How can we save Core Gaming?

[Pixel]

I am reviving this thread because I think a greater threat exists. We have our Xbox/PS/PC kingdoms fight little feudal wars about which platform is best, but our entire continent of core gaming itself is getting in some rocky waters. Konami semi-exiting, many great titles this year underperforming, the eastern developers doing poorly, Crytek struggling, Bioshock 3 barely being profitable, console sales starting to decline, etc. Entire swaths of our glorious gaming continent are being conquered by the smartphone mongol hordes. 10s of Millions upon 10s of millions of casual gamers left console games for smartphones.

Instead of arguing which console is better with your friends/ nerd coworkers/ and message boards, we need to advertise the awesomeness of core videogames. Discuss and even argue with nongamers everywhere just how awesome it is. At the bar, in the club, at the gym, at church, during a wedding, etc. We are the champions that will retake our sovereign lands and free the casual citizens that the evil Samsung and Apple empires took from us. We will do it for Gaben, for Miyamoto, for Spencer, for Kutaragi, for Don Mattrick, for Team Red, for Team Green, and for YOU!

ARE YOU WITH ME!!!!!

 

[bunge]

 

[Deleted member 11852]

Mental.

 

[Rangers]

Pointless. The world's gonna do what it's gonna do. I believe 12-45 males will always exist, so will some form of core gaming to cater them. Even if it all ended up on PC.

Also, consolidation is different than contraction. Core software publishing is surely becoming an oligopoly dominated by just Take Two, Ubisoft, Activision, and EA, but that's not to say it's doomed.

That said, yes it's quite sad to see former greats hobbled or essentially out of the industry. Crytek, Epic, Id. Heck rumors are Crytek has not paid staff in many months. Crysis a franchise I grew up with is likely surely dead.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I'm attempting to bring core gaming to mobile. That is, real console like control and console-like gameplay on a touch screen (yeah, it's not Adventures - that's on temporary hiatus). Public beta on Android will be out in a couple of weeks. I genuinely think this is the way forwards, offer people real games on the devices they have. If nothing else, assuming my cunning input system works, it'll be a nice test of whether core gamers themselves value core games on touch screens or not.

 

[Rodéric]

What is the definition of "core gaming" ?

Is it the duration of a game session ? (ie gameplay loops duration ?)
Is it the total duration of the game ? (ie hours to play to finish it ?)
Is it the difficulty/complexity of controls ? (remember that chess have a very easy control set/rules, yet being very deep...)

 

[Shifty Geezer]

In the context of this discussion, its the control scheme. One can argue Mario Run is a core game as it's a platformer, but the single button input means you only have one parameter to work with - timing. Core games have you managing multiple parameters and balancing them out for success, such as direction, jump, shoot. Core games are inaccessible to many who have trouble coordinating the inputs, but it's this complexity that makes them all the more rewarding for core gamers. There are obviously other genres like RTS that work with touch input (any mouse-driven UI is a good enough fit) but that's not what's being complained about.

 

[Rodéric]

Ok thank you.

 

[sebbbi]

In the context of this discussion, its the control scheme. One can argue Mario Run is a core game as it's a platformer, but the single button input means you only have one parameter to work with - timing. Core games have you managing multiple parameters and balancing them out for success, such as direction, jump, shoot. Core games are inaccessible to many who have trouble coordinating the inputs, but it's this complexity that makes them all the more rewarding for core gamers. There are obviously other genres like RTS that work with touch input (any mouse-driven UI is a good enough fit) but that's not what's being complained about.

Mario Run is deeper than it seems. Timing your jumps and wall jumps is important, but you also need to hold the jump for exactly correct time. You can also swipe during jump to control the character in air. Also each character has a special ability in air, and that plays crucial role later when you are collecting the most difficult black coins.

Mario Run is also very difficult game to master. It has huge amount of replay value. First you pass levels and worlds and collect standard coins. Then your main goal becomes to collect 5 special coins of every level. First 5x pink, then 5x purple and then 5x black. The courses also change slightly when you get all the special coins of one type -> new routes. You also have online multiplayer against ghosts.

Mario Run is similar to hardcore games such as Super Meat Boy and the Trials series (Trials HD/Evolution/Fusion). In Trials you have slightly more controls: gas, brake, and lean left/right (four). Old PC Trials games had WASD only (all digital). Mario Run has press, hold, swipe. It is definitely simpler, but Mario Run feels very much like Trials when you play it. I haven't played any mobile game as much as it lately. It is competitive, challenging, has replay value and enough high quality content. And it doesn't have any micro-transactions. Your skill is the only thing that matters and you get better when you play it. That's the definition of a core gamer game for me.

Mario Run is not a casual game. It requires lots of dedication to be good at. You can't call a game casual, if you spend 2+ hours straight trying to complete a single level (purple coin special level). And that's just completing it. It would take me much longer to collect all the five purple coins. And I haven't even seen the black coin special level yet...

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I can agree with all of that, but the problem here is a definition of 'core' and 'casual' which isn't really what's being discussed (and it's a discussion had before that has no resolution). I think in simple terms we can just talk about input complexity. That is, if every console from now on came with a single button controller, no matter how well made the games were, they wouldn't provide the experience that we associate with console gaming. Even if there are simpler games on consoles, they need to provide the twin-stick/Dpad+button experiences. The moment those experiences end, 'Core Gaming' as per the OP is ended.

 

[Pixel]

Mental.

Jebus really? I was being sarcastic and humorous. I was trying to inject some humor into a thread that already was filled with humorous posts. A mod moved the post and made it its own thread.
Who in their right mind would discuss gaming at a night club, or during wedding, or at church? Who in their right mind would take up some crusade to promote core gaming?

Well.... console fanboys might
I was humorously making the a point if fanboys are going to crusade for Xbox or PS4 or PC why not take up the crusade to promote core gaming. Put down their weapons and join hands to fight for a greater cause.

 

[Pixel]

Pointless. The world's gonna do what it's gonna do. I believe 12-45 males will always exist, so will some form of core gaming to cater them. Even if it all ended up on PC.

Also, consolidation is different than contraction. Core software publishing is surely becoming an oligopoly dominated by just Take Two, Ubisoft, Activision, and EA, but that's not to say it's doomed.

That said, yes it's quite sad to see former greats hobbled or essentially out of the industry. Crytek, Epic, Id. Heck rumors are Crytek has not paid staff in many months. Crysis a franchise I grew up with is likely surely dead.

I'm not being serious. A mod moved my post from that comedy filled console wars thread where the OP was jokingly justifying engaging in console wars and where everyone was being sarcastic

I was making light of the fact of what you see on youtube and everywhere else on messageboards where people pour their life energy into console wars.

 

[sebbbi]

I can agree with all of that, but the problem here is a definition of 'core' and 'casual' which isn't really what's being discussed (and it's a discussion had before that has no resolution). I think in simple terms we can just talk about input complexity. That is, if every console from now on came with a single button controller, no matter how well made the games were, they wouldn't provide the experience that we associate with console gaming. Even if there are simpler games on consoles, they need to provide the twin-stick/Dpad+button experiences. The moment those experiences end, 'Core Gaming' as per the OP is ended.

I am an old-school gamer. Started with NES and C64. Tac-2 was the most popular C64 controller (digital 4-direction stick + 2 digital buttons). NES controller had A+B and digital dpad. Many C64 games only used left/right and one button (jump). Even Super Mario is mostly left/right + jump. Sometimes you press up to climb a ladder in these games. But this could be done by other means if up-button wasn't present. Some games used down for crouch, but it wasn't usually important. Second button was important for some games (such as Megaman, Contra and others), because it allowed you to jump + shoot. Even Super Mario used two buttons with flower, but that wasn't a core feature of the game. These 3 button (left + right + jump) games started the whole "core" gaming industry. I firmly believe that you can still design good games with minimal input layouts for consoles (consoles = core gamer market).

Touchscreen is difficult way to control some genres of traditional "core" games. You can make some genres (2d) pretty well, but 3d is hard. Virtual sticks don't work well. Top-down strategy games and adventure games also work well, since touchscreen is good for point-and-click (and touchscreen has natural way to zoom and pan). I'd say a touchscreen is better input device than gamepad for these types of "core" games. Unfortunately we don't have many good strategy games on tablets. Most existing games are ruined by micro-transactions and designed for casual audiences.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

You're arguing a different branch of the 'core' and 'casual' debate. I agree with you, but you're missing the point being raised about a branch of gaming (whether it's called 'core' or something else, but we have no other word for it other than 'core') and how that is possibly a dying breed.

 

[Rodéric]

I'm a little lost, is it the number of buttons that matter or the number of relevant ones ?
I mean in modern shooters you have plenty of buttons that seem to be here "because it's the way we do that now" rather than carefully considered, like reload, iron sight...
Games such as The Witcher 2 controls were so plentiful I just couldn't play the game, and I'm not exactly an inexperienced gamer, and I don't think that the overload in controls gave any depth to the game either...

So I think what matters it the number of relevant commands that impact gameplay in a meaningful/intended way.
(To go back to may reload button exemple, it feels more like it's to be realistic rather than really meant to pace combat, but I might be wrong and it might just be me not finding the mechanic meaningful in many games where it just really slow me downs w/o opening any tactical gameplay.)

 

[Deleted member 11852]

Still mental.

 

[Silent_Buddha]

You're arguing a different branch of the 'core' and 'casual' debate. I agree with you, but you're missing the point being raised about a branch of gaming (whether it's called 'core' or something else, but we have no other word for it other than 'core') and how that is possibly a dying breed.

I'd argue that "core" gaming isn't exactly dying (it fluctuates over time but seems to be at a relative plateau) as much as casual gaming is growing. But that's to be expected when you make games more accessible (controls, game time, complexity, price, whatever). Similar to why Soccer/Football/Futbol is the most popular sport in the world. All you need is a ball.

Regards,
SB

 

[function]

I want to make a hardcore game for mobile.

It's like Pokemon Go, except instead of monsters you find mugshots - face photo selifies - of the other players in real world locations but with limited shrub cover.

The photo shows up on your phone screen, and then you have 30 seconds in that real world location to teabag the mugshot accurately in the mouth 12 times, using the multi-touch capability of your phone.

Front facing camera checks if ur doing it rite. You lose ten stars if caught by the police.

The game is going to be called "At least it's better than the Mass Effect 3 ending".

Edit: If I ever make it as an indie developer I'm going to have to burn this account.

 

[Tkumpathenurple]

I'm with Silent_Buddha: casual gaming is just growing faster than core gaming.

I don't have the figures to hand, and can't be arsed looking them up, but the games industry has gone from strength to strength, core games included. It's a multi billion dollar industry, and became huge before churned out smartphone games besmirched the medium with their JoeCartoon level of quality and depth.

Plenty of people just want a quick fix, a ball attached to a paddle. Many of us here (probably all of us... how many casual gamers visit forums?) have grown up with the medium and seen it grow into an art form that is gradually being accepted as such. Therefore, it makes sense to feel that it's under threat of regression or elimination when shit like Pokémon Go overshadows genuine artistic achievements. But it isn't.

Maybe smartphone games have matured in recent years, maybe they haven't yet, maybe they never will. They will always reach people more easily due to the ubiquity of the platforms. But that doesn't inherently make them worthwhile, and it doesn't generate loyal customers that truly love the medium.

Much in the same way that a cheap, formulaic horror film may generate enough revenue to justify shitting out another, it doesn't make it a work of cinematic art, and it won't keep people talking and thinking about it for years to come. It will fade into the ether like so much dross.

Meanwhile, quality content is still created and can be highly profitable when it stands out enough. This chance of high profits ensures that bean counting gamblers will continue to take risks and keep funding such content. And when a great horror film, or great core game, has been created, it stands a chance of converting a casual follower into a true fan. In which case, increasing the number of casual gamers - as the number of non-gamers dwindles - is only a good thing.

 

[Rodéric]

I'll just say one amusing thing here, the video game industry is much smaller than the board game industry.