I'll talk about whatever I want whether it affects me or not.  What a strange statement.  

Those wars may not be as bad but they're still the same thing.  Humans being humans. 

No different than iOS vs android wars and many others.  This thing ain't exclusive to gaming.  

Car manufacturers,  clothing brands,  sports team rivalries.  You gotta just accept this is part of life and move on.  

Personally I like the console wars.  It makes gaming forums interesting.  last gen was amazing on Vgchartz with the Nintendo,  Microsoft and Sony fans all very vocal.  

Now it's just Sony and Nintendo fans vocal on here.  Not as fun but there's still good levels of banter.  Long may it last.  And long may Playstation rule (because that's my platform so its in my interests). 

The thing is that you and many others are ignoring 3DS which literally has hundreds of games that arent on other devices.

Pokemon X/Y-14.98 million

Mario Kart 7-13.56 million

Thats six 10+ million sellers, twelve 5+ million sellers, twenty-four 2+ million sellers, fourty-two 1+ million sellers with more to pass those milestones.

Ya people dont like Nintendos output.........

1. Bad example. Free to play game that only makes money off microtransactions.

2. Because it would mean Nintendo would have to bow down to the influences of third party hardware manufacturers.

You really want future Nintendo games to look like this?

Because this would happen if Nintendo went third party. They'd end up overly realistic just to try and stay relavent.

And not to mention the fact that, if Nintendo went third party, they'd be showing a sign of weakness, which investors have already seen too many of. You honestly want Nintendo to be viewed as weak?

1. Bad example. Free to play game that only makes money off microtransactions.

2. Because it would mean Nintendo would have to bow down to the influences of third party hardware manufacturers.

You really want future Nintendo games to look like this?

Because this would happen if Nintendo went third party. They'd end up overly realistic just to try and stay relavent.

And not to mention the fact that, if Nintendo went third party, they'd be showing a sign of weakness, which investors have already seen too many of. You honestly want Nintendo to be viewed as weak?

Also why are Nintendo fans against this? You'll still get Nintendo games but you won't have to buy seperate hardware to play those games as well as third party games, and these systems have more power so you can have a better experience too. Its a win win for them yet I see Nintendo fans complaining about it.

I'll try to explain my reasons:

1) Nintendo moving to a third party multi-platform publisher isn't necessarily a straight-forward path to immediate success. It is an immensely risky move. Nintendo have far healthier finances than either Sega or Atari did when they went third party, but look at how they've become niche players in the industry since they transitioned away from hardware production. Sega were once Nintendo's biggest rival, commercially and critically, yet they are now a pale imitation of their former selves. Even a run of critically acclaimed games once they immediately went first party (Super Monkey Ball, Panzer Dragoon Orta, Jet Set Radio Future, Shenmue 2) wasn't enough to give them a strong position in the multi-format publishing market. 2016 is certainly Nintendo's weakest year in gaming (business wise), but they still have a hardware base of more than 70 million to sell their software into, and as someone else has pointed out, they've still published dozens of million selling titles, and a decent number of seriously successful titles that have sold 5-15 million copies. 3DS demonstrates there is still a market for Nintendo hardware, and that Nintendo software can still sell the right kind of hardware. Even with its limitations and serious challenges from smartphones, 3DS has done reasonably well. Note that the pattern of Nintendo hardware since they launched portable systems has been that the less complex, more affordable Nintendo systems have consistently done better than the more complex and expensive Nintendo systems. 

2)  If Nintendo move into multi-platform publishing, there are serious logistical and developmental hurdles. Nintendo have struggled to regularly release major software on Wii U, yet you think transitioning into releasing for two (or three if they include PC) systems that are more complex is a recipe for success? Nintendo would have to use more development manpower, money and time to release fewer games across the new systems, and they'd also be in competition with the biggest publishers in the industry, who have far more experience at turning out regular commercial hits on Xbox/PS. On top of releasing fewer, more expensive games, Nintendo would also receive less money per unit of software, because instead of receiving all royalties for their own software (plus royalties from third parties), Nintendo would receive whatever cut was left once Sony/MS had taken their share of the royalties. Nintendo would have to massively multiply their sales figures for many of their franchises, or simply have to cut out those franchises and concentrate on a handful (Mario, Pokemon, Zelda) of properties. You would, in all probability, end up with less Nintendo software, less often, as has happened with Sega.

3) Against this, we have the potential of the NX, which is said to offer more Nintendo software, more often. If that is combined with an affordable hybrid system which has a mixture of indie, Japanese and Western support from franchises like Disney, Skylanders, Lego, then that it what I would prefer. I don't just play the biggest Nintendo series, I enjoy their middle tier and niche offerings too. I have a gaming laptop and an Xbox One, which covers most (almost all) other bases I need. NX has the potential to be an alternative system, and I think the market needs that. Gaming hardware doesn't need to adhere to having exactly the same standards and library, and it baffles me that people want that. Why not have more diversity in the systems and software on offer? Nintendo don't operate the way Microsoft and Sony do. They don't need to sell you an operating system or control your living room entertainment, they simply need to sell enough games to turn a profit. NX and mobile represents their best bet of generating revenue streams in the multiple billions, and profits in excess of $500 million. They're a conservative, Kyoto based company, less interested in short-term trends and dominance than they are long-term viability.

I think NX is an immensely risky play, and far from guaranteed from succeeding, but I think it's the direction Nintendo need to head in. Ever since they launched the SNES, an increasing proportion of their sales and customers have come from the portable market. If they can retain that 50-70 million base in the short term, and expand through mobile in the long term, that's the future of Nintendo I'd like to see.  An independent platform holder, capable of providing a genuine alternative to the other platform holders. Not an easy ask, by any means, but Nintendo have been in many a tight spot before.

It still creates an off topic part for tiself which isn't a part of the main topic being talked about. The main objective is to stay on topic, not draw away from it and go "I'm happy having access to X and Y" and then continuing on from it when it was already done and dusted, it onto itself creates another can of pointless worms.

Those wars still aren't the same as you claim they are. They aren't 50/50 and never will be due to their nature and design, just like how every war isn't the same, you can call it all war but we can also call all life all living, that doesn't solve or compare to anything and just tries making everything appear the same to suit the idea when it's not.

I don't need to move on because I;ve known this long before you have.

You find them fun because you pick a side to go with and play off of it, history tells me this and history also tells me of the upcoming mirror argument to replace this line guranteed. 

Nothing lasts forever as you;ve said, it won't rule forever and the day will come and it will be good to see and end to it all. Long may the end be eternal.

Not entirely. Some like seeing their hardware being put to good use rather than paying for a good setup and never having any of it's power used, I can agree with those people for that condition because it doesn't involve corp money reasons as it's bound by hardware from multiple users and not some one spec list sent off the the factory to be churned out.

I look at Star Citizen as an example, it's excxlusive not because a corp said so but because those that pledged to the dev team wanted it to go high end rather than being stuck to a console's limitations. There are defintiely people out there who want something to use what power they pay for and I honestly cannot argue with that. I can when it comes to "just for the sake of moving you into a brand and making money off of you" though.

So you think there should be exclusives, just only on PC since it can be stronger through customization? 

Yeah, so that's actually a fairly normal thing for PC Gamers to say, so my previous statement stands