Unlike you, businessmen and investors are aware of concepts like diversification and opportunity costs. They understand that these are not mutually exclusive strategies.

The irony is that people who don't like video games use many of the same arguments. They say that people who play video games "are fucking stupid and they have no taste".

So really those of you who whine against casuals are no better than those anti-video game people.

Um nintendo stopped using that seal well before sony entered the market. The Seal is one of the reasons why 3rd parties disliked Nintendo so much, and when they got the chance they left them.

Also how many wii fit owners would buy another wii fit? I don't see this happening. Unless they add alot of stuff to it I don't think it would sell anywhere as much as wii fit.

I hear you, and I agree 100% that the "casuals" have always been the majority of gamers, although not necessarily the bulk of the software purchasers. But the reason I personally mock the snobcore is not because they're fewer than they think, not because they're less important than they think, and certainly not because of their tastes in gaming (which for a large part I share). I look down on them because they look down on others, simply because the others are different.

Too many of the people sneering at the "casuals" do so because they enjoy games that the snobcore think are a crappy waste of time. "Mini-games lol" sums up far too many of their opinions, and the fact that the people playing the games are enjoying Carnival Games or Mario and Sonic can't mean that the game is actually good for some people, it means that those people have crappy taste. I wouldn't care much if they didn't shove their opinions in our faces all the time, except that that type of attitude is ultimately harmful to our hobby.

The "bigger is better" philosophy that the snobcore demand has been killing off companies and forcing mergers and consolidations. Even as more money pours into the industry, more companies are posting losses and shutting down their doors, or simply becoming another bauble in a giant's diadem. We MUST move away from that, and the Wii and DS are the best vehicles we have for doing so.

Worse yet, alienating the new players runs the risk of turning them off of gaming, leaving the industry back in the dying state it was going. And I don't just mean financially (although that's important): I mean socially as well. It's cliche, but the Wii and DS really are becoming mainstream in a way that even the PS2 never was: it's not something that's played by just a handful of the same demographics, but something which is trying to offer something to everyone. And it seems to be succeeding, which means the image of the gamer as the loser who's still in his parent's basement might finally go away.

Shall we become the next comic book industry, with its stale offerings and ostracized fanbase? Or do we want the industry to have something to offer to everybody, which not only brings in more money but also new ideas? If the snobcore have their way, we will go the way of the former, and that's something I really, really don't want to see happen.

Don't forget market saturation ... Romantic comedies are far less expensive than big budget blockbuster movies and tend to have (much) higher profit margins yet movie studios continue to make both types of movies. If they only made one type of movie few of those movies would be all that popular, while many consumers would see not point in seeing movies.

1) Sony Playstation is what happened. Nintendo couldn't afford to maintain their arrogant policies with third party developers after the PS systems wiped the floor with them.

Casual gamers are not the only demographic in the video game market, and neither are the core gamers. If Nintendo caters to both at the same time, I really don't see the problem.

If you're implying that Nintendo will eventually abandon the core gamers for the mainstream public for one reason or another or even attempt to oust the core gamers completely, you're just as shortsighted as the bugger who wrote that pointless diatribe in the OP.

I agree some, disagree some. For fun's sake, I'll summarize the disagreement.

I'm torn on the "looking down" on people thing, because I admittedly don't think much of the idolatry of video game storytelling. I'd be a bit of a hypocrite if I didn't mention that I share some of that snobbish attitude, albeit aimed in a different direction. The sort of dreck for which we would rightly mock Hollywood is praised and exalted on the internets if it happens to come with a controller and a 30-hour-plus running time attached. It's a very strange blind spot that this particular subculture has.

Then again, I'm the first to say that quality is subjective. I don't like Smash Bros., Guitar Hero, or Gran Turismo, to pick three, but I don't think they're bad games. On the contrary, I think it's clear that as far as their genres go, they're at or near the top. They just don't appeal to me. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, to each his own, c'est la vie, insert tolerant cliche here.

On one ofyour other notes, I don't think that the Wii audience is going to look all that different from the PS2's in the end. I see both as largely mainstream-oriented machines. The casual segment is definitely more visible this time around, but I don't know if it's significantly larger. If anything, it's probably just natural growth of the indsutry as the population grows and new generations find gaming. There have always been new gamers - it just happens to be highlighted this time around, the way "mature gamers" were mistakenly thought to be a new breed in he 90s.

Wow, this made me laugh.

Look, guy, people aren't making you feel ashamed because you're wrong, but because you're selfish. You don't care what anyone else wants: you want what you want, and if other people want to lead video games in a different direction, then as you said: "Fuck him."

I would not use the Hollywood movie system as an example for your point.  Hollywood studios gladly kill the souls of movies in order for better profit.  Look at Die Hard 4 as an example.  PG-13 movies have a larger crowd, but Die Hard is a movie that should not be pulling punches and upping the stunt factor.  The vast majority of blockbuster movies are garbage aimed at the center of a target, not trying to create an engaging story.  Luckily there are smaller studios out there to provide some engaging content.

I refuse to click on the link because this is obviously some jack off just trying to drum up some traffic to his pathetic site.