Nintendo is arguably a weird example though -- in that they're a stellar game studio, a decent hardware vendor, and an awful business.

They can survive on less powerful consoles, and historically have especially in the era before indies blew up, in large part because they sell them pretty much entirely off first-party titles anyway. Even as of this year (Wikipedia's stats on this were last updated 3/31), the top-selling third-party release for Switch is ranked 15 overall. [0] That game, Monster Hunter Rise, sold less than a remake of Pokemon Yellow, ports of multiple Wii U titles -- namely New Super Mario Bros. U and Mario Kart 8 (which is incidentally at the top of the list), Ring Fit Adventure -- a game that's only available via physical copies because it requires specialized hardware and has still repeatedly sold out, and whatever the hell you want to call the travesty that was Super Mario 3D All-Stars. (I'll get back to that one.)

As a hardware company, they're all over the place. They experiment a lot, particularly with control schemes, but some (Wii, DS) execute better than others (Wii U) and not all of them are the best quality. The Switch is a marvel, conceptually, but the Joy-Cons have well-documented drift issues, and the Pro Controller has the worst D-Pad I've ever used despite being from the company that invented those. Its heyday included a pad that seemed to be built for comic book characters (6-arm Spider-Man and Professor X both come to mind), and while the GameCube pad is one of their better-designed ones overall, I started to understand Smash players' hand issues the moment I tried using it for Tetris. Meanwhile it took a literal plague for them to stop being the only vendor since Microsoft, with the original X-Box, not to include Ethernet.

Which brings me to Nintendo as a company. The kind whose stated solution for online when demoing Smash Ultimate was "lol hope you've bought our $30 wired adapter!" (And let's note, refusing to ship with this has made their already-dodgy online worse, at scale.) The one that would shut down Smash tournaments for using emulators on a 20-year-old game to enable online play during a plague, as if that same crowd wouldn't 100% just buy Super Smash Bros. Melee for the Nintendo GameCube again if they just gave it an actual re-release on a modern console. The company that, when it does port older titles, typically just ships lightly-retooled versions of them and proceeds to charge the full price of a modern AAA. The publisher that took Super Mario 64, one of the most iconic games it's ever released, for its 25th anniversary, and not only shipped a barebones port (of this and two other titles), but actively enabled scalpers by giving it a release so limited that they de-listed the digital version after six months.

As someone who enjoys a number of their games I totally see what you mean, but getting legitimate access to those titles involves a bunch of compromises I wouldn't generally have to make with other platforms and/or studios. As much as I don't exactly wish for consoles to become a duopoly again, a part of me really wonders what it would be like if Nintendo had gone the way of Sega.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_Nintendo_...