Okay so let's give an example. Say the number of "achievement obsessed" becomes greater and greater, and someone releases what is essentially an "achievement grab" and nothing more. Gaming is heading down the distributed content path, so you can say goodbye to rentals and returns. Anyway, word gets out that this is an achievement grab, and there is a surge of sales because of it. Some people see these figures, and skew the sales even further thinking it was perhaps a good game, not just an achievement grab.

Meanwhile, developers are watching intently, and saying "Hey, the gamers have spoken. They don't care about gameplay or story, or even graphics. They want ACHIEVEMENTS", and so they follow suit, releasing titles of easy grab achievements that have had no other thought put into them. In times like this, if game developers can find a way to make as many sales with less effort, they will.

I have a right to complain if I'm seeing a point of jeopardy in the gaming industry. Let's not forget the video game crash of the 80s (if you're old enough to remember it). A slew of crappy games with little appeal to the mass audience, that nobody could tell what games were actually any good anymore. 

I think you nailed it when the "adult" thing. I've been saying that for YEARS. Nintendo delivers "core" titles, such as Metroid and Zelda. No one can deny that. But what they fail at is ADULT games. Games like Halo, Dead Space, GTA etc. They have NEVER been able to make games that the majority of grown men want to play. They have NEVER developed games with sex, drugs,violence and blood. Every game they release is pretty much kid safe, and that turns a lot of grown up people away from their systems. They think Nintendo, and then think "children". They think Sony, and they think "adult".

If only Nintendo could handle both types of software, they'd dominate handedly.

You're not seeing a point of jeopardy, you merely saying an if statement that hasn't come true and is showing no real signs of comming true.  Achievement hunters are a small minority and it will stay that way.  Also, like i said earlier, achievement hunters rent the crappy games.  Just find forums where they talk about it.  There was even an article in Game Informer about the guys trying to reach 1,000,000. 

I can make up a bunch of if statements and claim that all games will be based on ponies in the future because girls like them and there is a growing number of bronies that buy games.  Now these pony lovers will only grow and developers will see this and make games for an easy cash grab and put forth less effort into games.  I have a right to complain about my if statement that isn't coming true.

If there is an actual threat then I'll agree there is an issue but there currently isn't and signs aren't pointing to it being a problem.

Did you totally miss my point about digital distribution? They're going to be forced to buy the game, because options to rent or buy used will no longer be available.

The number is hard to measure at the moment. I remember back in the early years of console gaming when the non-elite (ones who would do something other than play videogames all day) entered the market, critics dismissed them as a small, insignificant market. What happened to them now? I believe they now have the controlling numbers in the gaming population.

Besides, it's not a matter of what will be demanded. Game companies are like any other company in which they will take the road that they believe will give them the highest rate of return for their effort. why do you think the Wii received so much shovelware? They were riding the wave of popularity with the Wii's casual audience.

First of all, I love your username.

Second, I think one of the most pervasive myths about Nintendo is that it produces games for kids, and no one else. I admit that Nintendo games are much, much more family-friendly than their counterparts on Sony and Microsoft systems, and on PC. But many thousands of grown men and women love games like Mario, Zelda, Pikmin, Animal Crossing, Wii Sports, Pokemon, etc. There is some truth to the ESRB rating system here. E is for everyone.

First off, thank you. And secondly, I agree that Nintendo games are usually more on the E side of things. But that's my entire point. Nintendo doesn't develop games or focus on M rated software. When you look at the biggest franchises on the other two consoles, they're usually M or T. I think if Nintendo created and put together a team just for M rated software, it would be in their best interest. Why not dip your hand in every thing if you can? Why be the E company when you can corner the market?

This is a console that is launching with Mario, COD, and Assassins' Creed.

It's doomed.

Well, to be honest; they are paying for Bayo2 and publishing Ninja Gaiden 3 for WiiU... That's a stepp in the right direction, wouldn't you agree? Sure, they're not making those games themselves - but they are publishing... And Zelda TP was T ;)

Totally agree with this statement!

With this launch line up Nintendo will not be able to meet demand. Oh, and they have a 1 year head start over PS720. That's never good. And it's really their own fault ;)

And yet, it seems Nintendo failed to realize (or care), despite TP sales numbers, that that's exactly what people might have wanted out of Zelda, and made E rated Zelda again....which I doubt will reach sale numbers of TP  http://www.zeldadungeon.net/2012/06/the-legend-of-zelda-a-sales-history/

There was this great little article back when SS launched (that I can't seem to find now) wrote by some game journalist about his girlfriend who is hardcore Zelda fan. And how she abandoned SS and started playing Skyrim with conclusion in the line of "this is more Zelda than Zelda".

Now, I'm not saying that Zelda should be Skyrim (actually, I'm not to happy that Elder Scrolls came to that either, compared to Morrowind), but article did make some valid points. Openess of Elder Scroll alike games is something that we have seen in original Zeldas. Completely "mature" content is maybe not what is best suited for Zelda, but darker tone of TP was very good step in right direction. And then there's those puzzles - now, I love when puzzles are well incorporated into game, but Zelda has gone way too far, neglecting both exploration and combat, both pillars of original Zelda games. As much as I mostly disagree with Malstrom's rants, I think he has few good points in this one:

"Take the issue of Retro making a Zelda game. The reason why people want Retro to make a Zelda game is because of the pent up frustration people have for Zelda today. Zelda is too Japanese orientated, too anime, and plays like a crappy Japanese adventure game. In the past, Zelda used to be influenced by Western RPGs hence the non-linear nature of the early Zelda games. In the past, Nintendo said, “What do we learn from those Western games to make an even better game?” Today, Nintendo says, “Let’s purge all Western influences from our games” resulting in Nintendo games becoming extremely creepy. I think we’re at the point where parents will feel uncomfortable giving the game even to their child. It’s just too weird. And these parents today are those that grew up with Nintendo games.

I think there is another story going on here. Korean culture has more international presence today than Japanese culture. Korean culture in movies, music, and games has to be controversial in Japan. Is this all some nationalist venture? It made more sense to go Japan culture back in the 80s when Japan was on the ascendency. Today, Japan is a rapidly shrinking country especially with its aging population. What is to gain by making games that tilt so heavy to the Japanese tilt?

The reason why we want Retro to make a Zelda game is because we are sick and tired of the Japanese eccentricities in Zelda. “But Zelda is about story and puzzles,” says Miyamoto which is nonsense. We want Retro to make the game or any Nintendo game because we want a more cultural neutral game.

The reality is that Retro is actually a Japanese company that happens to be located in the United States. Nintendo doesn’t see Retro in the way how you or I see it. Nintendo’s relationship to Retro is for Nintendo to tell Retro the Way How It Is. Retro’s job is to soak it up. Retro is not allowed to go, “Hey! This is wacky Japanese stuff which is just crap. Here is how real game makers do it,” where Retro outdoes Nintendo on Metroid or on 2d platformers. A Retro Zelda sounds pretty damn good at this point. Miyamoto talking about how communication is needed for the puzzles and story is actually Miyamoto saying: “The soul of Zelda is Japanese.” But if we look at the classic Zelda games, we find the soul of Zelda is Western. Zelda is the combination of arcade gameplay with the Western Role Playing Game. Nintendo seems intent on crashing the Zelda franchise rather than admit that the Western RPG is the soul of classic Zelda gameplay."

Now, there's A LOT of Mastrom's BS in there (as usual), but the fact is that Zelda once was close to what bolded sentence states. And that type of games (in some similar form, as witnessed by success of Skyrim) is what "hardcore" audience today wants to play, and where the sales are. So maybe Nintendo, if they are really serious about "hardcore" (PS360) gamers, should be thinking about making something 1st party that catters to that audience, be it main Zelda title, spin-off Zelda title (I can completely see Adventures of Link spinn-off, with Fable-like combat and Gothic-like open world), or some completely different IP, yet tuned to "modern" game development (and consumption) tastes.