i said sony copied pc gaming after Microsoft did.

What i ment the type of games that they get plaid on, back in the day there was a huge difference between the games you played on console and the games on pc. Microsoft and than Sony changed that in a big way and i dont mean it in a good way

and he is a good guy, he dont fires people, he cuts back his own salary and the salary of the topstaff

http://www.polygon.com/2013/7/5/4496512/why-nintendos-satoru-iwata-refuses-to-lay-off-staff

nintendo is realy a longterm company, and iwata fits real well.

No, you're throwing around some fancy buzzwords to damage control, apparently not realizing you are what you hate. The N64 in itself was the beginning of the lack of disparity between the games played on consoles and PCs. Nintendo's bizarre hardware choices since the N64 =/= competition are twins, triplets, or whatever else.

Iwata is good for Japan but he really doesn't understand the Western market.

They're so quick to lock up Dragon Quest and Monster Hunter (Japanese centric IP) but where is the Wii U's Western partnerships?

And even in Japan, the Wii U has been a tremendous disappointment.

Handheld market is simply friendly waters for Nintendo. It's more kid-centric and even the adults who do play handhelds are less interested in realistic graphics when playing on a small screen. Even on cell phones, it seems people prefer cartoony games like Angry Birds and Candy Crush and Plants Vs. Zombies over games with realistic graphics.

And people don't really need as many handheld games nor as they as picky about third party support or a lack of genre support (ie: not many FPS or car sims or sports games on 3DS, but it doesn't matter). Handhelds don't sell as many games. But that plays to Nintendo as well because Nintendo doesn't get burned as badly with handhelds if they need to go a period of time without a major release.

Handheld games are generally quicker and cheaper to make as well.

The handheld and home consoles market have always been seperate, or are you going to claim nintendo made no home consoles during the ps2 era.

The gameboy did tremendously well because it was seen as an entirely different product to home consoles, and the subsequent revisions and upgrades continued that trend virtually uncontested sales wise until the PSP, as the atari lynx, game gear and other poorly supported devices didn't even scratch the surface.

You are simply tying strings between points that will never actually meet to try and swing sense into a critically flawes statement, nintendo have never been david, the few occasions their home consoles have sold badly, their handhelds have picked up the slack, thus in the competitive market nintendo is the goliath, and psp/vita/gamegear/lynx/pcegt etc are the davids.

Sega also used Windows CE on the dreamcast.

He's a genius.

rockstar cant make so cheap games i think, and the rest isnt great, u wanna have an exclusiv cod or bf?  that woulnt sell wii us and cost shitloads of money. only way in the western world would be indie indie indie. but nintendo makes it to hard for indie developers to make wii u games.

the most important thing for nintendo is the image, they have to get cool again. they need cool gamemaker like
Suda51 to let em look cool again... bayo2 is a nice start, but we need more stupid over the top games.

Things like Suda51 and even Bayonetta 2 (while a decent catch) are still too niche for Western audiences. 

I've said for a long time they simply should repurchase the rights to the James Bond license. There is nothing cooler than Bond (sit the hell down dudebros) and he already has an association with the Nintendo brand. And the rights are available as far as I know. Activision did not renew the rights. 

they are small, but they are cool.  u have to get the elite first to get the dudebros and other casuals.

 007 would be great, ohh  i loved the game on n64. and u could do realy cool stuff with the wii u gamepad.