Depends.  I am still waiting to see if any of these streaming services end up being offered via the Switch.  If so, then it might even help the Switch somewhat.  Otherwise I don't think it will have much effect.  Switch is already significantly better than any of these services already on its own.  They could only affect it by making Switch better.

Absolutely, it'll have an effect. A minor one, though.

Nintendo have carved their own niche with their franchises so I wouldn't think cloud gaming will be of any affect to them.

Also, Cloud gaming also has a lot of obstacles in the way before it becomes mainstream. Hypothetically even if if in a decades time when 6G is available and there are way less usage caps from ISP's, there isn't anything out there that really outright competes with Nintendo franchises.

Switch does not have lag that cloud has. Switch has bigger screen than phones. Switch battery lasts longer than phones at gaming due to singular focus (whereas phone does calls, texts, emails, other apps, etc.). Switch fits in most male pockets (sorry females and males with tiny pockets). Switch better me thinks. *Scratches belly and grunts.*

You don't really need to wait for 6G, 5G is plenty fast enough to have a good playable experience:

At 4 minutes in you can see him playing on 5G.

I think people still aren't quite getting what Cloud gaming is ... there aren't going to be like "Cloud games" as in this is like some separate platform with its own distinct library. 

It will basically be your entire PS or XBox + PC library in your pocket at all times. So eventually it'll be like if you buy GTA VI or Resident Evil VIII or Minecraft or Sea of Thieves or Monster Hunter World 2 or Cuphead or FIFA or Madden or whatever ... your entire current library is there where ever you have 5G or decent WiFi connection when you purchase a game on top of a service like Game Pass giving you ala cart access to a range of titles Netflix style. 

So you'll be able to play say GTAVI on your console like you normally would, but lets say you have to go to work or class and are taking the bus and feel like you want to play during your 45 minute commute ... you can now just continue playing that same game on your phone, tablet, or crappy laptop right from where you left off at home, and all your progress saves so when you come home later, the game picks up right there. 

For xCloud anyway MS has Minecraft Dungeons which is the console game, but they've also even added touch control overlay so you can play without even a controller if you want. I tried it and it's quite playable this way, other games will have this kind of support in the future too, but the market for controllers available for phones/tablets is starting to really also rev up. I personally use my SN30 Pro (SNES sized wireless controller w/dual analog). It's easy to fit into one pocket. 

I don't know how it is in the US and the rest of the world but the 5G coverage is still crap in most parts in the UK. You definitely need stable connection to be able to stream well. Also the type of people who play those games are probably not in the same market as those who play Nintendo consoles.

It's starting to roll out now en masse, but in 2-3 years it will be everywhere. 

There is no real "streaming demographic" I don't think. You can stream whatever you want likely. It's just in the future whereas for most people their home console games were frozen at home when ever they left the house, now you'll be able to access and play the games you have and/or the game service you have where ever and when ever you feel like. 

Been playing Cuphead or Monster Hunter at home? Stuck at your doctor's appointment in the waiting room for 30 minutes? You can pull out your phone and continue playing the same game, no fuss. 

It's basically going to be similar to what movie/TV media is now ... been watching a show at home on Netflix? Well you can continue watching it on your app on your lunch break at work too. No one really bats an eye lash at that today because it's a standard feature but if you showed that to someone probably even 12 years ago their jaw would hit the floor. It's about letting you have access to your library, even the most current games with you constantly.

No, it's a hybrid. It wouldn't sell as much if it was handheld only, people still buying standard more than Lite proves this point 

Why are you guys keep this narrative that Switch is a portable when it's a hybrid. It's the hardware main selling point. Lite had exactly the same specs of Standard Switch and is 100 USD less expensive, if public was that earger for portable models Lite was supposed to be at least outselling the standard Switch 

We are not claiming the Switch is a full-blown portable machine at all. Of course it is a hybrid. That's our point. The console being a hybrid (= can also be used as a portable) is a selling point of the Switch. If your claim was true that people moved to mobile, customers would think the Switch being a hybrid is a bad thing and would actively avoid the Switch because of this. In fact, that's exactly what many people argued before the Switch released: "It's a hybrid and people don't want to play portably because mobile gaming has killed dedicated handheld gaming. Therefore, the Switch is going to fail".

In reality, there was always huge demand for handheld gaming. It was just one Nintendo handheld that underperformed, the 3DS. It is absolutely impossible to draw from this the conclusion that mobile has killed dedicated handheld gaming. That's like saying "it rained yesterday, therefore the sun will never shine again". In reality the 3DS underperformed because of the usual reasons consoles fail: It was too expensive at launch for what it offered. It offered a gimmick (3D) people didn't like. And it lacked good games at first (the first really big 3DS game was Ocarina of Time 3D, a remake and months after launch).

The story that "mobile killed dedicated handhelds" was always wrong. Just like "the casualz now play on mobile!", which was always given as the reason the Wii U failed. In 2017/2018 people claimed Nintendo should concentrate on hardcore games to make the Switch successful because "the casuals have moved on". Fast forward to 2020 and - obviously - the Switch is selling like crazy because of games like Animal Crossing and Ring Fit Adventure, games that appeal to casual players and women.

Also, your example of Switch Lite sales does not fly: The Switch Lite is a less expensive version with less features. Of course it sells less than the main unit, you can't even play system sellers like Ring fit Adventure on the model! Software sells hardware! The real question is: How well would a home console only Switch sell? And the answer is: Very badly, because as a pure home console the Switch is not very attractive. Nintendo's success comes from owning the portable market right now.

Again, you are the one who claims mobile heavily affected dedicated handheld sales by using a sample size of one handheld (3DS) which obviously failed for other reasons. That's all the evidence you got. So the burden is on you to prove that handheld play is not a selling point of the Switch and that mobile has actually affected dedicated handhelds. Because if mobile truly had strongly affected dedicated handheld gaming, people would actively avoid the Switch as its mobility wouldn't be a selling point. In reality, the reverse is true: The Switch is selling because it is also a handheld.