Not sure tbh. What they want to?

@Zelda music. It was sublime until 0:50. Then it gets that cacophonic TP music going on, and it's horrible. But that reminds me that OoT was one such more silent experience involved more exploration than dialogue and action, and that's what I liked.

Didn't quite understand what you were saying... I think I was unspecific when I said "they" :P link that post to everyone sayinf"Nintendo is fine being d00med without copying Sony" ;)

Unfortunately Sony vision of the videogame market made the PS3 a pale shadow of the original PS and PS2 and let's not even talk about the portable market. When you go from first two generations straight to third and your portables are a far last place, something is wrong. Far more logical for Sony to try and emulate Nintendo (Move) than the other way around.

Ok. So the OP suggest Nintendo to try to "copy" Sony cattering to that segment with at least one attemp, not leave all their other games. Just devote 1 studio to try to make one cinematic game.

And then you ask for our thoughts about the lack of that attemp.

We for sure don't now, but have some clues: bussiness. Unfortunately (or not, or whatever) they simply don't want to try in that segment. I guess that they prefer to give those resources to other projects or other dead IP's (like Kid Icarus or Punch Out!). Maybe they'll try some more western-cinematic in the future, or try to partner with other studio, or simply attract third parties to do that.

As far as I understand, this last one option is the one they want. So they can continue making what they are doing: Mario/Zelda/Smash and maybe bring from death some of their old IP's, while making more Wii Fits and Wii Sports.

So your issues are with 

1.the pursuit of technical beauty for its own sake

2.the idea that games are primarily vehicles for stories 

3.developers that pursue their personal vision.

Are you implying that Sony is concerned with nothing other than these three traits, as per your original comment? I realise you said quite ambiguously "one of the few high-end developers" but this is undoubtedly a thread about Sony and Nintendo so I assume that's why you posted it in the first place. I ask this because I think it's a comment easily dismissed by looking at their first party game library. 

Also may I ask why you would have an issue with the pursuit of "technical beauty" for its own sake? Unless you have some crazy outlier philosophy regarding beauty I'd like to hear about...why would you take issue with the pursuit of creating something beautiful? 

I think the difference between the two ISNT the quality of the games but the type of games. Core nintendo games this generation arent really any different from core nintendo games last generation (other than the wii series though this has more to do with the wii itself and isnt really "core"). Maybe ,mario galaxy? People are excited for the games but they arent excited in the this-will-change-gaming-forever sort of way. I found it interesting that instead of trying for an innovative new game/IP of their own, that nintendo chose to get and develop Bayo 2. Im not criticising this as a bad move (its probably very smart of them and has created a lot of buzz) but its certainly not going to get people talking about the Wii U's features and direction the way a new game/IP would.

Whereas sony are trying to innovate and change and create new types of games - MAG, UC, Starhawk, Tearaway, HR, TLOU. So yes, I do think Nintendo should try and get some studios to come up with really innovative games - I know they have just come off a bad patch but they still have a ton of money and really there will no better way of attracting attention for the Wii U then by coming up with some new innovative game.

I agree. Sony has shown that they can be and are equal to Nintendo this generation if not better than. Innovative features such as crossplay prove this and the implementatiion of this feature through quality new ips such as PASBR and the revival of a classic series(Sly Cooper) prove this. Add on to this great new upcoming content such as the Last Guardian and it is clear to see which company makes the more prestigious games. Sony has even proven their games can transcend the console realm and penetrate the handheld market with solid entries such as Resistance, Uncharted, and soon Killzone. Nintendo needs to innovate to remain relevant in the console market and they need to do so quickly.

Problem is that their business model means I need to get a PS3 to get thiese gaming experiense, and as a console maker Nintendo really should cater to everyone and all tastes. I obviously not alone in wanting something like this. How many here has ONLY got a Wii?

They shouldn't stop doing what they're doing, just add some.

After playing Metroid: Other M, I would prefer that Nintendo stay as far away from cinematic games as possible. Let them do what they're good at and Sony do what they're good at. When Sony tries to be Nintendo it doesn't work well either.

lohl. Amp, it's not because one game turned sour that it has to be that way. Imagine Nintendo had made SotC, you'd be saying something very different.

Also, OoT, MM, Prime, all the NES games I mentioned in OP, LttP, there is potential for Nintendo to work from, it's not like they aren't able to make more psychologically compelling experiences. Fudge I don't even know how to word what I have in mind. That thing that SotC has, and that OoT had dang it.