Sony has had a strong stable of first party titles. They just let their developers move on to new ideas and series when they're ready. Developers don't have to make 20 years of Ico games and can move on to The Last Guardian.
Cut it out man. Nintendo has a large stable of IPs outside Mario. We going to act like Smash Bros, Animal Crossing, Kid Icarus, Golden Sun, F-Zero, Pikmin, Mother, Kirby, Mario vs Donkey Kong, Mario RPG etc don't exist?
We gonna pretend that the stable IPs they have don't switch it up entirely?? Zelda OOT, Mario 64, Mario Galaxy, SMB 3, Metroid Prime etc. Those games were innovative as fukk and completely different from other entries in their franchises. No one is tired of those franchises because each time they come out they're completely new and fresh. This isn't a Uncharted 2 to Uncharted 3 or Halo 3 to 4 difference. Some of the games have big differences in between each iteration which trumps this narrative that each entry is more of the same. You can't just say "Oh it's more of the same" and then pretend every other franchises that's longstanding is completely new and innovative each entry. How many more Call of Duty's or Battlefields until people are bored?? None, fans of those series will argue you to death saying how each entry is new and special until the next one comes out and they're saying how the older entry was better.
Does Nintendo make new ips? Yeah but 70-80% of what they release are the same franchises from the SNES and N64 days. It's Pokemon, Zelda, Mario, Smash, Mario Kart, Donkey Kong, Fire Emblem wash rinse repeat. Every now and then you get something like a Splatoon but it's a high percentage of the same franchises over and over again and they tweak the formula a bit.
Those franchises are some of the best games out period. The new franchises they make every once in a while are well received like AC, Splatoon, etc.
Even Microsoft outside of Halo and Forza usually let's their developers try new franchises.
Like what?
People just give Nintendo a pass because they grew up playing their games. Most of what people call innovation from them is gimmicks Nintendo themselves couldn't fully flesh out or utilize. After two and three decades of the same titles and franchises people are bored so if Nintendo can't come up with a successful gimmick you're left with the Wii U. Something that sells very poorly despite receiving those same franchises because the core gamer crowd has moved on to other companies.
I'm sorry this is nonsense. The Wii U debuted with horrible marketing, overpriced with games that looked exactly like the wii version. People thought it was a controller add on and the name didn't help. Nobody was "bored" with the games, that's something you just made up. I certainly wasn't "bored" with any of the Wii U exclusives I've had and the critical reception agrees.
Nintendo really sold their souls with the Wii. Sure kids and grandparents flocked to it for a few years but core gamers started tuning them out because if it.
they rode that wave and the casuals didn't buy a Wii U because they were thinking it was the same thing and by them all of them moved onto other things.
) portable screen
at the next trailer for the next re-skinned world war FPS or Assassins Creed but then pretend the new Zelda is more of the same. 
