I may be reading too much into his posts, but I believe Malstrom's concern is that the experiments may end up becoming the main attraction in the future. The support for this would be that 1) Nintendo's shown an interest in pursuing UGC as their flagship efffort (Holiday 2008), 2) Nintendo's continuing several experiments with UGC even after that debacle (Flipnote Studio, Mario vs. DK, Wii Music 2 (The Artstyle games aren't UGC, as far as I can tell)), 3) You rarely conduct experiments unless you're interested in expanding those concepts in the future (see Gamecube and GBA peripherals), and 4) Nintendo, and Miyamoto in particular, are still openly talking about embracing UGC, inspite of Holiday 2008 (see this interview, for starters).

While I don't completely buy into Malstrom's alarmism at this point, I do have to note that nearly every title you've identified as being key to Nintendo's current efforts are sequels (Fit Plus, Resort, Galaxy 2, Zelda Wii, etc. The Vitality Sensor is a clear exception and, while NSMB was only four years ago, I consider a console 2D Mario to be fresh enough to not call it a sequel). Alarmingly, most of the Wii titles you've listed already have a game on the Wii. To me, this implies a stall tactic: Nintendo's not sure where to go next, so they're throwing the familiar out there to buy some time. I thought, until this interview, that this meant they were abandoning their UGC approach, hence the need for filler titles, but this interview kind of makes it sound like they're willing to stick with the strategy while only mixing up the tactics.

I numbered your 4 sentences and spread them apart a bit to make this easier.

1) Mario Galaxy was nothing like Sunshine or Mario 64 and is considered by many to be the most innovative 3-D platformer.  Metroid: Other M is completely new, with new gameplay, new point of view, new pacing and action, new characters, and new story.  You're right about Twilight Princess, but Miyamoto has said that was the last traditional Zelda and he's doing something crazy different next.  That game was all fanservice for Ocarina fans (it's Ocarina's only true sequel taking place in the same exact Hyrule), a sweet farewell to that era of Zelda games.  But it's the only Zelda where you TURN INTO A WOLF.  More people say that Twilight Princess was ripping off Okami than say it's a stale repeat of Wind Waker.

2) Mario IS a spin-off, and always has been.  He came from Donkey Kong.  Then he was the villain in Donkey Kong Jr.  Then suddenly he was a plumber and he had a brother and he fought monsters in your plumbing.  Then he was part of a Wrecking Crew.  Then he and his bro were "super" and ate mushrooms that made them bigger as they battled through dungeons to save a princess.  Those games were all spin-offs, and that was all on the NES.  Mario tried everything before he found his true calling in life.  But he kept trying other things.  Even back on the SNES you had Super Mario Kart and Super Mario RPG.  This is nothing new and has nothing to do with User Generated Content or Nintendo failing or Miyamoto retiring.

3) Prove it.  This is the big logical jump I'm not seeing any evidence for anywhere.  Name me any Nintendo games you can think of where you can actually say "User Generated Content is the primary focus."

4) Here is some new content from Nintendo: Nintendogs, Brain Age, Wii Sports, Wii Fit, Wii Music, Rhythm Heaven, Excitebots.  And outside of America there's Disaster and Captain Rainbow.  They're working on new franchises, creating entirely new genres, and even with their old franchises they're trying many new things.  Maybe User Generated Content will be one of their several directions.  Why would it be the only one, or even a major one?

I have to seriously question this sentence. More innovative than Mario 64, i.e. the game that created the 3D-platformer? You're stretching it.

Aside from the new story part, do we actually know any of this for sure? We've gotten a highly-ambiguous trailer, an interview talking about Samus' maternal instincts, and, as far as I know, nothing else on the subject. I think this is a bit premature.

That was actually made up by the internet. He's recently said that the next Zelda won't be that different.

http://multiplayerblog.mtv.com/2009/07/02/miyamoto-next-zelda-on-the-wii-not-radically-different/

 Considering the development cycles, those people always make me laugh.

For the record, I agree with the rest of your post.

Metroid: I thought we knew the new Metroid would have 3rd person and 2-D parts, and it seems much faster, especially since Team Ninja doesn't make games about really slow atmospheric exploration.

Mario: yeah, I meant most innovative 3-D platformer SINCE Mario 64 defined it.

Zelda: whoa, news to me.  ::clicks link::

By ideas I wasn't talking about gameplay I was talking about levels, enemy's, item's, story etc. They keep fishing stuff from old Mario games. I think they do the same things with Zelda and Metroid.

Everything including Donkey Kong is considered part of the Mario Universe. Paper Mario, Mario Kart, Mario Party, Mario Tennis, Mario Super Sluggers, Mario Strikers, Mario and Luigi (the RPG series), Wario Land, Yoshi's Island. From what I hear Wii Sports was originally gonna use Mario characters, also.

When thinking of games where UGC is the primary focus Flipnote Studio, Mario vs. Donkey Kong: Minis March Again and Wii Music come to mind.

Yes they are making new content still but they still seem to be putting more focus in either using existing content and now it seems like they have this idea of their users creating all the content.

Mario vs. Donkey Kong: Minis March Again is a full single player game. It just happens to have a level editor on the side, like Smash Bros. Brawl or Mario vs. DK 2 did. No big deal. Also, the game's only $8.

I just looked up Flipnote Studio on Wikipedia. It's FREE.

I don't see where Nintendo is ripping off the consumer with User Generated Content anywhere here. Unless you believe Malstrom's right when he says that Wii Music alone marks the dawn of a new era of Nintendo bent on its own destruction. What's Nintendo going to do? Fire all their artists and stop making art so they can just make UGC-only games? Because the only person here asking Nintendo to fire any artists is Malstrom.

I've seen a lot of change in Malstrom.

He started out by writing articles showing that Nintendo was following Blue Ocean Strategy or Disruption.  He then went on to explain what might happen to the industry according to the theory.  Yes, his writing style was goofy, over-the-top, and he liked to insert himself into the articles to argue with imaginary people who only have weak straw men for arguments.  On the other hand, he was the only person talking about the business strategy that Nintendo themselves said they were using.  For that reason, he caught on.  Especially since this site is more about sales.

Since that time, he started his blog.  Instead of focusing on business strategy, he has been commenting on anything and everything in video games, and in the process, has allowed his own personal bias to start leaking into his writing.  The recent stuff I have seen from him seems colored by his like or dislike for particular games.  He doesn't back up his opinions with facts either.  Look at what he did in this piece.  He quotes Miyamoto, and then goes off on a tangent that is completely unsupported by the quote.  I'm tired of the unsubstantiated claims that we are just supposed to believe.  When you actually look into them, they are just not true.

I don't think we were talking about them ripping off anyone. It was weather or not Nintendo was headed towards focusing their games primarily around User Generated Content. Now it sounds to me like Miyamoto and Iwata were the main culprits in the past. But it seems like Miyamoto is still talking about doing it.

That's the thing, you aren't just supposed to believe anything he says blindly. Never except anything at face value especially from Malstrom.

He doesn't have to back up his opinions with facts because that's what makes them opinions. You seem want him to be right all the time. But that not the motivation for his site. He's always saying he wants to learn about business. If he's always right then what is he really learning?

I think the change you've seen from Malstrom is that his Blog posts are not complete articles instead they are his moment by moment take on current events. That many blog posts on a weekly basis will never be as complete as a gradually written article.

Every article from Maelstrom is always full of anger. Hes always angry at someone usually its someone anti Nintendo but now hes mad at Miyamoto and we need to ask ourselves why? Is there a reason to be mad at a company because sales of their console are lower than we wanted? i just dont get it.