Why are casual gamers harder sells than hardcore gamers? Because marketing trickery doesn't work on them!
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on March 23, 2010, 06:09:44 PM
Oh, no! The secret's out!
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: Mop it up on March 25, 2010, 07:01:24 PM
I agree with a lot of that. I would also add that "casual" gamers are more willing to try new things. Games like Wii Fit and Wii Sports are new concepts that were quickly embraced by "casuals," but "hardcore" gamers rarely deviate from established franchises.
I guess that's partly covered by number 1, but whatever.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on March 25, 2010, 07:14:31 PM
Wii Fit Plus is amazing.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: noname2200 on March 26, 2010, 01:00:28 PM
Pshaw, that article is absurd. The casuals buy whatever simplistic shovelware they see advertised. Take Carnival Games. We HardCore folks are much more discriminating: we can smell an overrated game from miles away. Now I'm going back to play GTA IV.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: broodwars on March 26, 2010, 02:12:21 PM
I wouldn't phrase this problem as the "casuals being more picky" so much as "the casuals don't need more than 1-3 games a year, and once they have their Wii Fit/Carnival Games/etc. they just ignore the rest". "Being picky" indicates that they actually care enough to critically examine and contemplate the various games out there, and then make a choice.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: KDR_11k on March 26, 2010, 02:54:32 PM
They buy a game if it makes a good case for why it would enrich their library. Just a minor improvement on a game they already have isn't going to make them shell out 50€ again.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: Guitar Smasher on March 26, 2010, 05:26:20 PM
I wouldn't phrase this problem as the "casuals being more picky" so much as "the casuals don't need more than 1-3 games a year, and once they have their Wii Fit/Carnival Games/etc. they just ignore the rest". "Being picky" indicates that they actually care enough to critically examine and contemplate the various games out there, and then make a choice.
Who needs games? Maybe the hardcore do, which is why it's apparently so easy to sell to them. But the casual crowd doesn't need games. That doesn't mean they won't buy more than 3 games a year, though. If they see something that they want, they'll buy it. It's not like if I learn about a new movie I really want to see, I'm going to think "well I've already been to the theatre once this month..." The point is you have to sell your game to them. Maybe they don't critically examine every game that gets released, but why should they, they don't need to. But don't accuse them of ignoring the rest, they'll respond positively if they hear/see positive things about a certain game. That's how word of mouth operates, and is why we actually see a ton of million sellers.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: D_Average on March 26, 2010, 10:57:09 PM
I wouldn't phrase this problem as the "casuals being more picky" so much as "the casuals don't need more than 1-3 games a year, and once they have their Wii Fit/Carnival Games/etc. they just ignore the rest". "Being picky" indicates that they actually care enough to critically examine and contemplate the various games out there, and then make a choice.
Who needs games? Maybe the hardcore do, which is why it's apparently so easy to sell to them. But the casual crowd doesn't need games. That doesn't mean they won't buy more than 3 games a year, though. If they see something that they want, they'll buy it. It's not like if I learn about a new movie I really want to see, I'm going to think "well I've already been to the theatre once this month..." The point is you have to sell your game to them. Maybe they don't critically examine every game that gets released, but why should they, they don't need to. But don't accuse them of ignoring the rest, they'll respond positively if they hear/see positive things about a certain game. That's how word of mouth operates, and is why we actually see a ton of million sellers.
Yeah thats true. Its seems like they ignore them, when perhaps they have no idea of their existence. However, if they saw as many game ads as movie ads, they'd probably respond and buy more than 1-3 games a year.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: broodwars on March 26, 2010, 11:22:06 PM
I wouldn't phrase this problem as the "casuals being more picky" so much as "the casuals don't need more than 1-3 games a year, and once they have their Wii Fit/Carnival Games/etc. they just ignore the rest". "Being picky" indicates that they actually care enough to critically examine and contemplate the various games out there, and then make a choice.
Who needs games? Maybe the hardcore do, which is why it's apparently so easy to sell to them. But the casual crowd doesn't need games. That doesn't mean they won't buy more than 3 games a year, though. If they see something that they want, they'll buy it. It's not like if I learn about a new movie I really want to see, I'm going to think "well I've already been to the theatre once this month..." The point is you have to sell your game to them. Maybe they don't critically examine every game that gets released, but why should they, they don't need to. But don't accuse them of ignoring the rest, they'll respond positively if they hear/see positive things about a certain game. That's how word of mouth operates, and is why we actually see a ton of million sellers.
I'm sorry, but if they didn't ignore the gaming industry in general we wouldn't hear all these stories of Wii owners who are satisfied with only Wii Sports/Fit and Wii software sales would be much better than they are. Maybe they're just satisfied with those, maybe they don't have the time to play more (something that lately I can be somewhat sympathetic towards as I work 12 or so hours a day these days), maybe they just don't care. No one knows for sure, and I honestly don't really care. All I care about is that they don't buy software outside a couple key titles, so I'm not altogether fond of them.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: Mop it up on March 26, 2010, 11:29:51 PM
The casuals buy whatever simplistic shovelware they see advertised. Take Carnival Games. We HardCore folks are much more discriminating: we can smell an overrated game from miles away. Now I'm going back to play GTA IV.
Considering that Carnival Games was built from the ground up for Wii, I don't see how it is shovelware. I also don't see how a 59% review average is overrated. The game delivers what it promises, and the controls work fine for the most part. I see that game as another case of people calling it a poor game just because it doesn't interest them. I'd rather play Carnival Games than GTA IV.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on March 26, 2010, 11:35:06 PM
Birdette, his stealth satire flew under your radar.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: Mop it up on March 26, 2010, 11:40:40 PM
That wouldn't surprise me if true, but with all the serious casual hate out there... I can't be sure.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: Ymeegod on March 26, 2010, 11:47:46 PM
The point being Mop is it ISN'T a good game yet it continued to sell. There's tons of BETTER party games on the WII that didn't even come close to hitting a million.
See the author misses a key point while it's true hype only effects die-hard gamers but casual gamers still fall for brand names (move-tie-ins, ect) way more. For example would be Mario and Sonic games (well at least the first one because the sequel was alright). Should it sold as well as it did (hit something like 6 million)--for an 65ish game. Nope, was it the hardcore gamers that bought it on hype? Nope since the bulk of the sales happened well after the first few months.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: Mop it up on March 27, 2010, 12:07:12 AM
The point being Mop is it ISN'T a good game yet it continued to sell. There's tons of BETTER party games on the WII that didn't even come close to hitting a million.
Spoken like someone who's never played the game. Or other party games.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: Ymeegod on March 27, 2010, 01:01:04 AM
Actually my sister bought 3/4 of those Mario and Sonic games so yeah I played them and no they shouldn't have sold more than any of the Rayman party games or even Boom Bloxs IMO.
Mop you live in an reaility like no other. just because you LIKED the game doesn't mean everyone else is wrong.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: Mop it up on March 27, 2010, 01:10:04 AM
Actually my sister bought 3/4 of those Mario and Sonic games so yeah I played them and no they shouldn't have sold more than any of the Rayman party games or even Boom Bloxs IMO.
But have you played Carnival Games? And at least you said IMO this time.
Mop you live in an reaility like no other. just because you LIKED the game doesn't mean everyone else is wrong.
It doesn't make them right, either. When it comes to games, there are no rights or wrongs.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: Ymeegod on March 27, 2010, 01:55:30 AM
The point was what's selling it not about people's views. The game isn't the top rated game in it's field yet it's selling 10 times the normal? Why--it has a brandname--Mario. Take Mario out of the title and the game wouldn't have sold more than 1 million. Sega's learning that the hardway--in case you missed the last few weeks-- Sonic Racing was released and it's bombing the sales charts (don't even think it broke 50K on the WII). So why doesn't SR game sell? It was reviewed almost as high as MK WII 78 vrs 82 yet it's not going see 1/2 million mark in it's lifetime.
------------------------------ And yeah my sister bought Carnival Games, Game Party, and a couple of others but I think I only logged in a few hours with Game Party and like 30 mins of CG before poping it out. Both of them were budgetting titles which sold mostly because of that point alone. Parents usually bought those titles for either a birthday present for another kid or x-mas gift. Again, the game was purchased by non-gamers = casual gamers. ---------------------------------
And the point about DLC and only the hardcore gamers falling for it is somewhat true. Casual gamers don't even have their systems enabled so yeah, that 100% true but as for gimmicks again WII FIT comes screaming to mind. Yeah, some people might actually use it but the vast majority of the people that bought the product never inteneded to use it. It sold like 30 million units but how many of those are actually being used? Or was used more than 10 hours? And it wasn't just FIT, Nintendo Dogs did the same damn thing or even a much older title, MYST--alot of people bought that game without the means to even play it :0.
Casual Gamers simply outnumber hardcore games and that's not going to change.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: BeautifulShy on March 27, 2010, 01:58:01 AM
I just want to add onto what Mop it up is saying. If a game interests someone than it really shouldn't matter what everybody else thinks. I'm sure there are some games that people on this board like but nobody else here likes.
Don't judge people because of their likes and dislikes. If we were all the same the gaming world would be pretty boring.;)
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: broodwars on March 27, 2010, 02:03:42 AM
I just want to add onto what Mop it up is saying. If a game interests someone than it really shouldn't matter what everybody else thinks. I'm sure there are some games that people on this board like but nobody else here likes.
Don't judge people because of their likes and dislikes. If we were all the same the gaming world would be pretty boring. ;)
Indeed. Just to clarify, if you like ****ty casual trash like so many on this site seem to given how vehemently they defend it, more power to you. I have a fondness for poorly-paced; melodramatic; often grind-heavy JRPGs (*eyes the copy of Resonance of Fate he's currently playing, which has had him forcibly grinding for about 10 game hours now just to get enough materials to use the game's various systems.*), which I certainly don't expect the rest of you to like. All I ask is that whatever you like, support it. That's my problem with the casuals: they've completely changed the direction of the industry and the types of games that are coming out, yet when it comes time to man up and support those games that they are partly responsible for creating, they're nowhere in sight. And the stuff they do support tends to be so creatively bankrupt (Mario Kart Wii, New Super Mario Bros. Wii, etc.), that I often think we'll never see more interesting projects from certain developers. As a result, everyone loses.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: Mop it up on March 27, 2010, 02:06:55 AM
Personally I don't believe a game sells over a million copies if it isn't meeting the satisfaction of consumers. Somewhere along the way, the word would get out that it is no good.
That's my problem with the casuals: they've completely changed the direction of the industry and the types of games that are coming out, yet when it comes time to man up and support those games that they are partly responsible for creating, they're nowhere in sight. As a result, everyone loses.
If people supported every "casual" game released on the Wii, they'd be buying five games a week. Game companies are at least partially responsible for low sales, if not almost completely.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: Guitar Smasher on March 27, 2010, 02:12:02 AM
I just want to add onto what Mop it up is saying. If a game interests someone than it really shouldn't matter what everybody else thinks. I'm sure there are some games that people on this board like but nobody else here likes.
Don't judge people because of their likes and dislikes. If we were all the same the gaming world would be pretty boring. ;)
Indeed. Just to clarify, if you like ****ty casual trash like so many on this site seem to given how vehemently they defend it, more power to you. I have a fondness for poorly-paced; melodramatic; often grind-heavy JRPGs (*eyes the copy of Resonance of Fate he's currently playing, which has had him forcibly grinding for about 10 game hours now just to get enough materials to use the game's various systems.*), which I certainly don't expect the rest of you to like. All I ask is that whatever you like, support it. That's my problem with the casuals: they've completely changed the direction of the industry and the types of games that are coming out, yet when it comes time to man up and support those games that they are partly responsible for creating, they're nowhere in sight. And the stuff they do support tends to be so creatively bankrupt (Mario Kart Wii, New Super Mario Bros. Wii, etc.), that I often think we'll never see more interesting projects from certain developers. As a result, everyone loses.
I thought you said casuals weren't picky, just ignorant. Well if they're responsible for the "****ty casual trash " coming out, but aren't actually buying the titles, then aren't they in fact being picky?
Or is it maybe because the industry is treating them like second-rate customers, while in reality they treat their funds as first-rate dollars.
Oh, and could you please lose the elite attitude. It's preventing me from even considering the validity of your arguments.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on March 27, 2010, 02:14:42 AM
News flash the so called "Hardcore" gamer tends to hover around the familiar too and "creatively" bankrupt games as well.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: broodwars on March 27, 2010, 02:22:36 AM
I thought you said casuals weren't picky, just ignorant. Well if they're responsible for the "****ty casual trash " coming out, but aren't actually buying the titles, then aren't they in fact being picky?
Or is it maybe because the industry is treating them like second-rate customers, while in reality they treat their funds as first-rate dollars.
They are ignorant, but ignorant by choice. Sales seem to indicate they find a couple games over a long period of time that they like, and they pretty much stick to them and don't bother looking into anything else. They're responsible for the casual craze by means of buying the Wii in mass droves, and buying particular casual or (at best) middle-of-the-road software in large numbers.
If the industry is treating them like "second-rate customers", it is because this casual audience has shown no initiative for developing their interests beyond their narrow niche of family/party games. Of course, it doesn't help when even Nintendo, in its continuing quest to make games for "everyone", fails to ratchet up the level of complexity in their games so the casuals become increasingly familiar with more complicated gaming conventions and systems. We get great core or middle-of-the-road titles that (IMO) the casuals ignore simply because the industry's done a piss-poor job of making them ready for them (not to mention letting them know the games exist). Combine an audience that is too skittish to evolve and a market that's too skittish to help them evolve, and you have the State of the Wii right now: underachieving in every possible way except for hardware sales. Just my opinion, of course.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: broodwars on March 27, 2010, 02:26:31 AM
News flash the so called "Hardcore" gamer tends to hover around the familiar too and "creatively" bankrupt games as well.
Here's the thing, though: for all the Gears of Wars; Call of Duties; and God of Wars we see in the core market, we also see Heavy Rains; Last Guardians; and Bioshocks. There's an audience that will support both the familiar and the new, something I see no hope for in this new generation of gamers. If I should be expected to learn to enjoy stuff like Boom Blox or whatnot (which I have to some extent), they should be expected to learn to enjoy stuff like Bioshock or Final Fantasy. It's a melting pot of interests the gaming industry's benefited from for decades now that I just haven't seen the casuals wanting to be part of.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: Ymeegod on March 27, 2010, 02:35:55 AM
Sigh, we aren't talking about what he/she likes but what sells and what's killing the industry. If you read the article it sounds like any other rantings from a fanboy. How the hardcore gamers are killing the gaming because they are buying "halo clones" and how the casuals are the ones that are saving gaming because they are buying "fresh" titles. That's his point number 1 which isn't the case because games like HL's Portal was a new concept and it was the hardcore games buying it up. Or look more recent titles like Heavy Rain. You don't need motion controls to make something fresh.
Reminds of me what reality shows did to TV. Yeah there's a market for them but what about those of us that loved ole school shows?
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on March 27, 2010, 02:39:33 AM
Sigh, we aren't talking about what he/she likes but what sells and what's killing the industry. If you read the article it sounds like any other rantings from a fanboy. How the hardcore gamers are killing the gaming because they are buying "halo clones" and how the casuals are the ones that are saving gaming because they are buying "fresh" titles. That's his point number 1 which isn't the case because games like HL's Portal was a new concept and it was the hardcore games buying it up. Or look more recent titles like Heavy Rain. You don't need motion controls to make something fresh.
Reminds of me what reality shows did to TV. Yeah there's a market for them but what about those of us that loved ole school shows?
Wii Sports, and Wii Fit were new concepts too. There are always exceptions to the rule. Get over yourselves, hardcore gamers can be just as, if not more exclusive to the familiar then anyone else. Just look at the top 10 lists each month, and tell me how many "fresh concepts" are on there for the "hardcore" gamer. Let's look at the best selling "hardcore" game last year, was it a fresh concept? Oh wait it was CoD:WaW2.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: Guitar Smasher on March 27, 2010, 02:47:08 AM
broodwars:
Why should people be expected to learn to enjoy things?
The point isn't for the casuals to evolve into hardcore gamers, it's get them to keep buying video games. If they weren't interested in Halo last gen, they aren't going to be interested in it now. It's not a learning process where you have to go through baby steps to begin. It's just a difference in values.
You mention that sales indicate that casuals only find a couple of games they like, which they stick with instead of continually stocking their library (and this is a stretch given the number of million sellers). Well I say that this indicates that they're not being presented with games that they're interested in buying. Imagine a new reader, who's just read his first book. He's not thinking "well that book was good, but that's the only book I'm going to read". He's going to hope that more books that interest him become available. But if nobody writes these books, then of course he's going to stop reading.
So when you talk about the state of the Wii, don't blame the casuals. There's plenty of room for games that interest them as well as games that interest the hardcores. The responsibility rests with the industry, which has failed to identify what interests each segment.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: broodwars on March 27, 2010, 03:14:26 AM
Why should people be expected to learn to enjoy things?
You know what? You're right. Why should people be expected to learn to broaden their horizons and enjoy new experiences, because it's not like that's the Wii's mission statement (or a common argument of Wii loyalists) or anything. It's not like doing so inevitably makes gaming better overall through an integration of new perspectives and ideas.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: KDR_11k on March 27, 2010, 03:16:04 AM
I'm sorry, but if they didn't ignore the gaming industry in general we wouldn't hear all these stories of Wii owners who are satisfied with only Wii Sports/Fit
I don't think I've ever actually heard such a story that wasn't just pure conjecture by a hardcore gamer based on the term "casual".
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: Guitar Smasher on March 27, 2010, 03:22:00 AM
Why should people be expected to learn to enjoy things?
You know what? You're right. Why should people be expected to learn to broaden their horizons and enjoy new experiences, because it's not like that's the Wii's mission statement (or a common argument of Wii loyalists) or anything. It's not like doing so inevitably makes gaming better overall through an integration of new perspectives and ideas. Oh wait, YES IT ****ING DOES!
WiiSports, WiiFit, etc... There's your broadened horizons.
You're just confusing your values with what you desire the casuals to evolve into.
And stop with the swearing, it's not persuasive, it's juvenile.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: Mop it up on March 27, 2010, 03:22:29 AM
Why should people be expected to learn to enjoy things?
You know what? You're right. Why should people be expected to learn to broaden their horizons and enjoy new experiences, because it's not like that's the Wii's mission statement (or a common argument of Wii loyalists) or anything. It's not like doing so inevitably makes gaming better overall through an integration of new perspectives and ideas. Oh wait, YES IT ****ING DOES!
WiiSports, WiiFit, etc... There's your broadened horizons.
You're just confusing your values with what you desire the casuals to evolve into.
And stop with the swearing, it's not persuasive, it's juvenile.
Actually, I removed the swearing shortly after the original posting, in light of preferring a more consistent sarcastic tone. Pity apparently my editing wasn't as fast as your replying. -_-'
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: Ymeegod on March 27, 2010, 03:53:06 AM
"I am not hardcore. Please do not lump me in with hardcore."
You're on a Nintendo fansite talking about video games that you seem to know about yet that doesn't make you hardcore? Hate to break it to you but there's only three types, there's hardcore, casuals, and lastly non-gamer. You have to be one of the three.
You're hardcore, there no two ways about it. Your login on this site would be enough proof of that.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: Mop it up on March 27, 2010, 04:17:44 AM
So just because someone chats on a forum and can remember games they've played, that makes them hardcore?
There are more than just the two extremes of gamers, "hardcore" and "casual" (I honestly don't see a difference between "casual" and "non-gamer"). There's a nice big grey area of people who don't fit either descriptor, but it's just easier for people to separate them into two vaguely-defined groups.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: Ymeegod on March 27, 2010, 04:34:16 AM
Being informed is one way to define a hardcore gamer vrs a casual gamer who simply buys on impluses. Non-gamer are parents or anyone else who buys games they would never use. Some people state that hardcore gamers also play complex games vrs simple games. For example Metroid Prime series would be considered hardcore and I would state that Zelda would be as well.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: BeautifulShy on March 27, 2010, 04:38:43 AM
I bet this is going to turn into a definition wars topic now.
I just have this to say. The Wii has been out going on its 4th year. Since the new gamers have had a Wii since it was launched that means that they have been gaming for 4 years. I want you Broodwars and Yemmgod to think about your first console and after playing and enjoying it for 4 years would you of labeled yourself casual? Think about that before you label people things.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: Mop it up on March 27, 2010, 04:42:33 AM
I don't know mate, people seem to have different definitions of "hardcore" and "casual" so I don't really buy into any of that. If I fit your definition then there isn't anything I can do about that, but I don't consider myself hardcore or pretend to be hardcore.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on March 27, 2010, 04:47:52 AM
For one everyone on the forum is considered hardcore--we do research on our games.
I am not hardcore. Please do not lump me in with hardcore.
At least hardcore how the industry likes to define it. The so called "well informed" gamer who thinks their opinion is more sound then a casual gamer is what I consider a hardcore gamer. The ones who buy 50 bazillion copies of GTAIV because the series is the roxors, and it is hyped to the moon. Get over yourselves, seriously, you are no better then a casual gamer in regards to what you buy or don't buy as a whole. Just look at the best selling "hardcore" games each year, you seldom see anything that isn't a sequel or a knock off of a popular "hardcore" genre.
The mainstream so, called, hardcore gamer tends to revolt me with their attitude (Usually in regards to casual gamers) so I would much appreciate not to be included with them especially since I have little time to devote to gaming. So I limit my purchases to games I truly want, and guess what was the last game I bought? Endless Ocean 2! I know, blasphemy.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: Ymeegod on March 27, 2010, 05:25:14 AM
Maxi? It still doesn't change what I stated about hardcore gamers? At one point of time we were all casual gamers but yeah if he/she has been playing for 4 years and begins to read reviews/previews then that wouldn't make them a casual gamer anymore. I really wouldn't consider my nephew a hardcore gamer simply because he plays alot and been gaming for three years. He's still green but at least he knows a few good games vrs the crap that everyone else buys him--Mom bought him Dora Dora for crying out loud.
Again, nobody on a game forum can call themselves an casual gamer.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: KDR_11k on March 27, 2010, 06:09:04 AM
You know, I have to wonder why people always ask who still plays Wii Fit. What's the answer if I ask who still plays Batman Arkham Asylum? That got rated as the game of the year by many publications.
Also what's with all the attributes that people tack onto "casual" gamers? Almost none of them are properly sourced, most just conjecture. Do we know if these people are uninformed? If we take that as a part of the definition for "casual" can we really assume that any statistics on "casual" gamers use those same definitions? There's way too much equivocation here.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: broodwars on March 27, 2010, 06:22:37 AM
You know, I have to wonder why people always ask who still plays Wii Fit. What's the answer if I ask who still plays Batman Arkham Asylum? That got rated as the game of the year by many publications.
The difference is that Wii Fit is a utility, not a game. I may not like it, but it has a practical purpose in being used often as part of a personal fitness program. Batman Arkham Asylum is my favorite game from last year by far, and if it wasn't for all the awesome games I'm playing right now (seriously, the last two months have been paradise for an RPG fan like myself. Star Ocean 4, Final Fantasy XIII, and Resonance of Fate alone will probably be enough to satisfy me till probably late May or June) I'd probably be playing it again. Hardcore games don't get played so much after completion because hardcore gamers have other games to play.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: Mop it up on March 27, 2010, 01:26:38 PM
This is what I gather from this topic: Casual gamer: uninformed idiot Hardcore gamer: elitist know-it-all There is no in between, everyone must be one or the other. Okay thanks for clearing that up.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: Guitar Smasher on March 27, 2010, 03:00:30 PM
This is what I gather from this topic: Casual gamer: uninformed idiot Hardcore gamer: elitist know-it-all There is no in between, everyone must be one or the other. Okay thanks for clearing that up.
Actually it's only about 2 users who have that attitude, at least in this topic. I guess they're just louder?
I also agree with you, I don't want to be labeled as a hardcore gamer. Gaming is only a minor interest of mine, and while I do try to stay informed, I don't dedicate much of my time to it. I'm on the path to becoming a lapsed gamer, but thankfully Wii has given me something to keep me interested.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: broodwars on March 27, 2010, 03:06:25 PM
I bet this is going to turn into a definition wars topic now.
I just have this to say. The Wii has been out going on its 4th year. Since the new gamers have had a Wii since it was launched that means that they have been gaming for 4 years. I want you Broodwars and Yemmgod to think about your first console and after playing and enjoying it for 4 years would you of labeled yourself casual? Think about that before you label people things.
1. I haven't labeled anyone here anything, so leave me out of that little definition spat.
2. Well, when I was 9 I definitely considered myself the hardest of the hardcore, and would be as such by any definition you please. I would play my NES games at least 5-6 hours a day, and when I wasn't playing I'd be reading gaming books/magazines (Nintendo Power, EGM); hanging out at my local gaming store; or creating my own pencil & paper games. Actually, getting rid of my NES for my SNES was one of the hardest things I ever had to do as a kid. :'(
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on March 27, 2010, 04:28:42 PM
To KDR,
Great thread.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on March 27, 2010, 06:00:20 PM
Good to know there are retailers that got their "casual" definitions straight, long before Nintendo DS even showed up.
Nice find. That video really picks up at 1:17 with a bit of Gsizzle.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: ThePerm on March 28, 2010, 08:15:49 PM
should be changed to broke gamers are pickier than you
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: Ian Sane on March 29, 2010, 01:31:41 PM
The idea that hardcore gamers just buy the same stuff is laughable coming from any Nintendo fan. Nintendo releases the same stuff again and again and everyone eats it up. NSMB Wii is the biggest Wii game to come out in a while. Almost everyone on this forum loves it, including me. But it is such a play-it-safe conservative cookie cutter title. Next on the horizon is Super Mario Galaxy 2 which sounds like a glorified expansion pack. Nintendo also recycles content like the NPC games. Wii Fit is all innovative but its follow-up is Wii Fit Plus which is such a minor update.
You can crap on GTA and Halo and God of War and all this but it's no fucking different at all. The only reason those games are crapped on is because they're NOT ON THE WII. Aside from the Wii___ series Nintendo has stuck almost entirely to really old franchises. Meanwhile Sony, who gets crapped on, has Uncharted, Resistance and Infamous which are all brand new IP for this generation. And even stuff like God of War, Killzone or Ratchet & Clank debuted only last gen.
Do core gamers just buy the same stuff? Well on the Wii the same stuff is all you can buy! Yeah I've got Mario and Zelda and Metroid but that's what Nintendo provides. That's ALL they provide that isn't aimed at non-gamers. The new IPs aimed at core gamers are actually on the other consoles. Sequels are going to sell and that's no different then the film industry. But that doesn't mean when new stuff is available it is always ignored or is destined to be ignored. More sequels are made because there's less risk and less effort involved.
The reason I don't own any of the Wii series besides Wii Sports isn't because I don't like original games. It's because I've tried these games and they don't interest me because they're too dumbed down. They rely on a novelty that wears off for me in a few hours. They lack substance. They're not worth the money to me. And that's all it is. It isn't even because it's aimed at a different audience. It's because the design used to appeal to that different audience results in games that I find BORING.
And even though there is no right and wrong in regards to liking games, if certain games are popular then that's what types of games will be made. The gaming industry is very much about trends. Something catches on and everyone copies it. So if I don't like the trend, genres I like get ignored and genres I don't like are made in abundance. If the novelty-over-substance of Wii Sports didn't catch on the Wii wouldn't be full of casual-focused trash. Maybe you like that stuff, but understand that if someone doesn't this really sucks. If Nintendo was making games you didn't like on a regular basis would you not be somewhat hostile about that as well?
As for casual gamers being more picky, hey, everyone is susceptible to some form of marketing. Cores, casuals, everybody. Sometimes it can be as simple as making a game that the person knows they'll like.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: KDR_11k on March 29, 2010, 02:06:24 PM
Is stuff like Uncharted or God of War really that much different from previous games if you ignore the new coat of paint? Sure, Nintendo doesn't even change the names on their games but slapping a new name and setting on there doesn't make Quake a new concept.
By the way, NSMBW was fairly risky because everybody thought that 2D retail games don't work on home consoles.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: Ian Sane on March 29, 2010, 02:23:28 PM
Quote
Is stuff like Uncharted or God of War really that much different from previous games if you ignore the new coat of paint? Sure, Nintendo doesn't even change the names on their games but slapping a new name and setting on there doesn't make Quake a new concept.
It's not much different, though there usually is some unique twist on the concept. But it still is fresher and more of an effort than using the same coat of paint. I understand there is only so much one can do. I don't expect any company to bust out a completely unique idea every time. Still if you can take existing genres and give it your own unique twist, well that's still something. That's still better than the guy who is just making sequels.
Most movies are not that original because there are only so many story ideas that really work. In the end what stands out is usually the specifics. But I'm still going to prefer the guy who makes something new over the guy who just makes sequels, adaptations or remakes.
Most "innovative" games just take something that's already there and add something to it. Wii Sports just takes existing sports which has all been done in videogames before and adds motion control.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on March 29, 2010, 02:47:08 PM
"Wii Sports just takes existing sports which has all been done in videogames before and adds motion control."
And after two decades of lazy, couch-ridden testosterone gaming, that's a big fucking deal.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: Luigi Dude on March 29, 2010, 05:26:29 PM
You can crap on GTA and Halo and God of War and all this but it's no ****ing different at all. The only reason those games are crapped on is because they're NOT ON THE WII. Aside from the Wii___ series Nintendo has stuck almost entirely to really old franchises. Meanwhile Sony, who gets crapped on, has Uncharted, Resistance and Infamous which are all brand new IP for this generation. And even stuff like God of War, Killzone or Ratchet & Clank debuted only last gen.
Oh give me a f*cking break. The reason why we crap on GTA and Halo is because these are the games that the Videogame media always praises with each new installment, even though they aren't that different from each other, but at the same time crap on Nintendo for releases sequels that are also similar.
Halo in particular always gets brought up because Halo 2 and 3 came out at the same time as Metroid Prime 2 and 3. In every review of both Halo games, the reviewers would even mention how both games are similar to their predecessors but then say that's a good thing because of how good the last game was. And yet for both Prime games, even though Prime 1 is one of the highest rated games off all time, both games got points docked just for being too similar. Even though if you were to compare all the Metroid Prime games, the difference between each one is much bigger then the difference between all three Halo games.
Do you understand now, it's about fairness. When the majority of the videogame media is nothing more then asshats, is it any wonder why Nintendo message boards like this one, that would contain *gasp* Nintendo fans are going to be annoyed and actually call out their BS. If someone is going to b!tch about Nintendo games for having the same flaws as the oscar winning masterpiece they just gave a 10 and called perfect, these people are hypocrites and they and the games they just praised deserve to be called out for it.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: Ian Sane on March 29, 2010, 06:03:43 PM
Quote
When the majority of the videogame media is nothing more then asshats, is it any wonder why Nintendo message boards like this one, that would contain *gasp* Nintendo fans are going to be annoyed and actually call out their BS.
During the N64 years when Nintendo would release only about three games a year but every single one of them was given GOTY praise no one said a word about the videogame media. Although you occasionally had some really out-there article Nintendo continued to be critical darlings, even though they were unpopular commercially. And the out-there articles were truly exceptional. You had that infamous Paper Mario review and IGN getting hung up on skins for Mario Kart. But overall a Nintendo game came out and it got near unanimous praise aside from the occasional mistep like Yoshi's Story. You can nitpick Metroid Prime 2's 92% to Halo 2's 94% but, really, that's splitting hairs. The fact that they're both in that range indicates that the videogame media thought very favourably of both games.
The attitude that the videogame media is full of crap didn't come about until the Wii was out and critics started taking Nintendo to task for their casual focused titles. Note that Super Mario Galaxy gets the old GOTY Nintendo-love. It's only titles like Wii Music that get weaker scores. I try these games out and I find them shallow and boring. I imagine the media feels that same way. The absolute best Wii games that aren't dumbed down casual affairs still get fantastic reviews. If the media had some anti-Nintendo bias why would they still praise Nintendo's best games?
I go to other forums that are not Nintendo specific and I don't see any accusations of bias against the Wii. I only see it on Nintendo focused sites. I also notice that much of the anti-reviews crowd are the same people that reject the notion that the Wii's third party support is terrible. It suggests to me that this is more about disliking criticism against Nintendo than any legitimate complaint about the videogame media. I think that years of Nintendo being the underappreciated underdog has created an Nintendo vs. the world mentality with a lot of Nintendo fans. There are forumers here who appear to DELIGHT in talented developers going under because of one flop on the PS3. Such-and-such game is critically acclaimed but is not on the Wii and it bombs and there is celebration.
I don't like that. What made me become a fan of Nintendo in the first place is a love of quality games. They made the best games so it was natural to be a Nintendo fan. So to me having any sort of ill feelings towards great games or talented devs is anti-Nintendo. It's the same sort of immature bigotry we would see from Sony and MS fans who refused to give Nintendo any credit for being talented and took pleasure in Nintendo's shortcomings. Some games are going to be overrated and some will be underrated and sometimes Nintendo is going to land on both sides of that fence, just like everyone else. But overall I'd consider the videogame media to be as reliable as we could reasonably expect.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: Mop it up on March 29, 2010, 08:40:29 PM
I think Ian Sane just made the post of the year, one that I will probably find myself quoting.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: Ymeegod on March 31, 2010, 12:51:22 AM
"Hardcore gamer: elitist know-it-all"
That doesn't actually define what a hardcore gamer is, that just a sterotype and not an accurate one at that. There really isn't an grey area, it's like the question "are you in shape". It's either yes or no.
As for Halo scores, you do realize most people rated the game high mostly for MP right? If you were just rating the SP I doubt the Halo 2 or 3 game would even get an 8. Similar to CoD, the MP is the meat of the game and the reason for higher scores.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: D_Average on March 31, 2010, 01:19:25 AM
As for Halo scores, you do realize most people rated the game high mostly for MP right? If you were just rating the SP I doubt the Halo 2 or 3 game would even get an 8. Similar to CoD, the MP is the meat of the game and the reason for higher scores.
You state this as if MP is inherently of a lesser value than SP.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: Mop it up on March 31, 2010, 01:21:12 AM
Please elaborate. At what point does one stop being "casual" and start being "hardcore"? Everyone seems to have their own opinion of when that point is, thereby making the terms useless and inaccurate.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: NWR_insanolord on March 31, 2010, 01:32:39 AM
Yeah, it's a pretty arbitrary distinction as it is; I don't see why it has to be as absolute as you're trying to make it, though I'm not very fond of the labels in any form.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: Ymeegod on March 31, 2010, 01:48:52 AM
The main point is what you're buying. A casual gamer really doesn't have a clue on what's available so he/she is pretty much happy with just about anything. A hardcore gamer knows what he/she is buying and at least what the game is comparable to others in their fields.
So say there's levels of hardcore which is true enough but once you cross the line there's no going back. It like different levels of "fat". There's what four stages of obesity now but once you hit the first stage you're already in the Not Fit state.
"You state this as if MP is inherently of a lesser value than SP. "
No, I didn't state is that way. The reason for Halo's success is mostly do to it's MP aspect of the game. The SP mode is slighty above average but isn't anything comparable to Metroid Prime single player mode.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: Mop it up on March 31, 2010, 02:14:09 AM
Consumer reviews show your assessment of "casual" gamers to be untrue: most give all of those Wii Sports knock-offs and other drivel low scores. Though your definition is too simple, as the only equation is knowledge and doesn't take into account other factors, such as the types of games one plays, how often they play, etc.
People are either gamers or they're not, that's the yes/no equation. There are many different types of gamers, which goes beyond just two types.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: Ymeegod on March 31, 2010, 02:33:09 AM
? The reason why the give knock-off of WII sports a lower score is because they already played WII Sports? And why did they end up buying/playing an knock off to begin with?
And there's really not a time barrier required to be consider a hardcore gamer neither nor is it mastering controls neither. That's more what you call a die-hard fan but that wouldn't make them exactly hardcore neither.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: Mop it up on March 31, 2010, 02:55:34 AM
Because they liked Wii Sports and they wanted more? And if they were truly happy with anything, they wouldn't dislike the Wii Sports clones.
So a die-hard fan is different than hardcore? This is starting to bore me.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: BeautifulShy on March 31, 2010, 03:04:00 AM
The "Hardcore" and "casual" talk is pointless. Everybody has different interpitations of these words and we basically go around in circles trying to define the words and in the end everybody looks like fools trying to figure out what they mean.
I have an idea. How about this. EVERYBODY IS A GAMER
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: Ymeegod on March 31, 2010, 03:24:01 AM
You miss the point? If they didn't play WII Sports would their view of the knockoff's change? They had to have played the best in order to have a standard to compare it to. "they were truly happy with anything" I never said that but casual gamers are less prickly about them. For example alot of those Knockoff clones score 8/10 from "users" but barely 5/10 from reviewers? Why, because reviwers played more of the genre and have a better grasp of what's available.
Die-hard fan is just that, my friend Will for example. He's a diehard Madden fan but outside of that one game he's a casual gamer. He shouldn't be considered hardcore just because he's logged 1000's of hours or mastering all the moves in one game. He couldn't tell you the difference between a Spyro game and a Mario one.
Hardcore gamers tend to know what the standards are, you don't have to play ever genre neither but you should at least know what the top games are in those genres.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: Mop it up on March 31, 2010, 03:31:41 AM
Well, I guess those are your standards and you're sticking to them. Good for you.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: Ian Sane on March 31, 2010, 12:26:05 PM
I think the definition of "hardcore" or "casual" is not that hard to determine. It's intentionally made vague to discourage discussion. "Well how to do you define something as casual?" is a way to dodge the issue. Or another tactic is to take an old game that everyone likes and retroactively declare it as casual or as a non-game to suggest that nothing has changed and Nintendo hasn't changed. But then the opposite occurs as well where someone just slaps the casual or non-game label on any game they don't like.
To me a game becomes casual when it is intentionally simplified for the purpose of attracting an audience that does not normally play videogames and does not have any specific interest in following the latest news regarding videogames. Or if you prefer, a game is "core" if those that are interested enough in games to follow games on the internet or read gaming magazines (or used to when mags were the main source of news) would be interested in it. To me it's no different than how a guitar magazine isn't going to bother covering guitars sold at Wal-Mart or Best Buy. You don't need to know much about guitars to know that that's a "casual" guitar.
This became an issue once Nintendo started talking about casuals. Casual games existed before but it was like Pop Cap games stuff. But Nintendo was one of the "real" videogame companies and that's why this has been such an hot topic. No one gives a **** about some nothing company making Wal-Mart guitars but Gibson or Fender starts talking about that and that changes things.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: that Baby guy on March 31, 2010, 04:00:42 PM
My 2 cents: Big games are overrated because more often than not, you have to sift through hours of crap to get to the good stuff, a la FFXIII. There's a decent game in there somewhere, but for several hours, you'll just be watching cutscenes and hitting the X-button.
Why would a "casual" gamer wait through that type of thing, when Wii Sports Resort offers instant combat with realistic sword options that are easy to learn, but still pretty difficult to master?
So, if developers stop making gamers have to invest hours to get to the creamy nougat of a game, perhaps casual gamers would like "hardcore" games a bit more. There's more to it, but basically, "hardcore" gamers will wade through terrible or dull parts of games, while more casual fans just become disenfranchised with the game if any part feels like a waste of time.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: Urkel on March 31, 2010, 05:38:06 PM
Going back to what the article actually said, it mentions how hype is very important to hardcore game sales, which I think is really the main point.
If "hardcore" gamers are as savvy as some would like to believe, then why do publishers spend so much advertising and hyping them up? 200 million dollars was spent on Modern Warfare 2's advertising campaign, and $2.5 million spent on Dante's Inferno for a Superbowl ad. "Hardcore" games are advertised nonstop on Adult Swim and Comedy Central.
Going by Ian's definition, these are all "hardcore"/"core" games, and the people interested in these games are the type to read gaming websites. So isn't it a waste to spend so much advertising these games? After all, these gamers will read reviews (which surely are never paid for) to know if a game is good or not.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: Ian Sane on March 31, 2010, 05:53:03 PM
Quote
My 2 cents: Big games are overrated because more often than not, you have to sift through hours of crap to get to the good stuff, a la FFXIII. There's a decent game in there somewhere, but for several hours, you'll just be watching cutscenes and hitting the X-button.
I partially agree with this. I wouldn't say these games are necessarily overrated but some games have real pacing problems. I don't mind cutscenes but they've got to be GOOD. I have to find watching the cutscenes to be entertaining and that also means the story has to be half-decent as well. I see the whole concept as something suitable for some games but is unfortunately used for all.
It seems what we need a punk movement for games. Right now we're like in the game equivalent of progressive rock where everything has become a little too pretentious and bloated. There was a time where practically all games just dumped you in the gameplay and away you go. Not everything should be like that but those types of games became rare, which is stupid, really.
My problem with non-games is that they cut the filler but it's not like you get the same experience as a core game with all the cutscenes skipped. You get something considerably more simplified. What I'm looking for is more like NSMB Wii in that it's a return to the days where with a Mario game you started it up and jumped right into a level. The gameplay retains the same complexity as a bloated game would. When I suggest "punk games" I mean something straightforward but without compromising the gameplay.
Final Fantasy XIII does it all wrong. It simplifies the gameplay but keeps the filler. The towns and sidequests and nonlinear design was the fucking gameplay. It's force feeding the player an embarassing story that needed to be scaled back.
I see two extremes that both suck. On the casual side we see games the strip out challenge, depth and complexity to attract the mainstream and on the core side we see games that are so wrapped up in the narrative and presentation that they become more linear and give the player less control and make the player watch the coolest parts of the game instead of playing them. We need something in between.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: ThePerm on March 31, 2010, 06:31:27 PM
a punk game movement
you mean Wario Ware?
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: that Baby guy on March 31, 2010, 07:42:19 PM
My 2 cents: Big games are overrated because more often than not, you have to sift through hours of crap to get to the good stuff, a la FFXIII. There's a decent game in there somewhere, but for several hours, you'll just be watching cutscenes and hitting the X-button.
I partially agree with this. I wouldn't say these games are necessarily overrated but some games have real pacing problems. I don't mind cutscenes but they've got to be GOOD. I have to find watching the cutscenes to be entertaining and that also means the story has to be half-decent as well. I see the whole concept as something suitable for some games but is unfortunately used for all.
It seems what we need a punk movement for games. Right now we're like in the game equivalent of progressive rock where everything has become a little too pretentious and bloated. There was a time where practically all games just dumped you in the gameplay and away you go. Not everything should be like that but those types of games became rare, which is stupid, really.
My problem with non-games is that they cut the filler but it's not like you get the same experience as a core game with all the cutscenes skipped. You get something considerably more simplified. What I'm looking for is more like NSMB Wii in that it's a return to the days where with a Mario game you started it up and jumped right into a level. The gameplay retains the same complexity as a bloated game would. When I suggest "punk games" I mean something straightforward but without compromising the gameplay.
Final Fantasy XIII does it all wrong. It simplifies the gameplay but keeps the filler. The towns and sidequests and nonlinear design was the fucking gameplay. It's force feeding the player an embarassing story that needed to be scaled back.
I see two extremes that both suck. On the casual side we see games the strip out challenge, depth and complexity to attract the mainstream and on the core side we see games that are so wrapped up in the narrative and presentation that they become more linear and give the player less control and make the player watch the coolest parts of the game instead of playing them. We need something in between.
I'm not going to argue much on FFXIII specifically, since before I pass a complete judgement on it, I want to get to the part of the game that's relevant to the big picture, and it's too far in for me to be there yet.
Rather, I'm going to say that we all know the issue with "casual" games is that many don't have the polish needed to become a good game. Still, that's not what the argument is about, but rather why casual gamers are more picky than hardcore ones. It's not about casual games versus hardcore ones, but rather casual gamers vs. hardcore gamers, in the aspect of how they discriminate in their purchase decisions.
At this point, I'd be willing to say this: Games casual gamers like are social. They're titles that either other people can sit down and watch them play and enjoy, or titles they can play with or against other people. Something like Uncharted 2, while I've never played it, seems to be marketed with this aspect in mind. Remember the commercials with the gamer talking about how his girlfriend thought it was a movie? Nintendo's response is to involve the second person, and even let them become a "back-seat" gamer, with Super Mario Galaxy and Sin and Punishment 2 both having Wii-pointer shooting controls, but no on-screen avatar to physically represent the player. I'm not going all out, and I'm not mentioning everything partly because that would take some time, and partly because it's something I've been toying around with writing an article or a series of articles on PixlBit about, but that's one basic thing successful "core" games have done to make previously single-player titles more social.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: Guitar Smasher on March 31, 2010, 10:33:53 PM
I partially agree with this. I wouldn't say these games are necessarily overrated but some games have real pacing problems. I don't mind cutscenes but they've got to be GOOD. I have to find watching the cutscenes to be entertaining and that also means the story has to be half-decent as well. I see the whole concept as something suitable for some games but is unfortunately used for all.
It seems what we need a punk movement for games. Right now we're like in the game equivalent of progressive rock where everything has become a little too pretentious and bloated. There was a time where practically all games just dumped you in the gameplay and away you go. Not everything should be like that but those types of games became rare, which is stupid, really.
My problem with non-games is that they cut the filler but it's not like you get the same experience as a core game with all the cutscenes skipped. You get something considerably more simplified. What I'm looking for is more like NSMB Wii in that it's a return to the days where with a Mario game you started it up and jumped right into a level. The gameplay retains the same complexity as a bloated game would. When I suggest "punk games" I mean something straightforward but without compromising the gameplay.
Final Fantasy XIII does it all wrong. It simplifies the gameplay but keeps the filler. The towns and sidequests and nonlinear design was the ****ing gameplay. It's force feeding the player an embarassing story that needed to be scaled back.
I see two extremes that both suck. On the casual side we see games the strip out challenge, depth and complexity to attract the mainstream and on the core side we see games that are so wrapped up in the narrative and presentation that they become more linear and give the player less control and make the player watch the coolest parts of the game instead of playing them. We need something in between.
So we need arcade-style games? I completely agree.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: Ymeegod on April 02, 2010, 01:54:32 AM
Doesn't that depend on the gamer? Some gamers love stories and others love gameplay. Take Mass Effect 2 for example, getting great reviews but the core gameplay is a pretty bland shooter--it's the story and characters that drive the game. It's to bad that the developers "dumb" downed ME2 by getting rid of much of the RPG elements like LOOT/Weapons/armor.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: ThePerm on April 07, 2010, 06:53:55 PM
oh and on the gaming media, the gaming media during the n64 days consisted of print magazines, and a little site called IGN. It was nowhere near the saturation it was today. Everything else was little fan sites, and the mags net version of catch-up. Darwin theory kicked in and we have the sharks of game media we have today.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: noname2200 on April 08, 2010, 05:24:48 PM
Doesn't that depend on the gamer? Some gamers love stories and others love gameplay. Take Mass Effect 2 for example, getting great reviews but the core gameplay is a pretty bland shooter--it's the story and characters that drive the game. It's to bad that the developers "dumb" downed ME2 by getting rid of much of the RPG elements like LOOT/Weapons/armor.
You're correct, but I think the assertion is more "if you want to get the majority of people to play the game, cut the fluff."* Most folks don't care for extensive story in their videogames, and while there's a niche of millions of gamers who do, that group pales in comparison to the tens/hundreds of millions who are turned off by the stuff.
*I don't think that's completely ian sane's point, but we'll go with that for now.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: Ian Sane on April 08, 2010, 06:52:50 PM
Quote
I don't think that's completely ian sane's point, but we'll go with that for now.
I'm just noticing that when you crap on casual games the defenders are quick to point out the excess and the superficial elements of core games. And I'm thinking "well that isn't what I like about those games." It seems that for some, casual games are embraced as an alternative to overdone "epic" core games. To me that's a shitty alternative so maybe we need something else. The idea of the Wii being a back-to-basics approach from Nintendo and comparisons to the NES get brought up a lot. And I look at that and think "why are we going all the way back to the NES?" It seems extreme to me. If there was some point where things went off the rails and we needed to take a step back and get back on track I figure it was much more recent than the NES.
If you're irritated by too many cutscenes and dumb pretenious storylines and exploitation you don't have to strip games down to Wii Sports to avoid that stuff. To me that's like lobbing your legs off to deal with an in-grown toenail.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: KDR_11k on April 09, 2010, 02:49:34 AM
Because the NES was Nintendo's best performing system.Much of gaming's growth is actually a result of population growth, the NES had the most universal appeal to people.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: SixthAngel on April 22, 2010, 01:03:12 PM
I think this is the right thread to put this in.
Why do the people on the internet (hardcore) who talk about games pick up the corporate speak so quickly. Words that belong in some company's corporate memo are paraded around internet forums.
The worst one is DLC or just as badwhen people use the word content when talking about something they want to get. Downloadable content is such a corporate word. We used to call them expansion packs or just expansions for small things. For a single thing like a map people would use the word map, not "content." I guess when you sell horse armor the word expansion makes it sound like your getting ripped off so the companies started saying "content." A word that could mean, and does, mean whatever they want. Internet gamers lapped that **** up and use DLC and content instead of the words traditionally used and actually explain things better.
The other big use I see on the internet now is the word IP and not just when talking about the business side. Instead of saying "what is your favorite new series?" it becomes "what is your favorite new ip?" This is another word that we have perfectly good words that take its place and also are more specific. Just because Activision uses the word IP in its memos and press releases doesn't mean we should.
HD is now used all the time when talking about video games and even internet video and entered videogame use far before a lot of other places used it. High rez has been used for ages when talking about video games. I understand when talking about a system connected to a tv but why do you call the new pc game video hd? For years and years your website had a high resolution setting, just like my computer monitor says. Why jump onto this name bandwagon so early?
As companies began using hardcore, core, casual, nongamer etc. hardcore gamers started to use all of these words too despite the lack of real meaning. Hell, Nintendo's marketing towards new people caused massive uproars (ignoring the hardcore) at a time when they were making and releasing more or their traditional games than they did on the gamecube. It seems to me that for whatever reason the "hardcore" gamer is incredibly susceptible to advertising and corporate speak.
Say what you will about casual gamers but at least they aren't watching HD videos on their high res monitor about that hardcore new IP they are interested in while hoping there is some DLC released for it.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: broodwars on April 22, 2010, 01:13:08 PM
Regarding DLC; IP; and HD, it's just easy to remember and refer to those as acronyms. Besides, with the exception of IP those are all terms actually used in-game and in your console's settings so it makes sense to refer to them that way. PC games are just refered to that way because more people play console games now than PC (with the exception of WoW, of course), so console terminology tends to bleed over into them.
As for the remaining words (hardcore, casual, etc.), as far as I know companies didn't pick up on using them until the gamers themselves started using them.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: Guitar Smasher on April 22, 2010, 02:23:04 PM
I'm pretty sure I heard Sony and Microsoft using "hardcore/casual" as a reaction to Wii/DS before gamers did, although I wouldn't be able to find historical evidence of it.
Also, I think the acceptance of new vernacular is influenced by the media, who are the ones who continually repeat it.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on April 22, 2010, 02:32:36 PM
The worst one is DLC or just as badwhen people use the word content when talking about something they want to get. Downloadable content is such a corporate word. We used to call them expansion packs or just expansions for small things. For a single thing like a map people would use the word map, not "content." I guess when you sell horse armor the word expansion makes it sound like your getting ripped off so the companies started saying "content." A word that could mean, and does, mean whatever they want. Internet gamers lapped that **** up and use DLC and content instead of the words traditionally used and actually explain things better.
I find it hard to call something an expansion if there's no retail release, personally, so what traditional word would work for horse armor? A charitable word, I mean. ;) We needed a word for the little stuff like that, and once it was established in the gaming vernacular, it simply displaced the more specific terms. This is ordinary language development, not a sign of sheep-like tendencies.
Quote
The other big use I see on the internet now is the word IP and not just when talking about the business side. Instead of saying "what is your favorite new series?" it becomes "what is your favorite new ip?" This is another word that we have perfectly good words that take its place and also are more specific. Just because Activision uses the word IP in its memos and press releases doesn't mean we should.
I could be cynical and recall my Slashdot reading days by saying that this is part of a much broader campaign by all big rights-holding companies to confuse the public about copyright, trademark, and patent laws, but instead I'm going to by cynical and point out that people on the Internets are lazy and would rather type "IP" than "franchise." That's a savings of seven (7) letters, enough to type "DLC" twice with room to spare! Incidentally, "franchise" always sounded very corporate to my ears, but I think that's been commonly used at least as far back as the early 90s. It's definitely older than this stupid harcore/casual nonsense. I think "franchise" took off because "series" didn't work anymore once Mario hopped in a kart and Mega Man got all 90s edgy.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: Ian Sane on April 22, 2010, 07:05:31 PM
An important rule in communicating is to make sure you're understood by your audience. So I'm going to use terms that everyone else uses in order for us to all know what the hell we're all talking about.
DLC to me is a very literal definition. It means something I can download for the game. It's nice to have a generic word to describe it all since it could mean levels, costumes, etc. When I write "HD" I usualy mean it literally as "support for HDTVs" but I also use it as a catch-all to group the PS3 and Xbox 360 together ("HD consoles").
My brother gets on my ass for saying "shmup" because he thinks that's a stupid term. He calls a game like Contra a "shooter" and a game like Gradius a "jet game". My brothers are the only two people in the universe that use the term "jet game". I call it a "shmup" because that's a term that everyone knows. Unlike my brother I'm making an effort to communicate, instead of just avoiding words I don't like and confusing everyone.
Though I very much see gamers as an internet community so the lingo is going to spread throughout it. The gaming media is largely part of that community. I don't feel a big seperation between the IGN staff or the NWR staff or just us forumers. Gaming isn't big enough to really have a seperation between the media and the fans. I've always seen them as equals.
What I don't like is when PR speak is shot back out at me from fanboys. Back in the N64 days it wasn't uncommon to hear a Nintendo fan use the "quality over quantity" retort. That pissed me off because all that mantra was was a PR answer to dodge the question about the lack of games on the N64. That's it. It's no mantra, no philosophy, just a PR man being full of ****. So using it as a defense made you sound like a corporate tool. You see that on every game forum - fanboys towing the company line as if they're on the payroll. That drives me nuts. There's nothing wrong with being a fan, but that doesn't make you that company's shill. You should be able to tell what's real and what's PR speak. The frustration comes when you call a company out on something and the response from other gamers is the same response the company gives.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: KDR_11k on April 23, 2010, 11:22:17 AM
I see Contra as a run and gun/action-platformer, shoot 'em ups involve no gravity.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: D_Average on April 23, 2010, 11:52:13 PM
What I don't like is when PR speak is shot back out at me from fanboys. Back in the N64 days it wasn't uncommon to hear a Nintendo fan use the "quality over quantity" retort.
Oh man, totally forgot about that! I was one of them, used to say that all the time. Then I grew up.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: broodwars on April 24, 2010, 12:03:12 AM
What I don't like is when PR speak is shot back out at me from fanboys. Back in the N64 days it wasn't uncommon to hear a Nintendo fan use the "quality over quantity" retort.
Oh man, totally forgot about that! I was one of them, used to say that all the time. Then I grew up.
You "grew up" and came to believe that large amounts of crap or mediocrity outweigh fewer amounts of quality titles? Ohh....kay.... :Q
That does touch upon probably the thing that annoys me the most about Nintendo fans this generation: all throughout the N64 and GameCube we all came together under the banner that sales didn't matter so much so long as we got great games (and we did get great games). Now that Nintendo's the top dog again, suddenly if you have a problem with titles like Wii Music; Carnival Games; etc. selling well, you "just don't get it." Now suddenly sales are all that matters, no matter what sells. I expect this attitude will flip-flop once again once Nintendo inevitably is no longer the top dog again (as is the way of business, with companies rising and falling over time).
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: ThePerm on April 24, 2010, 01:13:19 AM
because sales carry over from generation to generation, we needed NES sales so that we can get SNES and N64 again :P
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: KDR_11k on April 24, 2010, 03:49:25 AM
You "grew up" and came to believe that large amounts of crap or mediocrity outweigh fewer amounts of quality titles? Ohh....kay.... :Q
He grew up to realize that quality and quantity aren't mutually exclusive.
Yes, that and the fact that my friends who bought the PSone actually did have great games to play that weren't on the N64. I remember scoffing at them for playing games like Tomb Raider, Resident Evil, Final Fantasy 7, etc, and always exaggerating the games flaws to validate my decision to stay emotionally and financially committed to Nintendo, no matter what.
Then, I saw them playing Parappa the Rappa, and I said "Ah, f##K it, give me the controller!" And I played that game from start to finish in one sitting and absolutely loved it. That was the day my fanboism died. :cool;
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: Mop it up on April 24, 2010, 04:06:41 PM
I never really got too caught up with that fanatical stuff. We had both a Nintendo 64 and PlayStation, so I didn't really have much reason to justify owning just one of them. Though I did have to explain why I preferred the games on the N64. I never felt the Nintendo 64 had a lack of games, but this is because I was just a kid and could afford few games, and also that the ones available are all games I like. It was only when I started to look at things more objectively that I acknowledged the N64 had a small library.
Before that I had an NES and Genesis. I haven't had as much experience with other systems as I would have liked, but I've had enough to know Nintendo is my favourite.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: SixthAngel on April 25, 2010, 10:20:40 AM
At least we can all agree that Sega blew blasted away the snes with their high speed graphics. :P:
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: Mop it up on April 25, 2010, 10:42:03 PM
What a crock. SNES was tecnically superior. Deal with it.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: broodwars on April 25, 2010, 10:47:38 PM
What a crock. SNES was tecnically superior. Deal with it.
Indeed, especially in the audio department (where it wasn't even close). Better library by far as well.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: SixthAngel on April 26, 2010, 02:03:29 AM
I was being sarcastic since people were getting into an n64 ps tagline fight. I used the words high speed graphics which have no meaning and I thought the :P: made it pretty obvious.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: KDR_11k on April 26, 2010, 02:20:51 AM
The Mega Drive could push more sprites simultaneously (hence Vectorman), the SNES had more colors onscreen and the famous better sound chip.
Title: Re: Casual gamers are more picky than you
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on April 26, 2010, 02:59:45 AM
They could've at least figured out how to use multiple sprites to create the impression of a good quality big sprite.
