All Nintendo needs is a system that can show third-party devs just how powerful it can be in order to house their games.

This is one of the reasons why Wii U flopped in sales - A year too early.

The question is how much Pixel density do we really need?
Do we all need 4k resolution monitors/tv's & games at 4k?

I think the price for a consol able to do 4k currently would be.... insane.
The price alone of the consol would make sure the thing doesnt sell well.

I dont think we ll see 4k resolution consols for some time yet.
Eg Playstation5 probably wont be 4k... maybe playstation 6.

Wont happen. At max it will be closer to PS4. But not powerful than PS4 if they want to keep the price lower.

The price of ps4 and x1 are completely irrelevant to the price of wii u's sucessor. Still, those two should be in the $199 range in 2017 (or at least should be), meaning a wii u successor releasing at $299 is gonna be a big jump from the previous generation.

Basic competance? In what world? N64 and gamecube were considered very powerful for their time. N64 was unbalanced due to cardridges size but was still getting games that were before only possible on PC and the gamecube absolutely shat on the PS2 and had early titles like Rogue Squadron and Star Fox Adventures which the PS2 was never able to compete with, not even at the end of its life. Basic competence would have been Nintendo releaseing a dreamcast spec system in 2001.

The equivalent of Nintendo repeating N64 or Gamecube in 2017 would be producing a console signifcantly more powerful then the PS4, which is why I referenced those 2 systems. Nintendo's home console history is not one of producing weak systems like wii/wii u.

gamecube top vs PS2 bottom.

To that, I still point to the Gamecube.  It was a $100 cheaper than it's competition, not underpowered by the standards of it's generation, and yet was still one of Nintendo's lowest selling pieces of hardware. 

Based on their philosophy and how they have functioned up until now, I doubt that is going to happen. Ninten hasn't really been about being the most powerful console on the market, except maybe the SNES and GC, but I don't think they're going to switch to a standard powerful console. That just isn't really how Ninten works. And a 100 dollar subscription for people to pay a year until it is paid in full sounds too farfetch'd to happen. I'm just going to say no.

Ignoring that I completely disagree with this idea, I do have one major question.

How do you enforce a payment plan of $100 a year? The only way I can think of is DRM that if payments stop so then you have an expensive brick. I could definitely see people "jail break" their console then to play games on a fancy system that cost them $100.

Have repo men come and collect your console or face fines without payment? How much does that cost Nintendo? Seems like easy way to have a lot of bad debt.

The only way I could see a high end system working is if it is heavily subsidized by a service similar to many smart phone plans. You pay $100 for the console and $20 a month for online gaming and all. The issue with this is while a phone is next to useless without a network, a console can still be fine without it which takes us back to DRM issue above.

I love how people tends to forget this. N64 and NGC were powerful machines capable of great modern games. Even both Metroid Primes in the NGC hold pretty well in our days.

The N64 was marketed as the worlds first 64bit gaming system and the "world's most powerful game machine".... There are more Nintendo home consoles with emphasis on graphics (SNES, N64, Gamecube), then there are which aren't (Wii, Wii U). I'd say the original NES is neither here nor there because it had no competition really lol