The wii U just got plenty of even first party droughts because the development teams was struggling to develop in HD.
So, it seems that the pipeline of games would likely to be more crowded than 3DS + Wii U.

Games like xenoblade X wouldnt be possible, probably delayed to switch 2.
I dont even imagine what would happened to Bayonetta.
The sparse third party initiative (on CoD, assassins creed, batman, zombi U) would be gone, except by skylanders, lego, just dance, rayman.
Also, 3DS library alone could carry it.

Seems it would do much better than 3DS + Wii U combined, and keep the momentum going on to switch 2 (what switch is in our timeline).
Not only what we already got on switch, but also projects that went to wii U.

The switch needed to happen when it happened. Hardware would be much worse. The library would've been nowhere near as good as a ton of what makes Switch special people were not that accepting of Japanese games in the west in 2011. That is the peak 7th gen fuck Japanese games era. Also, Nintendo was just seen as a joke in 2011. It just doesn't work—the wrong climate.


Wii U needed to fall so Switch could stand. Switch launched in 2017 when Japan returned and was more socially acceptable again. Yakuza. Persona. Nier. BOTW. Mario Odyssey. To name a few of the most revered games of that year. Switch needed BOTW to show the hardware can run some serious games. Switch needed to happen in 2017 when game engines were more scaleable than in 2011.

It is hard to imagine for me as I actually enjoyed last gen, even if it was a commercial failure.

Personally I am glad it didn't happened a generation sooner, the 3DS is unique and I think I own about 15-20 sealed ones lol.

The WiiU I liked local multiplayer one player on TV and the other on the controller screen.

I some aspects the WiiU does some things better than Switch, like save files and backing up to external HDD. I hope when the generation ends, Nintendo just release a final firmware which allows all that, so when the services go down I can easily back up from something to another system.

The success of the switch is in part built on the failure of the WiiU and the mediocre success of the 3DS. Without them as precursors the switch would not have the same games. Rereleasing WiiU titles worked because so few had played them so for the most part they where new experiences.

Getting a Zelda game as a release title has happened twice. Both times the console they where originally developed for was considered failures and both consoles they ported to as one of the first titles saw more success than most of the other systems. I do not think it needs to be Zelda, but having a high end title from start on a new system helps a lot. If switch would release instead of the WiiU that title would be missing.

It would actually be pretty hard to tell them apart all things considered.

nVidia didn't really start to get ahead of other GPU manufacturers in the ARM SOC space until Kepler happened which brought forth a myriad of efficiency optimizations to the core architecture on top of a massive increase in functional units.
Maxwell took that and refined it to the 10th degree.

As an hardware idea, it'd probably would've been a good call for Nintendo who was still in the development of SD capable software. They had pains developing HD games at that time and a device like Pemalite suggested would've probably made some good software pieces on their part ....

But I feel like this would've only retarded the pains that exactly came with HD software development.
Also, a big part of the reason why the Switch succeed was it's big lineup of software early on coupled with ports of games on WiiU.

Can't say if the software on an hypothetical earlier Switch would match what we currently have.

Iwata said they experimented with the idea of having the hardware of the Wii U inside the GamePad (so basically a Switch), but it wasn't feasible at the time.

I don't think the concept works with lesser hardware, you needed Wii U tier scope games at a minimum for the concept to be appealing. I don't think people would be as impressed with the concept if it was only 3DS/Wii 1 level graphics. Right off the bat, you can throw Breath of the Wild away because it wouldn't be the same game with Vita-range specs. 

I don't think it could work at that level of hardware. There's no point of 'Switching' between handheld and docked modes if the docked mode is basically the same level of tech as the previous 2 generations and if it isn't outputting in HD. It would probably go the same as the 3DS, selling poorly at first until a price drop and Mario Kart sparks sales, and the dock would probably be dropped within a year in favor of pushing it as just a dedicated handheld. This level of hardware as a 'Switch' would have needed to be released much earlier to really work, instead of the DS and Wii, which would be stupid given how much they sold together.

Out of curiosity, with a Tegra 3 would it be viable for a 2011 Switch to get "impossible ports" of PS3/360 titles, similar to how the historical Switch got ports of PS4/XBO titles? I mean, of course it would vary by game, COD was ported to the Wii after all, but just how capable would it be in this regard?

It would have been amazing and I believe there would be hundreds of different variations made!