Play-on-the-go is not a gimmick. It's a very good selling point. 3d and motion control, on the other hand, are just not worth the extra development cost. Does anybody really think pokemon needed to rely on 3d to succeed, or mario (except for galaxy series) and zelda needed motion control to succeed? I'd take a cheaper or stronger NSwitch with no gimmick over the current model

Considering he's an Etrian Odyssey fan, I would say he doesn't care too much about sales when picking games.

I couldn't even take the gamepad 15 feet away from the console without losing signal.

Yeah, I think they should. Innovation just so you can say "I'm innovating" just feels meh. The switch "innovation" has yet to prove itself and whether it can bring truly unique experiences...like milking cows.

Asymetric gameplay was used by how many games on the Wii U really? Like 3? Even EAD didn't really even try this feature much. The main feature really was the ability to switch from TV to off-TV using the tablet pad. 

"Switch" is even the freaking first word in the Wii U unveiling trailer, lol:

https://youtu.be/qhlDHeCT-Q8?t=2m2s

SWITCH from TV to the New Controller

Nintendo knew the Japanese market was going portable only and Wii U was their attempt to hedge against that, the technology at the time only allowed for semi-portability. Switch is just the Wii U concept reversed, instead of a "dummy controller", the hardware is now in the controller and the "console" is now a "dummy dock". 

Correction - the analog stick was done by Dempa first. Similarly d-pad was done by several companies before Nintendo though one was circular to allow for 16 directions.

No. I have a PC for graphics.

I don't agree with that. The SNES was iterative. It was a more powerful, more advanced NES, with improved controller input. The N64 was the same, wih the addition of a true analog stick. The gamecube was a further enhancement of that concept. It's only with the Wii that Nintendo tried to break away from the mold. And it managed to win its bet. The Wii U was a conceptual mistake. It had the right ideas, but the execution was a disaster. And now we have the Switch, which is what the Wii U should have been in the first place. Among all of their home consoles, only the last 3 may align with your assessment that Nintendo differentiates itself from Sony and Miscrosoft's iterative methods.

But PlayStation and XBox also align with what you call "ever-evolving pieces of hardware". The PS4 allows for gaming experiences that weren't possible before it, like the PSVR. The Xbox 360 and XBox One also had Kinect which provided something unique when it comes to motion controls. Then you have to factor in the actual user experience allowed by those console's UI, which indeed appear as being PC-lite, but also more user-friendly then them, which is something that has always been an objective for home consoles. Point in case: the Famicon wasn't given such a name for no reason. For as long as consoles have existed, they've always been "dumbed down PCs". And Nintendo's consoles are no different. The question is why would you consider this to be a bad thing?

As I once told you in the past, I think you don't give enough credit where credit is due and are quick to unfairly dismiss Sony and MS. 

Honestly what do people think Nintendo would gain from releasing a powerful console with an enphasis on multiplats?

Are the people who already own a PS4/XBO going to buy a new Nintendo console just to play the big multiplat titles they already have access to or will they just stick with the console they have?

Are the people looking for a new console to play the big multiplat titles going to choose the new Nintendo console or are they going to buy the existing consoles with established libraries & online communities?

The majority of people who want to play these big multiplat titles either own a PS4/XBO or would choose a PS4/XBO over Nintendo's offering so the majority of people who buy this Nintendo console would be doing so to play exclusive titles.

And that's where the big problem lies. Nintendo had a hard time supporting 3DS (PS2 level) & Wii U (PS3 level) simultaneously, what happens when they have a PS3 level handheld & a PS4 level console to support?

By supporting two seperate HD devices, we would probably be looking at Wii U level 1st party support on each device leading to two poor selling Nintendo devices.

The thing about Japan that you have to understand is people play their 3DS/DS at *home* a lot of the time. It's basically become the new "home console" and traditional home consoles have become speciality/niche devices. 

Wii U was their attempt at trying to "bridge" this gap, even people who complain about the Wii U's limited range ... for a small Japanese home with thinner walls, that aspect of it actually worked pretty OK (off-TV/on-TV play). I remember Nintendo Japan did a video trying to show the Wii U concept better and it was a Japanese guy at home playing on the TV, then he goes into the kitchen to cook ramen and continues playing on his gamepad, etc. You can tell the whole idea was designed for Japanese homes. It just didn't take because you couldn't take the system out of the house, and I think Nintendo wanted to do that even in 2012, but the tech just wasn't ready.