I think I understand your point. I may be in the minority, but I did not buy the X100 for it's retro styling. I bought the X100 for it's optical VF, because I'm tired of using a smaller camera that gives me only an LCD or EVF as a substitute. I also bought the X100 for it's APS-C sized sensor and all the performance that goes with that. I love the 35mm equiv FOV lens and the fact that this 23mm lens on the X100 is integrated into the body provided the opportunity for Fuji to make an exceptional lens/sensor combination. I felt that there was some parallel with the Contax T3 film P&S of some years ago and they were able to produce a film/lens assembly that closely rivaled the quality of the Leica 35mm. I hoped that Fuji was up to that challenge and for practical purposes for me, they met it.
I was hoping that Fuji was trying to produce a camera that would produce not adequate but exceptional results for someone who wanted a camera that was usable in low as well as bright light, one that could render very pleasing images. For the most part, they did just that.
I might have balked a bit if it looked like a pumpkin, but in fact it does a great job of producing still images.
For me, the desire for Nikon to succeed is not to produce a retro camera but to produce one that meets those photographic requirements listed above. If it takes a DFM to do it, then I'd actually prefer that it was a DFE2. Nikon did make a rangefinder in the early 60s that was an excellent camera. It had an optical finder (e.g. mirrorless, except for the rangerfinder baseline). Perhaps that "brick" style (e.g. Fuji X-Pro1) might suffice. Then again it might succeed as a Nikon NX77 (ala Sony). I don't think the best place to start is a retro style.