OK, I'll reword.  Nintendo knows straight ports isn't happening thus bought a company to handle the cut backs and/or reductions.

Glad we agree on something.

Depends on how you define a "straight port". The Witcher 3 for example on Switch literally has the PC menu inside of it which was discovered by hackers, so it is literally the PC game put onto the Switch, not some bespoke version like the Game Boy getting some completely customized version of like Mortal Kombat circa 1992. You can change the settings in the Switch version and even change the frame rate to 60 fps if you overclock the Switch. 

Some developers are tight on resources because in part massive budget explosions, having a dedicated port studio can help bring more games to the platform. 

Optimization is what I mean.  Making up examples but limiting LOD or limiting number of NPCs, etc.  Just small tweaks to get better performance on weaker hardware.

Nintendo made the investment for a reason.  Likely it was a damn smart purchase.

It could just be they were in high level discussions for something and the studio is tight on resources at that moment ... GTA6, Final Fantasy games, who knows and an investment like that just sealed the deal. At this point we don't know. Nintendo has a new president, we don't know exactly how he will operate. 

You are shifting the goal post yet again. No one in the history of this thread has said anything to the contrary.

It doesn't stop the RTX 2050 from being a garbage GPU however. - But even Garbage GPU's can game.

Again, majority of PC gamers are not enthusiasts, the statistics have already established that.
But even hardware enthusiasts don't always operate their rigs on the bleeding edge.

So I am not entirely sure what your goal is with this superfluous argument.

But weren't you saying that the Switch is essentially the be-all, end-all because of the amount of Ram?

Are you going to stop being a hypocrite at some point?

Spoken like someone who has spent over a decade at sub 1440P, 60fps.

I remember the days when Xbox 360 and Playstation 3 gamers thought 1080P was irrelevant and argued that the 1080P advantage PC offered was redundant.
How their tunes changed when the Playstation 4 and Xbox One released.

You are literally being that person.

Considering that Nintendo's previous hardware releases in the mobile space were under-powered, I am not entirely sure you think it's the "win" you think it is.

Nintendo has more competition in the mobile gaming space than it ever has in it's entire history.
Phones and Tablets are more capable than ever... And PC is making big inroads in the mobile space and even Xbox is looking to dip it's toes.

Nintendo is a for-profit business and actually does need to compete at the end of the day or bleed marketshare. - The Switch 2.0 will bring them up into the current era with the current rendering paradigm's, but it's only going to be short lived with next-gen likely to start in a year if Microsoft gets it's way.

This. We are already seeing Xbox Series S games come with large compromises with games having cut features, reduced rendering quality, lower framerates and more. - The Switch 2.0 isn't going to make that easier for developers with it's slower hardware.

You have literally done zero research and provided zero evidence in the history of this entire thread.

You literally don't get the privilege of ridiculing others... Again. You are being extremely hypocritical.

Sorry but I don't agree with your points or general hardware philosophy. 

But if you want a cold hard metric on it, the sales don't lie, people that think like you are a small minority on message boards that make a lot of noise but aren't showing up to buy games in any big number. If that wasn't true, there are now several "graphics showcase" type titles this gen that have sold underwhelming numbers. 

The tech doesn't matter to begin with when the business model is falling apart. 

Whole lot of talk, not a lot of actual sales going on here which indicates an industry that is headed in a much different direction, it's like sitting on a movie board and having a small bunch of people talk on and on about CGI quality when the fact is the average movie goer doesn't give a fuck about CGI quality in 2024, it's not 1996 anymore where that meant a lot. 

And this is going to get worse not better, there's no studio head in this business that wants to pencil neck dork in their art department walking into their office tomorrow saying "we need to double/triple our budget from the level of today again for PS6". In fact we see clear as day in leaked Sony memos even that Sony even is shitting their pants internally that budgets are going over $300 million even on projects like Spider-Man 2. 

Nintendo was simply about 15 years ahead of the game on all of this, but it's playing out in real time now. 

Only some devs care about pushing tech, and that's fine, there are still plenty of games on PC that are designed for PC's like park/City sims, even when a small handful of those go to consoles, the PC side still handles those better, and that's not even the "1%" you speak of.

Pem and the others aren't even talking about the "1%" the way you are, they are talking about those with lower to mid-range spec hw, not the 3080/4080/90's (because anything below those models is considered mid-range and low end).

This still doesn't stop consoles and PC from pushing limits though. We see this with each console gen and also on PC via the likes of Nvidia and their tech. I can guarantee you Nintendo will show off the differences between Switch/Switch 2 and also create games designed for Switch 2's perf ratio and what it can handle/push, rather than "let's just make games to before Switch 1 and call it a day". Nintendo has often relied on art style when it comes to their games, and even those can still be expansive in scope like BotW, and even games like BotW looked better on Switch than the Wii U, and the same will happen with Switch 2 in regards to Switch 1. 

I'm still sporting my hw build since early-mid 2017, and it's still holding up decently 7 years later (meanwhile there's been 2 consoles gens in between that still need to play games at 30fps, while I can still do 60fps+ at 1440p, and I'm in the GTX 1000 series range, not the current RTX 4000 series, and no Ryzen CPU side, sporting only a 4 core-8 thread Intel CPU).

I'd stop putting focus on the 1% you're speaking of, because that is not the focus of this topic. Everyone else is talking about the mid to low tier ranges, not the 80/90 card specs. 

Fortnite is on Switch.

PC gamers spent over 38 billion USD last year for PC games:

How much have Nintendo gamers spent last year for Switch games? Probably less, since Switch games are only a fraction of the 53 billion USD of the total console game revenue (Switch + PlayStation + Xbox).

And since this whole thread focusses the "attractivity" of the Switch platform for third party developers... How much have Nintendo gamers spent last year for third party Switch games? 

The bestselling third party games (not based on Nintendo characters) on Switch are

• Minecraft (5.67 million units)
• Among Us (3.2 million units)
• Dragon Ball FighterZ (2.43 million units)
• Taiko no Tatsujin (2.27 million units)
• Octopath Traveler (2.16 million units)
• Human Fall Flat (2 million units)
• Dragon Ball Xenoverse 2 (1.82 million units)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_Nintendo_Switch_video_games

Cyberpunk 2077 is definitely a "graphical showcase". At the end of 2020 it already surpassed the bestselling third-party Switch game (Minecraft) with 7.67 million PC units (56% of 13.7 million total units).

The Cyberpunk 2077 sales have grown to over 25 million units since then; probably with more than 10 million PC units. Perhaps even a bigger PC share when we have a look at the platform breakdown of the "Phantom Liberty" sales:

Thanks to the raytracing update, "The Witcher 3" is still another "graphical showcase" to this day.

At the end of 2020 it already surpassed the bestselling third-party Switch game (Minecraft) with 12.4 million PC units (44% of 28.3 million total units).

The "The Witcher 3" sales have grown to over 50 million units since then; probably with more than 20 million PC units.

I'm talking about "graphics enthusiasts" like the ones that propagate and make a lot of noise on message boards like this one (even though this is a sales website). 

That's not "PC gamer", there are tons of PC gamers with low end rigs and tons of PC gamers that don't give a shit about graphics. 

The proof in that pudding is for several years all we heard was "wait till next-gen games with killer graphics arrive! People will flock to them!". Well those games have started to trickle out, things like Unreal Engine 5 showcase Immortals of Aveum, Senua's Saga just released, Alan Wake II, Avatar Frontiers of Pandora, the PS5-only Final Fantasy games, even something like Starfield which is a huge release. 

But most of these games are having underwhelming sales, some of them being full blown flops. I even hear stuff like "well people in Japan are buying a PS5 to play Genshin Impact". And people just casually say that without even thinking about it. Really? A smartphone game is the biggest game on a next gen console in a large market? They're playing that over a $100+ million dollar big budget next-gen Final Fantasy game? When the fuck did this just become the norm? If that isn't a glaring red flag that the market is changing in massive ways I don't even know what to say. 

Some people are wildly out to lunch thinking they're still in 2003 or something and the industry more or less is just working like it was back then, it's not even close. This gen is nothing like previous generations at all, we're nearly into the PS5's fifth year and the biggest 3rd party yearly IP (COD) is still on last gen consoles. We have a small handful of "lets push this new hardware" titles and pretty much all of them have failed to light up any sales chart. People don't care.