I hear you too. But you also, on you end, have to understand the importance of what Rol is trying to achieve.

I'll try to explain.

What Rol sees is a delution of company budget in resources that are not sure-wins. For example, he stated Skyward Sword.

He says that Skyward Sword was the reason why Nintendo failed to cater to the casual in the last 3 years of the Wii's life.

Here's why I never bought this from him... The fact of the matter is that Skyward Sword was developed by a team that was always dedicated to Zelda, they never shifted focus. This was true even throughout the first 3 years of the Wii's life.

When you look at matters closely, Rol sees a problem, and he's trying to find an explanation for it. In his eyes, it was Skyward Sword, but as I just showed you that can't be true.

What really caused the Wii drought in years 4 to 6 is the shift of focus to prepare for gen 8. It can't be SS as I've said before, the team was never involved in making casual games anyways. So the question remains, what is the culprit.

If we can put our finger on something that is counter-productive in terms of profit, then that gives Rol a reason to doubt Nintendo's competence.

This is important when using a blind-faith approach "let's give them the benefit of the doubt, they've already thought about it".

On the other hand, I'm not using blind-faith. I'm judging the strategy at face value given Nintendo's track record to follow through with their actions plans almost perfectly in the past 4 years. Mind you, it was not to their profit, but they have been faithful. What that tells me is that Rol's argument is valid against a "Nintendo knows what they're doing approach" that doesn't consider the action plans, but it is ineffective against an approach that considers the action plan and its viability in terms of profit-maker.

I tried to explain that to him, but he doesn't want to understand. Anyways, at least now you know why the "Nintendo knows what they're doing" mentality will never convince him, and rightfully so.

I know this isn't very clear, but I did my best. Feel free to ask questions so I can clarify.

^And it's trivial little things like that that antagonize people, it's really crappy...

But anyways, I'm glad we see eye to eye kepto.

He should schedule a an interview and ask what was intention for Skyward Sword? and is Skyward Sword considered a success for them and why?

That is not a question for the consumer but for the developers.

If we could do that, if we could ask Nintendo questions and talk to them, I think everyone in this thread would be quite a happy camper.

Sounds like Nintendo's retreating upmarket. This might be the best move for them. Opportunities for disruption don't come along every day. They need to consolidate their position and watch for the next opportunity.

Tough times ahead. I have a feeling one of the big three won't make it through this upcoming generation. Some people see three console companies in a closer race than we've ever seen, but I see three companies all struggling to earn a profit in this market.

Unpossible.

Not really. Nintendo's in a solid position moving forward with the 3DS, and so long as they avoid taking a hit on Wii U hardware, they should do well enough on that front financially. Sony as a whole struggles, but the PS division is supposedly strong (and would likely be preserved or spun off in any major bankruptcy restructuring), and Microsoft as a whole is now in great position, and so long as they don't have another Xbox 1 or RRoD-type financial debacle, they too should be good going forward.

The issue is whether the industry as a whole is stagnating, but its clear that, for the moment, there is room for everyone.

The difference here is that unlike stereoscopic 3D, the controller is actually capable of enhancing/changing the gameplay experience itself.

A 30% price cut within the first year of launch is not a solid position for the 3DS. Nor is Nintendo taking its first quarterly loss in decades. It could be argued that Gamecube Nintendo was in a stronger position than the Nintendo of today. We can only guess about how good or bad the Wii U will perform, but it's in an even more competitive space than the 3DS and doesn't benefit as much from the confidence of past performance.

At least Nintendo can say they made a net profit this past generation. Is Playstation strong? Or is it just strong compared to Sony's other consumer electronics? A quote from Sony's latest financials:

"Categories contributing to the deterioration in operating results... include... the game business, reflecting higher marketing costs to promote network service platforms and lower sales of PlayStation®3 hardware due to a strategic price reduction."

The PS3 has seen sporadic bursts of minor profitability overshadowed by long stretches of enormous losses. And Vita sure doesn't look like it's going to save Sony's bacon in the gaming market.

As for MS, Entertainment and Devices is losing money again, and the finger is pointed at soft gaming sales. The Xbox 360 is in a similar position to Sony (alternating huge losses with smaller profits), the big difference being that Xbox's parent company still has lots of cash to burn on maintaining its strategic foothold in the living room.

Right now, the console market is like a casino. The house keeps winning, but the players interpret that to mean that a big jackpot is overdue, so they keep placing bets. It's not sustainable. They can't keep placing bets if they don't start winning some rounds.