The Switch has shit graphics/performance but it has the best gaming environment of all major consoles now. Whenever I try playing something on the PS5, it feels like I need to go through a whole ass bureaucratic process to get into a game. I admit I don't know how it is on the Xbox these days, I imagine it feels less like paperwork than the PS5, but I doubt it's anywhere near as quick and snappy as on the Switch. The Switch's versatility as a hybrid console also rules, it's great to be able to take your games and saves wherever you go, without requiring some crappy cloud sync BS or anything else, you just take it and go.

Sure the Switch is worse at the online experience in general, but I'm not sure how much of that is needed for "core gaming" (ugh, that term). Most AAA online games these days are GAAS shit anyway. People will always voice chat on Discord even when games have it built-in. The best place for online gaming is, has always been, and will always be the PC. Especially because of how inconvenient all the system menus are on the PS5, I'd rather never try to interact with any kind of online community on it - once I'm in a game, I just wanna stay in it.

What are you talking about?

Nintendo is the only company making consoles for core gamers.

The other ones only make consoles for casuals only playing the seasonal COD or FIFA game.

Switch is the second best selling "core gamer" console ever. Not too bad for a company that "sucks" at it.

I dont know. Depends on how you define "core gamers" I guess. If the golden standard is the PS4 from its generation for example, then the WiiU and/or Switch is no match for its power or library of games(I mean the more mature core games). So they are not good replacements for a PS4. The WiiU and especially the Switch has loads of games for more hardcore gamers, but the consoles are weaker than the competition. The Switch is a handheld though and I think it was the most powerful dedicated handheld gaming device at the time it came out. Thats a bit of a stretch to make something seem powerful, but I had to be specific

There was gonna be a problem OP's specualtion the moment he tried to perceive the "core/hardcore gamer" as a defined trait of inherent superiority.

Spoiler, it isn't.
To me, the core gaming aspect is just the ability of someone to focus on a certain aspect of the gaming experience.

And as far as I'm aware, Nintendo has been mostly laser focused to bring pretty much everything they could aside from a few exception on the latest console, the Switch.

Meaning the Switch offers a core gaming experience that's simply more focused on the Nintendo catalogue of titles, even it has a plethora of 3rd party content you can engage with.

I always assumed that a core gamer would have both Switch and either PS5 or Xbox. Anyone who doesn't have both is a casual.

OK this take is as stupid as OP. 

I didn’t think that was possible but congratulations you did it!

It depends.
In terms of North American and European software, Nintendo has a very spotty record. The games either don't come to a lot of their platforms or have very watered-down graphics. Gameplay is the key, but specs matter to extent.
In terms of Japanese software, a good amount has skipped Nintendo platforms but not as many from what I can tell. The most readily apparent time Japanese publishers and developers were hesitant with a Nintendo home console was the Nintendo 64. The expensive, low-storage cartridges were a real problem. This also deterred a lot of publishers and developers in general.
Some more rambling....
In terms of specs: Wii and Wii U suck, and of course Switch in TV mode sucks too. N64 and GCN had great specs for the most part, but their game mediums were the issue. With the N64 (as I mentioned) it was a gaping wound. With the GCN, people overexaggerate at times the problem with MiniDVDs. The storage on the MIniDVDs (especially if you used 2) was not as severe a disparity compared to PS2 and Xbox when you compare N64's cartridges to CDs. A single N64 cartridge had the potential storage limit of 64 MB. A CD had 650 MB, which is over 10 times higher.
Another problem with Nintendo platforms is online. Wii was the first Nintendo platform to have notable online features (DS got some around the same time), and to this day online quality and features are a massive issue for players on Nintendo hardware.
Nintendo is too far behind in the specs department at this point. Even if Nintendo released a console in the future that was above a PS5 or even more like a PS6, the games would be an issue because Nintendo devs aren't used to having those specs to work with. Therefore, it makes no sense for Nintendo to play catch-up.

I think you're nuts.  Nintendo has popularized many features that are still common on controllers to this day D-pad, analog stick, shoulder buttons, ect. 

My NES, S-NES, original gameboy, N-64 (only system where the controller's analog is now sloppy) , Gamecube, Wii, and Switch would all like to tell you that they all work perfectly, in some instances even decades later.  What has failed : my WiiU , Two PS2, 1 PS4.  Nintendo knows how to make hardware.  They don't aim to be the pinnacle console each generation but instead deliver affordable hardware with features (call it gimmicks if you like) that support new styles of game play.

Don't get me wrong I have owned many, many Sony electronics over the years and they are typically feature rich, normally dependable.  Don't try to tell me that Mini-Disk Sony doesn't ever miss with their hardware when trying to bring something new to market. I like Sony as a company and am glad they are in the ring.  I just don't make the mistake of going all elitist with any of the consoles since I know they are all vastly inferior to a PC.  

The short answer is yes. Ever since Sega defined what core was, Nintendo has struggled with it. Sometimes it's caused them to bottom out, other times, they've managed to navigate and do well in spite of it. But since the 16-bit wars, they've been pretty clueless when it comes to the "core" crowd. Either that, or they don't care.