True that Xbox owners buy the most of the game sales are 3rd party games which I believe Microsoft only receives 30% of the revenue from. The vast majority of game sales on the wiiu are first party games where Nintendo doesn't have to share the revenue. Nintendo is also set to benefit from amiibo sales which I expect to become a larger business than skylanders. We know that in the past when unit share has been similar like the original xbox versus the gamecube Nintendo made money and microsoft lost big. In this generation Microsoft will sell many more units than Nintendo which will make their losses less severe but but even if Microsoft outsells Nintendo hardware 3 to 1 I wouldn't be surprised if Microsoft makes less money than Nintendo. All reggie is suggesting is that he feels more comfortable with a differeniated product. Sony and Microsoft have the spend  alot more in advertising and take many financial risks which Nintendo doesn't have to take as a result. Nintendo doesn't need to spend billions on advertising and doesn't need to do knee jerk price cuts because on a micro level they don't have a direct competitor. They don't have some other company out there which has 90% of the same games as they do to compete against. On a Macro level Nintendo has many competitors spanning from Apple and Amazon to Microsoft and Sony. I think you'd be very hard pressed to make a case that Nintendo would be better off competing directly against Sony and Microsoft. Nintendo is clearly better off with a differentiated product right now since they can't fall back on office and windows sales to weather a storm. Ask sega how competing directly worked out for them.

You can't compare Xbox's 1st gen losses to what Xbox One is doing.

It makes sense to take losses when you're starting a console in 2001 aquiring developers and making games with 3rd party devs. Even with all those losses the Xbox made a name for itself with marketshare and that is a success. The 360 launched and then made tons of money for Microsoft and still is making money for Microsoft.

True that Xbox owners buy the most of the game sales are 3rd party games which I believe Microsoft only receives 30% of the revenue from. The vast majority of game sales on the wiiu are first party games where Nintendo doesn't have to share the revenue. Nintendo is also set to benefit from amiibo sales which I expect to become a larger business than skylanders. We know that in the past when unit share has been similar like the original xbox versus the gamecube Nintendo made money and microsoft lost big. In this generation Microsoft will sell many more units than Nintendo which will make their losses less severe but but even if Microsoft outsells Nintendo hardware 3 to 1 I wouldn't be surprised if Microsoft makes less money than Nintendo. All reggie is suggesting is that he feels more comfortable with a differeniated product. Sony and Microsoft have the spend  alot more in advertising and take many financial risks which Nintendo doesn't have to take as a result. Nintendo doesn't need to spend billions on advertising and doesn't need to do knee jerk price cuts because on a micro level they don't have a direct competitor. They don't have some other company out there which has 90% of the same games as they do to compete against. On a Macro level Nintendo has many competitors spanning from Apple and Amazon to Microsoft and Sony. I think you'd be very hard pressed to make a case that Nintendo would be better off competing directly against Sony and Microsoft. Nintendo is clearly better off with a differentiated product right now since they can't fall back on office and windows sales to weather a storm. Ask sega how competing directly worked out for them.

It is also known fact that revisiting any of these games on the XBox 360 or PS3 is not fun at all as the gameplay experience suffers that much from not having up to date graphics. 

I