LMAO! The battle for second is not lost yet......

But how would they do that? It's selling like shit right now (we all know. Even though some of us say "oh, it's still over 50k, that's decent." I think we can all agree that it's actually selling like crap). Even post mariokart 8 sales are quite horrible. It won't magically start to sell.

Miyamoto sounds like such a bitter man in this interview.

I'm surprised this is actually real. Sort of, at least. It's clear he's been wanting 2D Mario fans to move to 3D Mario games for a long time now, and he's completely failed to do so. This might be confirmation of the end of 2D Mario (from Miyamoto's team, at least).

3DS will be doing it's decent numbers, far from what the DS was pulling.

Wii U a threat? Lol. It won't come close to the PS4 this holiday season, Xbone is underperforming big time but should be above as well.

Next year, the gap between the consoles will only widen, PS4/Xbone will destroy Wii U in terms of game library, as it surely will be game-drought-game-drought with some indies in between as usually with Wii U.

That article was full of nonsense being put into Miyamoto's mouth. If you ignore all of their "explanations" of what he means, and all of their contextualisation that is entirely their own, Miyamoto's words actually say something different.
----
"[These are] the sort of people who, for example, might want to watch a movie. They might want to go to Disneyland," he said.

"Their attitude is, 'okay, I am the customer. You are supposed to entertain me.' It's kind of a passive attitude they're taking, and to me it's kind of a pathetic thing. They do not know how interesting it is if you move one step further and try to challenge yourself."


"In the days of DS and Wii, Nintendo tried its best to expand the gaming population," he said.

"Fortunately, because of the spread of smart devices, people take games for granted now. It's a good thing for us, because we do not have to worry about making games something that are relevant to general people's daily lives."
----

First he says that there's no point focusing on the consumer that just wants to passively be entertained. They interpreted that to mean "no point focusing on casuals". Which is nonsense. He's saying that games should be about gaming, not about a story that you watch. He's criticising development of games that are really nothing more than somewhat-interactive movies, and praising games that engage the player.

Most so-called "casuals" like games that are easy to get into, not necessarily ones that don't challenge you. Wii Sports Bowling is easy to play, but getting a 300 isn't easy. NSMB Wii had a lot of hidden depth, but families could play it easily.

Then they've interpreted comments along the lines of "we wanted to make sure that gaming was expanded, hence the DS and the Wii" followed by "now you can even do it on phones" as an indication of no need to "reach out" to those customers... but that's not what he said. What he said was that gaming has been broadened, now, so they don't need to introduce people to gaming - they're already there. He's praising Nintendo for starting the trend of gaming into the mainstream, not saying that Nintendo doesn't need to try to capture the mainstream anymore.

The article is full of the stupid "hardcore" media crap - elitism meets ignorance.

His comments speak for themselves, not sure why you feel the need to interject your own agenda. 

It just started to do that, imho. Also, if you think x1 is doing better then your a hypocrit.

Adding this quote to the OP now.

Not sure I like the language he's using, but I love what he's saying overall. Casual gamers are fickle as hell, and appeasing them has now become a race to the bottom of the barrel, which is something Nintendo now seems to fully understand.

I really hope his comments on Nintendo's renewed interest in the "core gamer" is something they fully commit to, because it's going to take a ton of work to get rid of more than two decades worth of their casual/kiddie stigma.

If that were true, the article would have contained nothing but the comments.

The author(s) clearly felt they needed to interject their own agenda, and what I'm doing is demonstrating that what they've said doesn't actually line up with Miyamoto's words, when you stop and think about it.

EDIT: Curious how you attack ME for interjecting my own agenda, but not the media guys, by the way. Maybe because their agenda happens to align with yours?