The Switch as hardware isn't very innovative. It's basically a handheld that hooks up to the television. What Nintendo deserves credit for is going in whole-hog with the concept and combining their libraries.

That was something that was going to happen in the gaming space eventually, sure, but taking the first step is always hardest because sometimes the technology isn't mature enough.

I would argue that what separates Nintendo is that they are willing to put all their eggs in one basket.  

That can be good or bad and Nintendo has seen both sides.

When they try something different, they fully support it.  It's like pushing in all your chips when you have a pretty good hand.  

Yeah, masterpiece game are very rarely games, and it's even more  rarely than one platform have two of them in first year like Switch. IMO Nintendo Land is better game than Wii Sports, Wii Sports just had huge casual appealing. Mario Galaxy definatly had bigger impact on market but SM3DW was also great game. Like you wrote, Wii U did actualy got even bigger game than Zelda TP. I agree that NSMBU is basically NSMB HD, but DKTF was not DKCR HD and was great game. Also we can mentione Pikmin 3 thats actually best Pikmin game, or Smash Bros 4. and MK8 that are probably best games in franchises, Super Mario Maker is also great game, Splatoon 2, Xenoblade Chronicles 2, great Yoshi game...ad to that some ports like WW/TP HD...so totaly disagree, Wii U had some relly great and must have games, but had short full suport from Nintendo (only around 3 years) beacuse console was fail and Nintendo didnt want to invest any more in failed platform. I would actually arguing that Wii U has more quality games than 3DS if we compare number of quality games compared to number of all games released.

The Switch is appealing because it hits a number of targets at once. It's a simplified home console for casual gamers coming from mobile who had been put off by them before. It's a core-gamer friendly console as it lets you take some of the best AAA and indie games on the go, and even with compromises, it can still deliver the full experience. And it's a great family and party machine thanks to its built-in multiplayer and kickstand, making it a party system you can really take with you. While the Switch doesn't necessarily do anything new, it executes all of its core ideas in such unique and surprising ways that it makes it a joy to play on for nearly any game. The Switch is a very special console, it solves so many problems with, and addresses so many holes in the market with just a few swift strikes.

Well said.

It’s awesome. Before I bought it I thought it was good. But after having it for awhile and being able to bring it with me I really liked it.

We agree to disagree, then. But in the end software sells hardware and the software on Wii U didn't sell many consoles. And I don't even want to get into that discussion if you really argue that Nintendoland was better than Wii Sports :p Wii Sports was a worldwide phenomenon that single-handedly sold millions of Wii consoles around the globe, found its way into pop culture and was featured in the news for months after its release. Nintendoland probably didn't appeal to anyone outside the hardcore Nintendo fanbase. 

Well huge difference is that Wii U start receiving heavy hitters when consoles was already considered fail and nothing couldn't save it (while Switch has multiply hevy hitters and system seller games in 1st 9 months on market), but fact is that Wii U ended at end with some great games. Like I wrote, Wii Sports was worldwide phenomenon beacuse was great game for casuals and people that never before played any game, its game for 3-99 years old, but Nintendo Land was much more interesting game for core gamers, and for me Nintendo Land is easily better game. More popular and more apeling game for market doesnt mean its better game, Wii Sports has 76 metascore and despite that sold tens of millions Wii consoles to people that never before had any console.

"Red oceans represent all the industries in existence today – the known market space. In the red oceans, industry boundaries are defined and accepted, and the competitive rules of the game are known. Here companies try to outperform their rivals to grab a greater share of product or service demand. As the market space gets crowded, prospects for profits and growth are reduced. Products become commodities or niche, and cutthroat competition turns the ocean bloody; hence, the term "red oceans".

Blue oceans, in contrast, denote all the industries not in existence today – the unknown market space, untainted by competition. In blue oceans, demand is created rather than fought over. There is ample opportunity for growth that is both profitable and rapid. In blue oceans, competition is irrelevant because the rules of the game are waiting to be set. Blue ocean is an analogy to describe the wider, deeper potential of market space that is not yet explored." - W. Chan Kim and Renée Mauborgne - Blue Ocean Strategy 

If we consider that the red ocean in the gaming industry is the hardware power race, yes the Switch is an innovative product. The hybrid concept target a new and unexplored market that will give Nintendo an enormous profit on staying in it.

And that's what people who asks for Nintendo to make more powerful systems don't get. They don't want to enter in a saturated market with Sony and Microsoft. They are pretty good at the spot they are now and are making lots of money there without any competition.