| Kasz216 said: Such a position isn't really meaningful in this conversation... since the point is. It's a lot harder to capture a non hardcore audience then a hardcore one. So classificatiosn of specific games are pointless. As for Bad grammatical and spelling mistakes. That would be the editors fault no? Bad spelling and grammer are really more problems for the editor. I mean if we fault the writer much about grammer that makes E.E. Cummings the worst Poet who has ever lived. As for "Telling" instead of Showing. It's once again something that's going to depend on your audience. If your audience would perfer to be told... then it's better to right that way.
To become a phenomenon you need to be both great and know what the wider audience likes. This gets you the media that gets people to buy it. If you didn't have A and B, you either wouldn't get the press... or your book would get the press and it would flop.
|
Are we misunderstaning each other here? I'm just saying that I find labeling games "hardcore" or casual" is useless. You're saying that isn't meaningful, then you take the same position?
Bringing modern poetry into a discussion about grammar or spelling would be pretty useless, and you're right, it should be his editors problem, in the same way the flow of the content is. When it isn't caught, it's a problem with the technical quality of the end product, no matter who's fault it is.
You're still confusing "hits" and "phenomenons".
Which is where my original question was trying to head; I think there's an unanswered question of whether the Wii is a "hit" or a "phenomenon".
