I agree, it's still early. Although there are encourging signs. 

This is true. I certainly hope Switch does well. The thought of an two-party industry with Microsoft and Sony is a dismal prospect indeed in my opinion. I mean, I own systems from both, but Nintendo to me are the ones who keep things interesting by doing things a bit differently.

How would it be harder? Investors want their company to make money; when that company releases a product that is selling well they can easily drive up stock price due to that current success because the stock price is already low. Having a lower stock price makes the company's stock more accessible and therefore more people will invest in said company due to its current success at a low impact.

Yeah, but you make it sound like all they have to do is make a console that will sell. Well thats not always so easy. Look at Sega and Atari. Why didnt they just release a system that would sell great after the Saturn and Jaguar?

70-75 million is a good, realistic goal to have, one that will still require a lot of hard work and strong execution to get to.

100 million is really reliant on a new type of hit IP breaking out (or several) and that's something Nintendo doesn't really have control over. Or changing radically how hardware is offered and thus culminatively you kinda "cheat" your way there (ie: offering new iterative models of Switch more often, and not just simple cosmetic redesigns). 

Though I would say -- look at what's working for you Nintendo. The younger designers at Nintendo who actually play Playstation/XBox and like modern video games and aren't stuck in 1992 are the ones driving things like Splatoon (Nintendo's take on the online team based shooter) and Zelda: BotW (Nintendo's take on the massive open world Skyrim/Witcher genre type).

That's working for Nintendo, not $50 mini-game compilations. Nintendo ought to look at what other genres are popular today and see if they can't bring their own unique design philosophy to them (which in the process makes those games unlike anything else). First person shooters are still popular. Minecraft style games are popular.

Nintendo should look at making games in those genres IMO and let the younger people in the company have more influence in design direction. Hate to say it, but keep Miyamoto away, only let him come in once the concept is formed and finalized.

Yeah if Switch is going to be successful long term, they need more games like Splatoon and Breath of the Wild; fresh and forward-thinking projects that appeal to today's mainstream gamer, rather than the kind of conservative, living-in-the-past kind of projects they made far too many of on Wii U, like Starfox Zero, Ultra Smash, NSMBU, and even to a lesser extent 3D World and Tropical Freeze.

Fortunately, it does look like they're off to a good start with games like Mario Odyssey.

Agreed Splatoon and Breath of the Wild is the way forward for Nintendo. Instead of shunning modern game mechanics, they embrace them and are still uniquely Nintendo. 

And the audiences you attract from said games are a reliable base of consumer going forward ... unlike the audience you get from Wii Sports/Fit/Nintendogs/Brain Training. 

Nintendo can make Splatoon games for the next 10-20+ years now, BoTW can be the basis for Zelda games for the next 10-15 years. 

How about a first person shooter franchise, eh Nintendo? 

or 1 2 Switch?

That was my round about way of saying it, but sure. Zelda is clearly what's driving Switch adoption if they didn't have that game at launch they could very easily be in a world of trouble right now (see also: 3DS launch). 

Many of us would love Nintendo to stick to core games only, but its just not going to happen. Best we can hope for is a BOTW every 5 years with some DKC, Mario Odyssey and Splatoon like games sprinkled in every now and then.