No, but it is part of the hardware. As was the decision to go with a non-standard disc format that restricted storage space. Since the N64, for all the great hardware descisions Nintendo have made, their have been plenty of mistakes that have hindered the success of their platforms.

OT: I actually don't think Nintendo should go third-party but I can understand people who think they should. Nintendo have generally struggled to fulfill the potential of their home hardware platforms; N64 was powerful but had storage issues; Gamecube also had storage issues and a bizzare design; Wii was hugely successful but Nintendo were still unable to bring all but the core third-party games to the platform; Wii U was so poorly executed and the tablet proving to be such a hindrance that it's at the stage it's at. On the portable side the mobile and tablet segment is making inroads in their marketshare.

So, from a userbase perspective it sounds like a no-brainer. Go third-party and sell to a much larger userbase and reduce the R&D and marketing costs for designing the hardware platform. The next Mario Kart for consoles sells 30+ million like the Wii version did. The next 2D Mario games come out on tablets and sells tens of millions.

However, part of the appeal of Nintendo games and one of the reasons they're able to maintain such a high standard is because they control the hardware. By designing the hardware their software developers have full knowledge and can maximise the full potential of the platform for their games. I don't have full confidence that Nintendo could maintain the quality they do if they had to design for multiple hardware platforms. We're already seeing how difficult they're finding it just jumping to HD development on Wii U and that's where they've designed the hardware. They would really struggle if they had multiple platforms to get to grips with.

I think there are three groups of gamers when it comes to Nintendo. Those that don't like their games, those that like their games but don't think they are worth buying a platform for, and those that like their games enough to buy the platform.

People who would like Ninty to go 3rd party are probably mostly from the 2nd group, who enjoy the games but don't find the platform compelling enough to purchase. I suppose you could also just hate Nintendo so much you want to see their influence on the industry diminish which it certainly would if they stopped making hardware.

Because some people are ignorant when it comes to the benifit of having Nintendo around. Even worse some are actually willingly ignorant. It's sad but what can you do?

That's why they want Nintendo to go third party.

I can understand that kids might get only one console and students/young people having their first job can only afford one console but seriously there's no argument why all other gamers can't afford 2 or 3 consoles. You don't have to by them at launch, wait until they are 250 box and I don't see a problem. Seriously, in a time span of 5 years you can't affer 2x 250 box? Then you seriously have an issue.

Not everyone wants to spens lots of money on gaming. I have other things to buy as well. Art equipment, power transformerns and vacum tubes and other stuff. It's obnoxious to tell people how to spend their money.

I don't want Nintendo to third party though.

The storage issues on the GC were there but they weren't that bad.

I made a thread a few days ago showing the most Nintendo IP don't necessarily sell better simply due to install base, it seems as though just a few of their flagship franchises (2D Mario, Mario Kart, possibly Smash Bros) are directly dependant on how big the install base is. Even major series like Zelda, 3D Mario, Pokémon seem to sell a relatively consistent amount regardless of install base. This leads me to believe that most Nintendo franchises wouldn't necessarily benefit from being available on competitors devices. On mobile I can see Nintendo games getting big downloads but considering Nintendo games typically cost $40-60, those massive download numbers for free or $1 may not necessarily translate to more money for Nintendo.

The difference in the sales of the titles where the install base makes a difference is a compelling one however. Mario Kart is probably the best example. Just look at the difference from Wii to Wii U. MK Wii has nearly 6x the sales which is a lot of missed revenue/profit.On the mobile front I think Nintendo is one of the few companies that could suceed at selling $40-60 titles on App/Play Store. Plenty of people would spend that sort of money on a new Pokemon or big Mario title.

Like I said though, I think the appeal and quality of Nintendo games comes from the synergy of hardware (not just talking power/inards here but the whole package) and software teams working together. I don't think the magic of their games would neccessarily translate if they had to develop on multiple platforms.

People have been conditioned to only spend a few dollars at most for games on smartphones/tablets, there is no way Nintendo is selling $40-60 games on the App/Play Store. Pokémon is actually one of the games I'm talking about that sells a pretty standard amount regardless of install base, Pokémon Ruby/Sapphire sold 16 million on GBA with an 80 million install base, Pokémon Diamond/Pearl sold 17 million & Black/White sold 15 million on DS with an install base of over 150 million and Pokémon X/Y have sold over 14 million (still growing) on 3DS with a current install base under 60 million, also each of these devices had a remake of previous Pokémon games and all 3 times they sold in the 10-12 million range. The series has been stagnant since 2002. Like I said, it's literally like 2-3 games that have shown to be directly affected by install base.

As for ur second paragraph, I agree completely.

If I thought that Nintendo would make the transition to third party without a decrease in quality in their games I wouldn't be so against it. I'd still be against it, because I think Nintendo are the only ones making interesting hardware, but I'll admit it would be nice to have the option to play some games from other developers on my console and so a console that does it all would be appealing. But again, having seen what happened with Sega going third party, I'd have no confidence that Nintendo would keep producing good quality games in that case.