Sorry if already posted!

I heard that the chip (cpu/gpu) that Nintendo chosen was their best option Nintendo had to achieve an efficient battery life for a viable handheld console while still being a viable home console. Was the Nintendo Switch at launch sold for a profit, loss or did they break even at launch? If the Nintendo Switch sold for a profit, do you think Nintendo should have added 8 GB of main memory instead of 4 GB and would that of made porting games easier and would that have allow it to sustain 1080p Dock and 720p mobile at 60fps since Nintendo couldn't get a better cost effective low power consuming chip (cpu/gpu) at that time to maintain an efficient battery life for viable mobile gaming? I know that the pc has many different settings at different resolutions and that the gap in low-end to high-end hardware for pc's to run games on low settings to high settings is much bigger than Nintendo Switch (low settings) to XBOX ONE and Sony PlayStation 4 (high settings), so why aren't the third party support better when The Witcher 3 will be on the Nintendo Switch?

I suspect cafe will be power by a gpu comparable to the hd 6670 and have 1gb of DDR3 ram, with a cpu similar to the xbox360 but more powerful. If it is less powerful than this, then I will not be interested in it. I will just game on my entry-level pc, and wait to see if Microsoft or Sony has what I want.

IthinkNintendo will put 1gb of DDR3 ram in Project Cafe, and Sony and Microsoft will put 2gb of DDR3 or GDDR5 ram in their next generation counsel. I`am more concern with the amount of ram then the cpu and gpu, it is confining PC games. PC developers are designing games with counsel limited amount of ram in mind. PC games current average ram requirement is 2gb, if counsels had half this amount, they would not have received compromised game such as crysis 2, which has a less open world environment. Just like Gears of War developers pushed to get Microsoft to add an extra 256mb of ram to xbox 360, the PC developers should do the same for next generation of counsels.

system ram 2gb ( I will settle for 1gb ). The counsel should cost no more than $300. No 3d, 3d will deplete the system resources ( frame rate drop, decrease graphics capability, physics slow down, which affects the AI and brings total system cost up ). It should have graphics comparable to mid range PC graphics cards.

Nope

I hope they decide to bring it over to pc, so I and many others without counsels can enjoy.

No, gameplay and story should equally be great.

Graphics are important but it does not trump story or gameplay.

I can enjoy playing a game with good story and gameplay and have average graphics.

I run games at 1280 x 720 to 1440 x 900 resolution, so I really don't require the best there is to offer.

However it is time for a upgrade, but I can wait another year.

Who cares? It is no secret that Microsoft is not about quality, it is about creating and selling hype. They are just doing what they know best.kuraimen

Seem more like you describing Sony, hype wise.:question: They both probably should use all their capital to create more first party studios.:idea:

Instead of wasting money on exclusives and exclusive content; Look to Nintendo, they have huge amount of profit from their in house developers.

More new developers, equal more new IP's, a win for counsel gamers.:)