I agree. But generally a radical innovative product in a mature industry is defined by segmenting the market in different and original ways. We are accustomed to distinguish between hardcore and casual gamers because of games like WiiSports, Brain Age, Nintendogs, Just Dance etc. etc. Before that we didn't make such distinction even though it's quite clear there are always been more passionate and more occasional players.

Nintendo won't raise a bar between casual and harcore games, because their new system will likely be designed with a different maket segmentation in mind, hence its target will be trasversal to casual and hardcore players and also trasversal in terms of plaforms adopted (Smart devices, handhelds, console and PCs). That's the reason why they are a creating a cross platform account system.

In other words, the aim is to render the difference between hardcore and casual gamers irrilevant.

There's nothing wrong with market segmenatation. Some people are confusing this as a problem when it's not. If for a certain group of gamers a dedicated home console/portable just has the features/functionality that can create the games that scratch their particular itch .... *great*. For casuals if smart devices that provide tons of free games that are constantly updated with new content, on a shiny big HD display, with no complicated buttons or joysticks needed ... *great*. 

What the Wii addressed was not market segementation but a lack of games being made for casuals in 2006 period, which is no longer a problem today as thousands of games are available for this audience now, just in a different way. 

Market segmentation is just the sign of a good, maturing, evolving market. Some people like Coca-Cola. Some people like Sprite. That doesn't mean you can mix both and both crowds will like it, in fact, what is far more likely is you end up creating a drink that no one likes because it ruins the unique individual flavor of both. 

And that is (one of) the problem with the Wii U .. it's a system that wants to be something "both sides" can enjoy, but it ends up being a product that is dissatisfying to both groups. 

You pick one side of the road to walk on, if you chose to walk down the middle of the road, don't complain when you get run over. 

Maybe it's time to accept as well that what the smart device gaming market is may be the natural evolution of where casual gaming was always destined to go. Nintendo's strategy of like forcing casuals to wait for one "Wii _____" title every 18 months or something or "wait for Vitality Sensor" was likely not to work forever. The smart OS ecosystem just is more "exciting" ... there's more games, more constant updates, not to mention new phones/tablets, etc. etc. The Wii/DS are quite frankly "boring" by comparison. 

Beyond just the "free" games, I can see why casuals from their POV (even if I don't share their gaming tastes) really love smart devices. 

When I say attract both sides I'm not talking about what Wii U did which was, "hey we have casual games like Wii Sports/Fit/Party & hardcore games like Call of Duty/Assassin's Creed", I mean designing games that can appeal to "casual" & "hardcore" audiences or what is referred to as "casual-core". Games like Mario Kart, Smash Bros and the recent Splatoon fit this bill. I would say they should continue to push this type of game style that is simple & light-hearted enough for casual gamers while also having the depth & competitiveness that appeals to hardcore gamers that are fun to play with a group of friends/family members or online.

Mario Kart, Splatoon, and Smash Brothers aren't really "casual" games though. They are as complex as COD or Assassin's Creed in many aspects, they just have a friendlier presentation thanks to mascot characters and a some what easier learning curve. 

But if you can play Splatoon ... you can play COD. If you can play Smash Brothers well you can probably play Assassin's Creed without much fuss. You have to be skilled as a gamer to really be able to play those games to any level of success, that isn't the case with something like Wii Sports. 

I think Nintendo should make more multiplayer games period, why they haven't is beyond me because it was already evident with the monster success of GoldenEye in 1997 that they were on to something big. And ignoring the internet/online gaming was stupid too as Splatoon has proven. They should have been more proactive in this style of gaming for a long time.  

GoldenEye "saved" the N64 and basically sold the damn thing for months upon months where there was nothing to play and it sold the system even to non-Nintendo fans. 

Gamepad should be optional, sell it as an accessory.

Release the console with something like the Wii U Pro Controller.

Creating a new product with a different market segmentation is not a sign that the current segmentation is wrong, its just a sign there's an hidden demand or that you could cater to a certain target (not described in the current segmentation) more effectively. Creating new products using different segmentation criteria is someting that happens quite often in many competitive markets.

There wasn't a lack of casual games before the Wii: Ps2, GC had those too: party games, eyetoy games, music games like guitar hero. Also, many sports games like FIFA and PES could be considered at least partially casual games, since a large share of player are soccer fans who aren't really interested in playing anything else.

You're analogy of mixing Cola and Sprite is good to describe the WiiU, but it's not what I'm talking about. The WiiU didn't try to cater to any particular new or trasversal segment, in fact it was created with the attempt to cater former Wii users and former Ps360 users (both already existing segments).

If you use the example of Soda, a trasversal way to enter the market were Sprite and Coke are competing is to produce orange sodas or energy drinks. You're still producing soft drinks but you are not trying substitute neither Sprite or Coke, you are making a product that can appeal to a certain share of both markets, plus to some people who don't like neither of those.

Yup. Catch-22.

Yes, which makes them suitable for all ages & demographics while allowing less skilled players to enjoy them, that's the entire point I've been trying to make. Nintendo should create games that can appeal to children, females, families in addition to teenage/adult males (instead of just catering to those 2 demographics that the majority of PS/XB games do) while making such games "easy to learn, hard to master", so people of all skill levels can enjoy.

And bullshit on Mario Kart not being a casual friendly title, the series sold 36 million on Wii, games don't sell like that on a casual console unless they are in fact a casual game.

I think you can please both sides -- casuals and core gamers -- but honestly, for the first 1 1/2 years of the Wii U's life, it looked like Nintendo did not give a damn about either because they had a very underwhelming game library that lacked a real system seller (Mario 3D World was a good game but it fell short of what people expect from a mainline 3D Mario) until MK8 came out and by that time it was already too late.

Also, I believe the casual crowd didn't leave Nintendo rather than Nintendo just didn't provide anything to attract them to buy the Wii U -- and no, I don't think HD updates to Wii Sports and Wii Fit were going to make casuals buy an expensive piece of hardware when they already had those games on the Wii that accomplished the same thing.  If Nintendo had come up with a compelling new game with a unique concept for the casual crowd on the Wii U then I think they would have came over.  Instead Nintendo just kind of slapped the Wii label on with Wii U, went through the motions and expected lighting to strike twice without any meaningful software to court the casual crowd with.

The problem is what is this hypothetical "under served" group? The need for the Wii brand to be the introductory gaming device that brought back lapsed gamers/non-gamers/novice gamers is moot because smart devices do that better. Touch-only interface is simply so easy that toddlers can practically start playing on it. 

So then there's Wii/Kinect as the "party" machine where people come over and gather around the TV ... the problem with this is I think people had their fill of this and it gets boring after a while quite frankly. Waving your arms around isn't well suited for another other than play sessions of a few minutes and then a break. Nintendo Land attempted to advance the formula a bit and make it a little deeper, but doesn't work either because people don't complex motion games either. I mean I like to play charades with friends, but maybe once a month, not every day. So this "board games-ized" concept of console gaming I think was bound to simply run out of steam eventually, that cannot carry a home console platform forever. 

Smart phones are the natural evolution of the Touch Generations brand taken far beyond where Nintendo ever could have dreamed of. 

We actually are in the golden age of casual blockbusters ... Angry Birds, Candy Crush, Farmville, Plants Vs. Zombies, Words With Friends, Boom Beach, etc. etc. ... every six months there's some new break out hit, all games targetted at newbie/non/fringe gamers that have become huge breakout hits and mega-franchises in some cases. 

Casuals are having a blast. 

Core gamers are very happy with their PS4/XB1s, PS4 is selling fantastic, XB1 not quite as well but still headed to a very solid final showing. PC is booming.

Everyone is doing well except Nintendo. 

It's Nintendo that has the problem and it's largely due to the fact that they are completely out of touch with the market so the market found other sources to get their gaming fix.