Is Wii bad for the games industry...?

[tongue_of_colicab]

And those developers seemed to abandon the Nintendo ship at the N64 generation. Since the N64, the vast majority of great games have been 1st or 2nd party Nintendo games.

Yes. But why do you talk about historically if we only talk about the last 2 generations? What you said is not true. Besides that they came to nintendo with the nes and snes and left with the n64 and gc why couldnt they be coming back? No devs is commited to a system. They are commited to where the money is. To take one of your examples, nintendo's relations with square improved alot in the last few years. Devs are coming back again to nintendo, now its just a matter of them releasing quality games.

That's exactly the point I was making when I listed the casual games.

No that wasnt your point. You were calling games like wii fit casual games and stuff like mario and gta4 hardcore and didnt list them because of that. Games like mario and gta are aimed at the casual gamer. That is why they sell so well. Real hardcore games dont really exist anymore, certainly not in the major franchise games.

 

[LunchBox]

To my understanding, a hardcore gamer is someone who thoroughly enjoys and plays every aspect, nook or cranny of a game. He can play the game for countless hours or can finish it at an outstanding rate. They buy more games on average than a "casual gamer.


I saw some terms being thrown around in the topic and I want to ask:

What categorizes a hardcore game to that of a normal game?

How could the Wii damage the gaming industry when it's attracting these so called "casual gamers" to buy the system and games?

 

[V3]

Hmm this is interesting; a hardcore is someone who resists change. Basically in this case a hardcore gamer is someone who play lots of videogames. More than two hours a day would probably classified you into this category. What they play doesn't make them into hardcore or casual.

So games that have short learning curve and played for short burst of time I would say it's a casual game. You don't have to invest a lot of time learning or playing the game to get fun out of it.

Wii Sport would fit in the casual games category. Sandbox games like GTA4 or Super Mario Galaxy are easy to learn and play and design for short burst of play, I tend to classify them into casual games too.

A hardcore game would be like Eye of Judgment or any other games that required you to spend great deal of time just to get started.

Obviously this factor affect games appeal but it's not the only factors. People age, background, and gender affect appeal to.

I think in regard with Wii Vs 360/PS3 on B3D board is not about hardcore Vs casual gamer. It's more Graphics fanatics Vs the rest of gamers. You know when you are more worried about the resolution, AA level, filtering, lighting than the game itself, you're clearly a graphic fanatic rather than a hardcore gamer.

 

[LunchBox]

Hmm this is interesting; a hardcore is someone who resists change. Basically in this case a hardcore gamer is someone who play lots of videogames. More than two hours a day would probably classified you into this category. What they play doesn't make them into hardcore or casual.

So games that have short learning curve and played for short burst of time I would say it's a casual game. You don't have to invest a lot of time learning or playing the game to get fun out of it.

Wii Sport would fit in the casual games category. Sandbox games like GTA4 or Super Mario Galaxy are easy to learn and play and design for short burst of play, I tend to classify them into casual games too.

A hardcore game would be like Eye of Judgment or any other games that required you to spend great deal of time just to get started.

Obviously this factor affect games appeal but it's not the only factors. People age, background, and gender affect appeal to.

I think in regard with Wii Vs 360/PS3 on B3D board is not about hardcore Vs casual gamer. It's more Graphics fanatics Vs the rest of gamers. You know when you are more worried about the resolution, AA level, filtering, lighting than the game itself, you're clearly a graphic fanatic rather than a hardcore gamer.

Thanks for the input
didn't think of it that way.
it sure does explain some things to me

 

[Gubbi]

Classifying gamers into casual or hardcore is overly simplistic and wrong, IMO. Saying hardcore gamers resist change is even more wrong.

You can classify people into two groups: Those with video game experience, and those without. Let's call the first group gamers, and the latter entry-level gamers (or potential gamers).

Gamers have experience with various control schemes, entrylevel gamers have not. This means that the learning curve for a gamer is a lot "flatter" than that of an entrylevel gamer since there is less or no struggling with controls when picking up a new game.

What Nintendo has done this generation is to lower the learning curve for entry-level gamers by introducing new and more intuitive controllers/control schemes, - not by making shallow or dumb games for "casual" gamers. This is smart since entrylevel gamers outnumber gamers by a vast amount (>20:1).

Effectively Nintendo is recruiting vast amounts of people to become gamers. Eventually, these new gamers will be accustomed with various controllers and video games in general and be less intimidated by the learning curve associated with traditional console games.

And thus, in the end everybody will benefit.

 

[Limanima]

I think it is clear has water what is going to happen 2 or 3 years down the line:

From those Wii owners, half of them like to play games (so called hardcore gamers) and the other half have been led by the Wii feever.
The first half, will get tired of the Wii and will shift to the PS360. The other half will have the Wii collecting dust.

I don't think that the Wii is affecting the market for the hardcore games (should be read: games with great graphics).
PS360 have a good install base and the top games sell millions of copies. Why should developers stop investing $ on them?

The Wii is exactly like the PSEye games: I got a lot of them, played them in a few hours, got tired of them, and I went back to the real games.

 

[V3]

IMO. Saying hardcore gamers resist change is even more wrong.

I think this is the problem; people have different definition for who are hardcore gamers. If you apply the dictionary definition, if a person refused shift to consoles controller from PC mouse and keyboard control than we can say he is a hardcore PC gamer. But is he classified as hardcore gamers with just that for marketing purpose? Similarly you can apply that from traditional controller to Wii remote.

Ultimately hardcore/casual are marketing classification, it's used for marketing purposes. Marketing will most likely segment the market into smaller group still, to identify market potential.

 

[psorcerer]

Ultimately hardcore/casual are marketing classification, it's used for marketing purposes. Marketing will most likely segment the market into smaller group still, to identify market potential.

It's simple. You're hardcore gamer if you buy lots of games.
Which means in most cases more than 10 games per year.
I'm sure that most of the visitors of this forum are hardcore gamers.
It also means that X360 is a very hardcore console, see: "attach ratio". And Wii is a very casual console.
PS2 was both.
PS3 will be both when people get tired from Wii, soon enough, in a year or two.

 

[RadioFr33Europe]

No that wasnt your point. You were calling games like wii fit casual games and stuff like mario and gta4 hardcore and didnt list them because of that. Games like mario and gta are aimed at the casual gamer. That is why they sell so well. Real hardcore games dont really exist anymore, certainly not in the major franchise games.

Sure, you exactly know my point, thanks for letting me know. We have different ideas of what casual and hardcore games are. I personally don't classify Wii Fit and Nintendogs in the same category as Mario Galaxy and GTA. Maybe I do. You let me know.

 

[Scott_Arm]

I think the only way define hardcore gaming that makes any reasonable sense, is as a person that treats gaming as an integral part of their lifestyle. I don't think it matters what games, or what type of games, just the fact that gaming is a very important part of their life. If gaming is just a diversion and some entertainment for you, then you're casual, even if you're playing GTA or Metal Gear.

I don't think the Wii will damage the industry. I just think the Wii is proving there is room for another tier of gaming system. Previously you had your home console and your handheld. Now we have a handheld for something cheap and mobile, a high definition console for big budget games, and a middle-tier system that is a bit cheaper and will attract titles with modest budgets, which may be more casual friendly.

 

[patsu]

It's simple. You're hardcore gamer if you buy lots of games.

Hardcore gamer may be more suitably defined as someone who play games X hours a week, follow game-specific magazines/sites, owns Y games, etc.

Why are people afraid of Wii ? It proved to the industry that lifestyle games *can* be more lucrative than traditional gaming. Nintendo understood people's existing needs and habits, and then make these activities more fun to do. They made everything reliable and easy to use. Both Microsoft and Sony have a lot to learn from them.

I see Wii Fit as some sort of "serious game". I believe the gaming industry has been looking to extend gaming to other areas (e.g., military sims, education, interactive marketing) for years. I feel that the developers will have to go back to the basics, and inject fun-ness into everyday chores. That has to be a sacred or grand challenge for the gaming industry right ? Or do people just want to repeat the same old formulae over and over ?

 

[novcze]

Nintendo understood people's existing needs and habits, and then make these activities more fun to do. They made everything reliable and easy to use. Both Microsoft and Sony have a lot to learn from them.

jesus christ don`t listen Sony, he joking

 

[patsu]

Do you have to dampen the impact ? I wasn't really joking. Nintendo was very focused, and tore down everything that stood in the way of mass market adoption (price, ease of use, reliability, ...). The Wii product line was designed from the start with these traits in mind.

Whether their momentum can be sustained is a different question. It is subjected to follow-up moves. I think they stand a pretty good chance. The only glaring "hole" is online integration. Seeing how Nintendo moved for the past 1-2 years, I believe once the time is ready, they will do the right thing.

 

[novcze]

I think Sony is focused on different market/consumer (AV freaks and also gamers, me included), therefore no need to learn something from Nintendo.

That idea of Sony learning from Nintendo makes me feel strange in stomach. I don`t need next PS to be some lifestyle thing.

 

[patsu]

I think Sony is focused on different market/consumer (AV freaks and also gamers, me included), therefore no need to learn something from Nintendo.

That idea of Sony learning from Nintendo makes me feel strange in stomach. I don`t need next PS to be some lifestyle thing.

Even considering only its existing capabilities, the PS3 user interface is not as intuitive as one hopes. The PS Store revamp was a very welcomed improvement. There are still holes in DLNA, movie conversion, TV and resolution selection, Blu-ray menu navigation for instance.

At some point in time, Sony will need to address a larger gaming crowd. If Sony earns more, they will also be more willing to experiment with new gameplay. They can do so without affecting hardcore gamers negatively. Ease of use benefits hardcore gamers too.

 

[novcze]

Even considering only its existing capabilities, the PS3 user interface is not as intuitive as one hopes. The PS Store revamp was a very welcomed improvement. There are still holes in DLNA, movie conversion, TV and resolution selection, Blu-ray menu navigation for instance.

At some point in time, Sony will need to address a larger gaming crowd. If Sony earns more, they will also be more willing to experiment with new gameplay. They can do so without affecting hardcore gamers negatively. Ease of use benefits hardcore gamers too.

Hmm, I don`t have problems with PS3 user interface but improvements in functionality is welcome.

 

[acaeus]

PS3's browser is utter crap! It's incredible how Sony produced that S* when almost everything else is so sleek. Specially after the store revamp.

To put it in perspective, I use the Wii (opera brw) to browse the internet at a fraction of the res...

BTW Sony should freaking use the sisaxis for browsing!

 

[tongue_of_colicab]

Why do people think hardcore is about how much you play? Besides that I think the term hardcore should be something like enthousiast instead I also think what generally is seen as hardcore isnt hardcore at all. Hardcore isnt about how much you play. I like games, i've been playing games for years. However the older you get the less time you get for games. Does that make me less hardcore? I still like well designed games and I still dislike those who arnt. I think the fact that I can only play a couple of hours a week doesnt make me less hardcore than someone who spends 20 hours a week wasting his time on WoW.

I also dont understand how you can claim hardcore is someone who doesnt like change. If you ask me someone who is hardcore, thus likes games, likes changes, likes new concepts, wants games to go beyond the thirteen in a dozen games etc. However the view of a hardcore seems to be the opposite. Someone who is very narrowminded and only wants more power and as little as change as possible. IMHO that isnt hardcore at all.

 

[patsu]

PS3's browser is utter crap! It's incredible how Sony produced that S* when almost everything else is so sleek. Specially after the store revamp.

To put it in perspective, I use the Wii (opera brw) to browse the internet at a fraction of the res...

The PS3 browser is written by Sony in-house, and good for light browsing (e.g., reading forums and regular HTML sites). But it can't handle the latest Flash and DHTML content. It's pretty fast but the plugin warning dialog makes the speed irrelevant on some sites (It will pop up on every page).

BTW Sony should freaking use the sisaxis for browsing!

This I agree ! And the in-place text editing should be available for 720p TV and monitors too.

Why do people think hardcore is about how much you play?

It could be a proxy indicator (to define "active" hardcore gamers). If like me, you can't find time to play much anymore, then you may not be as active (or hardcore enough) as the younger generation or the old ones who stuck to their gaming habit. I don't believe these segmenting are definitive and clear cut. They are created for targeting purposes. Depending on which "model" the marketers need, you may be in and out of different segments as they tune their plans.

 

[psorcerer]

Hardcore gamer may be more suitably defined as someone who play games X hours a week, follow game-specific magazines/sites, owns Y games, etc.

If you buy more games, you play more games, you invest more hours in games, you spend more money on games, you want to secure your money, etc.
Thus all mentioned, including magazines, is just a function of buying more games.

Why are people afraid of Wii ? It proved to the industry that lifestyle games *can* be more lucrative than traditional gaming. Nintendo understood people's existing needs and habits, and then make these activities more fun to do. They made everything reliable and easy to use. Both Microsoft and Sony have a lot to learn from them.

Nintendo left "big console" business and their first step was successful. This in no way means that their next step will be equally successful. And they will make it soon enough. We'll see.