This blog will be mainly my thoughts and what I know about why Nintendo didn't put out an HD console in 2006. I do believe pretty much everything I say is accurate and do not feel the need to share actual sources as I will be using info that pretty much every gamer should know but use it to support the topic. If I am wrong with anything I share, please let me know so I can make the necessary corrections. 

It actually bothers me whenever I see someone hating on Nintendo saying that the the Wii U should've come out in 2006 or that Nintendo not coming out with an HD console in 2006 was them "abandoning the core gamer" when it's pretty clear why they didn't do it and why it was a smart choice for them.

First off, let's look at Sony, leading up to the PS3, Sony had the 2 most successful home consoles of all time, which obviously generated a great deal of profit for them since these consoles weren't overly powerful, therefore weren't highly expensive to manufacture. Yet when the PS3 was released, within the first year the PS3 wiped out all the profits that Sony had earned from the PS1 and PS2 due to the high cost of the system how much of a loss Sony was selling it at. Even Microsoft with the less powerful 360 was taking heavy losses with each 360 sold.

Looking at how much these two major corportations suffered, what would make anyone think that Nintendo could afford going HD at the time? Also look at how their previous two consoles performed, the N64 and Gamecube, while both were profitable for Nintendo, neither were phenominal successes like the NES and SNES. Add in the fact that a great deal of Nintendo's revenue is generated through hardware sales and it becomes pretty clear that Nintendo was in no position to be releasing an HD console. 

Next let's look at the business perspective of it. Nintendo has almost never been about cutting edge tech, and HD was extremely cutting edge at the time and Nintendo (for better or for worse) has stayed away from using technology before it was ready and had mainstream appeal, the Virtual Boy being one example of them ignoring this philosphy and look how it turned out for them. By 2005/06, HD TVs were still fairly uncommon and for those of you who played HD games on a standard TV, it's horrible and barely looks better than what you can get on the XBox and Gamecube. My family's pretty well off and we didn't even get our first HD TV until 2009. Now that HD is the standard and the tech is much cheaper (albeit still expensive) obviously Nintendo is going to join in and even then, they're not going nuts with the tech because they want to make sure they put out an adequately powerful console at an affordable price. History has proven time and time again that the most powerful console never does the best overall (even though the PS3 is arguably the best console of the 7th generation, it was still a financial disaster for Sony and the Vita is continuing that trend) so why would Nintendo do something that's only proven to destroy companies rather than help them? 

There's a reason why Nintendo has been around for as long as they have and are still in a very healthy state. When you look at the pacing of the videogame industry after the crash, it's been going Nintendo's pace until the 7th generation. Those companies that have followed Nintendo's pacing (in terms of timing and tech) have had successful systems like SEGA with the Genesis (and to an extent, the Dreamcast), and Sony with both Playstations. Companies that have ignored this and have gotten ahead of themselves have suffered greatly and tended to fail like Atari, SEGA with the Genesis add-ons and Saturn, the 3DO, Nintendo with the Virtual Boy and even the PS3 and right now the Vita (I hope it does well though since I don't want Sony failing). The only company who's done this and came out reletively unscathed and successful is Microsoft, primarily due to the massive success of XBox Live and the fact that they're the wealthiest company yet to have entered the gaming industry so they can afford to take these initial losses. 

So it's not like you have to dig around to find out why Nintendo does things their way, for the most part, it's proven to keep them alive and well. When you think about this generation, we heard of studios closing left and right but for some reason, Nintendo didn't close down any studios, instead they accquired a new 1st party and not only that, have been consistently expanding their development teams. While it may please all gamers or give them what they want, I would much rather have a company I love give me enough of what I want so they can remain in business for a long time than a company who tries to give me everything I want but at the cost of the company going down in shambles.