As far as Labo, I’ve seen everything ranging from “ha ha ha, they’re selling cardboard, that’s so stupid!” to “ha ha ha! they’re selling cardboard and it’s fucking brilliant!”
As for the store offerings, I don’t have one so I couldn’t tell you offhand, but that doesn’t really matter as much as you’d think anyway, and in some cases that crossover ends up resulting in a second sale. If people are buying those games on the Switch, they’re likely to play them on the Switch and Nintendo still makes money. It’s not really a question of whether or not the experiences are unique to the Switch, but whether or not there are enough good experiences to keep people’s eyes glued to the thing. If a person has the choice of multiple platforms upon which to buy a game, they tend to subconsciously prefer whatever platform they’ve been using most at the time, so as long as Nintendo can keep people glued to the Switch, people will continue buying things for it even if they could buy them for cheaper on other platforms.
Another thing to consider is second sales. Along with the affinity that people tend to feel for whatever thing they’re playing the most at the time, people also have a surprising amount of willingness to buy the same games more than once on different platforms because of some real or perceived difference. A personal example, I bought Axiom Verge for PC during a Steam sale, liked it, and ended up buying it again on PSN so that I could play it on my Vita while traveling. If I owned a Switch and was playing it regularly, I would have probably bought it for that instead.
(This is a different phenomenon than the behavioral quirks that fuel stupid platform superiority bickering, although it probably contributes. That behavior is more the result of susceptibility to marketing, and the subconscious need to justify one’s chosen “side” over the options not chosen. The fact that video game consoles are relatively expensive “luxury” items makes people feel more self conscious about making the “wrong” choice. That’s something of a coarse generalization, there are a lot of contributing factors but if you look at it from a “big picture” behavioral perspective, several permutations of that general pattern of behavior bundle together and help explain what I feel is is one of the most absurd sources of conflict humans presently have.)
Edit: One last thing “to which such games can be readily ported” is much closer to the mark than you might have realized. One of the problems that Nintendo has faced has been that they are exclusively a games company, and one that has a history of doing a lot of things in-house, not always for the better. One of the effects of that is Nintendo’s development ecosystem has borne more similarity to how development was done in the old days, when basically your entire toolchain was developed by the console maker themselves, than it should have. Modern games are many orders of magnitude harder and more expensive to make than they were when that model worked. By moving away from their custom PPC/AMD hardware that Nintendo used from the Gamecube up through the WiiU, they made porting things much simpler, and opened the door to using far fewer manufacturer-specific tools. When the list of third party developers came out, a lot of people were very excited, but most of them overlooked the reason why Nintendo had suddenly gotten all of these companies that had no interest in the Wii or WiiU to start porting games and it’s basically because Nintendo moved to a platform that made it possible to port games to the console without having a large, entirely separate team solely to support one console. Nintendo made it cheap enough for developers/publishers to justify the cost of building a port, which is a factor that played a much bigger role in deterring third parties from their consoles than system specs did. (Although that was certainly also a factor)
