Why do Nintendo fans hate this guy?

The key is that a more balanced approach is needed than what Malstrom is calling for. That, for me, is at least where the hate comes from.

article is an interesting read

some things I disagree with

"If a game becomes popular, it suddenly becomes ‘bad’ to them. I look at popular games and think, “This game is doing something right. What is it doing?”

imo this guy doesn't understand "the masses"

suddenly I see where Nintendo fans are comming from..... I think *keeps reading*

Because imo he jumps to easily too assumptions.  Although I'm not one that has read all of his posts/material based off this one post.  I disagree with a ton of it.

I am hopefully revealing that Nintendo is interested only in making games on their terms. They should be interested in making games on the market’s terms. Making more 3d Mario, ‘Maternal Instincts’ Metroid, Aonuma Zelda, is not where the market wants to go.

Sales data just disagrees with a lot of his statements.   While I do like what he has to say about Nintendo is setting up their audience for the future, a lot of his quotes like the one above just make no sense to me.  Iwata isn't happy with sales in UK, lordy lordy lets forget about how the game is going to sell 10 million worldwide.  Nintendo made 3d accessible for gaming.  Electronics companies have yet to make 3d truly accessible mostly due to other factors (such as media companies offering 3d content, and cost contstraints of 3d technology).   Whose to say the market doesn't want 3d, maybe we just want it to be more accessible.

hmmm

counter argument

if Nintendo creates a market that exist for them, then they have a market that they can almost always depend on

if Nintendo spends their time chasing what's popular they risk missing in that area with no core to fall back which could lead to bigger problems

if the wii's job was to get people interested in Nintendo games then that was a smart strategy on their part imo

the casual market is fickle, easily swayed by passing fads with those fads being next to impossible to predict or see coming like catching lightning in a bottle

put simply:

consumer saying they want to play the next Mario game, is very different from consumer saying they want to play the next fun game

the next fun game could come from anyone and more importantly anywhere as such that consumers sale could go to anyone and anywhere, the next Mario game however, is only ever going to come from one place to which that sale is going to go to

The fact that Nintendo had to operate at a loss makes it evident that the masses do not value stereoscopic 3D

I'm not sure how your getting to that conclusion.   I in my experience have not met a person who wasn't generally impressed by the 3d on the system itself.  Nintendo operated at a loss for a multitude of other reasons.  They launched a product that was suceeding their most successful product ever.  One of the main reasons for the DS's sucesses  is because it was priced lower compared to it's competitors.  Nintendos consumers are a lot more price conscious then other consumers due to the fact they are a majority casual gamers.  The casual gamer isn't prepared to  pay $250 dollars  for themselves or their kids when they can get a DS for $99.99   Are you saying that Sony operated at a loss becasue  consumers didn't value the hardware superiority of the PS3?

You almost have it right, except that you're still thinking in terms of the casual/non-casual as being an exclusive dichotomy. Certain games transcend these boundaries, like 2D Mario and Mario Kart, and in a properly implemented strategy, more games can fill that gap

Because he's really not all that intelligent, and he makes broad sweeping generalizations that are only loosely based on reality.  For example, let's look at one particular quote...

"Making more 3d Mario, ‘Maternal Instincts’ Metroid, Aonuma Zelda, is not where the market wants to go."

Let's focus on the 3D Mario for just one second.  We have had 3 3D Mario games in recent years.  The first one, Super Mario Galaxy, sold 10 million copies.  To put this success in perspective, this is more than any game for the PS3 or 360 that isn't Call of Duty or Halo 3 (not including the bundled Kinect Adventures).

Next, we have Super Mario Galaxy 2 which sold 6.73 million.  While not the same as the first Galaxy game, this is still incredibly successful.  The drop off is not entirely unexpected of a sequel.  Halo 3- Halo Reach shows a similar pattern as does Forza 3-4, Little Big Planet 1-2, and Killzone 2-3.  It must also be taken into consideration that Super Mario Galaxy 2 was presumably less labor intensive and less costly considering it used the same engine and many of the same assets as Mario Galaxy.

Lastly we have Super Mario 3D Land which has sold around 6 million copies on a relatively low install base and is still growing at a nice pace. 

So, the market doesn't want 3D Mario?  Apparently they do, because they're buying it.

This is what Malstrom does in my limited reading of his.  He takes an inch and stretches it into a mile.

3D Marios do not meet the staggering success of 2-D Mario games becomes, "The market does not want 3D Mario".

Nintendo releasing a system with a 3D screen becomes, "Nintendo apparently has long term plans concerning 3d and video games in the future which explains their strange obsession with it."

Metroid Other M wasn't very good becomes, "Nintendo is making games only to please themselves".

It's ridiculous, poorly researched sensationalism.  And thats why I hate this guy :)

I think that there was other factors as to why people bought the Wiis at such high prices.  There was a severe supply problem in which created a pent demand which triggered impulse buying and lots of early on buyers remorse.  When the DS launched it was innovative because it brought touch screens to the mainstream.  However the 3ds sales are exceeding that of the launch of the DS.  The DS later went on to be the best selling system pretty much ever.   Now if your going to say  that games are what made the DS a success then why didn't the consumers buy more PSPs (which launched with an argueably better game portfoilio?   When the DS launched it's gaming selection in usual Nintendo fashion was lackluster, but once games like brain age launched it triggered more demand.  I do agree that the 3ds will need genre busting games, and old franchises to continue it's sales growth.  But it's apparent the current sales they are getting are more or less based on excitement around the technology then the game library.  

Malstroms aregument is that Nintendo is not making games based on the Markets needs/wants.  Yet their rehashed franchises and new casual based Ip's have continued to create great sales for them.  Nintendo has it in the bag.  They don't have any blockbuster games on the 3ds yet so many people are buying a 3ds based on the 3d 'gimmick.' Once Nintendo introduces a steady influx of games that capitalize on this technology then they solidfy their position and it follows the same sales/blue ocean route of the ds.  However the 3ds is at an advantage over the ds  becasue its users  are more excited about the thought of 3d gaming, then touch screen gaming of it's older brother.   

3d games sells better than 2d games though, thats a fact. But there are still some cons with 3d like unassisted platforming, which stereoscopic 3d obvious helps a lot in that regard.