At many points in their history, Nintendo has released systems that take a different approach and are built around some innovative new feature, such as with Switch, Wii, and DS; on the other hand, they have also released iterative systems like SNES and GBA (and more recently Switch 2) that are pretty much the same as their predecessors, just more powerful.

Which grouping do you think is better overall, and why?

Innovative, But I consider the SNES to be quite innovative with its use of chip technology, the diamond face buttons, and triggers - both interface innovations are still used to this day. All those things gave it a substantial advantage over everything else until the Playstation came along, and the PSX used triggers and diamond face buttons too.

As much as I love the Wii, DS, 3DS, Switch and Switch 2, more of my favorite games are on the iterative Nintendo systems, so I picked iterative Nintendo systems.

The revolutionary ones (NES, Wii, Switch) made me the happiest. I value freshness, and those consoles were fresher than fresh.

I think iterative has its place. Innovation for the sake of it can be costly, and can be either confusing (Wii U), pointless (3DS) or not really ready to be in the market (Virtual Boy). Iteration can be safe and give the company time to think about what direction they should innovate towards. Switch 2 is already showing why Nintendo were right to take the safe approach. But also the timing has to be good, especially if there was room to improve on past ideas (magnetic joycons, no drifting, graphics closer to current gen). It allows the console to clean up some of the previous shortcomings and meet the original vision, which can be extremely enticing, but at some point it becomes too boring (like a Switch 3 would be), and leaves time for competition to replicate you.

That being said I always enjoy and deep respect innovative ideas and prefer it, especially when there are so many risks and it's seen as an underdog. DS, Wii and Switch (even to some degree the N64) felt new, fresh and honestly exciting. Even though I know the Switch 2 is great, even though I'm playing a lot of it, the magic of that first Switch can't be replicated. I hope we get to see Nintendo do that again.

SNES > NES
GC > N64
GBA >>>>> GB
3DS > DS

Wii and Wii U, both sucks

Need to see Switch 1 vs 2 in a few years

Probably iterative narrowly, and Switch 2 would only make that clearer.
GameCube is better than N64, GBA is better than GB or GBC, etc. SNES is better than NES.

I’d say except SNES, the iterative home systems were worse than their predecessors so I’d say the innovative ones. NES, N64, Wii and Switch. I played much more and had much more fun with those compared to GC and WiiU. Again SNES being the exception. Switch 2 remains to be seen. Right now I don’t have one, and if I never get one Switch 1 automatically wins for another point for the innovative group.

Though on the handheld side I’d pick the opposite funny enough. GBC (if we’re counting that separately and 3DS were better than their predecessors. I’m indifferent about GBA though and if we’re counting GB and GBC as one than it beats GBA for me.

So really it’s tough to say. I want to say overal there’s a higher chance of the innovative systems to be to my liking, so that’s my vote, but it actually comes down to specifics. And the games of course.

I just enjoy Nintendo first party games, and always have. I'm good with a creative new system, I'm good with new iterative systems. As long as we get Mario, Zelda, Fire Emblem, Donkey Kong, Metroid, Mario Kart and all my favorites I'm happy.

I picked iterative, because they often have backward compatibility and allow to play the innovative games while refining the systems and allow to explore the systems deeper. This is most clearly in 3DS which plays nearly all DS games and Switch 2. But we should keep in mind: without the innovative systems these games wouldn't exist.

I hope Nintendo settles on a Tick-Tock cycle: innovating, then iterating, then innovating again. I think that is ideal.