To be honest, Switch to me looks like the most hardcore game platform Nintendo has made like probably since before the DS.

The only game from them expressly aimed at "non/fringe gamers" was 1,2 Switch for the first 10 months. 

Compare to even the Wii U (Nintendo Land, NSMBU, Sing Party, Game & Wario, Wii Party U, Wii Fit U, Wii Sports Club, Mario & Sonic Olympics in year 1).

Mario is also a good barometer for where Nintendo really sees the system at ... the Wii/Wii U Mario games were more tailored towards the more "fringe" gamer element. Whereas Mario on Switch is going back to the N64/GameCube style of Mario.

I clearly stated what I thought it's ability to garner an audience was.

Seeing in public someone playing a quality game that one has ot play at home. Heck, the best draw would be two poeple playing together in public. You know two people waiting at the lobby in a hospital playing Mario Kart on tehir own switches.

Or seeing someone playing Skyrim on a bus ride to work. Someone else is thumbing mindlessly through facebook, or their clash game. They woudl be jealous and want the switch. It's simple. Public exposure. Which unlike a home console, which is stuck in ones house, the switch can go outside and get that exposure.

First Switch TV ads start showing up:

The messsage here is pretty clear -- play hardcore console games anywhere you like.

You're too caught up in "fanboy warz" that stuff ultimtately doesn't matter. 

I think more simply it's just this:

A Core gamer is someone who's willing to accept a "pain process" in games, because games inherintely have a "pain process". You can fail. In fact you have to fail. Person A who says "oh, cool lemme try again" is likely to become a "core" gamer. Person B who says "this isn't fun, I'm not winning" likely is going to become a casual player. And there's nothing wrong with either, I think it's just the dilenation. 

Video games are not a passive entertainment medium, you have to actively put effort into them to get enjoyment out of them (like playing a sport). Some people like to do that, some people don't. Neither is right/wrong, but if you can't stand the feeling of "losing" or being stuck in a game, you're never really IMO going to be a gamer, because that negative/positive feedback loop (encountering a tough situation and then figuring it out or finding a way to beat it) is basically the crux of all gaming. 

Like I have said before, I believe Nintendo does best when going for a "casual-core" approach.

By that I mean a strong emphasis on games that can easily be played by anyone but with enough depth and difficulty to make more experienced gamers come back for more.

Mario Kart & Smash Bros were the two biggest examples of this for a long time but now it seems like they are increasing this by adding Splatoon and it seems like ARMS fits this as well.

Well that is gaming though, the basic premise of it as an entertainment medium is encountering resistance either directly through an oppossing "enemey" and having to figure out how to defeat said enemey or being put into a world and having to figure out who to advance to the next area of said world. 

This is basically 99% of all games, Nintendo included. 

Whether you are a core player or a casual one IMO boils down to how much of a "pain process" you're willing to tolerate. 

It's like a person who comes up to you and says they want to get into sports, but they don't like sweating. Well ok. And they don't like losing. Well ok. And they don't want to get hurt ever. Well ok. I mean that really limits the scope of what sports they can play. 

Quite frankly too I don't think it's the industry's job to bend over backwards to people like this either, a superhero movie isn't going to bend over backwards to appeal to someone who just doesn't get superheroes, if you don't like it, then maybe it's not for you, game devs shouldn't handcuff their design ideals and dumb down games to ridiculous levels on the 5% chance a casual might like the game. 

If you can't play even get 5 stars in Mario 64, I mean the developer is not "wrong" ... gaming just likely isn't for you or only a very narrow subset of games are for you, most of which can be played on an iPhone. 

So apparently casuals are people who dont like to lose in games..............

If you're not willing to have some kind of "pain process" you can't really enjoy a lot of games. 

How are you going to appreciate a Zelda game if you don't like ever getting lost in a game or having to struggle to figure out how to get out of a dungeon? Or even a 2D Mario if you give up because you pushing B to run and A to jump is too complex for you? You have to be willing to be patient and "learn" a game. You have to be willing to develop your reflexes in a game. You have to be willing to adapt/learn to a game to improve at it. 

Gaming isn't always "pleasurable", it's a mix of resistance and the enjoyment from most games comes from *overcoming* that resistance, that's when it feels "good", when you beat an enemy you couldn't previously or figure out a level you couldn't previously. 

Not everything has to be for everyone. For some people, mountain climbing or biking is the best way to spend an afternoon, for other people it's torture. But that doesn't mean there's something wrong with mountain climbing. 

If you had a Wii for 5-6 years and you still can't play a 3D Mario or Zelda or Punch-Out ... really that's not Nintendo's fault.

Ya and like Rol said, you are far more likely to die in 2D Mario than in SM64 and im pretty sure Flappy Bird had a shit load of "Pain process".

Again, i think you have a really weird perception of what makes someone casual.

If you can't play anything beyond a 2D Mario ... the problem is you. It's not game developers. I'm sorry. If a 6 year old can learn how to play Mario 64, it's not some esoteric acheivement ... it's simply a matter of having some patience and willingness to learn. 

If you don't have any patience/willingness to invest in a game, you will never really be able to get into games because the range of games that can be made for you are extremely limited. 

Also downloading a free app like Flappy Bird and playing it for 15 minues for a laugh is not the same thing as actually digging into a game. Would any of those people pay $50 for Flappy Bird? Or even $1? How are you supposed to build a business catering to this type of mentality? This is like someone trying to make a movie for an audience that will only watch something for 5 minutes before falling asleep. 

That's not fair to the storyteller, there's an expectation that you're willing to pay attention for at least 45 minutes I would say for any movie. You have to give the design aspect of the entertainment at least a fair shot.