Im saying Nintendo will have less games in their library for the Switch than they did for the 3DS (because they will lack key third party which has pushed the generation). If more AAA multiplatform games were used on the switch you would see two and a half hours or less for a lot of games. When I get my switch I know I am keeping that thing plugged in as I favor the handheld look. 

Zelda manages to run for three hours on Switch, so where exactly would be the problem? No, I cannot imagine people being defensive over it. If you faced hostility in the past few weeks, then that's most likely due to some inane reasoning you presented.

I wouldn't expect people to play their Switch online in the wild (meaning away from power outlets). How many people do that with their 3DS or Vita? Maybe 0.01% if we use a highball estimate?

If we assume a scenario of people getting together to play local multiplayer with several Switches, one logical assumption to go with that would be that at least one person is always going to have a charging cable with them, because the likelihood that all people of the group are oblivious is extremely low. That you believe otherwise would be why you face hostility; it's not because people are defensive, it's because you are trying to pass off nonsense as sound reasoning. Also worth of note, getting used to charging Switch at home should be quite easy for people, because its natural fit is the dock.

I thought that you made this thread because you wanted to have a talking point why there will be a separate 3DS successor, something that you insisted on in recent weeks. But there won't be one. Switch's battery life is acceptable. If people are able to get ~4 hours out of a medium game, then that falls in line with the original 3DS, a system that sold well enough.

....Uh, can you dumb that down for be a little? I don't understand what you're saying.

Im saying Nintendo will have less games in their library for the Switch than they did for the 3DS (because they will lack key third party which has pushed the generation). If more AAA multiplatform games were used on the switch you would see two and a half hours or less for a lot of games. When I get my switch I know I am keeping that thing plugged in as much as I can( as I favor the handheld look). Mario Odyssey is definitely going to take a toll on it. 

Possible but I don't know. It will have the full and undivided attention of Nintendo and should have the dedicated handheld market to itself. If a game is adequate for Vita, 3DS, or even tablets, it should be considered Switch worthy. And it's still a capable home console.

Anybody that cared about the console experience on the go may have one single option in the foreseeable future.

How do you figure?

Zelda manages to run for three hours on Switch, so where exactly would be the problem? No, I cannot imagine people being defensive over it. If you faced hostility in the past few weeks, then that's most likely due to some inane reasoning you presented.

I wouldn't expect people to play their Switch online in the wild (meaning away from power outlets). How many people do that with their 3DS or Vita? Maybe 0.01% if we use a highball estimate?

If we assume a scenario of people getting together to play local multiplayer with several Switches, one logical assumption to go with that would be that at least one person is always going to have a charging cable with them, because the likelihood that all people of the group are oblivious is extremely low. That you believe otherwise would be why you face hostility; it's not because people are defensive, it's because you are trying to pass off nonsense as sound reasoning. Also worth of note, getting used to charging Switch at home should be quite easy for people, because its natural fit is the dock.

I thought that you made this thread because you wanted to have a talking point why there will be a separate 3DS successor, something that you insisted on in recent weeks. But there won't be one. Switch's battery life is acceptable. If people are able to get ~4 hours out of a medium game, then that falls in line with the original 3DS, a system that sold well enough.

How large was the Wii U's library and technically how long does it take to develop games fo the 3DS vs a normal platform? Assuming were keeping up with the times development is cheaper and shorter for games on the 3DS, thereby making it less of a risk to develop for an decreases the risk of not turning a profit if the right marketing is behind the game. The Switch isnt going to have a library like the PS4 or the Xbox One nor even like the SNES. Its going to be larger than the Wii U for sure.

Wait, so your reasoning is that Switch is more powrrful than 3DS, therefore it will get less games?

I'm pretty sure Vita, XBO & PS4 are all more powerful and recieve more games than 3DS so your reasoning makes no sense.

Actually, The vita had major droughts and very few system sellers. The 3DS had a larger library of games which were quicker and easier to make. What Sony was going for with the Vita was a platform that could have powerful games on the go and because they did not secure neither eough third party nor exclusives it floudnered opposed to the platofms they deal with in a much more reasonable way. For Nintenndo that primary would be the portable and for Sony that would be the home console.

There is nothting incorrect about saying that HD games take longer to make. When the market is already preoccupied the busier they get the harder it is to get to secure novel games. Nintendo and Sony both need to understand these lessons on their own way.