That's the only one I want to replay honestly. Hopefully the soundtrack is there in all it's glory.

I've done a little reading and it doesn't seem like they plan on releasing them individually at this stage... Would pay upwards of $30 just for the one game.

Doesn’t matter, the NTSC and Australian versions of Final Fantasy X/X-2 don’t show a download required note either, but X-2 is a download code. 

They still could make a PS5 handheld (not hybrid) to play the same library and that could be the most powerful HH possible and that wouldn't add another platform to support except porting which can be made and even API could make it simpler process than what we think, although I don't expect them to do it.

Yep, but this one is actually a mistake and even the european version mentions the download

Yup. If games can be fairly easily ported to Switch, then a Switch like console with Switch like hardware wouldn't be any different for SNY or MS. Since third parties are already easily porting to Switch then a Switch like SNY or MS handheld would be no problem porting games to now. Even easier if it's hardware more like what Steam Deck has. 

90+ mil sales isn't exactly niche either. That's a big growing pie that's uncut as of now.

I can see this doing really well on Switch for the novelty of playing full fat GTA on a Nintendo platform and on a handheld, plus on a system that's not only incredibly popular but which even niche stuff can sell decently well on.

If it wasn't viable to port games to Switch, then the ports would have stopped years ago. Instead, we're in the system's 5th year and it's still getting plenty of ports from both 7th and 8th gen.

Identical models for the most part. I think they are just tessellating them on the fly to just "refine" them, likely using n-patches or similar to tell the tessellator what to do.
But I would need to see the mesh comparisons...

You can DLSS the game from 4k to 8k, then supersample down to 4k.

DLSS isn't just about performance.

Plus we are in the era of high-refresh rate gaming... Finally. And again. (God bless ye ole' CRT's!)

You are comparing raw black and white numbers... That is *never* going to be accurate or representative. Just like Teraflops, you NEED to have an understanding of this stuff and place it in the appropriate context for assertions to hold more accuracy and legitimacy.
 
Xbox 360 was 22.4GB/s, augmented by 256GB/s of eDRAM bandwidth, but also held back by 21.6GB/s of FSB bandwidth.
Playstation 3 was 25.6GB/s with 20GB/s from Cell to RSX and 15GB/s back again.

The Switch is certainly 25.6GB/s which "on-paper" seems to be in the same ballpark.
But ask yourself this... What technologies has the Switch, thanks to it's nVidia Maxwell roots done to make more use of it?

Well. 4th gen Delta Colour Compression is one such technique.. When comparing Maxwell to a GPU (I.E. Xbox 360/Playstation 3) that doesn't use Delta Colour Compression, you can obtain upwards of 70% of more bandwidth. Suddenly the Switch's comparatively useable DRAM bandwidth is sitting around 43.5GB/s in a best case scenario, almost a doubling on that front alone.
https://www.anandtech.com/show/7764/the-nvidia-geforce-gtx-750-ti-and-gtx-750-review-maxwell/3

Throw in tiled based rendering which makes the use of bandwidth far more efficient... As it's able to discard parts of the scene via several culling methods that doesn't/isn't being rendered, saving on even more bandwidth.
https://www.anandtech.com/show/10536/nvidia-maxwell-tile-rasterization-analysis

The Switch's GPU also has more and better caches which helps to reduce the need to perform memory transactions.

The Switchs storage device  (Cart, Internal NAND and MicroSD) tends to be significantly lower latency and higher bandwidth than spinning rust drives, which can provide streaming advantages.

People just love to make arbitrary claims without fact checking.

Not probably. It can.

GTA 5 is built for the Xbox 360 and Playstation 3 and was "enhanced" for the 8th gen consoles.
The Switch is more capable than either of those two consoles in every single aspect.

No no, you missed my point, I wanted to point the weakest thing of the Switch, which is its bandwidth. But of course everything else make the Switch way more powerful.

You're both ignoring the main points and pointing to Switch's success as proof that the other manufacturers could and should make a portable version of their current consoles.

If Sony could make a handheld version of the PS5 then the PS5 loses its relevance as the next generation of home console.  It is no longer the cutting edge of graphics but the cutting edge of handheld graphics, which remain different things.  It means that Sony could have made the PS5 much more powerful than they actually did.  Sony and Microsoft don't want to have the best hardware in a certain category.  They want to have the best hardware period.  There's a reason laptops will always be behind the best desktops and mobile hardware will always be behind dedicated home console hardware.

Could they make a hybrid like Nintendo?  Yes.  But that would require not just a radical shift in their business strategy.  It would require a vast investment as well as a risk on a new product.  It would mean splitting their resources.  It would mean making development of every first party game more expensive and time consuming in order to make the different versions of the same game.  And just because Nintendo succeeds doesn't mean another company will succeed.  The Nes and Gameboy had many competitors but achieved total market dominance.  The Move never caught on and Kinect after initial success played a big part in why the XB1 sold tens of millions of units less than the 360.  The Vita was an unmitigated failure.

With all that in mind, it's easy to see why they are sticking to the dedicated home console market.  Nintendo's market is mostly people who wouldn't get a dedicated home console or people who would get the Switch as a second console.  The number of people who are getting the Switch as their only console and would otherwise get a Playstation or an Xbox is very low.  This means that both have a larger share of the home console pie to go around.  It benefits them to not be in direct competition with a third company.  If they could put out a handheld or hybrid to test the waters with no investment that would be one thing, but in the real world it takes a lot of time and money to create something like that and bring it to market, all of which could go down the drain if it doesn't sell.  If Sony announced a hybrid or handheld device tomorrow, it would have been in development for multiple years and had tens of millions of dollars of R&D put into it at the bare minimum.