NPD April 2008 (Post #16)

[Scott_Arm]

Don't make too much of it - a year or two before that there were huge queues at E3 for the id booth, where Doom 3 was demonstrated behind closed doors.

I dunno. In the case of the Wii, the buzz was immediate and it came from traditional gamers and traditional gaming media. The people who were lined up for hours to get them at launch are not what I'd call casual gamers. The Wii has had success with gamers. As word of mouth spread, I'm sure casual interest grew. But all this talk that gamers don't buy the Wii or play the way is stupid. I'm sure there are more parents and casual gamers buying it for their kids, which is probably where the big difference in sales comes from. If I had a young kid, I wouldn't be buying her an expensive HD console.

 

[dobwal]

I'm not sure, but it seems like 360 could have a good chance of being profitable for it's life, if not for the 1B RROD charge. So if you had a hypothetical situation where the system didn't blow up, which isn't that hard to imagine. I know they've profited about 600 million the last three quarters. I'm not sure what their 360 non RROD write off losses prior to that have been.

Another thing is, if Sony or MS was to drop out, the other would be selling 400-500k systems per month, and outselling the Wii most months (which was the case for comined PS3+360 sales most months before the last two). And probably wouldn't need much in the way of pricedrops without competition.

I disagree the hadcore market is small. It was the Ps2 market which has shipped 130 million consoles and became bigger than box office grosses before we'd ever heard of Wii. And games like GTA and Halo make money just as real as any Nintendo does.

Even without the 1 billion write off, the 360 represent billions in investment and they have recoup about 600 million and we sitting 2.5 years into the generation and 20 million 360 consoles. The 360 has a slim chance of breaking even and thats with Sony initially offering an extremely high priced console. Imagine if Sony would have released a DVD based PS3, you think MS pricing strategy would have revolved around 1 $50.00 pricecut 24 months after release.

The 360 dropping out doesn't automatically mean those sales go to PS3 and vice versa. Some of the current 360 userbase may have been turn off by a $600.00 console and some of the current PS3 userbase may have not entered a console race without the inclusion of BluRay.

The PS2 isn't made up of 130 million hardcore gamers and Halo and GTA are what many would call mainstream franchises with market wide support.

 

[dobwal]

Disagree. I generally care about good graphics more than gameplay. I dont aplogize for that. I think any hardcore does.

Of course we dont like to play good looking pieces of crap, but there will always be good looking games that play well.

I remember when I was about 14 watching some guys play Ultima 6 on PC. I told them I wanted to get a NES. I remember them sneering.."ewww..that has terrible graphics" or something of the sort. Later, after I got a Genesis, I imagined showing them "Ha! Look at the graphics on this sucker!" which were as good or better than Ultima 6. Of course this was 20 years ago. It's an innate reaction.

If someone was 16 and own almost every system made since 1972 and almost all the software for those systems, played them regularly and yet didn't own a 360 or PS3 then you wouldn't call them hardcore.

A large fraction of hardcore gamers love visual as it is a sign of technical advancement but the hardcore gamers are the first to regularly play systems long neglected and forgotten by the mainstream.

The ultimate hardcore gamer would own all three systems as visual quality isn't the sole variable that these type of gamers weigh when playing games.

 

[Teasy]

Why should MS react to Nintendo?

Exactly, Nintendo are so far out of MS's reach at this point they should concentrate on the battle for second with Sony.

 

[thatdude90210]

Don't make too much of it - a year or two before that there were huge queues at E3 for the id booth, where Doom 3 was demonstrated behind closed doors.

Of course, HL2 and Halo 2 first showings had lines too... as they are highly anticipated games. But that doesn't diminish the fact that people were racing pass the sequel to the best-ever selling console, to get to a sequel for what is generally regarded as a failed console. That's like the paparazzi running pass Brad Pitt & Angelina Jolie's babies, just to get pictures of Nicole Richie's baby.

And many will say that lines for the Wii were some of the longest ever seen at E3.

Disagree. I generally care about good graphics more than gameplay. I dont aplogize for that. I think any hardcore does.

At neogaf, that's known as "hardly-core."

 

[assen]

At neogaf, that's known as "hardly-core."

At neogaf, if you are unable to recite the attack sequences in ten boss battles from Japanese imports from the 16-bit era, you aren't allowed in the building.

 

[tongue_of_colicab]

Flashy graphics help with immersion/suspension of disbelief. It's why the original 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea looks funny now, but modern movies require loads of funding and talent to create something believable. The bar got raised each time out and you have to match it to realize that suspension of desbelief. See the debate about the "Navigator" set in the original Aliens film. A full expensive set for one shot. That one shot was part of that suspension and a key one, so it was worth it in Ridley Scott's view. Seems he was proved correct. The same with actually using Geiger's work for the Alien. Can you imagine that kind of game on the Wii? I look at the total game. The Wii doesn't measure up for me. Motion control or no motion control.

I dont think the movie argument is totally accurate as it would be like comparing the nes to a ps3. Yes ofcourse there is a big difference between those. But is there such a big difference between the wii and the ps3? If you take advantage of the wii hardware, will there be such a dramatic difference to what it cant do compared to the ps3? No there wont be I think, they are not in a totally different leaugeu. Not even compared to the ps2 I think. The only thing next gen has shown us so far is exactly the same games only better looking. GTA4 really isnt that big of a difference compared to the ps2 gta's.

Also immersion of gfx only goes so far. I'm currently playing max payne again, which is from 2001 I think. It still looks good and immersive today. Will it become more immersive if it was build to ps3 specs? I dont think so. Alot of what makes the game so immersive goes far beyond what poly's and high res textures will do. Just making things look better doesnt make it more immersive. Gameplay, game design and art design do those things. Ofcourse that means that if you take all those and have the best hardware it will be better than on a lesser machine but there is no reason Wii games cant be as immersive as ps3 games just because they wont look as good.

Ask yourself fairly, how long are you ''wowed'' by gfx? I get used to what I see pretty quick and after that its just normal and I dont go WOW anymore. That it becomes the same to me as the lower gfx games from earlier (to a certain extend ofcourse, a n64 or psx game wont do that anymore for me because the gap is to big).

I agree that most of Wii owners are new into videogames. They either actively hated videogames or ignored them. For those people, buying a game console such as PS2 was just an alien concept.

Oh please stop that argument already. Its excuse #328445345. If most of the wii owners are new to videogames than why did Red steel sold over a million? why did RE4 (released for like the 5th time) sold a million? why did RE: UC sold somewhere close to a million? Why did Mario galaxy sold millions? why did Zelda sold millions? why does Mario kart continue to sell millions? These are all classic games that by your argument wii owners wont have interest in because they hated those games before so they wont suddenly like them now. But than please explain me to who all those millions of classic games are sold if you say that most wii owners (with most I think 60+%) are new to consoles.

Like it or not but plenty of ''real'' gamers are buying the wii.

 

[Nesh]

Correction then. The majority of Wii owners are very possibly people new to videogames, people not much into videogames, and people that are Nintendo loyal fans which should explain why these games sell by the millions as they were intended to on a GC as well which didnt have a huge install base.

The word "plenty" is a very subjective word if no definition is given.

 

[DeadlyNinja]

At neogaf, if you are unable to recite the attack sequences in ten boss battles from Japanese imports from the 16-bit era, you aren't allowed in the building.

Well, you'd be hard press to find a game with a boss fight in today's so called hardcore games. Today's gamers just want to give themselves a label to think they're cool. Back in the old days, it really did come down to your achievements. There's definitely nothing wrong with overcoming a game while overcoming a language barrier. I myself have beaten 11 Fire Emblem games in Japanese without knowing a lick of Japanese.

 

[Asher]

Exactly, Nintendo are so far out of MS's reach at this point they should concentrate on the battle for second with Sony.

That's one way to put it, but a tad bit inflammatory and I also think it misses the original point. In a lot of ways, we are seeing two distinct overall markets with some overlap. If MS pandered to Nintendo's market with the Wii in any reasonable fashion, they run a very realistic risk of alienating their current userbase (myself included). The last thing this industry needs is more mass-market shovelware in the name of "cheap development costs" with twitchy controllers. One overwhelming success is enough there.

 

[Readykilowatt]

as much as many "gamers" are buying Wii, I think we forget in our calculated projections here that PARENTS, who have no allegiance to a platform or name brand, are buying these systems.

they could not care less what was on a system last gen or what the name is. all they know is the kids (and other parents) are talking about NINTENDO Wii (a name recognizable from the parents' youth as a fun, kid friendly machine) which is once again cool, small and affordable fun for the family.

You know what's interesting.... maybe most Wii households have two [or three] Wiis instead of one. One for the kids (Hannah Montana, etc.), one for mom and dad (Wii Fit, Wii Play, etc.) [and one for the Nintendo core gamer. (Galaxy, Brawl, etc.)] This multiplier effect, may push the Wii to 300 million units when all is said and done.

 

[Zassk]

MANY of those PS2 owners were parents who bought what their kids wanted when all the games were on PS2.

that's not true this gen.

So you think that parents today are better informed about gaming than parents 6 years ago? Perhaps. We are long past the point at which today's parents are yesterday's kid gamers. I think we are also past the point at which traditional non-gamers have found a place in their lives for gaming - the explosion of flash gaming already happened. I think the Wii is just tapping into some of these emerging trends, rather than being come new unexpected phenomenon.

 

[Nesh]

So you think that parents today are better informed about gaming than parents 6 years ago? Perhaps. We are long past the point at which today's parents are yesterday's kid gamers. I think we are also past the point at which traditional non-gamers have found a place in their lives for gaming - the explosion of flash gaming already happened. I think the Wii is just tapping into some of these emerging trends, rather than being come new unexpected phenomenon.

I dont think thats what he is saying. What he is saying is that the PS2 was all there was in the previous gen. PS2 had the largest install base, almost any game kids wanted to play, it had the brand name, it had basically everything.

If there was one console that was most likely for a parent to buy for his kid it was the PS2 as it was with the PS1.

This gen, another console appears that targets better the kids than its competitors. Price is undoubtedly more attractive, kids get excited with the new concept, it has what kids are most likely want, it is advertised accordingly. The parent listens to his kids. And even if the kid doesnt tell the parent what he/she wants, seeing all three consoles in store the Wii will most likely express what he thinks is most appropriate and fun for an underage.

The parent doesnt necessarily have to be more informed. Parents are just informed on simple, easily observable and directly experienced concepts that are easily and openly viewed by anyone.

Then again I could be wrong

 

[Tap In]

I dont think thats what he is saying. What he is saying is that the PS2 was all there was in the previous gen. PS2 had the largest install base, almost any game kids wanted to play, it had the brand name, it had basically everything.

If there was one console that was most likely for a parent to buy for his kid it was the PS2 as it was with the PS1.

This gen, another console appears that targets better the kids than its competitors. Price is undoubtedly more attractive, kids get excited with the new concept, it has what kids are most likely want, it is advertised accordingly. The parent listens to his kids. And even if the kid doesnt tell the parent what he/she wants, seeing all three consoles in store the Wii will most likely express what he thinks is most appropriate and fun for an underage.

The parent doesnt necessarily have to be more informed. Parents are just informed on simple, easily observable and directly experienced concepts that are easily and openly viewed by anyone.

Then again I could be wrong

that is exactly what I was saying. :smile:

 

[Teasy]

Disagree. I generally care about good graphics more than gameplay. I dont aplogize for that. I think any hardcore does.

I'd bet a lot of people who refer to themselves as hardcore gamers do prefer graphics quality over gameplay.. The fact that what they profess to be and what they prefer contradict each other is no doubt lost on them. Maybe a better title would be hardcore graphics fans

To be clear I know graphics can be a very important aspect of a game, they can bring you into a game world and help to engrose you. However I seriously can't understand how anyone can call themselves a hardcore gamer when they believe that gameplay itself is of secondary importance...

 

[Asher]

I'd bet a lot of people who refer to themselves as hardcore gamers do prefer graphics quality over gameplay.. The fact that what they profess to be and what they prefer contradict each other is no doubt lost on them. Maybe a better title would be hardcore graphics fans

To be clear I know graphics can be a very important aspect of a game, they can bring you into a game world and help to engrose you. However I seriously can't understand how anyone can call themselves a hardcore gamer when they believe that gameplay itself is of secondary importance...

What if they are of equal importance?

A comparison can be made to books. Some people just read books for the story alone, and don't really care how this story is delivered. Some people read books for the quality of the writing as well of the story. I fall into the latter here, games with terrific graphics are simply more immersive to me.

There are obviously ways to get around this on the Wii, and that's to stylize games heavily. MadWorld looks fantastic, for instance. The problem I have is the VAST majority of Wii games just end up looking like dated console or PC games, and to me it's the equivalent of reading a book written on a 8th grade English level instead one written on a university-level.

 

[Rangers]

I'd bet a lot of people who refer to themselves as hardcore gamers do prefer graphics quality over gameplay.. The fact that what they profess to be and what they prefer contradict each other is no doubt lost on them. Maybe a better title would be hardcore graphics fans

To be clear I know graphics can be a very important aspect of a game, they can bring you into a game world and help to engrose you. However I seriously can't understand how anyone can call themselves a hardcore gamer when they believe that gameplay itself is of secondary importance...

But isn't it about also, deep, complex, and immersive (some might says intimidating, also) experiences?

There are far more of those on the hi-def consoles. If you prefer that experience which is also I think part of being "hardcore" (which I generally think just equates to being relatively young and male) you will gravitate to the more powerful consoles.

 

[Daozang]

I never quite understood the appeal of the wii... Are there any games for the system that people who like (action for example) games can play? That actually play well with the wiimote? I will confess that I never paid any attention to the system or the games available, but up to now, it seems to me that hype alone is selling it...
Are there any AAA titles that define the console and are aimed at a more "mature" gamer?

It seems to me that MS and Sony were beaten this gen by a competitor that does not compete with them... Or at least does not compete at all fronts... That this is either a console for a completely different type of gamer or the new iPod that (to me at least) doesn't deliver...
Of course all these have been said countless times all ready... The wii is the king of the hill this gen. But I'm not convinced that this is the way the industry must follow.

And in regards to gameplay vs graphics on a thread heavy on "wii", is the wiimote that revolutionary that every game out there became shallow in comparison?! Are we confusing innovation with gameplay? Is the wii going to give me more in regards to gameplay when playing an FPS? Were those PC ***boys right all those years about the K/M combo?!!!

Sincerelly confused...

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I never quite understood the appeal of the wii... Are there any games for the system that people who like (action for example) games can play? That actually play well with the wiimote? I will confess that I never paid any attention to the system or the games available, but up to now, it seems to me that hype alone is selling it...

Sincerely confused...

Before forming an opinion it'd be a good idea to research the situation. . Wii's stereotypically party-game orientated but that's not all its got. There's Metroid Prime and Excite Truck as two off-the-cuff suggestions. The most telling thing for me is that major titles like Galaxies and Brawl don't use the Wiimote to great effect. It's as though Wii has two modes of operating - conventional for conventional games, and pointer for Wii specific game like Boom Blox. But really, you want to look up Wii's library (VG Chartz is good for something!) and see what there matches your interests.

 

[Daozang]

Metroid Prime and Zelda (mostly), are the 2 games that could be appealling to me, other than that I can't see anything released right now or in the horizon that could hype me enough to get the machine... Wii fit seems, ...interesting..., but it's not a game now, is it?
I remember being excited when I saw those videos of that launch fps yakuza themed game (can't rember it's name) but, boy were those comercials missleading... And the reviews made me forget the games name name now that I think about it...

I can only hope that MS and Sony won't follow Ns huge success next gen... I apologize to all the big N fans out there... To me it seems that to buy a wii, you either have to be a kid (let's face it, what you want is one of those other consoles but your parents bought it for you ), or you like Nintendos titles and can't stop yourself from buying yet another remake of RE4!