@ JL
*Mind explodes* That's one passionate post, and some huge amount of research going in there. If I tried to address every point you made to the level of detail you have, I would be writing a book, but I don't want to insult you by generalising in my reply too much.
Firstly -
I only agreed with the Second Console idea in theory. In reality, the majority of people will only ever have one console. At the moment, the vast majority of people don't have an 8th gen console at all, and many of them don't have one because they're waiting for prices to come down. Those people are more likely to only buy either PS4, OR Wii U OR X1, whether they own a gaming PC or not. Sure, there will be some who will have two, or even all three, but they're not going to make a huge difference.
As for Nintendo winning people over now, it's going to be an uphill struggle. They may have high quality games, but I reiterate - Mario and friends aren't for everyone. The Wii U was badly marketed and inadequately advertised, with hardly any games. It got it off to a bad start. Wii U will be a distant 3rd, if Nintendo don't get up and do something about that, but really they've left it far too late. I'm not saying it's impossible for a console to surge forward mid-generation, just improbable. And thus emerges the theme for my post.
Secondly -
You pose an interesting argument regarding the possible long-term implications of getting rid of Kinect. It seems from your evidence that Kinect did wonders for the PS3, but perhaps Microsoft have caught on to the fact that people just aren't so wowed with motion controls any more. Even Nintendo have removed the emphasis on it, somewhat. Still, yes, it's possible that being the only company touting any kind of motion control as a part of its central controller might benefit Nintendo in the long run. If, they market and advertise like mad. But it's improbable.
And that leads me on to the third point - standard controllers. Undeniably, your pictorial history shows trailblazing controllers that set the standards for their time. Not all of them are Nintendo. But look how they've become obsolete as time moves on. The generic shape and size of the the controllers people use today are variations on a general ergonomic theme, which again, may or may not be usurped in time.
Fourthly -
Most of your evidence here is anecdotal, and there's still no back up for Rare being the consolation prize for not being able to acquire Nintendo. I don't dispute that the majority of the videogaming industry is coming from Japanese firms.
Fifthly -
The Sun revolving around the Earth and all of the other absurd things you've put has NOTHING to do with the the fact that at this moment in time, it is highly probable, barring any extraordinary developments along the way, that the PS4 will be the most popular console of this generation. In fact, I'll turn it around another way.
Your argument that the strongest console NEVER wins, is based on lots of historical evidence throughout the various generations up until now. So, just consider for a moment, that the PS4's success is that highly improbable factor that has bucked the trend. Yet your whole thesis of Nintendo 'winning' is based around the highly improbable chance that 1 in 4 PS4 and X1 owners will buy a Wii U as a second console.
All of your research, the entire sentiment of your posts, are basically 'Possible Ways Nintendo Can Win', based on things that have happened in the past. Yes, there is the tiniest, micro-possibility that something might happen that will sell the Wii U like crazy. Just like the tiniest, micro-possibility that we might find some kind of living organism elsewhere in our Solar System.
There's nothing wrong with posting optimism based on wild possibilities. But possibilities is all they are.
I'm looking at probabilities, which, while still subject to change, are closer to reality.
