The Wii in particular is suffering from large amounts of shovelware. The box art and titles are designed to appeal to casual gamers. I was worried that new gamers would play these games and be put off gaming but something completely different appears to be happening - they're actually enjoying them!

Take these Amazon user reviews which appear to be written by casual gamers:

Monster 4X4 World Circuit. Metacritic average 51.

Well i bought this game for my husband, and as soon as it came with the free stering wheel we were playing it, i had just the controler and at first found it a little difficult to control it but soon got the hang and was thrashing my husband who was not best pleased we swopped controllers so i has the stering wheel and oh yes i thrashed him again, you can pimp your ride and choose tracks everything you want in a game. im back on here because ive just ordered it for my friends birthday too. HIGHLY RECOMENDED....

The Golden Compass. Metacritic average 39.

I got this game free with my Wii and a few people said it was a rubbish game. Well I've been playing it non stop for a couple of days and its fun! It doesn't take itself too seriously and follows the films plot carefully. It uses the Wii's controllers well and is addictive!!!! I would say to people buy it and give it a chance!

Chicken Shoot. Metacritic average 27.

This game is good fun. I bought it for my kids who are 3 and 7. They think it's great! Obviously not for anyone who wants a game with tactics or skill involved but good for a laugh.

Anubis 2. Metacritic average 19. 

I had loads of fun with game a bit trick to control at first but when i got going i thoroughly enjoyed it.

 

 

There are two possibilities here:

1) The hardcore gamers who review these games don't know how to review them. They don't understand what casual gamers are after and give them poor scores based on their own desires from games, completely forgetting what the target audience - casual gamers - want. 

2) Casual gamers don't have a clue. They don't know their own minds and only *think* they're enjoying these games. They need a hardcore gamer to show them the error of their ways and make them play real games like Zelda, Final Fantasy and Fire Emblem.

 

Personally I think it's a bit of both. If someone is new to games they may find something fun that a hardcore gamer wouldn't. The hardcore player has already played a better similar game while the new player finds it exciting and original. 

Please, before I read game reviews I bought new games solely on my own merit and I found all of them were enjoyable. Now, I shy away from practically every game because of low scores. It's a game, why do you have to analyze the fun factor of the game and give it scores?

I think the success of ratings websites and magazines suggests you're probably in the minority there. People want to read ratings and reviews before they buy so that they know what to expect, but this is kind of off topic.

totalwar23 said: Please, before I read game reviews I bought new games solely on my own merit and I found all of them were enjoyable. Now, I shy away from practically every game because of low scores. It's a game, why do you have to analyze the fun factor of the game and give it scores?

Wow total WIN!

I've also found quite a few low-rated games to be pretty fun, like Yu-Gi-Oh and Red Steel wasn't THAT bad. 

Reviews are based on a lot of factors that casual gamers don't care about or look for, especially in terms of graphics/sound/presentation. They only care about how the game plays. To some extent if they haven't been spoiled by the "truly great" games then to them the bad games will seem good. I'm kind of jealous. ;>

ferret1603 said: I think the success of ratings websites and magazines suggests you're probably in the minority there. People want to read ratings and reviews before they buy so that they know what to expect, but this is kind of off topic.

 

No it's not off-topic. I saying these people were exactly as I once was. They pick a game because it seems fun, and they're not too worry about the flaws. That's how they're rating these games as opposed to those number crunching reviewers, who probably takes off some points before they even play the game.

Review sites and magazines are geared more towards the "hardcore" gamers that tend to only want put their money towards the good/great games. They'll also buy the games that really interest them regardless of how well it scores.

"Casual" gamers buy most of their games based off of their interests and rarely look at scores, other than maybe comments from other buyers on Amazon.com or the like. They aren't expecting epic adventures and stories with grand visuals, they just want something quick and fun, and the shovelware delivers most of the time.

I don't think these guys need someone to introduce them to games in which they need to care about loads of stuff and learn every bit of it to finish them (and your 3 examples suits this statement, even Zelda). I doubt they care if their games support 480p+16:9 or if they are hearing beeps and SNES-era MIDI music.

 

gamingdevil said: totalwar23 said: Please, before I read game reviews I bought new games solely on my own merit and I found all of them were enjoyable. Now, I shy away from practically every game because of low scores. It's a game, why do you have to analyze the fun factor of the game and give it scores? Wow total WIN! I've also found quite a few low-rated games to be pretty fun, like Yu-Gi-Oh and Red Steel wasn't THAT bad.

 It's possible for an individual to enjoy a bad game but that doesn't stop it being bad. I love Bust-A-Move and enjoy Bust-A-Move Bash! on the Wii. That doesn't stop me acknowledging that objectively it is a poor game and deserved poor scores.

 

There is a difference between "enjoyment" and "art."

Very few blockbusters get nominated for the US's "Best Picture" Academy Award (Oscar). However, some of the Oscar nominations come from films that were well-received but not necessarily well-viewed.

Meanwhile, teen slasher films and crash chase films often do well at the box office but not with critics.

The same disconnnect is occuring with video games. And it is more pronounced on the Wii since the user base is so diverse.

The biggest example is Carnival Games (Carnival Games Funfair in UK/Europe). It has gotten medicore reviews but is still often sold out and in demand in the US. It has a fun factor for many people that reviewers can't capture/don't get/won't acknowledge. (For me, even at $40 it is a lot cheaper than playing all 25 of those games at carnivals. And the sometimes wonky controls make it feel "realistic.").

Similarly, Midway's Game Party is almost shovelware. But it sold so well that Gamestop now charges $25 for it (MSRP is $20). [Cruisn which is poorly done and more expensive is shovelware.]

Also, as has been stated here, reviewers over-value graphics and sound. Many casual players are used to playing Flash games, so the Wii is a step up for them (while it is a step down for reviewers who were playing the 360 or PS3).

This audience is generally NOT going to buy AAA titles. So the reviews don't matter to them. Fun does.

Of course, there is also sometimes no accounting for bad taste. That would explain some things as well.

Mike from Morgantown

PS -- If I could find Chicken Shoot cheap, I'd probably buy it.