Also known as Everyone else vs. Nintendo. The question is which one is better for the gaming community? And while we're at it, which one is better for the economy of gaming? You can't argue that getting more people involved in gaming is anything else but a good thing. But It can be argued that it could, in the long run, hurt the everyday hardcore gamer. Here are some sales figures for 2009: Top-Selling Hardware - 2009 DS: 11,185,400 Wii: 9,594,000 Xbox 360: 4,770,700 PS3: 4,334,500 PSP: 2,495,900 PS2: 1,799,900 2009 Console and Portable Game Software 1) Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 (360) - Activision 2) Wii Sports Resort (Wii) - Nintendo 3) New Super Mario Bros. Wii (Wii) - Nintendo 4) Wii Fit with Balance Board (Wii) - Nintendo 5) Wii Fit Plus (Wii) - Nintendo 6) Mario Kart Wii (Wii) - Nintendo 7) Wii Play with Wii Remote (Wii) - Nintendo 8) Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 (PS3) - Activision 9) Halo 3: ODST (360) - Microsoft 10) Pokemon Platinum (DS) - Nintendo It's abundantly clear that Nintendo is dominating the Console and Software sales around the world, but at what cost? If you are like me you have very fond memories of playing Super Mario Bros., Zelda and Metroid as a child. Strangely, Nintendo still holds the licenses for these great franchises but they do almost nothing with them. Instead they focus most of their resources in developing gimmicky waggle remotes and exercise balance boards. And the public eats them up, and by public I mean Soccer moms and old ladies. This is where it hurts people like you and I the most. We don't get a new awesome advanced Nintendo system to play awesome games on, we get a Gamecube in a new package with a gimmicky remote. We don't get the latest, greatest Zelda game in stunning 1080p, we get a jaggy and blocky mess of last gen graphics on our brand new HD tv's. Yeah, yeah I know, gameplay should always come first. But have you played a Wii game lately? There are a few that actually take advantage of the waggle remote and implement it nicely. Metroid Trilogy is a very notable example of what I am talking about. But then you have a sea of crappy party games and exercise simulators. The system effectively targets the casual gamer and exiles the hardcore gamer. I have a Wii. After buying the Wii, a spare remote, and a couple games I was down 400 dollars. 4 months later I have a 400 dollar paperweight. I bought it primarily for my girlfriend (casual gamer) and now she doesn't even play it. So the main problem I see happening in the future is the following: Game companies will attempt to follow suit (Project Natal anybody?) and valuable resources that could be used to improve future hardware and gaming services could go by the wayside. More and more software developers could devote more and more of their resources to developing games for soccer moms and less and less resources of developing games for you and me. Now, I 'm not saying this is a definite future scenario but it is a definite possibility. The gaming industry as a whole saw an 8% loss this past fiscal year and some developers may be looking for a way to make up for these losses, and what better way than to follow suit and target more casual gamers. And if that happens you can say goodbye to Call of Gears 12: Modern Halo Destroyer Deluxe Win Win Home edition 4, coming to your WiiBox3 Fall 2017. Discuss/
I see where your point is going against Wii/Nintendo but casual gaming has been bread and butter for Nintendo all the time. The contrast is creativity. Yes players can compete in this level of XBOX titles and series of COD/Gears games and see who is better at what.... the problem arises when the next game comes out. Unlike Wii play on gaming where it is group playable you often have a real social connection. Lets all be honest we love halo because the social aspect to playing 16 player Multiplier. You can not state that because your a hardcore competitive player that you would play these games with out some competition. I see no point in saying that the wii is no equally competitive but in different light. Score over style... is the biggest draw point of Wii, instead of working a control that fits the player the opposite is called up. It allows for open hold/control of the wiimote. So in turn competitive is how you make it... If players are being casual and social about gaming it would be a better venture of gaming, is this not why we have DDR, Guitar Hero, and Rockband? I think the serious gamer needed a break and score up some points o compare to one another. Further more I agree games should be more casual... I'm tired of seeing ****tards that think they are all that on XBL matchs, it is one thing to do that face to face and laugh about it afterward but leaves a devoid feeling after the match of silence because every one is rushing to the next room. Kinda feels like Lazer tag matches where once there is one person that wins there is no post game chatter and reflecting it was a fun game. Serious gaming encourages less enjoyment of the game... so why is it a game then? Thus I like Nitendos' direction... I love Wii, Wii Fit, and even Wii Resort. I can take that to a party and share it unlike COD where I can not share my screen let alone my attention. Casual>Hardcore gamer... -love Gopher
Everyone bought the wii because you waggle thing, screen waggles thing, it's like magic, everyone gets one for their six year old for Christmas. Turns out, even the six year old prefers chainsawing locust to jumping on turtles. Basically, the family entertainment sold better because of the concept. If you look at how much what has been played more, the 360 and PS3 would come out soo far ahead. This is why this E3 have introduced Natal and the Motion controllers, to appeal to the innocent family market. Truth is, Natal will just be eyetoy over-hyped. Motion thangs will be like wii plus, but a with better games and apps. Myself, I like to think of myself as a casual gamer. I still play halo customs with friends loads, and all sorts of arcade games.. But I don't get kicks out of Mario regurgitations and games aimed at 4 year olds. For me, out of the two options in the title, hardcore wins hands down in my opinion. But Family Friendly Gaming will rope in more money, whether we like it or not.
To be completely honest, I've never seen it as Casual and/or hardcore. It's always been the casual games, the competitive games and the 'games'. Taking a quick look at the list, only two games are there that I would consider competitive. Which as far as I can think, has always been the case. There are 3 casuals and the rest are those 'games'. And really, why has it become a competition between these game audiences? Gaming needs new blood by bringing out those 'games' and then those that would otherwise never think of picking up a game would then find out that they might like them and move onto casual games. If they really like them, they'd go competitive, though with the few competitive games out there it is unlikely. Really, gaming needs new blood more then ever as we have online gaming now. Let the casuals come on in. There's more then enough room around here to share.
Halo and COD are as casual as they come. Just because something has blood and guns in it doesn't make it hardcore. Play Dwarf Fortress if you want hardcore.
Doesn't price play a factor in sales? Of course it does. A lot of people purchased the Wii because it was cheaper than both the 360 and PS3. Also, it still is. And is this debate based solely upon the marketing behind game consoles, because I'd like to see opinions on other aspects of the consoles, such as majority user-base, time spent playing, health effects, etc.