Back in the film days, Olympus offered one and a half body styles only, the single digit OM-1/2/3/4 and the double digit
10/20/30/40. In reality, the only significant differences were the build quality/material and the viewfinders. That style lasted for 30 years.
Currently, they're making four and a half styles, the E-M5 and 10 being close to identical in size and shape. That's kind of progress, but they seem to have failed in the enthusiast market for "rangefinder style" cameras. The Pen-F was probably too expensive and had to go, which is what happened to the Panasonic GX8 as well. That's unfortunate, since Sony seems to be doing well with the equaly expensive A6500/6600, not to speak about the Fuji X-Pro Series, although I suspect that Fuji keeps them in the game more as an intellectual statement than anything else. "We are a film company so we make a camera that looks as if it's using film."
Being a Panasonic user, I agree that Panasonic has been better at offering cameras for clearly defined niches, currently with five distinctly different bodies, most of them with great ergonomics. Unfortunately, that hasn't resulted in great commercial success. Still, Panasonic seems to be in for the long term, and being the biggest company, they can probably afford to.
A varied offering doesn't necessarily seem to be the recipe for success in this market. The two market leaders, Sony and Fuji, have totally different policies here, Sony with their two and a half bodies while Fuji has nine(!) if we include medium format (and unless I have forgotten any).