Famousringo, bringing the knowledge.

Nintendo has finite resources, resources which they have to split across two different platforms (DS/Wii), and which they have chosen to additionally spread across two other platforms (WiiWare/DSiWare). They could either devote those resources towards appealing primarily to the numerically-small segment of the market whose demands are the most resource-intensive to satisfy. Or they could devote those same finite resources towards appealing primarily to the larger, more profitable market.

You started this chain of debate by saying that the Xbox 360 was not profitable. Where is your proof that the actual console itself is unprofitable? The point is that the data is deliberately obfusicated so that you cannot easily tell what is causing the profit and loss situation. The information that Microsoft has given indicates that the Xbox 360 is a significant proportion of revenue moreso than costs in the structure of the EDD when you do the math on 'the Xbox 360 revenue increased by X% in Y$ vs A% and B$ costs'.

Xbox 360 and PS3 have been profitable for years. Though Wii has been profitable since launch...

2 Years ago, I would have loved to see MS dominate the future generation of consoles, because they did great things with the original xbox and the 360. However, now due to obvious reasons I don't think so.

In fact, none of the three deserve mass success. I don't want consoles to be a culturing phenomenon next gen. 25 - 35 million sales for each console sounds just fine.

Isolation of casuals from console games will do the industry a world of good. IOS/facebook games should not be mentioned in the same breath as Sony/MS when it comes to gaming. Any synergy between the two in future gens would mean failure.

Nintendo not competing in the red ocean against Microsoft was a smart move that Sony missed to make and now they pay for it. The xbox is a little empire building side project for microsoft, they don't care if they sink a couple billion dollars here and there. They could undercut their competition until they give out their consoles for free without even blinking at the lost money. The way Sony and Nintendo operate today is all because of Microsoft.

Im really not sure why famousringo is being so sensitive......its bizzare

My original point is that MS has done great this generation not because Nintendo has done anything wrong but because of things MS has done right....

Im basically complikenting both Nintendo and MS. Nintendo from a business perspective have been rediculousky successful and are absolutely genious. The Wii litteraly prints money.

And MS has also been very successful with their business plan. AND have been profitable I stand by the statement.

The OP is basically implying Nintendo screwed up by not paying attention to the "core" gamer which just isnt true.

I swear some people want to bitch and argue about nothing....there is no discussion on this topic. MS and Nintendo both had awesome generations

Is it really stealing market share if Sony leaves the door wide open and unguarded?

In a perfect business world you would take both the red ocean and the blue ocean...and that it's almost impossible to achieve, either you go all out with one or the other. We have seen companies trying to take advantages of both "oceans" but they usually don't work the way they hoped for. 

With the Wii, Nintendo gather the casuals (blue ocean) and unfortunately unless you're a Nintendo fan their isn't much in the "hardcore" department (red ocean).

Sony failed to attract the casuals with the Move and MS have been the only company that managed to somewhat get both audiences with the Kinect, both still not enough as most multi-billion companies would want to.

Maybe if Nintendo would have spent even 1/100th of what M$ spent promoting Halo to promote the MP games when they came out, it wouldn't just be a "blip on the radar" these days.

I really doubt it. It might have worked for a big debut for the first title, but Metroid just isn't as general-appeal a series as Halo is.