I think the article is right about how our relationship with games changes because our relationship with time changed. When you're younger, time is a seemingly infinite resource and money very much isn't. So a game that can occupy your time, either with the need to practice or even just tedium (looking at you, JRPGs) is more interesting and valuable. When you're older time is scarce, but money on the scale of game prices really isn't. You have a low tolerance for spending time on things that aren't enjoyable like grinding character levels or honing shooter skills.
Nintendo puts a lot of effort into making gaming a more locally social, and especially family-oriented, form of entertainment. And even for some single-player franchises like Mario and Zelda they are adept at creating whimsically enjoyable experiences, so their games often transcend age boundaries. But games like Pokemon, with its grinding and random battles, doesn't.
Nintendo puts a lot of effort into making gaming a more locally social, and especially family-oriented, form of entertainment. And even for some single-player franchises like Mario and Zelda they are adept at creating whimsically enjoyable experiences, so their games often transcend age boundaries. But games like Pokemon, with its grinding and random battles, doesn't.