I think MS is at the greatest risk to leave the industry, and it has nothing to do with handhelds. Xbox will just be seen as an inferior alternative to PS4. Nintendo consoles will always stand on their own, for better or worse. 

Has all to with Microsoft thinking it is worth it or not. Windows and Office are such money makers Xbox may not be worth their time. Conversely they have so much money not bothered if it doesn't make as much money as they'd like it to.

This is some awesome deflection. Its like when I argue politics and everyone goes 'But Hillary!'.

Funny how people write "opinion" in their thread titles as if that absolves them of any responsibility or criticism.

People worrying about Trump when they should be worrying about Hillary. She's gonna be in jail soon!

Your premise itself is false.

You are essentially talking about profits vs costs and whether Microsoft is making enough money with just their XBONE vs Sony with their PS4 and vita vs Nintendo and their Wii U and 3DS.

However, the reality is that Microsoft is not _merely_ a gaming company.  They are a giant company with many products.  If the XBOX division is in the red then there are many other divisions in Microsoft that can counterbalance that.  Same with Sony actually, though to a lesser extent.  Nintendo however is almost exclusively a home console and handheld gaming company.

Given this Nintendo still seems like the company with the most potential for being in trouble, though smartly enough, Nintendo tends to still make profit on 'failed' products.

This doesn't even bring into consideration that Microsoft's strategy has shifted so that whatever iteration XBOX there is, it is not the sole way to play games within the XBOX ecosystem.  If someone buys a game for the XBOX or if they buy for Windows 10, Microsoft still makes money, and that is their current strategic attempt.

I think is not about the number of consoles, but the amount of profits.

I mean we can go on all day cherry picking data to make Nintendo look better, but it's still dishonest and a misrepresentation of the bigger picture.

Actually, the publisher gets less than $15 for a full $60 title. The platform owner only gets a$1 or two last I checked. Distrubutors get a cut. Stores get a cut, then there's production and shipping shipping costs. That eats up over $40 of a $60 game (the percentages change when the game retails for less than $60). When a first party publishes their own game, they get like $16 max per copy, as opposed to the $1 or so they get for third party.

Then there's second party games (like Pokemon) where Nintendo publishes the game, and owns control of the IP, but an independent studio makes the game. The royalty for that game could mean that Nintendo might only make $2-3 per copy of Pokemon sold rather than the $15 or so they'd get if they made it themselves. This came up when Pokemon Go came up, and people were discussing Nintendo's profits from that. It's actually remarkably similar for all Pokemon games for similar reasons.

You do realize that the 3DS is entering the last stages of its life cycle now, right?