I know this sounds like a confusing question but, bare with me. What I'm really asking is why should it matter if a game is "hardcore" or "casual"? I know there are hardcore game fans, and those who are more casual fans of the medium. And I know there are deep, complex games, and simple, accessible games. But why should one be better than the other. Why should things like challenge and a good story be exclusive to hardcore games, while casual games must conform to being shallow, pay-to-win puzzle games, or mini-game waggle fests? What good does that do for games, and more importantly, what would happen if a game steps out of those boundaries?

Take for example, the Professor Layton series. Is it a core game, or a casual game? While one would classify it as a casual game (which, it is), the answer should be, who cares, I enjoyed it, it's a good game. Thus comes to Nintendo. People keep begging for Nintendo to return to "core gamers" and make "core games". But I'd argue, what's the point? Just make good games. By freeing yourself from obnoxious generalizations about what is casual and what is core, you'll be able to explore different concepts, and make games that both audiences, could actually end up enjoying. Casual should not be code for "crap". That's just ego stroking BS made up by whinny elitists.

I'm not arguing that Nintendo shouldn't make games that aren't deep, core experiences, they certainly can. What I'm saying, is focus on what YOU want to play first. If it happens to be casual, then so what. Put as much effort into it as you can.

@jcrame10: 3D Mario usually feels very different from game to game. Mario 64, Sunshine, and Galaxy though share a similar structure, all feel very different. Granted Nintendo doesn't always do this as you said. But it's hard to say 3D Mario hasn't changed when it has.

@jcrame10: [quote] The only major exception is the Zelda franchise which tries something new almost every time.[/Quote]

Not really. Nintendo does this with most of their franchises. True the main idea is the same, but they usually add something new to make it fresh.

A big reason why I love the Dreamcast was because it had not only had Sega's best 1st party output since the Genesis, but it also had some of Sega's most creative and risky games. Jet Grind Radio, Space Channel 5, Shenmue, Skies of Arcadia, Crazy Taxi, Rez, Sonic Adventure 1 & 2, Typing of the Dead, Phantasy Star Online, Seaman. These are games that pushed bounderies, dared to be different from the norm, and took established franchises to new hights. However, can Nintendo be like that with the Switch? They were actually kind of like this with the DS. Kirby Canvas Curse, Elite Beat Agents, Trace Memory, Advance Wars: Days of Ruin, ASH, all their DSiWare games, etc. were all games that dared to be different as well as took established franchises in interesting directions. Recently they restructured their in-house studios (all of them now under the collective name of EPD) to place a bigger focus on younger talent. Plus, with the Switch being both a handheld and console, it frees up many of their other teams and studios to do other projects, which in turn, leads to MORE off-the-wall games like Splatoon or EBA.

It would be a breath of fresh air, especially how shockingly safe most of their output on the Wii U has been. If Nintendo has this structure, in addition to indie, mobile, and japanese devs on board, the Switch could very well have the potential to preserve the Dreamcast-style game design.

@Ghost120x: Really? Try watching Adventure Time, Steven Universe, Gravity Falls, Regular Show, Star Vs. The Forces of Evil, Harvey Beaks, MLP, We Bare Bears, Clarence, and The Loud House.

@emgesp: It'd be easy to assume Nintendo has no competent writers, but their Treehouse team has produced some well written localizations, but then again, they're just localizations. I'm sure there are aspiring story tellers at Nintendo, but haven't had much opportunity during Miyamoto's tenure at EAD. This is why Nintendo needs to use it's younger staff more and step out of their comfort zone. I made a previous thread about how I feel Nintendo's games in the future should be more creator-driven, well this is why.

@emgesp: Well, not every plot has to be TLOU levels of deep to be good. Often, a simple story can be impactful too.

@MirkoS77: I'm not saying it's the only direction they should take, just one area they can explore further than they currently do.

@emgesp: I shed a tear Super Paper Mario's ending. And I would lump Kid Icarus Uprising, and Fire Emblem along with the more recent Zelda games into the story category, as well as Xenoblade and Metroid Prime. Nintendo's developers are more than capable of it, but I think they need to do it more often. And it is possible to weave story telling elements into gameplay mechanics, Metroid Prime did it beautifully.

@lamprey263: @MirkoS77: You still don't seem to understand what I'm saying. I'm not talking about just going only for kids, or being super kid-friendly or anything. If you want an example of what I'm getting at. Watch something like Hey Arnold! Or Pete and Pete. What I'm proposing is Nintendo making a game that encapsulates what's more real about being a kid than what they do now.