I think they're going to grit it out with Wii U, letting 3DS drive the bulk of their profits for a few more years, but I'd bet money their next play is a Nintendo tablet for 2015/16 which can stream to a TV wirelessly while at home.

You're right, I did over simplify things. I forgot to blame ET. Lol!

Sorry couldn't help it. Please don't take offense I just had a good nice sleep and woke up at the right side of the bed and I am kind of hyper hehehe

I don't know what world you lived in, but from about 1995-2005 Nintendo was NOT King. Yeah, their handheld sold good (with little to no competition mind you) but in the home console market they didn't account for much. In that market Sony was King.

You can bring your profits argument all you want, but if you even try to argue that N64 and Gamecube dominated PS1 and PS2 you are 100% wrong. Come on now, you're talking about the (2) best selling gaming home consoles of all time! PS1/PS2 didn't have all the profitablilty of Nintendo (Mainly due to the handhelds) but who had the customers? Who had the games? Who controlled the market?

That is what makes you king. Not who made the most money while controlling little to nothing of the home console space.

Well, Wii U is doomed after all.

Then again, this guy should know all about being irrelevant...

Following this comment over and over again, I can say that I am less relevant than Bushnell, so that means I should know all about irrelevancy to, and my comments be considered gold regarding Nintendo, right?  Heck, I was a fan of Atari AND Sega in the past, so I should be primo regarding knowing what is becoming irrelevant, right?

I live in this world. The one where Nintendo is no. 1 in the game industry. 30 years, King of the hill. You wanna talk about irrelevance, having the largest marketshare/revenue but the lowest profits. That's the path to irrelevance. You wanna worry about someone, worry about PS & XBOX. They're unsustainable. If they're unprofitable again this gen, their games division is "GAME OVER".

That's fine, believe whatever you want. All I know is that from around 1995-2005 nobody cared about Nintendo 64 or Gamecube and everyone was buying a PS1 or a PS2 and a billions games.

Yeah, profits are nice, but in those years profits did not make Nintendo relevant in the eyes of the consumer, which believe it or not are the people who decide who is king in the gaming space. A King decides the way the kingdom moves forward. Nintendo with their N64 and Gamecube did NOT do that. The people obey and serve a king. The people give gifts to their king. Last I checked all the gifts (games) weren't given to Nintendo. Last I checked the people (3rd parties) did not obey and serve Nintendo.

My world showed me that that PS1 and PS2 reigned supreme over the Gamecube and N64. More games, more sales, more consumer mindshare, etc... Ask anyone what company was king in those years and I bet 9/10 will tell you they played on a Sony console.

Let's think about this. N64 (32.93M). PS1 (104.25M). Gamecube (21.74M). PS2 (157.68M). Yup, Nintendo was King alright! Clearly the people have decided!

What is the name of your world? Surely isn wasn't called Earth right?  

Oh, by the way, according to your logic Microsoft was King of the last 2 gens. Have you seen Microsoft's profits?!!!!

I also guess that Apple is the current King.

What happens when you wage a war of attrition? You deplete your war chest, borrow money, and hopefully enjoy your reign for a little while before you're thrown into exile. Ps1/2 controlled the console space for 10 years, yes. What happened to the profits? They're GONE! only 1 billion profit left. What do they have to show for it? Credit! in the minds of fans and supporters. The next phase is the eventual exile. The tortoise and the hair.

That's all great, but before that time came that person was still the king, which means Nintendo was not king for the last 30 years. Thanks for agreeing.