guinness
Not Ingrid for now
Nostalgia doesn't have to be the reasoning. Good games are good games in any context, and there are at least a couple of legitimately good games on the NES.
In isolation, completely removed of nostalgia and on non-market-influenced value alone, I would gladly be willing to make a single $20+ purchase for just Super Mario Bros. 3 alone. That said, paying a subscription to be able to rent games on a continual basis rather than just buying the ones that are worth it does seem pretty lame to me in general. The Switch would be a lot more desirable to me if it had the Virtual Console on it rather than the online service.
Nostalgia colors everything. Old me can't get as hyped as 30 years ago me for NES games. Yeah, the games are still good, but I can play those old games on everything under the sun, it's the same reason I can't get hyped for FF VII or movie reboots...let it go, move forward, make original IP, please.
As for the Switch, that's part of it's problem for me: so many ports of older games and indie Metroidvania games out the ass, but older me (with adult me money) is also getting real sick of Nintendo's nickel and dimeing shit. It's a portable Wii U, but the Switch can't begin to touch what the Wii U offered in older games, re: the VC. On that end, it makes no sense, because the Wii U was a sales disaster, yet Nintendo is so guarded with their IP, they're worse than Disney. I feel like Nintendo does well, in spite of themselves.
See the "but it's only $20/year" online. It's still lame in comparison to what Sony and MS offer, and while those are more expensive (but year passes go on sale a lot too), those don't require paid online to do cloud saves.
If not for the Twitch Prime, I wouldn't have bothered with Switch online, and even then, I'm not going to renew. It's just some old NES games, cloud saves, but not for all games, and online play. Sony and MS at least give people newer "free" games, and if the Netflix angle is important, MS does it better.