Switch is the 3DS successor. Which is ideal because Nintendo can put its focus on one device.

If anything, I would like a controller accessory that allows it to fold up like a 3DS. Not sure if that would work though, might be too heavy.

I think the Nintendo model was damaged first by mobile devices because of the more casual and lower performance level of Nintendo games but I guess its possible PS4/X1/PC games are vulnerable to mobile devices too in the long run as their games gradually erode the existence of smaller games on the major formats. I still believe there will be a market for ambitious games on powerful hardware but don't know how big a market that is. I can see it supporting multiple formats for sometime though. To create AI and photorealistic graphics still needs huge upgrades in performance so plenty of technology upgrades to come.

Try Ingress.

You know, you're describing the situation pretty much how it is, but your take on casual games isn't quite right, but let's get on to that after a minute.

The market for the ambitious games on powerful hardware is going to PC. This is what Sony said why they made PS4 Pro. This is also what happened with the microcomputers and multimedia players in the 90's, that lost their high end games to PC and low end games to consoles. Sony is closing studios, that would make absolutely no sense because that way PS4 could have more exclusives and have an edge over PC - unless Sony intends to make it's ecosystem more profitable (for third parties).

Because the mid-tier goes out first, all you have to do is to look what happened to Wii U and Vita: high end games were on PC/PS4/X1, and low end games were on mobile and 3DS. Wii U and Vita had potential, but they were trying to compete on the same values with the AAA industry games on more powerful systems.

As the casual games are just cash-ins on all the systems, it really doesn't matter which device you're playing them on - and I bet mobile platforms will continue being popular in this segment - I expect these games going to mobile, making the PS4 situation even worse (maybe not 4, but if 5 is on the same trajectory, it may be dead on arrival, like the Amiga CD32), while it's not helping at all the tablets and smartphones share the same multimedia functionalities with the multimedia games consoles.

Switch is positioned in the downmarket and it's obviously sidestepping from the multimedia race, but because of the architecture, it should be fairly easy to port popular mobile games on Switch.

Nah. I rather walk with my kids when they play Pokemon Go.

I agree with zorg1000; I don't think they would have sold enough units, and thus enough software, to recuperate the massive hardware losses. 

Perhaps the biggest problem, I think, was their inability to simultaneously develop for two consoles at once. Even if they drastically slashed the price, Nintendo wouldn't have been able to release enough Wii U games without causing significant software droughts for the 3DS, because they were unprepared for creating HD games. We often got major 3DS and Wii U games in waves - the Wii U would get a few games while the 3DS release schedule was weak, then the 3DS would get some games while the Wii U got very little. 

I just don't think they could have given the Wii U the support it needed without screwing over the 3DS, which they had already went through a lot of trouble and losses to rescue. They couldn't support two floundering consoles, so they cut the weakest link. That's my take on it, anyway. 

thats why im so hopeful for Switch, a single device that consolidates the software output of 3DS & Wii U is a device with a pretty healthy library and release schedule. 3DS still has a solid 1-1.5 years left in it so we might not see the full results of a unified platform until they fully transition away from 3DS.

You are right the switch is not going to be another wiiu, unfortunately....

No it doesn't. Do you really think they would put all their eggs on one home console when their last one flopped and while they have a portable market on the order of the 60 million?

I mean cmon... is that not a clear picture to you? Why do you think Nintendo would settle for a home console instead of a portable?

There might be merit to the sugestions that a portable switch SKU might be in the cards. Whatever it is, there will be a sucessor to the 3DS, you can be sure of that. And its not the home console, wich Nintendo says IS a home console. Why do you think they bother to make that distinction?

Btw the whole having the developers on one building just meant using similar engines and tools. It never meant only having one system.

Their eggs aren't all in one basket, they have mobile as well along side Switch, one of the reasons Xbox and PS fair a lot better is because both MS and Sony focus only on one platform. This is even more evident when Sony could cope in supporting two platforms so left PSVita to its fate, if alarge company like Sony struggle to support 2 platforms then obviously Nintendo would have problems as well even with them being more experienced as developing for portables now is equivalent to developing for a console.

Sooner or later you simply can't maintain that approach as costs and resources catch up to you, this is why they're using mobile for those low cost smaller titles, as they don't need to worry about hardware problems and can focus solely on one platform while having 2 separate sources for business.

See, that conclusion makes no sense. What would you think makes a bigger profit (and take software into account)? Selling 13 million home consoles or selling 60 million portables?

What made Nitendo money this last 4 years? Home consoles or portable consoles? It makes zero sense for them to focus all their efforts on a home console.