Why would that be impossible on iOS or Android? Also don't forget the much larger audience they could reach with such a move. There is a reason their investors want this, it means making more money.

Yeah you're right about Apple, can't find more about Google, but it seems Steam takes 30% as well so chance are Google does the same, makes me wonder about PSN, eShop and Xbox Live now lol.

Anyways, the investor part might have some truth to it, after all that's how investors are, but shares rising means people want to get in on what Nintendo is doing and that would in turn increase their market value, which is every commercial companys dream.

^^^^^^^^^^This above post is exactly how i feel in a nutshell.  I grew up like a lot of gamers with nintendo, and it seems to me ever since sony showed up they just were never able to compete, and its only gotten worse over the years.  Nintendo for whatever reason seem to outright refuse to spend the money to create a more balanced competive system in terms of the hardware specs, and a more flushed out online experience.  Instead they want to rely on gimmicky controllers, a fickle casual audience, and running their 1st party games into the ground none of which is a recipe for a consistently competive console imo.

What about Bayer, for example? Manufacture the pesticides that are killing bees, even though the pesticide has been shown to be ineffective at stopping actual pests. Meanwhile, as bees edge toward extinction, 1/3 of all food humans eat is threatened when the bees stop pollinating and those plants go extinct. The famines would be like nothing the world has ever known. Europe tried to ban the pesticides to save the bees, so Bayer sued the European Union. They're so obsessed with money, they'd see bees extinct and massive famines rock civilization to its core rather than face facts and make a new product and have profits dip for a bit. If you don't want them to die, fine, but you can't say it's pathetic to want it. Or what about Sea World? Horrific abuse of whales, just watch Blackfish. I'd love to see them die. How about big polluter companies? Sure, it's not too late for them to change now, but they won't, and down the line when global warming and climate change cause billions in damage, people will want them dead, and I won't blame them. 

All I'm saying is saying that "Anyone who wishes for the death of any company is just pathetic."is a sweeping, unfair absolute statement. Wanting a game company to die just because it's not a brand you're interested in is pathetic, but wanting a company to die in general may be justified or at least defensible depending on the circumstances.

bayer sued the EU because the reason for the ban was bullshit and the EU couldnt present any evidence for the claims.

I agree with the overall point the article is trying to make, but it's pretty poorly written. The author's own biases are laced heavily through out the whole thing, and his attempts to present those biases as a point of fact just make it comes across as the ramblings of a fanboy (which is a shame, since his core argument is perfectly valid if you ignore all of the nonsense puffing it up).

The part where he "dares" to state that gaming would be flat out bad with Nintendo made me groan. It would certainly be worse on the whole, they play a important role in the industry after all, but i fail to see how Nintendo themselves have a direct impact on the quality of every other developers titles.

Well, duh.. I thought that was something thatwas well-known by now!

Jup, completely agree. Many people forget the employees. 

Nintendo is very anti-consumer when it comes to their region-locking policy. Also having the New Nintendo 3DS be able to play games that the older models cannot is a huge middle finger to 40 million + 3DS owners. But you're right Nintendo always does right by consumers. /sarcasm.

:P Always remember you cant beat Sony, not even PS3 failed in the end