[These are] the sort of people who, for example, might want to watch a movie. They might want to go to Disneyland. Their attitude is, 'okay, I am the customer. You are supposed to entertain me.' It's kind of a passive attitude they're taking, and to me it's kind of a pathetic thing. They do not know how interesting it is if you move one step further and try to challenge yourself [with more advanced games].

 

Fortunately, because of the spread of smart devices, people take games for granted now. It's a good thing for us, because we do not have to worry about making games something that are relevant to general people's daily lives.

-Shigeru Miyamoto

This is from a recent interview with Edge Magazine.  Basically, Miyamoto isn't a fan of the Casual Gaming Market and would much rather stick to Core Gamers in where he can make less games that are the equivalent of a lousy smartphone game. 

 

Source: http://www.gamnesia.com/news/miyamoto-nintendo-is-focused-on-core-gamers-not-passive-ones#.U_4Ya8EpDQ8

Too quote any Dark Souls fans (or fans of other challenging games): "firetrucking casuls"(Personally i used to enjoy casual games like cod until I started playing Dark Souls )

Edited August 27, 201411 yr by Col.Random

If it means that Nintendo will make their games more challenging now,then that's good to hear

Once you finished a hard game, u never wanna play casual games again even if you die million times till you beat another hard game.

I kind of agree and disagree what he has to say . Yea harder games are still more fun in the long run and I do enjoy them and the same time I feel like Nintendo is being somewhat hypocritical since you really can't get anymore casual on consoles then Mario. That franchise is the perfect example on how games that are simple and easy can potential be as good as games that are challenging ( Dark Souls). 

 

Right now I am replaying Super Mario 3D Land, I am giving that game more attention then Bravely Default right now because SM3DL has that easy to pick up and play factor to it ( similar to smartphone games). Not saying I want Mario on smartphones just comparing the two.

I kind of agree and disagree what he has to say . Yea harder games are still more fun in the long run and I do enjoy them and the same time I feel like Nintendo is being somewhat hypocritical since you really can't get anymore casual on consoles then Mario. That franchise is the perfect example on how games that are simple and easy can potential be as good as games that are challenging ( Dark Souls). 

 

Right now I am replaying Super Mario 3D Land, I am giving that game more attention then Bravely Default right now because SM3DL has that easy to pick up and play factor to it ( similar to smartphone games). Not saying I want Mario on smartphones just comparing the two.

 

I agree wholeheartedly! Btw that's one of my favorite games outside of KH .

Brave words Miyamoto. Now why do you try to make something harder and stop re-hashing the same formulas over and over?

Edited August 27, 201411 yr by Firaga Sensei

If a video game is fun, I'll play it, period. It doesn't matter what platform its for or who the target audience is. 

Well, we see who the jackass is now. Sony's Brohei Broshida is a way better leader than this fool.

 

Quite honestly casual games are fine. I mean, that's practically what happened for handhelds until the DS showed up. 

That's honestly very hurtful. I'm not a "Casual", but I wouldn't call myself a "Core gamer" either. I kind of suck at games, as much as I love them, but I enjoy them anyways, and I try my hardest. I have a life, and I can't devote dozens of hours a day into gaming. So I'm not that great, and it's just painful that a big face in gaming would say something like that. :C

Well, we see who the jackass is now. Sony's Brohei Broshida is a way better leader than this fool. Quite honestly casual games are fine. I mean, that's practically what happened for handhelds until the DS showed up.

Childish much? 

That's honestly very hurtful. I'm not a "Casual", but I wouldn't call myself a "Core gamer" either. I kind of suck at games, as much as I love them, but I enjoy them anyways, and I try my hardest. I have a life, and I can't devote dozens of hours a day into gaming. So I'm not that great, and it's just painful that a big face in gaming would say something like that. :C

The problem is, that Gamenesia baited the title of the article. Miyamoto is calling the attitude pathetic, not the audience. That would be something no one would want to hear from him.

Edited August 28, 201411 yr by Hero of Winds

I kind of agree and disagree what he has to say . Yea harder games are still more fun in the long run and I do enjoy them and the same time I feel like Nintendo is being somewhat hypocritical since you really can't get anymore casual on consoles then Mario. That franchise is the perfect example on how games that are simple and easy can potential be as good as games that are challenging ( Dark Souls). 

 

Right now I am replaying Super Mario 3D Land, I am giving that game more attention then Bravely Default right now because SM3DL has that easy to pick up and play factor to it ( similar to smartphone games). Not saying I want Mario on smartphones just comparing the two.

 

This is about how I feel on this as well.

Brave words Miyamoto. Now why do you try to make something harder and stop re-hashing the same formulas over and over?

Oh come on, man. Like you've played any of his recent games. The formulas WORK, and he also adds in new twists that are really fun. It's not like CoD where they add a couple new maps and weapons and call it a day. Not to mention that the Wii U definitely has more interesting games than PS4 and Xbox One combined, if you ask me.

Oh come on, man. Like you've played any of his recent games. The formulas WORK, and he also adds in new twists that are really fun. It's not like CoD where they add a couple new maps and weapons and call it a day. Not to mention that the Wii U definitely has more interesting games than PS4 and Xbox One combined, if you ask me.

 

Still needs to make his games harder and more challenging.

Still needs to make his games harder and more challenging.

Super Mario 3D World had a lot of challenging segments. Pikmin 3 (In fact, all of the Pikmin games) are strategic, and can be challenging. Also, I thought you were into Star Fox? Guess what, Miyamoto's reviving the series, and there's no way that's going to be dumbed down. People need to quit bashing his new games when they haven't even touched them.

Super Mario 3D World had a lot of challenging segments. Pikmin 3 (In fact, all of the Pikmin games) are strategic, and can be challenging. Also, I thought you were into Star Fox? Guess what, Miyamoto's reviving the series, and there's no way that's going to be dumbed down. People need to quit bashing his new games when they haven't even touched them.

 

I'm not an idiot, Flash, I know Miyamoto's work. He been using the same franchises since the 80s and sometimes, it gets a little tiresome to notice how similar everything is even with the new projects he does. That's all I saying.

 

Also, I never said I was into Star Fox. I just used Fox a lot in Smash. I don't know where you're getting that I'm into the franchise.

I'm not an idiot, Flash, I know Miyamoto's work. He been using the same franchises since the 80s and sometimes, it gets a little tiresome to notice how similar everything is even with the new projects he does. That's all I saying.

 

Also, I never said I was into Star Fox. I just used Fox a lot in Smash. I don't know where you're getting that I'm into the franchise.

"He's been using the same franchises since the 80s" Pikmin? Nintendogs? Star Fox U? His new franchise he's working on? He's got plenty more than Mario and Zelda. Also, if you say Super Mario 3D Land/World are similar to New Super Mario Bros, you clearly don't know what you're talking about.

 

You talked about Fox so much, I had to assume you were.

"He's been using the same franchises since the 80s" Pikmin? Nintendogs? Star Fox U? His new franchise he's working on? He's got plenty more than Mario and Zelda. Also, if you say Super Mario 3D Land/World are similar to New Super Mario Bros, you clearly don't know what you're talking about.

 

You talked about Fox so much, I had to assume you were.

 

I meant the series such as Mario and Zelda, and you I also know that I know the difference between SM3D Land/World and NSMB. Once again, do not insult my intelligence. All I'm saying is that Mr. Miyamoto here is saying that games should challenge you when he spends more time staying with what's good and not enough time providing the so called "challenge" that he apparently believes in, as well as making sequels to game series that overall have used the same basic formula for the past how many years they've been out. Am I wrong? No I'm not. Look at all the Mario games made for console over the years: yes, they're not all exactly the same, but they stick to two formulas: either the classic 2D style of gameplay or the 3D style of gameplay introduced with Super Mario 64. And the games offer the same kind of challenges and objectives as well. 

 

Don't assume things. Granted, I'd like to be more into the franchise considering it holds a great amount of interest for me, but sadly, its limited to Smash and from what I've researched about it.

I meant the series such as Mario and Zelda, and you I also know that I know the difference between SM3D Land/World and NSMB. Once again, do not insult my intelligence. All I'm saying is that Mr. Miyamoto here is saying that games should challenge you when he spends more time staying with what's good and not enough time providing the so called "challenge" that he apparently believes in, as well as making sequels to game series that overall have used the same basic formula for the past how many years they've been out. Am I wrong? No I'm not. Look at all the Mario games made for console over the years: yes, they're not all exactly the same, but they stick to two formulas: either the classic 2D style of gameplay or the 3D style of gameplay introduced with Super Mario 64. And the games offer the same kind of challenges and objectives as well. 

 

Don't assume things. Granted, I'd like to be more into the franchise considering it holds a great amount of interest for me, but sadly, its limited to Smash and from what I've researched about it.

If you compared 3D World and Mario 64, they're very different. Heck, even SM64 and Galaxy are different. Galaxy is one of the most innovating games I've ever played (And far, far better than SM64 in my opinion). The 3D Zelda games are mostly copy/paste, but that's being changed now. Also, Miyamoto's not even making Mario games after 3D World, so you can be happy and hope that the next will be more of a challenge. Also, the reason he keeps these formulas is because they WORK.

 

Also, New Super Luigi U was definitely challenging. Once again, you're making these assumptions without ever playing the games.

I meant the series such as Mario and Zelda, and you I also know that I know the difference between SM3D Land/World and NSMB. Once again, do not insult my intelligence. All I'm saying is that Mr. Miyamoto here is saying that games should challenge you when he spends more time staying with what's good and not enough time providing the so called "challenge" that he apparently believes in, as well as making sequels to game series that overall have used the same basic formula for the past how many years they've been out. Am I wrong? No I'm not. Look at all the Mario games made for console over the years: yes, they're not all exactly the same, but they stick to two formulas: either the classic 2D style of gameplay or the 3D style of gameplay introduced with Super Mario 64. And the games offer the same kind of challenges and objectives as well. 

 

Don't assume things. Granted, I'd like to be more into the franchise considering it holds a great amount of interest for me, but sadly, its limited to Smash and from what I've researched about it.

 

If you compared 3D World and Mario 64, they're very different. Heck, even SM64 and Galaxy are different. Galaxy is one of the most innovating games I've ever played (And far, far better than SM64 in my opinion). The 3D Zelda games are mostly copy/paste, but that's being changed now. Also, Miyamoto's not even making Mario games after 3D World, so you can be happy and hope that the next will be more of a challenge. Also, the reason he keeps these formulas is because they WORK.

 

Also, New Super Luigi U was definitely challenging. Once again, you're making these assumptions without ever playing the games.

Ok, guys, listen up. First off, Firaga, Miyamoto has made games besides Mario and Zelda, that are actually challenging and not casual. Also, Games like Super Mario Bros. (Current now, like U or Wii) have their challenging segments, but are supposed to be easy to get into cause they are Head Franchise games. Nintendo doesn't want to turn away fans with the games being too hard like say in the NES era. The formulas have been changed and tweaked small bits over the years, but Miyamoto has kept them BECAUSE THEY WORK. New and different is not always better. Modern Final Fantasy is a perfect example of that, it's barely recognizable now and you can see why alot of people hate it now.

 

And Flash, Miyamoto has made strategic/challenging games, but Firaga's talking about where it concerns Zelda and Mario. They may have their challenging aspects and such, but you can't deny that they aren't nearly as hard as say Starfox or Pikmin. :| Miyamoto has kept the formulas the same, and for the most part, it has been too easy for the majority of each of the Mario games he's made. Although, the reason for that is since its supposed to be casual, given its the head franchise, and the formula's work. :

Edited August 28, 201411 yr by spiderfreak1011

Ok, guys, listen up. First off, Firaga, Miyamoto has made games besides Mario and Zelda, that are actually challenging and not casual. Also, Games like Super Mario Bros. (Current now, like U or Wii) have their challenging segments, but are supposed to be easy to get into cause they are Head Franchise games. Nintendo doesn't want to turn away fans with the games being too hard like say in the NES era. The formulas have been changed and tweaked small bits over the years, but Miyamoto has kept them BECAUSE THEY WORK. New and different is not always better. Modern Final Fantasy is a perfect example of that, it's barely recognizable now and you can see why alot of people hate it now.

 

And Flash, Miyamoto has made strategic/challenging games, but Firaga's talking about where it concerns Zelda and Mario. They may have their challenging aspects and such, but you can't deny that they aren't nearly as hard as say Starfox or Pikmin. :| Miyamoto has kept the formulas the same, and for the most part, it has been too easy for the majority of each of the Mario games he's made. Although, the reason for that is since its supposed to be casual, given its the head franchise, and the formula's work. :

 

Did I say they didn't work? No, of course they work. The fact that those franchises have been going for so long is proof of that. But I personally don't think its a good thing to want to play the same two or three games over and over again for twenty plus years, regardless of tweaks and/or changes because its still the same game. Is that a problem?

Edited August 28, 201411 yr by Firaga Sensei

I meant the series such as Mario and Zelda, and you I also know that I know the difference between SM3D Land/World and NSMB. Once again, do not insult my intelligence. All I'm saying is that Mr. Miyamoto here is saying that games should challenge you when he spends more time staying with what's good and not enough time providing the so called "challenge" that he apparently believes in, as well as making sequels to game series that overall have used the same basic formula for the past how many years they've been out. Am I wrong? No I'm not. Look at all the Mario games made for console over the years: yes, they're not all exactly the same, but they stick to two formulas: either the classic 2D style of gameplay or the 3D style of gameplay introduced with Super Mario 64. And the games offer the same kind of challenges and objectives as well.  Don't assume things. Granted, I'd like to be more into the franchise considering it holds a great amount of interest for me, but sadly, its limited to Smash and from what I've researched about it.

Throwing my hat into the ring, a game dosen't need to be innovative to be dynamic, fun, and challenging. The Pokémon games normally are a good representation of this, though Generation VI isn't terribly dificult for the most part, great design of areas and improvements in general features, additions of a few new but previously done by other people's featires (Pokemon-Amie, along with a few minigames) make the game fun, fresh, and dynamic. If you play online against others, you can see the dificult presented in multiplayer, and the side quests do present some small challenges sure, could and should be more dificult, but that doesn't change the fun it presents or the fact that it's not exactly for no one but causal gamers. Hell, the PWC proved that you can get to a World Champion level with a little electric mouse that was only previously only really used for fun. How do we battle? Same type-based weak/strong turn-based attack system with only 6 mon's in your party. Zelda games are known for their dificulty and innovative designs, like Link Between Worlds with the ability to solve puzzles by moving on walls. The core gameplay, however, did not change, being that it is a puzzle game that you have to find items, solve puzzles, and fight beasties to progress the game, yet it's still dificult and fun.Your argument is that if it's not new and diffrent, it can't be fun and a "hard core" gamers game or new and fun. Little changes to the gameplay makes it diffrent still and fun. Though innovation is nessicary and I won't deny that, saying that gaming will not contenue to be fun without changing the formula when it "gets old" is incorrect.

Your argument is that if it's not new and diffrent, it can't be fun and a "hard core" gamers game or new and fun. Little changes to the gameplay makes it diffrent still and fun. Though innovation is nessicary and I won't deny that, saying that gaming will not contenue to be fun without changing the formula when it "gets old" is incorrect.

 

Again, did I say that it makes it any less fun either, NeverBetter? NO. I just don't want to play the same thing for twenty plus years, sans a few changes here and there that only matter so much in the grand scheme of things. I don't care how "fun" the game is, if its the same thing over and over for the most part, I don't support it.

Again, did I say that it makes it any less fun either, NeverBetter? NO. I just don't want to play the same thing for twenty plus years, sans a few changes here and there that only matter so much in the grand scheme of things. I don't care how "fun" the game is, if its the same thing over and over for the most part, I don't support it.

I know that you play Kingdom Hearts, so tell me, what part of the gameplay is innovative, new, and fresh? I know you play a few wrestling games, and how much diffrent can a wrestling game be between versions? It seems like you just want to say that the only good games are ones you approve of, and you don't approve of games that don't play new every single installment if they're a longer series. KH is almost 8 entries deep, and unless KH3 plays diffrently from the other games in the franchise, you're probably going to stop supporting it as well, no? All I'm getting out of your statement is that unless you think it's worthy, there is no point to support it.

All I'm getting out of your statement is that unless you think it's worthy, there is no point to support it.

 

Once again, didn't ask for innovation, I just think Miyamoto needs to make his games harder if he wants to call out casual gaming. Can we stay on track here, because you really need to stop bringing up other shit that has nothing to do with what we're talking about.

Once again, didn't ask for innovation, I just think Miyamoto needs to make his games harder if he wants to call out casual gaming. Can we stay on track here, because you really need to stop bringing up other shit that has nothing to do with what we're talking about.

It seems like you are changing your story now. You said that "I just don't want to play the same thing for twenty plus years, sans a few changes here and there..." [sic] and now you're saying you're not asking for innovation at all. Odd.And anyway, most of the games he has produced are fairly dificult, they follow a style, but they're still dificult.