We love nintendo so when they do something stupid we want them to learn from it.

I didn't know that. Then they're just lost. The pricecut is a step in the right direction though.

Because of this they offered Nintendogs and Pilotwing at the launch?

This ad is great in my opinion and shows some the advantages the 3DS has to smartphone an DS: Better Graphics, 3D, "real" games.

Other ads for the casual crowd (with Nintendogs, Layton etc.) will follow surely.

Yes the smartphones and Tablet-PCs steal a lot of buyer from the 3DS. To continue the DS way of marketing and games would be a failure and nintendo recognized this (in contrats to some people in this thread).

first of all, at the bolded part: THIS!

second, @Rol: I actually had a response written to you in another thread a few days ago (I think it was the "why do developers expect Nintendo gamers to buy their shitty games?" thread) but it was accidentally deleted,  so I'll try to use some of what I remember from that post to address the point.

I mentioned the importance of uniqueness over on that thread, and this is something that still holds true. It is true that 2D Mario is an extremely powerful franchise, but looking at it from only one perspective is kind of a shallow analysis, don't you think?

Obviously one of the reasons NSMB sold so well was that there was a starving market for it, which in a sense also made it a kind of unique proposition because it was the first of its kind in years. But there were many other blockbusters on DS that didn't make such a successful transition to other consoles. For one, lets look at Animal Crossing for Wii - I think it failed to be a system seller because it was viewed as "more of the same" and as such not a reason to own a Wii. Same goes for Brain Age for Wii, which also didn't offer anything new to the consumer. A more recent example would be of course Nintendogs+Cats on 3DS.

So how did NSMB Wii avoid this issue? One interpretation would be that 2D Mario sells like gangbusters because it's 2D Mario, just like Pokemon sells on name alone. I'm talking about handheld Pokemon ofcourse, not the console versions who's failure can also be argued to further illustrate my point above (even though they weren't really more of the same and more like "less of the same").

But another reason could be that maybe it wasn't perceived as more of the same, because maybe it offered some unique, compelling features like 4 player multiplayer on one screen. This was not only something that helped it stand out from the DS version, it was also something rarely done in gaming for the most part. Incidentally, another system seller that made a fantastic transition from DS to Wii was Mario Kart. Once again I think you can argue that  4 player split-screen made this addition to the series stand out in the eyes of the casuals, because it offered something that was significantly different.

If that line of thinking is true then Nintendo should present us with a brand new 2D Mario for 3DS only if they can offer something that changes the game in a desirable manner and also cannot be experienced on other platforms. I have no idea what's going through their minds but maybe they haven't found such a "killer-app" feature yet, or perhaps they fear that taking away 4 player multiplayer would feel like a step backwards to many players, which is why they have so far only shown actual gameplay on Wii U instead. I think that's a far more likely reason than Nintendo abandoning 3DS support altogether in favor of Wii U, don't you think?

Incidentally this is part of why I don't always like Malstrom, he comes off as too much of a business-man, sometimes even too much of a fanboy, and never attempts to think like a developer as well. How about some ideas on how it should be done in addition to just saying that it should be done yesterday, and should make you feel like you did when you played your NES?
If he ever did attempt to back up some of his claims with actual game designs or concepts, I think he would realize that living up to an ideal is usually a little harder than it looks. Maybe then he wouldn't be so quick to look down upon those who have tried and failed.

Sometimes reading Malstrom reminds me of listening to Zero Punctuation reviews, but with slightly less creative integrity. That's because for one: Yahtzee's videos (he's the one who does the reviews for Edge) are never meant to be taken completely seriously, even if some of their vicious criticisms are legitimate, and second: unlike Mr. Malstrom who doesn't even have the decency to provide some kind of personal biography on his site, Yahtzee is someone with ACTUAL EXPERIENCE developing complete games, which at least gives him a tiny bit of integrity and adds some context to his rants.

Regarding the OT: I too am fairly underwhelmed by the ad and hope Nintendo go back to presenting 3DS as something cool and original, like they started to do with their "window to another world" ads, but should have taken further.

never mistake truth with temperament.

Yes, but 'power level' could mean either, so your words aren't applicable to me.

I didn't realize Dawkins was a Dragon Ball character...

(I'm assuming ofcourse that your an atheist. If not, then my condolences.)

I thought you were referring to Rol, not Dawkins.

And I happen to not be an atheist at all. Never was, never will be.

I'll start with addressing your second paragraph before getting back to the main point about SMB.

I agree with you that it should also be taken into consideration that not all games are suited for all kinds of platforms, but please don't tell me I'm over-complicating things if you intend to then add further considerations of your own to prove your point.

Nintendogs is indeed a game Nintendo never tried to move to home consoles, probably because as you said they didn't see a way to make it work on that format. However the 3DS is not a home console, so there must be another reason that game didn't sell. My suggestion was the uniqueness issue, what's yours?

I'll acknowledge that Animal Crossing seems to be better tailored to handhelds as well, and indeed Nintendo are releasing a new installment in the series on 3DS - by your logic it should prove to be a system seller, time will tell...
Incidentally this is a game Malstrom conveniently ignores, stating more than once that it doesn't exist or doesn't matter. When asked why, he goes on to say that it's because it has no release date, which seems like a petty nitpicking argument at best.

If you're going to argue that it should have shipped this year, please don't. That would just be another nitpicking argument which hardly merits further discussion. Running a large corporation involves a lot more juggling of different interests than just worrying about finishing a certain game on time. Let's not pretend we could do it any better if given the chance.

Regarding releases of ports or remakes like on GBA, I was under the impression Nintendo were already doing this on 3DS via the eShop. 

Finally, the main point about what you correctly acknowledge are "just" good games, such as 2D Mario and Mario Kart. I think both you and Malstrom make a similar mistake - maybe due to ignorance on your part, but not on his - when you assume that a simple looking game is simple to make just because it requires limited resources in terms of art and programming. More often than not what makes simple games fun and gives them their infinite replayability is due to thorough, repeated and rigorous balancing. This is something that cannot be stressed enough! A good example would be Blizzard games - those literally spend YEARS in beta because they must be played and played and played again, each time slightly changing a few parameters here and there and then playing the game for countless additional hours to see how they affect the "feel" of the game.

Therefor I cannot get behind the argument that these games are either easy to make or require limited time. In fact, assuming a game sells twenty million units simply because it's called Mario Kart or Mario Brothers is an insult to the consumer!

Regarding making an actual creative suggestion - one that has substance to it, not just a couple of lines you would pitch over the water-cooler, is something I expect of someone like Malstrom if he wants to be considered a good critic. Showing is always superior to telling.

In that case I would have done better to address my original criticism at others such as d21lewis or Snesboy. I didn't mean it to look like I was addressing you personally.

Regarding the comment, yes I know you meant Rol but I thought you were making an analogy about people who are good arguers, and just wanted to point out that presenting a point of view aggressively (as Rol does) isn't the same as presenting it thoroughly (as I believe Dawkins does and thought you did too). Sorry about the knock on religion, in that case. It was out of place in this context.