Would Nintendo survive if they went 3rd party?

[Ruler]

zorg1000 said:

Ruler said:

They buy it for the next zelda and are stuck with a 300$ console waiting for it to come out so they end up buying other nintendo games in the meantime. Thats how it always worked, and it worked pretty well for nintendo.

 

 

You lost your argument when you dismissed arcades 

1996	$44 billion (worldwide) $26 billion (worldwide arcade market)[118] $18 billion (worldwide retail market)[119]	$64.39 billion (worldwide)
1995	$29.32 billion (worldwide) $15 billion (worldwide retail) [28] $9.52 billion (Japan arcade)[120] $4.8 billion (US arcade)[104]	$44.17 billion (worldwide)
1994	$29.3 billion (worldwide) $20.8 billion (worldwide retail sales)[121] $8.5 billion (US arcade & rentals)[104]	$45.4 billion (worldwide)

http://vgsales.wikia.com/wiki/Video_game_industry

Arcades have nothing to do with the discussion, hence they are irrelevent, having popular arcade games does not translate to having popular console games.

Atari, Sega, SNK, etc never had games come close to the popularity of Nintendo games back when they made hardware.

Ur first paragraph is proven wrong by the fact that Zelda isnt even the most popular Nintendo franchise so it makes no sense to say people buy Nintendo hardware specifically for that game and just happen to buy other Nintendo games. Also who is dumb enough to buy a $300 console for one specific game that isnt even out?

Arcades were more releavant than home consoles and made more money than the current industry for a long time look at the numbers in the link and imagine how much it is if you consider inflation. SNK, Sega and Atari made more than Nintendo with arcades during their prime, period.