StarTropics, anyone?
Fixed.
Now then, since I said I'd do it:
For the record, I already mentioned F-Zero X, quite literally before your bold 
Fxeni brought ya up to speed on this already.
As for FE, I'll admit that it's gotten more love recently, but look at how long it took for Nintendo to bring it over state side. The fact that it's very delay has created a trope means that it's not exactly well looked upon with NoA in the early years.
Do note that previously, due to NCL not knowing how well received a game series like Fire Emblem would be in the West as well as most of the games in the series coming out in the later years of the Nintendo console lifetimes (most notably, Fire Emblem: Shadow Dragons & The Blade of Light, the first one which debuted in the NES/Famicom's golden years) they weren't sure whether or not the risk would be worth it. It was just because of Marth's and Roy's dual cameo in Melee that they were even considered due to the popularity of the characters themselves. It was Nintendo's way of advertising, and since us West folk were all like "whoa, who're these guys?", they tested us to see if Fire Emblem could fly here, and sure enough, it does
and well.
Not to mention it's one game every other year. Ever since Melee, we've gotten about 5 FE games; the second and third GBA games, the GC and Wii games, and the remake of the first game for the DS. In 8 years, only 5 games have come out. Granted it takes time to make RPGs, at least more time than other games, and particularly FE games, but NoA didn't even bother releasing the older games on a GBA cart.
Two things are wrong here. First off, you're comparing this generations' output of Fire Emblem games to a generation that has already concluded. This gen I wouldn't even think is half over yet, naysayers excluded. In that time we've gotten two much higher quality Fire Emblem games (Radiant Dawn & especially Shadow Dragon DS) as well as the promise of more surprises to come. The numbers might not be as great as the previous generation, but considering that last gen was the first gen we even got Fire Emblem here and it was all just so that there would be some name recognition and development of a western fanbase, you can't really hold 5 games in one go as the standard.
The second part to this is that if there are too many releases in too short a time span, you risk over saturating the market with the games. Imagine if Fire Emblem would release bi-annually. Sure us big time Fire Emblem heads would be in nirvana, but the majority of people would actually see this as cash cow efforts and pass them all up. New people who might be interested in the franchise might become discouraged to do so since they wouldn't know which one to jump into first when they see 4 or 5 games on the same rack. It could also come as a knock on the actual quality of the game. The dev team at Intelligent Systems would be forced to churn out as good a product as possible to make ends meet for their next one with only minor or incremental updates from the last game since they don't have a long enough development cycle to bring in the new ideas. This then leads to series burnout where even the hardest of the hardcore FE fans would probably get slightly tired of the same old same old with a little new dressing on the top.
Long story short, I for one welcome the longer time periods between FE games (and most Nintendo and non-Nintendo franchises actually). A delayed game can become a great game with the time, but a released game will be whatever it is (good, bad, unrefined, etc.) forever.
Also, since I failed reading here, the possibility of future Virtual Console + localized JPN Fire Emblem games (or hell even more remakes in the forward thinking vein of Shadow Dragon DS) = everyone's happy. This is all on them though, so I think it's best not to worry about it and just appreciate it when and if it does happen. (It'll save ya a headache or two to think that way.)
If there's one company I actually would never WANT to work for, it's probably Nintendo. They don't give two shits about a lot of their series.
This is the same company that won't lend out even the images of their characters for others outside of the company to manipulate or use due to their ninja like means of "IP Protection". Need an example of this? Switching Mario's persona to a more serious fighter's personality and
giving him denims in Brawl. There's a story about Sakurai having to overcome this just to get Mario. Imagine the hoops he went through for the rest of the cast.
Just put out Kirby and Pokemon on the handheld and Mario and Link on the console and the machines print money.
I'm not particularly fond of the neglect a lot of series get when it comes to console outings myself, but you know this isn't true. We've had rumblings on HAL working on a console Kirby much like a natural evolution of Super Star since the GCN days ([tornado fang]ing HAL). Pokemon was never really a console series, but we did get our Stadium equivalent in Battle Revolution. Then you forget a lot of the smaller stuff that really has a fanbase that's getting second chances on Wii. (Sin & Punishment 2, Punch-Out!! Wii, the EXCITE racers)
Plus, how often do they come out with an original series? I mean, seriously, I think the most recent ones are the Golden Sun games and Starfy games.
They do come up with original series, Captain Rainbow, the Tingle series (which is getting two weird new games soon
), the Rhythm Tengoku series, and as much as folks want to discredit it, the Wii ___ series. Thing is, it's a risky business trying to create a new property these days since no one is sure how it will sell and who/what market it'd sell to. It wouldn't be much use if you created a top 3 game of the forever with production values out the ass if the market for that kind of game was shallow and "fool's gold" to chase after. I understand your side though because Nintendo, who used to pioneer some of the most amazing new game experiences and series when they were fresh in the game, seems to have fallen back on their laurels and brand name to sell a game. Not like this is bad when 75% of the time they push out a new Mario, Zelda, Metroid and the like, it's always a top tier game. (I do wish for a new StarFox, Kirby, Wave Race, Pilotwings, StarTropics, or even the Kid Icarus reboot, just to see some fresh Kool-Aid from Nintendo soon.
)
I mean, I know Capcom isn't exactly innocent of it either, but at least they try a bit more. Dead Rising, Zack and Wiki, and because they were under the name once, you could also count Okami, Viewtiful Joe, and God Hand. Even if most of those games aren't a series, it was at least an attempt to branch out.
Everyone can learn from Capcom this generation. They took chances and seriously pushed their efforts and were rewarded for them. They obviously have a long way to go before their "sequelitis" starts to fade from the public scrutiny, but you also have to admire their forward thinking in this particular round of game generations.
Although the bastards did ax Clover...