This need to be in OP.

He concluded by saying that there is a different demand and market for 3DS as a portable system from Switch, and for a next handheld, Nintendo will keep considering it as always.

Nintendo's Shinya Takahashi chimed in as well. About a new portable, he explained that Nintendo is always thinking about its next game device, so the answer is "We are always thinking about it" rather than there is or there isn't a 3DS successor.

http://www.nintendolife.com/news/2017/02/official_financial_results_qanda_clarifies_kimishimas_3ds_successor_comment

Its almost as if you didnt read a single word i wrote because nothing you just said refutes my last post.

They are seperate devices with different features, marketing & software so 3DS sales at $250 are irrelevent to potential sales of Switch at $300.

Otherway around I think, I never said 3DS sales at $250 were relevent to potential sales of Switch at $300 in the first place yet you're pointing this out to me as if I said it. The only thing I said was $300 (price of the Switch) was a barrier for the handheld market. The Switch could go on to sell huge amounts of consoles but that doesn't mean it captured the handheld market. That's my point and you didn't address it, instead opting to tell me they have different features with different marketing & software...ok, agreed, lol.

I never said they were the same devices and never said they had the same features, marketing & software, which goes without saying...

You are saying handheld gamers wont buy Switch at $300 because they didnt buy 3DS at $250, that is faulty logic.

I bring up them having different features/marketing/software because those are the things that will determine the value of the device.

If 3DS had awesome features/marketing/software than it may have sold well at $250, those things were not awesome which led to people thinking $250 was too expensive. 

Please let it be a return to the Gameboy line. One screen, no touch controls, cheap and core as fuck. That would be awesome.

Way to cut into the potential success of switch before it even hits the market

My 3DS sucessor concept:
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=225569&page=1#

I don't really think it's faulty logic but I do think I could be wrong and you do bring up good points. But I don't see any features/marketing/software that can effectively negate the price barrier, especially a price barrier that is $100-$130 more than the majority of 3DS consumers paid for their handheld device.

It's like how someone stated earlier in the thread that a $300 home console with $60 games and paid online subscription service isn't going to replace the 3DS. The Switch may be too different from what the majority of 3DS owners are used to.

You don't take the system out. You take a part of the system. It's not at its main power on portable form.

Yeah, sure, it has a fun option that lets you underpower it and take it with you for a bit. But it IS still a home console at its primary function. It's portability is a secondary function.

Say if you consider the Vita a controller for the PS4 cause its what i can do, its the same thing. So... yeah... PS4 confirmed portable with that logic.

Sure, I could see them releasing a SKU of the Switch that is pocketable. Where both switch and switch pocket play all of the same games.

But a new handheld with games that can't run on the Switch? That would never sell now that the Switch will be on the market.

And, It would have to compete against the Switch and 3DS with too many disadvantages.

The issue is price and development costs. N3DS XL is priced at $200, Switch is priced at $300, a next gen DS with even more advanced hardware would be priced at $250 or more. Developing for the switch covers both a home and portable game in the cost of developing once, developing for a seperate non-compatible system would only pile on more costs to develop first party games for both systems.

They have cornered themselves by having a product like the switch that covers so many advantages and uses. TV out/splitscreen/controller options/Switch will probably be less than $250 by the time this non-switch thing could even launch/Exsisting game library by that time as well/etc.

As price drops on the Switch, they will only be able to launch a new handheld that exceeds all of the advantages of buying the switch.

The obvious being cheaper price, pocketable, and longer battery life. 3DS already covers those advantages.

Once they can shrink the die to ~10nm or less. Then they can produce a Switch mini or clamshell SKU or whatever is pocketable, with the same internal specs that plays the same games. This allows for more advantages over the switch and would justify a purchase and could be considered a dedicated handheld, all while minimizing additional hardware and software development costs.

Other than that, Nintendo could release more revisions of the 3DS and try to maintain that market, but they are not going to make even more hardware that requires another totally seperate game library, branding, development, etc. until both 3DS and Switch have have both had a very full life cycle.

With all that Nintendo has communicated about wanting software compatiblity across many devices, the switch serves that role. It can be hybrid hardware, dedicated home console hardware, dedicated handheld hardware, etc. same game library, same OS, different form factors, different hardware SKUs, etc.