What kind of decisions do you mean? The 3DS pricing, I would guess, but I was curious as to what else.
I think Nintendo consumers in general should be raising hell the way Nintendo has overcharged and ridiculously mismanaged DRM and Virtual Console. You have to buy the game essentially three times between Wii/3DS/Wii U. It is beyond comprehension that these lazy rom dumps are being sold at premium prices and minimum services. Looking at SONY's DRM management, Cross Buy, Cross Play, and Playstation Plus and they are just light yeards ahead.
I also think the hardware is equally short sighted in scope, but that is a whole other can of worms. On top of that, Iwata has had a long time to restructure and expand Nintendo for the next generation of development. It should happen next year, but will it be a matter of too little too late.
Nintendo in fact originally coined thd term 2nd party in 1995 to help explain their exclusive "special relationship" with Rare at the time. I believe it was done when they were doing media outreach for DKC2 and I remember the term being used specifically in EGM and Gamefan back then. At the time Nintendo didn't own a stake in Rare either, though a couple years later they did and they also applied the term to other exclusive external western studios they took minority stakes in like Silicon Knights and Leftfield Productions.
I think under that definition (platform exclusivity, minority stake) the only company you could really call a Nintendo 2nd party today is Genius Sonority.
It was a matter of semantics then, and it still is. Miyamoto wanted to distinguish the Japanese produced first-party games from those developed overseas at RARE. SEGA tried to do the same thing when they approached several European developers, but instead used the phrase "1.5 party". The terms still exist in some form of geek venacular, but it really is nonsensical. A first-party developer is transient, not permanent. All it means is x developer is working on game or games for the hardware platformer maker. A third party developer is simply a developer creating a game for a licensee publisher. None of these are permanent. People think these classifications of ownership are great for these neat organized lists. There is no better example than Nintendo itself. Intelligent Systems, HAL Laboratory have no formal ownership but develop nothing but first-party games. Monster Games has no formal ownership but has developed nothing but first-party games since 2005. Meanwhile, owned subsidiaries like Brownie Brown, Monolith Soft, and Nd Cube have developed about 50% of their catalogue for third party publishers.
Business wise, Diddy Kong Racing will sell a whole lot more copies than F-Zero ever would.
Some games are developed in favor of buzz marketing rather than pure sales. Bayonetta 2 is a classic example. It is going to sell on the lower end of Nintendo published software, but it exists to kind of push gamers and creators to think differently of Nintendo.