Revisionist History

In reality, Both Sony and Nintendo went in wanting different things. Ken Kutaragi, (The lead designer of PlayStation up to PS3) wanted to get Sony into the game Industry, and Nintendo wanted to develop a CD addon.

Sony wanted control of the SNES-CD format, in the same way that Nintendo had full control over the Cartridge format.

My favorite part personally is this paragraph:

By this point, Nintendo had had just about all it could take. On top of the deal signed in 1988, Sony had also contributed the main audio chip to the cartridge-based Super NES. The Ken Kutaragi-designed chip was a key element to the system, but was designed in such a way as to make effective development possible only with Sony's expensive development tools. Sony had also retained all rights to the chip, which further exaserbated Nintendo.

The day after Sony announced its plans to begin work on the Play Station, Nintendo made an announcement of its own. Instead of confirming its alliance with Sony, as everyone expected, Nintendo announced it was working with Philips, Sony's longtime rivals, on the SNES CD-ROM drive. Sony was understandably furious.

Because of their contract-breaking actions, Nintendo not only faced legal repercussions from Sony, but could also experience a serious backlash from the Japanese business community. Nintendo had broken the unwritten law that a company shouldn't turn against a reigning Japanese company in favor of a foreign one.

http://www.ign.com/articles/1998/08/28/history-of-the-playstation

If anything it was more Nintendo's fault then Sony's, but hey that's buisness.

The result was a long-forgotten cd peripheral and a lawsuit from the company they worked with for Nintendo and 2/3 console generations and the leading 8th gen console for PlayStation. 

Quite ironic.

Do not see how a 3rd console is part of Nintendo problem though... But i do have this problem that i feel i dont need a 3rd console that do and play kinda the same games the console i have do/play (Have WiiU-X1). But that time may come when you see a game you like and want that is only on that 1 console you dont have and end up with 3 consoles.

IMHO either PS or Xbox needs to die. The industry would be healthier. Given global sales it looks like Xbox wouldn't be missed all that much.
The incredibly stupid thing about it is that Microsoft could make TONS more cash just raking in software sales but are too dumb/proud to do so. Getting into hardware was a mistake for them and has yet to pay off. The final years of 360 were profitable but it's would still take decades at those levels to even catch up to zero lifetime investment level. And now xb1 looks like a certain decline from 360 numbers, tablets and phones continue to be a minute fraction of the entrenched competition, I just don't get it.

Their software and business/enterprise sectors are massively successful, why do they bang their heads against the wall in ill advised areas?

A great recent example was surface. Tons of losses. No rt/tablet success. Then they release office for iPad and make unholy awesome sales instantly. It's the perfect example of smart and efficient ways to make insane money. If someone else has built and dominates a market : take advantage and ride the wave for huge $$$ using your finest assets. Dont wade in and shred billions out of stubborn pride trying to reinvent the wheel when customers are already locked in with a market leader situation. Nothing to gain from that.

Solution: Become the first one.

There isn't even room for 2 consoles the way this gen is going lol

Right. Because there "hasn't been room" for three consoles the last many generations either, yes?

If sony just copied them we all would still be stuck in a kiddi gaming universe, where games are for kids and looked on as a joke by society.  Sony took the biggest risk and pushed the market beyond the safty of kiddies and selling only to them.  They took the challnage of expending the marlet beyond kids something nintendo neved dared to do.  

Its nintendos entire history that is do the same thing for decades pander to the same peopel with the same games.

 Also If failed add ons are originality to you then sega easly takes the cake from ninty in that.  

You think adding violence to games was a risk?  That was Nintendo simply not turning into a prostitute to make money.  Anyone could tell violence and sex make money, it takes strength of character to not go down that road.  As far as your kiddy remark goes, I'd say it was the immature gamers who think those violent games are the best thing ever.  I've played both and the Nintendo games are way more fun. 

Once again Nintendo uses the same characters, and makes new gameplay concepts.  Far better than Sony who has been steadily weeding out its genres to cater more and more to the almost exclusively the shooter/sports audience.  How many games do they even make still that aren't a shooter/sports game?  I know they used to have a decent range of products, but now they're turning into an Xbox (Indie games don't count).  

Sega's add-ons weren't add-ons they were desperation.  Moving from one product to another when the last one failed.  I would hardly call that the same thing.  Nintendo actively took risks while they were ahead in the industry.  I would say the Virtual Boy was actually a bigger risk than the Wii because they owned the handheld market.  If you wanna compare something to Sega, then I'd say the Wii is a better comparison than the "failed addons" I mentioned.  

It takes strength intelligence creativity to make something like TLOU and take a risk on it, there is nothign strong about recycling old concepts for decades.  Iv played both and there is little fun about playing the same thing over and over with no story no characters and still the basic run and jump being majority of the game for most of their biggest games.  Clearly im not talking about moronic blow shit up, but games like mass effect where your decision means a character is dead or not or emotionally driven games liek TLOU.  Sure theres a lot of pointless viloence just like there once was a lot of pointless kiddyness to games.  

Your baseless opinions does not mean its a fact.  you can post opinions all you want but facts are.  In the last 4 years nintendo has released nealry 30 games featuring mario.   How many do they make that do not feature mario.  This year alone 4 of their major game releases feature predominantly Mario.  Hell how many games does nintendo make that do not feature catrooni art ?  While in the last ten years nintendo released over 70 games featuring freaking Mario, sure looks like they are giving up on originality making new stories concepts characters and just pushing mario in everything and avoiding risk.

Might wanna look at games sony releases so you dont look ignroant on this topic.  Shooter and sports audience lol, do you have any knowlage at all about wtf you are posting.  Sony makes only MLb they dont make or cater to sports fans all that much.  Do take a look at sonys releases in the ps3 gen just to see how wrong you are and clealry just posting your emotions and negative wish full opinions that have nothing to do with reality.  

or do i have to educate you ?

TLOU was not a risk.  Sony sells itself on making violent games and coming out with new franchises all the time.  TLOU was the norm for Sony, and it wasn't a risk at all.  You make a zombie game and you are guaranteed to make your money back even if the console fails.  Look at ZombiU for that.  I credit them for making new characters all the time, but the gameplay is as unimaginative as it gets.  

And what would Sony's alternative be for playing it safe anyways?  They don't have a lot of franchises to rehash you know.  If it makes them a lot of money they rehash it like everything else.  

Yes I have admitted how many times now that Nintendo reuses characters...  So what..  They change the gameplay up every time so what does it matter.  Which is exactly what you still haven't defended on Sony's part yet.  They just drop new characters into the same engine.  That's why they churned those games out so fast, they just changed the characters and used the same exact engine.  That's worse than what Nintendo does because they rebuild Mario from the ground up every time.  That's why you only see 1-2 3D mario/Zelda games a generation in comparison with Naughty Dog who made 4 games because they could cut costs on the engine.  Not to mention they have stated they intend to continue using that engine on the PS4 as well.  

I didn't say that they don't have other franchises other than FPS, I said they are getting worse and more generic.  Their variety is getting narrower and narrower.