I don't get you and unless I am mistaken; you are the one that has no idea.

It see,s you have been conditioned into believing that the current multiple platform model isn't only better but its beneficial. You would be wrong if thats what you thought.

The only disadvantage to having one console is that it puts too much power in the hands of just the one company. Breeds complacency and kills the drive to innovate. Only way around that is to have an open platform, where there is a base hardware with a base TOS for every game released on it, somewhere along the lines of "all games must run at 720p@60fps and all have support for scalability. So basically everyone buys say a PS4/XB1 that comes with 16Gb of GDDR5 ram and an amd cpu. But you can swap in/out any amd GPU you want as long as its based on the GCN architecture. Swp in/out any type of HDD/SSD/SSDe you want too. That way you gaming at 1080p/4k@60fps would be entirely up to your budget. But then this could very well just be a PC albeit with a lot of restrictions to allow devs still be able to optimize their games for a specific type/expected hardware.

On the plus side, this doesn't mean that you will sell less consoles. It means that at some point every single person that plays games can/will have the console in their home since the base console will remain the same for over 10-15yrs. It means that you would have one singularinstall base of over 250M as opposed to 250M shared across 3 different platforms. Means that developers only ever have to make just one version of their game and have a much wider install base to sell it to. Means no more pltform exclusive crap, timed dlc...etc. It means that sony/ms/nintendo will become nothing more than publishers like everyone else and everyone an just concentrate on making great games.

This is surely an impossible feat cause for this to happen it would mean that sony/samsung/amd or intel or nvidia/LG...etc would all have to come together and make a "home console standards group" which will agree on the standard hardware for home consoles. And it means that that home console would be made by more than one hardware manufacturer in the very same way that different people make blu-ray players.

I dont think Nintendo has anything to do with any of this (neither does Sony or MS). The casuals will go wherever they think they can get the most for the least. (Wii with Motion/Party Titles, PS2 with usable out of the box DVD player, PS1 for CD playing...etc).

Sony tried to do the same with Blueray and PS3, but Blueray (or MS and HD DVD) was not even close to the scope of the DVD revolution.

This gen is shaping up to be more about gaming, as a good deal of those casuals are probably going to stay with their Wii's for the Party Games. This could all change, we will see.

You are missing his point. The wii sold around a 100M consoles. Just like the PS1 did too. The PS2 sold 150M and the GC and XBOX still had nearly 50M of sales shared between them. The PS1 showed it expanded th eindustry cause not onlyhad a console never sold so much, but it carried over all those gamers into the PS2 and added more. The wii didn't do that with the wiiU. It got people that wouldn't have bought a console into buying one, but it didnt convert them. So it just lost them to smartphones and tablets.

If you look at sales of the PS3/360, they total around 160M. Doesn't that seem familiar to you, thats around how much the PS2 sold. The expanded gamer base sony achieved with the PS2, it lost a lot of those gamers to the 360. The consumers wii brought in aren't being lost to the PS4/XB1... they aren't even in this space anymore. They are playing their games on their phones or tablets. And thats why nintendo is in the position they are in now. Cause now, for the first time in over 8/9yrs. They are trying to compete in the same space with sony and MS again for the same kinda gamers.

I think what you're posting is a false correlation there. 

The reason all three were successful last time around is because all three worked their butts off to achieve success.

You should also give credit where credit is due -- Sony turned the PS3 around by putting their nose to the pavement and working their butts off for the rest of the generation after starting overly cocky, otherwise the PS3 easily could have been a flop. That's to Sony's credit, not anything Nintendo (extremely arrogant to even try to paint it that way IMO) did.

If Nintendo wants success in this business, then they should work for it like everyone else does, not just show up and think they're entiteld to success because they're god's gift to gaming. Consumers don't reward that attitude ever. 

You should also get a primer on what Nintendo was actually like during the NES/SNES days when they did rule the industry in a lot of ways, they were incredibly full of themselves and bullied developers and retailers around like there was no tomorrow. Sega finally punched them square in the nose and bloodied their nose, and that woke them up out of their stupor. They do make great games, but lets not confuse that with their corporate policy -- they do tend to be dicks when they are given too much power. 

Do it and see many more studios flopping when the big releases get all the sales.

Do it and see how many people spent money on 2 or even 3 consoles, like last gen Wii/X360 - Wii/PS3 - PS360.

Sony is not even generating enough profit with those sales, Nintendo even less. Now with less money from hardware it will be hard for them.

I get the point you are trying to make, but that's not viable from a bussiness point. If mobile/tablet market grow up was in a grand scheame because traditional market was becoming elitist and focused on just big publishers and those little developers needed a platform to work where they are not shadowed.

With just one platform, all those small teams would have to look for fewer sales after Nintendo, MS and Sony exclusives on the same console, and big third party games like COD, AC and others.

I humbly agree. Nintendo got way too arrogant during the N64 and got stomped by the (IMO) superior PS1. They really stepped it up with the gamecube and it's a real shame it didn't do better which seems to have pushed them to do 'something different' with the Wii.

I'm not sure Nintendo should be the leader for any length of time, but they should never go away as they always add something whether it be great games or a new innovation. Even motion controls (which I hated with the Wii) seem to have been refined on the Wii U and can work really well (aiming in WWHD for example) to the point where I even prefer them to the sticks. Man I never thought I'd say that...

You are adding consoles sold and believing it's the same as userbase. And it isn't. Many of those have the two consoles at the same time, many bought a slim model and even more bought a Wii.

Also, there's a big missing chunk of 24M players from the original Xbox

PS2+XBOX = 184M

PS360 = 160M

My point is that during last gen people bought more consoles than ever. Being 1 or a million different persons, people was willing to buy more consoles.

More like people is creating a false correlation. I never said that Wii being in first place make automatically X360 or PS3 success.

What I pointed is that during last gen when Nintendo was the leader the other consoles can still be succesful platforms. Unlike the 5th and 6th when everything was focused on just one console, in the last one everyone can be happy.

Nobody is saying that Sony or MS didn't do anything to achive success. In fact they worked pretty hard to that, harder than now, but Wii was not an obstacle in that race. Wii was a success that make people to look again at the industry and be able to invest in it.

How many times we heard of other executives talking about how good was the Wii because when the users get bored and look for another kind of experiences they where going to look for their consoles? Even now that Sony guy is looking for the Wii audience. How is that not a good achievement for Wii and Nintendo?

Casual gamers demand new experiences? No, they demand cheap, easy to pick up and play games. Casual gamers don't make gaming a habit, which is why they are casual. The Wii had tons of cheap games and game packages, but then mobile platforms came around with tons of free games that people can play whenever they want.

Those people will never buy a console again. We may never see another generation as strong as 7th gen, simply because the market has shrunk.

My god, no. Unless they make a gaming focused console I don't want them to lead. The Wii was full of shovelware, if that was the rule our home consoles would become Candy Crush machines. I want the old SNES, GC and specially N64 Ninty back rocking 1st and 2nd party games like they did with Killer Instinct, Goldeneye, Cruis'n USA and company. Bringing StarFox back was a good sign, now make a new F-Zero and give me some hope!