"Foaming At Mouth Nintendo Hatred" (A Malstrom Article).

[Mr Khan]

richardhutnik said:

Stefan.De.Machtige said:

richardhutnik said:
My take:
1. Nintendo brought things on itself, by losing the (hard)core audience. The first break happened with Mortal Kombat. Sega jumped all over it. Nintendo then continued to remain married to an approach that didn't appeal to the young mail demographic, late teens into their 20s. You don't get Nintendo doing a GTA. Sony followed up on what Sega did, and capitalized on that market. End result was Nintendo got branded "kiddie", and they left.
2. The Gamecube controller is just plain weird. Sorry. It is nice to have a big honkin' fat green button in the middle, but across all games, it wasn't the best choice.
3. The Wii has its own niche it excels and, and should be left alone. To take a motion control game and say, BLAMMO it MUST be on the PS3 and 360 are missing the point. Like, we MUST bring Boomblox over to the PS3 and Wii? Why? It is made for the Wii.

You're transferring your changing game needs on Nintendo. Sure, it's your take and everyone can have his take. But it isn't much of a rational argument. Did you really expect them to follow you through every lifecylus? That's a strange expectation. No company does that. Nintendo renews much of its core every generation, like any entertainment business. Old customers leave, new come in. That happens with a lot of entertainment.

The thing is that I grew up in the target demographics that were what led to sales.  However, you can't say that every single thing there was mine.  I wasn't into Mortal Kombat at all.  I do know that Sega used Mortal Kombat to steal thunder from Nintendo.  This was the start of "Nintendo as 'kiddie'" (Keep in mind, I didn't believe Nintendo is, just that is the way it is).  Sony then exploited this further by allowing the likes of Grand Theft Auto.  Nintendo then got branded kiddie, and had losed the hardcore as a result.  It tried to keep doing what it was doing, and making money.  It did, but the growth demographic whines about it.  The complain Nintendo isn't "hardcore enough", and now they are gauled that Nintendo is on top.

In regards to this, I am far more Super Mario, than I am Grand Theft Auto and Mortal Kombat.

I think you're exactly right, but you're using it towards the wrong conclusions. The majority of the industry has been following the same generation of users since the NES. The 5-9 year olds that had the NES are the 10-14 year-olds targeted in the SNES generation, the 15-19 year-olds that led the PlayStation generation, the 20-24 year-olds that pushed the new-entry Xbox ahead of the venerable GameCube, and the 25-29 year-olds who now have families and steady jobs, the money to invest in large home theatre systems, and a craving for moving, adult content.

Nintendo didn't follow that generation, which is why it has become more and more evident as time went by that Nintendo was falling behind. Nintendo was only a few years off the "gamer generation" in the SNES era, and few people noticed, except in cases like Mortal Kombat. Nintendo was further behind in the N64 generation, and the cries of "kiddy!" grew loader. Moreso with GameCube, and now the point where it's increasingly unacceptable with Wii.

The wrong conclusion to get from that is that this demographic is the beginning and ending