@USDevilDog: I agree, but I would like to have the ability to play Nintendo IPs without having to shell out $300 for the price of admission. MS has almost done away with a mandatory console purchase with Gamepass, which is why MS appeals to me for the future of gaming. Also, who doesn't like Nintendo IPs? Just that question alone does a good job of answering why Nintendo should go mulltiplatform with their IPs.

Another Souls game. How many more do we need?

@sladakrobot: I saw it. Finally, software is being utilized instead just adding or creating new hardware.

@sladakrobot: Is it coming to the current generation or is this for newer hardware? If it's for newer hardware, then I may just ditch the next generation of consoles. It's just getting out of control at this point.

@sladakrobot: I hope you're right. But it's also been said that "it's up to the developer" to unlock 60FPS. The consoles of today are more than capable.

@itsnota2mer: I own and am an Xbox faithful, and I too had to laugh at your post!

@YukoAsho: I agree, but it shouldn't be this way especially when "newer and more efficient" developer tools are released. It's a sham at this point, really. In addition, 60 FPS should be the standard at this point. The consoles are powerful enough, so why short them? Being a console owner is only getting more frustrating, unless the goal is to move everyone to a PC. Which honestly, I think that's where I will be going after this generation of consoles. PCs last longer because they perform at a higher level for much longer.

@Akriel_Boulve: You're stuck in the past. Technology has evolved immensely. The Switch console is a Wii U with a much more streamlined and feasible concept. Also, most buyers don't care about the hardware inside; "Do you have good games that look great?", that's the buyer's mindset. In addition with chipsets and ports becoming cheaper at a much faster rate, Nintendo can capitalize on the elusive expansion port in their next hardware iteration, without making much of a sacrifice.

The other reason why Nintendo has failed in the past: the consumer. "What?", you ask. The consumer now is much more literate in technology, where a much larger portion of the customer base can troubleshoot their own hardware and software, than in the past. It's not like in the past where people would call a computer repair service to make those repairs. You got kids at 5 years old that are coding these days... it's mind blowing; we didn't even fathome that in the last 5 years. And that is something that you're overlooking. Any additional expansion hardware doesn't need to provide any additional functions, only more power that Nintendo doesn't have to manufacture. It's a risk worth taking for Nintendo, because they will virtually lose nothing on the gamble, and that's in the event that there is a loss. If you look at the SNES, that too had an expansion port on the bottom of the console. However, they were not going to go through with "SNES CD" because Sega CD wasn't that succeful. In addition, Nintendo would have had to manufacture that SNES CD. Where in this case, Nintendo doesn't have to manufacture any additional hardware, but only provide the expansion port for whoever wants to play graphic intensive titles, such as GTA V.

@Akriel_Boulve: The point is to get more people purchasing and using the hardware, while keeping their IPs to themselves, and generating more revenue. There, you go. Nice and simple. That was the point you missed.