Nintendo is "greedy" no doubt but I think the remasters/ports have more to do with the opportunity that rises from a lack of backwards compatibility than anything else.

See if the Switch was backwards compatible with the wiiU, I highly doubt they would make as many ports/remasters because people can get the wiiU version and will get very similar visuals/experience with a lot of these remasters/ports. It's similar to the lazy ports/minimal effort remasters which were on ps4 and xbox one. They have had a ton of remasters/ports due to the lack of BC. But now with the Ps5/SeriesX, because of BC, they will have a lot less ports/remasters from the ps4/one era. Especially since Sony and MS are practically giving a lot of these games away through PS+ Collection and Gamepass.

Imo if Switch 2 has BC to Switch, I doubt we will see as many ports/remasters of switch games compared to the wiiU games to the switch regardless of how successful Switch 2 is. Assuming they don't call it the Switch U that is...

Yeah it only applies to certain products, for Nintendo it's Pokemon, Mario, and Zelda stuff that reliably sells all the time with an occasional dark horse like Wii Sports/Fit, Animal Crossing. The rest can be hits or misses while most of their IPs sell rather modestly. Same goes for Apple, people buy iphones and ipads all the time but their marketshare in PC/laptops remains pretty small.

To be fair, there are a number of technical reasons as to why BC wasn't done for Ps4/X1/Switch.

Now sure, if they put enough effort behind it, I am sure they could have given an option one way or another. But I can't fault any of these companies for going the "lazy" route instead of spending R&D money on a feature who's purpose is to make them less money and generally isn't the main decision maker when it comes to console purchases for most people. Cause imo, because of the drastic changes in architecture, it wouldn't have been as easy as compared to say ps4/x1 > ps5/series x.

Now if they didn't have any BC for the PS5/Series X and Switch 2 (assuming Switch 2 has a similar architecture as Switch), I would certainly facepalm at that point.

"When they are more successful, they become too greedy."

So a company that is making huge profits wants to find ways to make even more profits.
Welcome to Business Management 101.

It isn't just Nintendo. It is an industry trend with hardware and games alike.

Not in the case of Nintendo, their games keep on 60 USD regardless of the sales. That's because right now Nintendo is ignoring the commodified side of games and using just the luxury side. They are keeping the image their IPs have a certain perceived value ignoring the fact their IPs could have sold better (and therefore being sold to more people who could become eventual new customers of this IP)

I don't like much this price policy. I'm ok with evergreens selling 60 USD forever and they are... well, evergreens, no reason to lower the base price. But a game like Link's Awakening that is failing to sell 4 million copies should be price cuted for at least 40 USD for quite a while now.

Get used to it man, no one forces you to buy HD remastered or classic games at full price when you already have your games on other platforms.

Here myself the Switch is the only platform i buy these ports or HD Remasters -incoming same excuse- for playing hybrid console(or handheld console) purposely a lot at my workplace everyday.

By the time next Nintendo's console arrival in the future, i promised i won't rebuy ports/remasters, it will be fresh new modern Nintendo games i will own.

The problem is your expectations of Nintendo.

There's just so many people out there that put these selective companies on a pedestal that they think these companies can do no wrong and/or that anything they create "should" be golden.

I really wanted a HD Skyward sword as I found the Wii version to be quite ugly and jaggy. The hardware didn't do the artstyle justice, plus now there are different control schemes to suit those that couldn't get on with motion controls. It's a great game that more people need to experience as it didn't exactly sell gang busters considering a 100m install base. Also regarding Wii U ports, they make complete sense. Nintendo are aiming them toward 70m of the Switch user base that didn't have a Wii U.

Having one game ported with a resolution bump and nothing else isn't exactly proof they are greedy, especially when the original game (while extremely popular to some such as myself) was not popular and sold horribly (about 4 million I think). The $60 price tag is probably Nintendo looking at past sales of this game, estimating sales on the Switch , and coming up with a way to justify the expense of creating new controls and updating the visuals.

The other ports listed prove they do include a lot of value for those games to be priced at their point. One game isn't a pattern (even a few wouldn't be). You'd need like 10+ games to have a pattern proving they are becoming greedy.