You are all over the place and not making any sense. This is how our coversation has gone.

I made a post describing what I think Nintendo should do in order to appeal to the west, which was use their western 1st/2nd party studios to focus on western games. Retro should make a first-person, western RPG with various aspects of Metroid Prime, Fallout & Bioshock mixed together. NST should go back to making sports games like Wave Rave & 1080 Snowboarding instead of Mario vs DK. NLG should go back to creating sports games but NOT Mario Sports. Monster games should go back to releasing racing games but NOT a Kart racer.

Ur response was that Nintendo did that during the N64 Era and it didn't help.

I responded by explaining how in the west, N64 saw a very minimal decline from SNES despite losing 3rd party support because they had a stronger focus on western software. Japan saw a big decline but not because of Nintendo releasing western focused games, it was due to losing most of their 3rd party support by going with cartridges instead of CD which caused them to lose the JRPG & fighting audiences that were huge on SNES but had migrated to PS1.

U responded that I was cherry-picking by only focusing on the west.

I responded by saying my original post was about ways to improve their image in the west so the Japanese market was irrelevant to my original point.

U responded with saying in order to improve their image in the west, they need to release western games instead of releasing more of the same.

So basically we have gone around in a complete circle and ur argument is actually 100% what I said in the first place.

I don't know if I would dismiss Nintendo's diversification...

During the DS/Wii era, they had a pretty good amount of games that were different from the usual Mario, Zelda, and Pokemon. Remember games like Rhythm Heaven, Nintendogs, Tomodachi, Elite Beat Agents, Endless Ocean, Brain Age, Art Academy, Captain Rainbow (JP), Disaster Day of Crisis, and, of course, the Wii series? Then this gen, they revived the Kid Icarus series with Uprising, revived Pilotwings with Resort, are about to revive Star Fox, helped Fire Emblem emerge as a more notable franchise with Awakening and Fates, created sequels to some of the games I've previously mentioned in my last sentence, along with Luigi's Mansion Dark Moon, Pikmin 3, Kirby's Triple Deluxe and the Rainbow Curse, produced Bayonetta 2 and Fatal Frame V (and IV on Wii for JP), and created a few new IPs like Splatoon, BoxBoy!, Nintendo Land, Steel Diver, The Wonderful 101 (with the help from Platinum Games), and Codename Steam.

True, but this isnt the DS/Wii era. We are in the WiiU/3ds era. Im not saying they are not diverse but has that diversification helped them in the last few years?

^ for the most part, unfortunately, no. It's a shame really. People ask Nintendo to make more IPs but when they do, it hasn't panned out for the most part (in the last several years), with the exception of Splatoon, Nintendo Land, and a few others. A pretty good amount of their new IPs are pretty good, but very few have reached commercial success. I do commend them for reviving old series and even broadening their IPs to different genres and crossovers this gen. #FE, Hyrule Warriors, Pilotwings Resort, and Kid Icarus Uprising have been solid to great games for their respective series.

I agree, I played Splatoon, its pretty good. SO the only thing that could be a problem is the hardware, it its not the games. And IMHO Ninty hasnt really made good HW in a while. Its always some silly thing or the other holding it back, even with the WIi it was held back by its HW or lack thereof.

Old, but always topical...

In a way you and Zorg are both correct: Nintendo is following the 1995 strategy, and so is Sony. But it's Sony's 1995 strategy they both follow, not Nintendo's. Sony learned from Sega to market their machine as more cool than the previous gen consoles and to a little more older audience (the 80's NES kids, who were growing up). When Sega did it with Megadrive, Nintendo followed soon after, and when Sony did it with Playstation, Nintendo followed it soon after. N64 had quite a number of Nintendo-published games targeted directly towards the teenage Playstation customer. Mostly developed by a third or second party developer. Playstation had more of these games because it had more of any games. With the Gamecube Nintendo had the usual 2nd and 3rd party developers, but also moneyhatting devs for certain games, such as the Resident Evil games. Wii took a step in the opposite direction and had more focus on families instead of the 18-35 male - like the NES back in the day - but Wii U returned back to the teenager market.

The 1995 strategy works for Sony because it's where everyone else tries to follow and Sony is the one leading.

And, Sony has it's share of family or kidfriendly games, while Nintendo has teenager/single male games. It's just that Nintendo's problem is, that their family friendly games have been rubbish lately, just like everyone elses games in the market too.

They weren't competing with Ps3/360 during the Wii era though, they expanded the market during that period. In fact the Ps3 + 360 sold collectively about 160m which is more or less as much as Ps2 + Xbox sold during the previous generation, the Wii didn't stole those marketshares.

Mario 3D World, Smash Bros U, Mario Kart 8, NintendoLand .... rubbish? The problem is the WiiU doesn't make sense as a console to play familiy firendly games.

That's assuming PS3/360 did not expand their reach beyond PS2/Xbox though, which I don't think is a safe assumption to make.

Where there is audience overlap, there is competition.

I have faith