This

That's not how I think it would play out... The HD consoles depend on each other to make HD games viable, so one being dropped would almost certainly cause the other one to be dropped. Developers would have to make do with Wii/DS, which I think is better than making do with 360/PSP/PS3.

I understand that, but all that means is dropping the price would spark their interest again, wouldn't it?  A company couldn't let their market stagnate by keeping their product overpriced, I think.

So you do agree with me on one point, HD console decline. I don't think that only one console on the market is any good.

That wouldn't help much if your competitor is the Wii. It's cheap to produce, very profitable, Nintendo would drop it as well and still be winning against the lone 360, which can't afford big drops+not as profitable.

QFT

This what would hurt the gaming industry the most. 1 console in the market, even if it was just nintendo. where would be the competition? the drive to be the best? the vast choice of games?this is only reason, in my opinion as to why the gaming industry would decline.

if gaming got too expensive then it's easy to make it cheap again, by making a cheaper platform. that's the beauty of the vg market. do you think sony and ms HAVE to make hd consoles that need $millions to develop for? no. they could make a wii spec console if they wanted to.

I did a lengthy post but i lost it so i'll just have to sumarise.

Nintendo contribute a whole lot to overall market growth but this is due to alot to growth from the casual market Wii-Fit , Wii-Music , Wii-Sports , Super Mario X alot of generic , mass market stuff . Purley from a financial perspective Nintendo has contributed alot to the growth of the industrythrough the creation of new demographics not by increasing the spending or interest of existing ones.

However this growth is something that can be replicated if Nintendo left the industry , i don't think it's so much the innovation that captured the mass markets but it was a product and a concept which apealed to them which brought them in , in the masses it doesn't take alot of genius to come up with Wii-Sports , Wii-Fit or Wii-Music it takes genius to identify the gap in the market and capitalise on it before everyone else has , Nintendo have identified the gap Sony & MS are both able to capitalise on the opportunity if Nintendo leave it but they can't because A.They We're too late B.The Consumer has placed all their eggs in one basket.

In terms of damaging the Integrity of the industry I think Sony & Nintendo play a major role , Microsoft offer nothing unique really . Sony and Nintendo are opposites which compliment each other , Sony contributes to the more hardcore , technological ,"geeky" segment of the gaming industry with their cell technology, blu-ray , HD graphics , hardcore games . Nintendo offers alot to the casual / mass market with hardware and software which apeals to their needs .

I don't think it's a matter of Nintendo innovating far more than anyone else , everything Nintendo is doing has been done before in some form , Nintnedo's genius comes from the utlisation of what already exists to apeal to the masses in ways never done before .

Nintendo revived the industry with the NES. They were more innovative than Sega, with their controller (shoulder buttons). Sony was successful with their PS1 introducing CD. They created an opportunity for third party developers. Meanwhile Nintendo gave consumers, thumb stick and rumble. Sony introduced DVD and Eyetoy with the PS2. Dreamcast introduced online gaming, but it became a success with Xbox LIVE. Microsoft also introduced custom soundtracks, hdd and easy to use architecture of hardware. Nintendo introduced the Wavebird. This generation Sony introduced Blu-ray and Wifi simultaneously with Nintendo. Nintendo also introduced motion (sony also a little) and avatars. Microsoft introduced achievements.

I think Nintendo made the most improvements for consumers. They are not so open minded towards third party developers. And that's the reason why they've lost some console wars. Sony and Microsoft are more open to third party developers. Sony's and Microsoft's first party games are less popular than Nintendo's first party this also helps third party developers.

Nintendo has the crown of innovation for consumers.

However, allmost all these innovations are not created by the Big 3. For example motion control was already possible in the 80s. And their are other companys that improve gameplay like Immersion. Most improvements are jsut introduced by the Big 3 to the mass market.

Man I love how HappySquirrel comes up with these great semi long posts. That describe very well Right or Wrong Nintendos part of the industry. While a handfull of poster mostly describe elements that prove Sony/MS part in gaming towards gameplay(not industry) and it means to them. So rather than come out with nice long counter arguments. They are terse and mostly what seems like opinion. HappySquirrel seems happy enough to paint a picture of the industry. How about some people decide to take a step back and take a look at everything as whole.

"no. they could make a wii spec console if they wanted to."

This sums up the problem that view. Sony/MS don't want too, but people want to hold onto to this "IF"as a saving grace for their own belief. This doesn't mean they can't, but if they believed it was important they would have done so. What we will see next generation are implementations from the next round of machines that look closer to the Wii in strategy than they do to the PS3. Why? because it's proven and proving to make more money. Once we reach the new development phase of consoles Sony and MS are going to design what's already done and do it again. They will try to do the same thing better. If Nintendo follows the continued model, then they will once again make Sony and MS irrlevent to console industry. As it is at this time now. Sony and MS going away won't hurt the industry. They or newcomers will come back, but with new strategies for the future. GC/Xbox were made irrelavant to the industry last generation. it's still here and far more healthy because Nintendo was pawned(is that right?) last gen. They came back with a new strategy. See notice that's it's ok for Nintendo or MS made irrelevant, but it's not ok for Sony? That's a fan thing.

In the end i'm pretty sure the belief views of the posters whom I refer to will just dig in their heels and whine. Ignoring fact, history, trend, proven market strategy and hold onto it's personal beliefs and wants. That's fine. I tend not to post more than once because continous arguement goes no where especially when the arguments are terse 1/2 sentences and are considered strong and meaningfull.

I think HappySquirrel is wasting his time though, but hey I like reading his posts. They are insightfull. Take a book from Million if you don't want to believe that Nintendos path or stretegy are the right ones. Million knows how to look at things from outside less personal view. Right or wrong it's well thought out and is worthy of discussing.

Anyways I hope the thread continues *gets out popcorn*

You seem to claim a level of objectivity demonstrated in the way you put down everyone else analysis as inadequet. However you fail to justify many of the claims integral to your argument you just make unjustified assertions.