But Wii U didnt supported even UE3 while PS360 supported it, and for instance Wii U even received Unity suport very late, while Switch support almost of available engines right of gate, and has very modern tools, APIs...all that make huge difrence compared to Wii U espacily in combination with hardware that is easier to work with.

Of course. That's why games like Mass Effect: Andromeda and Red Dead Redemption 2 aren't coming to the Switch. That's why Overwatch's dev team is doubtful they can even port an existing PS4 game to the Switch, because the Switch is even easier to develop for than the PS4. That makes perfect sense.

Regarding Switch’s technical performance, Eggebrecht said its between Wii U and Xbox One. However, he claims that developing is as easy or even easier than the PlayStation 4. Switch is further supported by having all modern GPU standards.

So the Switch is going to get all of the lovely little indies that the PS3, Xbox 360, Wii U, PS4, Xbox One, 3DS and PS Vita get already. That's splendid news from months ago.

Probably means API. API maybe easier to work with on Switch to get more out of the hardware he has. PS4 API maybe a bit more complicated to get more form that hardware. Nothing to do with power.

In raw power Switch is closer to Wii U, but technically it's much closer to X1 (and maybe above X1 more modern tech/arhicture).

Well Switch did raise MK8 resolution from 720p to 1080p, or Fast RMX from 720p to 1080p with better visuals and frame rate. One game doesn't mean much.

I mean I guess thats true... even if its much closer to Wii U, than Xbox One.

Wii U - 176 Gflops.
Switch - 393 Gflops (docked)
Xbox One - 1300 Gflops.
Xbox One Slim - 1400 Gflops
Playstation 4 (&slim) - 1840 Gflops

I dont think that Ryse look much better than Halo 4 for instance.

Talking about Switch, just look FAST RMX, and how actually huge difference is compared to Wii U version, and that's actually great because Switch is not full generation above Wii U if we talk about raw power. We still need to see Nintendo pushing hardware, most of this 1st Switch games are Wii U ports or reused assets and other parts of Wii U games, IMO 1st "real Switch game" will be Mario Odyssey.

Fact is that Wii U didnt supported for instance UE3 and UE4 and Switch support them.

You can ofcourse port game without engine support but thats means much more work for porting, so opposite of what devs talking about Switch thats very easy for developing and that is "light years ahead of Wii U".

What are you talking about? Devil's Third (a wiiu exclusive) is on UE3.

Switch is still strong even in portable mode than Wii U, and Wii U was actually great home console for Nintendo games, and Switch can be only better.

Of Course that Nintendo has no intention of joining the war to be "the most powerful console" on the market, and what would be point when other two companies are already doing that, best Nintendo chances are to offer something different and new, not most "powerful hardware".

Having console thats stronger than Wii U or half of XB1 in form factor of Switch is very impressive.

Looking at this image, I find it silly when people try to compare the Switch to XBox 1 or the PS4 in terms of power. Maybe those people think the pixels appear on their screen through magic?

Whatever the case, I'm not much of a power or graphics nut but it's good to hear the Switch can outperform the Wii U.

The Switch is a new platform that is not backwards compatible. Indies and developers are porting their current titles to it since it is lower risk and a normal thing to do if you want to prepare the ground during the launch period. We've seen this before.

If anything they should be porting older classics due to the easy development mentioned here.

... yes? I'm not quire sure what your point is there considering this was pretty much my intial point, that is, that the Switch is getting all kinds of indie titles that are already on other platforms.

Do you see that as a positive or negative way?