Mainstream Audience 'Noticing' Games Again

In an interview with the San Jose Mercury News, Shigeru Miyamoto makes it plain that he's extremely pleased with the way the Wii has changed the face of gaming. He says that he gets the feeling that 'because of the Wii, people ... are finally taking notice of videogames again.' The interview goes on to discuss some ways in which Miyamoto hopes to capitalize on that 'notice', including the possibility of introducing new Nintendo characters sometime next year: "For characters, we came up with the concept of the Miis and that allows people to come up with their own characters. Maybe next year sometime, we may have new characters in the same way we came up with Pikmin when we introduced the GameCube."

Summary misses the best part

[Drogo007]

Summary takes one small point from interview and excludes the rest of the interview, most of which was much more interesting. Particularly the questions about the lack of new characters/franchises in the launch lineup and Miyamoto's response.

I think the main point of the article (and thus the summary headline) should've been "Nintendo still focused on fun" - Miyamoto stressed that they worry about making the games fun before focusing on a target market - because as every runaway success in the videogame industry has shown:

If it's fun and interesting, it's going to transcend the boundaries of any target market (e.g. GTA, Sims, Wii)

"Mainstream" vs. "Hardcore" categories.

[Lemmy Caution]

The first stage of cinema was as a coin-operated novelty, with nickelodeons and zoetropes accompanying carnivals. It was associated with seediness and the demimonde, although a group of researchers (Melies, Lumiere, etc.) were very excited by its possibilities.

The subsequent phase of cinema was that of the movie house that should serials, to which young people would enthusiastically and uncritically congregate. These series might go on for years, but despite their scope, they were often aesthetically limited. A few auteurs worked to expand the form, but it was generally the provenance of people with a lot of spare time and not very much cultural capital.

The third phase was the "breakthrough" - the arrival of the film house as a place for everyone to go. This is the era of Cecil B. DeMille, Charlie Chaplin, and Buster Keaton, and the other early silent stars. What changes is the format: instead of long serials, there are 2 hour-long films that are meant to be enjoyed by busy, intelligent people.

This is where I see games going - into the era of DeMille, and out of the "Lone Ranger" phase. The one quirk I see is that the kids who spend all Saturday at the movies which the serials are considered the "hardcore" enthusiasts. I think this will change, when it becomes those who appreciate games like Flow who are identified as the more advanced gamer. Notice that the high age of film-as-art comes after the DeMille period (it varies to time and place: German expressionist film in the 20's and 30's, French new-wave film in the 50's and 60's, American New Hollywood film in the late 60's and early 70's, etc.)

But what happened to that enthusiast who spends all day watching Lone Ranger serials, but who could never really get a Bunuel, Godard, or Kieslowski film? He loses his status as a cinematic connoisseur, and is instead seen as kind of lowly figure. I imagine that could happen to the people we call "hardcore" gamers now.