Every day you can go on any forum or major online publication and read insults and complaints regarding Nintendo's tendency to keep releasing games from existing franchises.  Although Nintendo has created several new IPs in the recent generations, still the complaints regarding the oversaturation of Mario titles and other well known mascots continue.

But I would argue that each new IP actually limits the number of sequels and reiterations of our most beloved franchises, much to the chagrin of Nintendo fans across the globe.  I for one expect a new Mario (2d, 3D, Paper), a new Zelda, a new Metroid, a new Smash Bros., a new Mario Kart, etc, etc, every generation.  These mainstays are the main reason I purchase a new Nintendo console.  The one generation where I didn't get a Metroid, the 64 generation, I didn't purchase the console.

I'm not against new IPs.  I love Pikmin, Chibi Robo, and the slew of WiiWare titles that have come out in recent years.  But at some point Nintendo's software teams will be so large and spread too thin to both excite new gamers as well as satisfy the ravenous nature of the old school fans.  

What means more to you: seeing your favorite franchises updated and reimagined with each generation, or  experiencing brand new games set in brand new worlds, particularly concerning Nintendo franchises? 

I'd prefer to have old franchises built upon, though we should be able to get both.

Hopefully Nintendo's upcoming reorganization will enable them to do more. Low capacity has long been their handicap.

Well, I personally don't like Mario or platformers, so we're not even in the same book. That's a major reason why I moved away from Nintendo when the PSOne was released. I was platformed out.

More Zelda and Metroid and less Mario would make me give Nintendo more consideration but so would other IPs where the primary focus isn't on jumping or flat cartoon characters.

What is this upcoming reorganization?

i think Nintendo always tries to keep a good balance between risky new IPs and well stablished idem
obviously, that varies depending on Nintendos economy, i think that good times are coming

They should be able to do both. 3rd parties can create new, successful IP, why can't Nintendo?

Well with two different platforms launching within a year of each other, that was bound to happen.  And certainly, Mario is an example of how NOT to address a franchise.  However, I enjoyed thoroughly both Galaxy titles and New Super Mario Bros Wii.  Super Paper Mario was also a nice addition to the Paper Mario franchise.  I think maybe the 2d and 3d could have been staggered better with a 3d Mario being selected to launch alongside the WiiU.

As far as the N64 is concerned, I worked for a video store at the time.  I played all the major titles and don't think I missed anything by not actually owning the system.  Final Fantasy, Tomb Raider, Oddworld and Tekken occupied the majority of my time in those days and I think they were well spent.

Honestly, we should get both, but if it must be a choice, then I pick the "seeing your favorite franchises updated and reimagined with each generation" option.

And they should stop being lazy with 2D Mario.Good thing they actually put a bit more effort than usual for NSMBU.

Their business models are different. Nintendo, as a first-party publisher, is first and foremost focused on creating games that sell consoles. Nintendo's revenue focus comes more from third party licensing and from the consoles, so their focus is to sustain the franchises that sell consoles, which is their way of achieving growth.

Meanwhile, growth for the third parties come from the games alone, so they are more incentivized for rapid release of successful franchises, which burns those franchises out often.

I count spin-offs as new IPs, or games within a series that adopt a different genre.