Khuutra said:
Hardcore gamers at the time weren't console gamers, so to speak. "You can do so many more things with a computer!" they cried, appalled at the simplicity of a game like Super Mario Bros. where you run to one side and jump. Yes, our hardcore grew from their casual. I certainly agree that console fanboyism plays its part, but the part it plays is very small in the more rational crowd. Fear of change is at least justifiable; console fanboyism is, at its best, silly. |
Okay then, that begs the question of who was buying videogames before the NES came out. The Atari 2600 sold about 30 million units. Since casuals didn't exist (at least not in very large numbers) and hardcore gamers were all using PCs, then where did these sales come from? How did the 2600 sell on par with the Genesis two generations earlier if there were only a couple casual gamers sprinkled here and there and hardcore gamers were playing on computers? E.T. was hyped up a lot on the 2600 before it came out (even though it ended up being disappointing). Certainly it wouldn't have been hyped that much on a console of hardcore gamers. The simple truth is that casuals have always existed and have always dominated most consoles, and that defining casual and hardcore is an exercise in stupidity. So, in effect, my argument is self-defeating. But I don't mind.
The NES was incredibly popular in its day, demolishing any competition and selling huge amounts in the American market. It didn't have much competition from home consoles, and the computer was always around (and still is). Change definitely scares a couple fanboys, but most are just angry that the console is in first place and selling games they don't like. The NES moved shovelware, so did the PS1 and PS2, and now the Wii is following suit. The Wii didn't change anything outside of control scheme, and even then, third parties aren't taking full advantage of the capabilities of the Wii-mote.
