For me, it was Dragon Quest 11. That game is so charming and lovely. It may not be an exclusive but the Switch version has beautiful orchestrated music instead of midi tunes, and that alone makes a huge difference. The characters have so much personality, the story is very good and the battle system is addictive. This game is like a time capsule for me, it took me right back into the 90s.

Really dislike when people suggest that the Switch has mostly repackaged Wii U games. Of the 59** games Nintendo has published physically on the Switch only around 11 of them are also on Wii U. Here is the list: BotW, Mario Kart 8, Pokken Tournament, Bayonetta 2, DKC: Tropical Freeze, Hyrule Warriors 1, Captain Toad, New Super Mario Bros U, Tokyo Mirage Sessions, Pikmin 3 Deluxe, and Super Mario 3D World. 

Since Nintendo released Mario Odyssey they've released 51 other titles, with only 8 of those titles being on the Wii U and four of those were in 2018. Basically, they've given us four titles on the Wii U in the last three years. This narrative that Nintendo has inundated its users with Wii U port after Wii U port has got to end. It's just not true. Maybe it was true back in 2018, but it's certainly not true in 2021. 

**This number doesn't include games that were only published in one region, such as Bravely Default 2, and it has combined certain titles such as Let's Go Pikachu/Eevee or the four Labo kits into one published title for simplicity and honesty 

Well aren't those quite a lot? I mean, of course Nintendo hasn't released ONLY repackaged WiiU but their reliance on repackaged ports cannot be overstated.

Lots of WiiU games piling up also with Wii remasters (see Mario All Stars, Skyward Sword, Xenoblade Chronicles) and remakes (Link to the Past, Advanced Wars, Mario Party Superstars). It could also be argued that some of the content branded as "original" didn't really evolve that much compared to its WiiU counterpart (Mario Maker 2, Splatoon 2).

Overall Metroid Dread was some needed fresh air, I haven't been playing the Switch since Luigi's Mansion release in 2019.

You haven't read the entire content of my comment if you feel they have still been relying on Wii U ports in any significant capacity over the last three years. 

Also, 11 games is not much at all. I believe the PS4 has about the same amount content that is also on the PS3. TLoU Remastered, Wipeout HD, MLB the Show 13-16, Uncharted 1-3, Beyond Two Souls, Heavy Rain, GoW 3, Journey, LittleBigPlanet 3, Helldivers Ultimate Edition. This is out of 54 published games (not including only PSN games). Even if you don't break up Uncharted 1-3 and all the MLB games that's still 10 games. People don't say this about the PS4, so idk why they continue saying this about the Switch.

Xenoblade is a remake tho

And no, 11 games over 4000 isn't "a lot". It's good, it fills blanks when needed, it allows people who didn't play the games on the Wii U to play them (and let's face it, nobody had a Wii U) but that's it.

Most of the games you listed there are cross-gen which isn't the same thing as they are brand new games not rehashes of old games. Also yes Uncharted 1-3 shouldn't be split-up, otherwise then we'd be splitting NSMBU and NSLU and Bayonetta 1+2 up so that tactic to pad the list would end up backfiring. Likewise including Helldivers and especially Journey against full retail titles could be seen as padding the list in Nintendo's favour but let's include them anyway: PS3 to PS4 vs WiiU to Switch:

So you're right the difference isn't MASSIVE. But there's several reasons Nintendo gets more flack for it than Sony.

1st: The pricing. An example we can take here is TLOU:R. It launched just 1 year later on the PS4, they bundled it with all the DLC and they charged $50 for it, $10 less than the original release. Meanwhile Nintendo will take a game that is years old like DKC:TF, slap a bit of content in and then charge more for it than it cost in the original release.

PlayStation remasters are usually priced lower than the original releases, in fact the only game in that list they charged $60 for was Uncharted and that included 3 games that were originally $60 each.

That's the first reason Nintendo gets more negative reactions to it's WiiU Ports.

The second reason is that Nintendo relies heavily on it's first party for it's systems. Sony can get away with some remaster padding because the majority of it's userbase is quite happy playing many of the blockbsuter third party titles like GTA, Far Cry, CoD, Fifa, Assassin's Creed etc in the gaps between. Switch leans far heavier on it's first party and so padding with remasters has a much greater affect on it's users.

So in summary: Nintendo gets more hate for it's last-gen ports because they price them high and their system is a lot more reliant on first party content.

Bold 1: Yeah, I understood that which is why I didn't. I also combined several Nintendo titles in my list for the total games released as well. I'm not sure why you think I'm trying to be devious. I also included simultaneous releases with BotW. I'm not opposed to being fair at all, but I'm also fine with taking out the simultaneous releases as well since you'd prefer.

Bold 2: I'm counting titles that were released physically. I don't care if they are full, or half, or whatever. The pricing is of no concern to me for this (see: Bold 3) 

Bold 3: I don't understand how the perception that Nintendo is relying on Wii U ports and their library mostly consists of Wii U ports has ANYTHING to do with their pricing structure. Those are two different arguments. One is: "Is Nintendo porting too many games from the Wii U" and the other is "Are the games they are porting worth the price of admission". I will be the first to admit that despite purchasing several Wii U ports, I don't like their pricing structure. I definitely prefer Sony's, but I tolerate Nintendo's (sometimes). 

Bold 4: Nintendo relies on first party content because they receive less AAA support and their userbase primarily purchases Nintendo published content (though these last quarters have actually shown a bit of a change in that). The suggestion that Sony is allowed to port their content but Nintendo isn't because Nintendo receives less AAA third party support overall is blaming Nintendo for something they don't have control over. In addition, if this is your argument, would it not be fair to include all of the last generation ports from each of the third party publishers in an argument against Sony's consoles since Sony relies on third party content more than Nintendo? I don't think that would be a fair comparison at all. I think that each company can only control the output of what they publish. Nintendo already publishes more content on average than both Sony and MS for their console, so I think you're placing them on a freakishly high standard that they won't be able to meet, especially since they are quite significantly smaller than MS and Sony. 

Side note: The Switch actually has more games total for the platform (over 4000) than the PS4 does now, so it's userbase has a lot to play. Yes it isn't AAA, but I do think that having a pretty significant number of titles over the PS4 does mean that these single individual ports don't really affect the userbase much at all. I mean, these ports should really be seen as a net positive regardless, but that's beside the point. 

This is a hard question, because every long-living series has its best title since ages: Zelda, Tetris, Dragon Quest, Mario Tennis, Luigi's Mansion, Mario Party, Animal Crossing, Smash Bros., Metroid. All of these games surprised me in an unexpected way.

Then we have some very good remasters, which we haven't seen during Wii and Wii U era: Mario Kart 8 (60fps in 2 player mode), Link's Awakening, Pokémon Let's Go, Skyward Sword, Final Fantasy, Katamari Damacy.

But the games which were waaaaaay better than I initially thought were Hyrule Warriors Age of Calamity, Mario Tennis Aces, SnowRunner, Dragon Quest XI and Octopath Traveler.

On the other hand - the most disappointing game for me is Bravely Default II. I really had to force myself to finish this game.

On the surface yeah it doesn't have anything to do with it. But it's relevant because it's what leads people to complain about them.

Thought Process: Wow they are charging too much for this old WiiU game on Switch -> WiiU Ports are bad -> Nintendo make too many WiiU Ports.

If the WiiU ports/remasters were cheaper there'd be less negativity surrounding them meaning less people would be complaining about them, even about things that have nothing to do with pricing. The dots don't need to line-up perfectly or at all, if you feel bad about something you'll be more critical about other completely unrelated aspects too.

This also applies similarly to your Bold 4, you asked why people kept criticising Nintendo for their ports/remasters more than other platforms, and that's because their customers have higher expectations and rely more on their first party output. Whether those expectations are fair or not doesn't really have any effect. It's one reason Nintendo is more criticised. 

I'm not saying Nintendo isn't "allowed" to do something, I'm just pointing out the reasons why "People don't say this about the PS4, so idk why they continue saying this about the Switch."

Witcher 3 (or the Switcher). When it was announced, it was one of those "what? no. no way! WOW!" moments. That's my go-to game while commuting or during the long flights.