They would lose some cache as a third party. Sales would go down.

no doubt the numbers would be huge but you must consider this=

Nintendo always made the best games for THEIR systems. They knew always what they were doing because they knew the hardware. Therefore we got great games like galaxy or Wind Waker.

If Nintendo games would go mulitplat then they won't be so amazing. I cannot see the 360 playing Mario Galaxy without some massive reprograming.

Depends on the game. NSMB and Pokemon on IOS would have unbelievable sales.

That said, I'd wager down in general. Nintendo puts a lot of work into advertising, managing, and releasing everything absolutely perfectly in its own little eco systems to maximum sales to the fullest potential for a very long time. Having a console galvanizes fans more than simply being another 3rd party publisher ever could, and results in Zelda or Kirby fans purchasing and exploring other Nintendo IPs they otherwise would've never even considered in order to get the most of the console they had to buy for the game that initially drew them in due to very low 3rd party competition.

 It gets very complicated, but there's a reason Nintendo doesn't want to go 3rd party. They've got things down to a science.

I think Nintendo games stand out more because they are on Nintendo's platforms. If they went multiplatform their sales would drop imo, because they would be competing with much more franchises.

I don't think they should go 3rd party. Well maybe if they really go down in popularity, but I don't see that happening soon.

Of course sales would be significantly higher if Nintendo's key franchises went multiplat. They'd have a significantly larger pool of gamers to sell to. But they'd have to give up their hardware business for that to be a true success though, as their own platforms would drop off the map completely if their stable of games were available elsewhere.

I would go nuts for an ultra-realisitc Skyrim-like Zelda title.

I don't see them releasing Wii Sports on PlayStation 3 in 2006 to great sales.

It depends...

Metroid Prime for example appeals to a similar demographic like Bioshock; MP sold about 2.8mil on GC whereas Bioshock sold about 3.8 on 360+PS3. If MP would've been released on 360+PS3, it would have had probably sales somewhere like that. So, yeah, it would have sold more, but considering the install base, the difference is not significant.

The point is: Nintendo consoles are almost completly bought by the demographic that buys Nintendo games. On other consoles this demographic is rather small thus there wouldn't be such a huge increase in sales. There might be some exceptions for this theory, though. I don't know how huge offline multiplayer is on non Nintendo consoles - games like Mario Kart or Smash Bros. would sell huge, but actually they sell already decent on Nintendo consoles.

In the end, I don't see a point for Nintendo to stop their hardware business and go software only.

Well first of all Android/iOS games are far simpler than Nintendo games. Mario would not be suitable due to being overly complex and requiring reaction time and better controls. Second, at about 8 million sales between NSMB2 and U, Nintendo has made ~300 million USD, if they released it on iOS, it would have to be at 99 cents, and the game would probably only sell 5-10 million at most going by the sales of other games like Sonic which sold even less than that. So 5-10 million dollars, and they would hurt the brand.

Also, Nintendo would hurt their hardware business if they released games on other consoles, it would be a fairly stupid move business-wise no matter how you put it. Nintendo games and hardware go hand in hand, it is an iconic combo. If they do anything multiplat, it should be to promote their own hardware.

Also, why is the poll asking a totally different question on a totally different topic than this thread?

Zero. Nintendo would have ceased to exist.