With the Nintendo Switch most likely finishing its run as the greatest-selling console of all time, and Microsoft slowly shifting its position from a competitor to a games supplier (similar to what Sega did during the PS2/XB/GC days), Nintendo is sitting as the market leader with Sony maintaining a healthy competitive threat to the ruling market leader.

The question I have for you, given:

• the Switch 2 (Codenamed Ounce) is about to be revealed
• the usually very volatile strategies Nintendo had employed in prior generations (N64 cartridges and 3-prong controller, Gamecube mini-disk and lunchbox design, Wii tv-remote style controller and motion control games, WiiU 2nd screen, DS second screen and stylus, 3DS 3D display)
• the Switch being the quintessence of Nintendo's designs over the past 7 generations,

What should be Nintendo's approach to maintain industry leadership in the games industry? See the poll and add other strategies you might consider wise.

How often does the Switch outsels the PS5 since the PS5 has been in a healthy stock situation?
Switch sold wonders, and the system being so old and still selling so well is really great, but when was it truly the market leader consistently for the last time?

Nintendo has been marketleader in every generation except PS2 and PS4 where it had about 2/3 sales of the PS family. The reason is that a lot of people only consider either one or the other of Nintendo's consoles at a given time, which is not a true comparison. You have to sum all consoles per gen as follows:

• NES (Won)
• SNES vs Genesis (49.1M vs 29M Genesis)
• N64+Gameboy Family vs PS1 (118.69 GB + 32.93M N64 vs 102.49M PS1) OR (74.91M GB 1996-2002 + 32.93M N64 vs 102.49M PS1) See source below.
• GC + GBA vs PS2 (21.74M GC + 81.5M GBA  vs 159M PS2)
• Wii + DS vs PS3 + PSP (101.63M Wii + 154M DS vs 87.4M PS3 + 82.5M PSP)
• WiiU + 3DS vs PS4 + Vita (13.5M WiiU + 76M 3DS vs 117M + 16M Vita)
• Switch vs PS5 (143.5+M Switch vs 62+M PS5)

Nintendo has been contested leader in GC + GBA and WIIU + 3DS, 2 gens, all other generations it won.

Gameboy source: 

https://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread/246545/gameboy-total-lt-sales-breakdown/

I chose "not change anything", since I didn't like any of the options.  

What I really think they should do is 1) increase their monopoly position in Japan and 2) court Western indie devs to make content for the Switch 2 (ideally exclusive content).  This leaves AAA Western publishers to try to do their best on Sony/Microsoft platforms which have diminishing install base numbers each generation and longer wait times between the releases of big new games.  I believe this will make the AAA Western publishers to tailor their games more and more for the PC and eventually force them onto the PC entirely.  So, basically I think Nintendo can take over the whole console market by increasing their relations with the types of developers that already benefit from their platforms and forcing AAA Western publishers onto the PC.

Switch's primary competition was the Xbox One and Playstation 4. - They are the same generation of hardware and graphical feature sets.

Gameboy came out in 1989, there is no way it gets paired up with the Nintendo 64 which came out in 1996... I was using the Gameboy alongside the SNES with the Gameboy adapter before the Nintendo 64 was even a mention in magazines.

Basically you have fluffed with the hierarchy.

Do stuff like:

1. Fully embrace online
- as in get better online infrastructure, finally get rid of friend codes and let people easily connect and chat and invite people to games and all that basic stuff

2. Stop letting beloved franchises go dormant for long periods of time
- for example, next gen let's see Star Fox, F-Zero, DK, Advance Wars, Golden Sun, Kid Icarus, etc

3. Really go after third parties to get third party AAA games not only coming out on Switch but coming out the same day they come out on PS/XB/PC

4. Keep building out the classic titles available so that the latest Nintendo system is always the ultimate machine for Nintendo's entire historical library
- ideally add GC to NSO Expansion Pack next gen, or at least port a bunch of GC games to the system, and release Galaxy 2 and Prime 3 and whatever other Wii games are worthy that haven't been released yet

5. Stop making bone-headed decisions
- Some examples:
- Mario Golf Super Rush's content not being ready when they released the game
-Switch Sports not having Golf available for a while and not including Boxing at all and not including training modes so a $40 game was worse than the 15 year old original that shipped included with the Wii as basically just a free (and super fun) demo
- Actually basically all the Nintendo Sports games this gen were shallow experiences
- Adding Mario 35 to NSO and then bizarrely getting rid of it for no reason! Why go through the effort to make a game to add value to their online subscription only to then take it away??
- Super Mario 3D All-Stars only being available for 6 months despite great sales, and also super bizarrely including Galaxy but not Galaxy 2, in addition to not including extra cool perks like the original Mario All-Stars had.
- Randomly holding off releasing Advance Wars for a year-plus just because there was a war in Europe, as if there aren't wars happening in the world at all times
- I dunno how much control Nintendo has over Pokemon but stuff like releasing 3 Pokemon games in 12 months, announcing V/S just weeks after Legends Arceus was released, allowing a buggy mess like V/S to ship were all absurd and if Nintendo has any ability to influence GameFreak they really need to start wielding that influence

6. Realize that price cuts are fine and consumer friendly
- Not talking about hardware here, as there was no need to cut the price of Switch hardware until last year (though they definitely should at this point). Talking software here.
- Ports of old games should not be sold at $60, period. The most absurd case was where DKC:TF's original WiiU price was actually $50 and Nintendo actually raised it to $60 for the Switch port. Unless a ton of work was done to update/improve the game, old ports should be like $40 as a standard price. Hell, look at MP:Remastered, it was so well done it felt like a complete remake, and yet still was only priced at $40 instead of $60, whereas most old ports by Nintendo don't have anywhere near that much work put in and cost $60. Nintendo needs to follow a MP:Remastered strategy from now on. The other great example of where they did a port right was SM3D World, sure they priced it at $60, but that's because they added a whole new great Mario game to the package.
- Bring back Nintendo's Selects $30 games. Why are old Switch games that barely sell still priced at $60? Lots of older Switch games should have been dropped to $30 a couple years ago. Evergreens are fine at $60, but there are a ton of games that haven't been sellers for years that plenty of people would pick up if they were dropped to $30.

7. Just keep the hybrid setup, and make sure to keep systems priced at consumer friendly prices as the Switch has done. Also add a cheap "Home" model next gen to go alongside the hybrid and Lite models.

8. Actually fix problems when avoidable problems occur - for the Switch it was joycon stick drift. As soon as that problem became prevalent Nintendo should have done whatever little re-engineering was needed to fix the issue for all joycons manufactured in the future. Instead they basically just said sorry that's just something you have to deal with on the Switch.

All these things together would help grow the user base, and even make people who never buy Nintendo sit up and be like okay yeah Nintendo is finally really pulling out all the stops to be by far the best company in the industry.

brother wtf is this thread lol. No, I’m not in support of Nintendo engaging in horizontal integration. I just want them to make games and keep doing what they always do. Give me a new Zelda, Mario, Pikmin, Smash Bros, MarioKart, etc., and I’ll be happy. :) I don’t want to see Nintendo becoming a corporate juggernaut like Microsoft or Apple.

I used chronology like we all should. Esp. for Gameboy, i used exactly the years of sales they coexisted in.

I didn't fluff anything, it's just the reality you prefer not to know.

Nintendo is market leader but it's not dominant. It's not direct competition to anything else. PC is more direct competition to the rest of the console space and PC is also more competition to Nintendo now with Mobile PCs.

Also, you can't measure Switch against 9th gen like this site does, it makes no sense. It has been selling for half of 8th gen and 9th gen. It's a handheld as well as a console. Comparison just don't make sense even if it could play the majour third party games. 

The comparison is generally acceptable, because the dates of competition are what matter, nothing else. Switch will have coexisted for most of its existence at the same time as PS5 and XBS. The three are competing for marketshare, you can't deny that and pretend like you are basing yourself in reality. Take Japan for example, the Playstation would sell worlds better if the market was not dominated by Nintendo.