I get what you're trying to say, but that's not actually what the article says.DVS BSTrD said:
What it implies is that to Nintendo, Character and Setting are an afterthought.
They design games, then put a setting around them that fits. If the gameplay will fit with an existing set of characters and setting without feeling strange, they go with that, otherwise they come up with something new.
Seems like a reasonable strategy to me, considering it focuses on gameplay innovation, rather than narrative innovation.
Think of it less as not wanting to come up with new stuff, but more like wanting to focus your efforts in a particular area, rather than trying to invent everything in your games from the ground up every time.
(That does come at a cost, you know? Effort spent developing one part of a game, is effort that could've been used to do something else too.)
Still, this strategy isn't nessesarily right or wrong. It's just different. And easy to pick on because it looks superficially repetitive. (Because the stuff they keep reusing is the superficial, easily seen stuff that you can see a mile off without even looking at the game itself. - "Oh look another mario game!")
