I'm very sorry but I'm going to have to disagree here too. If I remember correctly, the GPU of the Swich is based on the Tegra 1 with Maxwell technology when at the time it could have been based on the more advanced Tegra 2 on Pascal technology. Now you may argue that it would have made the final product more expensive, that may or may not be true, I don't know and for all I know it could be true. My point here is that the Switch did NOT use state of the art technology at the time of production. I just wanted to clarify that point.

Sure there is, you mentioned Ocarina of Time and Twilight Princess - the N64 may have had a powerful chip, but that was irrelevant due to severe bottlenecking. In practice, it was considerably weaker than the PSX due to the low capacity cartridges and the incredibly small texture cache - causing muddy and low-detail graphics. The features of the Switch are more on par with current technological standards. The final result is that Switch games can look very close to PS4 games, but N64 games got nowhere near PSX games in terms of clean detail and visual appeal.

An additional flaw, the Wii also did not have the raw power of the other consoles, and yet you listed Twilight Princess. If you got Twilight Princess on GameCube, then you had it on an even less powerful console; and I don’t see how you would be able to tolerate playing GameCube in 2007, if relative power is so important to you.

Except you just tried to find flaw in my argument by saying and I quote "it's still state of the art for portable platform" And that's not an assumption, that's actually your words...

Now that this backfired, you are trying a different angle, namely that you admit it's a hybrid and your argument is that I deny it is also a portable? Or maybe you are saying I deny it to be a hybrid? Whichever you mean I have never denied that, not sure where you read me saying I deny it to be that.

I have only said and I'll keep saying it's weak as a home system, the portable side is decent but I have no interest in it so I concern myself with the home console part of it and that part is weak.

Feel free to find flaw and disagree, I'll only ask that at least you do me the favor of disagreeing or finding flaw on what I say and not what you think I said.

But the thing is I did not play Ocarina of Time on the N64, I did play it much later on the Wii, if I remember correctly.

Not to denigrate the N64, I could not really speak of it cause I did not own one at the time but from what I've heard, it was a very decent system capable of 3D gaming at a time 3D environments were still the new big thing in video games. So whatever you said against how good or how bad the N64 performed, seems to be irrelevant in the context of the Switch as, and I said that before, those systems had the excuse of being what they were at a time where technology was not what it is today.

However weak the N64 might have been (and I don't think it was for the time), it was doing rather well at a time where the issue was not how well 3D environements are made but can a machine do them at all? And the anwser was yes, the N64 could.

But this is 2017 and I don't know about you but my standards have somewhat risen and I am logically more demanding. Therefore trying to defend the 2017 Switch's flaws by criticizing the 2002 Gamecube or the 1997 N64 by holding those to more recent standards is literally irrelevant and what they call a cop-out.

Sorry but don't try to get the Switch off the hook by attacking the past or using the past to justify the present.

1. The Legend of Zelda: Link's Awakening
2. The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past
3. The Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker HD

A Link to the Past
Wind Waker
Skyward Sword

I didn't try I actually did find one, here's a simple question that highlights it is the Switch a powerful portable for this era? Also learn to read context.

"it's still state of the art for portable platforms" 

Where does this line say it's only a portable? It highlights that as a hybrid it's still a state of the art portable as well so again you've either assumed or not read things properly.

You can't go off arguing about state of the art then choose to ignore key parts of a platform's concept that's being heavily selective you may not be interested in the portable side of things but it still factors into the equation.

I am legit confused here.  I used maze like earlier in the thread, but obstacle course would be a damn good description of the overworlds for the 2D games like A Link to the Past, Link's Awakening, or the Oracle games (hell, the original too).  It is much more straight forward to get from point A to point B in the 3D games.  The biggest complaint about the overworlds in the 3D games is typically that they are too empty.

I will admit it has been a long time since I did a playthrough of Link to the Past, but I remember spending a ton of time in the dungeons.  Probably about the same ratio as any of the 3D games.  My most recent Zelda was Wind Waker HD, and it was my first time playing Wind Waker.  It was a 53 hour playthrough.  No way even 20 of that was dungeons.

Help me out here; you won't play Botw cos it's on "weak" hardware... yet you liked Twilight Princess, which launched on hardware that was even weaker at the time.

You really love arguing for the sake of arguing. I don't care that you think it's great as a portable, it may very well be and I have never said otherwise, I'm AGAIN ONLY saying it's weak as a home console, you know the thing you plug on a TV which is how I would use it which is why I speak of the home console part of it, what part of this you don't get?

Being selective has nothing to do with it as I clearly say AS A HOME SYSTEM, whereas you choose to ignore this and keep talking about the portable part as if my analysis EVER made reference to that part. Why do you even bring that part into this convo when everyone INCLUDING ME AGREE it's a decent system when used as a portable? (With exception made to the battery life) Is there some kind of war going on between you and logic?

This is the last time I say it to you as repeating it beyond this point becomes redundant. Believe and understand whatever you want, it does not change the facts of the matter.

Take care.