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

Forums - Gaming - Switch's Gimmick Doesn't Target The Casual Gamer

Swordmasterman said:
zorg1000 said:

A person who plays games casually, as in something they do while relaxing in their free time or while hanging out with friends.

That is the reason why 3 party games din't sold very well on the Wii.

What? I'm not sure what that has to do with anything...........

Regardless, over 100 3rd party games sold over 1 million and overall 3rd party sales are around 500 million on Wii.

In case you don't know, that's almost the same amount of NES+SNES 3rd party sales....you know consoles considered to have great 3rd party sales.



When the herd loses its way, the shepard must kill the bull that leads them astray.

Around the Network
Soundwave said:
zorg1000 said:

A person who plays games casually, as in something they do while relaxing in their free time or while hanging out with friends.

That can be literally 95% of the industry, lol. 

There's a difference between a soccer mom who's extent of gaming ability is Angry Birds on a phone or Just Dance, and she'd never be able to complete a game even like Mario 64, and someone who can play Mario 64 just fine, for instance. 

Drawing a dilineation there isn't incorrect, because it's significant, those two audiences are not one and the same. I would more accurately the industry falls into 3 rough pools with some overlap but not a ton ...

Pool 1 - A person who doesn't really care that much about gaming, likes to play once in a while to burn 10-15 minutes at most a day except for that one time they got hooked on Candy Crush and played for 4 straight hours and thought that was an impressive feat. Mostly plays on smartphones/Facebook browser, doesn't like complex games, virtually any type of 3D game is beyond their abilities or interest. Even after 6 years of having a Wii that they played intermittenly, they still wouldn't be able to get even 1/4 of the way through a game like Ocarina of Time even with a gun to their head. 

Pool 2 - This person can basically play any type of game you put in front of them, generally have been playing games since childhood, but they prefer the 'mainstream' games that appeal to their specific real life interests like Call of Duty, NBA, Madden NFL, GTA, Forza, Halo, etc. They prefer to play with friends too. They don't follow the industry closely or at all in most cases. Just wanna have fun, but have a relatively high level of skill, given enough time/practice they would be good at any type of game. Gaming is more "wish fulfillment" for this crowd (I wanna be a sports star, gangster, super soldier, X-Wing pilot, that's cool). 

Pool 3 - Hardcore gamer, they understand industry nuances like the difference between Japanese and American games, keep track of developers and even know the designers of games. They are the wine connosieurs of gaming and early adopters for most/all platforms, they are quite picky in what they will and won't play. Oddly this crowd inadvertantly often becomes the actual buying audience for games like Splatoon because only they can appreciate certain aspects of that game, whereas Pool 1 will shun the game for being too complex and Pool 2 will shun the game because it doesn't allign with their "I just want badass fantasy fullfilment in my games". 

And then you have Pool 4 which is kids ... they are drawn to just about any type of video game like a fly to a light (especially boys). But by age 8/9/10 or they go into either pool 2 or 3 (ie: wanting to play GTA because the older kids at school think it's cool, or loving games so much that they become Pool 3). 

Exactly, 95% of people who play games are casual.

And you are still being too black/white when it comes to discussing demographics.



When the herd loses its way, the shepard must kill the bull that leads them astray.

Am I the only one that's beginning to get sick of the word "gimmick"? When anyone else does them they're called "features", but now even portability is a "gimmick" when Nintendo is involved.



irstupid said:
spemanig said:
That all depends on how you define a casual gamer. I certainly wouldn't consider every person who knows how to use a traditional controller a "core" gamer.

A core gamer is an informed gamer. A casual gamer is someone who only plays games casually and is mostly uninformed about the games industry. Casual isn't restricted to people who like motion games and mobile only. So yeah, I'd say Switch does target casuals.

I mostly consider a casual gamer as someone who gets their gaming knowledge from TV's commercials or seeing a friends system/game and going "oh, that's neat. What's that?"

People online bitching about FPS, graphics, power, price, ect are not casual. And I'm sure if you were to ask a mod or owner of this site how many people are this site, it is but a fraction of a fraction of the total gamers out there.

"Core" gamers are the minority.

Will Switch's gimmick (people love to label Nintendo things condesendinly gimmicks don't they?) attract casuals? Very likely initially at least. All it takes is someone to see another on a bus/train/lobby or somewhere playing Mario Kart, Zelda, Skyrim or something on their Switch for the other person playing Clash of Clans to be intrigued/jealous and want that.

The Wii sold gangbusters on that word of mouth/try it out, ect. People had a blast playing Wii sports at a firends and so got it. I'm guessing the initial draw of the Tablet playing great games portable will attract many. It all depends on how long that lasts. Nintendo needs ot keep games pumping out that are fun to keep the tablets in the wild for others to see and want them.

So this is my message to all Nintendo people who want the system to "win". PLAY IN PUBLIC. Don't be ashamed of playing a Nintendo game in public. Be loud and proud with your system. People seeing you playing is free advertising for Nintendo. Now when those "region free" Waifu games come out, then maybe stay hidden again.

the wii sold like gangbusters by selling to a certain kind of casual.  the kind of casual that never played on a 3D gen console before (n64, ps1, ps2, xbox).  people that found consoles to be intimidating but found the wiimote to be inviting.  

i still remember that time i was at the store and the sales guy was trying to sell a older lady on a sonic game to which she said,.. "oh i dunno.  running and jumping.  i don't think i'm ready for that."

 

use whatever label you want to describe the audience that made wii successful.  that label of people aren't going to be attracted to the switch.



zorg1000 said:
Soundwave said:

That can be literally 95% of the industry, lol. 

There's a difference between a soccer mom who's extent of gaming ability is Angry Birds on a phone or Just Dance, and she'd never be able to complete a game even like Mario 64, and someone who can play Mario 64 just fine, for instance. 

Drawing a dilineation there isn't incorrect, because it's significant, those two audiences are not one and the same. I would more accurately the industry falls into 3 rough pools with some overlap but not a ton ...

Pool 1 - A person who doesn't really care that much about gaming, likes to play once in a while to burn 10-15 minutes at most a day except for that one time they got hooked on Candy Crush and played for 4 straight hours and thought that was an impressive feat. Mostly plays on smartphones/Facebook browser, doesn't like complex games, virtually any type of 3D game is beyond their abilities or interest. Even after 6 years of having a Wii that they played intermittenly, they still wouldn't be able to get even 1/4 of the way through a game like Ocarina of Time even with a gun to their head. 

Pool 2 - This person can basically play any type of game you put in front of them, generally have been playing games since childhood, but they prefer the 'mainstream' games that appeal to their specific real life interests like Call of Duty, NBA, Madden NFL, GTA, Forza, Halo, etc. They prefer to play with friends too. They don't follow the industry closely or at all in most cases. Just wanna have fun, but have a relatively high level of skill, given enough time/practice they would be good at any type of game. Gaming is more "wish fulfillment" for this crowd (I wanna be a sports star, gangster, super soldier, X-Wing pilot, that's cool). 

Pool 3 - Hardcore gamer, they understand industry nuances like the difference between Japanese and American games, keep track of developers and even know the designers of games. They are the wine connosieurs of gaming and early adopters for most/all platforms, they are quite picky in what they will and won't play. Oddly this crowd inadvertantly often becomes the actual buying audience for games like Splatoon because only they can appreciate certain aspects of that game, whereas Pool 1 will shun the game for being too complex and Pool 2 will shun the game because it doesn't allign with their "I just want badass fantasy fullfilment in my games". 

And then you have Pool 4 which is kids ... they are drawn to just about any type of video game like a fly to a light (especially boys). But by age 8/9/10 or they go into either pool 2 or 3 (ie: wanting to play GTA because the older kids at school think it's cool, or loving games so much that they become Pool 3). 

Exactly, 95% of people who play games are casual.

And you are still being too black/white when it comes to discussing demographics.

Yes I agree with that, buuuuuuuut

The bulk of Sony/MS are "casual" gamers to a degree but it's kinda disingenious to use this as an arguement because I think we all know full well when the term "casual" is used on gaming message board discussions, we are talking about people who are *very* casual, as in the types of people who can't really play anything much beyond a 2D Mario, and even more than that, really don't have any desire to want to play anything much beyond that. 

These are people who quite honestly can't even properly play 90% of what Nintendo publishes on a yearly basis. They would be completely utterly lost if you put them in a room and made them play ... Zelda or even a 3D Mario and would likely give up after 5-10 minutes. 

They mainly today game on smart devices. From that POV, it is correct to say Switch isn't really a device for them, there are far cheaper ways to play Just Dance these days. 



Around the Network
kitler53 said:
irstupid said:

I mostly consider a casual gamer as someone who gets their gaming knowledge from TV's commercials or seeing a friends system/game and going "oh, that's neat. What's that?"

People online bitching about FPS, graphics, power, price, ect are not casual. And I'm sure if you were to ask a mod or owner of this site how many people are this site, it is but a fraction of a fraction of the total gamers out there.

"Core" gamers are the minority.

Will Switch's gimmick (people love to label Nintendo things condesendinly gimmicks don't they?) attract casuals? Very likely initially at least. All it takes is someone to see another on a bus/train/lobby or somewhere playing Mario Kart, Zelda, Skyrim or something on their Switch for the other person playing Clash of Clans to be intrigued/jealous and want that.

The Wii sold gangbusters on that word of mouth/try it out, ect. People had a blast playing Wii sports at a firends and so got it. I'm guessing the initial draw of the Tablet playing great games portable will attract many. It all depends on how long that lasts. Nintendo needs ot keep games pumping out that are fun to keep the tablets in the wild for others to see and want them.

So this is my message to all Nintendo people who want the system to "win". PLAY IN PUBLIC. Don't be ashamed of playing a Nintendo game in public. Be loud and proud with your system. People seeing you playing is free advertising for Nintendo. Now when those "region free" Waifu games come out, then maybe stay hidden again.

the wii sold like gangbusters by selling to a certain kind of casual.  the kind of casual that never played on a 3D gen console before (n64, ps1, ps2, xbox).  people that found consoles to be intimidating but found the wiimote to be inviting.  

i still remember that time i was at the store and the sales guy was trying to sell a older lady on a sonic game to which she said,.. "oh i dunno.  running and jumping.  i don't think i'm ready for that."

 

use whatever label you want to describe the audience that made wii successful.  that label of people aren't going to be attracted to the switch.

And I do not consider grandmas and soccer moms or whatever other group you want ot lump into that as casuals. They non gamers that were lured by some neat toy.

I'm talking about the millions of casual gamers who own a PS3/4 or 360/One. There are millions of them. Majority of every userbase is casuals. THis has nothign to do with soccer moms or grandmas.



irstupid said:
kitler53 said:

the wii sold like gangbusters by selling to a certain kind of casual.  the kind of casual that never played on a 3D gen console before (n64, ps1, ps2, xbox).  people that found consoles to be intimidating but found the wiimote to be inviting.  

i still remember that time i was at the store and the sales guy was trying to sell a older lady on a sonic game to which she said,.. "oh i dunno.  running and jumping.  i don't think i'm ready for that."

 

use whatever label you want to describe the audience that made wii successful.  that label of people aren't going to be attracted to the switch.

And I do not consider grandmas and soccer moms or whatever other group you want ot lump into that as casuals. They non gamers that were lured by some neat toy.

I'm talking about the millions of casual gamers who own a PS3/4 or 360/One. There are millions of them. Majority of every userbase is casuals. THis has nothign to do with soccer moms or grandmas.

That's just semantics. 

I think you know full well when people say "casual" on a message board like this they mean grandmas/soccer moms/"I don't like a game unless I can win in 5 minutes" types of people that if they are playing anything today it's largely smartphone apps. 



irstupid said:
kitler53 said:

the wii sold like gangbusters by selling to a certain kind of casual.  the kind of casual that never played on a 3D gen console before (n64, ps1, ps2, xbox).  people that found consoles to be intimidating but found the wiimote to be inviting.  

i still remember that time i was at the store and the sales guy was trying to sell a older lady on a sonic game to which she said,.. "oh i dunno.  running and jumping.  i don't think i'm ready for that."

 

use whatever label you want to describe the audience that made wii successful.  that label of people aren't going to be attracted to the switch.

And I do not consider grandmas and soccer moms or whatever other group you want ot lump into that as casuals. They non gamers that were lured by some neat toy.

I'm talking about the millions of casual gamers who own a PS3/4 or 360/One. There are millions of them. Majority of every userbase is casuals. THis has nothign to do with soccer moms or grandmas.

i'm not sure what to say.  i don't want to go on grammer-nazing the word "casual".  i'm trying to bring up a point of view on NSs ability to attract an audience.  do you have anything to directly comment on that?



Soundwave said:
irstupid said:

And I do not consider grandmas and soccer moms or whatever other group you want ot lump into that as casuals. They non gamers that were lured by some neat toy.

I'm talking about the millions of casual gamers who own a PS3/4 or 360/One. There are millions of them. Majority of every userbase is casuals. THis has nothign to do with soccer moms or grandmas.

That's just semantics. 

I think you know full well when people say "casual" on a message board like this they mean grandmas/soccer moms/"I don't like a game unless I can win in 5 minutes" types of people that if they are playing anything today it's largely smartphone apps. 

That is bull and you know it. Beyond some Wii Sports type of game, there is a zero percent chance anyoen is considering a grandma or soccer mom playing.

Now bring up Just Dance or something and you may have an argument for a group of teenage girls who don't game playing that. But leave that grandma/soccer mom crap at home. Casual term was around long before the Wii came to be. What were those soccer mom/grandmas playing back then? Oh that's right, NOTHING? Just like they are playing now. NOTHIGN. So leave them in their nursing homes and mini vans where they belong and out of our conversations.



Soundwave said:
zorg1000 said:

Exactly, 95% of people who play games are casual.

And you are still being too black/white when it comes to discussing demographics.

Yes I agree with that, buuuuuuuut

The bulk of Sony/MS are "casual" gamers to a degree but it's kinda disingenious to use this as an arguement because I think we all know full well when the term "casual" is used on gaming message board discussions, we are talking about people who are *very* casual, as in the types of people who can't really play anything much beyond a 2D Mario, and even more than that, really don't have any desire to want to play anything much beyond that. 

These are people who quite honestly can't even properly play 90% of what Nintendo publishes on a yearly basis.

They mainly today game on smart devices. 

So basically people whose extent of gaming is nothing more than free games on their phone that require nothing more than poking a screen with a single finger and play just to waste time were never going to buy a gaming console no matter what.

The vast majority of mobile gamers were never Wii or DS owners considering that Wii+DS sold about 255 million while the amount of people who play on mobile is in the billions.

At best you are looking at like 10% of the mobile gaming audience having ever owned a Wii or DS so it's also very disingenious to say that the Wii/DS audience and the mobile audience are one in the same.



When the herd loses its way, the shepard must kill the bull that leads them astray.