Well, that and the size of the market itself.
> Their games and online offerings, for the most part, frankly suck compared to their competitors.
Their online offerings, sure, I guess. But their games are good, even on their consoles that don't sell well. Nintendo made a lot of money by doing nothing more difficult than porting really good games on Wii U onto the Switch.
They make money on remakes of decades-old games with minor graphical and quality of life tweaks because the games are good.
Not everything likes all of their games, and that's fine, but many do.
Nintendo has never and probably will never try and seriously compete in the multiplayer arena - they've got some casual multiplayer stuff but they're not trying to out compete Call of Duty, Halo or Starcraft.
I do agree that they do milk those main properties for all their worth, but they're pretty careful about releasing bombs - Mario Odyssey was a pretty notable and dramatic fail for them but, again, the fact that their games suck to you doesn't matter. I'm a big fan of EU4 and as such Nintendo doesn't want my business - they cater to young and casual audiences building easy to access for the family games rather than historical simulators or Dark Souls.
In the United States and Europe, it became Nintendo's fastest-selling Super Mario game ever, with 1.1 million copies sold in the US within five days.[120][121] According to the NPD Group, the game was the best-selling video game of October 2017,[122] and was listed by Amazon as the online retailer's highest-selling game of the year.[123]
I suspect it just got overshadowed by Zelda Breath of the Wild, which really stole the show for the Switch launch year.
Edit: Trying to think which Mario game was NOT considered a success? Maybe Mario Sunshine? That goes back to the Gamecube, and looking at it now... that ALSO had good reviews. I don't think there's been a dud in the mainline Mario franchise... ever?
People really love to hate on SMB2 (NES).
There is still a lot of desire for games you can play with people at a party, or play with your children and spouse all together on the same screen. Every other videogame maker has abandoned that niche.
have you considered that you might be the one divorced from reality and the average consumer does not care about this?
I'm pretty sure forming a group and then finding a match was possible 10+ years ago.
Of course, that doesn't mean the average consumer cares. I'm not even sure I care that much (I'd pay for the online service and play more Tetris 99 if matchmaking was faster though... I don't like sitting around waiting to play, so I do other things instead)
For the online mode of Salmon Run, yes.
It's been a few years since I touched Splatoon but from what I recall, if you go to the arcade, you can set up a local co-op Salmon Run session anytime. It is/was not well-advertised.
The Switch platform has been a stellar success and isn't stopping any time soon. As a business, Nintendo is thriving.
Nintendo franchises stay pretty fresh relative to other franchises. Is your issue with the concept of franchises in general? Every platform/ecosystem has them.
For Nintendo, the first party platform and franchises have always been the central focus. They remain a hit, decade after decade. So, it's not clear what your beef really is.
Completely agree with you here and just want to emphasize that the 5% of the IPs they rehash over and over produce legendary games. Many of these games push the boundaries of gaming in every way possible.