Cause you don't like him, doesn't mean he sucks. The 3DS does really well right now. IF Miyamoto says that there isn't any better person leading Nintendo than there is something right about it.

I recall the Pokemon Company did this awile back with an app about the franchise, nothing deep, but enough to intrigue (I think). ~_^

I quoted you because you had an interesting point, although a wrong point in my opinion. You are right that Nintendo has a strength in portables, but after the success of Wii it would be crazy to ask them to leave the console market altogether. Nintendo requires its console department for the time being -- at least until Nintendo can come up with a handheld device that can stream 1080p to TVs and allow development of more complex console-like titles, so that they can truly look at an option of a 'hybrid' handheld/console. For the time being, and potentially for the next-gen too, they need Wii U or Wii U 2 when that comes out.

Nintendo is clever in not creating a system that is all too powerful. Too much cost and given the state of the industry which has seen development costs rise to the heavens in the span of 10 years, it is the right call to make a system that can do anything PS3/XBOX 360 can and then some, but without asking the developers to create a game that would most likely cause their financial bankruptcy.

What the industry and its' analysts don't get is that we've become complacent in the graphical leaps and these have become our way of 'satisfying' gamers that want more. But gaming is not just graphics, just as good music or entertainment is not always about the 'wow' factor. The way things are going, developers will find it hard to make profits by developing games (hence why they need to turn to DRM and new policies regarding the use of their software to maximise profits). But this is not a sane strategy. The way things are going, we are either getting $99 games or games that cost $60 but won't allow you re-trading and/or using YOUR game on another console if and when your console dies. And what happens when, somewhere down the line, XBOX One support is dropped by Microsoft? You lose your games forever?

These are big questions and we need a company that does some 'traditional' thinking while at the same time having very good businessmen. Nintendo does not have the power of Sony or Microsoft but they are succesful where it matters -- being profitable in the long-term and ensuring that their business plan is viable not just now or for the next 3 years. How many companies in the past 10 years have made excellent games, with big budgets, only to close down shop a few months down the line?

The industry needs Nintendo, because they need a reference point. We also need the innovations, whether they are Steam or the new policies designed by Android/iOS but we also need a company that understands gaming, that does gaming as a business for tens of years. People were disappointed with Nintendo's E3 showing (and as a gamer, I was also disappointed), but what they failed to see is that Nintendo has created several new games with less than a quarter of the budget of the big titles shown for One and PS4. And these titles will be profitable and make Nintendo money. As long as Nintendo can develop the Animal Crossings for less than a couple of million USD (quite possible even much less than that) and sell multiple million copies of their games, they will be a HEALTHY company. And this is what matters. Nintendo could have given us the all-encompassing 3D Mario we've all been waiting for, but at what cost? Does it make sense to create a 35 million USD Mario game on a Wii U with less than 6 million customer base, essentially sacrificing all that money for very little returns? Donkey Kong, a simplistic 3D Mario game and Wii Fit U will do more for Nintendo in terms of revenue than a very expensive Mario would do.

And the expensive Mario, at this stage of the life of the console, would just cause Nintendo problems.

EDIT: And let's not forget the fact that Nintendo, in making a weak Wii U, have essentially the trump card of playing with the price if required. Nintendo will be able to lower its' price to as low as $149 if required (a parity price with current PS3/360 hardware prices) which would likely create an interesting situation. The price of admission is too expensive right now, but if Nintendo is a 'family' company first and foremost, then by pricing their products well below competition they WILL be able to get all those customers (parents with children, college students) who don't have the big financial power to invest in a very expensive system and games.

Big post. I agree with you. I wasnt sugesting they drop the Wii U, i was saying they should plan this for their next wave of consoles/console. Especially if they dont manage to resurruct the Wii U the way they did the 3DS. But its possible they might manage to turn it around. Despite that i think they should aim to unify both their consoles for their next generation so they can focus their development efforts and make a platform that is more atractive to 3rd parties.

I think Nintendo's problem with 3rd parties lies with the fact that Nintendo released first, then tried to "second guess" their opposition, predicting incorrectly that Sony and Microsoft would bring out less powerful machines. This has led to a power discrepancy for the 2nd gen running, only this time, 3rd parties have gone with the opposition from the get-go. Is this the wrong strategy from them? Only time will tell. Its not too late for Nintendo to come back and even get a fair amount of 3rd party support but their big-hitters really have to start shifting some consoles, starting this August.
Me? I will be happy just as long as Nintendo make a healthy enough profit to churn out as many of their good games as poss this gen and stay alive for next.