For the three-millionth time, what makes a game "core" is for it to have a high learning curve in order to "master" playing it, thus requiring a player to spend high amounts of time playing it in order to be competitive against the game's best players.

So, let's look at Mario Kart Wii and Smash Bros. Some of the highest learning curves in the entire videogaming industry. That would, therefore, make them some of the most "core" titles out there.

I own SMG, Zelda, MK, Brawl, WarioWare, Metroid, and Paper Mario. I've played Mario Party 8 and Strikers. I played Animal Crossing on the gamecube.

And it seems your definitions of hardcore are quite different from mine. Call of Duty does have some harcore elements to it, like the online leveling system, but it's still a casual shooter that anyone can just pick up and play. Much like Halo.

@tonestarr

outlaw is talking about actual hardcore games like certain pc games. SSBB and MKwii are definitely not hardcore because their learning curve is not actually that steep compared to games like civ/ starcraft.

secondly "Core" is just a marketing term used to describe the majority of the owners purchasing habits, kind of like the term "market share" but more in relation to the IP's themselves as brands that are synonymous with the console.

This. I was talking to Kasz about this earlier. It's all made up by gamers to separate themselves from other people to make themselves feel like superior video game players.

Again, you guys clearly haven't played much Mario Kart or Smash Bros. There are elements in both games that require an incredibly steep amount of learning to master.

The problems you guys are encountering are that, unlike Starcraft or Civ, these games are also newcomer-friendly - they can be picked up and played by any random chump, but pit a newcomer against a seasoned veteran and you'll see it differently.

That's the difference between niche hardcore and mainstream hardcore. Both may still have a high learning curve, but mainstream hardcore can at least be played by a noob and enjoyed, even if he sucks at it comparitively.

As for y'all's other statements... you know you're contradicting yourselves, right? Saying "Those games aren't core!" while simultaneously arguing that "core" is a creation by elitist gamers to feel superior... well, I guess you're not contradicting yourselves necessarily - you COULD be admitting that you're stuck-up elitist scumbags, but I doubt that...

More division on a stupid term. I wasn just going by what I thought most people considered a hardcore game. I just don't see how a game like Mario Kart or Brawl could be considered that traditional definition. You can tweak things by making up "mainstream hardcore" for it to fit you though.

Total = 55.8M
50m user base

360 Top10 = 55.61M
30m

PS3 = 34.94M
22

does not look that good when you look at their user base.

If i was a dev id make a 360/PS3 maybe PC also game and totally avoid the wii.

I think the OP was using CORE in terms of core Nintendo franchises that existed prior to this generation.

Also, for the record, the top 10 Nintendo Wii games this generation have sold 142.28M. If you remove purchases of Wii Sports that would not have been made, the total is still over 120M (that is applying the 44% attach rate in Japan where it is sold separately for FULL PRICE). Related to that, both the Xbox 360 and PS3 have at least one game each that are among their top 10 that have been bundled.

Mike from Morgantown

outlaw never said "core" he said those games weren't "hardcore". and I'm really sorry but I must challenge the idea that MKwii and SSBB are hardcore. I know you like them and I know they are deep, but there really is not much to worry about in those two games. There are a limited amount of moves and tactics, in fact, only one or two tactics are really the best, whereas a true hardcore game can have many tactics.

Not only that, but newcomer friendly does not make a game better or worse IMO.

Those games you mentioned, they are difficult in that, even though it is easier and simplified, the importance of other factors becomes magnified, like timing for example. However, it is still a couple of things to worry about compared to the variables in sc or civ.

In fact, civ and sc are games where even if you have years of experience you can still get your ass handed to you whereas in mkwii and SSBB years of experience and training will leave you almost untouchable.

Just my opinion.

Some people seem to miss the point. The discussions have always been about third-parties. Wii third-party hardcore games rarely outsell PS3 and 360 ones. In fact why don't we get the top 10 Wii third-party hardcore games and compare the sales to 360 and PS3...

360: 28.44 Million
PS3: 20.36 Million
Wii: 13.25 Million

Keep in mind that one of the games in the Wii list is a budget title, while two others are casual music games that have sold 7.1 million combined according to VGChartz and things become more obvious.

If you're not selling a music, minigame, or some other sort of casual game on the Wii things start to look bleak. People cheer the slow sales that eventually reach 400,000+ as huge but what happens to these series next generation when development costs increase? Or when the games are facing game franchises where the HD investment has already been made and the games are several generations along in their development? Or even basically having to re-establish your franchise for new audiences because barely anyone played it last generation?