Wright said: Nope. Competence in the hardware department is what pushes this industry forward. Besides, I'm a xbox player, but don't tell me this does not look HORRIBLE:

Yes, but this looks awesome:

No, because I don't want to buy more than one console per gen.

Would Playstation and Saturn have adapted to dual analogs, if Nintendo haven't brought them first and showed with a game that they work? That is the point here. Also the controller probably wasn't a total mess, if the competition was inspired by it.

No because like it or not Nintendo has a strong influence on the competition and the industry and introduces hardware traits which become realized and standard after their own software utilizes these traits, some pivotal examples of their influence are below.

- They designed the first modern day console and controller in the NES.

- Brought us the save game feature.

- Gave us a viable analogue design.

- Gave us rumble.

- Created and built up the handheld market.

- Explored new interfaces like motion controls as far back as the 80s and even had wireless peripherals back then.

- Gave us a viable implemented use of touch screens on handhelds and now consoles.

- Gave us 4 controller ports.

from a console stand point now. from a portable side the future is very Bleak. The 3DS is doing really well now in Japan but its first year was awful until they almost slashed the price in half! if it was hard to sell a portable this gen can you imagine how hard it will be in 5 years time? The Vita is obviously in the same boat. It would be smart for Sony and Nintendo to move heavily into the Mobile gaming Space. Mario would rival Angry Birds Easily even if Nintendo charged £2.99 a game with micro transactions there games would make more then they will on the 3DS and there is no worry of Hardware costs.

i think it would eb good for the industry and Gamers when the big dogs put there software out of mobiles, but i don't think Nintendo should go multi for Consoles it just doesn't seem right

This would be terrible for gamers. Third parties have spent years telling us all that they cannot compete on any console where Nintendo has a presence, so if Nintendo games suddenly appear where they do business, you'll see publishers and developers shutting down on a daily basis. The Sony and Microsoft consoles would just become boxes to play Nintendo games, which no serious gamer should ever be forced to tolerate.

I can see it:

Activision: "We'll launch CoD: Whatever  on the 12th of November...

Nintendo: "What a coincidence, we'll launch the next Mario Kart that same day"

Activision: "Uh... Did we said November? No, no, we meant December, yeah the 12th of December"

Nintendo: "Isn't that a coincidence? That's when a new 2D Mario will go on sale too"

Activision: "Shit!"

Nintendo: "Don't worry, for the next year we'll only have our less successful franchises, Metroid and Pikmin... with a new 3D Mario, and for the next one Smash Bros, Zelda and Donkey Kong.

3rd Parties: "F*ck"

Honestly no for the reasons that have already been said: competition, innovation, why Nintendo and not the others, etc.

I actually think that its more of a benefit for Sony to just be a publisher of the devs that make PS exclusives. My reasoning:

1 - Sony tends to look at other trends and build on them (example: Move controller emulates the Wii remote idea) If they became a periphreal company for another system, like Nintendo, they could build off of Nintendo's concepts and provide new insight for their system, without the burden of developing consoles.

2 - While Sony publishes a lot of games, they don't have a ton in the way of 1st party developers. Thus they have less physical overhead as far as re-training developers, where Nintendo has several 1st party branches that would have to be retrained for entirely new hardware and interfaces.

3 - Sony is great at marketing, so they have the reach, but their hardware division operates at a loss. Going publisher-only would allow them to dramatically increase their profits and strengthen their stocks.

I don't suggest the same for Microsoft, mostly because MS builds on PC ideas, and they can port most games fairly easily between the PC and Xbox, so they have 2 viable hardware markets already.

That made absolutely no sense. What do you mean by that?

He means that the technical inferiority of Nintendo platforms means that games made for Nintendo platforms could easily be made for technically superior systems, with any special peripherals just brought over as needed, whereas technically superior games cannot exist on Nintendo consoles without sacrifices being made.