Because Japanese companies are well known for radical changes.

This brings up the interesting thought experiment of trying to figure out where Mario Kart would be if it was instead "Kart Racers" with original characters, Splatoon was instead "Mario Soakers."

Pikmin isn't a system seller, but it still does a solid 1 million copies with each main entry. That's enough for Nintendo to continue doing it. Not every game needs 50 million sales to be considered successful.

I Think experimenting with both new and traditional IP are both equally important. It all depends on whether it fits with the IP or not. For example, Cappy in Super Mario Odyssey works because it's a natural extension of the Mario Power up mechanic, just without the actual power-ups. I like New IPs, but I also like expanding upon existing ones as well. That's why I also want Nintendo to start taking more risks with the Mario universe again, in addition to completely new concepts. The Mario universe has a lot of room to explore, so why not explore some of it?

I think his point on Pikmin is that even though it's a million seller it's not a game that will be prioritized when a platform still needs to be pushed Nintendo will obviously keep doing games like Pikmin but likely later on in a platform's life when the system sellers are out or alongside a system seller.

They are experimenting with both new and traditional IPs it's just as he said the ideas that can stand on their own are made into new IPs, it's better this way tbh because taking risks with an establish IP can lead to situations like with DmC Reboot and DMC where even though the former is still a good game it's hated by many of the usual fanbase because they feel it should never have been part of the franchise so even when a risk is executed right you can still draw a blank the result is it's better to do a new IP for such risks and expand your library with them.

Nintendo doesn't need to outsource though. Just because Pikmin is being developed by an internal team, that doesn't mean they can't still continue working on it. Like I said, it still does well enough to justify it being done internally. Same with games like ARMS and Labo. They're not mega sellers sure, but they have an audience, and if the teams still want to make more games in those series, well they should be able to. I'd understand outsourcing if the development team simply has no ideas or feels somebody else can do what they're looking for better, like what happened to F-Zero after X. But I think outsourcing a game just because it's not a system selling mega hit is a very shallow mindset.

I wasn't necessarily disagreeing with you, I even mentioned that I also want New IPs regularly from Nintendo. I was just making a point that you can experiment with existing IP as well. As for your other part, I agree that I would love to see another multiplayer Zelda that doesn't fallow the arcade-style format of FSA or Triforce Heroes.

I love that Nintendo makes Pikmin. And Windwaker. And Sunshine. And Chibi Robo. And Labo. And every other game that misses the mark. I'm sorry it affects the natural order of sales progressions and offends investors' sensibilities. They are fricking weird. They make mistakes and go back to the drawing board and then release jewels. I don't care to argue with anyone regarding whether these decisions are the correct ones; I only care whether I really enjoy myself playing all these wonderfully ludicrous games. And I do. And Nintendo has cash reserves to take risks and please so many different people. And hopefully this new president makes a few head scratching mistakes along the way. I love a good meltdown on the forums as much as anyone else.

No, I mean the Wii.  The Wii U was so bad of a failure that there is not a lot to learn from it other than to not be remotely like it ever again.  There was a lot to learn from the Wii though.

The Wii was a success, but it was short lived.  That is the main problem with the Wii.  It wasn't a sustainable business model for Nintendo.  Their developers didn't want to keep making "Wii style" games like Wii Sports and Wii Fit.  These franchises were hugely successful, but Nintendo doesn't make these games anymore.  They just didn't want to make them.  On the other hand the idea of having cheaper hardware and "different from the norm style" games was really working for them.  

The solution to all of this is the Switch.  It basically is a super-powered handheld device.  Nintendo has had a handheld business model for decades, so it is something they are really comfortable with.  With the Switch, Nintendo can still have a home console that is cheaper than other home consoles, but they make games that they are comfortable making.  It is both a really successful model and it is sustainable for them.  

The Switch is the sort of console that Nintendo could keep making forever if Iwata were still the CEO.  However, now that Furukawa is the President it is hard to say what direction the company will head.  I don't think we will have a good idea until the next Nintendo system releases.

Except it does. Pikmin regularly does 1 million copies with each main entry. ARMS sold over 2 million worldwide, and Labo's done 1.5 million total so far. Yes, they're not system sellers like Mario Kart or Smash Bros., but they're successful enough to justify in-house development. Again, not every game needs to sell 20 million copies to continue in-house development. I get that games are a business, but businesses can afford to produce niche products so long as they still make some money in their own right. Nintendo's teams already make some of the highest selling games in the industry, why not also let them work on stuff that doesn't sell as much, but can still turn a profit anyway.

Outsourcing should only be done if the development team either has no more ideas for the property but still wants to keep it going, if its a spin-off, or if another studio can do something the main development team can't do at all, or nearly as well. I just don't believe that an IP has to be outsourced if it's not an instant hit or cash-cow.

Where's the evidence of this? I'm pretty sure the developers enjoyed making Wii Sports and Wii Fit during that time.

In anycase, a bigger problem with the Wii was that the industry had evolved too much during the time of its success that Nintendo was either unable or unwilling to keep up. Wii can be a sustainable buisness model, and I'd argue the Switch proves that since a lot of its DNA comes from the Wii. The problem was more the lack of a long-term plan on Nintendo's part than it not being sustainable. After the Wii took off, it felt like Nintendo never really knew how to follow up on it. Thus we got stagnating interest towards the end of the life, and the disaster known as the Wii U.

If this was the Wii U days where Nintendo couldn't afford risk-taking with niche games, I would agree. But it's not, this is Switch-era Nintendo. A company that has a far more consistent release slate now that 95% of their developments are consolidated to just one platform, with a console that regularly breaks sales records, and has software sales so good, that even most of their niche games can regularly pull 1-2 million copies worldwide. They can afford to make ARMS and Pikmin in-house currently. Like I said, you're argument would've made sense during the GameCube or Wii U days, where Nintendo need to stop screwing around and put out something that's guaranteed to move consoles at a time when they're not selling. But the Switch and its mainstays are breaking sales records each year.

Again, this argument would be sound for a console that's struggling to find an audience. But the Switch is already an established hit, there's not much of a need to mandate developers to try and make a system seller because the Switch already has plenty and sells consoles on its own as well.

I agree with this, and its why the Wii U was a disaster. Nintendo saw the success of the Wii, but they didn't know how to follow up on it, and were rightfully punished for not having a long-term plan after they found success. So they need to be on their toes for the next console, but for now, with their current success, they should also allow their devs to loosen up and peruse the more niche stuff as well. So long as the Switch still has enough guaranteed system sellers each year, then EPD can afford to do weird stuff like Pikmin, Labo, 1-2 Switch, and ARMS.