It's not that it is a choice to fuck up your game (in most cases). It is actually that the publishers of the game get to make such decisions, especially when the game is exclusive. EA gives the best example. It forces Maxis and DICE to release their game even when it is not ready and to release it on the sin that is Origin. EA forces them to use microtransactions and DLC and whatever crap. Activision forces multiple developers to make COD and whatever. 

For example, when Sony buys over Nintendo, Sony decides what happens with their games. It must be 1080p because the Sony audience likes that, although it will negatively influence the overall gameplay experience (30fps). Sony gets to decide what will be DLC and microtransactions and if online will be payed. Nintendo does not decide that as a third party. And they WILL do that because no single other company shares the same view as Nintendo. It is what makes Nintendo unique. In most cases, Nintendo tries to stay true to the consumers. And that sacrifices the power of their hardware, but they deliver some amazing games and content. We have to have such decisions to make as gamers.

ahh port begging
you people realize that there profits could decrease dramatically right?

I can dream right :(

Pachter keeps spewing out the same BS over and over again so he probably doesn't realize that..

Lost save games? Really? If any save files get lost, it are the ones of Nintendo devices. Steam, PS3, PS4, Vita, 360 and XBO offer cloud saving.

If your Vita gets stolen/lost/damaged, you buy a new one, register it and download your backup with all digital games & save files. If your Vita retail games get stolen/lost/damaged: buy them new or used or digital and download your own save games. If you switch from a retail version to a download version of a game (more conveniant), your save games are compatible.

If your 3DS gets stolen/lost/damaged: bye bye digital downloads and their save games. If your 3DS retail games get stolen/lost/damaged: your save games are lost forever... but if you buy the replacement used, you get the save games from the seller. If you switch from a retail version to a download version of a game (more conveniant), your save games aren't compatible.

Wii U certainly shows how that *could* be true. Wii shows how it is also very false. The truth lies somewhere in between, but that's only because dedicated games hardware itself is under more threat than ever.

Sony and Microsoft's exit strategy is obviously to a services platform, but what road will Nintendo choose?

there's no room for patcher

He is an idiot. Wii U might not be doing that great but 3DS is doing good and past Nintendo hardware has been very successful.

The Wii U hardware does not turn a profit.  Nintendo software, on the other hand, probably has the highest profit per title of any software in the entire industry.  Sales versus production cost for many Nintendo games has to be insanely good.  That's what analysts and investors are looking at.  IF Nintendo went third-party and could sell the same volume, they would probably be the most profitable company in gaming not named Valve.

However, there is no lock that they would sell the same volume without owned platforms pushing their games and captive audiences.  I think game sales and IP value would decline over time, though they should still continue to be quite profitable.  Hardware brings the potential for crazy profit, as with the Wii, but it also brings the potential for losses despite strong software sales, as with the Wii U.

Pachter actually raises a good point here, though, with regards to Nintendo being behind the curve.  He thinks, as do many others, that the dedicated gaming console industry is going to change dramatically and that Nintendo will be so behind that they will never see it coming or adapt in time.  Given the state of the Wii U, there is some degree of validity to that concern.

True true, guess I overlooked that in my tired confusion yesterday.