Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 07, 2006, 05:07:40 PM
“How is the Wii the only right choice for gamers? Contrary to what you believe, Wii games for the most part ignore “hardcore” gamers. Just look at its lineup. It’s filled with games like Elebits, Super Monkey Ball, Duck Hunt and Excite Truck. It has a handful of promising games, take Super Mario Galaxy and Wario Ware, but the rest hardly qualify as harcore, if that’s the point you want to make. Hell, even its best games, like Mario, Zelda and Metroid, wouldn’t really qualify as hardcore.”
“The Wii may outsell it (PS3) at launch, but no one cares about those numbers…With the Wii, on the other hand, developers hesitate calling it a next-gen system now, which isn’t so hot…and this is something both hardcore and casual gamers will definitely notice.”
Post by: Bill Aurion on September 07, 2006, 05:09:41 PM
(So yeah, that's why this guy works in IGN Playstation...)
Post by: Blue Plant on September 07, 2006, 05:10:52 PM
Quote
"The Wii may outsell it (PS3) at launch, but no one cares about those numbers…"
He certainly would if the situation were reversed.
Post by: wandering on September 07, 2006, 05:13:36 PM
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 07, 2006, 05:14:17 PM
Post by: blackfootsteps on September 07, 2006, 05:14:34 PM
Hardware numbers do matter, look at the number of games that were PS2 only or ported there because of this.
Post by: KnowsNothing on September 07, 2006, 06:02:49 PM
Post by: NWR_pap64 on September 07, 2006, 06:42:32 PM
Also, if there is something the DS Lite has shown us is that sometimes the most captivating experiences are offered by simple, unique and fun games (like Animal Crossing, Brain age and Nintendogs).
So not being "hardcore" doesn't always mean the system will fail.
Post by: jasonditz on September 07, 2006, 07:28:51 PM
Post by: mantidor on September 07, 2006, 07:31:28 PM
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on September 07, 2006, 07:54:06 PM
--YODA
Post by: Strell on September 07, 2006, 08:05:06 PM
You don't get more hardcore than that, unless you're a pansy FF7 PSX brat kid.
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on September 07, 2006, 08:06:14 PM
Post by: Athrun Zala on September 07, 2006, 08:39:24 PM
ok, go play some Madden and Generic Shooter 23 kthnx
Post by: King of Twitch on September 07, 2006, 08:43:56 PM
Post by: KDR_11k on September 07, 2006, 09:18:09 PM
Post by: Dirk Temporo on September 07, 2006, 09:18:14 PM
Post by: Mario on September 07, 2006, 10:13:15 PM
What's his definition of hardcore? This is like a post on gamefaqs by a 13 year old. Where do IGN get these people from?
It's funny how Nintendo fans criticise Nintendo but Sony fans never criticise Sony and just lash out at Nintendo as well.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 07, 2006, 11:10:46 PM
Juan Castro, IGN Playstation:
How is the Wii the only right choice for gamers? Contrary to what you believe, Wii games for the most part ignore "hardcore" gamers. Just look at its lineup. It's filled with games like Elebits, Super Monkey Ball, Duck Hunt and Excite Truck. It has a handful of promising games, take Super Mario Galaxy and Wario Ware, but the rest hardly qualify as harcore, if that's the point you want to make. Hell, even its best games, like Mario, Zelda and Metroid, wouldn't really qualify as hardcore.
As for the European delay and lack of US units this holiday season...
Yikes. It's obviously a negative thing in the short term, but few people expected the PS3 to hit its stride right after launch, anyway. Like the 360, it will probably take the PS3 a while before it finds its footing. The Wii may outsell it at launch, but no one cares about those numbers. Now, if the Wii is still outselling the PS3 in three years, well, that's another story. But given Sony's strategy in trying to "futureproof" the system, chances are the PS3 will still appear irrefutably next-gen years from now. With the Wii, on the other hand, developers hesitate calling it a next-gen system now, which isn't so hot...and this is something both hardcore and casual gamers will definitely notice.
And yes, it's easy to hate a company who wants to "force" very expensive change upon people, but the PS3 (like the PS2) before it, appeals to older gamers who have a better chance of affording it. And, just like Jeremy likes to point out, Sony is banking on the iPod people out there -- those bazillions of people who gladly pay upwards of 350 bucks for a music player."
Post by: ShyGuy on September 08, 2006, 12:17:56 AM
Post by: RiskyChris on September 08, 2006, 12:36:23 AM
Post by: Blue Plant on September 08, 2006, 12:38:56 AM
Post by: Terranigma Freak on September 08, 2006, 03:31:20 AM
Post by: Ceric on September 08, 2006, 04:09:07 AM
Post by: Nick DiMola on September 08, 2006, 04:19:50 AM
It makes me laugh how people could still have faith in a system that has so many problems it's ridiculous. Go buy a 360 you retards, it has all the same games and will be at least $200 cheaper.
Post by: Ceric on September 08, 2006, 04:24:01 AM
Also who else will take the heat away from Nintendo and MS?
Post by: BigJim on September 08, 2006, 05:00:45 AM
How rich.
Post by: JonLeung on September 08, 2006, 05:06:02 AM
Sony fanboys believe in the PlayStation name just because of marketing, whereas Nintendo fanboys swear by the games.
In other words, Sony believes in Sony because they're told to, and Nintendo fanboys at least know what they like. At least, that's how I'd like to see it... >_>
And Nintendo fanboys seem more "out there" as they are still a minority. Or were. And are typically more convinced that they like their games.
But how is that a bad thing? You shouldn't buy a game console if you don't want to be a fan of its games.
Post by: couchmonkey on September 08, 2006, 05:13:46 AM
Right opinion, wrong supporting evidence. He should have pointed out all the games that the hardcore audience is missing by ignoring Playstation 3 rather than attacking games that hardtime longcore gamers love.
Post by: BigJim on September 08, 2006, 05:57:15 AM
By that I mean they helped gaming break out of the "13 year old teenage boy" stereotype of the 8-bit and 16-bit days and make it a subset of pop culture that attracted adults as well. Sony's involvement was overall good for the industry.
Today it's a bit ironic to see Nintendo fanboys dishing it out against Sony, calling out arrogance and karma. I mean, Nintendo's past speaks for itself. Karma smacked their arrogance right upside the face. For some Nintendo fanboys to be so arrogant as to claim the PS3 is already dead? Stupid. Nintendo's the underdog with something to prove here. It hasn't even BEGUN yet.
That being said, at the end of the day, chip problems, delays, and all of that aren't going to matter. The market is extremely forgiving. Delays are quickly forgotten. The only REAL mistake Sony has made, IMHO, is that game consoles aren't "luxury items" as Sony's PR likes to call it. Their pricing is all wrong. Everything else will be forgotten with time.
Post by: Smoke39 on September 08, 2006, 06:09:00 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ceric
But where will I get my now promised H games?
On Wii. With vibrating remote action for increased immersion.
Post by: UltimatePartyBear on September 08, 2006, 06:25:26 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: BigJim
By that I mean they helped gaming break out of the "13 year old teenage boy" stereotype of the 8-bit and 16-bit days and make it a subset of pop culture that attracted adults as well. Sony's involvement was overall good for the industry.
I think that happened primarily because gamers grew into adulthood without giving up their favorite pastime. If Sony hadn't been there, it would have happened on another console.
Quote
Today it's a bit ironic to see Nintendo fanboys dishing it out against Sony, calling out arrogance and karma. I mean, Nintendo's past speaks for itself. Karma smacked their arrogance right upside the face.
That's true. You'd think Sony would have noticed that they were walking into the same trap Nintendo once did, or the trap everyone who's become enamored with their own success has walked into. "Pride goes before a fall" is an old concept -- old enough to be written in the Old Testament.
Quote
That being said, at the end of the day, chip problems, delays, and all of that aren't going to matter. The market is extremely forgiving. Delays are quickly forgotten. The only REAL mistake Sony has made, IMHO, is that game consoles aren't "luxury items" as Sony's PR likes to call it. Their pricing is all wrong. Everything else will be forgotten with time.
I wonder about that, too. The PS2 had a pretty crappy launch, as I recall, but it didn't have as much competition.
Post by: Strell on September 08, 2006, 06:28:01 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: BigJim
Fanboys are fanboys for their own reasons. I mean, the PS systems had a number of games (good and bad) for just about anything you wanted to play. For that, it's an easy choice and an easy system for people to get behind. I don't think Sony fanboys are drones, I see that as a network effect. Their friend(s) have a PlayStation, and that kind of word of mouth is immensely powerful, and so it's a logical step.
Today it's a bit ironic to see Nintendo fanboys dishing it out against Sony, calling out arrogance and karma. I mean, Nintendo's past speaks for itself. Karma smacked their arrogance right upside the face. For some Nintendo fanboys to be so arrogant as to claim the PS3 is already dead? Stupid. Nintendo's the underdog with something to prove here. It hasn't even BEGUN yet.
What you describe about Sony fans is entirely the same definition as drones - mindlessly following the group.
The difference between Sony's arrogance and Nintendo's arrogance is that Nintendo has already gone through the rock-bottom phase. Sony has been high rolling ever since they came out. Nintendo's been at both extremes. Because of that, they've been able to recognize their mistakes, where as Sony just comes out and issues statements like "wtf, we invented 3D, nougat, and Benjamin Franklin." Not to mention Nintendo really changed after the exit of Yamauchimotron, which would be the equivalent of getting rid of Hirai, Kuntaragi, and whatever idiot called GIANT ENEMY CRABS authentic Japanese history.
It's not even worth it to compare them at this point, unless they existed in the same time frame, when they clearly don't and never could.
Post by: Ceric on September 08, 2006, 06:59:18 AM
I dish it out where it is. I don't go out of my way. Yeah I'll hark on Sony about all their problems. I'll also Hark on Nintendo about all their problems too. Lets not forget MS either. I'm pretty equal opputunity.
I'll also do the flipside. If any of them do something well in my mind then I will praise them about what they did well.
I know why I prefer Nintendo and I know why I avoid Sony and MS. Just one of those things.
Post by: Ian Sane on September 08, 2006, 07:54:47 AM
I think he does realize that and that's the point he's making. Nintendo isn't targetting the hardcore and therefore hardcore gamers, like YOU the reader, shouldn't buy it and should buy the PS3 instead. That argument actually makes sense... except for the PS3 part.
None of the console makers this gen care at all about hardcore gamers, and by that I mean people seriously interested in games. It's all about the mainstream. That's what Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo are all focusing on. Nintendo's plan to do so is just different than the other two's. Nintendo wants people who don't play games buying games. Sony and MS want people who don't play games buying their console for other purposes. In Sony's case it's to get people buying Blu-Ray.
Sega and SNK were hardcore gamer console makers. They made their consoles for gamers and concentrated on who was buying their games instead of who wasn't. They both failed sadly.
Ironically, when it comes to Nintendo, hardcore gamers tend to favour the NES and SNES days the best, when Nintendo was incredibly mainstream. It's been the time period where Nintendo has catered to a more dedicated following that their output has been considered their weakest.
The moral of the story: I'm not sure. Make lots of killer games, have friendly third party policies, don't jerk around your fans, and have incredible marketing and you'll probably do fine.
Post by: BigJim on September 08, 2006, 08:03:01 AM
Quote
What you describe about Sony fans is entirely the same definition as drones - mindlessly following the group.
What makes it mindless? What I described was natural word of mouth advertising and network effect. That's how MOST people operate with anything. It's not mindless. It's the strongest form of advertising there is. Not the dumbest.
An example of what I consider mindless following were all the folks here, before E3, that said they were picking up a Wii on the first day, sight still unseen, price unknown, and completely in the dark about any Wii content whatsoever. Yet they were already sold.
The typical defense to that is, "Nintendo has a history that people can count on." Well so did Sony at the time, regardless of what any of us think about the PS3 and the state of Sony today. There was nothing inherently wrong with the PlayStations. They had massive, satisfying game lineups. It's completely logical to prefer those systems.
Quote
The difference between Sony's arrogance and Nintendo's arrogance is that Nintendo has already gone through the rock-bottom phase. Sony has been high rolling ever since they came out. Nintendo's been at both extremes.
All well and good. But it doesn't give Nintendo fanboys any logical license to demonstrate the same arrogance when they have no idea what's going to happen. All they have is the vision of PS3 crashing and burning in their minds.
Sega and Sony fanboys were no better while they watched Nintendo fall. Nintendo fanboys later laughed all over Sega, and now Sony because they think they smell blood. Fanboys are equally dumb, AFAIC. None collectively act any better or smarter than the other.
We're smart. They're drones? That in itself is fanboy defensiveness. Fanboys from ALL camps claim the other is arrogant, and they all have a point. They share something in common -- righteousness.
Post by: JonLeung on September 08, 2006, 08:25:23 AM
That's an example; you could substitute the PS2 and GameCube above for any other (or at least the part about the "turning a blind eye")...but because the PS2 was ahead by so much, I'm certain there were casual gamers who simply bought PS2s without really thinking. To want a GameCube, you'd pretty much have to want it, in which case you know what games are on it, and that is more hardcore. You could own a PS2 and NOT be a mindless drone, of course, but I think it's all the casual gamers that make me tend to think a PS2 owner is more likely to be one.
Just my opinion.
Post by: Dirk Temporo on September 08, 2006, 08:36:16 AM
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on September 08, 2006, 08:42:12 AM
I AM TEH RIGHTEOUS
Post by: Ceric on September 08, 2006, 08:48:42 AM
I wanted a Wii before E3 because it was smaller than my Cube and more energy efficient. Also my Cube is blinky and there are games it won't play that I want to play. The Wii could have been just a Cube redesign for all it mattered.
Wow I go to respond and there are lots of responses. I'll admit I'm a Fanboy. I'll also admit that if my PS2 was blinky and the upgrade was not that much more and smaller I go for it, even though I don't really play it.
Post by: BigJim on September 08, 2006, 09:13:08 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: JonLeung
Well, the reason why I think "following the group" is mindless is because casual gamers were buying the PS2 simply because everyone else had one, and that it had the most games - without really looking at all consoles' game line-ups. It's fanboyish to turn a blind eye to the GameCube library just because none of your friends have a GameCube.
That's an example; you could substitute the PS2 and GameCube above for any other (or at least the part about the "turning a blind eye")...but because the PS2 was ahead by so much, I'm certain there were casual gamers who simply bought PS2s without really thinking. To want a GameCube, you'd pretty much have to want it, in which case you know what games are on it, and that is more hardcore. You could own a PS2 and NOT be a mindless drone, of course, but I think it's all the casual gamers that make me tend to think a PS2 owner is more likely to be one.
Just my opinion.
Consider this. If people want a portable, the default choice has been a GameBoy or DS, correct? Should we consider those buyers mindless drones? I don't think so, IMO. That's too generalizing. Nintendo earned their spot as the defacto choice in that market as far as I'm concerned.
Just as well, the PlayStation's default status was also earned. It didn't take off on faith and marketing alone, despite what so many Nintendo fans think. There was plenty of substance to back them up. The game library spawned more buyers, and more buyers spawned more games. That's what a healthy market is. Would it be fair to consider them drones, but not those GB/DS buyers? Of course not.
Unless you think those portable buyers are drones too, I guess.
Then that's another story. Heh. If anyone hates Sony for their success, it's either jealousy for some reason, their own fanboyism, or both. I'm not quite directing this at you, just trying to bring a bit more perspective to the thread, since you brought up an interesting point.
Post by: Arbok on September 08, 2006, 09:16:09 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Dirk Temporo
Something occurred to me. What's the source on the quotes in the OP? I searched Google and couldn't find anything.
" Here is everything he said, it is from IGN roundtable BTW You have to be an insider member to see this."
-VGrevolution
That would explain why you aren't finding it through Google, as it's membership only content.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 08, 2006, 09:17:09 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Dirk Temporo
Something occurred to me. What's the source on the quotes in the OP? I searched Google and couldn't find anything.
The source is IGN Roundtable for IGN Insiders. I too wasn't quite sure where they came from when I got them but I found it when I looked in the roundtable discussion where most of the IGN editors made comments.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 08, 2006, 09:24:57 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: BigJim
That being said, at the end of the day, chip problems, delays, and all of that aren't going to matter. The market is extremely forgiving. Delays are quickly forgotten. The only REAL mistake Sony has made, IMHO, is that game consoles aren't "luxury items" as Sony's PR likes to call it. Their pricing is all wrong. Everything else will be forgotten with time.
Also doesn't help matters when their Bluray player may not read some Bluray DVDs, arrogant attitude doesn't help either, blatantly copying Wii with a less functional controller, lack of any innovation whatsoever (goes with the previous point), launching late in Europe (say what you want but letting Xbox 360 and Wii get a large lead is not good business), one of the smallest launches in history in U.S. and Japan (that hurts too because you are losing customers to other systems who can't get a PS3), um lack of any stand out title besides FF and MGS, taking out a 600+ million dollar loan, overly expensive hardware production, lacking true backwards compatibility, and even the chip problems could be a factor because it sounds like it needs ALOT of ironing. But I guess your right, pricing is their only real mistake
.
Post by: BigJim on September 08, 2006, 09:34:21 AM
Quote
But I guess your right, pricing is their only real mistake .
Glad we agree.
I'm not saying those things aren't problematic, but I don't think they're going to matter in a year. The price will be the only real thing that haunts them at the end of the day, until they finally reach $300-$400.
Post by: JonLeung on September 08, 2006, 09:35:12 AM
Like the people who proclaim the PS2 is best, etc., then you ask them what games on other consoles they might like and they say something like "none, because they aren't any" or some other vague answer that makes it sound as if they never even considered the competition. At all. It's like they buy a product, and simply don't want even the slightest doubt that they bought something less than the best, and/or that they might be happier with another. Ignorance!
At which point, even if you considered me a fanboy, you can at least see the logic (whether that's right or wrong in a moral sense) that makes me think there are people more fanboyish and ignorant than I am.
(And forgive me if I sound like I'm getting irritated. I'm not really.)
I'll admit that as a Nintendo fan I do have bias. I'm more likely to be hyped up by the mere mention of a new Zelda game before even seeing anything about it. But I don't think I'd write off a whole console no matter who makes it just because everyone else I know doesn't have one.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 08, 2006, 09:40:37 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: BigJimQuote
But I guess your right, pricing is their only real mistake .
Glad we agree.
I do agree with you there, price is probaly their largest obstacle. They are really flirting with disasator with a 500-600$ price when the Xbox 360 is about equal in graphical horsepower for 300-400$. Oh yeah I forgot one thing a big problem is that many 3rd parties are taking away exclusives or at least considering it.
Post by: Ceric on September 08, 2006, 09:58:43 AM
My 3 year old Cousin wanted a PS2. He doesn't now what a videogame really was. I had my Cube down and so tried to get him to play even a simple game. Had no interest what so ever he just wanted to run around and play. I can say that was mindless. The only reason he wanted one was because the other kids had one. It was a status symbol.
Now my new little brother, by marriage, is 3 as well. He's actually been playing Videogames since he was around 2. He has one of those kids videogames system. So must of the games are his level and a couple are not, there really for 5th graders and like mathematics and grammer stuff. He know what a game is he'll actually play the old Playstation he has. Not well but he now what they are and like. If he said he wanted a PS2 I wouldn't doubt that he actually want a PS2 for no other reason then getting different games.
I had a coworker who owned a PSP just to own one. Never used it for games. Didn't like any of its game. SHe had two, white and black. It was bling-bling. Yet again status.
My brother wanted one at launch because of the games it promised. After the selection was proven to never improve he got rid of it.
Its mindless if the reason you want a game console is not to play its games but as a status symbol of sort or to attract someone.
If you want a game console to use more than status. Its not mindless.
Same goes for HD Players if you want HD-DVD or Bluray because you have a hi-def system and you want the quality. More power to ya.
If you want it to keep with the Jones or be the first on the block. That's mindless in my mind. Getting something not for what it does put how it affects your social standing is what I think it means in this context.
Actually that doesn't even cover it. Maybe it's buying totally uninformed.
You know I'm going to stop. Like Art we all have are own personal idea about this that we are willing to defend. Also like Art this term have morphed into an untangible thing.
Post by: JonLeung on September 08, 2006, 10:05:15 AM
If you have a PS2, you're keeping up with the Joneses. If you have an Xbox 360, you're a generation above the rest. It's status.
If you like GameCube games, you probably don't care that other people think it's a kid's purple lunchbox or that it's in third place. And that shows that status is less important to you; that's more hardcore.
The Wii may be the same...in a world that's obsessed with power, perhaps now more than ever before with the transition to HD, a Wii player can still have fun with his standard-def games.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 08, 2006, 10:06:18 AM
Post by: BigJim on September 08, 2006, 10:20:16 AM
Quote
Perhaps I've had some bad experiences with Sony fanboys, BigJim
You just need to hang out with more adults.
I've been online since 1988. I'm sure many of us have been around a while... There's nothing anybody can say about other fanboys that hasn't also applied to many Nintendo fanboys. I've seen it all.
Just as an observation, the only big difference I've seen among the fanboys is that because Nintendo integrates more "business" into their PR, they've spawned fanboys that *think* they're analytically smarter. i.e. "Online isn't profitable." "The Super FX chip is better than CDs because CDs only increase storage space." yadda yadda. So now things like the profitability card are dropped whenever convenient. But it's still only PR, and drones to repeat it.
Post by: BigJim on September 08, 2006, 10:23:40 AM
Quote
If you like GameCube games, you probably don't care that other people think it's a kid's purple lunchbox or that it's in third place. And that shows that status is less important to you; that's more hardcore.
Yet that too me registers as "fanboy" more than the other options. Being hardcore doesn't mean someone is a fanboy, but it's certainly an ingredient.
Post by: JonLeung on September 08, 2006, 10:27:33 AM
People who enjoy the PlayStation for Metal Gear Solid, Final Fantasy, and Grand Theft Auto aren't playing Sony games. They're PlayStation games, whose franchises can and do appear on other platforms. Yet they cling to their Sony because they somehow think they can bring everything together under one roof, so to speak.
In that sense I think a Nintendo fan(boy)'s love for Nintendo is more "real" than a PlayStation fan's love for Sony, in which case a PlayStation fanboy's ranting sounds more ridiculous since it's not quite as grounded. Or is it the more definite "love" (or, as some might say, more blinding) that alienates the more casual gamers? (Again, I find it pointless to own a game system if you don't expect to want to enjoy it and love its games - and somewhere about there is where the line between being a fan and a fanboy ought to be made.)
I'm gonna cut this short since I'm at work... >_>
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on September 08, 2006, 11:38:56 AM
Oh yeah, 2003 when Nintendo announced they were already designing GameCube's coffin.
TIME TO LOCK THIS UP.
Post by: JonLeung on September 08, 2006, 12:36:30 PM
Post by: Ceric on September 08, 2006, 12:49:15 PM
Post by: Strell on September 08, 2006, 01:50:46 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: BigJimQuote
The difference between Sony's arrogance and Nintendo's arrogance is that Nintendo has already gone through the rock-bottom phase. Sony has been high rolling ever since they came out. Nintendo's been at both extremes.
All well and good. But it doesn't give Nintendo fanboys any logical license to demonstrate the same arrogance when they have no idea what's going to happen. All they have is the vision of PS3 crashing and burning in their minds.
Ok at that point we're debating Nintendo's arrogance versus their fanboys'. That's two completely different things.
Post by: wandering on September 08, 2006, 01:53:43 PM
Quote
the Wii is the GameCube's coffin
So, nintendo is putting the GameCube inside of the Wii? That would make sense. The Wii is, afterall, just a GameCube with a new controller.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 08, 2006, 02:16:26 PM
Not only that but all their consoles were competitively priced, PS3 is not competitively priced but it will not have the advantage of being the first and only choice for next gen gaming. ALot of 3rd parties are realizing this and making their games multisystem, and I'm not sure the Sony fan base is strong enough to sustain it (PSP has shown this fanbase isn't nearly as rabid as Sony likes to believe). This generation Sony cannot distinguish itself unlike the previous two generations and that can spell trouble especially with a similarily powered Xbox 360 and a Wii console that will provide gaming experiences (for better or for worse) that cannot be found elsewhere.
Post by: Ian Sane on September 08, 2006, 02:30:11 PM
1. Hardcore gamers with lots of disposable income that buy all the consoles.
2. People who are fan of a specific game, franchise or developer and buys a console if it has that developer. In the PS2 case such examples would be GTA, Metal Gear Solid, or Square Enix. These people may buy more than one console provided what they specifically want is on more than one.
3. Casuals with no real loyality that just buy whoever has the most games. They don't really know what they want so buying a console with the most stuff is always the safest bet. A lot of the NES, SNES and Gameboy userbase made up this group.
4. Fans of the console maker themselves. In the PS2's case this would be people who own Playstations for Sony's games. This is the group that will stick with the PS3 no matter what. This type of group is what allowed Nintendo to survive in the console market for the last ten years.
Number 4 and number 1 are the only groups you ever get for sure (unless you really suck like the N-Gage). You can get 2 with some good third party deals but they're not necessarily a big group (depending on what they're a fan of). Sony will get some group 2 people with Metal Gear and Tekken and stuff like that. Group 3 however is the bulk of the Playstation fanbase and Sony can easily lose them. Group 4 is what keeps you around when group 3 isn't interested. The problem for Sony is that they pretty much don't have such a group. Who really buys Playstations for first party games? Aside from some Gran Turismo fans I can't think of anyone and those people would probably be group 2.
Post by: Deguello on September 08, 2006, 04:05:32 PM
Sony may have made several mistakes, but their assault on the middle-class and poor gamers is definitely going to be their biggest. IIRc, 70% of the PS2 userbase got theirs after the first price drop. And that was a price drop from $300 to $250. Try doubling those amounts and see if there is an actual "price drop" in the mind of the average consumer. Even worse is if you are a Sony fan and want to support the PS3 and PSP. That's a pretty tall order, considering that it's not even confirmed that PS3 games won't be more than $60.
It is a shame that both Microsoft and Sony have made me a Nintendo fanboy by default. I normally did strive to get all the systems and have the most eclectic selection of games. Now, however, I can't even afford an Xbox 360, so a PS3 is certainly out of the question, so much so that I hate it whenever a game is announced for it. I mean really, the game may as well just not exist, even if it is the next installment of a series I like or just something interested.
But seriously, the price is the biggest screwup ever. They basically are throwing away the Walmart crowd, which is one of their strongest supporters, to grab technical enthusiasts who are dwarfed in comparison. And considering tha launch shortages admitted to by Sony and the ebay madness which will surely accompany it, it might be 2 years before the PS3 is available enough and affordable enough for your average consumer. And the average consumer is, like Ian said, Sony's biggest user bloc.
And you know, it's funny. I heard this "System and games aren't hardcore" schtick two years ago about the DS, citing that the PSP will obviously steamroll it. I'm not sure how that worked out for the PSP, what with having all of those hardcore gamers mulling about it, but I am leaning towards blinding success, especially in Japan, which is hardcore gamer central.
Post by: JonLeung on September 08, 2006, 06:04:06 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: DeguelloBut seriously, the price is the biggest screwup ever. They basically are throwing away the Walmart crowd, which is one of their strongest supporters, to grab technical enthusiasts who are dwarfed in comparison. And considering tha launch shortages admitted to by Sony and the ebay madness which will surely accompany it, it might be 2 years before the PS3 is available enough and affordable enough for your average consumer. And the average consumer is, like Ian said, Sony's biggest user bloc.
Add the two years of waiting for a decent price drop to the facts that Sony's depency on the PS2 has gone longer than they should've, especially since the PS2 was a year before its competitors, and that the PS3 is now the last to the next-gen race, that the Xbox 360 started this next generation about at least a year earlier, that if you haven't already pre-ordered one you're unlikely to get one this year even if you're going to try to be a PS3 early adopter simply because of shortages, and if you live in Europe, it's another few months more, which is about a year after the originally expected Spring 2006 date... (And if you count the really "hardcore gamers"' hyping up of the PS3 shortly after even the PS2 came out, well, it's been a long wait.)
With alternatives like the similar-and-cheaper-and-already-available Xbox 360 and the crazily-new-and-different-and-nobody-can-stop-talking-about Wii, can anyone afford the time (waiting for the PS3 to be relatively affordable), or the money (betting on the PS3 to be worth its crazy price tag no matter what)?
Unless you're a game-playing android, it doesn't matter a bit if you're a "hardcore" gamer, casual gamer, rich gamer, poor gamer, non-gamer, Joe Schmoe, Jane Smith, Aunt May or whoever. You'll have other priorities in life besides games, so when you do get into the games, or anything for that matter, your time and money and effort and faith is going to go into what you think is best. Even if you can't consider the Wii "hardcore", the price and pick-up-and-play simplicity is going to make it popular.
Does spending more time and money waiting for the PS3 make one "hardcore"? If so, I don't see a need to be "hardcore" anymore, if I ever was.
Post by: Kairon on September 08, 2006, 06:13:11 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
Since we're talking about fanbases now I would group the PS2 userbase into four groups.
Hmmm... I would divide the PS2 userbase into two groups:
Those who can afford the PS3...
and those who can't.
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: JonLeung on September 08, 2006, 06:35:55 PM
Those who have given up on the PS3 now...
And those who will give up on the PS3 later when they see the price for real in a store? :P
Okay, that was a fanboysih moment. I'll admit to that. There will be PS3 owners. And, hey, some will even be happy about it. Good for them.
But enjoy the PS2 in its dying days, Sony. It's pretty clear that you passed the high point of your success in the games business. It's only going to go downhill from here. How quickly or how far depends on how often you alienate or frustrate your potential buyers, and you've done a lot of that already, sorry to say.
Post by: Kairon on September 08, 2006, 06:53:33 PM
Especially if the 360 can achieve a price drop this holiday season or next.
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: Mario on September 08, 2006, 07:08:24 PM
The only good MS news each week is a Sony stuffup. I'm still waiting for them to capitalise on this.
Post by: Spak-Spang on September 08, 2006, 07:22:56 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: JonLeung
How about:
Those who have given up on the PS3 now...
And those who will give up on the PS3 later when they see the price for real in a store? :P
Okay, that was a fanboysih moment. I'll admit to that. There will be PS3 owners. And, hey, some will even be happy about it. Good for them.
But enjoy the PS2 in its dying days, Sony. It's pretty clear that you passed the high point of your success in the games business. It's only going to go downhill from here. How quickly or how far depends on how often you alienate or frustrate your potential buyers, and you've done a lot of that already, sorry to say.
This may have been fanboyish, but there is a point to this statement.
The hardcore gamers already know about the PS3 price and have made up their mind whether it is worth it or not. Some will say yes, other will say no.
The casual gamers (that make up most of the audience for PS2 and Xbox) have done little to no research on the PS3, and just know it is coming out. When they see the price in the stores as actual reality, it will dawn on them and hit them hard. $600!!! Is it worth it? What about games? What about extra controllers? It is a sinking Money Pit.
Now add in parents buying systems for their children, and you realize that the PS3 is going to have a rather Niche market until the price drops.
On the other hand, the Wii sounds like it will be affordable enough for almost anyone to pick one up relatively cheaply if they are even half way interested in games.
And Microsoft I am sure is just happy, they don't have to throw out a price cut on the 360 to play hardball with Sony yet. They must be getting pretty close to manufactoring at cost you would think. Perhaps Summer will be a perfect time to announce a price drop. (Right when the PS3 actually becomes widely available around the world.)
Post by: Ceric on September 08, 2006, 07:23:42 PM
He never said that you had to have all to be hardcore. He just stated that the Hardcore are pretty much the only group that could justify to themselves to have all.
In regards to Mario's comment, thats ok because MS is really ecstatic about the success it is having. Their pleased with it and in the end of the day that's really the only goal any system has. Nintendo seems pleased with the Wii at the moment. Sony well... I don't know. I just don't know. It so mixed.
I have a refurbed PS2 because of the price. I tend to like things new but I couldn't justify $250 for my lesser console (lack of good term to use.)
At the moment I see the PS3 actually having a very short lifecycle before we see its predecessor. If things keep going how they are.
Post by: JonLeung on September 08, 2006, 07:24:05 PM
I would guess is that the Xbox 360 came sooner than it should, but more importantly that a lot of people were/are holding out for Sony's and Nintendo's next consoles. You can't truly say it has no competitors when consumers are aware of future competitors and are willing to wait for them to show up.
And it's not like when we hit a new generation of consoles that the "previous" one instantly and totally dies.
But you're right, I'm sure Microsoft would want to do better, and yet they haven't truly capitalized much on Sony's blunders.
Post by: Spak-Spang on September 08, 2006, 07:25:24 PM
Post by: Kairon on September 08, 2006, 07:39:53 PM
But, it may have a chance to hold the lead on the PS3 for a month or two in Japan! /omg
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: IceCold on September 08, 2006, 07:49:15 PM
QuoteThere is a big difference here.. Even during the 64 era, Nintendo continued to innovate and push gaming forward. They invented the analogue stick and showed everyone how 3D games were done, busting out several timeless games during that time. Super Mario 64, with the analogue stick, was the blueprint that the industry as a whole followed, and it was made by Nintendo. Sony in present time, on the other hand; what exactly are they doing to push games forward? Nothing at all. They add this shoehorned motion functionality to their controller, clearly as a reactionary move. Worse, they are moving the focus away from games with all this multimedia stuff. And to top it off, they are helping to move the industry dangerously close to another crash. Because of high development costs (having to do in large part with their HD graphics push) there is little innovation, there are generic and similar games for publishers wanting to play it safe, the smaller developers are getting squeezed out because of the cost, etc, etc.. Add in the whole multimedia/Blu-Ray fiasco and the ridiculous price, and you have a recipe for disaster.. It would only be a matter of time before the saturation is too much if the industry continues where it's headed.
Today it's a bit ironic to see Nintendo fanboys dishing it out against Sony, calling out arrogance and karma. I mean, Nintendo's past speaks for itself. Karma smacked their arrogance right upside the face. For some Nintendo fanboys to be so arrogant as to claim the PS3 is already dead? Stupid. Nintendo's the underdog with something to prove here. It hasn't even BEGUN yet.
QuoteI read once that during the NES era, the penetration of video games in North America was 33% of households. Currently, it is at 32%. A percentage point doesn't sound like much, but when there are millions of households involved, it is a hell of a lot. More importantly, it shows that Sony really didn't expand the market much, or make it mainstream. I will admit that their marketing was very aggressive and well done, which helped them a lot. But they did not reach out to new audiences nearly as much as many people think. They certainly couldn't have been able to do what they had done if it weren't for what Nintendo had done..
The game library spawned more buyers, and more buyers spawned more games.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 08, 2006, 08:20:56 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Spak-Spang
Mario: Xbox 360 is suffering from price, and bad press recently. But furthermore, there hasn't been that single killer title you must own for the system yet. People are saying it may becoming this Holiday Season...but I have a feeling the masses are literally waiting for Halo 3 and a price drop. As I mentioned early I expect both of those this Summer.
Hey now I am quite happy with my Xbox 360, I have Dead Rising, PGR3 and Madden 2007 for it
. In regards to Xbox 360 not getting the market penetration it may have expected, I really think that is due to the price more than anything, 400$ is pushing it (Lets face it not many are buying the core edition).
Post by: ThePerm on September 08, 2006, 11:35:08 PM
there isa difference between adult oriented and hardcore, and if asking someone through a translator..it will totally confuse the devloper.
Post by: Artimus on September 09, 2006, 02:42:32 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: ThePerm
ign pulls this crap too much, i just read the interview with a designer on Day of Disaster and all they asked about was how its adult oriented..and it ocmpletely wasted the interview.
there is a difference between adult oriented and hardcore, and if asking someone through a translator..it will totally confuse the devloper.
I'd actually say that the Disaster question was meant to have the opposite effect, prove that the Wii will have games like this. Show how the I LOVE HALO 2 image is now totally irrelevant. And, to be fair, Nintendo does have fewer adult games.
Matt is like us all in that he expects the best of Nintendo. He's unpopular because he calls them out on a lot of stuff. But he doesn't do it because he's annoyed at them (well, he is, but so are most people in those cases) but because he does have a wide audience and sometimes he can start something that makes Nintendo listen. His recent push to have all games 16x9 and progressive scan has had at least one developer listen.
Matt is probably the best person to have on your side at IGN. He's a better journalist at most and he doesn't go around making comments about any system like the one that started this thread. Don't think for a second he doens't love Nintendo.
Post by: Mario on September 09, 2006, 02:50:31 AM
Post by: The Omen on September 09, 2006, 04:51:07 AM
Quote
TextAnd, just like Jeremy likes to point out, Sony is banking on the iPod people out there -- those bazillions of people who gladly pay upwards of 350 bucks for a music player."
Okay, did he really bring up Apple? An apt comparison it is not. There are many different types of Ipods varying in cost. I can get a 30 gig IPOD right now for 239.99. I can get the shuffle for under $80. A better comparison would be Apple computers. The Mac is looked at as the greatest piece of tech ever. Geeks love it. Problem is COST. Offering a superior product at twice the cost of a full featured PC means the market tends to go for the PC 80% of the time. I believe Apple has less than 10% of the market.
So in that regard, since the PS3 will be over double the price of the Wii how can he really think it won't effect the market negatively for Sony? Sure, some gamers can afford it, but most cannot. Being an adult doesn't mean I want to spend my mortgage payment on a PS3. In fact, these so called older gamers have a lot more bills in general.
This guy is very defensive, and as someone else said, it appears he's a tad bit worried.
Post by: jasonditz on September 09, 2006, 06:13:03 AM
Anyhow, I know that's not the point, but nearly all the Mac people I know have a DS, and many are already talking about the Wii. The people that are willing to "pay a little more" for their experience aren't just looking to pay more, they're looking for the experience, and if the experience they want is in the cheapest system, so much the better.
Mac people are an important gaming market for Nintendo and Sony to fight over (and IMO Nintendo's got a big edge in this regard) because:
* They/We have lots of disposable income which means we're the sort who are liable to end up with 50-100 games in a console's lifespan.
* We're generally not getting a great gaming experience on our computers.
Post by: Artimus on September 09, 2006, 08:44:46 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Mario
The problem with Matt is that he calls them out on stuff that isn't even wrong like the existance of Tingle and meaningless spec numbers, which upsets Nintendo fans like me who don't agree with his opinion and don't like that lots of people listen to it.
The Tingle thing is a very poor example. That isn't a complaint in the serious sense, but more a fun campaign. Does he hate Tingle? Yes. So do half of the people who know who he is. Does he want him to die? Yes. Does he really CARE if he does? No.
And I don't know what you're referring to about specs. He had no complaints about the Wii specs, all he did was post them. If there's an issue with the specs then the issue is with Nintendo.
Post by: Deguello on September 09, 2006, 09:56:12 AM
The addition of any sort of 16x9 progressive widescreen to any game has nothing to do with Matt's opinion at all. That is a total non sequitir. Matt also tried to influence the DS/PSP in a similar way, stating condescendingly that he wasn't even interested in handhelds before the PSP, and that Nintendo should up the specs or something. Well, that's all well and good, but I bet he doesn't talk much about portables any more, if you know what I mean.
It must totally infuriate him when Nintendo is successful and they did it without taking his advice. It's a daily reminder of just how little influence he really has. He even campaigned to keep Smash Brothers in Japan because it was "too weird." I mean seriously.
Post by: Artimus on September 09, 2006, 10:21:42 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Deguello
Matt is just an irresponsible journalist. He posted those spec numbers without any sort of source other than "unnamed third party developer" and since then those numbers have basically been debunked.
The addition of any sort of 16x9 progressive widescreen to any game has nothing to do with Matt's opinion at all. That is a total non sequitir. Matt also tried to influence the DS/PSP in a similar way, stating condescendingly that he wasn't even interested in handhelds before the PSP, and that Nintendo should up the specs or something. Well, that's all well and good, but I bet he doesn't talk much about portables any more, if you know what I mean.
It must totally infuriate him when Nintendo is successful and they did it without taking his advice. It's a daily reminder of just how little influence he really has. He even campaigned to keep Smash Brothers in Japan because it was "too weird." I mean seriously.
LOL. None of this is true.
The specs were from the sheets given to developers at the time, not an unnamed nobody. They've been improved since, but were proven to be accurate. He posted them because there was a ton of speculation. He had no negative comments. One day you're complaining there's no news, next day you're peeved because it's not as powerful as the PS3.
Uhhh...Matt did influence one developer, check the mailbags. He's also heavily pushed it and mentioned it to Nintendo repeatedly. He's not influencing Nintendo there, he's influencing smaller developers who think no one cares. It's a good thing too, because we're talking about ADDING 16x9/pro. scan not removing a 4x3 mode.
He took back what he said about the DS. He doesn't talk about it much now, he has NEVER talked about portables much at all over the YEARS. But he has said several times since that he was wrong and the DS has turned out fantastically. So he was wrong? He thought the PSP looked better. He's not allowed to believe that?
I've never seen him mad about Nintendo not taken his advice. When they don't and they do well he's happy for them. When they don't and it turns out he's right he's sad. It's tough love, but it's love.
Can you please provide the Smash Bros. info in a link? I agree that would've been rather stupid, definitely. But that would've been 1997 or so? And once in 10 years isn't anything to crucify him for.
I just don't get the hatred for him. Have you people even read major gaming sites? He is by far the best section head of ANY major site. GameSpot? Crap. GameSpy? Crap. IGN everything else? Crap. He works endlessly for Nintendo fans and he loves Nintendo to no end. The difference? He doesn't lie, and he's not a fanboy.
Look at the comments that this thread was originally about. Is that how you want Nintendo fans to look? Always fanboy, always bashing other people? Making ignorant marks just to pimp your console no matter what? Heck, he admits to love big tech and super-graphics, but he's never ONCE criticized the Wii's power. He admitted he didn't know how Nintendo could make it work, but then before everyone came over at E3 he said he was sold. He loves the Wii.
I think we're lucky that the most influential Nintendo journalist is an honest one. Is he frustrating at times? Yeah. But he doesn't go around giving us a bad name. He's the best know of the IGN editors. Consider that. Who is the best known IGN editor? The Nintendo guy. We're bound to disagree with him on some things, naturally. I disagree with some PGC previews, reviews and editorials too. But if you actually look at the facts, and what he actually says, not these tired propagated stereotypes that have no bearing on reality, you'll see he loves Nintendo and he wants to give us as much info as possible and to see them do extraordinarily well.
Post by: Kairon on September 09, 2006, 10:46:52 AM
It's just that he DOES work for an entertainment site called IGN, so there are obviously going to be some rough edges there, and he hasn't drunk the kool-aid.
Heck, Ian hasn't drunk the kool-aid, but we still love him, don't we!
Nintendo fanbois shouldn't discriminate on people who don't drink kool-aid. (And vice versa, non-kkol-aid drinkers shouldn't belittle us when we be-wii-ve!)
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: Deguello on September 09, 2006, 11:02:33 AM
Is it so hard to get a name of one of these developers? I mean seriously, everytime Matt enters a discussion, all third party names go unmentioned. And is it possible to pony up a link? And Seriously? Do you honestly believe Matt has any say over any developer doing anything? I mean like the developer saying "Oh gee, I wonder if we should do anything to this game, hey look Matt says he likes widescreen progressive scan! We should appease him and thank heavens that he pointed out something that the GC could do to us, because we would have never figured that out for ourselves." And of course he's disappointed when Nintendo doesn't listen to him. Just listen to him harp on endlessly about voice acting in Zelda and how disappointed he is that it probably won't feature it. Normally this would be inconsequential, but we are talking about a site the takes away points for not having any kart skins. I mean seriously, it would be like I got a bug up my ass about Captain Falcon not being in F-Zero: Maximum Velocity and trashed the game because of it. It's just not good journalism or good criticism.
The problem with the Specs story is that he presented them as final and allowed the "source" to throw out crap like "souped-up Xbox." And I never complained for lack of news. And if he did it because people complained for lack of news, that makes him even more irresponsible than I imagined. You don't fabricate an incomplete and unresearched news story because it's a slow news day.
And his newfound silence about portables is SERIOUSLY why I dislike him. He never even cared about handhelds UNTIL Sony made one to compete with Nintendo. He even posted a stupid and inflammatory comment about a "top level Nintendo developer" sayign that they could get a better looking game of their GC game working on the PSP. Do you know which "top level Nintendo developer" it was? It was Saru Brunei and their GC game Cubivore. I mean seriously, Cubivore. The straight N64-to-GC port. This metering of information makes him grossly irresponsible and disingenuous. Then for 4 months he was all about the PSP, and now he doesn't talk about any of them anymore, basically because his predictions proved false, he lost his credibility on that issue and just slash-burned his way out of it.
I don't want Matt to be an insipid rah-rah fanboy, but it could help him out a lot if he was a better journalist. You can't juxtapose This IGN Playstation goober to Matt and say we should thank our lucky stars that Matt isn't as bad as the other. The IGN Playstation guy is an idiot, but Matt is not vindicated by him.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 09, 2006, 11:13:21 AM
Post by: Kairon on September 09, 2006, 11:14:09 AM
The only cure for that is kool-aid.
Edit: Matt's problem is that he's a hardcore gamer. Seriously. He likes Metroid. METROID! That's a game that isn't very casual friendly at all.
This is a problem because Matt might not understand that the future of Nintendo and videogames in general is not the hardcore gamer, but the blue ocean. It's not the big hardcore release, but the long tail.
Basically, Matt has always been a rough fit for Nintendo because he's becoming more and more of a Dinosaur type of gamer, and all of his pat vitriol for Nintendo has resulted from his difficulties adapting to this brve new world of gaming where he's more of a niche minority than a demigod.
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: Ceric on September 09, 2006, 11:16:19 AM
Post by: Deguello on September 09, 2006, 11:26:18 AM
And the funny thing about the widescreen Progressive scan stuff is that Matt not only likes it, he wants Nintendo to FORCE DEVELOPERS to use it. I mean seriously, he wants Nintendo to play god with third parties again, when their past relationships with some of them are tenuous already.
I think Matt is a fanboy, just a different type. He's the Han Shot First, "they can never do anything right," "How lost they are without me" type that Star Wars has to endure.
Post by: The Omen on September 09, 2006, 11:39:32 AM
Quote
? Do you honestly believe Matt has any say over any developer doing anything? I mean like the developer saying "Oh gee, I wonder if we should do anything to this game, hey look Matt says he likes widescreen progressive scan! We should appease him and thank heavens that he pointed out something that the GC could do to us, because we would have never figured that out for ourselves."
Obviously, you don't understand what he's doing at all. He's not telling them what to do. And no, they wouldn't listen to him.
He's not the influence over the developers, WE are. He's giving US the shout out that "Hey, these guys are too lazy to put a stinking 16x9 pro scan mode in this game. Demand better." He using his status on a huge gaming site to help make sure the laziness inherent with the GC generation won't go unchecked. So you don't think he has a huge influence? That's not the point. He DOES have a huge audience. The developers know that Nintendo fans are a fickle lot, and any appearance of laziness means a no thanks from them. Hence, when Matt says this developer is being lazy with the Wii, it's directed to his readers, us. The negative response is what the developers will listen to.
Post by: Kairon on September 09, 2006, 11:43:46 AM
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: Deguello on September 09, 2006, 11:47:47 AM
Post by: Ceric on September 09, 2006, 12:05:25 PM
Quote
I just wonder sometimes if he does all that stupid stuff because he needs attention
Yes. Yes he does. Its not a personal matter, I'm sure he likes the attention somewhat. But he's on a site that generates revenue from ads and he has a family. Over time IGN seems to have let Matt stray away more and more from the other editors. Why? Because he gets the attention. He had for a while one of their slowest channels news wise. Kept it alive and popular. People like him. They value his opinion. That's one of the reasons his blog is the most popular.
The sad fact is that if Matt slipped and starts to lose most people attention then he's canned. No paycheck for him. I'm sure if Matt was instead the lead editor of PGC here he wouldn't put some types of articles up even if it was slow. PGC isn't out to make a profit and no one is paid just dedicated. That could be the difference of letting news slip from an Undisclosed source instead of waiting for when they can be named.
Oh also, Yes I do have a Widescreen TV. You be hard pressed now to find a true upgrade that isn't 16x9. All the Demo Kiosk seem to be using 16x9 TV's. All the tradeshows use 16x9 TVs. All the places where you have to prove your product before it can go to market for the most part.
Post by: Strell on September 09, 2006, 12:14:11 PM
Matt Camsasmasamasascaimcaicmaicaicaia doesn't deserve this much discussion about him.
Seriously.
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on September 09, 2006, 12:28:58 PM
We should be talking about how many of Ubi's Wii games are being developed by Ubi Shanghai.
Post by: Kairon on September 09, 2006, 12:33:57 PM
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on September 09, 2006, 12:41:37 PM
WORST LAUNCH EVAR
Post by: Artimus on September 09, 2006, 01:17:22 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Deguello
Just listen to him harp on endlessly about voice acting in Zelda and how disappointed he is that it probably won't feature it. Normally this would be inconsequential, but we are talking about a site the takes away points for not having any kart skins. I mean seriously, it would be like I got a bug up my ass about Captain Falcon not being in F-Zero: Maximum Velocity and trashed the game because of it. It's just not good journalism or good criticism.
Now it makes sense. Someone is pissed off he didn't give Double Dash a 9.0. I didn't realize people really cared that much. You know what? I love Nintendo as much as anyone but I think 7.9 was too HIGH for Double Dash. 7.5 was more fair. OMG ITZ TEH TRUTHZ!!!!?q@@ Who are you to declare what is and isn't qualified as a flaw in a game, anyway? But because I'm tired of this silly say-so, let's look at part of the conclusion for the Double Dash review:
Quote
The production values put into Mario Kart: Double Dash are extremely disappointing; honestly, do we really need two item buttons (X and Y) instead of dedicating one of them to a look-behind function? Having played a title like SSX 3, which redefines what you can do with arcade racers -- how much you can offer the players -- I feel like Mario Kart: Double Dash is missing so much
...
I expected so much more than this ho-hum effort. I had hoped for deeper controls, more than one selectable costume, skins for the karts, maybe GBA link-up support, more intriguing level designs, more characters, much more high-quality music -- the list goes on. I mean, it's still an enjoyable game, but not on the level it could have been.
Ahh yes. The only reason he didn't like it is because there's only one skin per cart. Clearly it has nothing to do with him feeling the game is control wise a step back from MK64 and not a good value for a new version of the game. Oh no.
Oh, wait, what's this? GameSpot gave it the same score?! 9 of its 83 reviews were 79 or lower? Another 16 of the 83 were 80s?! OMG you'd almost think he wasn't alone.
Seriously. Are you kidding me? All this comes down to is you're angry he doesn't pimp Nintendo endlessly.
And please show me where he harps ENDLESSLY about Zelda's voice acting. I seem to recall he's said he'd love to see Zelda have it on a couple occasions. I also seem to remember him saying it looks like TP will be the best Zelda ever. Hmmm...is it actually possible he'd like to see something added to a game but can still love the game!? No way! That would go against blind loyalty!!! I bet you'd find most people, not only him, think voice acting (if well done) would add to the game. PC games have been using it for over a decade. We're not talking about Link having a voice, remember.
But, please, do show me this endless harping.
Post by: JonLeung on September 09, 2006, 02:09:12 PM
Love him or hate him, agree with him or not, whatever. I see little point to argue about what he thinks and says - or what anyone thinks and says, really. We all have our own opinions.
I seriously doubt he has any say about the fate of the Wii or any Nintendo console or anything major so I'd just move on.
Well, you can do what you want, it just seems like he has too much attention already, and unfortunately I may be contributing to that. So that's it from me about this.
Post by: Deguello on September 09, 2006, 04:47:21 PM
That selection from the review is actually quite telling of his awful criticisnm. The phrase "production values" should never ever be in a serious review. You know what game has a lot of production values? EA's From Russia With Love. It is amorphous and has different meanings to different people. Furthermore, he reviews the game based upon what his expectations of the game were going in. "I expceted?" I mean seriously, video game reviews aren't forum posts. You can't do a serious review like that. He even compares it to a game that's not even in its genre. He is basically reviewing the game for what's not there, instead of what is. You can't do that, it just isn't good criticism. That basically means that I should never ever review an RPG or an MGS game, because I don't care about storylines and cutscenes and I DO expect gameplay, both of which are incredibly lacking there. You should only review what is there, not what you expected to be there, but isn't.
You can't review a game with a laundry list of your expectations and dock points accordingly. It just isn't good critique and it contributes to the homogenization of games where they all have to fill out certain base criteria before they are accepted. It stabs at the very heart of innovation.
And yes Matt has wanted voices in Zelda for a long time, even so much so that he said it wouldn't be "epic" without them. There even some quote where Reginald Fils-Aime had to tell him that is foolish. And this all leads back to that "production values" thing. Who cares if it is the best game of the year, no voices = low production values = let's take off some points. All it takes is for him to bring his list into the room when he reviews it and the hype you say he has for it goes out the window once he doesn't hear the voice acting that isn't there.
As I said before, I don't care if he likes Nintendo or not. He can fanstroke them all day long like that IGNPlaystation guy or he can bitterly hate them with all his passion. I don't care. It's his past irresponsible journalism and his FANBOYISH expectations which color his critique that concern me.
and you know what, I am seriously tired of talking about him.
Getting this topic BACK ON TRACK or else.
Post by: ShyGuy on September 09, 2006, 04:53:27 PM
Post by: wandering on September 09, 2006, 04:53:52 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon
Matt's problem is that he's a hardcore gamer. Seriously. He likes Metroid. METROID!
And your problem is that you have no taste in games. Seriously. You don't like Metroid. METROID.
Quote
Basically, Matt has always been a rough fit for Nintendo because he's becoming more and more of a Dinosaur type of gamer, and all of his pat vitriol for Nintendo has resulted from his difficulties adapting to this brve new world of gaming where he's more of a niche minority than a demigod.
So gamers who prefer games that aren't designed for dinosaurs are dinosaurs now?
Post by: Kairon on September 09, 2006, 04:58:52 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: wanderingQuote
Originally posted by: Kairon
Matt's problem is that he's a hardcore gamer. Seriously. He likes Metroid. METROID!
And your problem is that you have no taste in games. Seriously. You don't like Metroid. METROID.
It's a gunpei Yokoi game. GUNPEI YOKOI.
QuoteQuote
Basically, Matt has always been a rough fit for Nintendo because he's becoming more and more of a Dinosaur type of gamer, and all of his pat vitriol for Nintendo has resulted from his difficulties adapting to this brve new world of gaming where he's more of a niche minority than a demigod.
So gamers who prefer games that aren't designed for dinosaurs are dinosaurs now?
...whut?
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: wandering on September 09, 2006, 05:03:39 PM
Quote
It's a gunpei Yokoi game. GUNPEI YOKOI.
Yes, that was my point. The man was a genius.
Quote
...whut?
You're calling Matt befind the times for being too "hardcore" to appreciate a brave new world where games like Brain Age are designed for people who are...well...behind the times. I was noting the irony of the situation.
Post by: Kairon on September 09, 2006, 05:11:06 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: wanderingQuote
It's a gunpei Yokoi game. GUNPEI YOKOI.
Yes, that was my point. The man was a genius.
perhaps, but he was a HARDCORE genius.
QuoteQuote
...whut?
You're calling Matt befind the times for being too "hardcore" to appreciate a brave new world where games like Brain Age are designed for people who are...well...behind the times. I was noting the irony of the situation.
Ah, I see. Hahahaha. clever.
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: IceCold on September 09, 2006, 07:48:07 PM
QuoteIt doesn't really matter, Artimus and Deg, since Fran Mirabella actually wrote the interview..
Now it makes sense. Someone is pissed off he didn't give Double Dash a 9.0. I didn't realize people really cared that much. You know what? I love Nintendo as much as anyone but I think 7.9 was too HIGH for Double Dash. 7.5 was more fair. OMG ITZ TEH TRUTHZ!!!!?q@@ Who are you to declare what is and isn't qualified as a flaw in a game, anyway? But because I'm tired of this silly say-so, let's look at part of the conclusion for the Double Dash review:
Post by: Artimus on September 09, 2006, 07:53:03 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: IceCold
Heh, didn't Juan (the one who wrote this) use to work at the Nintendo channel?QuoteIt doesn't really matter, Artimus and Deg, since Fran Mirabella actually wrote the interview..
Now it makes sense. Someone is pissed off he didn't give Double Dash a 9.0. I didn't realize people really cared that much. You know what? I love Nintendo as much as anyone but I think 7.9 was too HIGH for Double Dash. 7.5 was more fair. OMG ITZ TEH TRUTHZ!!!!?q@@ Who are you to declare what is and isn't qualified as a flaw in a game, anyway? But because I'm tired of this silly say-so, let's look at part of the conclusion for the Double Dash review:
LOL That's right. Oops!
Guess it just goes to show how empty his comments were.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 09, 2006, 08:05:38 PM
Post by: Mario on September 09, 2006, 08:45:49 PM
Post by: IceCold on September 09, 2006, 09:08:25 PM
Post by: wandering on September 09, 2006, 09:16:52 PM
Post by: ShyGuy on September 09, 2006, 09:22:29 PM
Quote
You're calling Matt befind the times for being too "hardcore" to appreciate a brave new world where games like Brain Age are designed for people who are...well...behind the times. I was noting the irony of the situation.
New is new Old and Old is the new New.
Post by: Deguello on September 09, 2006, 09:30:05 PM
Discussion of Matt Cassamassina from IGN ends here. Seriously.
Post by: Ceric on September 09, 2006, 09:30:54 PM
Black: One camp wants games to be reviewed in a vacuum. Where it is treated like its the only game the person has ever played.
White: The other camp wants games to be reviewed in context to every game made. The review is done in a style where its strength and weaknesses are measured against its peers.
Each school of thinking has its pros and cons. Ideally a review would consist of a Black and White review. This allowing people to form their own Greys on the matter. Much like politics we all live in the Greys because it is against mans nature to adhere to the extremes. We just tend to be more left or right and argue accordingly.
Personally I guess I'm more White. I like Black reviews but I'm able to form my Greys better when I have reference points. A White review is more useful for me in my final decision and a Black review is more academicaly enjoyable.
(Oh just so you know I didn't randomaly pick who was white and who was black. White was chosen for the all enclusive review because white light is all the colors and Black was chosen for the vacuum review because it is the absence of color and the color of Space.)
Post by: ThePerm on September 09, 2006, 09:51:58 PM
as far as matt goes...he can play whatever video gamehe wants without work getting in the way.....thats something i can't do irght now. So he is in a way unlike us. Most of us are in college and have jobs..which leaves very little room for video games. So, in the last 4 years iv gone from hardcore gamer to casual
Post by: BigJim on September 09, 2006, 10:49:07 PM
Yes, I might. So holding any of them (IGN, PGC, etc) to a journalist standard is barking up the wrong tree. They're all just fans with a soapbox they made for themselves (PGC) or trying to make a living/revenue off of (business sites).
About Matt, some of you seem too dramatic in your dislike for him. At least the examples mentioned (voice acting, "forcing" developers) seem pretty weak, if not out of context. Relax. Take a blue pill if you must, and I don't mean Viagra.
Besides, isn't Matt just one of those "30 year old stunted man-children" Deg accused older gamers of being?
Post by: Deguello on September 09, 2006, 11:26:21 PM
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 09, 2006, 11:52:47 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: IceCold
I agree with Mario; to say that MK64 is better than Double Dash, forget by a huge margin, is just untrue..
Unless you have a differing opinion, I found Double Dash to be uninspired, whether it be the generic racing tracks, basic battle mode arenas or the lame battle mode (I really prefer the ability to jump and thought the level designs were great in MK 64). WIth that said I prefer MK DS over both MK64 and MK DD.
Post by: Spak-Spang on September 10, 2006, 04:08:57 AM
Post by: zakkiel on September 10, 2006, 06:42:16 AM
Post by: KnowsNothing on September 10, 2006, 06:54:56 AM
MKDD has strange controls, but once you get used to them I thought it was tons of fun. I just think the special character-based items were handled poorly, I'm glad they're gone now. Other than that it was pretty good.
MK64 was awesome. The tracks were great, but more importantly it just felt good control-wise. MK64 wins.
MKSC for GBA was awesome too, unfortunately I lost my copy. I figured at the time that MKDS would be so awesome I wouldn't need it anymore, but I guess I was wrong, I still want it back. The tracks freaking rocked.
The original's okay, but the worst of the bunch in my opinion.
THE END
Post by: Ceric on September 10, 2006, 07:15:03 AM
Post by: Neodymium on September 10, 2006, 07:25:56 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: KnowsNothing
MK64 was awesome. The tracks were great, but more importantly it just felt good control-wise. MK64 wins.
The terrible loose control is what ruins the game for me.
Double Dash had really tight controls and good drifting, and that's what makes it my preferred Mario Kart.
I know that goes against the grain of most Mario Kart fans.
Post by: Artimus on September 10, 2006, 07:51:14 AM
Post by: Spak-Spang on September 10, 2006, 08:09:09 AM
Post by: KDR_11k on September 10, 2006, 09:20:51 AM
Post by: Strell on September 10, 2006, 10:03:56 AM
Post by: NWR_pap64 on September 10, 2006, 10:10:09 AM
Mario kart DS was fun, but felt like more of the same, even if it is one of the best MK games around.
And mario Kart 64 made my childhood...
Post by: Athrun Zala on September 10, 2006, 10:32:31 AM
and MKDD is very underrated, it's multiuplayer modes are simply awesome
Post by: Hostile Creation on September 10, 2006, 10:48:12 AM
I've certainly raced on Baby Park more than any other track ever. That's practically the only course my friends and I play anymore. BABY BABY BABY
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 10, 2006, 11:10:58 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Hostile Creation
Double Dash is an incredibly good game, but I'm still not sure if I've logged more hours into it than into MK64.
I've certainly raced on Baby Park more than any other track ever. That's practically the only course my friends and I play anymore. BABY BABY BABY
I know with Mario Kart 64 I've played my friends and family in it countless times, easily one of the most replayed games of all time for me (Mainly battle mode though). What I loved about the game was the solid controls (never found them too loose), and neat shortcuts (I felt MKDD was lacking in cool shortcuts) , it also had some really awesome additions like going to Peach's Castle. My favorite tracks were the Yoshi one (I loved the different paths you could take), rainbow road for its cool shortcuts, and Wario Stadium. All around I think MK DS had the best tracks, even the new ones were tons of fun such as the Airship or the Waluigi Pinball one! In Mario Kart 64s battle mode I found the block fort (easily the best battle arena ever made) and the double deck were both great. Even though I felt the battle mode was shallow in MKDD (the extra modes felt thrown in) I do love playing Luigi's Mansion on MK DS.
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on September 10, 2006, 12:41:19 PM
Daisy annoys everyone incredibly so much hardcore everyone loses their concentration banana FOR THE EFFING WIN.
Post by: JonLeung on September 10, 2006, 12:52:01 PM
Post by: IceCold on September 10, 2006, 02:43:16 PM
QuoteWell. I'll take this one at a time. First off, the tracks were no more "generic" than MK64; I recently played the 64 version as well, and I confirmed this for myself. There certainly were a few great tracks in MK64, but many of them were just boring.. DD, on the other hand, has more variety, more creativity, and they are more fun to play on. Some of the later stages especially were brilliant.. On to controls then, which I feel that DD wins in a landslide. Tight, responsive controls with a good "feel" while driving - they became transparent very quickly. And I also believe that DD's attempt at innovation was a breath of fresh air to the series; otherwise it would be just like MK64. Two karts are definitely underrated, and do provide some more strategy and fun.
Unless you have a differing opinion, I found Double Dash to be uninspired, whether it be the generic racing tracks, basic battle mode arenas or the lame battle mode (I really prefer the ability to jump and thought the level designs were great in MK 64). WIth that said I prefer MK DS over both MK64 and MK DD.
I will agree with you that the battle mode in DD was lacking, and more effort should have been put into it. However, it's incredibly balanced.. I have 3 friends who are about the same skill level as me in DD, and playing the battle games are always a riot. Whether it's Bobomb Blast in Cookie Land, or Shine Thief in Luigi's mansion, the games always come down to the wire, which makes it really fun to play. I also agree with whoever said that DD needed more secret passages, but that really didn't make or break the game to me.
So yeah, we're entitled to have our opinions, but that's why I prefer Double Dash over MK64..
EDIT: I guess we can all agree on one thing - don't play Mario Kart of any sort right after you play F-Zero GX!
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 10, 2006, 03:29:22 PM
.
Post by: IceCold on September 10, 2006, 04:58:45 PM
QuoteNow that is a case where you're not entitled to your own opinion!
Originally posted by: VGrevolution
Ewww to Fzero series
Post by: wandering on September 10, 2006, 05:10:23 PM
Quote
Well. I'll take this one at a time. First off, the tracks were no more "generic" than MK64; I recently played the 64 version as well, and I confirmed this for myself. There certainly were a few great tracks in MK64, but many of them were just boring.. DD, on the other hand, has more variety, more creativity, and they are more fun to play on.
I feel the 64 tracks were more....evocative. Just focusing on setting, Rainbow Road was magical, Toad's Turnpike and Chocowhatever Mountain evoked the open road from a kid's perspective, and then you had stuff like Bowser's Castle and snowy world whatever and the beach and the desert. It was all very memorable and cool. Contrast this with DD, which drew it's inspiration from the bland Sunshine, and I don't think there's any comparison.
...Though I did like that one course. The Donkey Kong one, with the canon.
Post by: Ceric on September 10, 2006, 06:21:19 PM
That's why I'm going to play it on my Wii
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 10, 2006, 06:26:54 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ceric
I do not like F-Zero GX on the Gamecube because it has always Restarted my Gamecube.
That's why I'm going to play it on my Wii
Your GC probaly did that because the crappiness of the F-Zero series was too much for it to handle. hehe
Post by: wandering on September 10, 2006, 06:27:24 PM
Post by: Ceric on September 10, 2006, 06:29:10 PM
Post by: KnowsNothing on September 10, 2006, 06:30:03 PM
Post by: Spak-Spang on September 10, 2006, 06:35:19 PM
Post by: Ceric on September 10, 2006, 06:37:42 PM
Post by: Kairon on September 10, 2006, 06:48:10 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: KnowsNothing
VG is band for having the worst taste in video games ever.
Umm... *raises hand*
I don't like Metroid, remember?
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: Ceric on September 10, 2006, 06:57:01 PM
Post by: IceCold on September 10, 2006, 06:57:19 PM
QuoteVGRevolution is so not HARDCORE. And you know it! Seriously, how can you not like the F-Zero series? The speed, the adrenaline, the rush, the brilliance..
Originally posted by: VGrevolutionQuote
Originally posted by: Ceric
I do not like F-Zero GX on the Gamecube because it has always Restarted my Gamecube.
That's why I'm going to play it on my Wii
Your GC probaly did that because the crappiness of the F-Zero series was too much for it to handle. hehe
And to all the pansies who think F-Zero GX is too hard, you don't deserve to own a HARDCORE GameCube!
Heh, it's funny how that's one of the few games where I can actually say that and back it up..
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 10, 2006, 07:04:11 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: KaironQuote
Originally posted by: KnowsNothing
VG is band for having the worst taste in video games ever.
Umm... *raises hand*
I don't like Metroid, remember?
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Did you like the 2D metroid games? That is how I am I really liked Super Metroid, Metroid Zero Mission, and Metroid 1 yet never have been a big fan of the Prime series.
Post by: Ceric on September 10, 2006, 07:13:59 PM
Post by: Kairon on September 10, 2006, 07:16:47 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: VGrevolution
Did you like the 2D metroid games? That is how I am I really liked Super Metroid, Metroid Zero Mission, and Metroid 1 yet never have been a big fan of the Prime series.
No, I really didn't dig the original Metroid series sidescrollers. My younger brother can play Super Metroid for hours though and just get sucked in, and I'm not averse to watching him play. Prime doesn't fare much better, though I did actually enjoy it for maybe an hour or two thanks to the transforming touch of the master, Miyamoto. Primarily I enjoyed the Space Station Tutorial level a lot and then...eh.
Quote
Originally posted by: Ceric
That's right Kairon. VG is band. I mean their is more then one person in a Band. So Rock on Kairon. Rock on VG. Rock on Ceric... Oh, wait I play tuba... um... Polka on Ceric.
I'd like to learn to play the theremin if you don't mind.
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: Strell on September 10, 2006, 07:38:46 PM
It's not even debatable.
For some reason, I keep reading "The Wii is so not hardcore" in a Group X voice.
Shiggity shiggity schwa.
Post by: Ceric on September 10, 2006, 07:48:45 PM
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 10, 2006, 07:51:23 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Strell
No, if you don't like Metroid at all, you have bad taste.
It's not even debatable.
For some reason, I keep reading "The Wii is so not hardcore" in a Group X voice.
Shiggity shiggity schwa.
As you should read it.
Post by: WalkingTheCow on September 11, 2006, 12:46:14 AM
The Grand Theft Auto series was always well reviewed but I could never manage being terribly interested in them. After about 30 minutes I'm immensely bored. Yet. . . I'm still pretty confidant in my good taste.
*looks back to his harmonium, thinks better of it and grabs the ukelin*
Post by: KnowsNothing on September 11, 2006, 01:52:56 AM
Yeah okay.
Post by: Spak-Spang on September 11, 2006, 03:57:26 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: WalkingTheCow
*looks up from his harmonium*
The Grand Theft Auto series was always well reviewed but I could never manage being terribly interested in them. After about 30 minutes I'm immensely bored. Yet. . . I'm still pretty confidant in my good taste.
*looks back to his harmonium, thinks better of it and grabs the ukelin*
Perhaps its the open-ended game design. I really don't enjoy the "playground" type game design worlds. I want to have specific tasks that I know what to do and how. I don't want to search to find them either.
Post by: Ceric on September 11, 2006, 04:50:07 AM
Post by: Athrun Zala on September 11, 2006, 08:52:01 AM
Quotelol, seems like it
Originally posted by: KnowsNothing
So now this thread is a competition to see who has the worst taste in games?
Yeah okay.
F-Zero GX is the most hardcore and difficult as hell game EVAR!
and how can you not like Metroid? :S
Post by: JonLeung on September 11, 2006, 09:12:13 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Athrun ZalaQuotelol, seems like it
Originally posted by: KnowsNothing
So now this thread is a competition to see who has the worst taste in games?
Yeah okay.
F-Zero GX is the most hardcore and difficult as hell game EVAR!
and how can you not like Metroid? :S
I've finished hundreds of games. Heck, for all I know, maybe over a thousand...or two? I've certainly lost count. Nearly every game I touch. I can finish just about all games on a three day rental (back when they were only three days), except for some RPGs which rarely take over a week.
BUT IN F-ZERO GX I CAN'T PASS STORY MODE'S STAGE 7! And I hear there are at least two more stages after that, one of which is on a track with no rails!
F-ZERO GX owns my butt, shamefully. But considering that it's by Nintendo AND Sega, I couldn't ask for a better game to be defeated by. (You know, like how some losers in a tournament (even in the early rounds) who lose along the way to the champ are like, "at least I lost to the champ"...etc.)
Post by: KDR_11k on September 11, 2006, 10:30:50 AM
Post by: Deguello on September 11, 2006, 10:51:27 AM
Quote
This is still a quasi-debate on whether certain videogames qualify as being hardcore, yes? And not a debate on abortion or gun control?
Listen, since you asked, I’ll tell you what I meant by hardcore. A game, to me, is hardcore when exceedingly difficult, appeals to a small section of the gaming public, and is obtuse in some way or another, whether through its mechanics or theme.
Metroid, Zelda and Mario are fantastic franchises that appeal to almost everybody. So, by my definition, which is the only one under attack, none of them qualifies.
And that’s all I’m going to say. There’s far too much to do (eating, shaving, watching episodes of Futurama) to spend significant time on any message board arguing about — honestly now — things that don’t matter.
I guess that last sentence just confirms that he thinks his opinion does not matter.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 11, 2006, 11:00:58 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Deguello
LOL! IGN Playstation guy attempts to save face, fails.Quote
This is still a quasi-debate on whether certain videogames qualify as being hardcore, yes? And not a debate on abortion or gun control?
Listen, since you asked, I’ll tell you what I meant by hardcore. A game, to me, is hardcore when exceedingly difficult, appeals to a small section of the gaming public, and is obtuse in some way or another, whether through its mechanics or theme.
Metroid, Zelda and Mario are fantastic franchises that appeal to almost everybody. So, by my definition, which is the only one under attack, none of them qualifies.
And that’s all I’m going to say. There’s far too much to do (eating, shaving, watching episodes of Futurama) to spend significant time on any message board arguing about — honestly now — things that don’t matter.
I guess that last sentence just confirms that he thinks his opinion does not matter.
What PS2 games are exceedingly difficult and appeal on to a small section of the gaming public? Ummmm, guess that counts out every franchise on the system lol. Really he makes no sense whatsoever, what exactly is a "small section" of the gaming public? Personally I consider a hardcore gamer as someone who enjoys games of all different genres and doesn't let what is "Popular" affect his/her descision on what to play.
Post by: wandering on September 11, 2006, 11:01:06 AM
Quote
hard core
noun
1 : a central or fundamental and usually enduring group or part: as a : a relatively small enduring core of society marked by apparent resistance to change or inability to escape a persistent wretched condition(as poverty or chronic unemployment) b : a militant or fiercely loyal faction
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on September 11, 2006, 11:49:07 AM
--MR. T
~~~~~
Though that does avoid the other definition of "hardcore" involving the actual content of the product, you know, the "for big kids only" ECW or porno flick kind -- the stuff that's usually lame cuz they fail to be executed tastefully, unlike Krystal in StarFox Adv or Daisy in Short Shorts Sportswear.
Post by: Athrun Zala on September 11, 2006, 06:26:40 PM
Metroid isn't really popular (shame really, those games rule) so that doesn't make them comply with his "definition", and that makes the PS2 is the most not-hardcore thing ever....
in any case, that guy is an idiot, and MrT and Pro are right
Post by: Strell on September 11, 2006, 06:52:19 PM
And no one plays those anymore except about .004% of the gaming public.
Post by: wandering on September 11, 2006, 07:11:38 PM
Quote
And no one plays those anymore except about .004% of the gaming public
What is up with that? I had a friend who traded in Ikaruga because it was "too hard."
I'm not saying it's not hard - it is - but that's not the point. You move a ship around and shoot lasers at badguys. I just have no idea how anyone could find that not fun.
Post by: Ceric on September 11, 2006, 07:22:46 PM
Post by: WalkingTheCow on September 11, 2006, 09:59:31 PM
Beat it twice with the highest amount of lives, easy mode, and continues at 2 mil. points (the quickest countinue gaining option).
And even on those easy, easy settings. . . By far, the most difficult game I've ever played. And it was difficult in the very best way. . . And am I actually on the subject at all?!?
The Wii. "Hard-Core" . . . right.
Relative and/or unanswerable at this point.
Post by: KDR_11k on September 11, 2006, 11:58:11 PM
You played that? Is it any good?
As for difficult and no mass appeal, how about Viewtiful Joe and P.N.03? You can master them to the point where you ever get hit and waste every enemy within moments but the way there is hard and the same applies to alledgedly hardcore games like Contra or Ninja Gaiden (which, considering its popularity, might have difficulty being called hardcore under that definition).
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 12, 2006, 02:21:08 AM
Post by: Nick DiMola on September 14, 2007, 08:21:33 AM
Mainstream/Pop Gamer = Hardcore Gamer
Plain and simple. Every time I see the term thrown around it isn't referring to the type of gamer who would take a chance playing anything out there, it is referring to the type of gamer who is interested in only the popular genres of video games (ie: FPS, Sports/Racing, Fighting). I believe that the title is truly a misnomer. In my mind hardcore means that you are very heavily into gaming and you have been around for a while and experienced the full gamut of gaming. You are willing to try new games and experience new things. From now on when I see Hardcore Gamer I am going to replace it in my mind with Mainstream Gamer. And what I would consider to be a hardcore gamer is simply a Gaming Enthusiast/Veteran. Ian's post in the Talkback Guitar Hero DS thread sparked me to reanalyze my perception of the phrase and what exactly it means.
Post by: Terranigma Freak on September 14, 2007, 12:01:47 PM
Post by: darknight06 on September 14, 2007, 12:49:08 PM
2. bleary eyed game addict who plays in HIS bedroom in the dark with a Pepsi in hand for hours on
end, sometimes days.
3. a "manchild".
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on September 14, 2007, 01:36:12 PM
Post by: EasyCure on September 15, 2007, 06:00:20 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: darknight06
Hardcore Gamer: (n) 1. someone who takes videogames far more seriously than anyone ever should.
2. bleary eyed game addict who plays in HIS bedroom in the dark with a RED MOUNTAIN DEW GAMER FUEL THAT MAKES YOU TEH L337 HALO PLAYER in hand for hours on
end, sometimes days.
3. a "manchild".
Fixed
talk about mainstream/pop-gamer alright...
Post by: clevelandst124 on September 15, 2007, 09:38:37 AM
The Hardcore that fanboys bring up is just to hold Nintendo to child-like status.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 15, 2007, 10:18:56 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: clevelandst124
If you are truly "hardcore" you wouldn't care about sales or systems period. This is because you'd own them all, Wii included, and probably don't hesitate to spend $50 or $60 when a good game comes out (surprise the wii has a few).
The Hardcore that fanboys bring up is just to hold Nintendo to child-like status.
Actually, caring about sales is important, because with solid sales then you won't see any more systems, which if you care about a company is NOT a good thing, just look at Sega.
Post by: KDR_11k on September 15, 2007, 10:20:18 PM
Quote
If you are truly "hardcore" you wouldn't care about sales or systems period. This is because you'd own them all, Wii included, and probably don't hesitate to spend $50 or $60 when a good game comes out (surprise the wii has a few).
You mean if you're a rich hardcore gamer. I hesitate when it comes to spending my 60€ because I can't afford doing that very often. I'm currently seeing five new games that are probably worth full price (Rogue Galaxy, Valkyrie Profile 2, Super Paper Mario, Tingle's Rosy Rupeeland, Sonic Rush Adventure) but I only have enough money to buy two of them. If the PS3 was the dominant system for the gen I'd have to spend 600€ to have the dominant console. That's not only 10-15 games at full price, that's also about 6 months of gaming budget for me. I.e. if I bought a PS3 I wouldn't do any gaming for half a year (yeah, sure, I'd have Motorstorm and Resistance to play but I don't like console FPS or racing games, those have a combined value of ~5€ to me).
Post by: clevelandst124 on September 16, 2007, 05:09:50 AM
