Topic: What if Nintendo kept the Wii U and released another powerful console?

1) It is not economically feasible
2) they are not ready to release any other console
3) they are already alone in developing software for WiiU
4) this move will piss a lot of customers

so.... NO

I dont think that would make any sense, one console for family friendly gaming and another, overpowered console for hardcore gamers... sounds kinda confusing to me, there is nothing worse as to confuse the customers.

Personally I would rather have them release consoles more often, like every 4 years! Fully backwards compatible! Similar to the ds/3ds thing. It would make sense to me, and I think most people would be up for it, too, since they could play all the games for all the other nintendo consoles they had bought.

I would just start scalping amiibos at that point.

Competing against yourself isn't dumb, just look at Nintendo's own history where they released the DS while continuing to support the GBA for years alongside it. Sometimes you have to cannibalize your own sales before somebody else does. I don't necessarily agree with the specifics of this idea but in general it's not always bad.

That may have been the PR but lets be honest here that's not what happened. The DS came out and was a success and that success was the end of GBA. Going down the list of 70 or so million sellers on the GBA only four or so were released after the launch of the DS. And we're talking mostly mutli-platform movie cash-in type games, something which doesn't sound like "long term support" when compared to the DS which got a whole Pokemon generation after the 3DS launch.

I don't think for a second that their "three pillar" strategy was anything more than them trying to protect themselves in the event that the DS was a Virtual Boy style flop. It's certainty not "proof" that the OP's theory of one company having competing consoles being a viable idea. The fact that Nintendo haven't come out with a new Gameboy at all since the introduction of the DS say everything you need to know about the three pillar strategy.

Your taking those quotes too literal. "Be your own competition" in other words, you need to better yourself each time. If you did 10 push-ups yesterday, then next time you'll do 20. "You need to disrupt yourself before your competitors do" You need to constantly challenge yourself and blaze trails, not wait around for the competition to force you to change with the times. In no way do either of them mean you should literally compete with yourself with your own products, heck, Apple does even do what your suggesting Nintendo to begin with.

Absolutely nobody is saying its better for people to pick Sony or Microsoft over Nintendo for any reason. Nintendo shouldn't be splitting resources between two different home consoles. The time, effort, and money that would have gone into making a "Pro" console and "family" console should be pooled together. I don't see Sony or Microsoft doing that, so why should Nintendo? Not to mention, they have a "kiddie image" problem to begin with. So you want a 100% "kiddie" console from them, as their main console? How is that different from what they've been doing?

If Nintendo (or any console manufacturer) came out with a second "more powerful" system that had some big exclusives to push it then we know exactly how it would play out. It has happened before, it happens every console generation. For a start there are two groups of people who matter in terms of making a console a success. There are the people who are the dedicated fans of gaming or that platform in particular. These are the people who will buy a console early in its life and they're also the people who buy the most games. Secondly there are the more mainstream players, the people who come late to the party, these are the people who give the platform momentum towards the middle of a platforms life.

If Nintendo went with a two console strategy then the lesser console would fail. For a start the enthusiasts, the people who buy all the games, would buy this new platform and suddenly not be interested in games for the old platform. So the big hitters like Zelda and Mario would have to jump ship or all of that development would be wasted. Secondly the more mainstream players would see this new platform and decide to wait it out or go somewhere else rather than risk a dying platform. Particularly if the console was already on the shelves and even moreso if some of the bigger new games were starting to jump ship.

There is no way this strategy would work.

After I've read your post, I can only think of one thing:

SEEEGAAA

my guess they will redesign the wii u next year with better storage and gamepad, cheaper too. and you can see the new console successor hitting japan early 2017.

I don't know about a redesign, but the Wii U is definitely due for a price cut right now.

they must, because xbone and ps4 will (at the end of 2015). AMD confirmed it, they are creating a new apu for xbone and ps4, cooler operation, lower wattage, and cheaper.
http://www.bit-tech.net/news/gaming/2014/11/03/xbox-one-slim/1

Of course it was mostly PR. What I'm saying is that it was still a good decision for Nintendo to introduce the DS even though its success spelled the end of the GBA. Using your Virtual Boy example, that was a flop and the original GB didn't suffer for it.

But that's what would make this a bad idea. What you and I are saying is that they could release a new console alongside the Wii U but doing so would likely mean the end of the Wii U. OP is trying to argue that they should make a console that's basically identical to their competitors and then everything will work out. Ignoring the fact that doing so would mean the end of the Wii U and would also mean that developers would have to stop making what little games they currently are for the system.

If they were going to go for power rather than the low price then the time to do it was when the Wii was still their primary console. Preferably even earlier than they eventually did. However even then I'm not 100% convinced that that would have not ended up the same way. I suspect that a lot of the Wii U's sales woes are more about image than they are about what's under the hood anyway. People were completely convinced that it was about Playstation and XBox even before the Wii U's first showing. Releasing a new platform and killing the Wii U would just burn current owners and do little else IMO.