I'd argue that the Switch has done as well as it has precisely because Nintendo refused to follow the pack. Some of the Switch's features are gimmicky (does anyone really use the motion features or advanced haptics?), but it's still a great system if you either primarily play handheld or just don't know for sure that you'll always have access to the TV. I'm a new parent and the Switch suddenly makes a lot more sense for me — I can still game in places where I won't wake or distract my little one. The $300 launch price also made it a relative bargain.Yes it was under powered on launch. It use a mobile SoC that was already a couple years old. They need to axe the portable aspect of the switch and put it more towards the power. But this is Nintendo will always Nintendo. They don't follow what everyone else is doing.
And Nintendo's in-house game lineup has generally been phenomenal this cycle. Breath of the Wild, Super Mario Odyssey, Animal Crossing, Splatoon 2 and 3... even Tetris 99, for that matter. Yeah, some games just aren't practical on the Switch, but there's still lots of fun to be had. We spend so much time chasing specs at times that we forget most people just want games they'll enjoy, and Nintendo delivers that.
Having said all this, I hope Activision still commits to COD on Nintendo hardware even if the Microsoft deal remains blocked. It'll probably take the Switch's replacement to make that happen, but it'd be a great move.