yeah I'm not on either extreme, the extreme that thinks the rest of the industry is complete garbage and there's only "boring realistic high-graphic games" or the other half that think Miyamoto is dumb and Nintendo just does dumb cartoony/kid stuff
neither is really accurate in mind
I saw this comment though and I think Miyamoto is too old-fashioned and stuck in his ways and fails to actually see the value in a lot of things such as great graphics and online play. he cares a lot about "gimmicks" and making things "unique" but a lot of the time you don't actually need that. he's legendary and has a lot of great ideas and I respect him but I'm definitely not going to agree with everything he says.
Some of my most anticipated games and my favorite ones in general have great graphics. Star Fox Zero might be fun but some of the textures look so bland that I honestly can't be that hyped for it, it doesn't feel like a $59.99 game--there are way better looking games, even on the Wii U. I hope the graphics get better because otherwise maybe I'll cancel my pre-order and get when it's cheaper.
Also, games can both look more realistic while still retaining a high sense of artistic style of creativity. Super Smash Bros. for Wii U looks way better than Melee, for instance, but it's not a realistic game style. Yoshi's Woolly World looks great, and the artistic style is awesome, but it wouldn't work as well if the quality of the yarn theme wasn't good. Same for Kirby and the Rainbow Curse. You see, if you really want a game to impress visually (which is just one of many elements that make a good game; graphics isn't everything, but it's definitely SOMETHING), IMO you should make it look both realistic and set a cool, fitting style for it, or you need to settle for something that's considered "timeless" by people, such as pixel art. Some art doesn't need to be high-quality to still look great.
But in a game like Star Fox, it seriously needs some work.
And yeah, if I want a truly impressive looking game like Horizon: New Dawn or some of the other stuff I've seen at E3 for PS4/Xbox one, well, I'm not going to get anything quite like that on Nintendo consoles, which is why I don't just play on Nintendo consoles. I like how creative Nintendo is and how much of a variety they sometimies have because admittedly there were like 10-15 shooters shown at E3 and it got really boring, but at the same Nintendo didn't impress me with any AAA games this year (Zelda didn't show up after all, I already have Xenoblade X, and Star Fox didn't actually *look* like great IMO), and I was kind of disappointed to see all the Mario and amiibo stuff, so they've got plenty of their own problems.
For me, as much as I dislike games with a visually dull style, as boring as realistic graphics get--they get old pretty freaking fast, and they don't age well because video game graphics are always getting better--I was still kind of more impressed by what I saw at the Sony conference. So, I think Miyamoto's trying to be all "hipster" what with gameplay rules but he's going to the opposite extreme.
Visuals don't make a good gmae
But they can make it a great game
And gameplay alone often isn't enough to make a great game either
after all, if you were just pressing buttons on your controller without any visual feedback and such, how boring would that be? and it's hard to get excited and immersed when a game that's *supposed* to be modern looks like it's 5 years old
I cut old games slack because I know they're old, but I can't cut new games slack, sorry. put in a little more effort, Miyamoto, and maybe be a little less stubborn and reassess your priorities. You've got a lot going good for you, but you're also kind of disconnected from a lot of gamers and I think that's causing some hurt