>>34180090Not gonna happen, they're not gonna gimp themselves. If they saturate the market they'll just create a situation where they're competing with themselves for no reason. The Switch is a huge upgrade from the 3DS and works as a handheld and is only $50 more than the 3DS was at launch. There's no middleground for them to capitalize on without pointlessly splitting hairs. Why would they bother making something less powerful than the Switch but more powerful than the 3DS if you can just buy a Switch, which is more powerful, has better games, and is also a handheld? What would this theoretical system even cost? Assuming it's better than the 3DS they'd probably want to sell it for more than the 3DS was at launch, but even if they didn't and sold it at the same price as the 3DS was, why not just spend $50 more to get a superior system that already has good games and is also a handheld?
There's really no scenario where Nintendo throws another device into this mix, the Switch has a niche as a powerful handheld and a comparatively weak but still competent console. It's a niche that's clearly working for them since it's well received and selling, why muddy the waters?
