I took this comment to mean that they are planning to unload a LOT of games on us very soon.

Powerful isn't Halo 3, MGS, GoW, GT or Mario Galaxy and Twighlight Princess.

Powerful is changing the whole industry around you. Powerful is Wii Fit and Wii Sports.

Maybe powerful was the wrong word. They should have used the word GODLIKE.

 In Nintendo's defense, this is the first possible trash talking I've heard from them this generation, whereas we seem to get such statements from Sony and Microsoft (especially Sony) weekly.

@Euphoria

For the most part, no one actually argued with what Sony had said in that thread.  Rather, that that fact didn't help them as much as the statement implied.

Nintendo PR for you. At least Sony just said they were the best but Nintendo says "only" which is very untrue. Just because almost every game they push out can sell almost 5 mil + copies each doesn't keep their statements true. Microsoft and Sony are just as equal if or not better 1st party producers and they for the most part don't leave huge gaps between game release times like Nintendo.

I love you Nintendo but don't get cocky like Sony did last gen. You can be taken down and you're crown can be relinquished.

That was a fake interview. He never said that. Even so, I bet he could say even worse.

So their plan is to bring out a lot more casual stuff.  But who can blame them since they're selling millions of copies of games like Wii Play?

First off, I don't think they actually said that.

Second off, even if they did, I agree.

You've ruined the legend of Yamauchi.

Serious note: This reminds me of whole fake Kutaragi "The PS3 will teach discipline" quote.

Nintendo is good at what they do.

 I'm quite curious, what other statistically viable measure besides sales numbers of products would you propose we gauge this by?  "Quality"?  Last I checked, "quality" is a derived statistic: you cannot assign an absolute numeric score to it, despite what misunderstandings of how MetaCritic and review sites work might suggest.  Quantity of released titles in a given timeframe?  I fail to see how that's more useful than overall sales of units, seeing as a company that releases 100 products that sell 50,001 copies each is not necessarily better off than a company that releases 10 products that sell 500,000 copies each; more than likely they're worse off, as the overhead of producing something tends to cancel out the benefits of early sales.  I suppose you could go by revenue, disregarding that price is generally indexed in this sort of analysis to avoid the pitfalls associated with blatantly disregarding inflation, but even then, Nintendo would end up on top in the comparison simply by sheer volume.

 I guess my point here is, if you're going to be opposed to using something as the basis of comparison, at least make sure you have something of equal or greater reliability to replace it as the bellweather gauge.