And who's fault is that? The company who's sole purpose it is to monopolize the mobile gaming market.

Restrictions can be lifted. It's a hen and egg problem. If big name publishers want to release their expensive and big games on ios or android just watch how fast the platform holders will drop those restrictions.

If Nintendo wouldn't have all people who buy big mobile games exclusively on their platform they would develop on ios and android. And if not all devs would make their mobile games on Nintendo's devices people would go to ios and android. See the problem here? A single closed platform has completely monopolized a certain section of the gaming market.

I think the current 3 is a good mix, but if Microsoft drops off and doesn't make another console it would be nice to have a 3rd. Due to nothing exciting me at Microsofts conference, I'll probably be buying a Switch now. If I could find one, anyway. So I'm really hoping they have a good "conference" now.

See no reason for another platform. If you believe MS does not challenge Sony you did not attend the PS3 years to reap the benefits of the PS4. Sony is leading because they made the right course change while Ms lost focus. MS fired the person who lost focus and now have a new direction. I like the direction MS has made, if you think turning a big ship on the dime is feasible then you have no clue how the industry works. Just like Nintendo with the Wii and now Sony with the PS4, smart market decisions led to huge marketshare and profit. Just like the PS3 , the WiiU and the X1, bad marketing decision could see your installbase get Nerf. When all is said and done, each OEM has made good choices and bad and suffered for those gens. When the next gen starts, it will be interesting to see if MS can change their course.

You're getting way off track. I wasn't blaming anyone. I was stating a reality. You mentioned that if he wanted to play games on the go, he could just play mobile games instead of a Switch. You called them "great options," which is obviously not the case for someone who wants to play Switch games.

It doesn't matter is restrictions can be lifted. This was never meant to be a "what if" debate. It's a "what is" debate, and "what is" is definitely not that mobile gaming is a comparable substitute to a traditional console gaming experience that the Switch is designed to provide.

The only way a company can survive this day is to have their own market separated from the other. You can't expect the market to be fully crowded by many company and expect all of them to get profit. It doesn't work that way.

Both Sony, Nintendo, and Microsoft have tried to take some market share from the other's comfort zone and have failed. Just let them do their own thing and they would be fine.

This opens some new space for Valve to propose the SteamBox as an object that's neither a console nor a PC, but just the best of both worlds mixed together.   

Yeah and market them as a console/PC hybrid

No, they wouldn't. First, Nintendo doesn't make mobile games. They make console games. Mobile has a completely separate design philosophy that is completely different from console gaming. Skyrim on Switch is just Skyrim. It's not "mobile Skyrim."

Second, the mobile marketplace is far more complicated then you're making it out to be. Apple doesn't restrict download sizes on their phones for no reason. The do it specifically because they don't want app devs to develop apps that big on their platforms. Space, especially on mobile devices, are expensive, and phones are digital-only devices. Raising the app size cap would effect everything, not just games, which means that any app could be made to take up an unreasonable amount of space on your phone, meaning that Apple would have to provide more space on their phones to compensate. 500GB on the lowest end, and over 1TB on the highest end.

1TB. On a phone. Because you want to entertain the idea that it's Nintendo's fault mobile doesn't get traditional games.

And that's just one issue. You'd also need to figure out how to either convince hundreds of millions of people that they want to play games made for buttons on a touch screen. or convince 100's of millions of people to buy the same exact controller add on that they will have to carry with them wherever they go indefinitely so that mobile devs have a reliable controller config to work with that actually makes the extra control scheme worth implementing.

You have to convince people that they want to pay $60 for many games on their phone, plus DLC and online multiplayer and season passes and the like. Their phone - a platform they primarily use for texting and social media. A platform that has push notifications for all of those things, that would definitely be a constant interuption to your hardcore iOS Dark Souls 3 session.

Your problem is that you think the Switch is a different market from the PS$/XBO, or that the mobile market has anything in common with the handheld market or the Switch outside of not being tethered to a television. Both are false. Nintendo doesn't have a monopoly on any market. They just have a really weird console.

I would say it's healthier than it was in 7th Gen. The Wii brought in a lot of money, but it had​ zero staying power. It was simply a trend; one that died down after a while.

So while the numbers show Gen 7 as more profitable, Gen 8 is getting relatively close on primarily core gamers rather than trend followers.