What's your thoughts on VR?

Ha, VR. That's exactly what I was getting at. If you think the current use of this "VR", is innovative, you're sorely mistaken. All current VR is, is AR with two screens stuck in front of your eyes. We're still using controllers with it.

If you truly think Nintendo should leave out of consoles, there is something wrong with that thought. Look at where we are heading with Sony and microsoft. They're competing so hard that they are making upgraded consoles mid gen, just to keep up with PCs. I really don't want to constantly have to shell out 300-400 dollars for a new console that does almost exactly the same thing as the previous ones, when I could just build a gaming pc and upgrade specific parts cheaper. 

Someone already said it, but Nintendo is the last strictly gaming company, we don't need the other two be the only ones who make games and consoles because they are unreliable when it comes to gaming. Look at how other studios/branches each of them shut down just because sales have gone down. can you imagine what either one of those companies would do if their latest consoles sold as much as the Wii U, I can guarantee they would cut those businesses off and sell the assets.

VR is AR? What real footage is it augmenting? Or don't you know the difference between VR and AR? http://www.augment.com/blog/virtual-reality-vs-augmented-reality/

And why are the use of controllers and innovation mutually exclusive? Do you know that there are also VR games that don't take use of controllers or combine controller-input with other data (position, direction, angle, acceleration, trajectory of the headset, hands and/or the whole body)?

Thank you RavenXtra that you locked another thread.

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=225373&page=1

I obviously didn't mean that it LOOKS like AR, but that "VR" currently functions like AR. And look, you just outed yourself. You're saying that VR uses motion control (which is exactly what Nintendo brought to commercial market. Current VR is just like what we call hover boards. It's not the real thing.

Who is "we" and what is "our" definition for hover boards?

And of course VR is not the "real thing"... going outside and doing everything in reality (no matter the consequences or danger of these activities)  is the real thing. ;)

Yes SEGA does. The thing about SEGA is that their greatest accomplishments are tied to the arcade scence. 

Lol "we" is people who own them, the manufacturers, the media, etc. 

It becomes far easier to see Nintendo's position on becoming a third party developer when the company is put into the context of being a toy company first and a software developer second.

Granted, Nintendo was originally a (card) game company first, which shows how the company has been able to adapt their business model to changing times (Nintendo made Game And Watch LCD toys before the Famicom), but given the slant of their consumer demographics (swings towards the children's market more than any other console manufacturer) it would leave a gap in the market if they ever left the hardware business completely.

That said, the response to Pokemon Go, but not Mario Run, does demonstrate previously untapped markets had been left on the table. What distinguishes Pokemon Go from Mario Run is in how each respective game used the platform for which it was developed for.

Pokemon Go in retrospect, seems like such a natural evolution for the game that it boggles the mind why the concept wasn't executed earlier other than for an unnatural resistance to allowing Nintendo's IPs showing up on anything other than their own hardware.

Mario Run, on the other hand, was like every other mobile run game with the exception that it featured the Mario IP and cost $9.99. Is there any wonder why there was only a 4% conversion from those who downloaded the free demo to those who paid for the full app?

The point is that Nintendo uses the unique features of the hardware they design in the process of developing their own software titles. Yes, some of those features would be available on other platforms, but each iteration of Nintendo hardware allows software developers to explore the hardware and incorporate those features into their games. Some hardware elements have a greater effect than others (shake control was fun if not completely unnecessary, 3D was interesting, but ultimately had no impact on game play), but hit or miss, it's what allows Nintendo to innovate and have fun rather than just be an IP company that cranks out sequel after sequel.

Wait... are you actually saying VR isn't an innovation but HD Rumble is?