If you make a million predictions, one of them will come true eventually regardless of how absurb it is.

Problem is, the same did not hold true for Sony regarding the PS3 failing compared to the PS2, but this is another topic.

Present success better prepares one for future success, but it does not guarantee it. You may and most likely are exactly right regarding 3rd parties and the next Nintendo next console. However, to think just because Nintendo is #1 means they will get equal 3rd party support compared to Sony and Microsoft is a bit lacking.

The company cultures of both Sony and Microsoft inherently invite 3rd party support. Sony the most because 3rd party support is what made the PS1 and PS2 such smashing successes. Microsoft is along the same lines with their involvement in the PC gaming industry prior to launching the Xbox.

Neither Sony or Microsoft could last 1 year without a quality 3rd party release. Their biggest weaknesses besides an emphasis of technology over software is their unwillingness to generate quality 1st party games. Sony and Microsoft consoles in this respect are defined by 3rd parties, while Nintendo defines itself.

I believe Nintendo's 1st party successes have engendered an attitude of "we are #1 now, we were #1 then, and the products we make will never be outshined by a 3rd party product." I have not seen any 3rd party game released on the Wii to make me think to the contrary. The link Khuutra listed of the top selling 7th generation games is dominated by Nintendo 1st party games.

Regarding 3rd parties, Nintendo's 1st party success is it's weakness. Can the 3DS buck this trend? Of course.

Don't listen to these other assholes. Your ideas make sense, but won't necessarily happen. They could, but it's not 100%.

Now, your point on multiplayer. I would love for Nintendo to come up with something as awesome as Steam, PSN, and Xfire because that would be sweet. However, if that meant taking out 4 player local multiplayer, then I don't want that. There's nothing more that I hate than buying a new game or having a friend buy a game and we hang out to play co-op and it's only co-op online. Even with all the power of the HD systems...tsk tsk.

Better online play but make 4P local a sacrificial lamb? Fuck no.

So the past endlessly repeats itself? Apparently so regarding 2D Mario games. A phenomenon that never ends.

Then again, my gut tells me not to buy it. The games may follow the same lines from the 1980s on, but how we play them changes. New controls with the Wii copied by the Move and who knows how Kinect will change the way we game.

Yet, when I see Black Ops selling 5.6 in one day I question why can't a Nintendo game do that? Is it the way we as individuals view games and Nintendo is marketing to that 8 year old inside of us when it comes to a game such as New Super Mario Bros. Wii? Is this it? Nintendo as the Disney of video gaming where even 30 year old adults will want to buy the latest version of Cinderella, while their children are screaming for it?

If so, then Sony and Microsoft better up the cuteness in their games because Nintendo has been on to something for decades now.

1. Actually they failed to hit the entirety of the Blue Ocean or you could say that other competitors got there first. Probably their biggest and best examples of the untapped by Nintendo blue ocean out there is Apple and Facebook. Facebook gaming on a whole is significantly more popular than the Wii, Farmville is more popular than the Wii. Both appear on utility hardware which is PC or iOS based devices and both devices are multiuse.  I've said it before but the best way to tap into a non gamer market is to give the non gamer some good non gaming uses for the device first to go along with the gaming uses. You can't sell them a game if you can't sell them the hardware so given the popularity of Farmville and iOS devices I say open things up and throw in a utility browser where people can add functionality. Since these cannot be anticipated, open the console up to the majority of comers.

2. I totally agree. More than half of couples don't have children and the number of people per household has been going down for a while now. I believe it is under 2.0 per household on average or very similar. By the time people have their own console at home they sometimes play, the value of playing it at someone elses house and the novelty of such will go down. Multiplayer is becoming more and more accepted and developers are making more of this online mode.

3. Obviously its something to do with both the controller capabilities and the consoles capabilities. It isn't that they didn't try to make Wii games. It is just that most Wii games they tried to make were complete failures and a lot of the games that came out didn't earn enough money to warrant continued experimentation.

4. You know a movie like Avatar? Titanic? Star Wars? Ben Hur? Gone with the Wind? What is the connection here? Well the former movies tap into blue ocean movie audiences. Nintendo are skilled in attracting them time and again, something which only James Cameron has done in a repeatable fashion.

A.) It depends on the player but it also depends on what is released. It takes a lot better product to get one of these people interested in purchasing a game. Probably they aren't quite as picky around Christmas since they might be actively looking to purchase a game.

B.) More like a hardcore Farmville player nowadays. But yes, Nintendo has to compete against games like Farmville especially for the attention of these people. One could say the rise of Farmville may have dented Wii software sales by a noticeable degree. Microsoft/Sony don't have to try as hard because their gamers actively seek out the games.

C.) Unlikely. Most will continue to play games in some form whether it be a Facebook game, Farmville, Solitaire or something on an iOS device. They will just lapse in interest from playing more complicated games like what Nintendo offers by comparison.

D.) Probably not significantly. The Xbox 360 has a more core audience which is why the spread between the top quartile game and the bottom quartile game isn't as significant as the Wii. This is because of the people who buy 5-10 games per year and sometimes even more tend to be more on these systems. When you buy 5-10 games you cannot be picky and choose only Call of Duty, Fifa and Halo as your 3 games for the year. That means the more niche games get a leg up. The Wii doesn't so the game buying gets clustered around the 1-5 best or most popular releases in the year.

Probably even better as an explanation would be music. Im a very casual listener of music I listen to classic hits on the radio and I haven't bought a song in years. However some people are the opposite, they buy albums/singles in large numbers and they attend concerts and from these people musicians arise to make the music. Without the core/hardcore music listener the variety and health of the music industry would be severely reduced.

5. If they are still selling they haven't been milked out. Arguably the most popular movie of last year was Pocahontis in space. Most people don't care if they've seen the characters before or the plot so long as the way it comes together is still relevant and enjoyable.

6. Nintendo makes the games that noone else likes to make and makes a mint off it. Their failing was in not getting the games they didn't like to make on their system too. If they can rectify that mistake whilst continuing to pursue untapped markets with their own software they can make a killing. The reason why Sony's 'high quality' games don't sell nearly as well as Nintendos is the former has to compete with a huge range of other core software. If things were reversed and third parties made Nintendo style games, Sony would be the one selling 10M or more with Uncharted 2 etc and the tone of what you are writing and the content would be significantly different.

So long as Nintendo rectifies their weaknesses and maintains their strengths then they can maintain their position. If they can figure out a control scheme which is core and uncore friendly whilst perhaps learning the lessons of Farmville and iOS from Apple then they can surely maintain their position as number 1 because they have a significant strength that noone else has, they have the ability and desire to craft games for the most uninterested and difficult customers in the industry.

The PS3's failure was covered in my first post on this topic ...

There are two things that have been demonstrated to undermine the advantage of being the successor to a market leading console, being beaten to the market by 18 months or more (N64) or launching for $500 or more (PS3). If Nintendo launches their next system for around $300, at the same time or earlier than their competition, history shows us that it is very unlikely that this system will not be the market leading system.

Or to put it another way, I think it is more likely that Sony and Microsoft will launch their console's 18 months (or more) after Nintendo's next system at a price of $500 (or more) which will lead to both systems selling less than 20 million units than it is for Nintendo not to sell at least as many systems as their competition in the next generation.

Who the hell are you to affirm this? Nintendo aren't stupid, I'm sure they know the Blue Ocean strategy has its weaknesses.

I think, but don't know with 100% certainty, neither Sony nor Microsoft will make the same mistake as the PS3 with the $600 launch price. It took Sony 2 to 3 years to climb out of that black hole and it was not an unseen climb.

Scenario B (launching 18 months before) is more likely to happen. From what I read, Sony wants this generation to last, while many others and myself firmly believe Nintendo will end this generation come holidays 2012. Lord knows what Microsoft is up to...Heck I won't be surprised if they make the first digital distribution only console backwards and forwards compatible with PC gaming with upgradeable graphics drives and whatnot to stay consistent with cutting edge PC graphics.

Both Sony and Microsoft can afford to wait it out for another 2 years because their product lines are diverse ranging from music labels to automotive software. Nintendo being the sole, pure video game company does not have time as a luxury, which many view as a weakness, but in reality is  strength because it allows them to approach the market with a single-minded focus on video games and not developing products such as 3D gaming to support their 3D televisions as Sony is doing.

Nintendo will be first, but for how long is unknown. The wildcard here is Microsoft. Sony has already stated their want for this generation to continue into 2014.

Well I don't know who will be #1 next gen but Nintendo can do it if they do a few things. 1. Upgrade in tech to have a console at least more powerful then the 360 and PS3. Its time for HD and its time for a big graphical update. 2. Upgrade their online service to be at least comparible to PSN even though LIVE should be what they shoot for. 3. Obviously keep their exclusives coming. An HD Zelda, Mario, Metroid would be unbelievable. 4. Improve 3rd party support. Nintendo is missing out on tons of the huge games this gen and even though its not affecting them this gen because of the casual support it will next gen because the casuals who bought Wii will not be upgrading to a new console. If Nintendo does these things then PS4 and "720" could be in trouble, but I predict it will be alot closer than this gen. Its anyone's game.

Good read. It is an excellent opinionated post.