"The top-notch designs became cartoonish, the unparalleled gameplay level became too basic, the content remained linear and the genre focus continued to be the same (platformers, RPG and little more). As a result, the teenagers and adults that grew up with Nintendo were already too old to be pleased with the same experiences and kids became the main client of the “kindergarten” offers that Nintendo games had turned into."

Stop reading after this.... The whole OP smells of BS

It was much more than marketing. Microsoft spent a lot of money creating cutting edge games like Halo and Project Gotham. They have also done a hard work of convincing 3rd parties to go multi-platform on games that otherwise would have only been on the console that had 75% of the market. Look at how they bleeded with the original Xbox while X360 even presented profits (and you can't say they spent more on marketing or securing exclusives on the Xbox than on the X360). They have started an empire on the 6th generation and went the right way. Or will you say Mario Kart Double Dash demanded the same resources as Project Gotham to be made? Or that Mario Sunshine demanded the same resources as Halo?

There is a reason why Nintendo opted by the cartoonish graphics, the balloon-based games, among other decisions.

Then why hasn't any Sony platform needed such a restriction to earn a remarkable game catalogue?

No, that's not what is written. It's not about small or big amounts of money. It's about every dollar. Read it again and see the 1-dollar example.

the contradiction is amazing

You criticize Nintendo for the following:

"Nintendo got clinged as much as they could to the old formulas"

So when Ninty puts their own unique spin and innovation on genre's, you slam them for not directly competing with games within the genre.

"Same thing happened in the Fighting genre, where Nintendo came up with Super Smash Bros to compete with the complex and somehow realistic Tekken, Dead Or Alive and Soul Calibur. Recycling characters to an arcade experience shows the Nintendo’s commitment in regards to the Fighting genre. Same thing with the Strategy genre, where Pikmin was the only RTS to compete with the complex Command & Conquer, Age of Empires, Homeworld, Company of Heroes and the deep and simulating Civilization and Total War. "

The amount of spin you use to paint Nintendo in bad light is incredible and quite frankly hilarious

What are you talking about? I'm pretty sure Sony has guidelines and restrictions also, they won't just let any game on their platform. You have to be licensed by Sony to develop on their consoles as well. 

Most of it are facts. The rest is backed up by facts too. Why should I tell that Nintendo's policies like region lock or inventory management are not real, just my opinion?

I see no point in bringing up Nintendo's old policies from the NES era in the context of current Nintendo. It was a completely different market, practically rebuilt entirely thanks to the NES after the crash, run by different people, and with many actions that have more than one interpretation.

Iwata's Nintendo has collaborated with 3rd parties in many ways, including marketing, publishing, localizing, assisting and funding games from them. Notable examples of these include collaborations with Namco-Bandai (Mario Kart Arcade games, Wii Sports Club, Smash Bros WiiU/3DS, Star Fox Assault), Sega (Bayonetta 2, Mario and Sonic, F-Zero AX/GX, Sonic: Lost Worlds), Tecmo-Koei (Hyrule Warriors, Metroid: Other M, Samurai Warriors 3, Fatal Frame), THQ (uDraw), Square-Enix (Dragon Quest, Bravely Default, Mario Sports Mix, Mario Hoops 3-on-3, Fortune Street), Capcom (Monster Hunter), Atlus (Shin Megami Tensei X Fire Emblem, various games published in certain regions), Level-5 (Professor Layton, Inazuma Eleven), Ubisoft (publishing Just Dance in Japan) and various cameos from Nintendo characters in their games. They have also worked with lots of external developers and invested in Unity to attract indies, with small developers like Shin'en, Wayforward and Renegade Kid proving how there's success to be found on their platforms. Just because they don't follow the same strategies of Sony/Microsoft doesn't mean they're not willing to collaborate with them. And just because they chose to separate themselves from the current homogenization that gaming is going through hardware-wise (something that I personally appreciate) doesn't mean the doors were shut. They gave them an alternative, and many of them took good advantage of it.

As far as your opinion on the importance of hardware specs and production values, I'll just state here that I couldn't disagree more. I don't judge games on the basis of said measures, and as others have already mentioned, many developers have gone bankrupt by trying to fulfill said expectations. The cost of HD development has also been in big part responsible for how big publishers these days see games as a checklist that needs to be completed, avoid taking risks, and promote questionable practices like abusing DLC, online passes and charging for online gameplay. Nintendo avoided said abuses while creating games that provided both fresh and traditional experiences with plenty of polish of their own, regardless of being on less capable hardware. Hardware that provided new ways to experience videogames, which, regardless of your personal opinion of them, were enjoyed by millions around the world.

Please read section 2.1 of the OP

Not innovation, differentiation on what is better to be the same.

For example, the N64 cartridges when CD was becoming the standard. That is not innovation, that is limiting game space.

For example, different machine architecture than others. That is not innovation, that is raising up the costs of multiplatform games.

I'm sorry but I don't need to read that pile of text to understand that high power allows low power but the opposite is not true. For example, Wii has no HD games but PS4 has indie titles. Raising up the roof is raising up freedom...to whatever devs want to use it.

Last paragraphs of section 2.2 of the OP (source: http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2014-secret-developers-wii-u-the-inside-story).

Are you kidding? Most of this article is opinion. I respect your opinion, but let's be real here- this is an opinion piece with few facts and a lot of spin. 

If that's what you truly think of Nintendo, that's fine with me. 

Funny how you say it's hard to find a Nintendo gamer that's willing to listen to criticism... it's even harder to find a journalist, writer or blogger that is willing to accept criticism on their opinion pieces. Even going as far as to call the opinions facts and defending said opinions with narrow minded logic. 

You want us to see things your way like it's the only logical way to see things.