Wii was not lightning in a bottle, it was a calculated success that was extremely conceptually short sighted, and Wii U most definitely did not fail because it was a generation behind. It failed because it wasn't convenient, popular, or accessible. It wasn't a good mass market product. It had a bad name associated with a tainted brand. It had bad marketing. It had horrible multiplatform support. It had no software appeal to the mainstream western market it was trying to appeal to. It had cheap looking hardware with poor erganomics. It had no compelling value proposition. And all of this combined resulted in it getting terrible media attention. That's why the Wii U failed. Not because "it was weak."

Power only matters with regards to getting multiplatform games. That's it. Getting software. You have the games? Then you're golden, and all you need to worry about is everything else.

@bolded, doesnt that kinda contradict what you said about PS4/XBO earlier? If PS1 & PS2 were able to beat N64 & GC/XB by being power competitive than how is power the reason PS4 is beating XBO?

If we have a handful of examples of most powerful devices winning and less powerful devices winning than that shows power is not the reason for winning/losing and is instead dependent on the overall appeal of the device, a combination of software, features, price, marketing, etc.

Switch is very unlikely to get strong multiplatform support though. It's not like the PS2 to PS4/Xbone's GCN/Xbox, more like the Vita to the PS3/360. More to the point though, Nintendo gamers just don't buy multiplatform games in enough numbers to justify them.

I'm not saying it is very likely to get strong multiplatform support. I'm saying that if it does, power won't be a factor in its success or failure.

As for audience, that's maliable. Before the Wii, "Nintendo gamers" weren't soccer moms and senior citizens. It only takes one product to completely change the type of audience you bring in, and it would be just as easy as it was with the Wii to change Nintendo's audience to the type of people who would buy multiplatform games. They would need to do things drastically different than they did with the Wii and Wii U, but it wouldn't be this insurmountable task.

The gamers who play multiplatform games have little reason to buy them on Switch when PS4/Xbone offer the same games with better graphics, better online infrastructure, thriving userbases, and most of their friends.

Better online infrastructure? Do you have the patents for the Switch online infrastructure?

The console with most of their friends? Did your friends recieve their Playstations and Xbox's before their release? 

Better graphics? Xbox seems to have pretty good third party support...

Ok sorry for being a little bit of a cocky smart ass.  But you get what I mean. That isn't an infallable argument, but there is some truth behind it. It really depends on HOW MUCH you're sacrificing with the Switch. We can sit here all day and talk about graphics, but what we do know is that for the first time in a long time Nintendo is using a "gimmick" that will benefit hardcore gamers and casual gamers alike. A gimmick that doesn't change the game or hell even the method of control. Something that is so perfect in that it's innovation is not innovating the console but it's portions. 

People are talking about the Switch a lot. It's a fact. As for Online infrastructure, we don't know. What i'm guessing is that online games are going to do worse on Switch, but RPGs are going to do fantastically. I'm also guessing indies will flock to switch. I'm a bit worried that the Switch is actually TOO powerful for some  of the exclusively DS developers, but they'll probably move to phones or still develop for switch at their own development risks. 

As it is though, if a port does 400k at least, it's still going to be a success on the Switch, considering how easy it is to port to. 

Nintendo's online has never, ever been on par with the competition.

Over 70 million people already own a PS4/Xbone. 

And Switch won't come close to Xbox One graphically.

Of course they do. Not being tethered to the TV. The main selling point and the reason the Switch video was viewed 22m times on Youtube.

First, graphics don't matter, especially if the Switch is cheaper. Second, we know nothing about the Switch's online infrastructure. XBO has a better online than PS4. PS4 beat out XBO. No reason Switch's can't be better than what's come before on Nintendo platforms, and its free. It only takes one generation to improve. Nintendo having inferior online isn't an iron-clad law.

Switch can get a thriving userbase too and people can play with their friends on the Switch. I never understood this logic. We literally saw people drop Xbox for Playstation this generation, but people still think that people are that brand loyal that they'd never play on another platform. We literally see people switch from userbases of 80m to userbases of 3m during genrational jumps, but people think it can't happen with the Switch.

There was a combined installed base of 160m PS360 owners last gen, save for some overlap. We haven't even reached half of that yet, meaning there are potentially 85m consumers yet to upgrade, yet it's somehow unsurmountable that Switch can make that up when we've literally seen underdogs do it before against worse numbers with the PS4.

Here's a crazy thought: What if most of their friends buy/end up buying a Switch?

It never has before,  could be now. Probably won't, bud we don't know. 

Ok. And last generation how many consoles were sold total? Oh yea....about 260 Million. Forgot. 

Resolution wise maybe. we don't know. You aren't a developer. these are rumors.  I agree it might not, but it might.