Only in the sense all capitalism is my enemy. Nintendo is not special. They are just another corporation

I regret watching that nonsense of a video

Frankly, the greatest harm Nintendo's success with the Switch has done to me is how much it has emptied my wallet with all these awesome games I want to play.

I've owned a Switch since 2018 and I'm not drowning in games?.

Only time I was drowning in games as with my GBC, GBA, DS, and by the 3DS things started to lessen, and by the time of the Switch I own like 3 Ninty 1st/3rd party titles, the rest being a few indies.

I liked what the Wii U offered at the time, whilst you don't, so I think you're going to find different strokes of fans along the way, and I honestly wished Nintendo had to keep on fighting, because a constant fighter tends to put up a better fight than getting one lucky knockout punch and surfing the rest of the fight.

My issue with the Wii U was that it did have some great games, it only had a tiny number of worthwhile ones per year with long barren months in between, because it had no third party support after its first year due to poor sales.

On the Switch, there's copious third party games to fill out the gaps between Nintendo releases, due to it being successful enough to attract the investment of outside publishers.

Of course, personal preference is always going to be a factor; I own more than thirty games for my Switch for instance, and can't keep up with all the new ones coming out.

But the Switch wasn't a lucky punch, it was a premeditated, deliberately calculated and ingenious move, a killer concept sold with killer games and, once it got going, a plentiful supply of software from across the industry, from AAA titles like Witcher 3 and Doom Eternal, to a smorgasbord of indies, and plenty of AA fare in between.

Agreed. I've bought more games for Switch than for any other single platform I've owned. The RPGs alone are enough to keep me occupied for a long, long time. 

Why is this thread still alive?

That was due to their level of hw, which made it difficult for 3rd party support, and it also did not help that Nintendo decided to wedge itself halfway into an already existing generation of consoles. 

Yes, they have had that newfound third party support, but it hasn't made late ports cheap or of their best quality, something that should have been pressed harder for.

Well of course, we all have our personal prefs from system to system. I prefer indies because I see them experimenting more than 1st party projects which cost millions to create.

I don't see how it was "premediated", that's like saying they deliberately designed the Wii U to look weaker and then come back strong with a timed and calculated knockout. That also means by that logic, that any failed system they are to release is also pre-calculated, to again, make themselves look weak, only to come back with a good system soon after. 

It's also very strange how everyone else in life can make mistakes and then learn from them, but with Nintendo that's not possible, everything is premeditated and calculated, so they win/lose entirely on purpose and not because they made mistakes and didn't read the room properly. 

Again, I do believe you are conditionally attached to Nintendo. Yes you have no real choice to point out their shortcomings, but at the same time you're denying any flaws and citing others as pre-calculated, which tells me that you are deeply attached to them.

While no hardware manufacturer sets out with the intentions of making a failed console, you can clearly see a difference between how Nintendo handled the Switch (and Wii) as opposed to the Wii U.  Both the Switch and Wii had heavy marketing campaigns from Nintendo.  The Switch was announced to the world via a Super Bowl commercial, an unprecedented marketing move for Nintendo at the time.  And Nintendo had the viral "Wii would like to play" ad campaign.  Meanwhile, the Wii U was released and sold with almost no marketing push whatsoever.  If you look at the overarching timeline of the 3 consoles, you get a sense that Nintendo was intending to move from the Wii to a console/portable hybrid, but technologically they couldn't get it done yet at a marketable price.  But since the non-HD Wii was rapidly getting long in the tooth and no longer a value proposition in the home video game space, they needed to replace it asap. 

That resulted in a stop-gap console like the Wii U.  A unit with a gamepad that would function like the Switch (on screen and off screen playability) but with unfortunately extremely limited range.  Very little focus was given to marketing the Wii U, because Nintendo was more focused on the R&D of refining the Switch, which they almost immediately began talking about publicly as codename NX.  A lot of people thought that Nintendo should have sold an HD-Wii instead, but how many end of life console upgrades would they have sold?  More than, less, or around the same as the 13.5 million Wii U's they ended up selling?  It's the same reason that the Wii was born as an add-on idea for the Gamecube, but instead became its own console.  Nintendo knew they would get more sales out of releasing new hardware than a peripheral for a system with flagging sales.

So, yes, I do think the trajectory of both the Wii U and Switch were calculated moves by Nintendo.  Just watch that very first Super Bowl ad for the Switch.  Nintendo had a very clear message on what the Switch was and how it would benefit gamers, compared to ads for the Wii U over a year after its release where they were still trying to explain to the consumer what the device was.  In reality, it was an unfinished Switch.

Oh, and it's only natural for a Nintendo gamer to get defensive whenever a Nintendo console's success is labeled as "lucky".  Both the Wii and the Switch far too often get written of as "happy accidents" for Nintendo.  The company isn't infallible, but they also aren't the only console manufacture to have survived in the video game console space since 1983 by sheer luck.

The Wii U's hardware did not preclude third party support; systems like the Switch, Wii, and 3DS show that lower end hardware can still attract support if the sales are there to justify it.

Obviously Nintendo did not intend for the Wii U to flop as it did, but the Switch wasn't some random matter of throwing a dart at a spreadsheet of ideas; Nintendo looked at where they were failing, and learned from their mistakes, creating a much more appealing and well designed system to correct their problems of 2012-2016.

I'm no apologist for Nintendo; I criticize them all the time.

I could talk at length about their stinginess with information about key upcoming games, the times they miss the mark with systems like the Wii U and Gamecube and games like Metroid Other M, 1-2 Switch, Animal Crossing Amiibo Festival, etc.

Sometimes Nintendo are smart and win, sometimes they behave stupidly and lose. They're not imperfect or infallible. I like them in general, but I do not deny their flaws. Switch just isn't one of them.