I agree with first part, but if we talk about "major 3rd party multiplat releases" you dont know that, offcourse Switch will have some major 3rd party multiplat releases (even Wii U had them), but that isn't point of this conversation at all..

3rd party games will look worse on Switch, but it won't look awule, probably biggest difference will be just lower resolution, 720p.

If you have zero intrest in mobile gaming than you can use it just like real home console, thats whole point with Switch.

Thinking that Switch could be sell for $129 in unrealistic in any case, don't forget that New 3DS XL is still $199 while official price for Wii U is still $299.

You dont know that, Switch will be around 3x more powerful than Wii U, Switch games will be more prettier and more advanced compared to Wii U games. Nintendo games will look great on Swtich, despite its less powerfule than XB1/PS4.

Difference is that laptop is still using laptop screen while Switch can be played on big TV. And you have actually lot a people who using laptop like real desktop.

You basically complaining because Switch is handheld too, but nobody force you to use it like handheld, point of Switch is to that like real home console or like real handheld, depending of consumer itself.

Well damn you have a point.

A sub 150 dollar after tax home console with all nintendo games when Pro/Scorpio are 400 and higher would be a hell of a bargin.  

And of course that sub $150 console is very unrealistic, even Wii had $249 launch price.

wiiu also had a screen in its controller.  And was sold at profit if im not mistaken.  

If NS power is inferior to PS4/X1 feel free to justify its +200 price ?  

Why would it be unrealistic? PS4s was 212 with a bundled game. A "switch" with these specifications and without battery, screen and dock station should be very possible at 150.

I dont talking about Wii U, I talking about Wii thats basically overclocked GC hardver with motion controls. And Wii hardware was more inferior to PS3/Xbox360 than Switch will be compared to Xbox Scorpio.

Wii U had launch price of $300/350 and actually sold at loss on launch.

You can't really talk about discount prices or current deals, official price for PS4 Slim is $299.

Japanese maybe, and  short lived western support at best. 

And while it may not directly be the point, the power gap is essentially only important due to that will be the deciding factor for third party. In that case this is directly associated. Even if it is closer to the PS4 and Xbone than Wii to PS3 (which sure, but PS4 is a last gen console) it doesn't matter.

If Switch is actually running these graphics:

Then $250-$300 w/game + extra storage are both fair prices. 

That is an incredible amount of power in a portable game device. 

That's what I'm saying. I really like the Nintendo first-party stuff by and large. I'm not a Zelda fan personally, but I absolutely understand the popuarity.

If the Switch comes out at $249, then by common knowledge of screen prices and battery prices we can deduce that ~$100 of that cost is going to two major components that myself and a certain number of other people don't care about or need in any way.

I'm not even saying that the Switch shouldn't exist, while I would have preferred a $249 console that was home-only with specs comparable to the OG PS4, I would be fine with the Switch if they also offered a version that didn't waste my money on things I don't need.

THAT'S the difference to me, $249 for a relatively weak console with features that I won't use is just annoying to me. I'm not going to bash Nintendo for it or anything, because clearly there are tons of different gamers out there with various things that they prioritize. They've made their minds up and I hope for the best with them. I do think they'll be hurt by the low performance in terms of getting big multiplat support. I don't think we'll see COD, Battlefield, Battlefront, Red Dead, GTA, etc on the thing. I bet the rare major multiplats they do get will be poorly received.

I also bet that their 1st party titles will be as masterfully made and reviewed as always. But just as I didn't feel like spending $349 on a WiiU to play like three games that interested me, I'm not going to buy a Switch only to have it sit in a dock and play maybe 3 or 4 games over the entire lifespan of the thing. $149 or less for the same thing without the screen and battery I'll never use? NOW we're talking. It's as much about the principle of it to me as the fundamentals.

And if the thing turns out to be $299 or more, I'll just feel bad for them. The hardcore Nintendo fans will show up in droves for the initial run, but I can't see $299 being a successful price point when the lineups for their competition are massive by now, and 2017 looks to be a monster year for the PS4 in particular. And if it's $349 like some expect? It might be the last Nintendo console ever made.

To go back to an earlier point though, anyone that buys a laptop that LITERALLY only leaves it sitting on a desk has wasted their money. The same $ will always buy more performance, upgradability, and reliability in a desktop. Always, unless you get some ludicrously cheap deal or aren't comparing brand for brand.

Current example (just grabbing current deals from Dell) :

Dell Inspiron 5000 13", Intel i3-6100U 2.3Ghz, 4GB Single-Channel DDR4, 500GB SATA HDD, Intel iGPU HD520, 13" 1080P Display $499

Dell Inspiron Tower, Intel i3-6100 3.7Ghz, 8GB Dual-Channel DDR4, 1000GB SATA HDD, Intel iGPU HD530, 22" 1080P Display $499

The desktop is nearly twice as fast on CPU, has double the ram with double the bandwidth, double the hard drive space, faster GPU, and a much bigger display. Someone would have to be insane to buy a laptop if they had zero use for taking it anywhere. I suppose if someone was VERY cramped in space, that might be something. Obviously anyone with the need to take it somewhere absolutely needs a laptop. But that's not the point. The point is that choices are good. Someone who doesn't need a laptop can get a desktop about twice as good for the same price as seen above. In the case of the Switch, if someone doesn't need handheld features at all, it would've been nice to have a variant that saved a bunch of money. Or a 'pro' version that was the same price but the costs were poured into performance instead of a screen/battery.