Firstly, this:
"There's also the question of initial momentum. The Nintendo N64 hardware might have been delayed, but the wait was worthwhile - launching with Super Mario 64 and Pilotwings 64 (and Star Wars: Shadow of the Empire in Europe) saw Nintendo hit the ground running in a way that GameCube and Wii U couldn't achieve."
Makes the whole text feel like BS, as I don't think any sane person could find anything good in N64 being 2 years late in the market, and why is N64 being compared to GC and Wii U, why not NES and SNES. Oh, wait...
Secondly this:
"N64 and GameCube demonstrated that Nintendo doesn't need to win the console war in order to be hugely profitable, it simply has to do what it does best"
Huge profitability was due to handhelds, not because of lackluster sales of home consoles and their games. I don't doubt the two being profitable, it's just that the Gameboy line was the bread and butter.
If the whole story is evaluated in the light of those idiotic statements, the author likely doesn't have any clue what he's writing about.
When you look at the Iwata statements, he seems to be addressing issues Nintendo has, such as them needing to ditch the "old" platform when introducing new ones, as Nintendo lacks the resources to develop to multiple platforms, while Nintendo might be interested in supporting more than one or two at a time. Iwata also seems to hint that Nintendo is prepared in the lack of 3rd party support in the future.
Nintendo is obviously looking for a "future proof" tech that is expected to be scalable for home consoles and handhelds and into the future. It's quite possible that Wii U isn't going to be on the compatibility list, but starting from the next handheld.
Ei Kiinasti.
Eikä Japanisti.
Vaan pannaan jalalla koreasti.
Nintendo games sell only on Nintendo system.
