I think their first mistake goes all the way back to N64 with RARE.

They should have bought them out JUST for the IPs, who cares i the people left as people are replaceable.

Back to the topic at hand, They need to release that 3rd parties dont give a damn about them and move on. Therefore, I agree they need to create more studios or purchase some good IPs that are going bankrupt. Another mistake, when THQ went under there was a fair few good IPs they could have picked up.

I think you're right about how they focused too much on 3DS and kind of took for granted the challenges with transitioning to HD.

They absolutely should have bought RARE. That would have been such a terrific acquisition. And I also agree that they dropped the ball when THQ went under (though I think I read somewhere that they had picked up a few developers from that company, but I may be wrong). But the IP's were going dirt cheap; they should have snapped some of them up.

Why buy RARE for 400 million, when you can buy Retro for 1 million? (No seriously that's how much Retro cost)

Just to keep all those ips

What has Rare done lately which has shaken the gaming world like Golden Eye or Conkers?

Nothing.

Hence Nintendo did the right thing, let Rare go.

I honestly believe they should look into more western based studios, I think that Retro and Next Level Games have done fantastic work and I think that they are able to relate traditional Japanese Nintendo charm with more modern western development ideologies

Can't believe so many people are saying yes. Nintendo has a lot of talented first party studios. Nintendo just rushed the Wii U and underestimated development time. That's why we have the drought that we do.

So many people seem to have this mentality of "the more first party games the better." From a business perspective it's simply not the case. Nintendo has enough studios for several big first party releases a year. These releases already have to compete with third party games. Making Nintendo's first party offerings compete with each other in addition to third parties is not a good idea.

As I said people can be replaced. Those IPs were iconic on Nintendo platforms. Imagine if the Wii had Conker, Perfect Dark, Killer Instinct, Jet Force Gemini etc... It would have filled the gap we currently have with no games.

We (and Nintendo) need to go ahead and accept the reality that, barring another major Wii-like disruption, Nintendo home consoles will never be the home of great third party support again. That ship sailed once the PlayStation came to town, and it has yet to come to port again. And even with another Wii-like disruption, who can truly predict it and be prepared for it? It's obvious that no one, including Nintendo, expected the Wii to take off the way it did, otherwise third party publishers would have been more ready with the appropriate kind of games waiting. Instead, they reacted too late when they saw the success and put out toe-tipping or half assed projects when they finally got around to trying to cash in. The few that put forth effort to make critically successful titles rarely got rewarded with sales.

If Nintendo wants more third party support, it needs to take a "rising tide" strategy: get more consoles in homes period, and do that by first creating/acquiring more studios to increase the quantity of compelling exclusives that fill in the gaps where you can't get other publishers to take care of business for you. Screw what other publishers think; when consumers see a consistent schedule of game releases with fewer droughts and more first party hits, they buy. Then when those pubs see consistent monthly sales, they greenlight more projects of their own accord, without Nintendo seemingly always having to be the one to extend the olive branch and bend over backwards to get some attention.

Second, Nintendo should broaden its own horizons by producing the kind of games it can't rely on others to handle for it. It should satiate its own fanbase that wants those kind of experiences you typically can't find/have trouble getting much of on a Nintendo console and tell the EAs, 2Ks and Deep Silvers to go suck a fat one.

And when Nintendo shows them how it's done, they take the baton and go with it. Even if that doesn't happen, consumers can still say, "Well at least we have [Nintendo's realistic racing sim] and [Nintendo's FPS] and [Nintendo's bloody bro-dude co-op TPS] and [Nintendo's other foray into satisfying a market it hasn't tapped]. They may not be Forza and Crysis, but we know they won't suck, because it's Nintendo. So we'll bite."

TL;DR: we all say people buy Nintendo consoles for Nintendo games. Well then make more compelling Nintendo games. Then when consoles start flying off shelves, third parties will be beating down Nintendo's door to get on board. See: DS, 3DS.