Why is Nintendo always portrayed as the company deemed to fail?

[Jumpin]

HappySqurriel said:
Sony-Doom and Nintendo-Doom are two very different beasts ...

Sony-Doom is based (primarily) on the corporate finances of Sony along with the poor sales of the PS-Vita and involves doubts about whether Sony learned their lesson with the PS3 and/or whether they can adapt to function using a strategy that doesn't involve dramatic up-front losses. In other words, while you may disagree with the analysis, Sony-Doom is based on extrapolation of problems Sony currently is having; and is ultimately based in reality.

Nintendo-Doom is based (primarily) on flawed assumptions surrounding moronic stereotypes, and a significant effort is spent ignoring reality. Nintendo's strong (overall) finances, the solid sales of the 3DS, decent interest in the Wii U, the explosion of multi-console ownership in the previous generation (because people buy a system that offers unique gaming experiences not necessarily the best graphics), and etc.

Sony doom articles would go away if Sony fixed some of their underlying problems and saw success in general, but no amount of success will ever eliminate Nintendo doom articles. Essentially, after (about) 2009 the "Sony Doom" dried up until Sony released the PS-Vita because the PS3 and PSP were selling far better; but even when Nintendo was selling the Wii and Nintendo DS at record pace people were writing about how their failure was right around the corner.

Seems about right.

Sony doom = based on facts.
Nintendo doom = based on ignorance.

This is why even though in 2008 Nintendo saw the most profitable year that any videogame company has ever seen, they were still somehow doomed.