@rjejr I should have elaborated: I wasn't talking about Nintendo sticking to its guns, I meant ME sticking to my guns. I believe I'm right, so I will not be convinced otherwise, unless information comes straight from the horse's mouth, that proves me wrong.

But I do find it interesting, funny, and weirdly fascinating how each person interprets the exact same text in a completely different way, even though in a lot of cases, such as this one as well in my humble opinion, there is no hidden message, reading between the lines or usage of diversion tactics.

And Apple and Nintendo would be an absolutely horrible fit, so that has even less of a chance of actually happening than Disney, which also isn't going to happen. Disney might take over Sony, if they keep giving them crap about the Marvel stuff, but Sony is already completely Westernized, so there would be zero difference in the kinds of games that they would then put out.

In Nintendo's case, any and all takers would completely destroy or at the very least severely damage Nintendo's IP's, their legacy and their ideologies, so in no scenario imaginable in this universe or any possible other, would it be a good idea.

As for branching out being an indication of it: no to that as well. A company that branches out, is either already very certain of itself, and not afraid to venture into new things, risking its own capital in the process (although 9 out of 10 times, it's a calculated risk), or they are preemptively busy with creating a bigger, more stable foundation, in order to be able to better safeguard their future.

In either case, that is just smart business, and has nothing to do with reactionary measures towards any hostile outsiders. In fact, Nintendo may even have taken its cues from Sony here, seeing as they've already diversified their business long ago, and regardless of considerable losses over the last decade, they were still able to right the ship again, so let's just for the sake of argument imagine that this got Nintendo thinking that they should also stop betting on a single horse, which might be the very reason they backpedaled on the mobile games department, and added amusement park ventures to the list as well.

On a side note: I don't have a problem with people talking about it either, but I do think that it's kind of weird to make baseless assumptions coming from a question that someone outside of Nintendo asked.

If we exaggerate the example a bit, then that would mean that if someone would ask Furukawa if he sleeps in red Nintendo pajamas, and he would answer "well, I don't have a red pajama, but I do have Nintendo pajamas", that the layman's conclusion would then be: "oh my god, Furukawa only sleeps in Nintendo-themed pajamas".

That's NOT what he said, that's NOT what he meant, and as such there are NO definite conclusions that we can draw from that.

As my mentor always hammered into my brain: assumptions are deadly...

Why would it be so hard, difficult or impossible to just accept that the man said what he said, without having to find some extra meaning to it?

If you ask me, you could almost say that he was lead/goaded into that answer, in which case I can reiterate what I said before, which basically comes down to that whatever answer he would have given, the exact same ridiculous conspiracy theories would have arisen.

In my strong opinion, nowadays, it's like the word "business man" or "CEO" is almost synonymous with someone who is either always lying, or at the very least always ambiguous, and that is just not always the case.

And in closing, as I often do, where it concerns Nintendo, we must not forget that, contrary to Sony, they are still a VERY traditional, and honor-bound company, so perhaps their word really IS their word.

Would be very nice if the world would agree with that for once, instead of always questioning or suspecting...