That is one of the biggest things that bothers me about nintendo right now, that is a very valid point. But they are working on that as we speak. I'm bothered by it now, but when they deliver on games I will be one happy gamer. I just wish they could deliver the goods faster.

Slander I say! But seriously, you fail to see how the company has changed. Yeah, maybe what they did 20 years had a negative effect on the industry. Who knows? The industry was truly a mess back then (see the Video Game Crash of 1983) and Nintendo had an undeniably large part in shaping it into something amazing. I think its just as arguable that everything Nintendo did was beneficial to the industry as the inverse. 

On top of that, they don't employ those practices any more. In fact, from what I've seen, Sony and MS are much worse at that now than Nintendo is. Additionally, the ecosystem that MS/Sony have bred is a large part of what is pushing the industry to another crash. 

You just see the company as evil for old and outdated reasons, I see the fact that they have changed (despite you claiming that they make no effort to change) and not only play a large role in making the industry as it is now into a great place but also they played a huge part in making the gaming industry wonderful all those years ago. Would the video game industry be in a better place now if Nintendo was never around? I highly doubt it and you have no way of proving otherwise.

Once again, you claim baseless supposition as fact.

@ Your Response to MDMAlliance (page 17):

1. Nintendo has around 7-8B$ in the bank...I don't really know where you are getting that 32B$ figure from but you seem to be fairly misguided. I would like a source that is more trustworthy than an imgur pic...

2. You need to admit that your whole "debt" (I used quotations!) argument is bollocks and has no hand in truth whatsoever...

3. "First, they didn't evolve as fast as competition (that's why I said "Nintendo wasn’t able to follow the market trends and the industry turns"). Second, they were the same IPs with the same characters and in many times with the same formulas. Look at the examples the OP gives (cartoonish graphics and balloon-based games are some of them). That's not evolving."

 Why should Nintendo follow the market? I've asked this before but you haven't told me. What good does everybody doing the same thing to for the market? Why should we encourage market homogenization? How is Nintendo doing something different that everybody else in any way a bad thing? 

Also, you say Nintendo wasn't able to keep up with the market yet through the entirety of last gen, the market was chasing Nintendo with things like Move and Kinect and a multitude of clone-esque games (eg. kinect sports). Nintendo doesn't follow the market, that much is true. It leads. 
You want to insult Nintendo for making cartoonish games? Why? How would changing that be good for the industry? Evolution generally occurs because there is some external force selecting for change but there is no force doing that. The market isn't trying to change Nintendo as shown by the massive sales of games like mario kart and New Super Mario Bros. If Nintendo did "evolve" into photorealism, they would just be joining a crowed market fighting for the same resources everybody else is consuming, arguably hurting themselves and hurting the market.

4. If you want to insult the fact that Nintendo relies too heavily on Platformers and RPGs, how about looking at other companies instead of the "market".

Square Enix: Leans too heavily on RPGs

EA: Leans too heavily on shooters and sports games

Microsoft: Leans too heavily on Shooters and racing games

I could go on. Additionally, I wouldn't even say that your point is true. Nintendo releases games in all sorts of genres from sports games, shooters, puzzle, racing, fighting, platformer, turn based RPG, real time RPG, hack and slash and much more...

5. Why is complexity the direction the industry should go? Why is it inherently better? I for one hate racing sims...they are just boring. I don't find it fun to drive a car around a circle for twenty minutes, that just isn't interesting to me. Basketball games are just boring, running up and down the court with mechanics that just aren't fun...However, I can really enjoy Mario Kart or Mario Sports games. They focus on fun and they deliver in spades. Your implication that this is inferior is baseless.

6. "Nintendo has only made linear games":

Have you forgotten that Nintendo are the ones who made games like Metroid (are you really calling metroid linear? really?) and Xenoblade? What exactly would you consider non-linear because to be honest, I don't see many non-linear games in the industry from anyone...

7. "Games began with balloons and have gradually evolved into voice acting. Please go see the videogaming history."

11. "Yes, Sony and Microsoft, unlike Nintendo, develop top-notch game engines."

Funny stuff...Nintendo uses great custom made game engines for their games that lead them to be the best looking on the hardware. Implying Nintendo doesn't put a lot of effort into their engines is ridiculous (its the whole reason Pikmin 3 took so long to make).

12. "How do you define "great music"? It's again your personal tastes? Please understand this (read it 3 times before any reply to me)"

Listen to the soundtrack from most Nintendo games and its easy to see how much work went into it. From the fully orchestral soundtracks of Galaxy 2 to the brilliant compositions in Metroid to the amazing soundwork in Xenoblade...You may say quality is subjective but you would be hardpressed to deny that Nintendo puts a lot of work into game music. 

Yes, Sony and Microsoft, unlike Nintendo, develop top-notch game engines.

Can you list  some examples, and what distinctions you made to determine why those are top-notch engines. Are you implying that Nintendo's in house game engines do not meet that criteria? What can NIntendo do to make their game engines top-notch?

WiiU was the most powerful console when it was launched. Therefore cutting edge.

You didn't bother to read my post exactly. Let's make it simple: For every dollar you pay for WiiU or WiiU-games, Nintendo invests more than one dollar (let's say 1.30$) into games or hardware. For every dollar you pay for PS4 or PS4-games, Sony invests less than 1 dollar (let's say 0.70$) into games or hardware. That is your exact argument, but applied to the current situation instead of history.

They just built a massive new R&D facility.  I think they pulled support for Wii and had little new for Wii U because they were in transition from the 2 buildings.  They couldn't expand their development teams in the old building and Wii U certainly requires more development resources than did Wii.  Their Wii U output was limited simply due to logistics and manpower allocations.

Ever notice how far more external studios are handling Nintendo 1st party development?  They've had to outsource a lot.

The problem with this thread is that you take your opinions, some really blurry sources (that are not even first hand sources, or even second hand sources), then merge them and call them facts.

You decide to take as true an anonymous-sourced article that was about an prelaunch and early dev. dev (theres a whole thread about that in this forum) yet you downplay and article about a recent dev that shows that most if not all of those problems were arranged or never existed. When some user reply you and you dont know how to explain that you only tell them to go and read the op again (or a part of it) as if, for your concern, you are already right and they didnt read in the way you wrote it. And you do this constantly

You say "I don't need to read that pile of text to understand that high power allows low power but the opposite is not true.". With that you imply that you have previous knowledge, and that is excelent, but when someone tries to do the same but against you op you do it again, tell them to go and read that part of the op that, acording to you (you dont say it, but you imply it), they just dont undersand. The argument you most use is the guiness records one, you throw it away as if people have not read/undertand it and you continue; let me bring a counter argument of some user, this time with all respect 

The Guinness book relies on facts (i.e. fastest car speed officially recorded,  most number of hotdogs eaten in X minutes). Most importanly, it limits itself to facts, it doesn't try to link facts with each others, it doesn't try to explain reality, it stops before that. You comparaison with the Guinness book doesn't make sense since you are trying to explain reality.

And using the quantitative measure of ''Effort/time/money'' to qualitatively analyse games is misleading since the quality of a particular game is not determined by the amount of ''Effort/time/money'' put into it, notwithstanding you even knowing that amount.

You also downplay others opinions and articles, but your sources are: An image (sourceless one, already have been searching for it), a blog entry about the pre 90's nintendo (sourceless again, but thats not bad if we consider that is a BLOG) that actually conclude with "I personally think that the inherent risks of a single system market are sufficient to warrant concern if the industry becomes dominated by one company again." that actually has more to do with the actual state of ps4, but lets continue, you also have a source about the lets play in youtube and nintendo not allowing it, wich you yourself say that it has damaged themselves more tha anything and only covers your op's 3.2, and an article from eurogamer, doubted and called "clickbait" from others developers (something i cant deny or probe personally), no more sources (you didnt quote anything in your op also) and yet you claim that most if not all of your arguments are facts or are "backed up"

Im going to do a final quote from a user up there, 

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

I've just answered your question (how has the Wii attracted shovelware). You say there's nothing wrong with that. That's fine by me, but I have a different perspective, that's all.

Nintendo has screwed 3rd parties because of many many points I've mentioned on the entire section 2 of the OP...and only 1 of them is creating a significantly weaker console than competition, which neither Sony nor Microsoft have ever made. Wii is 1 gen behind X360 and PS3. WiiU is 1 gen behind XOne and PS4. PS1 was not 1 gen behind N64. PS2 was not 1 gen behind GC. Am I being biased for that? I think I'm not.

And this is one tiny part of the whole section 2 (harming developers). Please read it and tell me if you don't perceive a difference between Nintendo and Sony/Microsoft.

Please show me evidence. Not that it erases Nintendo's bad practices, but it would be already a start.

Setting the example is just one of the several points I've made there. Why do you ignore most of what I say so that you won't get the right message? Are you willing to really debate the points I've made or you just want to break my arguments into small little pieces and spin-off whatever you get from there?

I will only say it again: a highly powerful hardware allows low powerful games, a low powerful hardware does not allow highly powerful games. Freedom means developers are free to do whatever they want.

Furthermore, a more powerful console is more expensive to design and to produce. No only your argument is false (devs have indeed all the freedom to do whatever they want on the powerful PS4 and XOne) but also Nintendo is not opting by producing less powerful consoles to protect devs, it's just to protect their own pockets.

Just to keep themselves alive?? Please, look at reality: http://i.imgur.com/vXo7Z.png?1

Yes it can. Consoles could even be all the same. We only need diversification on software, and even that doesn't mean there must be poor games. I know it's hard to imagine, but it would be possible to make a AAA Mario game. Nintendo has the resources and the talent to do that. They just lack of willingness.

It's not the business that is greedy, it's a specific company in comparison to the others.

The arguments presented in there are laughable. I would be ashamed of posting such a link and say "educate yourself". Please, they even claim that squeezing a market is a good thing.

Sony and Microsoft also work with 3rd parties and licensing rights and they don't need region lock. Why? Please tell me why.

Those are only excuses and false arguments to stand for a shameful business practice.

The problem with this thread is that you take your opinions, some really blurry sources (that are not even first hand sources, or even second hand sources), then merge them and call them facts.

You decide to take as true an anonymous-sourced article that was about an prelaunch and early dev. dev (theres a whole thread about that in this forum) yet you downplay and article about a recent dev that shows that most if not all of those problems were arranged or never existed. When some user reply you and you dont know how to explain that you only tell them to go and read the op again (or a part of it) as if, for your concern, you are already right and they didnt read in the way you wrote it. And you do this constantly

You say "I don't need to read that pile of text to understand that high power allows low power but the opposite is not true.". With that you imply that you have previous knowledge, and that is excelent, but when someone tries to do the same but against you op you do it again, tell them to go and read that part of the op that, acording to you (you dont say it, but you imply it), they just dont undersand. The argument you most use is the guiness records one, you throw it away as if people have not read/undertand it and you continue; let me bring a counter argument of some user, this time with all respect 

The Guinness book relies on facts (i.e. fastest car speed officially recorded,  most number of hotdogs eaten in X minutes). Most importanly, it limits itself to facts, it doesn't try to link facts with each others, it doesn't try to explain reality, it stops before that. You comparaison with the Guinness book doesn't make sense since you are trying to explain reality.

And using the quantitative measure of ''Effort/time/money'' to qualitatively analyse games is misleading since the quality of a particular game is not determined by the amount of ''Effort/time/money'' put into it, notwithstanding you even knowing that amount.

You also downplay others opinions and articles, but your sources are: An image (sourceless one, already have been searching for it), a blog entry about the pre 90's nintendo (sourceless again, but thats not bad if we consider that is a BLOG) that actually conclude with "I personally think that the inherent risks of a single system market are sufficient to warrant concern if the industry becomes dominated by one company again." that actually has more to do with the actual state of ps4, but lets continue, you also have a source about the lets play in youtube and nintendo not allowing it, wich you yourself say that it has damaged themselves more tha anything and only covers your op's 3.2, and an article from eurogamer, doubted and called "clickbait" from others developers (something i cant deny or probe personally), no more sources (you didnt quote anything in your op also) and yet you claim that most if not all of your arguments are facts or are "baked up"

Im going to do a final quote from a user up there, 

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

Ps: please pardon me for my english, not a native speaker

ps2: i cant expand my post as i have to go to the uni, but anyway is always a pleasure to have a discussion

I didnt read his long rant on Nintendo honestly, i feel it would be a waste of my precious time....

but if he, in the OP, somehow even implies that Nintendo doesnt have, not even competent, but TOP NOTCH Music composers and legendary artist, this is the BIGGEST facepalms in existence.

Nintendo has the best Music in the industry by far. I thought that was common knowledge