Nietzsche is probably the most overrated philosopher who ever lived. He was a manic who instead of learning from the world withdrew into a fantasy version built from well-phrased sound bites (or "aphorisms" - which sounds nicer). His ideas primarily serve the purpose of confirming elitist and Darwinian perspectives predominantly popular among people who hold a grudge against society because they didn't get a large enough chunk from the big cake.
That's an unfair characterization, and ignores the profound impact he's had on other intellectual giants such as Carl Jung, Herman Hesse and many others.
It seems like you're bone to pick with him is largely his elitist tone, which yes that's the whole point of his writing. He does not write for the masses, but for those striving to break out of herd mentality. To write him off as an elitist manic is to ignore who he was writing for and why.
I think that may be only partially fair: some people appreciate his writings because they question things which, at the time, (and possibly still now) would have been considered “true” or unquestionable (particularly stuff on moral). One may not like it but I think can still benefit from asking similar questions (while ignoring the answers which are, anyway, often somewhat cryptic). I personally enjoyed Thus spake Zarathustra for that reason, not so much the cake one.
