

Yes they garner great sales, but what does that do for Nintendo who may still get inferior ports even if they did match up with power? I mean look at Watch_Dogs being released without the DLC of Mass Effect 3 when the entire trilogy was being released on last gen consoles as a package? Of course there were a few exceptions but should it be that way? If so, I'd rather Nintendo ask them to utilize the hardware more effectively instead of trying to money hat ports that would eventually do little to their cause.

The DS, Wii, and 3DS found great success not because they provided similar experiences as the PlayStation and/or Xbox, but because they showed new experiences that you couldnt get anywhere else. Yes mobile had an affect on the 3DS sales, but it's still a selling product unlike its Vita counterpart because of games like Kid Icarus Uprising, Luigi's Mansion Dark Moon, Kingdom Hearts Dream Drop Distance, the Dragon Quest remakes and eventually XI, Mario 3D Land, Zelda A Link Between Worlds, Kirby, a portable Smash Bros. (it sold over 7 million for a reason regardless of it being inferior to Wii U), Yokai Watch, Monster Hunter, Fire Emblem Awakening and Fates, Animal Crossing New Leaf and even Happy Home Designer, Shin Megami Tensei, Bravely, and so much more.

I'm with the camp that wants unique games the Switch. Let's be honest - a lot of these games are just going to be ports. If we get a few (Monster Hunter) home console exclusives, maybe even bring Megaman and Castlevania home along with some new IPs, we'll be in business.

You keep picking out pieces of my arguments and refuting them instead of responding to the whole picture. I said Pokemon and Mario Kart FOR $200. Pricing is essential.

You're accusing me of being blinded by my appreciation for Nintendo franchises, without evidence mind you. For the record I've played one Pokemon game - Pokemon Red. But I'm wise enough to know how popular that series is.

Do you really want to bring up GCN, Wii, and WiiU in your argument? GCN and WiiU, the two systems closest to what you're advocating, sold poorly. Wii, the console closest to what I'm advocating, sold like gangbusters. 

Different is not ultimtely bad.

However, if we want to see 3rd party support stick on NS it must be profitable for the company. That means they must keep the costs low to put the content on the NS to allow maximum profits. 

Too many people think they need to do what Nintendo does to be on a Nintendo system. But that is stupid. Nintendo has their own art-style and way of doing things. Every other game creator who tries, pales in comparison. Sega's Sonic and other franchises never hit Nintendo levels. Capcom's various older IPs the same outcome. They need to keep existing ports the same with maybe subtle differences such as touch support for menus etc. Then create possibly a new IP they could experiement with a console such as NS with lower overall dev costs required. This is why titles like Zack & Wiki were perfect on Wii. That is the only area 3rd party's should experiment with. New IP that is different, not altering an existing port like EA did.

Sure, as long as it gets good games without wacky controls

I don't doubt the existence of these people and Swicth will be my go to platform for Skyrim remastered, but for new, cutting edge games I do really question the amount of people who will pick the notably downgraded Switch version of Mass Effect Andromeda over the PS4/X1 version. Will it be 500k or 1.5m? I wouldn't expect much but hopefully a few developers give it a try so we can actually see the results, as well as seeing if it results in signifcantly better Japanese sales or not.

From Nintendo's standpoint they also have to remember that 80m people will already have a console they can play Mass Effect on come March 2017. Unique titles are definitely going to be a more compelling feature for those current gen owners then downgraded versions of upcoming PS4/X1 titles imo. If Nintendo could get both, then thats great but I think theres more worth in unique support, or games which won't scale badly; remasters, games with unique artstyles (Yoka-laylee) or games that have a casual/kids audience who aren't so grafix/online conscious.

Also I don't think this has any bearing on whether its seen as a handheld or home console. Back in the day consoles used to all be completely different. I'm hoping the Switch brings back a focus on gameplay mechanics, fun, gives shine to neglected genres (platforming/puzzle/turn based RPG/Console strategy games) and encourages developers to think outside of the box. Time will tell...

I'm sure that wasn't meant to be a joke but most people might take it as one.

Nothing in the article says that.

Just because ports are technically possible, it doesn't mean that they are possible or make sense from a financial point of view.