The Switch is vastly less portable than my iPhone. I almost always keep my iPhone nearby, but I would almost never carry a Switch with me (not to mention, I'd almost never even use a Switch, because I've got a few more important things to do than play games).
It's in my backpack along with my laptop. My backpack is always in the same building or vehicle as I am, so it's always with me. It's not in my pocket like my iPhone, but it takes less than 20 seconds to pull my Switch out and start playing on it. Just take it out of the backpack, tap the power button, and I'm in the game. In contrast to the iPhone, where I'd have to pull it out of my pocket, wake it up, unlock it, pick a game, then wait a minute for the game to load.
Sure - some of the benefits on the Switch come from the fact that it doesn't have a Web browser or Facebook or camera competing for system resources, so the game I'm currently playing can always be fully loaded and ready to go but... so what? I didn't say the Switch was a versatile general purpose device. I said it was the greatest game device ever, and barely any less portable than my iPhone, which is true.
[doublepost=1511360050][/doublepost]
However, I'm not convinced that they currently sink any significant efforts into gaming.
They don't, but they certainly reap the benefits of having a popular gaming platform without even trying. I think the Switch is going to take a noticeable chunk out of App Store revenue.
[doublepost=1511360364][/doublepost]
This is an insane statement.
The original Nintendo, Super Nintendo, Game Boy, and PlayStation were all better.
None of those but the Game Boy are portable, so right there you're wrong for 3 of them. Game Boy lacked great 3D adventure titles. Top-down Zelda and Pokemon never appealed to me (although I love side scrolling Metroids.) Fire Emblem is okay - kind of slow paced. I prefer RTS or something tighter like Mario + Rabbids rather than dealing with dozens of units in a Turn Based Strategy game.