Edit: I was in a rush and I didn't write it properly but can't edit it cost the site is fucking up again and it will eat my paragraphs.

TGS 2005:

By the way, when you look at the part where the Nunchuck is connected to Wii Remote, it looks like Motion Plus is already connected.

Congrats, you just made the stupidiest post in the whole thread. Could you point out where he is wrong?

Nintendo made profits:

FY 2004: 316 000 000

FY 2005: 777 000 000

FY 2006: 894 000 000

FY 2007: 1 489 000 000

FY 2008: 2 480 000 000

And the current FY is on track to surpass 4 billion in profit.

So, there really is a reason to say Nintendo is making brilliant business decisions. Besides. if you look at it, you'll notice that Malstrom isn't writing his own "theories", he's writing about the blue ocean strategy and disruption. And in order to argue the staregies, you really need to have quite a lot of merits. He even points out historical facts (i believe these originate from Christensen) and even has a few videos where people are pointing out the disruption in various products) What Malstrom is doing, is only observing the market and then writes about what it means in disruptive terms. And i must say Malstrom has a very good insight.

@Yushire: Sean Malstrom isn't his real name. He writes with an alias, which is a very good way to evade ad hominems.

so does US and Europe

guitar hero/rock band are not music games

you aren't making music with them, you are trying to hit the right button at the right time

Or plain disagree, take your pick. Some people's reactions to Malstrom might not be ignorance, but simply a differing stance and point of view, I know that's why I don't like his pieces much. Has it really come to this? That everyone who does not revel in the glory of the Wii and thinks its a huge stroke of genius is uninformed or doesn't "get it"? This game, like the others in the "series" looks to be fun for a day or so and I think a great many gamers realize this and think the same.

This is the core of the issue, he was right on one account and so everything he says is the gospel. I disagree and see him as a John Lucas with even more bravado, everyone gets a strike now and then (especially if you flood up the channels with predictions) but that doesn't mean that whomever got it pegged is a genius and everything he/she says is a given. Just my 2 cents. And, no; this is not related to the fact that I am not a huge Wii fan, I simply find people's doting on bloggers and certain forum users ludicrous and slightly childish. Notice how said bloggers and forum users rarely or never talk about the instances where they're wrong.

PS: This is not directed at you frybread, just the tone of this entire thread, its turning into a Malstrom fapfest as usual.

Sorry, I thought they were easy to find. At the time he was not writing under the name of Sean Malstrom, it was mostly on forums. Looked around and I couldn't find the links. :(

Yeah, but any crazy fanboy could predict that Nintendo was going to win by a landslide. He was one that got his message out. He used to predict they would win by graphical technologies. Then he changes his arguments to games when he sees he was so wrong. What does that mean to me? It means he is going to predict they were going to win no matter what. That is fanboyism and that is when I stopped reading his stuff.

I didn't point out where he is wrong because that is not what I wanted to say. My message is mostly to make people be more critical about what he writes.

If he wants to write about nintendo and the blue ocean strategy, then fine. I would expect that he would mention all the times nintendo got it right and about the times they got it wrong.

Is nintendo doing really well with the blue ocean strategy? Yes.

In a critical sense, did they do everything they should to perfection? Probably not. There are probably areas where they could have made things better.

Now take Malstrom's articles. Which one is he doing? Is he writing a critical vision of nintendo and the blue ocean strategy or is he just glorifying everything nintendo makes and relating it to the blue ocean strategy? I think the answer is quite clear.

@Mummelmann: A lot of gamers definately think so, i don't disagree, but now that you think of it, you really would need to look it outside your personal preference. Just like the number of people who don't like the game and never will, there will be people who love Wii Music. I, for example, don't like GTA sequels, but i can see why people like the games.
If make a rough definition for a genious game, it would propably be a game that nobody have thought out before and a game that appeals new audience.

And Malstrom "being right" isn't the issue, the real issue is why he was right in the first place. If you read his Wiikly articles, you'll notice that they have the same tone as this blog post in question. He tells in the Wiikly, that Wii will GC, not that it will beat the sales records so far. What eventually boosted Wii for the dominance it has, is because of Sony fucking its things up with PS3. The Playstation brand was so strong, that it could had competed with Wii, but pricing the PS3 out of the competition and creating a Blu-Ray (price) deadlock, keeps it out of competition.
The thing with Malstrom is, that he is basing his articles and blog posts to an extent, to blue ocean strategy and disruption strategy, the thing what all the analysts should have done.

@rubido: Well, Nintendo is doing pretty much everything they can. Wii Music is part of the strategy. Then there is the competition, that can create surprises, ie you can only say later on, that was the strategy perfect, not in advance.

Yes, the answer is quite clear, but you didn't have the right option.
He is studying how Nintendo is managing its disruptive business strategy. If you have ever read studies that have been made in similar cases, they all glorify the "rags to riches" companies (or riches to riches in Nintendos case, since it made good profit even before the DS and Wii). Then, what you critisize, is when the company doesn't follow the strategy, for example: if Nintendo suddenly would cancel all the "Wii series" type of games or wouldn't make games like MKWii and Wario Land (especially this) and would focus on games like SMG, they would step out of being a disruptive company to being incumbent.
Why Malstrom doesn't mention the times Nintendo got it wrong, is because Nintendo haven't got it wrong. Nintendo is going forward by the Christensen books. Only thing that counts, is whether the games are good enough to meet the new values so that the new audience is adopting them.