I'm shocked, shocked I say, that this objectively bad idea is getting the "-shrug- it's better than nothing" treatment.
Or maybe we have a difference of opinion ?
You've stated it's bad without any reasoning why. Others have concerns about ownership of a game vs having to rent it if Switch is their only console. Adrock mentioned an issue of not being able to play RE7 on the go if it's a streaming-only option. And there have been slippery-slope arguments about a precedent being sent. If those things concern you? No problem, it's easy enough to not buy it, and Capcom won't continue if there's not a financial incentive.
This news doesn't really affect me since I could play this game on PS4 or PC. But, if Switch was the only way for me to play it, I PERSONALLY would be fine with it being this option assuming 1) the streaming is stable, 2) It looks on-par with its PS4 counterpart, and 3) They're charging what I consider reasonable.
$20 is reasonable to me assuming the above for what is basically a rental. two weeks to rent this thing alternative methods would be almost the same amount. I find this absolutist position of "if I can't own a down-ported version on Switch, then Capcom shouldn't bother at all" hot take kind of baffling.
[/size]