It isnt being unique, but as I am sure others have stated, Nintendo has been slow to adapt to external changes in the industry as well as with marketing to the changing audience.
Being unique has nothing to do with it, Nintendo in their last 4 home consoles have just made decisions that instilled fatal weaknesses in their devices.
N64 - Cartridge medium
GC - The mini disc medium, while later somewhat vindicated the GC controller was not initially well received and the early push of the purple color as the main device color.
Wii - The device barely being stronger then the previous generation, the lack of HD, the weak online infrastructure, the multiple add one, extra devices that never got support beyond 2 or 3 games and Nintendo's own abandoning of support (particularly the lack of more traditional releases that dried up mid way in its life cycle with a focus more ontargeting nostalgia and casual audiences) for the system in NA at least half of the system's life.
Wii U - Poorly named trying draw on the Wii audiences but winding up just confusing the less knowledgeable. Just like the Wii it was just strong enough to be slightly stronger than the last generation. The tablet is well implemented but the lack of more advance tech giving it weaknesses that don't help it seem like a true advancement. The lack of Nintendo titles early on that show the positives of the console or its controller like they had with the Wii and the N64.
These fatal flaws have wound up hurting Nintendo, while the N64 and Wii did well enough due to their games, innovations and other factors, the Wii U is probably even with the improved online features and powerful graphics has all the hallmarks of a Frankenstein device that was not put together by a core concept but piecemealed together by a committee looking at what THEY believed were the current weaknesses of the Wii and not the upcoming issues or features a new generation of consoles would need to face .
