You seem to be mistaking correlation with causation, it’s like saying Sony should stick to even numbers because PS2/PS4 sold better than PS1/PS3 or that consoles that sell over 150 million will have successors that sell roughly half (PS2/DS to PS3/3DS). I’m sure we can find other silly examples of technically true statements that have no relevance.

No, Wii U does not represent the Nintendo core gamer. You cannot ignore Nintendo’s more successful device that made up ~85% of their hardware & ~80% of their software sales that generation. For many Nintendo fans there was no reason to purchase a $300 Wii U for games like NSMBU, 3D World, MK8, SSB4, WW/TP HD when you could get a 3DS for roughly half that with games like NSMB2, 3D Land, MK7, SSB4, OoT/MM 3D and a bunch of other big hits like Pokémon, Animal Crossing, Fire Emblem, Luigi’s Mansion, etc. It’s like saying Vita represents the core PlayStation gamer while ignoring PS4.

At the end of the day its just opinions. I cant prove what I say is true and you cant prove what you say is true. We can only believe what we think might be true.

Ill give you the WII U argument though. I admit that is a flawed argument from my part.

I think they may drop the Switch name. It just confused people with the Wii U. The important thing is that people know its from Nintendo. I dont think the Switch name carries a lot of weight when it come to their next console.

Couldn't disagree more. People didn't buy Wii U cuz it was a weird singe-controller asynchronous-play system that few people had any desire for, that also tried to be a direct sequel to the Wii despite the Wii having lost most of its popularity by the time it was replaced. Wii U failure had nothing at all to do with people confused by the name. Anyone interested enough to potentially spend hundreds of dollars on a video game system can do a <5 minute internet search to look up what the Wii U was. Also, if people were confused by the name then every generation people would be horribly confused by Xbox (360?!, 1?!, Series S/X?!).

The whole idea that people were confused by the name is just an excuse to not admit that Nintendo F'd up big time with the entire concept of the Wii U and Nintendo was either unwilling or unable to change concepts for the next system once the every game having motion controls fad started to fade by the Wii's fourth year. If everyone was still demanding motion control games last decade, if people were really excited about the game pad and that async gameplay setup, and if they had a killer app like Wii Sports at launch again, the Wii U would have been a smash hit. But instead it had none of those things. Name had nothing to do with it. Saying people were confused about the name would be like saying 3DS didn't do as well as DS because people were confused about its name, ignoring the obvious flaws in the system (an expensive feature that people didn't really care about, along with mobile phones starting to take away the market for low end handheld systems).

I don't think the Switch holds as strong a brand name as the Wii (temporarily) did, but its still a strong name. Switch is basically what Nintendo is now. If they are doing another hybrid, and I can't imagine they aren't, there is no reason whatsoever to move away from the Switch name. It would be very weird to move away from the Switch name if they are coming out with a direct hybrid system sequel to the Switch. They definitely are gonna want to keep the Switch brand as changing it would purely be a negative move for them.

I am 100% in agreement with you. The whole notion that human beings can’t understand what new generations of hardware are unless it’s numbered feels like an insult to human intelligence. We’re Homo sapiens, not capuchin monkeys… most of us :)

The Wii U was also one of the most heavily marketed consoles at launch, with kiosks all over the place. People knew what it was, and if they didn’t, why weren’t there mass sales of Wii U games for the Wii? Why were the old Wii games still outselling all the much more heavily marketed Wii U games? The answer is simple, we’re not capuchin monkeys!

I am 100% in agreement with you. The whole notion that human beings can’t understand what new generations of hardware are unless it’s numbered feels like an insult to human intelligence. The cope/excuse is absurd to the point of nonsense. We’re Homo sapiens, not capuchin monkeys… most of us :)

The Wii U was also one of the most heavily marketed consoles at launch, with kiosks all over the place. People knew what it was, and if they didn’t, why weren’t there mass sales of Wii U games for the Wii? Why were the old Wii games still outselling all the much more heavily marketed Wii U games? And when people did buy Wii U games, they were for the Wii U console. The answer is simple, we’re not capuchin monkeys!

Sure it’s opinions but we have the power of hindsight where we can look back and analyze various things that happened during previous generations to create informed opinions. Taking a single trend and ignoring the other variables isn’t a good way to come to a conclusion.

For 3DS & Wii U, I agree that their names were a factor as they did not do enough to indicate that they were brand new consoles, the average person could easily mistake 3DS for a DS revision with a 3D screen or think Wii U was a tablet accessory for Wii but there were clearly other very large issues on top of that so they would have had large declines regardless of name.

As for Super Nintendo & Gameboy Advance, I would really like to hear how those were poor names that contributed to their declines from NES/GB or why GameCube did so poorly despite having a completely unique name from previous consoles.

This makes no sense. It's like saying people don't buy next versions of iPhone because they already have one. There is nothing more intuitive or easy to understand than Switch 2. 

Of course, many people use consoles for as long they can. Those are the late adopts. They purchase consoles when they are either finding their consoles outdated, or there are no more new games to play or because their consoles are starting to tear apart.

The point of going to another name it to showcase a different concept or idea. If Nintendo wants to sell another idea then I'm all for a new name. But if it's just a straight upgrade then it's a no brainer calling it Switch 2.