Why is "Nintendo" used as a qualifier for games?

[ijustlikegames:)]

the_dengle said:

ijustlikegames:) said:

curl-6 said:

ijustlikegames:) said:
Nintendo=casual, light games that don't have a lot of story depth

Xenoblade. ;)

The exception that proves the rule, thanks:)  Besides that isn't even out yet. A vast majority of Nintendo games are games you can sit down and have a blast with for a short period of time. Nothing wrong with that, just the truth. Although Nintendo did say they wanted to win back more of the core audience so maybe we will see that change. The common perception right now though is that Nintendo is the more casual of the three, just like X1 is more for fps and competitive gaming and the PS4 is the all around go to system, no need to be upset by that.

There are enough exceptions to disprove your rule, and Xenoblade in fact came out several years ago. Fire Emblem is a casual game without much story depth? Metroid? Zelda? Kid Icarus? Pikmin? Mother?

Casual is an undefined term which I will ignore. "Light" is also not a term I'm familiar with with regards to defining video games, maybe you can help me out with that one. If lacking story depth makes a game a Nintendo game, damn son, why didn't anyone tell me Nintendo had gone third-party? There are so many Nintendo games on non-Nintendo systems it's blowing my mind.

Yes ignore the term casual because you know I'm right about that. Good tactic, if you can't argue it ignore it. Anyway you're clearly just going to be super defensive if anyone says anything that you disagree with so I'm done with you.