Nintendo and the Decline of Hardcore Gaming 438
angry tapir writes "Chris Jager from GoodGearGuide argues that the rise of casual gaming means near-certain death for hardcore gaming. The sales of casual 'party-friendly' games are massively outstripping the sales of classic hardcore games, and the makers of other consoles are taking note of Nintendo's success in attracting non-traditional gamers to the Wii and DS. There is evidence that Sony and Microsoft are both trying to tap into the casual market, and it's only a matter of time before hardcore gaming goes the way of the Nintendo PowerGlove."
Of course, the trend toward casual doesn't just involve Nintendo — World of Warcraft's success (and the huge effect it's had on the MMO genre) is often credited to its focus on casual gamers. While it's not unreasonable for game studios to want all players to see all of the game's content, perhaps there's a better way of catering to the more hardcore players than tacking on difficulty modes and "do it the hard way" achievements.
Wait, what?! (Score:5, Insightful)
"World of Warcraft's success (and the huge effect it's had on the MMO genre) is often credited to its focus on casual gamers"
Sorry, but if you're writing an article claiming that casual gaming is ousting hardcore titles, you don't pick the world's most notorious timesink as supporting evidence. People who lose their jobs, homes, families and even lives, playing 20 hours a day, 7 days a week are not what I'd consider "casual" players...
Does not follow. (Score:5, Insightful)
Don't forget that some 'hardcore gamers' also own Wiis. The end is not as nigh as you think it is; people like a change in pace every once and a while.
Besides, what do you think is happening to all the current hardcore gamers? They don't just disappear, you know.
Re:Wait, what?! (Score:5, Insightful)
IMO, it's an addicting game for casual gamers, and that's why so many play it, and get stuck in it.
WoW is NOT casual gamer friendly! (Score:4, Insightful)
How many times does it need to be said?
Show me that stats that say their main player base comes and goes on a monthly basis.
Show me a casual gamer who DOESN'T buy gold.
World of Warcrack IS a great game, I have spent more than the usual $100 for the game itself. Perhaps that is what the article means? It is likely to bring back people who have not played for a while? Suck them in for a few months, then spit them back out into their normal lives, free from addiction?
Repeat after me : WoW is NOT casual gamer friendly!
Why would Casual gaming displace hardcore gaming? (Score:5, Insightful)
There will always be a market. If most of the developers are developing casual titles, then there's a decent niche for any medium sized developer to aim for the hardcore market segment.
Re:Does not follow. (Score:2, Insightful)
Maybe they are just growing, starting to work, get a girlfriend, you know... all this takes your time away, no more nights spent training on some hard gaming, so casual games are more handy.
New generations are not replacing them, they are exposed to wiis and casual games and more easily pick them up.
Also, at least here in my country, 10-20 years ago video games were considered a nerd thing, so if you wanted to video game you had to isolate yourself, hardcore gaming was your solution. Now video games are some kind of social thing, so new generations prefer party games and the like.
Calling WoW a casual game is ridiculous (Score:1, Insightful)
In fact it's analagous to calling heroin a casual drug because the dealer gives you the first hit for free
Re:WoW is NOT casual gamer friendly! (Score:5, Insightful)
20 hours a week is not casual gaming.
20 hours is two 5 hour sessions on the week-end and 3, 3 hours raiding sessions.
(you make up the extra hour logging on every day to check and relist stuff in the AH. Sorry, Auction house...)
Not casual.
Pulling out the Wii fit and having a bash once a week is casual.
You CAN be a casual gamer and spend 20 hours a week, you just need to put that new title down after you finish it and not have a need for another one immediately after.
Re:More like the decline of the Wii.... (Score:1, Insightful)
Or perhaps the Japanese market isn't particularly similar to the (much larger) American and European markets, where the Wii still tops sales by a wide margin and the PS3 is in last by a mile (probably because it costs a ton and has no games worth playing).
Semper Games
Re:Wait, what?! (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, I consider them people who need serious help. I personally haven't personally met such a person and I'm an avid gamer myself. These kinds of people would just easily be in that situation for other reasons. Replace WoW with gambling, tv, hanging around the street, etc. It's just that WoW seems to be the most accessible hobby for them where they could get away from real life problems or just rebel from the world.
Re:Wait, what?! (Score:2, Insightful)
That's because the term "casual" is misleading. They only have a casual interest in the "gamer lifestyle" but they do focus a lot on a single game when they play one.
Article goes against common sense (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Does not follow. (Score:5, Insightful)
I also object to the shoddy logic used here.
"Casual games are selling really well" is good, but how do you leap from that to "Hardcore games aren't going to be made anymore?" If you follow all trends to their illogical extremes, the future begins to look like a really bizarre place, and death of hardcore gaming is among the least of your concerns. If current population trends continue, in 5000 years the earth would be a ball of human flesh expanding at the speed of light. Of course, that can't actually happen.
Videogame sales are overtaking movie sales. Anyone seriously think movies are going to die?
Much the same "Casual gaming" is gaining ground but extrapolating that to say it will continue until 100% of all games sold will be casual in a few years is delusional. That doesn't make sense. People who get into making games because they love making games aren't going to make casual games because goodgearguide said they will. Gamers who like challenging games aren't going to buy wii fit knockoffs just because casual gaming is on the rise.
I really don't understand where this urge to claim the sky is falling and nintendo is causing it is coming from. My best guess is elitism, new people are coming to our hobby, but they're not into the exact same things we are, so we think they're stupid, some of us become paranoid and start forming odd conspiracy theories where these johnny come latelys are trying to deprive us of our games and make us play wii sports. It's stupid. As long as we have money and are willing to buy games that appeal to us, there will be games made to appeal to us.
Sony and microsoft are wanting to get in on the casual action. Naturally. That sounds a bit scary until you ask yourself "What good hardcore games were any of them making anyway?" Seriously. Of the three console makers, only nintendo was making many quality titles, and they've been for the kids since I was a kid.
Microsoft made Halo, only they didn't really make it so much as buy Bungie who made it, and I don't see a Halo 4 coming out or doing well if it does. At the moment, I can't think of a single other microsoft game, besides their flight sim.
Sony makes gran turismo and God of War, which are nice and all, but again, hardcore gaming doesn't exactly depend on them.
Terrible article.
Re:Does not follow. (Score:3, Insightful)
I'd say the loss of time has already happened, people (well, veteran gamers) demand games where they can progress every time they play with not much learning required. Meanwhile "casual" games are all about applying your skill. A single match may only last a few minutes but to progress (beat your own highscore) you must improve yourself.
Same as other media (Score:2, Insightful)
And what exactly IS hardcore? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Wait, what?! (Score:3, Insightful)
Agreed, in the old games progressing to the next stage/level was a pain in the ass. In Wow on the other hand, one could bend all their energies into leveling as quickly as possible, and I guess that could be "Nintendo Hard" in it's own way. But you can just as easily take play in a relaxed casual manner, and simply progress slower, only losing out on getting the shiny items ASAP.
Casual AND Hardcore, my mind reels. :)
Re:More like the decline of the Wii.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Just because the PS3 outsold the Wii for 1 out of 16 months (in one country), doesn't mean that only the hardcore players are left to buy peripherals and software. There are still substantially more Wii owners out there than any of the other consoles, and some of those people are still buying new accessories.
And given that you are obviously a hardcore player (who are apparently now in the minority), your personal preference of which console you use cannot have any bearing on this discussion because you cannot extrapolate it to all other gamers.
Re:Article goes against common sense (Score:2, Insightful)
Hardcore games are crappy (Score:1, Insightful)
When game designers finally realise that the 'hardcore' gaming community doesnt need yet another console FPS with the words army, tactical, squad-based or post-apocalyptic written all over it, maybe they'll tap into the millions and millions of other game genres/scenarios/storylines which would actually be interesting to play.
Re:Where there's a will... (Score:5, Insightful)
*facepalm* Hardcore gaming is just fine thx (Score:5, Insightful)
Exploiting a previously unfilled niche, for overall growth does not require that some other aspect of the system loses out. Aside from obvious logical flaws in TFA's rant, observations above don't stack up: since when are World of Warcraft players considered 'casual'? You could be forgiven for making that assumption of course, until you actually meet a few or play yourself.
Hardcore gamers are not going anywhere, even if they aren't going to be the biggest percentage of revenue in the future.
So unless the current mainstream s selling their PS3s in order to buy a Wii - making a change in habits - the overall games market is growing because of the addition of new consumers.
I would have found it a more plausible read if TFA was talking about how casual gaming is a *gateway drug*, and how it is a very clever marketing move.
Re:Casual != !hard-core (Score:5, Insightful)
You're missing my point: it's not a dichotomy of "if you play games then either you're a casual gamer or an addict". There's a spectrum, and you fall in the middle. At the very least you want three pigeonholes: casual, committed, and hard-core.
Someone who plays Minesweeper or Bejeweled for half an hour in their lunch break some days and occasionally has an evening playing Wii Tennis with friends is a casual player. Someone who intentionally invests time in a game to improve their ability is no longer playing casually but showing a level of commitment. Someone who self-identifies as a gamer, spends hours every day playing games, or aims to be recognised as an elite player of one game is hard-core, but not necessarily addicted.
Re:Where there's a will... (Score:2, Insightful)
There will always be RTS, where the people who suck at playing the game still will keep on sucking and the good players will play other good players.
Only bad thing is "random team" where you have to if you want to team kill the retard you are playing with or keep him ;)
Re:Wait, what?! (Score:4, Insightful)
Sure, you can spend your whole life in it, but it isn't a requirement like it was in EQ. You can level to 80 and get near everything a Hard Core Gamer gets in WoW with little effort and time. People don't have to spend time in it, that is what makes it causal.
I'm not into WoW, but.... (Score:3, Insightful)
..even for an outsider like me, putting "World of Warcraft" and "casual gamers" in the same sentence, seems odd to say the least. I associate WoW with people spending several hours per week, even per day, playing online.
But, if I've been wrong, I am glad: there's this beautiful real world that awaits to be discovered - it would be a pity not to do that, and waste your time playing WoW instead.
Re:More like the decline of the Wii.... (Score:4, Insightful)
Or maybe it has to do with there being no major Wii game releases in several months? Yes, there was Wii Music but that fell pretty flat (can't have a smash hit every single time) and didn't really sell systems. The release drought on the Wii simply prevented the Wii from increasing in appeal in that period of time and thus sales slowed down as the number of appealed-to-but-not-sold-to people ran low. This has nothing to do with "casual" gamers losing interest and everything to do with there simply being no games for them to be interested in.
If you want anecdotes here's mine: When the Wii drought kept going for too long I bought a 360 (it was fairly cheap, 200€ for the 60GB Pro, down from 240€) to expand the library I can buy titles from. Because I couldn't find anything interesting on the shelves I got some points for XBLA and my first game on this brand new HD gaming system was a port of a Playstation 1 game that I bought because I liked the sequels on the handhelds (CvSotN), now capable of displaying its 320x240 graphics in glorious HD. Maybe it's the way demos are set up on the system but only one of the six retail games I bought had a demo, most of the demos I played ended up repelling me from the game. By now I've really enjoyed two retail games on the system and liked three downloadable games quite a bit, I've still spent 30€ less on games than the console itself. Played the games I liked to the exhaustion point (either the ending or where they got boring) and now the thing's collecting metaphorical dust. It simply has a total lack of games, anything good is available on the PC as well and costs 20€ less there (with much faster pricedrops so even bigger savings if you wait for the bargain bin). I'm sure someone would be inclined to point at Gears of War now but guess what, they didn't even release that in this country (because reducing the violence would mean "compromising their artistic vision", whatever the vision behind a game about space marines chainsawing alien dinosaurs is*...). Meanwhile my Wii kept accumulating games, both retail and downloadable despite being in a release drought (WiiWare wasn't in a drought and many older retail games kept falling into the bargain bins).
*=Speaking of space marines chainsawing alien dinosaurs, Dawn of War 2 got a 16 rating, Gears of War was apparetly too violent even for an 18 rating. Seriously, a freaking Warhammer 40k game passed as 16 without any censoring and they can't get Gears of War into a sane range?
Such a strange comment (Score:5, Insightful)
That's the mistake of equating a market segment and a playstyle. The "casual gamers" people talk about when they talk about markets are simply people who prefer games considered crap by the older gamers
When I've seen the term "casual gamers" used, it has nothing to do with what "hardcore gamers" consider crap, but rather about people who play games casually.
The "casual gamer" isn't necessarily casual,
How can the "casual gamer" not be casual? That would make the term meaningless.
that's just a stereotype built up by detractors who want to sweep this massive market under the rug
Say what? Almost every use of the term I've seen is to promote casual gaming, not to detract from itself. I haven't seen casual gamers being afraid of the term, they even use it to describe themselves.
Gaming "outgrew" the simple fun of the arcade
When did that happen?
and with that left a lot of the people behind who were just not interested in this whole "games are art" masturbation...
Whoa. I don't think "games as art" really has anything to do with the "hardcore gamer" - surely they would scoff at the notion? Although I have seen many casual games referred to as artistic and creative.
On the whole, I find your post to be oriented approximately 180 degrees from reality.
This article is terribly flawed (Score:5, Insightful)
From what I've seen about my friends and family that play wii (and have never played Playstation or XBOX), they get bored of wii sports/guitar hero/wii fit/etc. after 2 or 3 months and then never pick up their wii again. If anything, the hardcore gamers are the ones that are going to stick around and continue to buy new games
Re:WoW is NOT casual gamer friendly! (Score:5, Insightful)
The issue is not that you HAVE to buy gold. You don't. You are correct that dailies can get you a heap of cash, quickly.
Casual players do not play dailies that often. Why? Because they want to play stuff they haven't seen or done and dailies=grinding. I bought gold simply because I wanted to get a full frostweave set and worked out it would take me two months of playing at my normal rate to gather the materials. (then they nerfed it!)
So I simply bought gold to quarter the time. I used the rest of my time to play the game and not grind. I buy gold to play content, not save up for it.
(gold is about $13US for 1000, so I consider working for one hour a better proposition than grinding for 20)
I always accepted that I would be behind hardcore players in skill and in equipment.
To get back to my point, what you are demonstrating is commitment to the game.
If you grind for cash, you are not casual.
If you consistently play over years (or even months) in arenas, you are not casual.
Time is one indicator, commitment is another. You may be borderline in time spent, but your commitment makes you not casual.
You are NOT a casual player. I am not judging if that is a good or bad thing, perhaps it is better than going to bars and picking up diseases? It still doesn't change the fact that you are NOT a casual player.
what does Casual mean ? (Score:4, Insightful)
It seems there is a debate about what casual means:
- rare, short, light gaming sessions: the gaming pattern is what defines "casual"
or
- ages 7-77, easily accessible: the accessibility is what defines "casual"
Anyhooo, I guess casual gaming will kill hardcore gaming the same way family sedans killed sports cars. Slow news day ?
Wii Casual vs WoW Casual (Score:3, Insightful)
I'd just like to point out that what is deemed "casual" in World of Warcraft is usually very different from what is deemed casual regarding the Wii.
Actually, in WoW, the term hardcore and casual are thrown around to mean so many different things, they are almost worthless. Before I got bored and quit recently, I was the raid leader and main tank of a medium sized guild. I raided typically 4 hours a day for 3-5 days a week, and spent a quite a bit of time in addition to that farming, PvPing, gearing up guildies in 5-mans, etc.
Your average person would probably call that hardcore, but in WoW, that would be considered casual by many people.
When I imagine a casual Wii player, OTOH, I imagine someone who doesn't spend much time or money playing games, has a Wii, maybe spends a few hours a week playing Wii Sports, Mario Kart Wii, etc, and maybe busts it out for friends. Much different than a WoW casual.
Anyway, the idea that "hardcore" and "casual" gaming are in a zero-sum conflict is silly. Both can and will survive, and there is a huge amount of overlap between the two. "Hardcore" gamers frequently will play a game of Wii Sports now and again for a change of pace, and there's nothing stopping a Wii-loving casual soccer mom from playing Halo 3 on her kid's Xbox 360 once in a while.
Most "hardcore" gamers I know own either all 3 systems, or own a Wii and a 360 or PS3. (I have all 3.) They may grumble about the Wii and casual games from time to time, but most still enjoy a good game of Mario Kart now and then.
Re:Wait, what?! (Score:5, Insightful)
WoW is catering to casual gamers, believe it or not.
Maybe we should first of all get a good definition of a "casual gamer". The way the industry (and also the article) describes it, the "casual" gamer is not someone who plays every now and then when the mood strikes him but gaming ain't no important part of your life (as the term "casual" would probably suggest). The casual gamer is someone who does not want to "master" a game, but who wants to play it at leisure and still make progress. The casual gamer is not someone who has the will or zeal that he MUST best this or that foe, or master this or that tricky part. He wants to go somewhere, play, and go away with the happy feeling that he's accomplished something, without having to climb a steep learning curve before.
WoW is all about this. What makes WoW the huge success it is, is simply that it also caters to those that actually do want to "master" it. It has all the things in place to keep the perfectionists around while still giving the "casuals" the ability to finally, eventually, see the good stuff too.
Re:Where there's a will... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Does not follow. (Score:3, Insightful)
Pretty much the same feeling here. People, get serious. Not everyone follows the latest fad, and people will do what they want to do. Why the heck should I play "casual" games when I don't like them? Why the heck should I think that any other "hardcore" players would?
WiFi is really taking off here, finally. Does that mean that we can't buy wired switches anymore in 5 years? Would anyone be taken serious who suggests that?
Vegan food has been a fad for a while too, but did all the burger joints close because suddenly everyone wanted to "eat healthy"? Ok, we're lucky, most of the healthy eaters died from malnutrition, something that won't happen to the casual gamers, but you get the idea.
hardcore = boring, casual = original (Score:2, Insightful)
I consider my self a "hardcore gamer" in the sense that I prefer games where there's actually some progress to made. No matter whether it's a story that slowly unravels, a character that develops or just new levels which are a little different/more difficult than the previous one. I don't switch on my PS3 every day - not even every week - but still, virtual dart or bowling is not for me.
The reason why people like me have started to look into so called "casual" games is that it's actually these titles that add new gameplay and original ideas nowadays. Whatever game magazine you look at today, the headlines are always occupied by the next incarnation of yet-another-fps (now with even better graphics and more realistic blood, yadda yadda).
There used to be a time (remember the Amiga) where the most anticipated and big games were the ones that had some sort of original idea to them. But these days the game industry is taking the same path as hollywood or the music industry. No one is willing to invest money into something new because everyone's afraid that it might fail. As a consequence new ideas are only developed in the small game/"casual" marked where the financial risk is obviously limited.
Don't get me wrong, I do like great graphics etc. and I'd be willing to shell out 50 bucks for a game anytime. But now that I'm through with LBP I'm really having difficulties to find anything else that appeals to me. So if Sony and friends want to keep the hardcore game market alive, maybe it's time to start risking something again when it comes to investing in new ideas.
Re:Casual gaming (Score:3, Insightful)
As Simon Cowell's found out, it's easier to shove out something half arsed that the public will quickly forget about (but not before ploughing millions into first) than to come up with anything original.
Yet, the most originality appears to be happening among the so-called "casual" games, while the "hardcore" are mostly endless re-iterations of the same thing.
Re:WoW is NOT casual gamer friendly! (Score:4, Insightful)
You say you play casually and had the best gear and almost the best rep. This is simply not possible for a casual player.
Saying 20 must be casual because it is not 80 hours, is not a logical statement.
"I only have 5 cars, I am not a collector, some guys have 20 cars!"
"I only murdered 3 guys, most serial killers murder 10 or more!"
Being a casual player is not measured on a bell curve.
If you got that far in WoW you simply are NOT a casual player. Why do WoW players feel the need to justify their playing habits? You play more than 10 hours, you are not casual, you have maxed out pretty much anything, you are not casual!
Reality is out there!
Re:Does not follow. (Score:3, Insightful)
I was going to respond along similar lines as the parent, but I hate idiocy very much and this article displayed a massive amount of it from the author. I simply couldn't put together anything other than a rant at how bad this article was. The parent post however gives me a nice springboard to make some additional points without ranting.
When he says Sony and Microsoft are looking to get into casual games, I don't think he was talking about first party titles, just that they were pushing that route and perhaps even helping fund 3rd party developers down that route on their consoles, I suppose a game like Lips on the 360 is a good example.
Microsoft and Sony are doing this not because they in any way want to do away with hardcore games on their title, but because they want to expand their market. Ironically, he is suggesting that Nintendo is going to do extremely well because they're pushing the casual games market. Unfortunately, this is why Nintendo will actually fall behind if they don't take action - Microsoft and Sony are moving into casual games whilst also strongly supporting hardcore games, whilt Nintendo isn't diversifying in this way. Effectively, Microsoft and Sony are holding ground in the hardcore market whilst pushing to gain ground in the casual market whilst Nintendo are sat purely in the casual market seemingly refusing to budge into hardcore whilst simultaneously risking having their market share chewed away by Microsoft and Sony.
You see, it's not as simplistic as casual vs. hardcore, as the parent quite rightly points out. Both types of game make money and both have a place, one will not eliminate the other and the only thing that is happening now is that casual gaming was previously neglected and since this generation of consoles there has been a realisation that it deserves equal treatment, and that's now what it's beginning to get. This does not mean it will continue expanding, again as the parent says and if anything I'd say it has limited scope due to the fact casual games tend to cut away the storyline element, and there's only so many games of the same genre you'll want to buy if there's not even a story differentiating them from each other which is a common difference between a lot of casual and hardcore games. I would say though that casual gaming has a bigger userbase which will make up for the lower attach rate of casual games. To give an example in numbers, what I'm saying is that the hardcore section of the market makes it's profits by selling 10 different games to each of 10 different users, whilst the casual market makes it's profits by selling 1 game to 100 users - both shift as many units, but in a different manner.
One final point about TFA is that I'm a little dubious on his definition of hardcore, in fact, I'm convinced some of his examples can't even be defined as one or the other - Rock Band appeals as much to hardcore gamers as it does casual gamers, you can't simply call it a casual game and hold it up as a pinnacle of success in the casual gaming world when I'd wager a bet, many of the people who bought it are in fact hardcore gamers who are also still buying the Call of Duty, Killzones and Halos of the world as well.
When you can make something like Halo 3, sell it at an average of £35 a peice and sell it to 9 million users, netting you probably in the region of £250 million or more in pure profit you're not going to just give that up or even give the chance of that up. That's why many companies will still keep developing hardcore games. Oh, and also because some companies probably don't even want to make hardcore games, certainly companies like id Software for example seem to actually enjoy developing hardcore games.
"Hardcore" Game =/= "Hardcore" Gamer (Score:3, Insightful)
I fail to see the correlation of a growing population of gamers and many of those being attracted by party games and the death of hardcore games. Maybe it is because you are ignorant enough to think it is the game that makes you hardcore. A new gamer who plays party games in all their spare time is just as hardcore as someone else playing "Ultimate Blood Explosion 3" for the same time.
Casual gamers become hardcore with time (Score:1, Insightful)
I don't think it is casual games that are taking control of the gaming scene. What is happening is a change of state in our global society. The people that grew up with the first pcs are now past they're 20s 30s and even 40s. Video games are part of the working force. Kids are now growing up not with an industry in its infancy, but with one that has strong multinational corporations behind them. The computer geek kid is now married and has shown his partener the fun behind gaming. Games are no longer tailored for the boys only. Now were at a point that even those that 10 years ago runned like hell from this type of technologies, are now willing to give it a try and see "what is all the fuzz anyway".
To tell you the truth I think hardcore gaming is only going to get stronger. Why? Simple. Everyone starts as a casual gamer, but as addiction takes hold he becomes a hardcore one. That is already happening. Look at MMOs where wifes, husbands kids instead of watching TV are playing all together online. Casual gaming? It is no longer casual when you pass more than 3 hours playing GTA with your husband.
Both (Score:3, Insightful)
In my day, I spent hundreds of hours playing Quake (and I don't think I've seen anything that matched it), but I no longer have the time, energy, patience, or remaining carpal tunnel capacity to put up with learning some game's 17 inverse lower Egyptian Ninja super power spin moves. Plus, I have little kids and a wife, so unfortunately the spurting gore- and slut-fests are out.
When I get home from a long day at work, I want to blow up easy-to-hit baddies for a while, or walk around in an interesting and well-written environment. I don't want to see "game over" or even be sent back to the "beginning of the level". Better yet, the game should come with a "god mode" accessible from the very beginning--I bought the damn thing, I'll decide how much I'd like to "cheat".
I'm having trouble finding good games like this, but I have plenty of money burning a hole in my pocket if someone can point them out to me. Zelda Wind Waker was not too bad, though really too difficult to be really entertaining. At this point, Lego Star Wars is about as good as I've found.
That's what "casual" is to me. I have a Wii. Game suggestions welcome.
Re:Wait, what?! (Score:5, Insightful)
The best way to define a casual gamer is to first describe their opposite; the hardcore gamer. Now, from my experience there are two ways to stop a "hardcore" gamer, or as I like to refer to myself, an avid video game player.
1) The first thing an avid player will do upon booting up a game is go into the options menu. If you know casual gamers, and you know avid players, watch them as they start a new title. The avid player will virtually always head into the option menu to tweak settings. The casual player tends to jump right in.
2) The avid player plays on the harder difficulty settings. Casual players are notorious for playing on the normal or easy modes, finishing the game and never playing it again. In fact, you'll find that a lot of games now name their difficulty settings "casual", "hardcore"(Gear of War: Xbox360), etc, etc. Over time the easy or "casual" difficulty levels have become absurdly easy to cater to this player type, to the point where most avid players will now, by default, choose the hard or "very hard" difficulty setting on their first playthrough, not out of masochism, but because they actually understand that the reward in a game comes from overcoming the challenges it presents. Despite all else, avid players will respect a difficult title (Transformers:PS2)
The avid player enjoys playing the game for its own sake. They appreciate craftsmanship and will respond to goo quality in gameplay. Casual players play the game simply for the sake of having played it, in the same way they would watch a film. They are out for a fairly automatic, "on rails" experience that resembles a passive film medium as much as possible.
Re:Wait, what?! (Score:1, Insightful)
Think of it this way. A hardcore gambler does not sit around pushing money into the slot machines all week. That is an addicted gambler but certainly not "hardcore" by anyone's definition. A hardcore gambler counts cards, plays in tournaments, and does considerable research at the horse races.
Likewise, a hardcore wine enthusiast doesn't sit around getting drunk on cheap box wine. A hardcore technology enthusiast doesn't just collect gadgets. Finally, a hardcore gamer certainly doesn't sink all of their time into World of Warcraft.
Re:Why would Casual gaming displace hardcore gamin (Score:2, Insightful)
This is why there are magazines for speciality interests such as trout fishing, even though the circulation of celebrity gossip magazines is much much higher, and they're much easier to produce. The market segment is way too crowded.
Re:WoW is NOT casual gamer friendly! (Score:2, Insightful)
You say it simply isn't possible, but I've done it, so apparently it is.
I didn't say 20 must be casual because it is not 80. However, you haven't given any criteria that says why anything more than 10 hours is hardcore.
I am pretty sure I said more than 10 hours is not casual. Hardcore is yet another category.
Try to not link two unassociated issues together.
I'm just pointing out that what people consider "hardcore" for a WoW player wouldn't have been considered even a raider in EQ, let alone a hardcore player, not even close. *THAT* makes WoW a lot more casual friendly than the older, more hardcore oriented MMOs like EQ.
What is consider "hardcore" (even though we are talking about casual) in one game makes no difference to another game. If you fit the criteria for "not casual", you fit the criteria, no matter what game you play.
You seem to have confused a casual WoW player with a casual gamer. They aren't the same thing. You apparently aren't a hardcore gamer. That's fine, it isn't for everyone. However, as a hardcore gamer, I can definately say that WoW is a good example of how games have moved away from the hardcore gamers and become more casual gamer friendly.
What?
Is WoW not a game???
What the hell are you talking about?
How can a casual WoW player NOT be a casual gamer?
What other game (if you want the best gear) FORCES you to spend MONTHS raiding 3 nights a week to get the best gear? How is that casual friendly??
Also "you have maxed out pretty much anything, you are not casual" isn't logical either because it makes the assumption that maxing out everything in a game by definition makes you a hardcore gamer.
See what you did there? You took a statement about WoW and assumed I was talking about other games. I wasn't. You then go to use that false assumption to make a point that has zero relevance to anything.
Ask any player of WoW if they have the best gear without raiding 3 nights a week and they will laugh at you. Therefore IN WoW, you must be more than casual, you MUST have made a commitment to raiding therefore NOT CASUAL!
So considering that if you play tic-tac-toe, on offense if you start with the middle square, there are really only like 4 different unique type ways the game can progress, and on defense, there is only 3. So using your definition of a hardcore gamer,
You mean the one YOU just made up
if I play 7 games of tic-tac-toe, I am now a hardcore gamer, because I have done it all. Doing everything in a game designed to be casual does not make you a hardcore gamer, sorry.
Sigh. Again... No, I mean if you play tic-tac-toe for 10 hours or more, you are not playing casually?
And yes, being a casual player is measured on a bell curve. Casual = average. Hardcore = top few percent.
Wrong again. A hardcore gamer is defined by their actions, as is a casual player NOT on their relative place in society.
Lets say you and your mates create a game, which you all play 50 hours a week, so every single player is a hard-core player. No bell curve needed.
Are addicts defined by a bell curve? So if half the addicts die, then Bob who uses once a month, moves up the bell curve and becomes an addict?
From the dictionary definition of hardcore: "the most dedicated, unfailingly loyal faction of a group or organization". The most dedicated. It doesn't say the people who are more than x. It's the *MOST* dedicated, meaning the top end of the scale. You will find the amount of time people play MMOs in hours per week follows a bell curve, so yes, it definately does get measured on a bell curve. Just not your idea of what is more than x, where x is a lot for YOU. Because YOU apparently aren't near the top of the curve.
Prove they fit a bell curve.
Where I am is totally irrelevant, if I spent more than 10 hours a week, that would make me... not casual perhaps?
If you commit to a game, then you are not casual. Talk all you like, it all comes back to commitment, you made it, you are not casual.
Re:Where there's a will... (Score:3, Insightful)
Not really. Even during the early stages of TBC when things were "difficult" (in Wow terms...) your '99.9%' is a gross exaggeration. In fact, I daresay the majority of players who stuck with WoW for more than a month have done dungeons. But it's mostly irrelevant, because the game itself has always been somewhat casual, and now in WotLK it's so pathetically easy I'm not sure it's even hard enough to be considered "casual". I mean really, games like Warioland, Mario Party, and Solitaire are more difficult.
Re:Where there's a will... (Score:5, Insightful)
Many players never hit 80. They log in a couple times a month, do a few quests, get into a couple of fights, maybe meet up with a friend or two, and log out.
And they each bring just as much revenue into Blizzard as the most obsessed raider, probably at a lower cost.
Re:Where there's a will... (Score:1, Insightful)
why are you making assumptions about the entire game just because of your own personal experience? just because you haven't seen the content, how can you say the game is not tailored for the people who have seen it?
from the sounds of it, you are oblivious to what's available in the game, which makes you a bad candidate to make comments about what it caters to.
Re:Does not follow. (Score:3, Insightful)
Microsoft and Sony are doing this not because they in any way want to do away with hardcore games on their title, but because they want to expand their market.
So 3 years later they finally understand what Nintendo was saying they were doing back in 2006?
Talk about dense competitors.
Ironically, he is suggesting that Nintendo is going to do extremely well because they're pushing the casual games market. Unfortunately, this is why Nintendo will actually fall behind if they don't take action - Microsoft and Sony are moving into casual games whilst also strongly supporting hardcore games, whilt Nintendo isn't diversifying in this way. Effectively, Microsoft and Sony are holding ground in the hardcore market whilst pushing to gain ground in the casual market whilst Nintendo are sat purely in the casual market seemingly refusing to budge into hardcore whilst simultaneously risking having their market share chewed away by Microsoft and Sony.
Unfortunately, you're completely wrong because your premise is wrong. Better hope MS and Sony understood better than you what Nintendo says it's doing since years.
It's very simple to see where you're wrong. You say Nintendo push casual gaming which is completely wrong. Nintendo is pushing games for EVERYONE!
Every time they say it, it falls on deaf ears from their competitors. No wonders the competitors "casual games" are flop after flop.
Nintendo is already doing incredibly well, and will go on doing so, because they don't focus at all on casual games, but on games for everyone. Just looking at their line up show that clearly.
It's just that their more casual oriented games sell more than the other ones.
These talk of Nintendo falling behind are just laughable, and I think no more than wishful thinking drowned in bitter tears of seeing Nintendo crush everyone after all these stupid BS of them dying or going 3rd party.
Seriously. The Wii is pulling numbers in slow months, that any other consoles never pulled outside of holiday months (November and December).
The brands are already set.
The people that started gaming on the Wii are mostly people that would never have bought the PS3 or X360. I don't know where this belief comes that these people, that hardcore gamers are denigrating, would suddenly becomes so highly hardcore gamers that they would buy another console with last gen controls. The only thing that will happen is that people will be pushed to hardcore Wii games.
Even the competition putting out motion controls will only help Nintendo. Now "casual gamers" have the choice of a little HD games library of motion controlled games, or the huge SD games library of the Wii with motion control. The casual gamer will go for the Wii library without even thinking twice.
Wii Fit alone will assure that people won't go to other consoles ("OK, it has HD and all, but does it support Wii Fit?").
To give an example in numbers, what I'm saying is that the hardcore section of the market makes it's profits by selling 10 different games to each of 10 different users, whilst the casual market makes it's profits by selling 1 game to 100 users - both shift as many units, but in a different manner.
Except that even some good hardcore games are losing money en masse, while the good games for everyone are making money hand over fist.
Didn't you hear of all these closing studios since the PS2 era? It just accelerated in this generation, with HD just killing them all even more. Just look at the financial reports: losses after losses.
Even the retarded tie ratio numbers proves you wrong. In the USA, it shows that Wii owners are buying as many games as PS3 owners, which is just one less than XB360 owners.
And it's a huge feat for Wii owners, because most of them have the Wii since far less time than most PS3 or X360 owners, because of the outstanding growth rate of the Wii.
Because when in two months you have say 500 000 more X360 owners, you have
Re:Where there's a will... (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Wait, what?! (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:WOW certainly isn't just casual game play (Score:3, Insightful)
The Wiis also top the resale charts on Craigslist, Kijiji, etc. once the novelty wears off and they discover there's very few games worth buying.
Re:Wait, what?! (Score:3, Insightful)
Seriously, the author of this article is pretty daft. He makes the argument that hardcore games are on the decline because they are selling poorly on the Wii. No shit sherlock. Why would anyone buy a Wii to play hardcore games? Second of all, some of the games he claims are casual can just as well be hardcore games. For example, the "Guitar Hero" genre has developed some of the most hardcore video game players I've ever seen. Just look at the video of all the kids playing these insane songs. Lets not forget people hacking their consoles in order to create their own songs too. And like you said, WoW can be just as hardcore as it is casual.
And one thing is for certain, hardcore gaming isn't going anywhere. All the top sellers on the PS3 and XBox360 are what the author would call "hardcore" games, and if you combine the sales of those consoles, they are outselling the Wii. He says there aren't any hardcore games coming out in the near future. I guess he doesn't really follow what Blizzard is doing at all.
Hardcore video games were never outselling casual games in the first place. Just look at the best selling games of all time:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_video_games
The list is dominated by casual games that have been released in the past. There is no decline of hardcore gaming.
Re:Wii Casual vs WoW Casual (Score:1, Insightful)
I think a concern (at least for psuedo-serious non-hardcore gamers like me) is that we got "gyped." I can only afford one console and opted for a Wii due to Nintendo's library. In doing so, I felt there was an implicit promise that Nintendo was going to continue catering to me. However, there are no deep games out there for me to enjoy. After completing Super Mario Galaxy and Zelda, I don't know what to do with my Wii.
Another quick "weak" confirmation of this is if you go to videogame review websites; the percentage of Wii games with scores above 9.0 is significantly lower PS3 and 360 games.
Re:Both (Score:3, Insightful)
That 2nd paragraph is everything I've been trying to articulate to people about games for the past 2 years. Thank you thank you THANK YOU for putting it so concisely and perfectly.
I've long been of the opinion that games need to have some kind of, what was it called in Vista, "tilt switch" to detect potential player frustration. Frustration isn't fun. They share a common starting letter but they aren't one and the same. When people get frustrated, they stop having fun. When they stop having fun, they stop playing. And when they stop playing, they tend to remember the bad experience, which comes around to bite the company who made the game when their next big game is released. Games and game developers need to recognize this and start programming games to enable (not necessarily force, but at least enable and make it damn clear to the player that it's enabled) a "compliance mode" of sorts that can, put bluntly, force the game to lose so that the player can continue experiencing the software s/he paid what was most probably a considerable amount of money to experience. Fine, have it be a toggleable feature for those who don't want to completely kill the challenge. I'm all for giving the user more options. There needs to be some kind of frustration-stopping feature available, though, for those of us who don't really care to pull our hair out over some insipid jumping puzzle.
When I was 16, losing repeatedly was motivation to get better at the game, look up an FAQ, hone my skills, whatever. Now, 10 years later, the company CEO is just as likely to get my copy of the game, disc snapped in half, along with a scathing letter from me detailing exactly where he can place the jagged shards of DVD and an explanation of why I will not be purchasing his company's blood-pressure-raising products in the future. I'm willing to retry a level up to 5 times (soft limit, of course, and I'll try more if gameplay's really good) but after that I go straight for the FAQs. If it doesn't solve the problem, I just give up. No more analysis, no more calling friends for the solutions, no more thought devoted to the game at all. It sits on a shelf and rots because frankly, I don't want to look at it since it'll just remind me of how much it aggravated me. Does that make me not "hardcore?" Fine by me. I. Don't. Give. A shit. Anymore.
As far as I'm concerned, they can make games as mind-crushingly hard as they want as long as they include a feature to temporarily (where "temporarily" is a duration defined by the player and not by the developers) drastically diminish the difficulty to bypass trouble spots.
Re:WoW is NOT casual gamer friendly! (Score:3, Insightful)