I find these definitions tough in this way. I’m pretty sure that what makes someone a “hard core” gamer is the willingness and availability of time to spend a significant proportion of their time playing. Someone to whom video games are a very big part of their life and their skill at them makes an important contribution to their self image. This leads me to define a “hard core game” as the type of game that primarily appeals to that group. A game that has a significant and steep learning curve, is intense and competitive, has a long immersive storyline and generally is fairly violent in theme.

The other side of the coin is, to me, much harder to define. Maybe we should borrow a page from VGchartz and call them others. This group ranges from those who share hard core taste and standards for production values but lack the time; all the way to those that only want very easy games to learn for social/party gaming. The game reviewers seem to me to only recognize these two stereotypical groups and to score mainly in terms of the games appeal to one group, the hardcore.

Now here is where I see a problem, what about other games. Does the fact a game does not appeal to the “hard core” gamer make it less of a game. Not if it works well in a different group it shouldn’t. Take children; a lot of games are written for them. Probably more should be. At one time most games were written for them. Now if they are even mentioned in a review it’s in a dismissive way like “kids might like this, nothing here for anybody else.” So what’s wrong with that? Why has the “gold standard” for games become a male old enough that he probably ought not to be spending that much time playing games anyway. If you don’t believe me ask their wives and/or boss/professor.

What about a gamer, like me, who knows and appreciates quality but does not have the taste or time for epics like GTA. My gaming comes in short  30 min packages when I take a quick break from RL. I tend to like games like MK Wii because I can play that brief a time and still have a fickin ball. Am I less of a gamer because I don’t have unlimited time to devote towards it? It would be like assuming that only hookers can appreciate sex because they spend a lot more time at it than I do.

What about someone who only likes a few specialized games? So what? If I buy a tennis racket, no one assumes I also want to play football.

There are so many different types of gamers with different needs and tastes that I just think this male 16-30 centric  judging may no longer by very useful and as a consequence scores don’t reflect the ultimate success or failure of a game the way they should.  We constantly hear comparisons of Metacritic scores over 90 as some indicator of top games. Is it?

Let’s take our top selling games this week worldwide. Eliminating the bundled games, the top selling games were MK Wii, Wii Fit, and New SMB. None of them is a member of the exclusive 90+ and yet their sales seem to indicate otherwise. Mario Kart Wii only scored 82 but sold almost a MILLION copies in one week, 37 weeks after launch. Wii Fit (is it even a game?)scored 80, selling 800K over a year after launch. There is something wrong with this picture.

What I think is wrong is trying to judge like one judge fits all and that just is no longer true.

 That attitude seems born mostly out of a totally unrealistic and childlike belief that if you ignore something it will go away. Actually a central part of Nintendo strategy was to elicit this type of non-reaction.

As an individual gamer that is certainly your choice. There is at least two current systems I pretty much ignore myself. For a journalist who pretends to be a professional, to blow off over half the market is plain stupid and self defeating.

 Such is your privledge. I think their strategy is the only one that makes sense and I am very confident that gaming will not go back to the old control system. I used it for decades. I never particularl liked it.. I leaned to hate it. Without it I just wouldn't game at all.

You think the analogy is ridiculous. So did the major surgeons of the time, but history proved it true and will again.

 I never said you wouldn't or they should. I just think they better realize that not everyone is  an 18 year old Male like you. We already know what you like and that you'll like the reviews. You are not however the whole world.

Sorry to disappoint you. You are MALE and 24. Your response is perfectly reasonable in that the reviewers were written for you and by people like you so I think it only appropriate that you are suitably appreciative. I'm sure that the difference between scoring on Wii Fit and its sales performance only concerns you in terms of what's wrong with those idiots taht keep buying the damn thing, not in whats wrong with reviews that didn't see it coming.

I think it is ok to not like the Nintendo way of doing things but the HD fans just attack it with aggression. Nintendo fans then have to jump all over, you know the amount of cursing and dissing "hardcore" gamers have said about the Wii, how can't Wii fans not respond.

I never said anything mean in a vulgar manner about PS3 or Xbox 360, I might say I don't like one or the other much or one is not doing so well, etc... But never just came out and rant how bad the console is (maybe the company as a whole but not the console itself). I understand people not liking the Wii but people have turned it to hate and calling it the doom of all gaming. People saying this game is a "pile of crap" or shovelware for every single game does not make other people feel it is ok to LIKE the Wii.

So it is ok to not understand and like the Wii but other kinds of gamers should also make it ok for other gamers to like the Wii. Please accept the Wii and understand people like those games you call "shovelware" =[

People who find traditional controls dont deserve to play videogames. Learn it or leave it. Why should I be forced to play dumbed down and simplified games while the newbies arent forced to learn the hardcore way?

Actually, NSMB does have a 90+ rating (or very close to it). Things is though, do you think the game would be selling nearly as well as it is now if it had starred Wario instead of Mario?
It doesn't matter if EA's fitness game turns out to be better than Wii Fit in every way. It's got no chance in hell of selling as much.

Quality often has very little effect on sales. Most of it's brand recognition, marketing and hype.

Lets see, you're male. You don't give an age but from your avatar I'm going to guess 16-25, whatever.

Actually, I'm not angr. At my age I find most human folly amusing, sometimes interesting but I'll never get upset over video GAMES. They just aren't that important.

I don't even pay that much attention to vidoe game reviews because they are as a rule shallow and poorly written and seldom of real value.

I just wanted to make an observation that of late, they have gotten so frustrated with the fact that their reviews while seeming to have a vast effect in the HD world often seriously hurting games they didn't even dislike that much, but no noticable effect in the Wii and DS world, that they are showing a petty spitefulness. It only makes them look silly but if they don't mind looking like a horses's patoot they should go right ahead.