When Nintendo finally unveiled the Nintendo Switch, it put an end to one of the worst kept secrets in gaming. The home/portable console hybrid had been rumored ever since Nintendo first began cryptically talking about their next console, at the time codenamed NX. The consensus after the reveal was that if they were aligning their console and handheld development resources into one platform Nintendo could do some amazing things.

With so much excitement about a unified Nintendo platform it was rather disconcerting to see Nintendo President Tatsumi Kimishima declare that the Nintendo 3DS line wasn’t going anywhere in an interview with Bloomberg last October.

“Thanks to our software, the 3DS hardware is still growing. So that business still has momentum. And certainly rather than being cannibalized by the Switch, we think the 3DS can continue in its own form,” said Kimishima when directly asked if the 3DS was being discontinued. This isn’t the first-time Nintendo has defended multiple hardware platforms. The Nintendo DS was originally pitched as their “third pillar” and not a GBA replacement. While there is certainly some sound logic in keeping the 3DS, ultimately Nintendo is better off ending the 3DS line and moving forward with the Switch as their only platform.

The games may stop but the 3DS will live on

The most common counterargument is that Nintendo doesn’t want to negatively impact 3DS sales by publicly announcing the system is dead. That argument makes sense for the Wii U, a console with a thin library, but doesn’t hold as much weight with the 3DS. Even if Nintendo doesn’t make another 3DS game it doesn’t diminish the console’s value because of the already robust and excellent library available.

The 3DS library is one of the most diverse libraries available on any platform. Everything from side-scrolling platformers to fighting games to epic role-playing games have a home on the console. On top of the 3DS library the handheld also has access to the excellent DS library as well. In fact, I would argue that there hasn’t been a better time to own a 3DS. That library will always be there; you can always find something to play regardless of the new release schedule.

By leveraging that library Nintendo can continue to manufacture and sell 3DS systems without spending any additional money on development. Sony adopted a similar strategy with the PlayStation 2. They continued to manufacture and sell consoles, the PS2 remained in production until 2013, even after the 2006 launch of the PlayStation 3. Nintendo could take another page out of Sony’s playbook and court indie developers much like Sony did with the PlayStation Vita. Sony confirmed in 2015 that it had ended Vita development but the console lived on thanks to a steady supply of independent games. The bottom line is that there is precedent for a console to live on even if there isn’t first-party development.

Keep the games coming

While the Wii U was a commercial failure it still had its share of critically acclaimed games. Bayonetta 2, Super Mario Maker, Mario Kart 8, and Splatoon are just a few of the highly-regarded games available on the console. The problem was that Nintendo struggled to maintain a steady stream of releases.

It would be naïve to assume that third-party developers are finally going to get onboard with this console. The Wii U started out in a similar place; ports of the previous generation’s big games early in the lifecycle. Of course, the poor sales of the console didn’t inspire confidence but those sales can in part be blamed on Nintendo’s release schedule. After the system’s November 2012 launch Nintendo didn’t release another first-party game until June 2013’s Game & Wario, a seven-month gap, and that was a minigame collection. It wouldn’t see as a core game until Pikmin 3 in August 2013, nearly a year after the console’s launch.

The lack of steady releases made the console a wait-and-see proposition instead of a must buy. It was hard to justify buying a console for a couple of games and once the third-parties jumped ship Nintendo was never able to make up for the lack of releases.

In theory, moving all 3DS development over to the Switch alleviates that problem. The 3DS has largely abandoned the touch screen as a primary control method and the Switch tablet has a touch screen in the rare case a game requires it. Most games wouldn’t need to be modified much from a gameplay and controls perspective to be playable on the Nintendo Switch. Even if the third-party support dries up, which wouldn’t be a surprise, Nintendo could still maintain a healthy console with six to eight first-party games a year; roughly equal to their current combined output for the Wii U and 3DS.

Give us a reason to Switch

So far, most games shown for the Switch have been traditional home console games. Right now, Nintendo is selling the Switch on the promise that you can take your game with you anywhere. The trailers show people playing expansive games such as The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim and The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild at home and then seamlessly taking it on the go. While that is impressive it also does little to justify the portability, especially when the game’s performance may suffer as a result.

Portable games are different from console games in their design and scope. The best ones provide a fun gameplay loop in small chunks, such as last year’s excellent Picross 3D: Round 2 for the 3DS. While the 3DS has a large library of role-playing games and other genres that lend themselves to longer play sessions it also features a large library of games meant to be played in short bursts.

The ideal situation would be two distinct groups of Switch games; portable focused experiences and more traditional console fare. Both game types would still take advantage of the system’s core feature – play your portable game on the TV or console game on the go – but there would be experiences tailor made for each playstyle. The battery life of the Switch seems problematic but in a world where you are only playing an hour or so during your commute, 3 hours is more than enough time. On top of that, Nintendo has shown they love accessories so it isn’t out of the question for them to release an extended battery for the tablet.

Nintendo has a chance to do something special with the Switch by creating a unified platform for all their games. As Nintendo has shown time and time again, their development teams are arguably the best in the world and this is their chance to leverage that in an unprecedented way. Having one device to experience every one of those games isn’t just a dream; it’s a necessity if Nintendo wants to give people a reason to buy the Switch.

If the Switch becomes the place to play Zelda, Mario, Pokemon, Fire Emblem, Professor Layton, Phoenix Wright, Etrian Oddessy, ect. ect. it could be incredible. Hopefully these developers migrate to the Switch sooner than later.

3rd party games are a good 90% of the games I own for my 3DS and an absolutely integral part of why it was a success compared to the WiiU. (Same for the DS before it.) My greatest fear would be to see the Switch push those developers away, for any number of reasons, not only leaving Nintendo in the same poor position of having to support an entire console themselves, but also depriving me of the types of games I most enjoy.

If the Switch cannot maintain quality 3rd party support on par with the 3DS then it will be an abject failure as a replacement.

Has Nintendo ever stated that the intent of the Switch was to also provide a handheld console experience? Sure, they have marketed it's portability but I feel like that's slightly different than saying, "This is a home-console and a handheld-console". Handheld games tend to have such a different feel from home consoles, providing more bite-size game experiences such as in Picross 3D. So while they have demonstrated the ability to play in "handheld mode", that's not the same as providing handheld software. Have they ever stated handheld focused software would come to the Switch? I suppose that may be a natural assumption/extension to make...

When the details of the Switch began to leak, and it was officially shown off in that initial trailer, I was super excited because my first thoughts went immediately to "Dude, Pokemon and Monster Hunter on a fucking television. I'm in." The true excitement and potential of the Switch is exactly as you say, it rests within the promise of the unification of Nintendo's game development power, bringing the handheld and console sides together, which could even support the device almost entirely on their own.

But yeah, I have to admit there's a part of me in the back of my mind that's nagging at me, telling me "This device isn't what you actually want it to be. What you think Nintendo is doing is too good to be true." It makes perfect sense when you look at this device that you consolidate both your handheld and console games. And to be fair, it's not like Nintendo could just come out tomorrow and say "Yeah btw the 3DS is dead now" because it hasn't been all that long since they've released new models, they still have games coming for it, and they don't want to just shoot their own market in the head. They still want to sell those things while they can.

Then again though, since announcing the Switch's launch, and the initial bit of games they showed in that full reveal show, the games they have all just feel like the games you would see on a Wii U successor. Zelda is great, and so will be Splatoon and Mario, I'm sure, but these are all console inspired games. What I've yet to see is that 3DS legacy moving to the Switch. I have to assume E3 will be the final test. The clearest thing that would show what Nintendo views the Switch as at E3 is whether or not they announce a Pokemon game for it. Or if between now and then you see Capcom start talking about a Switch Monster Hunter. I feel like everyone in the world, except Nintendo, seems to know the Switch is truly a hybrid device. To make it work they need to fully commit. I'll feel a lot more comfortable about the future of the system when/if they finally do that.

@marokai said:

This is exactly the change in perception I experienced watching their pre-release stream. Before I also expected the Switch to be positioned as unified console - which to me was the biggest argument for getting the device. After the stream I was much more under the impression that this is first and foremost a successor to the Wii U and Nintendo not being willing to give up the 3DS handheld market and it's install base for the Switch.

For that reason I decided against buying the Switch day one but will wait for the E3 announcements and aim for a holiday season purchase earliest - probably only if they announce a strong first party line up the coming months though.

While I think that the Switch is a fantastic console and got one at launch, I don't really see it replacing the 3DS as a true portable system.

For me the portability aspect means that I can start playing Zelda in the living room and finish playing in bed, I don't see myself using it while waiting in line at Gamescom or TGS. I feel that the Switch lacks the true portability of a "real" handheld and therefore I would probably prefer having some kind of 3DS successor in the future.

I'm not saying I don't see the appeal of a truly unified Nintendo platform, I just don't see the Switch really pulling it off.

The current model Switch is way too delicate to give to a child to play, not to mention too expensive and too big. Case closed. Until the Switch has a 2DS style unbreakable slab model it will not replace the 3DS.

Nintendo should create Switch versions of its future 3DS games but the Switch does not replace the 3DS. I had the true hybrid dream too but that is not what they delivered. Maybe some day there will be a version of the Switch that is that, but not today.

The 3DS is the only thing making Nintendo money they can't dump it yet especially while the Switch is new and quite expensive. Nintendo has merged their console / portable development teams it would be smarter and easier to release software on both platforms then phase out the 3DS as the Switch becomes cheaper.

I'd sooner let the Switch die than the 3DS, but that's just me.

I don't know how the Switch can be successful without replacing the 3DS, but most of it's announced releases so far feel strictly like a Wii U replacement.

the next monster hunter will be on 3ds. just calling it now to save myself disappointment.

look forward to the proper fire emblem game on switch in 2018 (?) though!

Support from third-party Japanese developers is what will make or break the system for me. Announcing the next mainline SMT game was a good start. Now just give me somes like Stella Glow and Radiant Historia that I can play on this impressive new hardware.