"It works for them, it will work for us!!!" is a horrible way of thinking.
Copying another companies successful strategy does not mean you will be successful, an example Wii Remote & Playstation Move. Wii Remote was a huge mass market success, PS Move was a moderate success at best. Other examples, Smash Bros vs PS All Stars or Mario Kart vs LBP Karting.
The point of a powerful console+traditional controller strategy is primarily get the big multiplatform 3rd party titles so the question is how many of the people who buy consoles for these games will choose Nintendo over PS/XB? Will current PS4/XBO owners jump ship to play these games on Nintendo? Not likely, they already have a console to play them. Will future buyers choose Nintendo over PS4/XBO? Perhaps some but most will choose the consoles with already large libraries and online communities that their friends are playing on.
The most likely result is that the majority of people who buy this Nintendo console will do so to play exclusives and multiplats will be an afterthought.
Well, it's not really that it's copying so much as it's just how stardard gaming is like, with the console and a controller, and Nintendo originally used to do that. And it's not really about doing what Sony and MS is doing, but just assuring it's a console that can get as many games as possible. If a large library is there, then likely more people are going to buy the system, whether as a primary or secondary.
But yeah, whether they go the safe route, or the innovative route, I just want Nintendo to succeed, and which one is the better route, I'm not really sure.
That doesn't really address the issue, the audience for mainstream, western focused software is simply not on Nintendo consoles and hasn't been for 15-20 years.
You didn't answer the questions at all, why would people who already own a PS4/XBO buy a Nintendo version of those consoles? Why would people looking for a new console to play AAA 3rd party titles choose Nintendo over PS4/XBO?