Nintendo should copy Sony

[S.T.A.G.E.]

Veknoid_Outcast said:

There is a difference between  a casual and a hardcore gamer. Super Mario is a pick up and play game that doesnt involve control scheme difficulty but rather the difficulty is based on the course you are to walk through. Depending on the difficulty you choose is the level at which you will play. Easy is generally the casual setting. Most games now have a casual setting because casuals in most cases just want an experience and not an overcomplicated challenge. They want a slight challenge if one at all. A hardcore gamer will play mario to death on the hardest setting finding the ins and outs of the game. Mario was not created to attract hardcore gamers, but I am sure there are setting the core gamer can set to play a harder setting. Mario attracts mostly women/children and alot of people grew up with it. What game do you think my mother thought was the only acceptable game to buy for me with the Nintendo when I was really young? Mario. Would she have bought me any of the Sony exclusives? Hell no, unless it was Crash or Spyro. The only chracters my mother knew about were Mario, Donkey Kong and Sonic the Hedgehog. I dont disagree that a hardcore gamer will play any game at all, theres no doubt about that, but hardcore gamers are more defined by the way they play games rather than just their voice in variety. If they are passionate gamers variety is a given. Theres a reason Nintendo is after the PS3/360 crowd and its because they offer something Nintendo doesn't in their games. Even after selling nearly 100 million consoles they still lacked a proper core fanbase. They could sell their third party core titles for anything.

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

But don't you think you're sliding dangerously into elitism with these definitions? Control scheme difficulty seems like an arbitrary criterion for "hardcore." As does an audience made up of women and children for "casual."

It seems like your definition of hardcore gamer is one who plays serious games in a serious way. I guess my definition of a hardcore gamer is one who knows the industry, plays all the games, can write and speak about video games with authority, and makes video games his or her hobby. Casual video gamers are those who enjoy playing games, but know less about who made the game, less about genres and sub-genres, spend less money and energy looking for and buying games.

But I don't think someone who elects "normal" over "hard" difficulty is precluded from the hardcore community. Video game investment is not the same as video game skill.

Its not elitism. It's like calling someone a hobbyist gamer. Casual gamers aren't hobbyists, but rather they play games for its novelty. Some play only a couple games a year IE: Madden,FiFA, COD and call it a day (those I would consider moderate gamers). The hardcore are the technical, experienced gamers who can and will play everything. Give Demon Souls to a casual and see if he/she doesnt snap. Hell....let a casual play UFC online and see if they dont get frustrated by the control scheme before  the asswhipping them will endure online. Casuals like COD because its pick up and play. Have those same casuals play Battlefield...get ready for tears. Look at Tekken Tag 2's review on IGN and watch how they screwed up the games score because the fight lab wasnt casual friendly. In my school they train me to illustrate to satisfy various audiences. I can break down exactly why Mario is for children simply based on art direction. I dont even need to get to the details of the game.