The advantage the Wii U had when it was first release was that it could handle PS3 and 360 games much better than the Switch can handle PS4 and XB1 games.

The advantage the Wii U had was that it was coming same time the PS4/One came. The PS3/360 were still huge and thus most all games were still made fro thsoe systems and just ported up to the PS4/One and ported sideways to the Wii U. They didn't have to find a way to make their resources heavy game work on a less poweful system than it was original made. They just had to make their game for the new hardware.

In retrospect the WIi U support was a joke considering the sales of the Wii. The Switch's support in its first 9 months is insane considering how the WIi U performed. What has been so far announced I ddint 'expect to hear until next E3. Thought most devs would be too late to the ball, you know right now going like "oh shit, what shoudl we make for this hot system", but seems a few had took a chance on the switch.

More or less. The two Assassin's Creed games, the two Arkham entries, Splinter Cell Blacklist, Watch_Dogs, Black Ops II...All of them run worse on Wii U than on PS360. There were exceptions, mainly Deus Ex HR, but unfortunately it was never the rule. 

However, I guess it's true that support for the Switch has been somewhat impressive considering the failure of the Wii U. It would be nice if it could maintain that pace for the rest of its life. 

Eh? I would put the Xbox One launch titles over every 3rd party Switch game out yet. (PS4 as well but the One had better launch titles imo)

BF4, Blackflag, Dead Rising 3 > Any 3rd party game currently on the Switch.

I think the impressive part is that there's support after the Wii U.

Would you like to list the long list of third party tirple A titles that are on Switch and the problems associated with them?

1) NBA 2K18 has frame rate cut in half, resolution reduced, storage issues.

2) Fifa 18 has missing modes, completely different engine, lesser online experience, plays like a last generation title.

3) DOOM runs at half the frame rate, missing a feature, has storage issues, runs at 720p no matter what, comes out a year and four to five months later.

4) Skyrim is lacking features (all we really know thus far).

5) Lego City Undercover has frame rate issues, graphically downgraded.

6) Ultra Street Fighter II does not offer enough new content, is sold between 1/4 and 1/2 the price on competing consoles.

7) Rocket League runs at 720p no matter what (that is all we really know about the title thus far).

So far, the Switch is in the same position as Wii U but with fewer triple A titles. And in some cases like the game having the same features (2K18) as its counterparts, it offers new issues (storage) to make up for the almost worthy port. I am not saying people should not want these games, I am saying you are completely incorrect when you say Switch games are more complete. They are hurting just as much as Wii U titles were hurting.

It's not that hard to realize the last time EA fully supported a Nintendo consle.

Roger that!

Mostly true although you have given Doom a bit too much credit as that appears to be running at 540p on portable a lot of the time. However it's mobile tech and primarily a portable system which is a huge part of the system's appeal. Docked performance is low performance compared to other consoles but still capable of fantastic satisfying visuals like Mario Odyssey and the portable side is far more impressive. It's a nice package. No one is expecting the Switch to deliver the same quality of graphics or sophisticated game engines that you see on ps4 or xbox one that push the envelope on what can be achieved on those systems. It will always be a compromise and downgrade on Switch but for many games that don't need huge resources there is no reason why games on Switch can't be as good as ps4 and xbox one which you can then take with you for portable gaming. Then add to that the huge appeal of Nintendo's own exclusive games. Plenty of reasons to own Switch, PS4, Xbox one or PC. 

The excuse that it is mobile tech does not work in this context. We are talking about if the support is impressive and this mobile tech is superior tech to Wii U tech. However, if Wii U got a 720p 30fps version of DOOM that came out a year and five months later and cost a full sixty dollars, people would scream "lazy dev" or, "this is why Nintendo fans don't buy third party" and that would be said about technically inferior hardware.

The question is, "is Switch third party support really that impressive" and in the context of the question, there is no way people can say yes. Same watered-down ports and overpricing (Switch tax?) issues plus some new problems thrown in. Again, I am not trying to insult Switch's situation; rather, I am trying to give people a better and more honest perspective on Wii U's situation in light of this question. Nothing has changed in this regard.

Now, if you are asking about Switch vs. 3DS (as in hand held vs. hand held), we would be having a different conversation. We all know that Switch is compared to Wii U by most people because they see it as a home console or hybrid (I do not because it is a hand held) so in the context of this question, I am providing the best possible answer I can.

Lastly, expectations can change, sure. But that does not change facts. Just because downgraded ports and higher prices are more accepted this time around, that does not change the fact that the ports are still downgraded and some are priced higher.