By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - The origin of "casual/hardcore gamers" and other industry bullshit.

Tagged games:

Arius Dion on 29 December 2013

Excellent thread. What this shows me is how powerful marketing can be. It also shows me how self destructive industry can be.

Wii was a huge opportunity to truly have gaming become something more. Gaming lost the stigma of being for loser basement dwellers for a moment. But the industry shunned the Wii and Nintendo abandoned the revolution.

Casual and hardcore is complete bs. And ppl ate it up hook line and sinker. Shunning the market leader has consequences. Nintendo abandoning the revolution has consequences. We will see these consequences clearly as this gen progresses.



Bet between Slimbeast and Arius Dion about Wii sales 2009:


If the Wii sells less than 20 million in 2009 (as defined by VGC sales between week ending 3d Jan 2009 to week ending 4th Jan 2010) Slimebeast wins and get to control Arius Dion's sig for 1 month.

If the Wii sells more than 20 million in 2009 (as defined above) Arius Dion wins and gets to control Slimebeast's sig for 1 month.

Around the Network
Devil_Survivor on 29 December 2013
DonFerrari said:
Devil_Survivor said:
DonFerrari said:
And apparently the gaming industrie have been growing with these so called hardcores from PS1 100M to PS2 160M to PS3+X360 currently at 160M... while going casual Nintendo have hit just one time 100M but not the same level of SW attach ratio... so why would pubs give more attention to "hardcores"??

I'm so tired of the victimism (from feminists and some winny gammers)... they try to invert logic, like its devs fault for not catering for them and not them investing in devs that cater... if devs get their money from their supporters for those kind of games why would they allienate the granted buyers to try and cater to people that don't know why they buy and what to buy?


Dont't try to compare feminists to little whinny gamers because feminists actually had some cases to be made for being the victims of discrimnation like not being able to vote, getting paid the same for the same work as men, not being able to get a divorce, etc. 

I can compare when the poster do that himself... and I'm not talking about real feminists from the beggining of the last centurie... I'm saying about the new ones that complain about earning less but accept the maternity leave and early retirement... they complain about not having the same rights but want to add more privileges at the same time... so yes I can compare, as well as I can compare to gay or other minority groups that see the other side as enemies all the time.

Tell me something who is the other side exactly? White men? is that who you mean? Because if it is then sound a crazy right wing nut job that belongs in the Tea Party. If I'm right then I feel very sorry for you. 



 

DonFerrari on 29 December 2013
Devil_Survivor said:
DonFerrari said:
Devil_Survivor said:
DonFerrari said:
And apparently the gaming industrie have been growing with these so called hardcores from PS1 100M to PS2 160M to PS3+X360 currently at 160M... while going casual Nintendo have hit just one time 100M but not the same level of SW attach ratio... so why would pubs give more attention to "hardcores"??

I'm so tired of the victimism (from feminists and some winny gammers)... they try to invert logic, like its devs fault for not catering for them and not them investing in devs that cater... if devs get their money from their supporters for those kind of games why would they allienate the granted buyers to try and cater to people that don't know why they buy and what to buy?


Dont't try to compare feminists to little whinny gamers because feminists actually had some cases to be made for being the victims of discrimnation like not being able to vote, getting paid the same for the same work as men, not being able to get a divorce, etc. 

I can compare when the poster do that himself... and I'm not talking about real feminists from the beggining of the last centurie... I'm saying about the new ones that complain about earning less but accept the maternity leave and early retirement... they complain about not having the same rights but want to add more privileges at the same time... so yes I can compare, as well as I can compare to gay or other minority groups that see the other side as enemies all the time.

Tell me something who is the other side exactly? White men? is that who you mean? Because if it is then sound a crazy right wing nut job that belongs in the Tea Party. If I'm right then I feel very sorry for you. 

Other side?? Anyone that isn't favorable to them, maybe a straight, a man, a white person, an atheist, etc... Or don't you see feminist threating man as enemies, black people or spanish threating white man as enemies, religious fanatics threats atheist as enemies and vice-versa... anyone that still think white man have a debt to black people because of things that happened long in the past or men to women is always making themselves victms and their counterpart abusive and opresive... I´not in the tea party, but you don't need to feel sorry for me, I'm fine;



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

theRepublic on 29 December 2013
DonFerrari said:
And apparently the gaming industrie have been growing with these so called hardcores from PS1 100M to PS2 160M to PS3+X360 currently at 160M... while going casual Nintendo have hit just one time 100M but not the same level of SW attach ratio... so why would pubs give more attention to "hardcores"??

I'm so tired of the victimism (from feminists and some winny gammers)... they try to invert logic, like its devs fault for not catering for them and not them investing in devs that cater... if devs get their money from their supporters for those kind of games why would they allienate the granted buyers to try and cater to people that don't know why they buy and what to buy?

The PS1 and PS2 hardcore?  Lol.  The reason that so many people bought these is because these were the "casual" consoles of their day.  Their libraries are absolutely filled with "casual" style games you will not find on the N64, Gamecube, and Xbox.  Much like the Wii of the seventh generation.



Switch Code: SW-7377-9189-3397 -- Nintendo Network ID: theRepublic -- Steam ID: theRepublic

Now Playing
Switch - Super Mario Maker 2 (2019)
Switch - The Legend of Zelda: Link's Awakening (2019)
Switch - Bastion (2011/2018)
3DS - Star Fox 64 3D (2011)
3DS - Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney (Trilogy) (2005/2014)
Wii U - Darksiders: Warmastered Edition (2010/2017)
Mobile - The Simpson's Tapped Out and Yugioh Duel Links
PC - Deep Rock Galactic (2020)

DonFerrari on 29 December 2013
theRepublic said:
DonFerrari said:
And apparently the gaming industrie have been growing with these so called hardcores from PS1 100M to PS2 160M to PS3+X360 currently at 160M... while going casual Nintendo have hit just one time 100M but not the same level of SW attach ratio... so why would pubs give more attention to "hardcores"??

I'm so tired of the victimism (from feminists and some winny gammers)... they try to invert logic, like its devs fault for not catering for them and not them investing in devs that cater... if devs get their money from their supporters for those kind of games why would they allienate the granted buyers to try and cater to people that don't know why they buy and what to buy?

The PS1 and PS2 hardcore?  Lol.  The reason that so many people bought these is because these were the "casual" consoles of their day.  Their libraries are absolutely filled with "casual" style games you will not find on the N64, Gamecube, and Xbox.  Much like the Wii of the seventh generation.

If you can't see irony nevermind...



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

Around the Network
Jumpin on 29 December 2013
theRepublic said:
DonFerrari said:
And apparently the gaming industrie have been growing with these so called hardcores from PS1 100M to PS2 160M to PS3+X360 currently at 160M... while going casual Nintendo have hit just one time 100M but not the same level of SW attach ratio... so why would pubs give more attention to "hardcores"??

I'm so tired of the victimism (from feminists and some winny gammers)... they try to invert logic, like its devs fault for not catering for them and not them investing in devs that cater... if devs get their money from their supporters for those kind of games why would they allienate the granted buyers to try and cater to people that don't know why they buy and what to buy?

The PS1 and PS2 hardcore?  Lol.  The reason that so many people bought these is because these were the "casual" consoles of their day.  Their libraries are absolutely filled with "casual" style games you will not find on the N64, Gamecube, and Xbox.  Much like the Wii of the seventh generation.

There are no casual games on PSX, PS2, N64, Gamecube, or Xbox.

Casual games are designed for short play sessions, usually in the area of 1-5 minutes. Some examples of these are Brain Age and Candy Crush Saga.



I describe myself as a little dose of toxic masculinity.

KungKras on 29 December 2013
theRepublic said:
DonFerrari said:
And apparently the gaming industrie have been growing with these so called hardcores from PS1 100M to PS2 160M to PS3+X360 currently at 160M... while going casual Nintendo have hit just one time 100M but not the same level of SW attach ratio... so why would pubs give more attention to "hardcores"??

I'm so tired of the victimism (from feminists and some winny gammers)... they try to invert logic, like its devs fault for not catering for them and not them investing in devs that cater... if devs get their money from their supporters for those kind of games why would they allienate the granted buyers to try and cater to people that don't know why they buy and what to buy?

The PS1 and PS2 hardcore?  Lol.  The reason that so many people bought these is because these were the "casual" consoles of their day.  Their libraries are absolutely filled with "casual" style games you will not find on the N64, Gamecube, and Xbox.  Much like the Wii of the seventh generation.

I'm not arguing against your position with this post, I'm just adding my perspective to your discussion :)

The PS1 and 2 were marketed as "mature", which appealed to the 20 year old male  demographic that the industry started optimizing in the same era.

When the Wii brought in older people, "mature" wouldn't cut it. So they changed it to "hardcore", while the Wii was for "casuals"



I LOVE ICELAND!

arcelonious on 29 December 2013

For me, casual vs. hardcore (in regards to the type of gamer) simply means how much an individual is into something. A casual gamer, for example, may buy only a couple of games a year and average only a few hours a month for gaming, while a hardcore gamer may buy several games a year, and dedicate at least a few hours a week to gaming. I think people are needlessly adding too much emotion to these terms (e.g., cool vs. uncool, mature vs. immature, etc.), when it's simply a measure of how much someone values gaming, a genre, or so on.

Then of course there are games aimed at casual play (i.e., designed for quick play sessions) which isn't exactly synonymous with a casual gamer, because someone who plays a lot of video games may still enjoy those types of games. Just as there are hardcore Scribblenauts fans who dedicate hours each day to a game, there are casual gamers who play Call of Duty and only average a small amount of hours across the year (likely front-loaded with release).



kabamarutr on 29 December 2013
KungKras said:
kabamarutr said:
Let's add some more...

Perhaps, this will make seem a little mean towards ninty, but what the heck, we're having a discussion here.

I'd like you to consider what was Nintendo's move after the Wii. Seeing "the rise of tablets" (who would have missed it?) they tried to merge the two worlds. They created a tablet-joypad to appeal to tablet lovers and embedded the innovation of dual screen gameplay. A sound strategy, if I've ever seen any. So they rushed to get to that ground first. Be the first to grasp that market. They didn't need a strong machine for that! So they set upon the conquest of a new gaming trend.

Yet, it didn't work out (so far at least), as the essence that drew gamers to tablet gaming was not the tablet itself. It was the nature of its games. Connect three gems in a line and here the rewarding "bling", accompanied with flashes and colours and topped with a counter that changes its dials with speed like the old-time cash counters. Bringing, in this manner, the feelings of success, rewarding, glamour, glory and...profit with a few, nearly mindless moves. Rewarding that they didn't find in family life, job or otherwise. Success, that does not come easily, despite the full hours of every day hard work and the toll they take. Glory, that is so praised on movies and shows and so coveted. Money, which is as real in their pockets, as the numbers on the counter.

It's pure psychology.

Just to make things clear. Even from the get-go, Nintendo positioned the Wii as being for EVERYONE. They showed Wii Sports along with Zelda TP and Metroid Prime, as well as a trailer for Mario Galaxy during the Wii reveal. Nintendo's aim was disruptive innovation, IE serve the low-end market, and then with technology advances of their disruptive innovation, they would be able to get to the high tier, pushing their competitors higher and higher up until they are forced out of the market. Also, during their 2008 peak, the Wii alone sold twice the software of the PS3 or 360.

I'm not trying to defend the Wii U. It didn't continue the disruptive trend in the way it was supposed to. But what you cannot say about it was that it was only marketed for "teh cazualz". Again. Look at the games Nintendo are publishing for it. There is a great deal of variety.

The thing is, that when the Wii hit the world. The game industry had been busy for decades optimizing the userbase of young males, and thus alienating all other markets. So they reacted very hostile to the Wii, because the Wii also catered to markets that went against their user base optimization. Sure, they tried to change later by making the spin off "for casualz" kinect and move, but look how that turned out. They never tried to expand gaming, they just released a pink "for girls" chocolate bar.

Well, yes. Each and every manufacturer declares his product suitable for everyone. No one sale can be afforder to be lost. But to "get aboard" my train of thought forget for a while the term "casual".

Manufacturers need the most sales they can achieve. They anticipate market trends, gaming trends, likes and dislikes... Then they calculate the group with the most people in it and target it during development. Whether they are casuals or hardcore is a matter of philosophical debate. I estimate that the WiiU hardware design targeted console gamers that are also intrigued by tablets, simultaneously satisfying loyals and touch-controlled games lovers.

History will show how that decision fairs.



This, I stole from grandpa...It's called soap.

kabamarutr on 29 December 2013
DonFerrari said:
kabamarutr said:
DonFerrari said:
And apparently the gaming industrie have been growing with these so called hardcores from PS1 100M to PS2 160M to PS3+X360 currently at 160M... while going casual Nintendo have hit just one time 100M but not the same level of SW attach ratio... so why would pubs give more attention to "hardcores"??

I'm so tired of the victimism (from feminists and some winny gammers)... they try to invert logic, like its devs fault for not catering for them and not them investing in devs that cater... if devs get their money from their supporters for those kind of games why would they allienate the granted buyers to try and cater to people that don't know why they buy and what to buy?


I agree with this and will add some.

Indeed, the gaming industry has been growing. Just add the total sales for each generation and you will see it clearly. The allocation of those new entries demonstrates the gaming style of preference. Clearly there is a grand amount of people out there who want to play "casually". This does not mean Nintendo. It means that when they get home after a tiring day, they need to settle and relax with a game that does not require much on behalf of the player. Some simple arcade, a mindless shooter or whatever fits your bill.

We then come to a point where the industry seeks what those people like to play. Is it shooters? Do shooters sell? They will mass-produce them until they become unprofitable again. Is it motion games, with cameras or other devices? The market will be flooded with those. If the analysts believe that the profit will be worth it, whole console developping strategies will be based on it (see XB1 and Kinect2).

We need to understand that the industry is a soulless and money eating beast (and rightly so). They don't care what "the few" like. They will fork out what people buys most -> what will bring them more profit. I, myself, hate this. I tend to cling to indie games which bring me the nostalgia of the "old school": the 8-bit and 16-bit. But I cannot expect the industry to go back to the late 80s.

To conclude, such was Nintendo's decision regarding Wii. They anticipated that motion sensing is what people are going to go crazy about and invested on it. They wanted the money and they succeeded. Such was their success, that the other two dropped the "mantle of seriousness" and set sail to the same direction. Because in that direction lied the pot of gold, at least at the time.

You were spot on... market sell and develop to what they think is profitable and don't care much about to who they sell just how much it sell... marketing will always try to put their product with a nice image, sometimes that image would be hardcore and other would be seem as casual (but usually that is more related to our bias on the subject than what the market really wants).

I don't see it as inteligent to just try to sell to minorities and hope to profit instead to sell to majority and broaden the chance of sucess... and if Ninty is being left aside they should be the ones trying to change their images not the devs.


Indeed. Hardcore or casual, it's a matter of philosophical debate. I, for one, cannot define any of those two terms. It will be very easier to understand by everybody, if we consider that romance does not exist in the gaming industry.

A company produces a... product. Be it machine or software. If the product is good, the buyer spends his money on it and... that's it! No loves made, no loves lost. The buyer/seller relationship ends there. 

Companies don't brand people as "casuals" and "hardcore" and spend money in developping with these ambiguous terms in mind. They find market trends, anticipate feedback and reception and act accordingly.

It's us who then decide who to brand "cool" or "noob" and it's really "where my choice stands" and "where the rest of the choices stand", respectively. 



This, I stole from grandpa...It's called soap.