Nintendo Considering "New Business Structure"

Somehow, I don't think that Mario Kart and Smash Bros will sell the 6 million more consoles they thought they were gonna sell by the end of Q1.

As for my take on it, I pretty much agree with the major criticisms of the Wii U which have been stated thus far. It is a vastly underpowered console compared with the Xbox One and PS4, and it has a controller which is super unique, which is both a strength and weakness of the console. While it could potentially offer unique and rich new gaming experiences, third party developers who want to develop games for multiple platforms, thus maximizing their potential profits, most likely see too much work to develop for that controller relative to their potential gain. Also, since the hardware specs are clearly inferior to the other two major consoles, developers may feel restrained by hardware limitations which are simply not present on those other consoles.

I believe Nintendo's most significant problem thus far is their marketing, or lack thereof, of this console. I still see parents who think the Wii U is just an expansion to the Wii, i.e. the controller is the "U". Making games which rely more on the gamepad is necessary, but they need to make sure consumers understand that this is a separate piece of hardware from the Wii. Maybe renaming the console would do the trick, but I'm not sure how viable of an option that is this far into its life cycle.

The problem I see with the games isn't a lack of quality titles, as so many people point out. From what I can tell, there are plenty of great games currently released for or coming to the Wii U. The problem I see is a lack of innovation/change. Even games developed by Nintendo don't make particularly great use of the gamepad (which I understand they said they are going to address from here on out). Also, to me, many of Nintendo's flagship series feel too iterative at this point. While I love Zelda, Pokemon, Mario, etc., I would like to see something fresh from Nintendo. I'm talking about new IP, not another Metroid/Zelda (though that would be welcome as well). I think licensing out their major franchises is a great move, provided they seek companies who will do them justice and can generate interest in developers. With their flagship franchises being worked on by other companies, Nintendo's first/second party studios can possibly work on developing wholly original franchises/games. I'm not looking for something which will revolutionize gaming as we know it; I just want something fresh and original. I'm sure I'm not alone in thinking that, while I love Nintendo games, I'm not willing to drop $250 to buy a box for the sole purpose of playing the next Zelda, Mario Kart, or Smash Bros, especially considering that I have experiences with all those franchises and others on the 3DS.

Can Nintendo turn the Wii U around? Possibly, but I think it's not very likely. From where I'm sitting, it looks like Nintendo's problems this generation stem from being too rooted in tradition. As much as Iwata and Nintendo's other big names have done, it may be time for some of them to move aside for younger people who understand the current market better and may be more willing to make the radical changes Nintendo may need to keep up with a constantly changing market. I'm not trying to make light of their contributions to gaming, but at some point, change is necessary. Nintendo should have had these problems last generation, but they got lucky by being, as Jeff said, the right console in the right place at the right time. I have a feeling that Nintendo thought that lightning was going to strike twice and "casual" gamers would jump on the Wii U out of loyalty to the Wii, but clearly that didn't happen.

Personally, I don't understand what everyone's problem is with the possibility of Nintendo going third party. People don't buy Nintendo's hardware because it's state-of-the-art or "unique" or has the greatest online infrastructure in the world; they buy them to play Nintendo's exclusives (or out of nostalgia/loyalty, but neither one of those things is logical, so I'm not going to address those reasons). What would be the problem with Zelda or Mario appearing on PS4/Xbox One, both of which will undoubtedly have larger install bases than the Wii U if things don't change? Why does it matter what box you play a great game on so long as you're playing that great game and having fun? Just because the worst happened to SEGA doesn't mean that the same thing would necessarily happen to Nintendo. And the 3DS is fine anyway, so if you really wanted Nintendo hardware, I'm sure they'd stay in the portable business as well. The way I see it, Nintendo going third party, which I am by no means saying is an inevitability, could only serve to distribute their games to wider audiences.

I love some Nintendo games. I really do. But I think they made/will make too many mistakes with the Wii U for it to be saved. If they make another console, hopefully they learn from their mistakes with this one. I think all the "Nintendo is doomed" stuff is complete nonsense, but I think the Wii U being a failure for Nintendo is absolutely in the realm of possibility. Here's hoping for a good 2014 for them, but I have my doubts.

@alecofthewest: Look at the sales of a Mario kart games with a very low hardware base. It does not sell systems like they need it to. It will sell average at best.

Jesus, this thread... Nintendo WILL bounce back, it's amazing how much people underestimate the power of smash bros and mario kart.

@rurounigeo: Reggie is nothing else than a puppet. He has no control over Nintendo at all. As for Iwata. He makes the same mistakes over and over again. Lack of 3rd party support was not just on the Wii U. Lak of released games was not only a problem with the Wiii U. This meeting just showed again Iwata incompetence of the current market. For example they have not enough tried to approch children and families? That is all they basically did and it was not enough because no one cares. The Wii was a success because of one game alone called Wii Sports. That was the thing and made the Wii successful. The Wii U has nothing like that at all. IT is basically another dual screen device like the 3DS.

Also another thing. The 3DS does not sell well. It sells ok. And the software outside of Japan is again ok. But it is nothing compared to the DS for example. It is still way under expectations as well. And to believe that the 3DS will be the major drive in 2014 for Nintendo like Iwata does is just dumb. There won't be a Pokemon game to save the hardware and software sales this year. People have just moved on to IOS platforms. And the idea to try to market Nintendo products on these platform to lure away people is just naive. This will never work because they would not care enough. They would play the demo or whatever they do and then move on.

Iwata even thinks that 3rd party games will magically reappear on the Wii U. How why? Because of Smashbrothers and Mario Kart? I highly highly doubt it.

Another point. They will focus more on the Touchpad and at the same time their newest Donkey Kong game will have no screen functionality at all. Iwata needs to go as fast as possible and with the next bad period until June heads will roll because he can not just reduce his paycheck again.

So what do people think now?

- Doubling down on Wii U Pad and game that use that pad.

- New non-wearable device for health & excerscise that must (you woudl hope) be step beyond viatality sensor

- Stresses its commitment to its own strategy of keeping its games exclusive to its own consoles

- Only using other devices (smartphones tablets) for "service" apps to help with selling games that had previously been confined to games consoles

- Wii U's Nintendo Network ID (NNID) log-in system, which the 3DS recently started supporting, will also be used across smartphones and tablets too.

- Nintendo DS titles will also be coming to the Wii U Virtual Console, with touchscreen play enabled on the Wii U Pad.

So was that enough? Was that enough to sway fears?

MY TAKE:

They came out far too weak. They needed to say they were hiring and working on developeing new teams that would work exclusively on new properties while not slowing their development of the games they currently have in development. They needed to show vitality and health for THEMSELVES, not a mysterious non-wearable 'health' device for their users. They needed to SHOW off something desperately, because being so vague is a huge mistake when people want to 'see' what Nintendo is doing substantively.

I think doubling down on Wii U Pad was necessary, but I don't believe for a second they have more than one or two games that will actually do that or need the pad. The push asymmetrical game play at the start was a daydream without any substance of ideas. I don't think the functionality the pad offers offset the high costs of the pad itself. Yes you can play a game without tying up the TV, great for parents, but not worth the cost? Not really. I can see why they need to follow this path to the end, but I hope they are not delusional enough to make a Wii U Pad 2 in the next consoles. If there is one company that should push a nice joypad as a single solution that works with all games it is Nintendo.

All their plan to use other handheld devices are okay, but they are expected...they should be doing nothing less than that...its not a cherry it is just good sense overdue. I could not care less about Mario on an iPhone, that is not what they NEED to do. What they need to do is allow for smartphones and tablets to act as a touch screen display just as their Wii U Pad does. It won't help for all games, but they could at least allow five people with portable devices to play a Wii U game that they all control from their own touch device.

The bottomline is that Nintendo is going to do nothing. They will ride out Wii U for another two or three years trying to break-even while saving face. We can only hope their next system are better and come in-line with what they really need to be doing.

pick up the old Virtual boy dream…make friends with Palmer Luckey and John Carmack…;)….oh yeah and fuck iwata

Bologna and you know it. Nintendo is obviously the least corrupt of the three console makers.

Nintendo's problems is their success and strength. They have too much money on hand, they have too many people in top positions that have been there forever, and they are afraid to rock their own boat. They have nothing to gain from change because they are not scared yet and they have too much security from their war chest of money.

I don't even think they need to do anything too dramatic. That is the sad part they could just adjust and be back on track, but to do so would embarrass Shigeru Miyamoto. He is a huge impediment to creating new properties because his view of what a game "is" and "isn't" is so damn narrow. It woudl be okay if he was one voice amoung manny at Nintendo, but he has veto power over ALL games. His voice is the only one and nobody tells him no.

I think what will happen is a slow death for Nintendo. It will take them a decade or two of skidding along the bottom run of gaming to run out of money, but because they won't build/try/strive for anything new because Miyamoto is too myopic. Even he admits he does not understand the games other developers make, which would be fine if he didn't stand in the way of other people at his company.

Nintendo should go bankrupt; price fixing the cost of NES games and systems for 5 years shows how corrupt they are. GOODBYE nintendo!

Weirdly enough, this makes me want to buy a Wii U even more.

Ok we all agree Nintendo has made some huge mistakes but there are two things I cannot agree with:

1. Nintendo leaving the console market

2. Iwata being canned.

1. Let's clarify something. Sony did not make BREAK EVEN AND TURN A PROFIT on console sales for the PS3 until roughly 4 years into the systems life. And lets also remember that currently the PS3 has outsold the Xbox 360 and "won" 2nd place behind the Wii last generation. Yes the console that many in this thread have praised for doing everything right and "innovating" finished dead last. Its successor at the moment is also last behind both the PS4 and Wii U and in all likelihood will remain as such for the remaining ~2 months of the fiscal year.

So Nintendo can more than handle a few slow years. Have you all forgotten that the DS, Wii and now 3DS literally printed and print money for Nintendo? Nintendo's R & D Division is amazing and is only limited by what the men at the top want them to make. Remember that Vitality sensor mentioned at E3 2010? It tracks your vitals and heart rate which can be used to program events occurring in games based on your feelings.

What if I told you we could be living in a world where the Wii U is the PREMIER HORROR GAME CONSOLE? We could all be watcing Patrick Klepek crap himself playing the Wii U in spooking with scoops. If nintendo decided to say screw it and include one with every console and released an HD version of Fatal Frame IV: Mask of the Lunar Eclipse and with the help of the vit sensor make the most fearful experience in video game history so far? What if EA saw and said hey we have to make Dead Space on this there by leading EA to actually develop for the thing.

Wouldn't that give the Wii U the image of being a serious console for serious gamers and fix the biggest problems with the system: It's public perception with younger gamers and its lack of 3rd party support.

But we don't have that. It's not R &D's fault. They make cool stuff that never even gets to see the light of day. Nintendo is so scared of making another Virtual Boy but yet feel brave enough to release the Wii U like they did and with the tech it has. It just doesn't make sense sometimes.

The point is Nintendo has tricks up its sleeve. They should stay in the console market because what R&D produces is unique and 9 times out of 10 it is something fun. 5 years from now Nintendo could release the Otama Gamesphere and every man woman and child could go insane for it. So don't throw in the towel.

2. Why is everyone calling for Iwata's head when an equally large portion of the blame is on Reggie Fils-Aime. Yeah. That's right. The regginator is the man who's head should come off for this. I invite you to read his favorite book Blue Ocean Strategy. Notice anything? How the entire last decade of what Nintendo has done worldwide is Reggie's strategy and what Reggie believes in? Reggie has been the one to misjudge the American market. Reggie has been the one pushing for certain strategies .

Yes Iwata is the man at the top but I'd be hard pressed not to blame Reggie for how Nintendo has evolved over the last decade. Reggie is the great communicator of Nintendo. He's the one that brushes aside the wants and demands of gamers and refuses to stray from his strategy. Who's outright lied before. He's the one that constantly tells hardcore gamers they aren't important. He's the one who at the end of the day squandered his and Nintendo's good standing with hardcore gamers (and I love Reggie. I really do. I have the Wii launch shirt with Reggie in a bruce lee pose that is of very limited quantity that I wore proudly) and damaged the Nintendo name. Nintendo has strung people along for far too many years with promises. I mean can anyone mention anything good that Nintendo of America has done in a while?

It is time for Reggie to go. I fell for his shtick. I believed in him and that he would take care of the company that brought me so many hours of joy as a kid. I stuck up for him over the years. But I can't do it anymore. Nintendo cannot do this anymore. There are good people who aren't tone deaf that can take his place out there. If Nintendo is going to restructure it must start with Nintendo of America and Reggie.

But all Nintendo do is pump out the same franchises when fans want something new. Sega on the other hand, have franchises that they're not taking advantage of. Sequels to Shenmue, Valkyria Chronicles, Jet Set Radio, Skies of Arcadia and even more are all begging to be made. I loved the Dreamcast and what Sega were doing then, it's just that with Sega's failings with the Megadrive towards the end of its life and the Saturn and Sony's huge success with the Playstation, pretty much killed them. It's hard to say how Nintendo would perform outside of their own hardware. They'd need even more staff to take on bigger games as they develop for these much more powerful consoles. The latest Mario game which received favourable reviews sold poorly and was beaten by Knack.

Why does this line of reasoning persist? Nintendo has made practically all it's money off of console sales, with over half a billion sold during the last 30 years; they have over a trillion dollars in assets; DS itself nearly outsold PS3 & Xbox360 combined; Wii outsold both aforementioned consoles; Nintendo profits off every console sold.

Why would a company which has made billions off mostly game console sales -- the most successful game console manufacturer in the world -- suddenly stop making hardware because their current console isn't an immediate success?

Replace all instances of Sega with Nintendo and all instances of Sonic with Mario right? Nintendo was always more successful at developing game franchises than Sega, and as long as Nintendo kept their core developers around, they could be much more successful than Sega as a Dev/Pub only.

Wildly inaccurate, actually.

For a few years? Wii outsold the PS3 and Xbox 360; DS practically outsold both PS3 and Xbox360 combined, and -- unlike Sony & Microsoft -- Nintendo made a profit on every single one of their consoles. Of the over half-billion consoles Nintendo has sold world-wide since the 80's: half were sold during the last 10 years.

Nintendo hasn't been competition in the console market? Nintendo has been the console market on a world-wide level, and the other "big dogs" are always playing catch-up. Yes, Nintendo had to lower their profit projections (or even report a loss) for the next fiscal year, but Nintendo is still a trillion-dollar company where their assets are concerned; both Sony and Microsoft -- as entire companies -- have around 150 billion in total assets. Unlike Nintendo: those companies make lots of products unrelated to game consoles. If you go by those numbers -- actual, global success over the last 30 years -- it's only not a competition because Nintendo practically owns the console game playing-field.

Nintendo has plenty of money ... mostly from several hundred-million console sales.

Finally, If you don't see how Nintendo has innovated over the last few decades: you're not paying attention. As Michael Ancel said recently: Nintendo is almost innovative to a fault.

Forgive me, but I think I'll agree with Ancel's (experienced) opinion over yours.

Iwata is not expected to step down from his position as Nintendo's leader.

Fuck them then. If you're not going to get rid of the cancer that is slowly killing this company because of the complete lack of want to innovate and evolve into 2014 you deserve to crash and burn. And this hurts us more than anything too, I know, but fuck them.

Competition breads innovation but Nintendo hasn't been competition in the console market for a few years. One or two good games a year is not enough, especially when it's the same fucking shit over and over and over and over and over and over and over again. It just further reinforces their complete lack of desire to change with the times.

Apparently, and I don't know how accurate this is, they pissed away the ENTIRE surplus of money that the Wii generated for them with the WiiU. Yet they still stand there holding their dicks going "Dur. We don't know what happened. Iwata is still in charge though and nobody will answer for our shit decisions. Dur."

I hope that Nintendo reads my blog and listens to me. The Wii U is fine, it just needs MORE GAMES. Amirite?

@budwyzer: Unless of course Nintendo wants to be making pachinko machines in the near future.

The doom and gloom always make me sort of chortle. Lets not forget, the 3DS was the best selling hardware platform last year (by a mile), and Nintendo sells 3DS's at a profit.

The WiiU is struggling, but Nintendo as a company is making a profit off the 3DS alone. I wouldn't be sad if Nintendo decided to just go full hand-held and never make another living room console. I think the WiiU was a misstep by Nintendo. They tried to capitalize on the success of the Wii before Microsoft and Sony could wrangle the next generation, but they marketed it horribly (most people thought it was an add-on for the Wii), and it wasn't enough of an upgrade for the Wii's casual fanbase.

In the end, I don't think Nintendo will abandon the WiiU. It's very likely they'll continue to make first party titles for it for at least a few years...but I have no doubt they will make it less of a focal point of the company. They'll hunker down on the 3DS and be profitable for it.

Nintendo is forecasting a $250 million loss for the current fiscal year, ending March 31, and has slashed its sales forecasts for Wii U from nine million to 2.8 million.

I think it's because many gamers from certain cultures feel like playing a whimsical, brightly-colored game would be an affront to their (already fragile) masculinity; those of us who are perfectly secure in our being and can enjoy games for what they are don't have that problem.

I agree that Nintendo makes great games -- well polished, no patches, already "complete" upon release -- but don't even think they are doing anything "wrong" with the hardware, either. Wii U is an odd console because it's not sporting the fastest processor or integration with NFL and Facebook, but I don't think the people who care about those things are Nintendo's target demographic.

Notice both Microsoft and Sony have some kind of dual-screen functionality with their new consoles ... following Nintendo's lead yet again.

We have a Wii U at my house and my 4-year-old plays it daily. Interesting/unconventional design always takes time for normal people to appreciate and accept, but my (unpretentious) kids love it. "Core gamers" reacted the same way to the Wii when it was released, but Nintendo still managed to out-sell both Sony & Microsoft during that console generation.

It just sucks because they are still making great games on the WiiU and on the 3DS. I have all three consoles just I have for every generation since the gamecube/xbox/ps2, and the WiiU is doing BETTER than those consoles at giving me cool games in the first couple years (Pikmin 3, Mario 3D World, Rayman, ZombiU,Windwaker, Nintendoland). I just don't understand why interest has dried up in these sorts of games with color and light hearted subject matter.

Nintendo is still making great games and now they might end up halting that because they gave the new console a terrible name with worse marketing, and people are too focused on violent franchises with far inferior gameplay (AC4, COD, BF4). Don't get me wrong, I play those games too, but the games I've played on my Wii and Wii U consistently end up being my favorite games every single year even though there are fewer of them.

Really bums me out, because games wise, they aren't doing anything wrong imo.

Well said sir.

Before the Wii U came out ... like when the Wii was out? The #5 best-selling game console of all time? You said that Nintendo should stop making hardware while they were manufacturing the home console which out-sold Xbox360 and PS3 by more than 20 million units? You said this during the time that Nintendo nearly sold more DS consoles than PS3 and Xbox360 sales combined?

I'm going to guess (and hope) that you do not consider yourself a financial advisor.

You say "dying hardware" like Nintendo hasn't been making any money, but Nintendo is (right now, regardless of the news about a projected profit loss) the most financially-successful console manufacturer in the entire world. The margin by which Nintendo leads all-time global console sales is massive: more thanhalf a billion Nintendo consoles sold over the last 30 years. The majority of Nintendo's success is directly from hardware sales.

Why is this fact so difficult for people to understand?

You're right about Black Knight, but it's also a spinoff. From what I've heard, there's more than one "Sonic Team" at Sega, and Black Knight was the B-team. So it's easy to forget that it exists.

@ruthloose:

If anything, it seems that leadership that results in financial gains is anti-consumer, vulgar, and crass.

Worst scenario I see out of this is some iOS Pokemon abomination and Nintendo following suit with Square Enix, and releasing hideous, poorly controlling versions of their classics on iPhones.

@thatdutchguy: Yeah, I have been turned off to Nintendo's home consoles since the Nintendo 64. Nintendo needs to go back to the NES and SNES days, that is to say, they need strong 3rd party support. Can they repair the damage after almost 2 decades of bad decisions? I don't think so.

I've been saying since before the Wii U came out that Nintendo should go the way of Sega, but when I say that I never meant that I want them to make shitty Mario games on other consoles and become irrelevant. I just mean as far as dropping the dying hardware and switching strictly to software.

Pokemon on iOS will make Nintendo's profits skyrocket.

A PS4 and Xbone Zelda game would outsell almost anything else out there.

Smash Bros. Melee is still the best version and is still played in big tournaments everywhere even though the game is over 13 years old. If they released an online multiplayer enabled version on Steam, the number of active online players for a Nintendo game would break all records in like a day.

Release all the older generation Nintendo games as downloads for PSN, XBLA, Steam, iOS, etc., and watch people overload servers trying to download them on the first day. It would be ridiculous. Some people would buy the games just to see how crazy it feels to be playing a Nintendo game on their iPhone or Playstation even if they don't particularly like the game.

This is just the tip of the iceberg for how much success Nintendo could have if they would only unshackle themselves from the hardware and exclusivity and just spread out into everything else. I really hope they realize it before it's too late.

Nintendo must be considering making an android gaming phone based on a chip like the Nvidia Tegra K1.

It would be awesome to see Nintendo making both games and peripherals (Wii remote, Wii U tablet, etc) for PC, especially if they played cross-platform with their consoles. Guess they're talking more about smart phone games though... or maybe something like iFruit.

Just stick to the fucking 3ds. God damn.

I was addressing the statement/concept that Nintendo is doing a bad job in the console market as enthnocentric, and not necessarily the people; ethnocentrism refers to viewpoints, anyway. I'm sure people in Asia don't see Nintendo as "failing," or needing to exit the console sales business, for example.

About your nationality: you say where you are from in your profile, and while you are not "American" in the sense that you are from the USA, you are from "the Americas," and not from Asia, where Nintendo has seen most of their success. Regardless: this isn't about you, and was not meant as insulting.

I do agree with you that "the Americas" are not "small potatoes," (sorry for the hyperbole) but I think part of the reason so many "Americans" are upset at Nintendo is because Nintendo seems to proceed with its designs without regard to what "American" gamers want. America is not Nintendo's first consideration, and why should it be? The majority of the planet's population lives in Asia!

I apologize if I upset you, as this wasn't really all about you; I was mostly just frustrated with the trend of posts where people compare Nintendo to Sega, say that they should get out of the console business, etc. when, in fact, Nintendo is today (by the numbers) the most successful game console manufacturer of all time. Sega never even got close to that. You spoke about Nintendo following Sega as though it was inevitable, and I don't think history or the numbers support that possibility at all.

Why should/would Nintendo exit the console business when they're still on-top globally?

Another issue here is that people are treating handhelds and home consoles as different markets, which isn't appropriate; they are all "consoles." Yes, it is true that Nintendo's biggest successes have been handheld consoles, but the Wii was nothing to laugh at; it outsold PS3 and XB360.

Maybe Nintendo will stop making home consoles (and I doubt it) but I'm pretty sure they will never stop making gaming consoles altogether.

@driftspace: You presume too much... Funny to be accused of ethnocentric without knowing my gender, nationality or ethnic background. Just a heads-up: I am not American... But even then I would be hard pressed to call that market "small potatoes", or ignore that, in any other markets outside of Japan, the Wii U is the least sold console of the next generation, and the one least supported by third party.

You also presume I am talking about Nintendo abandoning all hardware, when I am just referring to the console side of things. You know, the branch Nintendo had to reduce its expectation to a third, forcing a restructure and a statement from the chairman to its shareholders. That part is fact, not something I just presume.

I think Nintendo's most painful problem is their inability to do digital distribution well enough. Arguably, they have/can crush it sales wise when it comes to making games that come on discs/carts and go in their hardware. I think the mobile phone world, specifically iOS has a lot of potential usage for plying their back catalog of NES, SNES, and GB/GBC ports (last time I looked Android had more emulators than you could count, so no need to bother there). I think the idea that Nintendo would make original content for phones is a farce, but building more goodwill among the folk who aren't buying Wii U's or don't realize yet that they want a 3DS with more full featured mobile gaming, couldn't hurt. As it is, the Virtual Console situation is downright abysmal. Let someone else, namely Apple, handle a bit of the digital distribution and rake in the money with ports of Super Mario at $5-$7 a pop.

As for the touchscreen control issue (that Jeff has mentioned in podcasts previous), I think there's enough finesse for most games when done well. Super Crate Box and League of Evil are extremely tight platformers on iOS that use touchscreen d-pad and buttons very well. If they were willing to put a bit more work into the ports, they could add bluetooth/wifi networking for multiplayer. Hell, that exists now in emulators, and is perfectly serviceable for a game of SNES Mario Kart over the internet. Obviously Pokemon Red/Blue also comes to mind, and could leverage networking as an excuse for a higher price. I mean honestly, if Square Enix can get away charging $10+ for mediocre ports, Nintendo could surely do better than that.

Well, this is obviously a sign of the gaming apocalypse. The only logical course of action is for all developers to go back to developing games for the Playstation 2. Otherwise we're all doomed.

This just isn't going to happen; people keep making comments like this, but they don't understand Nintendo's world-wide success as a company. 3 of the 5 best-selling consoles of all time were manufactured by Nintendo, with the DS holding the #2 spot, and the Wii -- yes, that console which everyone loves to hate -- holding the #5 spot. (Microsoft doesn't even appear until we get to #9.)

If you look at the actual sales numbers: the only console manufacturer which actually struggles to be in the console race on a world-wide level (since we should not just be talking about America here) is Microsoft. The Nintendo DS all by itself has out-sold every single console Microsoft has manufactured combined, and part of NIntendo's sales model -- since the NES -- has been to profit on console sales. Most console manufacturers sell consoles at a loss in an effort to make it up in licensing fees, but not Nintendo. Nintendo has $20 BILLION in liquidity; and more than ONE TRILLION DOLLARS in assets. Nintendo has more assets (and definitely more liquidity) than GOLDMAN SACHS.

Nintendo has been the worlds largest console manufacturer (measured by revenue from console sales) for decades, and still holds that title. For Sony and/or Microsoft to dethrone Nintendo on a global level they'll basically need a miracle, or for Nintendo to literally hibernate for 10+ years.

It seems that the majority of these people assume that because Nintendo does poorly in America that it's a failing company, but America has kind of been small potatoes to Nintendo for a very long time now, and -- by sales comparison -- Microsoft's Xbox series is the smallest potato in the world-wide console market.

It's called ethnocentricity, people, and it's not a good thing; if you're going to participate in a discussion about a GLOBAL company: look at global sales numbers, and think globally.

Nintendo will probably still be making game consoles until long after we're all dead.

I guess you can only release underpowered hardware and get poor 3rd party support for so long before the market catches up to you.