Some would.  But there is a big difference between mobile gaming and handheld gaming right now.  The colapse of handheld gaming would be a blow to the industry.

I don't even know what, "Ms lets turn you into slaves," means.  With Sony now charging for online play, there is even less that separates the two.

Saying they are the most successful gaming company of all time is a really bold statement seeing how 3 Sonys consoles out sold 5 Ninty ones by 80 million.  If you average it all out, Sonys platforms have out sold Ninty ones.  

The statemants applies to handheld but not consoles, and wii by the defenition of the word was no phenomenon,  fad describes it much better.  Given ninty dropped waggle from its succesor seems to strengthen that.

Most everything on any forum is absolutely pointless from a practical standpoint.  

It means the policies they wanted to do with X1, if not for Sony owning their ass at E3 and PS4 preorders skyroceting those aholes might have actually brought that bs to fruition.

Eyetoy predated both DS and Wii, as did the Sega activator, unless of course you want to pretend 4.2m sales for a game with a hardware accessory isnt "popular".

To break it down

"Nintendo popularized motion gaming" - Was popular prior to ds/wii, no AS popular, granted, but popular non the less.
"Neither would exist if right now if it were not for Nintendo" - Pure assumption, given that sony already had the eyetoy and their development department had been working on its successor (pseye) since the commercial release of the eyetoy. As for kinect, assuming that mobile gaming took off just as well as it has done, and i see no reason why it would not, it is safe to assume that Microsoft would have gone ahead with their aquisition of primesense and released kinect regardless.

Again though, if you want to claim nintendo popularized motion gaming despite the existance of eyetoy, about the only reason you will have to claim this is overall lifetime sales, in which case your point is "it wasnt first but it sold more, so it popularized it", at which point anyone could easilly point to the mindblowing sales of mobile and tablet devices which far outstrip standard gaming consoles, and say, "actually, no, the mobile market popularized motion controls and touch input". (like it or not, tilt sensors and touch inputs equate to motion control).

I put it to you that Nintendo simply timed the release of the Wii right, in regards to motion tech which already existed, at a price point and age range target to perform well on the open market, a lucky strike in timing that they have failed to repeat with the WiiU.

They caught the people transitioning from console gaming to mobile, and non-gamers to mobile gamers just at the right time for the Wii, a large potion of this customer base have now either migrated to mobile, migrated to playstation or xbox, or returned to being non-gamers, or casual "facebook" style browser games, as evidenced by the WiiU.

I am not attacking Nintendo however, I am simply being logical and unbiased about it.

I'm speaking soley in terms of SOFTWARE here. Do you really think Sony's studios have been more succesful than Nintendo when it comes to games?

The point of this topic was to have a civil and reasonable discussion about Nintendo's role in the gaming industry, and whether some people are putting them on a pedastal.

Judging by your post, I'm guessing that isn't your preferred kind of topic, so feel free to find one that's a better fit for you.

2. Nintendo is by far, the most innovative.

It means the policies they wanted to do with X1, if not for Sony owning their ass at E3 and PS4 preorders skyroceting those aholes might have actually brought that bs to fruition.