Malstrom is always right, except when he isn't.

Seriously, all of his articles and his whole disruption analysis is correct, it just explains everything.
He was wrong a few times in blog posts, but these are just blog posts, I don't think that he taks them that seriously either.

Also, I think the haters overreact his arrogance, because it is just his successful writing strategy, if he wouldn't be that arrogant, you wouldn't read him. The 2006 article "Why Wii Won" made him popular, but the 2008 article "How Obama Loses" article didn't take away this popularity. People listen to arrogant, prophetic claims, especially when they are right, not discussions and opinions.

WHAT?! THE PLAYSTATION D-PAD?! ARE YOU KIDDING ME?!

That's the worst Dpad I haver ever the disgrace to met in why whole life! Playing Castlevania SOTN, Resident evil 2 or a fighting game on the PSOne was a masochistic venture that always left me callus in my thumbs! even the Xbox pad was better!!!!

Damn!

My take:
1. Nintendo brought things on itself, by losing the (hard)core audience. The first break happened with Mortal Kombat. Sega jumped all over it. Nintendo then continued to remain married to an approach that didn't appeal to the young mail demographic, late teens into their 20s. You don't get Nintendo doing a GTA. Sony followed up on what Sega did, and capitalized on that market. End result was Nintendo got branded "kiddie", and they left.
2. The Gamecube controller is just plain weird. Sorry. It is nice to have a big honkin' fat green button in the middle, but across all games, it wasn't the best choice.
3. The Wii has its own niche it excels and, and should be left alone. To take a motion control game and say, BLAMMO it MUST be on the PS3 and 360 are missing the point. Like, we MUST bring Boomblox over to the PS3 and Wii? Why? It is made for the Wii.

You're transferring your changing game needs on Nintendo. Sure, it's your take and everyone can have his take. But it isn't much of a rational argument. Did you really expect them to follow you through every lifecylus? That's a strange expectation. No company does that. Nintendo renews much of its core every generation, like any entertainment business. Old customers leave, new come in. That happens with a lot of entertainment.

This thread reminds me of a discussion I had years ago with someone that used to read the National Enquirer.  One day they read out some predictions from a psychic and I said it was all nonsense.  They then pointed out a major prediction the psychic had made before that happened.  I then pointed out that the psychic made predictions each year and one of them coming true was not any kind of proof of them having special insight.  I could tell that dispite the conversation the person still had their belief in the psychic's abilities and that I was just wasting my time.

I should have known that when I mentioned how Malstrom's analysis and prediction about the Presidential Election was wrong that someone would dismiss it or make some kind of excuse to ignore it.  I know if I point out any mistakes that Malstrom makes (like making up quotes, getting facts wrong, etc) that people will just say to ignore those as well.  So I'm saying from experience to anyone that tries to argue over his writings, don't bother because you'll eventually come to realize that you're just wasting your time and to just ignore threads about him from now on.

The thing is that I grew up in the target demographics that were what led to sales.  However, you can't say that every single thing there was mine.  I wasn't into Mortal Kombat at all.  I do know that Sega used Mortal Kombat to steal thunder from Nintendo.  This was the start of "Nintendo as 'kiddie'" (Keep in mind, I didn't believe Nintendo is, just that is the way it is).  Sony then exploited this further by allowing the likes of Grand Theft Auto.  Nintendo then got branded kiddie, and had losed the hardcore as a result.  It tried to keep doing what it was doing, and making money.  It did, but the growth demographic whines about it.  The complain Nintendo isn't "hardcore enough", and now they are gauled that Nintendo is on top.

In regards to this, I am far more Super Mario, than I am Grand Theft Auto and Mortal Kombat.

I think you're exactly right, but you're using it towards the wrong conclusions. The majority of the industry has been following the same generation of users since the NES. The 5-9 year olds that had the NES are the 10-14 year-olds targeted in the SNES generation, the 15-19 year-olds that led the PlayStation generation, the 20-24 year-olds that pushed the new-entry Xbox ahead of the venerable GameCube, and the 25-29 year-olds who now have families and steady jobs, the money to invest in large home theatre systems, and a craving for moving, adult content.

Nintendo didn't follow that generation, which is why it has become more and more evident as time went by that Nintendo was falling behind. Nintendo was only a few years off the "gamer generation" in the SNES era, and few people noticed, except in cases like Mortal Kombat. Nintendo was further behind in the N64 generation, and the cries of "kiddy!" grew loader. Moreso with GameCube, and now the point where it's increasingly unacceptable with Wii.

The wrong conclusion to get from that is that this demographic is the beginning and ending

Every time Nintendo appealed to their hardcore, with stronger hardware and more violent games, they lost more than they gained. That's why they went for the blue ocean or mass-appeal strategy. What they did before failed them. They tried more hardcore and failed twice. Meanwhile the Playstation won, because it chose to attract casuals and hardcore. With the PS2, the casual percentage grew even more. Nintendo saw it, learned form it and made it her own. Bam, blue ocean adn the wii.

You can't really claim that the Playstation 1 or 2 was more hardcore over the N64 or the GC. The two playstations won only with the casuals, not the hardcore. GtA only sold some 17 million on a installbase of +-130 million. The casuals of then might be hardcore now and vice versa. That's something which will happen to the Wii users too. Off course hardcore is a word which is thrown around too much. But it can only be defined by an personal opinion, not a clear-cut definition.

The so called 'kiddie' branding is barely happening outside the internet, mostly hardened HD fanboys. What's more important anyway: what the mainstream audience thinks or a small minority on the internet? For a any company, it is the mainstream audience. Nintendo chose so and is printing money now with an  console unrivaled in sales. 

Nintendo has always been about taking steps in the right direction, not to mention reliability. They have always marketed to younger gamers. That is why the PlayStation had such a huge success. Nintendo was marketing to the same age group when their fans were adults. That is why the "hardcore" or the first generation of gamers left Nintendo. Nintendo was making some really good games especially on the GameCube, that just wasn't reaching the adult gamers due to the fact they were mainly silenced by Sony's reign.

Most of the "hardcore" that you are referring to are just like me. We never left Nintendo. I have an N64 and a GameCube. I love both of those systems, but I also have the PlayStation and the PS2. Now, Nintendo has released the Wii. I waited in line to get Twilight Princess day one. Then, I waited months to get another good game. Still, there are only a few handful of games on the Wii that the classic Nintendo fans as myself enjoy.

Nintendo is so wrapped up in selling "Wii" games that they are not making many "Nintendo" games. Punch-Out just came out. I don't have it due to financial problems, but within June, I will have it. The last "Nintendo" game we got was Mario Kart Wii that is a year old now, and is still selling as a "Wii" game.

Honestly, If I would have known the Wii was going to be such a big hit, I would have never gotten one. The majority of gamers who were playing Super Mario Bros. now have a PS3 or 360. We want to play fun games. We don't want to dance with a remote in our hands. Nintendo has abandoned it's original fans for "Wii" fans. One decent game a year is not considered good. That is pathetic. I understand why they are taking this route. This is where the money is. The fact is, anyone who says Nintendo has not abandoned their original fans is mistaken. They could win me back, but a game with "Wii" in the title is not going to do it. I will still pick up any good game they release. I have not abandoned Nintendo. They are not releasing the games that Nintendo fans want.

I'm not cherry-picking your argument, but that line stood out to me...as false. There has definitely been more than 1 game a year from Ninty.