Question. Have you actually played The Last Of Us? Or are you going by the assumption that due to it's popularity and few people on this site who 'over glorify the game" that it means that it is of low quality? Believe it or not there are elements in the story that were far from mediocre and the gameplay for the most part was solid (although I wish it was a bit less linear). TLOU really does manage to find a well balanced blend of both without overdoing it on the glitz and presentation that other AAA titles end up with. 

On a different note. I do not forsee Nintendo changing their policies of "gameplay comes first". They're also situated quite nice financially to where they can only sell 20 million consoles and still make a comfortable profit. If the industry does eventually crash due to absurd big budgets with low returns, at least we'll still have Nintendo.

I have not, and will probably never will, played The Last of Us. I am making an assumption not due to it's popularity or people's reaction to it, but rather on the basic tenant that story telling and video game design are two incompatible diciplines that will necessarily by their very nature will require compromise between the two. The result that follow are predictable: mediocrity. In fact, I am pretty sure I could pretty much write up the story of the Last of Us without ever having played the game or seen anything about it outside the boxart and random things about the characters I've picked up from posters on this site.

As for your different note. I feel that Nintendo has already backed off their gameplay first credo quite substancially, and that it will only get worse. Furthermore, peswsimist as I am I think Nintendo will have to either go with the more shallow mass market experience, or embrace a niche status.

I will agree on MS part because the xbox one presentation emphasized sports, TV and COD but Sony's PS4 reveal was richer than that and you guys know it. You're the one with the wrong perception.

We can discount those ones I listed besides  TLOU. How about Heavenly Sword, Lair (I know it sucked), Genji, Folklore (they made a big deal about this one), Siren, Demon's souls (it was published by Sony), etc

See this list and tell me sony caters to dudebros again

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_video_games_published_by_Sony_Computer_Entertainment#PlayStation_3

Most of the games on your list aren't nintendo games either which kind of proves the point that they are not that important as those games would easily go elsewhere.

An American localization or even a Western one is not a requirement to acknowledge the existance of a game. Disaster: Day of Crisis still exists, and there are various ways to play the game if you're interested (homebrew, PC emulation, etc). After all, we're in a global forum, so why should we stick to NA releases only in this context ?

And yes, Endless Ocean and Hotel Dusk are externally-developed IPs, but unlike TitalFall (published by EA), they're Nintendo-owned IPs, published worldwide by them. Similar to Ratchet and Clank (developed by Insomniac), The Order: 1886 (Ready at Dawn), Gears of War (Epic Games), Lost Odyssey (Mistwalker/FeelPlus) or Heavenly Sword (Ninja Theory). Now, given that pretty much all big publishers engage in this practice, how is it justified to single out Nintendo here ? All that matters here is who owns the IP. And if some don't feel like giving Nintendo credit for those IPs, then they should at least apply the same criteria to Sony/Microsoft. No double-standards.

Finally, please read my previous post regarding the subject. There's a list there of many other new IPs produced recently by Nintendo, and there's even more than that...

I thought the same thing as well, until I picked up the game and played it. The characters do not resemble, in my opinion, what the boxart necessarily gives the opression of and that is why it caught a lot of people by suprise. There really is a deep story behind the game and the character development as you progress is quite excellent. The gameplay mechanics are much better than your typical 3rd person shooter. I understand your hesitation, but if you own a PS3 or have access to one, I would highly suggest giving it a try.

Which core Nintendo games do you believe demonstrate this? I can admit that NSMBU seemed a bit rushed and could have used more polish, however, Pikmin & SMW3D demontrated the excellent core gameplay that Nintendo fans (such as myself) have become accustomed to. Nintendo also tends to do whatever it wants so I'm not too concerned about them going with them going with the mass market experience for core titles as they did not make any changes to them for the Wii. Nintendo becoming niche in the terms of gamecube sales doesn't really bother me either. They can still make a profit and at the end of the day, will probably be the only console developer around in the next 10-15 years.

Yes, Sony does release more than just games directed at the "dudebros" audience (whatever those are, which is arguable...). But the discussion was not about everything they do, but about what is their focus. For example, Nintendo focuses on arcade-like experiences which are generally family-friendly, but they can also publish things like Xenoblade, Sin and Punishment, Fire Emblem, Disaster: Day of Crisis, Zangeki no Reginleiv, Pandora's Tower, etc. There's a difference between their "bread and butter" type of games where their focus is, and the rest.

In the case of Sony, their focus this past gen has clearly being on the likes of Killzone, Resistance, Gran Turismo, Uncharted, Little Big Planet, Heavy Rain, and Ratchet and Clank, not on the side of White knight Chronicles, Rain, Puppeteer, Demon's Souls, Siren or Eyepet. Their focus has been far more on the Western side of development than on Japan, and among those, far more on the realism, cinematic, shooter trend that we're seeing these days. You can evidence this in the way the games are marketed and released (like Siren:Blood Curse being digital only), or where the funding goes. 3 Resistance games, 2 Killzone games, 3 Uncharted games, 2 Gran Turismo games > Folklore, 2 White Knight Chronicles (the second one localized by D3 Publisher in NA), Genji, Lair, Heavenly Sword, etc. Sure, Little Big Planet and partially Ratchet and Clank stand out here as different cases, but so are Zelda and Metroid on Nintendo's case. If your argument here is to not generalize as much, then I can agree with that. But if we're going to examine where their focus lies, then this is how I see it for both, being fully aware of their lineups.

The last part of my previous response to you had a list of 3rd party niche games on purpose. It was in response to the suggestion that 3rd party niche titles can't find success on Nintendo platforms. All 3rd party games are free to go elsewhere of course, whether we talk about Valkyria Chronicles or Harvest Moon. The point was just that Sony platforms are not the only ones where 3rd party success can be found, nothing more than that.

Ya, people say they are important because they are one of the big 3 manufacturers, which I guess is a automatic pass into the big leagues.

Nintendo isn't the only family friendly game maker out there and frankly their software is decades behind the competition. They are cutting edge yet traditional to the point that it hinders them at the same time.

This is talking about consoles. As far as handheld gaming goes, Nintendo is THAT important.

So mario galaxy did a new thing. Cool. We've established that. Clearly hasn't translated that much because they just made another non-galaxy mario game. Can someone give me something the wiiU has done that's important to gaming? Or the wii honestly, besides mario galaxy. Because I can easily give several from the ps3, as I already have. 

Well Nintendo also made Captain Rainbow for the Wii in Japan, but what good is that? That's just as beneficial as Animal Crossing for N64. This is being picky, you know I meant that Nintendo needs to make new IPs for Western gamers.

As for Hotel Dusk/Endless Ocean, I agree with you, let's not call Gears of War, Resistance, etc MS or Sony IP's either.

So....looking at your list, that narrows down the Wii games to Wii series and XenoBlade, which is what I said (after you pointed out I forgot the Wii series).

I also want to add something to my original point about Nintendo needing to make new IP's. Nintendo needs to make a new high budget/large audience IP. Something that will sell consoles. XenoBlade and Wii Sports were very nice, but since Nintendo doesn't get the 3rd party support that MS and Sony get, I feel the WiiU needs more.

I would also like to see the return of Starfox, F-Zero, and Earthbound for the WiiU. Super Mario RPG 2 would also be nice, but I don't see that happening. Same with Earthbound, but I can still hope for an Earthbound Collection, much like the Kirby & Dragon Quest Collections Wii saw.

No one company is *that* important to the overall industry.

Any one of Sony/MS/Nintendo could go away and the industry would still do OK. Nintendo is a little more unique perhaps in that their heritage and history are closely tied to the game industry, they focus most on family friendly product in an industry overwhelmingly targeting almost everything at teenage males, etc, and Mario is still the best known video game character in the world. 

If Sony or MS dropped out, a company like Samsung could easily move in and likely offer something fairly similar, so what they do is not all that important either. 

To be fair to Nintendo also it's a little bit of a high bar to set to expect every platform they release to completely revolutionize the industry. The fact is in each of the three previous decades 80s/90s/2000s ... Nintendo over the course of 10 years brought many new things to the table ... the birth of really the modern console with the NES (d-pad/third party licensees/etc.), the 3D revoultion of th 1990s they contributed greatly to with Super Mario 64, the analog stick, rumble pak, and even GoldenEye (really the first big console FPS with emphasis on multiplayer). In the 2000s they were first to touchscreen gaming (sorry Apple) and motion gaming too. 

Sony/MS are basically just refining the same formula over and over again which is of the "game console for the 16-30 year old male trying to push gaming to be more like Hollywood movies schtick". Which is fine, but I think it's kinda unfair to single Nintendo out in this instance.