Of course!!

This needs another option..

"Yes, it has too high of a lead, however, new consoles are coming out before 5 years is up."

You are mistaken, A third party can not develop a game for the Xbox 360 and port it with little cost to the PS3 nor can it do the same for the PC. The architecture of all three machines are different. That means it requires resources to port a game from one system to another. It's not as simple as you seem to think nor is the cost minimal. Also the Xbox 360 and the Wii have a similar architecture, The Power PC and their GPUs are built by AMD. The Wii development kit is very cheap and building a game for the system is very easy and cheap. If it were not so do you think that all of these no name companies would be developing games for the Wii? A lot of them are considered shovelware by us but others tend to enjoy them.

Final Fantasy XIII had been in development for what? About four or five years before they announced it was going to be ported. No one knows when they started porting the game . Unless you work for Square Enix, I doubt you know.

You state that the Wii is down year over year but it was only 200k the last time I checked and that is easily rectified. The Xbox 360 is enjoying great sales due to a new slim model being released and a clearence on the old model that is being replaced. The PS3 had a new model released last year and was above the Wii and the Xbox 360 but sales returned to normal when the effect wore off. Also if you look at the Xbox 360 sales. You'd see that no old software is popping back into the top twenty in software sales. This indicates that old users are Upgrading their consoles.

""Nintendo's trend the last two generations has been to announce and launch a new portable system, then a year later, follow with a new home console.  This will be no different.""

That statement is conjecture and is false. The Gamecube was five years old when Nintendo pull the plug on that system While the GBA was only four year old. The DS is around six years  now while the Wii is only approaching it's fourth birthday. Nintendo will not kill the Wii for the sake of a hardware race with Sony and Microsoft. If they wanted to do that then they could have made an HD system instead of the Wii. Furthermore the Gamecube was in third place last gen. Yet Nintendo did not pull the plug on that system until after the five year cycle was up.

As I stated previously, The DS is appoaching it's 6th birthday and Nintendo has new technology to replace the system. Sony should have replaced the PS2 early in it's life span, using your logic, because it was inferior to the Xbox and Gamecube. They should have also replaced the PSX early in it's life span because it was severly underpowered when compared to the N64. But they did not, proving that your logic is flawed.

Nintendo will not kill the using your logic. There is still money to be made off the software and the hardware. All Nintendo has to do is release more games. The sales of the rise and fall depening on the amount of software that they release for the Wii. They also have a blue print to follow which was developed by Sony. I think they'll do that it's more beneficial in the long run. Besides Microsoft and Sony are not going to launch a new console any time soon.

**Note: This part of the post is under the assumption that no new home console will come out in 5 years.

Hrm... in 5 years? The Wii will be around, still profitable, and relevant, but I can't see it still being dominant. And the reason for this is the 3rd party companies. Unless a game has been in development for a while (DQX), or has Nintendo helping them, 3rd parties have already written off the Wii for their big-name games. And even if they fall into 3rd for total sales (which I don't see happening, BTW), it will remain relevant, if for what it has done to gaming. And I'm not just talking about getting motion controls to take off. I'll look at that more:

Many of the "hardcore" gamers bitch and moan about how Nintendo brought in a slew of new "casual" gamers. But, the fact is, while there was still current growth, if no reach out to new people was made, things would start to stagnate and shrink. What needs to be watched is what this new breed of gamer does. Yes, there will be some, quite a few, in fact, that will play their Wii, finish, and be done with gaming again. But I do think there will be some that will start to get interested in other games that they also hear about- and start to branch out. And it is at this point that I think Nintendo's loss of dominance will start to accelerate; the only games advertised for the Wii are done so by Nintendo. The interest will be a gradual process- you're not going to get someone who got into gaming this gen playing the WiiBlank line, suddenly jumping in with Halo: Reach. What may happen, is say someone enjoys Wii Golf. They may have picked up Tiger Woods 11 for the Wii, using the same controls. They may then see a commercial for Madden 11. Hey, it's also an EA Sports game, let me look in to that. A year or 2 later, EA advertises some other new game that would be considered "core". This person may see this, and be interested, solely by the fact that they're familiar with EA's sports games, and they know the company for other good games. Of course, if EA is advertising a core game, it'll be a PS360 release. But our WiiBlank fan didn't have an HD system. He does, however, know someone who does. He talks to that person about the game, maybe even tries it if they have it. He likes it, and buys a new system and that game. And now there are other games to look at. Konami may have released a game like game X from EA, but that has feature Q. Maybe that'll get picked up also. And from here, things go on.

I also think it'd be foolish to say that Nintendo would lose everyone, but their new fans from the Wii already have a Wii, so they won't keep the console market for them going. This leads to Nintendo's benefit at the launch of the Wii's successor, as they see the new system from Nintendo, and remember they fun they had with Wii Sports. But this time (hypothetically only), Nintendo packages it with Super Mario Galaxy 3, and sells Wii Sports Universe seperately. This fan, who wants WSU, gives SMG3 a crack, and likes it. And now they're branching out more into other games. And my biggest hope, is that Nintendo and the 3rd parties would this time capitalize on a market that is there at the beginning. The severe lack of quality follow-up, despite Wii games outselling their PS3 counterparts initially, is what killed the "core" market on Wii, and why they will not keep their dominance for an extended period of time.

As much as I hate to say it, Nintendo's best shot at dominance is to get the 3rd parties on board with a new system. The PS1 and PS2 proved that you don't have to be the strongest system. (For that matter, in no gen, has the strongest system won.) Give them some power, but not so much as to go overboard on the system cost and complexity. I personally think that Nintendo did the right thing with the Wii, but enough of the 3rd parties are showing even recent malice toward it, trying to sink it, because they're afraid of change. Without the change, we would get to a market small enough that nobody cares about dominance- it's just not profitable. Technology is not a straight line- adapt, or die. And it is the adaptors that will be dominant, long past the Wii and this 5 year window.

The Wii isn't even going to be dominant for the next 2 years.

WTF are you talking about?

PS3 is dominant since day one. Source.

Ughhh, this is turning into one of those internet nuances where logic is pummelled and abused the way religion treats science.  And you're making very incorrect assumptions.

For one thing, my "logic" doesn't automatically assume the PS2 should've been replaced early in it's lifecycle to compete with the GameCube and Xbox--for one major reason (that isn't sales), the PS2 was technically still in the same generation as the GC and XB.  Most games at the time were made on the PS2 and then ported to the "bigger brothers" because A) the PS2 had higher sales so it made sense to optimize for the PS2 and B) it's cheaper and easier to port a game from a weaker system to a more powerful one.  Everything the PS2 could do, the GC and XB could do.  The same wasn't necessarily true the other way around.  The Wii is easily a generation behind--and everyone knows that.  It's as if the PS2 was running on N64-era hardware.  The Playstation was also not under-powered compared to the N64.  Looking back, many PS1 games made the N64 look like the weaker system thanks to those stupid cartridges and the N64's pathetic textures.

You seem to be assuming that porting from the Xbox360 to the Wii is somehow cheaper and easier than porting from the Xbox360 to the PS3.  Which is just absurd.  For one thing, the Wii cannot even handle many of the new game engines such as that in Call of Duty: Modern Warfare or the Unreal 3 engine. 

Here's what happens when porting from Xbox360 to PS3:
--Programmers rework the game for the different system architecture.
--Graphics may be upgraded slightly if time and money permits--if it's even worth doing.

Here's what happens when porting from Xbox360 to Wii:
--Brand new engine must typically be used.
--Polygon counts must be dropped drastically across every facet of the game.
--Texture quality must be reduced so the Wii can handle it--if it's HD, it won't work.
--Some more detailed animation sequences will likely have to be redone as poly counts change.
--Depending on the physics engine of the game, that may need to be redone.
--Lighting will likely need to be changed.
--Smaller, specific things such as bump mapping and the like will not just transfer over from HD to Wii.

Just because the Xbox360 and Wii may have similar basic architecture, that doesn't automatically make porting shit to the Wii suddenly an easy task.  Remember, the Wii is roughly the same power as the original Xbox, and it's not even remotely close to the Xbox360.  If porting from HD to Wii was so easy, Activision wouldn't have handed the development of the Wii versions of Call of Duty to different development teams.  If it was so cheap and easy, development of the Wii version would've been done by the same team that made the HD versions.  For that matter, if porting from X360 to Wii was easy, then the Wii version of Dead Rising would've been more like the X360 version than the piece of crap the Wii ended up with.

...

Okay then. 

Old software suddenly "not showing up in sales charts" is not proof that most new Xbox360 sales are going to users simply upgrading.  Older games, for one thing, are not typically in constant production throughout the lifespan of a console.  They are not still making Fable II, for instance. 

I was mistaken in one thing, however, and that is that I was a year off in thinking of the launch of the DS.  I was thinking 2005, not 2004.  Still, Nintendo did not just kill off the GBA because the DS was out--it was still fairly heavily supported for another year all-around.  Nintendo did axe the GameCube in 2006 when the Wii launched, which was pretty foolish--but then, there was almost no support on the thing, and the fact that the Wii was barely any different meant that many GC games could just easily be dropped onto the Wii.

Nintendo is also not going to follow Sony's blueprint for console/system development and sales.  They didn't the last two generations, why would they do it all of a sudden now?  Essentially, you're not using logic.  You're making really loose assumptions like equating the PS2 to the Wii in their respective generations, which is grossly innacurate.  The Playstation & N64, and the PS2 and GC/Xbox were in similar leagues with one another.  The Wii is at least a league behind the Xbox360.

no, why? the whole gen will disspear in 3 years

I dont know if this generation is going to last 5 more years, but if it does, it is unlikely having the Wii as the dominant  console.

Then again, I am just saying my opinion. By no means I am trying to guess the business moves, and strategy of Nintendo. I might be dead wrong.

Now that the 360 and PS3 offer kinnect and move,regardless of how well they sell and all that business

What would a super Wii offer that the 360/PS3 doesn't,are nintendo really going to increase/double the power/capability of a 360/PS3 and release a more expensive console in the next 18 months,people say a super Wii would force MS and Sony into the next gen,but why

forgive my ignorance on Wii online as i don't know if it is like live/psn,as in subscription/DLC/movie charges but maybe nintendo would want to tap that market of their fanbase with a super Wii,

obviously a super Wii is going to have improved motion control systems and whatever else they are working on,let me know what you think without the bashing,i'm interested to know

maybe it will be a Nintendo Wii 3D in 3 years time