Dude Wii Sports was brutal...the only really fun minigame on it was bowling...any of the other sports have better equivalents with traditional controllers...Mario Tennis, Fight Night, Hot Shots Golf/Tiger Woods, and The Show/MLB2K are all better equivalents of the other four options. 

The only things going for it were:

1) It was bundled in, so you kinda had to try it

2) It's easily accessible for kids and old people

3) Yeah they can be fun with big groups and whatnot even though they're [technically speaking] poorly made games. 

Okay and side note...it's a fucking 7 year old game, I better not get called out for trolling here...there has to be a statute of limitations here on VGChartz...if I can't chirp a bad game now, when can I?

They would need to get a license to launch peripherals for them, though.

And, as Eurogamer has proved with the PS4+Vita vs WiiU+GamePad comparison, some peripherals must be planned during the design of a console to work as they should.

Thing is Nintendo could still innovate with controllers.  The Wii console itself was totally underpowered device and what was done with the control mechanism could just as well been an add-on for the PS3 or Xbox 360. The same goes for what Nintendo did with the Wii U.  I will grant that they have tried things with the controllers, but there would be nothing stopping them from doing that exact same thing with PS4 and/or Xbox One.  Make the compelling game for the add-on controller and it will sell. It will sell more than the Wii U.

I prefer better quality hardware plus new things that will improve gameplay and not the same thing over and over again with better grapix

Because then it would cease to be Nintendo.

Why would they make a phone? That just doesn't make sense.

It would make a lot more sense, in a Google-Nintendo partnership, for them to create a gaming platform more akin to Steam, and then create hardware of various types to utilise that platform. Kind of like the gaming equivalent of Android.

And no, a Nintendo-Microsoft alliance would be a disaster for all involved. The two companies are just too different from one another in terms of how they operate.

Anyway, on the overall topic - it's not that Nintendo fans are necessarily opposed to going third party, it's that Nintendo fans know that Nintendo won't do it. Beyond that, most Nintendo fans don't want the loss of Nintendo's influence on hardware, because Nintendo is the trend-setter of hardware, despite typically being lower power. They introduced the analog stick. They introduced shoulder buttons, force feedback, motion controls, touchscreen controls, and wireless controllers. They made multiple attempts at introducing 3d visuals (the first that I know of being Virtual Boy). They tried console-handheld connectivity multiple times.

Nintendo's history is filled with experimentation and innovation in the hardware space. By comparison, the biggest bit of experimentation done by either of the other two was Camera Control - that is, Eyetoy (which later evolved into Kinect). Sony introduced Move only after Nintendo had proven the viability of motion controls. Microsoft introduced Kinect for a similar reason. Sony and Microsoft are companies whose main industries involve a lot of refinement but not a lot of true innovation. They have a tendency to respond rather than innovate. Nothing wrong with that, but the gaming industry needs a hardware maker that takes chances of that sort. Sometimes it's an instant hit (Wii). Sometimes it's a complete flop (Virtual Boy). And sometimes it takes a while to get off the ground, but becomes a powerhouse with time (DS). Obviously, it's too early to judge whether the Wii U is more like Virtual Boy or DS.

In short, Nintendo fans recognise that the loss of Nintendo's influence on gaming hardware in general would be bad for the whole industry. This isn't to say that the industry would collapse, or that gamers should be singing their praises or ignoring their flaws. Just that there's value in Nintendo remaining a hardware maker, even for those who aren't interested in playing on Nintendo systems.

Because nintendo fans get irritated by new experiences

I'm not saying that you're wrong, per se. I would just like to point out two things that you may not have considered. First things is, why are you arguing for Nintendo to go third party and not either of the other two console manufacturers? Why not argue for Sony and Microsoft to merge with one console, since theirs are so similar to begin with? Wouldn't it be better for consumers to only have to worry about buying two consoles for all the first-party exclusives instead of three? Nintendo typically makes the most unique consoles anyway, so they would seem less likely than either of the other two to stop making consoles. Second is, graphical power has almost nothing to do with success in the marketplace. The console or handheld with the most power has never been the dominant console in it's generation. Wii won last gen, with lowest horsepower. PS2 won gen before that, with lowest power, PS One won gen before that with lower graphical capabilities than N64, etc. So, graphics really don't matter. If they did, Xbox would have won over PS2, PS3 would have beaten the Wii, N64 would have beaten the PS One, PS Vita would be killing the 3DS right now. So clearly, it's been proven time and time again, that it's the software that drives a console to succeed in the marketplace, then comes the price point, and graphics are always a secondary concern.

perhaps the same reason why sony doesnt go third party despite losing so much money currently

Seriously imagine a new pokemon and mario on android.  It would sell INSAnELY well even at $20!   Think how much money Nintendo could be making...