Frankly, there's next to no evidence to back up your claim that a more powerful system is the solution
I would say there is.
What we're seeing with the two next gen consoles is that when it comes to third party games people are flocking to the one who delivers 1080p and a solid 30-60 fps.
Horsepower by itself sells games.
There has to be horsepower all around though. You need games to be technically proficient but you also need the online infrastructure to have horsepower too.
If Nintendo had a console that could do Battlefield 4 with 60+ players on a map and Nintendo paid for a special perk for the ones who played on their console people would go and buy it.
Big companies don't hate Nintendo, they'll gladly sell to anyone who makes them money. The thing is that having to scale back games or cut pieces out costs a developer money and why waste the time?
Horsepower builds a base.
The biggest factor of Nintendo matching/better the specs than their competitors would be cost?..wouldnt' it?..I mean Nintendo can't actually sell that the amount of loss that MS/Sony can do, (can they? or they just won't?)..so even if they do match the specs/better it, Nintendo system would be very expensive..then people would be saying "omg that's so expensive..screw that" ...Im going for MS/Sony.. :P
The Ps4 costs $381 to make atm, so Sony is close to making a profit or at least breaking even. They'll be making significant profit by the time they shrink the chip size down.
So Nintendo could easily make a much more powerful console if they wanted, albeit with no gamepad or other crazy big addition.