I think it's clear that the problem with this game, which on a different scale also beset Skyward Sword (which, if I recall, sold poorly relative to the expectations of the Zelda brand and the gigantic, saturated Wii install base), is that we are at a point in the lifespan of the system when the owners themselves have drawn firm conclusions about whether the platform's unique control scheme is up their alley or not, and a new game isn't about to persuade them.
I'm more bullish on Star Fox Zero than most (just as I adored Skyward Sword and am generally warm to motion aiming), and I don't mind a further delay, but it seems to me that no amount of polish or quality will bring in the people who want their Star Fox 64-2 with sticks, a single screen, and more obviously spectacular graphics. That market segment was already lost and could never have been won. Those of you in this camp know who you are and also know that you wanted a different game from the concept up.
I, for one, will play it. I like my Nintendo wacky.
Just wondering if people realize that Miyamoto became a big deal when teams were much smaller than today and had a lot of the genre defining ideas both in the pre-NES through NES days and again in the N64 days. It is revisionist history to act like he hasn't had a huge impact on gaming.
Beyond this, at least the way Nintendo employees describe it, he has been very influential in shaping products from the original Metroid Prime to, yes, Sticker Star. If you want to deny larger than life figures just because you cannot believe, go ahead. But you're not being some "realist" above the heads of low information posters. You're being wrong.
This is essentially correct.
Where Sticker Star is concerned, I had my share of problems with the game (mainly the "inventory check" boss mechanics) but none of them had to do with the effect Miyamoto's detractors pinned on him. But Internet Conventional Wisdom has a way of snowballing into stupid, incessantly repeated talking points that never go away.