Oh, I see. You think the Switch is like the Wii. You think it is attracting a new crowd of people or maybe bringing back the old Wii crowd. That is why you are defining "arcade" in terms of accessibility.
The problem with this reasoning is that the Wii was a whole lot more accessible than the Switch is. The Switch has no Wii Sports type of game. If you are thinking "arcade" means accessible, then the Switch needs a mega seller that is as easy to learn as Wii Sports. It doesn't have this. You shouldn't put the Wii and the Switch in the same vertical column on your table, because their library of games is pretty different.
Switch is not successful because of extreme accessibility. Switch is successful, because it is a handheld system. Nintendo has never been defeated in the handheld space. They are leveraging their extreme success in the handheld market and bringing it into the home market as well. That is why the Switch is successful. It is not about extreme accessibility.
The "arcade gameplay" on the Switch is actually pretty similar to the "arcade gameplay" on the N64 and Gamecube. Switch's big arcade-like games are Mario Kart, Smash Bros and Mario Party. You could find these same types of games on the N64 and Gamecube. You could also find these types of games on the 3DS. They sell better on the 3DS. Now they are selling well on the Switch. That's because the Switch is bringing in all of the handheld gamers and then bringing in some home console gamers too. It's not bringing in the Wii crowd in big numbers. It's merging the home and handheld markets.
Most of the popular accessible Wii games already have a counterpart on Switch: Mario Kart 8 Deluxe, NSMBU Deluxe, Animal Crossing: New Horizons, Ring Fit Adventure, Super Mario Party. You are setting a very arbitrary rule by saying that Switch needs a sports game in order to qualify for the same column when there's already a good selection of accessible games on the system. Being like the Wii does not mean to be exactly like the Wii.
Switch being successful because it's a handheld system is as shallow of an analysis as saying that Switch can't have a long lifecycle because Nintendo consoles don't have long lifecycles. Indeed, you are on the same level as a common anti-Nintendo troll.
I've said it multiple times before, a complete version of such a table would include handheld consoles. I can tell you where Nintendo's handhelds would be placed: GB/C, GBA and DS would all be Arcade Evolution, because those were the games those handhelds were about. The 3DS would go into Balance, because Nintendo's initial sales pitch bragged with IPs like Assassin's Creed, Darksiders and other games from American/European developers who started out with PC development. Some of these games were never released for the 3DS, but failure does not change intent, just like it does not do it for the Wii U where PC games got even more attention from Nintendo during the initial sales pitch.
This context explains why Nintendo handhelds were successful. Not because they were handhelds like your shallow analysis suggests, but because they were built on what made Nintendo a successful console manufacturer. The 3DS was only moderately successful at best and it's very likely that that is a direct consequence of Nintendo's different approach, because the pattern that is forming for Nintendo's ups and downs strongly correlates with their strategies.
Lastly, the IPs you named (Mario Kart, Smash Bros. and Mario Party) all sold better on the Wii than on the 3DS. And on Switch they are selling even better than on the Wii. I give you that Switch is bringing in the handheld gamers, because it obviously does. But at the same time the Wii crowd has been coming back, hence why we've already seen new franchise records for games long before they are done selling. Switch software numbers already look amazing, but these games are from being done yet.