The N64 should've sold at least 60 million LTD, when people talk droughts, there literally was nothing released for the N64 for months at a time at some points because of the cartridge format decision. I played Mario 64 pretty much for a month straight until Wave Race 64 came out.

That ruined a console that people actually were actually enthusiastic about. I think it's much harder to get people interested in a platform they're apathetic about from the get go.

I met so many people that considered an N64, but simply had to buy the Playstation instead because the difference in software releases was monstrous.

Wii was also heavily supply constrained that first year, I think everyone knows it could've sold at least 50% more easily.

The other thing I think that is obvious now in hindsight, is how important Rare was to Nintendo. They tipped the scales of a very close 16-bit war in Nintendo's favor with DKC and really saved the N64 from death in its second holiday by providing Diddy Kong Racing and especially GoldenEye. That allowed the system to keep chugging until Zelda: OoT was ready. 

I think these numbers say a lot actually.

According to the chart, the system hasn't come anywhere near outpacing the Gamecube since January. Pikmin was the first game it had that cracked the top 10 in something like 7 months. And it's only sold about half as much as the GC in the same time frame. The PS3 performed much better in its first year despite being a $600 running gag with production problems--it's lowest selling quarter so far was 700k, while the WiiU has seen numbers as low as 160k before it's first birthday.

That's absolutely abysmal. If we're talking about the N64, it's not going to sell much more than that globally at this rate.

The Gamecube never failed. Nintendo profited off of it even though they came in third. They never switched to DVD's so their hardware was a bit cheaper even though their graphics were second best. Sony used DVD's and the price of DVD's went down for Microsoft followed suit the year after.

The third parties defected from Sega and Nintendo:

1) Because of Sega's incompetence with their launch, trying to beat Sony to the market.

2) Nintendo never had CD-based software, but they were turned off by Sega...so Sony was the obvious choice.

The GameCube did fail in the sense that it didn't hit the sales goal that Nintendo wanted (I believe they wanted 50 million for it, it didn't even get to half that). There was also a point in the GameCube's lifespan where they were forced to cease production of it and were stuck with unsold inventory, which I believe was a painfully embarrassing (and costly) experience for Nintendo.

It's part of the reason why the Wii was in such limited stock its first 12+ months ... Nintendo wasn't willing to manufacture over a certain amount and get stuck with unsold inventory again.

Microsoft entering the business screwed Nintendo IMO ... when it was just Sony-Nintendo and you had Sega fumbling around, Nintendo could make more mistakes with their consoles, but once people had two viable alternatives that weren't a trainwreck like Sega ... Nintendo lost a lot of their leeway.

 Microsoft's existence in the gaming industry was perfect for Nintendo because they aren't competing for Nintendos market (until the Wii). It was a diversionary tactic to slow down Sony's advances with multimedia in the gaming industry. Yes, Microsoft's existence also got in the way of Nintendo, but their intention was mostly to get in Sony's way. Nintendo's failures were mostly because of Nintendo's inability to work with third parties and Sony had great relationships. I never heard about the cease of production part though. That has to suck. I thought the Wii was being sold in limited supply to bottleneck the demand and create higher demand off of the word of mouth from consumers. Hmmmm...interesting.

You kinda need to have an idea that justifies a "disruptive" product.

N64 had high-end 3D graphics, Wii had the Wiimote ... a tablet controller is the best Nintendo could come up with for Wii U.

Their huge mistake is thinking they could sell that just like a Wii and people wouldn't notice that it was no where near as revolutionary.

I think Nintendo ran out of interface gimmicks a while ago -- even with the Wii, they were unable to bring the Vitalty Sensor to the market and probably had nothing else, so they just went with a tablet controller.

Virtual reality like Occulus Rift is probably the next big industry disruptor, but it's far too expensive for Nintendo to have used in 2012 and doesn't fit their image of social/family gaming.

What exactly could they have done to go after the blue ocean again?? Seems to me their hands were tied.

Wii Shortages... is the only fun part about this.
It`s amazing, when put in perspective, how Wii U is doing so bad, even when comparing to GC. Despite all the PS2 hype, GC could still do better than Wii U, who had basically no direct competition.

I believe the recent price cut and the coming games will more than help Wii U do a lot better. Yet, i also believe it will be hampered by it`s own image (looking too much like Wii). Along with the price cut, a full redesign should have been done aswell. Keep the name, but change everything.

If N64 could do that well during the holidays, Wii U still has a chance.

The other thing that becomes obvious when looking at Nintendo consoles that have been successful (relatively) is they all had an "X Factor" game and that game shows up usually in the 1st year of the console's release.

By "X Factor" I mean a game that isn't a Mario/Zelda traditional IP and broadens the appeal of the system.

SNES had Street Fighter II which really caused sales to spike. SNES from there on really became the go to system for fighting games and arcade ports, barring the brief Mortal Kombat 1 controversy.

GoldenEye certainly did its job, though the N64 was ultimately hog tied by terrible droughts brought on by the cartridge format. But GoldenEye was a pivotal game. And the N64 became synonmous with console FPS and multiplayer games.

Wii Sports. Obviously. There were about a bazillion mini-game comps for the Wii largely chasing its success.

Seems to me like the two consoles that basically tried to rely on the usual Nintendo franchises/old franchises solely to do everything -- the GameCube and Wii U have the biggest problems.

You need to have an X-Factor game, something that brings in a different audience, and right now the Wii U doesn't have that and unless Bayonetta 2 or X become huge hits, it doesn't look like it's getting that or that Nintendo's even trying. Perhaps they bet the farm on Nintendo Land being that game.

Mario + Mario Kart + Zelda is only getting you about 25 million users. You gotta have something else to go far beyond that. That's really what defines a successful Nintendo console I think, is the question of "What Else?". People know a Nintendo console brings you Mario/Mario Kart/Zelda/DK ... the question is "what else you got Nintendo?". What new game/experience/gimmick/fad/breathrough/idea is there?

Even when you look at the 3DS ... Japan is the only market where the 3DS is selling up to Nintendo's expectations (by their own admission). And what's the difference ... the 3DS has an X-Factor there in Monster Hunter being exclusive (effectively). It's the smartest thing Nintendo has done in the last two years was to take that franchise away from Sony entirely.