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

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Play Magazine: Nintendo has officially gone off the reservation

RolStoppable said:
ckmlb said:
RolStoppable said:

I am not worried at all about that article. It's just the editor's opinion about Nintendo's new approach.

Mario Kart Wii is coming and proving his assumptions wrong that there won't be any new games for core gamers anymore.

Nintendo is ruining gaming as we know it indeed.


So you think the editor of the magazine who just visited Nintendo doesn't know about Mario Kart coming to Wii and we do right?


I have read enough about Nintendo's philosophy behind the Wii and the DS to be sure that they won't abandon the core gamer market ever.

Do you really believe an editor of a magazine that refers to himself as casual gamer has more knowledge than a dedicated gamer that's highly interested in Nintendo's business plans? 


Are you for real??

"I drink Coca Cola every day, and I've done a high school project 10 years ago on Coca Cola business plans.. so I'm a Coca Cola expert and I know more then anyone in the Coca Cola business"  <-- does that sound retarded? Yep it does, it's just as dumb as the comment you're trying to make here.

 



Proud Member of GAIBoWS (Gamers Against Irrational Bans of Weezy & Squilliam)

                   

Around the Network

First of all, Nintendo has always been a "casual" games company. Being a "core gamer" company creates systems like XBox, not Game Boy or NES.

If they are commiting any sin, it is not "abandoning the hardcore for the casuals," but "abandoning the casuals for the non-gamers."

Others have said they are "abandoning the people who got them where they are"--but can you blame them? Those people got Nintendo to 3rd place in the home console race! The people who really "got them where they are" are the DS buyers, not the Gamecube buyers (both of us).

But in a year when Nintendo is releasing a main series entry in the Mario, Zelda, Pokemon, Smash Bros. and Metroid franchises, I'd argue they haven't abandoned their Gamecube/GBA base just yet.

Maybe they will next year, but lets wait until they unveil their lineup! This editor somehow determined Nintendo's long-term strategy from an event where no new games were reveiled. He in fact states that nothing new was reveiled, and the fact that he can conclude anything from this suggests he was predisposed to that anything in the first place.

I hope Nintendo doesn't reveil anything new at E3, because I'm convinved eventually one of these yahoos "in the industry" will literally put on a straw hat and take the ol' guitar out to the porch to sing a Nintendone-me-wrong song.



"[Our former customers] are unable to find software which they WANT to play."
"The way to solve this problem lies in how to communicate what kind of games [they CAN play]."

Satoru Iwata, Nintendo President. Only slightly paraphrased.

RolStoppable said:
Legend11 said:

Maybe I'm wrong but the link you posted was for analysts and not for videogame magazine Editor In Chiefs. Also many of those analysts are likely not into videogames at all and have never attended any company's Gamer's Day or know many people behind the scenes when it comes to videogames. Also to simply jump from one group of people and infer that it applies to another is a weak argument at best.


The link was for analysts indeed.

I guess you know Pachter, he is probably the most popular analyst for the videogame business and he is often quite far off with his predictions (also about the outcome of this generation) even though he follows this industry since years.

The point of my argument was that people who are paid to pay attention to the market and its trends (be it analysts or journalists) can be off with their assumptions. Just because it is their job to write about the videogame market doesn't neccessarly mean that they are right. Journalists often tend to repeat what analysts have preached, so it's not that the case that there is no relation between those two groups.

Just out of interest: Why do you criticize my argument as being weak, but totally ignore konnichiwa's argument in the same quote which is without a doubt far weaker than mine?


 Maybe he understand mine who knows. Journalist almost never repeat the words of analysts.
I can remember when everybody said (anaylysts) PS2 is to expensive, not many games it will not sell 40 million, look now!  Many editors of viedeo gaming magazines were against those analysts and they were right about it; And to answer your question about will PS3 sell 110 million,  Why not?

The market of people who play games grows and more people can afford consoles.

Even this can be possible:   Wii 180 million, PS3 and X360 more than 110 million. 






DonWii said:
ANOTHER OPINION ABOUT THE NINTENDO MEDIA SUMMIT:

From GameLife Wired Blogs Editor:

All the same, it seems like Nintendo's aims here were to get the press a day full of unfettered hands-on access to all the games that we're not likely to pay attention to at what is sure to be a crazy clusterf**k of an E3 in July. For my part, I certainly wouldn't have put the time into Strikers or Brain Academy had they not had this event. So I understand why they did this. But it doesn't leave a very good impression to do it by sending out a press release that deliberately teased us with the tantalizing possibility of playing the heavy hitters, then presenting a lineup of also-rans and niche titles once we were all trapped in Seattle.

While he was dissapointed, he did not see it as the end of Nintendo's focus of the hardcore. He was a bit more rational, IMO.

However, as I have stated, judge Nintendo after E3.

Interesting to see a different take on the issue from another journalist.

Why are you quoting your words?

 

Love this words:  . For my part, I certainly wouldn't have put the time into Strikers or Brain Academy had they not had this event. 






Around the Network
Erik Aston said:
First of all, Nintendo has always been a "casual" games company. Being a "core gamer" company creates systems like XBox, not Game Boy or NES.

If they are commiting any sin, it is not "abandoning the hardcore for the casuals," but "abandoning the casuals for the non-gamers."

Others have said they are "abandoning the people who got them where they are"--but can you blame them? Those people got Nintendo to 3rd place in the home console race! The people who really "got them where they are" are the DS buyers, not the Gamecube buyers (both of us).

But in a year when Nintendo is releasing a main series entry in the Mario, Zelda, Pokemon, Smash Bros. and Metroid franchises, I'd argue they haven't abandoned their Gamecube/GBA base just yet.

Maybe they will next year, but lets wait until they unveil their lineup! This editor somehow determined Nintendo's long-term strategy from an event where no new games were reveiled. He in fact states that nothing new was reveiled, and the fact that he can conclude anything from this suggests he was predisposed to that anything in the first place.

I hope Nintendo doesn't reveil anything new at E3, because I'm convinved eventually one of these yahoos "in the industry" will literally put on a straw hat and take the ol' guitar out to the porch to sing a Nintendone-me-wrong song.

Interesting approach...



konnichiwa said:
Why are you quoting your words?

 See if people read it and stop debating.



i dont think nintendo will abandon the hardcore gamers like myself but with the wii it will definitely have more casual games but Mario, Metriod and Zelda will fill in for the hardcore but needs more hardcore gaming then just Mario, Metriod and Zelda. Third Party will have splited casual and hardcore games. for example EA has Madden and Need For Speed for the hardcore while Boogie and MY SIMS for casual games.



konnichiwa said:

Why are you quoting your words?

 

Love this words: . For my part, I certainly wouldn't have put the time into Strikers or Brain Academy had they not had this event.

Well, I guess there is no convincing you then. You missed the whole point of what he was trying to say.

 



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.



No, it's not going to stop  'Til you wise up
No, it's not going to stop  So just ... give up
- Aimee Mann