Play Magazine: Nintendo has officially gone off the reservation

[omoneru]

Many threads on this board revolve around the issue of "hardcore". The debate never ends partly because posters don't really agree on what constitutes "hardcore".

My definition of "hardcore" is probably a bit different. To me, I don't see many "hardcore" games on console in the first place, if there is any. I have an impression that most hardcore gamers are playing PC games, although they often have a console to play something casually.

I've seen a lot of friends literally devoting their lives to PC games. Some PC titles require constant participation and enormous playtime to master them. Examples include Diablo II:LOD and World of Warcraft where dedicated players just never stop playing and pretty much sacrifice their real lives (note: it doesn't mean that there aren't still those who play these titles casually). These games don't end after playing only 50 hours. New patches come and it goes on and on. They don't have life. I know these people well because I was one of them. Personally I define these no-life gamers as "hardcore".

(By the way, games can be "hardcore" even with anime/child-like graphics as long as game-structures have depth to suck people in and keep them playing intensely for a very long time. No-life gamers usually couldn't care less about "quality graphics". They often intentionally set graphic settings low so that they get best frame-per-second possible. They don't give rats arse if they can see sweat on an enemy's face. Neat graphics is nice for about a few hours in the beginning; the rest is about gameplay.)

So, it sounds a bit odd to me when I hear supposedly "deep / hardcore" XBOX and Wii titles. I'm sure there are some, but in my book most aren't "hardcore" enough to keep no-life gamers play no end and to drain their real lives.

In this sense, I don't think Nintendo is focusing on "hardcore" audience, but Microsoft and Sony aren't chasing them either. I'm sure they don't ignore these no-life gamers, but that's not their main focus. Instead, these console companies have focused on gamers who play a few hours a day and 1-4 days a week. People who have lives -- regular gamers, if you will.

I'm pretty sure Nintendo won't ignore these regular gamers given their sheer number in the market and the fact that they helped the success of PS2 after all.

The real question is how much Nintendo and others will sacrifice the resources for these regular gamers to make games for non-gamers. In terms of both 1st and 3rd party titles, I don't think they will sacrifice much. After all, this strata of gamers are royal supporters for the game industry, unlike the casuals who may "defect" on a whim. It's just risky and bad for business to ignore these gamers in the long run.

Overall, we'll see a lot of new soft-core titles, but that doesn't mean we'll see less regular titles. Regular titles may seem less due to the comparison with the growing number of casual titles, but the actual number of regular titles will probably go up given the larger install base of Wii.

People who wish to see the failure of Wii tend to see the scarcity of regular titles in comparison with casual titles as a sign of "Nintendo doesn't care about us" and to start a anti-Nintendo campaign for every single news they read. But that's just a wishful thinking. Decent regular titles are scheduled to be released and the number isn't that bad considering the console's only 6-7 month old since the launch. The support from the 3rd parties is growing. You don't have to feel overly protective and attack new casual titles every time you hear them.

But if you want to think Nintendo doesn't care about you, I suggest you just keep playing on XBOX or PC. Everybody wins.