http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2016/04/20/apple-app-store-makes-twice-the-money-googles-play-store-does/

Nowadays pretty much every game on iOS is also on Android. The piracy on android is exaggerated, like it is on PC.

That's not a bad idea actually. Release the old games from SNES and below. People probably rebuy Mario Bros on every device it's available on. It's another chance to re-re-re-re-redip on the old classics.

Yes and no.I think you are especially wrong in the part that the only reason to keep software exclusives is to get the profits from third partys and subscription services.First that you could easily create a program that requires a subscription fee in other platforms that has success.Think PS Plus or XBox Live without the paywall for internet use and you got it.I mean, Xbox Live on 360 already did that and was successful.The free games every month, plus the discounts they throw every now and then exclusives to the service is more than enough to make people jump in.And who knows, they may think of something that makes it more atractive.

Second reason that i think you are wrong is that they dont do it only to get the cut from third party games.You subestimate the kind of profit that you can have from first party game, at the very least for Nintendo.While it is debatable for Sony and Microsoft, since they dont plubish and sell gangbusters(think Fallout 4 or COD levels of sales) you might be right for them on this one, but for Nintendo is a different story.Just look at the attach rate for games on Wii U.Hell, for all the mistakes that the Wii U did and the horrendous droughts it had, Nintendo supplied the console almost by itself and did a somewhat decent job of it.Games on 3DS that Nintendo owns sells millions upon millions, and also its not one or two titles that have done that, but many.If you need further examples, just go one generation earlier.On the Wii, Nintendo has dozens of titles that sold over 10 millions.And that just overshadows the profits done by the cut of the money they make on third party.The same can be said for the DS.And that brings me to the next point.

If Nintendo were to go third party(which is what you are basically implying), the profit they get on each of their titles would fall considerably.Now, Im not sure of the numbers, but I would say that each physical copy sold they get around 75%(?) out of it, and digitally it is 100%.If they were to publish on other machines, be it PC, mobile, PS4 or XOne, the profit would fall to 60-50%(?) for physicals and about 80% for digital.You could argue that they could compensate for increased numbers sold the lack of total profit per unit, but they would lose something more important:total control over their decisions.Now, this is a personal opinion of mine, but since Nintendo wouldnt have created their own hardware, they wouldnt know how to take full advantage of their power and as a consequence the games would suffer for it.Not only as a third party, you would have as much freedom to do what you want as the owner of the platform.Other thing that I also find important to note is that I personally believe the industry would suffer as a whole.I lost count on how many times Nintendo revolutionized the industry and kept pushing it further, adn we all stand to lose if that went away.

To the point at hand, while I may have overreacted a bit about VC games being available on other platforms(If Nintendo did like its own program(that Nintendo itself controls) that allows you to play VC games on PC and has cross-play with Nintendo hardware,I could see it somehow working), I believe you are wrong about the rest because of the reasons listed above.Plus, I think its also important to note that Nintendo is one of the few companies that are not as interest in profit  than making great games.I mean, they are still a company so of course they want to make money, but they are not afraid to make high risk choices that could potentially make them lose money, just for the sake in what they believe will make their games better.So I dont think Nintendo is doing that(releasing their VC games on other platforms) anytime soon.

Old vc games, sure! But only being limited to iOS is nonsense... Most developers release games on both, specially SE, EA, Ubisoft and etc. Limiting yourself to only one platform without any money from the platform holder to keep you exclusive is just stupid.

On the other hand, it will make people stop buying or rather rebuying VC on Nintendo consoles/handheld. So it depends on how much they think vc is a selling point.

And make amiibos work on phones!!!!! 

1. I assume when you say Xbox Live already did it on 360, you actually meant to say PS+ did it on ps3 with regards to a subscription service that didn't have online play locked behind a paywall. PS+ was at about 4 million subscribers back in the day when it was nothing but free games (and much better free games then we're getting now) But with the online being behind a paywall that number is up to 21 million subscribers, with the launch of the ps4 (and the start of locking online multiplayer behind a paywall) subscriptions to PS+ SHOT up. I don't agree that you could make a subscription service on PC for example that would be as profitable or successful as PS+ or Xbox Live.

2. Absolutely, Nintendo's main profit currently is by far first party software. That's exactly why they shouldn't be limiting their consumer base.

3. Yes and that's exactly what I would argue, take Mario Kart 8 for example, absolutely phenomenal game. The predecessor sold over 36 million, yet Mario Kart 8 sold only over 7.5 million so far. (I'd post vgchartz numbers but I can't get the site to load.) Mario Kart 8 has been SEVERELY hindered by the very small installbase of the WiiU. If this game was released on ps4/xbo and PC as well I have no doubt it would have sold at the very least 20 million copies. Regardless of the cut they have to give to Sony, Microsoft and Steam it would have made them at least twice as much as it made on the WiiU. As for Mobile Nintendo could very easily create it's own store on android and get 100% of the profits.

4. As Nintendo would be publishing their own games they would have full control over their titles. They would lose no control.

5. With their hardware currently being a fraction of the power of the competition it's irrelevant that they wouldn't be able to squeeze as much power out of the machines. But the difference between what third party's and first party's can get out of a machine isn't that drastic, the greatest looking games on a machine sometimes come from third party's.

6. They make high risk choices because they think it has a chance of being very rewarding in terms of profits. They are definitely as interested in profits as any other company, (amiibo).

Nintendo make the majority of their money from first party software, so why hold it back. They should focus on continuing to develop phenomenal software and not waste resources on developing risky hardware that the software is reliant on selling so it actually has potential customers. If Nintendo's hardware doesn't sell, it's games don't sell. The entire business is reliant on hardware selling, these last few years would have been far far better for Nintendo if they were third party.

The WiiU has some fantastic games that could have sold several times more units if they weren't restricted to Nintendo's platform.

Many iOS and Android users buy Final Fantasy games and other Square Enix games.

Why shouldn't these people also buy Nintendo games instead of pirating them?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA ...... no!

Mario would be absolutely ruined having to play on a touchscreen