In my case, my main gaming platform is PC. Consoles for me are just for exclusives which i can't get on PC. The only switch exclusive that interests me so far is Zelda, this is why I concluded that, so far, it's not worth buying a Switch just for one game.

I always lol when I see that argument. It's just so stupid, increasing third-party support will never stop me and many others from purchasing Nintendo first party content. shit I own all three consoles and the support those consoles get have never deterred me from getting a Nintendo first party game

And that makes sense, we are all different.  In your case, portability is not a factor so 1st party IPs would be the deciding factor.  If you are not into them, then you are not into them.  However if you were only speaking about YOUR needs, you should have specified as much.

However the way you worded it implied that the only reason for ANYONE to get one was 1st party IPs, while ignoring the various other factors involed.  Your gaming needs to not equal the needs of everyone, or even most people.  We all have unique lifestyles and needs for our gaming after all.

I have seen a lot of threads with users needing to justify Switch, everything that Switch attempts needs to be recognised and congratulated, everything about it needs to be compared to be better than everything else ( which I understand as this is what the site is about but it appears to be so much more than anything before).

If anyone has a negative opinion about Switch or a Nintendo game, some users take it as a personal attack and over react in defending it.

Now I am not anti-Nintendo and I hope they do well as I am a big fan of having a diverse range of games for people to experience but just my thoughts on what I am seeing.

Non Nintendo regular users are the ones that actually act salty over Nintendo Switch success and feel the need to dismiss every positive news about its sales with poor reasonable arguments like this one mentioned in OP about "lack of competition".

This is more a reaction over these shade throwing attempts than nintendo fans being salty

Your view over this site behavior is pretty questionable to say the least

I see what you mean but also look at it from the other side, for years people have been saying things like

"Nintendo needs to go 3rd party"

"their consoles can only succeed if they get casual soccer moms & grandmas on board"

"Nintendo systems are only good as secondary devices"

"mobile is killing their handheld market"

"3rd parties dont sell on Nintendo consoles"

"Switch will fail because it's too weak for a home console and too expensive for a handheld"

After years of putting up with this, is it a surprise why Nintendo fans may want to brag and show all the detractors that they were wrong?

I can definitely see how it would be annoying from somebody who is neutral and never took part in the badmouthing but at the same time it isnt much different from 2014/2015 when we got alot of bragging about PS4 success after years of people saying Sony was going to go bankrupt.

Well, it depends a bit on the game.

Mario Tennis Aces: Can you even tell me any other tennis game that came out this gen? Or any other arcadey sports title for that matter (Golf Story is the only other title that comes to my mind - and that one is both based on Mario Golf and a Switch exclusive)? These are things that got very hard to find outside of Nintendo.

Jump&Runs: While there is some nice resurgence here with the rereleases of Crash Bandicoot, Spyro, with Sonic Mania and several indie Titles (A Hat in Time, Shovel Knight, Freedom Planet...), the genre itself mostly survived due to Nintendo, thus having the majority of the fanbases on their platforms.

Mario Kart: Similar to the above, arcade racers mainly survived due to this series, thus again accumulating most of it's fanbase.

Splatoon: A very different and fresh take on the FPS/TPS genres, one which at your normal publishers certainly would have been dismissed in an instant. It shows that unconventional ideas can not only be pulled of with great success, but that there are audiences which aren't covered by the games the publishers offer.

Labo: Who else would have greenlit something like that?

ARMS and Smash: Both are pretty different takes on the fighter genres. Smash wasn't even expected to succeed, but it became a, ahem, Smash hit despite being so unconventional as both platform fighters and mascot fighters were virtually unknown before the first one and most of these nowadays try to copy Smash in some way or another

And then there's the thing that most of these series are decades old, thus having built up a fanbase over many years and entries.

In any other case however, they have to compete with all their competitors on equal footing (save for shoehorning Mario characters into a game for brand recognition). Third parties complaining mostly because they competed with sub-par games in the ballpark of Nintendo games - things that just can't go over well.

I mean, if Nintendo's offerings in the niches that the dominate ever falterd they would. But its just not WORTH IT for third parties to compete with Mario (and it's spinoffs) and Pokemon when Nintendo does it very well and already has established itself. Most other previous attemps to cash in have been hasitly done and forgotten.