Other M was an attempt to be hardcore. And Killer Instinct (since Rare was a second party at the time) shows Nintendo was trying since the SNES days (although it was an arcade game first).

This post is just summarizing what Malstrom said all these years so the content is stale for those who read this. While I do think he is right it kind of pisses me off. Not because he is criticizing Nintendo but because Nintendo knows what they have to do and refuse to do it. Sad part is that their are people in the company who grew up with Nintendo and want to make games like the ones they grew up with. Though instead they are told to work on some weird 3D collect a thon

While I actually enjoyed the Gamecube I almost quit because of it. I am more into the NES/SNES style Nintendo games

http://seanmalstrom.wordpress.com/2011/10/31/iwata-asks-super-mario-3d-land/

This is his latest post, where he gives direct quotes from people at Nintendo showing that 3D Land, and both Galaxy games, were made for the purpose of trying to turn fans of 2D games into 3D games. Excerpt:

Iwata: "That’s really too bad for people like you who have worked so earnestly on Super Mario in 3D."

Malstrom: "WHO CARES!? What’s ‘too bad’ are the MILLIONS of Mario fans who were not allowed to purchase a 2d Mario game because some retard in Nintendo refused to make it. It is the market’s desires that matter, not the developer’s desires."

Why not just have both? There are a lot of people who buy nintendo consoles just for a 3d zelda and 3d mario. You can't just leave 1/4 of your audience, especially since they are so loyal(the gamecube would have sold as much as the Dreamcast if it wern't for the 3d games). I mean people say the sales of 3d marios are dissapointing, yet Mario Galaxy has 10 million in sales, and is very close to that "arcade" super smash brothers. And Zelda is a guarenteed 5 million and a system seller, which is also very close to donkey kong country returns.

And the sales of 2d Mario's are so good because of margin, you can't just release them constantly over and over and over again. It loses the novaltly of that old school feel after a while. The first two will sell great, the next two will be just ok, and then the series becomes stale and doesn't sell anymore.

alright, now he just sounds like a baby. "Fuck you miyamoto!" how mature

I would say it's more annoyance at them being so thick-headed and disrespectful to their customers (in this case, thinking they can change the customers instead of the product).

Just read those articles, and I must say, he's absolutely right. As long as Nintendo refuses to listen to its majority customers, it will always fail spectacularly. Whatever Sony or Microsoft may try, they can only affect Nintendo slightly, since they're not arcade companies. The failure of the 3DS, 3D mario, all their fault. It annoys me since I like their arcade games so much, yet they refuse to make them.
But what's more interesting is that in that Iwata asks, they repeat their true intentions with 3D mario, for the 3rd time, and still people won't listen. Because the aim of SMG 1 & 2 was to get the 2D mario fans, their sales were a failure. And it pisses me off with what contempt they treat 2D mario fans, like complete idiots, and how they wish to get rid of it.
And of course, this will only lead them to failure. As it always did.

If you could figure out how to make one game to satisfy two markets and your own artistic desires all in one shot, you'd spend a lot of time searching for it too

This is the only part about this malstromism that drove me to abject rage when it was at its peak around here back at the end of 2010, this narrow-minded sense that there is only one logical path to game development, and while i acknowledge that the market clearly exists for 2D Mario, untapped and in need of service, Nintendo as it is cannot provide all things to all people, and so they are bound to try to hybridize styles they have brought forth

I wonder why he avoided mentioning the gba for some reason.

EDIT: He didnt mention the gba brand. He should have given reasons for gba to.

They aren't relevant to those articles. He's mentioned the GB line plenty of times in the whole site (just use the search box), including that the GBA sold well because it stuck to the game roots that worked for Nintendo's other hit systems.