OP has the right idea. In the game business, the hardware is the gameway to the software. Nintendo designed both the DS and Wii that way. Sony and Microsoft, however, make systems that do "everything," and play games, but they don't focus on the experience of the game.
1.Nintendo created a lot of software that complimented the DS.
2. I haven't seen Sony do that with the PSP.
Which is Sony's big problem right now: they are not a game company. Nintendo has all of their departments integrated (as a software/hardware company) and is only a game company. Sony is a conglomerate.
3. Their developers are not really "Sony," but are 3rd parties they own. They are not as tightly nit as Nintendo.
4. That, and they lack the talent Nintendo has. In the end, it all comes down to software.
1. Agreed 100%, and its titles like Pokemon, Zelda, Brain Age, and Nintendogs are what have made the DS what is today. It was also an excellent idea to partner with Level 5 for Prof. Layton.
2. Disagree, at least in the case of SCEJ, though Sony Japan's offerings feel more like quirky and cool indy titles than AAA releases.
3. Thankfully that has been changing over the years. The first step was to unify Sony's various studios under a single banner through the creation of the Worldwide Studios entity back in 2005. This has resulted in a much better general vision behind the software Sony produces, and a general increase in the quality of their products, thanks to the collaborations now often seen between SCE's studios. The second step was getting these developers directly involved with hardware design, something that has happened more recently. SCE has been slowly becoming more and more like Nintendo every day, and it should lead to great things.
4. I disagree. I would argue the creative minds at Media Molecule are up there with Nintendo's best, and Nintendo doesn't have anybody quite like Naughty Dog, Sony Santa Monica, or Guerrilla Games in their arsenal. Both companies have their strengths and weaknesses, and both offer a wealth of quality content for any gamer. I do agree that Sony's software is by and large less marketable than what Nintendo produces, given the audience they often cater to.
2)None of the software from Sony has moved hardware. Outside of Gran Turismo, none of Sony's software moves their hardware. They are dependent on third parties to do it for them. When they don't, you get the PSP and the PS3.Nintendo's software is meant to push the hardware. This is why Nintendo's systems are doing so well (I would argue that the N64 and Gamecube software did not try to acheive this).
3)That's not what I mean. Nintendo is an integrated hardware/software company. This means that the hardware is designed around the software. Miyamoto would say "Wouldn't it be fun if there is a system that does this," and the engeneers can go off and do it. No matter what, Sony will do this backwards, which does not work. At best, they would make the software and try to familerize developers with it. Since video games are about getting the software, this will always fail. Sony is also a conglomerate. They do a lot more than video games (which bleeds into their video game offerings). Nintendo is only about games. This means they only focus and think about them. Their president is a former game programmer. This is how they were able to see Gamer Drift. Also, Sony is too big. No matter what, they will not be able to get such a clear message and identity (how can they? They can't have multiple identities for each section). Nintendo being small works towards this. Growing to big will eroad the common thoughts and identity of the business. No matter how hard they [Sony] tries, they will not achive this.
4)That is really an insult to Nintendo. The sheer power behing Nintendo developed software drawfs that of Sony's developers, which I say aren't that great. The market proves this. To achive the level of sales Nintendo titles get, they have to be of very high quality. If Nintendo's offerings were not of high quality, they would not succeed in the market. The must also be because they sell for so long. They are so good that people are coninved to buy the game two years after it's release. It is this reason they sell so well. Sony has never made a must have title. All the must have titles for the Playstation system came from someone outside of Sony. You may like the games they make yourself, but you must admit they do not sell as well as other third party games. This means they are only on par with third party developers, which also proves my point that they are just 3rd parties under the Sony name. Uncharted and Little Big Planet didn't light fires in the consumer's mind. But games like Mario Kart and New Super Mario Bros. certainly did.
I agree with 1 so no comment there.