Yeah, I'm on the side that thinks he's wrong, or at least mainly wrong.
I mean, he shows that chart and says "This collapse shown above is not due entirely to “less accessibility” or “going away from the basics of gaming”. From someone who participated in this ‘bleed’, it is clear to me that a big reason why is that Nintendo refused to compete with its past."
If that's so, then why did those gamers go to the competition? Did the competition have these games? Truth is, as the whole industry went away from some of those classic designs, it was expanding. Maybe people left Nintendo, but they clearly went somewhere else. Somewhere else where there was no catering to the things he claims the lack of is alienating players.
So yeah, of course the effect he describes exists. It's just so much far from being as big as he makes it seem. I think he's projecting his personal experience on the entire industry and suspect that's all he does all the time.
