Support NeoGAF

[timetokill]

I would like someone to define what they mean by these downmarket and upmarket groups are relative to the video game industry.

Pretty sure people are using it as many would use "casual" and "hardcore" on the purchasing scale.

"Downmarket" would be the casual/expanded market, purchasing 1-3 games a year, first-time console owners, etc.

"Upmarket" would be people that consider themselves gamers, people that buy 6-12+ games a year, people on GAF, etc.

Of course you wouldn't just jump from one extreme to the other. There would be a progression, and obviously not everyone is a future GAF member.

 

[leroy hacker]

Besides, wasn't Dead Space Wii built to take advantage of the platform? It's a rail shooter of sorts, but I hear it was quite good at what it did, and it was an original, well marketed product for the Wii. See, it wouldn't matter what they do, it would never be good enough.

The fact that this argument is becoming conventional wisdom, that Dead Space Extraction could not have been a stronger product and that if DSE can't succeed then nothing can, really disgusts me. For one thing, it is directly contradicted by the fact that Extraction was the least successful and not the most successful of the Wii's M-rated titles in 2009. Furthermore, there were many ways which should have been clear to EA why this game was far from the strongest product possible:

-Outsourced to Eurocom.

-Sold at full price, whereas all of its genre competitors except for UC and their own NERF game that included a NERF gun were $20 cheaper, at least if one takes into account that HotD: OK got a price drop very quickly. (One might say that 3rd parties want to sell their games at full price so that this criticism is practically useless for them, but the point is that there is not much mass-market audience for full-priced games in the rail shooter genre specifically and they would be better able to sell their game for full price in a different genre.)

-Within its genre it probably was the most original title on the Wii, but it was only original within the narrow specifications of that genre. That's not the kind of originality that makes an audience take notice and become excited the way they did with something like Mirror's Edge, Portal, Braid or even, to a much lesser extent, Muramasa. EA may have thought they were doing something truly original with their "guided first-person experience" nonsense but they didn't fool anybody.

-IP previously unknown on the Wii, and was a significantly less known franchise than its genre competitors. However, this factor might not have hurt so much without the next two:

-Virtually no marketing.

-High information Wii fans who might have provided positive word of mouth making up for the lack of marketing over the long term were strongly against the title because it wasn't what they wanted from EA. By the way, the fact that EA was completely blindsided by this response, as proven by dev comments in the announcement thread, shows that EA didn't understand their intended audience of 'hardcore' Wii gamers very well.


Also, according to your post history it seems like you own a Wii, and yet it sounds like you didn't buy this "quite good, original, well marketed game." Think why you did not, and try to generalize how many other people might feel that way. I'm not trying to guilt you about not buying the game since I didn't buy it either-I'm just trying to inspire some reflection on the point that this product wasn't actually all that appealing.

 

[ElFly]

The fact that this argument is becoming conventional wisdom, that Dead Space Extraction could not have been a stronger product and that if DSE can't succeed then nothing can, really disgusts me. For one thing, it is directly contradicted by the fact that Extraction was the least successful and not the most successful of the Wii's M-rated titles in 2009. Furthermore, there were many ways which should have been clear to EA why this game was far from the strongest product possible.

Isn't DSE a really buggy game, that frequently freezes the console?

Dunno how that would affect sales, but it shows that it wasn't an honest effort to make a good game.

 

[VAIL]

Isn't DSE a really buggy game, that frequently freezes the console?

Dunno how that would affect sales, but it shows that it wasn't an honest effort to make a good game.

I've never had it once freeze on me, and the production values are there, it is a stellar looking title, but again it's been pointed out so many times and it falls on deaf ears.

-Niche Genre
-New IP in general, the Original title didn't sell gangbusters itself
-Lack of proper marketing

The whole attitude toward development on the Wii is really confounding with it's "tests" and basing development on sales of titles that frankly would have sold in lower numbers on any platform, either due to style or general suckage. I think it's easy excuses for creativly bankrupt developers.

 

[AniHawk]

People love Mario Party games, they are really high quality, it was always the volume that bothered me, I never got the need for a yearly sequel.

And I mean throw in some booze, and it is one hell of a night.

The second Mario Party is still the best. Although I haven't played any of them past 4. Did a 55 turn game recently. Man, the backstabbing that happens...

 

[Stumpokapow]

The second Mario Party is still the best. Although I haven't played any of them past 4.

since 4 only DS really compares to the first 3.

 

[GrotesqueBeauty]

Isn't DSE a really buggy game, that frequently freezes the console?

Dunno how that would affect sales, but it shows that it wasn't an honest effort to make a good game.

I haven't had a freeze yet, and the game definitely sports higher production values than 95% of 3rd party Wii games. Unfortunately EA made a terrible choice with the genre (look at the reaction to the announcement that it was a rail shooter- hell, it was a cynical joke before we knew it was a reality), and the game has other flaws. It's a pain in the ass to replay because of the abundance of drawn out story sequences where you're basically passive except for spamming the kinesis button, not to mention the leveling system is completely stripped of any depth.

In a nutshell the assets are fantastic and the storyline shows genuine thought was put into properly expanding the mythos, but the core gameplay is extremely limited. So while the game isn't especially glitchy (in my experience- I don't question others who have run into bugs) it's hardly a slam dunk you could reasonably consider a killer app on any system.

 

[swerve]

-Outsourced to Eurocom.

It's so simple. 'We're targeting the core with this game'. Oh really? Did you give it to Kuju or Eurocom to make? You *did*? Then you ain't targeting the core with this game.

If you're selling to the elite, the know-it-alls, the fans, the people who follow your brand and know your star developers names... don't give it to anyone but those star developers to make it if you want it to sell. The elite like to be treated like the elite. Treat us nicely and we will buy it.

'People only buy Nintendo games on Nintendo systems'. Well lookie here, Nintendo puts their best teams on Nintendo! Co-incidence?

 

[HK-47]

And how do you suppose they do the former, given the massive differences in capabilities between the Wii and the other two? The only realistic result would be a pure downgrade and blatant compromise, which would be seen as such by the public, and as a lazy effort destined for failure by Wii fans.

No, it would have to be the second, which would then essentially be an exclusive. It would have to be marketed hard, have a strong appeal and be well designed, and all based on a hunch that it will pay off greatly, enough so to justify the resources put into the product. Of course, it could be that the market just plain doesn't desire to have these types of games on Wii, and would rather go for the HD solutions in the case that they do want these types of games in the first place.

Besides, wasn't Dead Space Wii built to take advantage of the platform? It's a rail shooter of sorts, but I hear it was quite good at what it did, and it was an original, well marketed product for the Wii. See, it wouldn't matter what they do, it would never be good enough. Developers and publishers would be lashed heavily by internet critics, who never once think to perhaps redirect some of the "blame" towards the platform designer who decided to force a unique and incompatible solution into the traditional mix. Not everyone wants to be shaken up, least of all members of an already shaky industry.

And no, what I wrote wasn't really sarcasm. Since some people, such as yourself, are so confident in this magical solution, I suggest that you pool your money together and help fund a project of the sort. Perhaps this level of confidence would rub off on the publishers, eh?

Agree except for the part where DS Wii was well marketed. It had no marketing.

 

[HK-47]

People love Mario Party games, they are really high quality, it was always the volume that bothered me, I never got the need for a yearly sequel.

And I mean throw in some booze, and it is one hell of a night.

Please. After 3 they started phoning it the fuck in. Stumpy it right. Only MPDS is worth shit after 3

 

[Nuclear Muffin]

Please. After 3 they started phoning it the fuck in. Stumpy it right. Only MPDS is worth shit after 3

Mario Party 6 and 7 aren't bad, I like how each board has its own set of rules.

But yeah, Mario Party 3 is the best in the series. That game is just legendary!

 

[Medalion]

I don't care if Nintendo sold a billion wii's in one second.

We want games GAF can give a shit about... it's still a joke of a console gaming wise, amirite?

 

[[Nintex]]

I don't care if Nintendo sold a billion wii's in one second.

We want games GAF can give a shit about... it's still a joke of a console gaming wise, amirite?

I'm playing Little King's Story right now, the joke's on you, not the Wii.

 

[Taurus]

I don't care if Nintendo sold a billion wii's in one second.

We want games GAF can give a shit about... it's still a joke of a console gaming wise, amirite?

Yeah, that's the spirit! High-five! \o.

Spoiler

Actually, if you take your head out of your ass, you could see that 2009 was Wii's one of the, or dare I say the best year so far software-wise. If you can't still find anything worth playing on Wii, just move on and stop complaining. Hint: Little King's Story, Punch-Out!!, WSR, NSMBW, Metroid Prime Trilogy, TW10, Dead Space E, Silent Hill SM, PES2010, Boy and his Blob, loads of WiiWare gems etc etc.

Or maybe I just should post notsureifserious.gif instead of the spoiler part...

 

[GrotesqueBeauty]

I don't care if Nintendo sold a billion wii's in one second.

We want games GAF can give a shit about... it's still a joke of a console gaming wise, amirite?

If you've got a narrow conception of what constitutes good console gaming, sure.

 

[gamergirly]

Yeah, that's the spirit! High-five! \o.

Spoiler

Actually, if you take your head out of your ass, you could see that 2009 was Wii's one of the, or dare I say the best year so far software-wise. If you can't still find anything worth playing on Wii, just move on and stop complaining. Hint: Little King's Story, Punch-Out!!, WSR, NSMBW, Metroid Prime Trilogy, TW10, Dead Space E, Silent Hill SM, PES2010, Boy and his Blob, loads of WiiWare gems etc etc.

Or maybe I just should post notsureifserious.gif instead of the spoiler part...

I think he was being sarcastic. It's obvious while we as a whole at GAF are highly influential, the world is buying what they want. I cant shake the feeling that Wii would NOT be #1 if GAFers voted :lol

 

[Alcibiades]

I'm seriously interested in a Dead Space port for Wii (even this late in the game) but am not gonna bother with Dead Space Extraction unless I find it for $5 or $10 new.

Extraction just didn't please almost anybody exception multiplatform owners that happened to be really, really big Dead Space fans.

Wii-only owners could care less for the most part (and would probably prefer to plunk down $50 for a real game like Reflex than cheaply-produced rail spinoffs like Extraction and Darkside Chronicles).

The multiplatform non-Dead Space fans weren't gonna care.

The multiplatform Dead Space fans were slightly interested but probably don't want to pay full price for what is obviously a low-budget effort (compared to Dead Space on 360/PS3).

I really wish EA would bring Dead Space 2 to Wii and give the franchise a legitimate chance to succeed on the system but I don't think they have the leadership at the moment to step out of their comfort zone.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I have another idea to expand on in a later post that I don't want to get into but it basically proposes that almost ANY attempt to pigenhole demographics on Wii is bound to fail. The Wii audience is too large and too varied at this point to try and stereotype as a whole. You just gotta make a solid game and not worry about the labels (non-game, casual, mainstream, core, E-rated, M-rated, etc..) and let people know it exists.

Not every game is gonna be the genius of New Super Mario Bros. Wii, but the success of EA Sports Active (non-game), Boom Blox (casual game), Force Unleashed (hardcore game), World at War (hardcore M-rated game) illustrates that 3rd parties can succeed with all sorts of genres and ratings on Wii and not every game needs to be overthought to death. Overthink the demographics and you get All-Play Madden (or Dead Space Extraction for that matter).

Any line that says "Wii gamers want X" or "Wii gamers want Y" is both too simple (there are WAY too many subsets of audiences on Wii now for a statement that begins like that too be true) and too complicated (trying desparately to figure out some elusive factor that applies to all Wii owners is bound to fail).

 

[The Technomancer]

Honestly? I think one of the biggest mistakes with DS:E was branding it as a Dead Space game. I mean, yes, the story is definitely DS, and they couldn't just call it Space Horror Adventure, but by making it a Dead Space title, they inevitably invited comparisons to the original, which in turn made it look like HD->Quality Title, Wii->Condescending rail-shooter spinoff. Which a lot of people found insulting. I mean, we know 3-rd person action-shooty things can be done on Wii, RE4:Wii was great. Why on earth go with a rail-shooter unless you're attempting to market it to an expanded audience. And if you're marketing to an expanded audience, why use an IP only upstream gamers are familiar with? You'll just alienate them, and get no brand recognition from the downstream folks.
Its like if someone decided to make BlazBlue: Chibi Editio...oh wait

 

[GrotesqueBeauty]

Honestly? I think one of the biggest mistakes with DS:E was branding it as a Dead Space game. I mean, yes, the story is definitely DS, and they couldn't just call it Space Horror Adventure, but by making it a Dead Space title, they inevitably invited comparisons to the original, which in turn made it look like HD->Quality Title, Wii->Condescending rail-shooter spinoff. Which a lot of people found insulting.

I don't think the problem was branding it as a Dead Space game at all. It was making a rail shooter that didn't share the same benefits of the ones that preceded it. Starting from scratch wouldn't have changed that, it just would've driven costs up. UC coasted on the good will generated by RE4, the overwhelming strength of the IP, and the promise of better support down the line. HotD 2&3 Return was a well established franchise in its native genre and released at a budget price. Both of them arrived before the genre had reached a saturation point on the console, which soon after became synonymous with halfhearted ports and cynical spinoffs. It was terrible positioning on EA's part. They never should have assumed using UC as a template was a good idea because they were working from a different foundation. Hell, even DC wasn't able to capitalize on its success because all the good will was already dried up.

 

[JJConrad]

Pretty sure people are using it as many would use "casual" and "hardcore" on the purchasing scale.

"Downmarket" would be the casual/expanded market, purchasing 1-3 games a year, first-time console owners, etc.

"Upmarket" would be people that consider themselves gamers, people that buy 6-12+ games a year, people on GAF, etc.

Of course you wouldn't just jump from one extreme to the other. There would be a progression, and obviously not everyone is a future GAF member.

This is what I thought, and in which case this upmarket/downmarket talk simply does not apply to the video game industry.

This industry is an entertainment industry first and foremost. The Wii expanded the market by creating technology that extended its content beyond the traditional bondaries of gaming. However, it was its content that actually created anything.

As this industry defines them, casual and hardcore are not up/downmarkets of eachother. They're demographics. You can't change the tastes of each set. You can take a 40 year old woman from never played a game in her life to now gaming everyday, but she will never want to play anything like Modern Warfare. The upmarket versions of a teenage boy and a soccer mom will never have much in common. NSMBWii is a 100% upmarket game for many people. A game like Modern Warfare 2 is a downmarket game for much of the teenage male population.

So this talk of Nintendo moving upmarket means very little... certainly not what GAF would want it to mean. They could go balls-out hardcore as much as Microsoft, but unless they change their target demographics it won't look any different. This also seems to be where 3rd parties are getting hung up on... their trying to cross-pollenate hardcore and casual games but are destroying their target demographic in the process.

 

[The Technomancer]

I don't think the problem was branding it as a Dead Space game at all. It was making a rail shooter that didn't share the same benefits of the ones that preceded it. Starting from scratch wouldn't have changed that, it just would've driven costs up. UC coasted on the good will generated by RE4, the overwhelming strength of the IP, and the promise of better support down the line. HotD 2&3 Return was a well established franchise in its native genre and released at a budget price. Both of them arrived before the genre had reached a saturation point on the console, which soon after became synonymous with halfhearted ports and cynical spinoffs. It was terrible positioning on EA's part. They never should have assumed using UC as a template was a good idea because they were working from a different foundation. Hell, even DC wasn't able to capitalize on its success because all the good will was already dried up.

Right, but my point is in this case, rather than an established IP helping their game, it actually hurt them, because fans perceived this as a step backwards. Dead Space is no Resident Evil, the latter has a long history, and strong brand recognition. The only people who care about Dead Space at this point are dedicated fans and video game junkies, two rather small and notoriously fickle markets.

 

[Effect]

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I have another idea to expand on in a later post that I don't want to get into but it basically proposes that almost ANY attempt to pigenhole demographics on Wii is bound to fail. The Wii audience is too large and too varied at this point to try and stereotype as a whole. You just gotta make a solid game and not worry about the labels (non-game, casual, mainstream, core, E-rated, M-rated, etc..) and let people know it exists.

Not every game is gonna be the genius of New Super Mario Bros. Wii, but the success of EA Sports Active (non-game), Boom Blox (casual game), Force Unleashed (hardcore game), World at War (hardcore M-rated game) illustrates that 3rd parties can succeed with all sorts of genres and ratings on Wii and not every game needs to be overthought to death. Overthink the demographics and you get All-Play Madden (or Dead Space Extraction for that matter).

Any line that says "Wii gamers want X" or "Wii gamers want Y" is both too simple (there are WAY too many subsets of audiences on Wii now for a statement that begins like that too be true) and too complicated (trying desparately to figure out some elusive factor that applies to all Wii owners is bound to fail).

This really has always been the case with the Wii since it launched I think. Look at how the various launch titles did. You had Rayman Raving Rabids do very well. You had on the other side of the coin Red Steel which also did very well. There was Madden 07, Call of Duty 3, Excite Truck, Wii Play a few months later though.Then you have Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess and the craze over Wii Sports. True it was a packed in game but it did wonders in Japan where it had to be bought and it most likely would have done the same outside of Japan if that had been the case after people had viewed ads for it and saw it's price point. Right from the start there was a mix of games and many did well. The diversity of Wii owners was proven then. It continues to be proven when you have the Call of Duty games do well even regardless of how downplayed and ignored they seem to be by Activision itself. The Sonic games do decently still. Resident Evil 4 did very well even though it was a port of the GameCube game with the extras put into the PS2 game. Tiger Woods is still solid and Madden would have been as well if some within EA hadn't' been beaten with the stupid bat.

It's why talk about the "Wii audience" never once had any validity to it. The audience was and is as diverse as the audience on the NES, SNES, Genesis, Nintendo 64, PS1, Dreamcast, PS2, Xbox, GameCube, PS3, and Xbox 360. You can not even limit the new people brought into the fold as "casual" or "non-gamers" either. The only factor that links them is that they might not have been gamers before. However once brought in they can then find things they do like, even if they don't buy as much as long time gamers. We know that even changes after a while.

Publishers need to advertise their games though. Not every game is going to break million. That's always been the case, even on the PS2. The million sellers are few and limited to a handful of franchises. However if you want it to do extremely well you need to advertise. They have no problem at all doing so on the PS3 and the 360. Yet they feel they are justified in not having to do it on the Wii even when they themselves claim to be putting out a serious effort. Even though the rail shooter genre is bad place on the Wii I have no doubt had Dead Space Extraction been advertised and treated as if it was a serious offering it would have done a lot better then it did and maybe have had legs by word of mouth due to enough and certain people having played it.

 

[GrotesqueBeauty]

Right, but my point is in this case, rather than an established IP helping their game, it actually hurt them, because fans perceived this as a step backwards. Dead Space is no Resident Evil, the latter has a long history, and strong brand recognition. The only people who care about Dead Space at this point are dedicated fans and video game junkies, two rather small and notoriously fickle markets.

I see what you're saying, but I doubt a similar product without the branding would have done any better. At least connecting it to the Dead Space universe probably attracted a handful of fans on top of the very small pool of light gun enthusiasts.

 

[Vinci]

As this industry defines them, casual and hardcore are not up/downmarkets of eachother. They're demographics. You can't change the tastes of each set. You can take a 40 year old woman from never played a game in her life to now gaming everyday, but she will never want to play anything like Modern Warfare.

Of course not, and I doubt anyone is stating anything that dramatic would happen. The idea is to move them slowly towards content not 100% identical to what they originally got involved with. Taste is obviously going to lead people in different directions. Hell, not every gamer is going to play MW2. That's natural.

But getting people in with Wii Sports and moving them to Mario Kart, then to NSMB Wii or some other software that doesn't resemble Wii Sports or Mario Kart, is a major accomplishment. It's the idea of leading them further into the depth of gaming, not necessarily into particular experiences or with any real end-goal in mind other than diversifying their interaction and adoption of more than one genre or play-style.

 

[Penguin]

The second Mario Party is still the best. Although I haven't played any of them past 4. Did a 55 turn game recently. Man, the backstabbing that happens...

I think 4 is the peak of the series, but that's also the one spent the most time with. I did enjoy the addition of like different themed/playing boards, and though gimmicky the 8 player modes.

I think that Nintendo should make a Mario Party Collection, like the best mini-games from the first 7 games or so, some of the better designed boards, nicer graphics, more characters and online play.

And 55 rounds? That's insane, I mean I think 15-20 is like an hour already. :lol


*Looks around and see there is other discussion going on*

 

[Flachmatuch]

I see what you're saying, but I doubt a similar product without the branding would have done any better. At least connecting it to the Dead Space universe probably attracted a handful of fans on top of the very small pool of light gun enthusiasts.

Well it definitely made it worse for me, but it doesn't count because I wouldn't have bought a lightgun shooter anyway (having already bought 4, mostly because there wasn't anything else to play). The original Dead Space gameplay would have been such an awesome fit for Wii controls, could have been better tha RE4 Wii even. I was definitely pissed off when it turned out to be another lightgun game.

 

[Version 3.0]

Well it definitely made it worse for me, but it doesn't count because I wouldn't have bought a lightgun shooter anyway (having already bought 4, mostly because there wasn't anything else to play). The original Dead Space gameplay would have been such an awesome fit for Wii controls, could have been better tha RE4 Wii even. I was definitely pissed off when it turned out to be another lightgun game.

That's how I felt, too. "Dead Space for Wii? Sounds perfect!" turned into "Oh, it's another light gun game...pass." To be honest, if it weren't Dead Space, I'd still not be interested, but the franchise name on it made it 100% certain I'd not touch it, like someone spitting on food I didn't plan to eat anyway.

Upon hearing that it's a really good light gun game with some new mechanics, I decided to pick it up...someday, for no more than $10. From my point of view, they couldn't possibly have handled this any worse.

 

[Gravijah]

I think 4 is the peak of the series, but that's also the one spent the most time with. I did enjoy the addition of like different themed/playing boards, and though gimmicky the 8 player modes.

I think that Nintendo should make a Mario Party Collection, like the best mini-games from the first 7 games or so, some of the better designed boards, nicer graphics, more characters and online play.

And 55 rounds? That's insane, I mean I think 15-20 is like an hour already. :lol


*Looks around and see there is other discussion going on*

I will fucking slay anyone when it comes to hitting a button really fast.

 

[Majmun]

It is really not Nintendo's fault that third-party developers (mostly the Western ones) are being idiots. If you want better sales, you put your heavy-hitters on the system with the largest installed base. Simple. Capcom should have put RE5 on the Wii, not the 360+PS3.

Take a game like DQIX for example. Square releases it on the DS, and it sells 4+ million units in like a day. There are murmurings that DQX is going on the Wii, which is the natural console for it to go to (behind the DS.) If Square had half a brain, they would have put FF13 on the Wii. That is the biggest market for FF13 (again, after the DS).

Until that happens, though, third-party developers won't have a chance in hell of tapping into the vast Wii market.

Most games are multiplatform nowadays. Even FFXIII.

So releasing a game for both Ps3 and 360 makes the developers and the gamers happy.

 

[EmCeeGramr]

guys stop talking about dead space or sipowicz is gonna show up and proclaim that ea and visceral and eurocom should be tried and executed for war crimes JUST FOR THE PRINCIPLE OF IT

 

[Penguin]

I will fucking slay anyone when it comes to hitting a button really fast.

For the life of me, I have never ever been able to win those button mashing contests. The rest of them I stand a chance, but when it comes to button mashers, I don't know if friends have faster fingers or I'm just not use to it.

 

[JJConrad]

Of course not, and I doubt anyone is stating anything that dramatic would happen. The idea is to move them slowly towards content not 100% identical to what they originally got involved with. Taste is obviously going to lead people in different directions. Hell, not every gamer is going to play MW2. That's natural.

But getting people in with Wii Sports and moving them to Mario Kart, then to NSMB Wii or some other software that doesn't resemble Wii Sports or Mario Kart, is a major accomplishment. It's the idea of leading them further into the depth of gaming, not necessarily into particular experiences or with any real end-goal in mind other than diversifying their interaction and adoption of more than one genre or play-style.

I would say you're wrong for three reasons:

1) I don't think there is a person here who doesn't associate hardcore with teenage boys and casuals with moms to some extent. The entire industry has been wired that way. So while no one may actually expect such a dramatic shift, there is still a sense of disappointment that some type of shift isn't occuring.

2) Mario Kart is not a downstream or casual title. For the person who was brought into gaming by Wii Sports and moved onto it, its completely upstream. It's a complete game, rich in content, but targets a different set of people than what you or I imagine. You can't say that that person now needs to move on to NSMBWii or something else. You're now trying to change their tastes. The upmarket for the new Wiisports gamer is more motion based games (and not always more advance games).

3) Like I was saying earlier, the majority of the Wii's success comes from the existing PS2 gamer. They're not people in need of being moved up stream. They are simply gamers who exist outside of the demographic that the industry calls hardcore. They may have overlapping tastes with hardcore gamers, but not enough to warrant getting a PS3 or 360 (this is why there is still a need for those types of game on Wii). Nintendo is basically the only company catering to this group of gamers with fully, competent games and thats why their games have been selling so much better than anyone else's.

 

[Megadragon15]

For the life of me, I have never ever been able to win those button mashing contests. The rest of them I stand a chance, but when it comes to button mashers, I don't know if friends have faster fingers or I'm just not use to it.

Get a controller with turbo functions, maybe. Saves wear and tear on your tendons. :lol

 

[Vinci]

1) I don't think there is a person here who doesn't associate hardcore with teenage boys and casuals with moms to some extent. The entire industry has been wired that way. So while no may actually expect such a dramatic shift, there will alway be that expectation that some type of shift will occur.

I certainly don't, and I hardly think Nintendo does either. They just want people to play all different types of software, since that allows them to be a more active customer (which is ideal for Ninty).

2) Mario Kart is not a downstream or casual title. For the person who was brought into gaming by Wii Sports and moved onto it, its completely upstream. It's a complete game, rich in content, but targets a different set of people than what you or I imagine. You can't say that that person now needs to move on to NSMBWii or something else. You're now trying to change their tastes. The upmarket for the new Wiisports gamer is more motion based games (and not always more advance games).

I'm not suggesting that they need to move on or should be forced to go on. The point is to get people from one style of game to another using certain connecting themes between them. In the instance of a move from Wii Sports to Mario Kart, that's motion - that's the ease of pretending the Wii Remote is a tennis racket or a steering wheel. And that's fine, but they are still very different games; they're just using the same appeal factor but in a different way.

I've seen anecdotally relatives go from Wii Sports to Mario Party to Mario Kart, and on from there... These games are all very different, regardless of whether they are easy or complex, fully-featured or not. It's hard to call someone casual when they have a game collection that showcases multiple genres, especially compared to those folks who tend to only buy sports games or racing games or FPSs.

3) Like I was saying earlier, the majority of the Wii's success comes from the existing PS2 gamer. They're not people in need of being moved up stream. They are simply gamers who exist outside of the demographic that the industry calls hardcore. They may have overlapping tastes with hardcore gamers, but not enough to warrant getting a PS3 or 360 (this is why there is still a need for those types of game on Wii). Nintendo is basically the only company catering to this group of gamers with fully, competent games and thats why their games have been selling so much better than anyone else's.

Nintendo's not catering to anyone specifically. They're simply doing what they've always done and releasing quality content across a number of genres. Casual or core - upmarket or downmarket - this should be appealing.

 

[justchris]

I kind of wonder about this argument. Do the kinds of consumers making up most of the Wii market really think in terms like this--think abstractly about whether or not developers are willing/able to make games they want in the long term and how they should react? We're Internet geeks, and this is GAF which makes us much more cognizant of concepts like "developers" "AAA" "first-party/third-party" and "big-budget effort" than most people. I can't really see most Wii owners thinking thoughts like "Third-parties haven't put any effort into their Wii games so I shouldn't expect any good ones in the future. Guess I won't be buying any third-party games from now on." I'm not sure anyone other than those who closely follow industry news thinks in those terms.

I don't think the phrase 'third-party developer' ever enters into it. But I can totally see someone going, "This game is shit. Who made this shit? Yoobeesoft? What does that even mean? Fuck, I'm not buying any of their shit anymore." A bad game doesn't hurt the reputation of all 3rd parties, but it does hurt the reputation of the company that has their logo on the box.

Besides, wasn't Dead Space Wii built to take advantage of the platform? It's a rail shooter of sorts, but I hear it was quite good at what it did, and it was an original, well marketed product for the Wii. See, it wouldn't matter what they do, it would never be good enough. Developers and publishers would be lashed heavily by internet critics, who never once think to perhaps redirect some of the "blame" towards the platform designer who decided to force a unique and incompatible solution into the traditional mix. Not everyone wants to be shaken up, least of all members of an already shaky industry.

How can you possibly make that statement? Dead Space wasn't a well marketed product for the Xbox 360, PS3 or PC. And its sales on those platforms reflect that. I've seen no evidence it was marketed any better on the Wii than every other platform it was on.

It's so simple. 'We're targeting the core with this game'. Oh really? Did you give it to Kuju or Eurocom to make? You *did*? Then you ain't targeting the core with this game.

Whoooooaaaa, there, don't knock Kuju. They made Crush (well the Zoe Mode guys did, and Headstrong made HotD Overkill, which was also pretty awesome), so that makes them top-tier developers in my book.

 

[JJConrad]

I certainly don't, and I hardly think Nintendo does either. They just want people to play all different types of software, since that allows them to be a more active customer (which is ideal for Ninty).



I'm not suggesting that they need to move on or should be forced to go on. The point is to get people from one style of game to another using certain connecting themes between them. In the instance of a move from Wii Sports to Mario Kart, that's motion - that's the ease of pretending the Wii Remote is a tennis racket or a steering wheel. And that's fine, but they are still very different games; they're just using the same appeal factor but in a different way.

I've seen anecdotally relatives go from Wii Sports to Mario Party to Mario Kart, and on from there... These games are all very different, regardless of whether they are easy or complex, fully-featured or not. It's hard to call someone casual when they have a game collection that showcases multiple genres, especially compared to those folks who tend to only buy sports games or racing games or FPSs.



Nintendo's not catering to anyone specifically. They're simply doing what they've always done and releasing quality content across a number of genres. Casual or core - upmarket or downmarket - this should be appealing.

I would wholeheartedly agree.

I just see is this blue ocean strategy stuff as something the industry is over-stating and over-simplifying. Once you start considering all these different demographics there is no telling where upstream really leads. It becomes far messier than what the discussion in this thread would lead one to believe. But the industry has latched onto this idea that its either hardcore or casual with nothing inbetween and we gotta fix them casuals.

 

[gerg]

I would wholeheartedly agree.

I just see is this blue ocean strategy stuff as something the industry is over-stating and over-simplifying. Once you start considering all these different demographics there is no telling where upstream really leads. It becomes far messier than what the discussion in this thread would lead one to believe. But the industry has latched onto this idea that its either hardcore or casual with nothing inbetween and we gotta fix them casuals.

From a business sense, it's very easy to tell where "moving upstream" leads. Moving upstream would necessitate moving towards the more interested (hardcore) consumers. Traditionally, and in the immediate future, these are 18-35 males. Therefore, moving upstream would necessitate attracting this audience to your product.

Because there aren't any "hardcore" or "casual" games, however, the idea of a "bridge" game which moves the consumer from casual to more hardcore games is slightly less tenable. Although, I presume it could be used to refer to games which are bought by both the expanded audience and the traditional, core 18-35 male fanbase.

 

[Sadist]

guys stop talking about dead space or sipowicz is gonna show up and proclaim that ea and visceral and eurocom should be tried and executed for war crimes JUST FOR THE PRINCIPLE OF IT

:lol

 

[Gravijah]

For the life of me, I have never ever been able to win those button mashing contests. The rest of them I stand a chance, but when it comes to button mashers, I don't know if friends have faster fingers or I'm just not use to it.

Gotta learn how to vibrate your hand, man!

 

[justchris]

This is what I thought, and in which case this upmarket/downmarket talk simply does not apply to the video game industry.

Actually, it does, he's just misconstruing why certain gamers are upmarket and downmarket.

It's about values, not necessarily about genres.

Upmarket gamers value graphics, sound, internet connectivity and splash. In shorter terms, technology.

Downmarket gamers value interactivity, social interaction, and low barriers to entry. In shorter terms, physical/social immersion over sensory immersion.

Not innovation. All markets value innovation, innovation=uniqueness=newness, and everyone values new experiences.

A gamer moving upmarket doesn't change the genres they are interested in. Instead, they show an increased appreciation for the technology and sensory immersion factors that drive upmarket sales. This does not mean they lose appreciation for their existing values, they just add the upmarket values on top of the old ones.

 

[poppabk]

From a business sense, it's very easy to tell where "moving upstream" leads. Moving upstream would necessitate moving towards the more interested (hardcore) consumers. Traditionally, and in the immediate future, these are 18-35 males. Therefore, moving upstream would necessitate attracting this audience to your product.

Because there aren't any "hardcore" or "casual" games, however, the idea of a "bridge" game which moves the consumer from casual to more hardcore games is slightly less tenable. Although, I presume it could be used to refer to games which are bought by both the expanded audience and the traditional, core 18-35 male fanbase.

I think the 18-35 male demographic is the more interested consumers because these are the consumers who have traditionally been targeted. In a market where only one demographic is catered to, of course that demographic is going to make up the majority of the customers. If anything the recent success of Nintendo has demonstrated that there is a broader market out there that is just as willing to purchase content if it is aimed at them.

 

[Davey Cakes]

Gotta learn how to vibrate your hand, man!

It's all about using the index finger and, yeah, vibrating your hand. I'm pretty darn good at those button-mashing games.

 

[gerg]

I think the 18-35 male demographic is the more interested consumers because these are the consumers who have traditionally been targeted. In a market where only one demographic is catered to, of course that demographic is going to make up the majority of the customers. If anything the recent success of Nintendo has demonstrated that there is a broader market out there that is just as willing to purchase content if it is aimed at them.

I don't see how anything I wrote contradicts this.

 

[CrisKre]

I kind of wonder about this argument. Do the kinds of consumers making up most of the Wii market really think in terms like this--think abstractly about whether or not developers are willing/able to make games they want in the long term and how they should react? We're Internet geeks, and this is GAF which makes us much more cognizant of concepts like "developers" "AAA" "first-party/third-party" and "big-budget effort" than most people. I can't really see most Wii owners thinking thoughts like "Third-parties haven't put any effort into their Wii games so I shouldn't expect any good ones in the future. Guess I won't be buying any third-party games from now on." I'm not sure anyone other than those who closely follow industry news thinks in those terms.

I want to clarify by saying that I state the third party support in contrast with what the HD twins are getting in terms of budget in development resources and marketing resources. In that sense the first few years of a console´s life span surely determine in the mind of consumers what type of experiences are available for them to acquire. A steady string of big AAA blockbuster type games like the HD twins have been getting since mainly their first year in the market will attract a certain consumer to that particular type of gaming experience. Wii consumers are, i believe, open and used to getting Wii___ games and nintendo mascot games for the system, whereas HD gamers are because of what has been consistently offered to them, more inclined to go for heavily advertised more hardcore type games.

 

[Lenardo]

Why do we always devolve into the same stuff over and over and over again? geez

the reasons why 3rd parties are not putting product on the wii is simple.

a high quality "AAA" game takes ~2+years to do prior to this current gen starting

we had the 360 announced and coming out the ps3 announced and SUPPOSED to come out at about the same time, and the revolution coming later.

most of the dev heads went ps3 gonna win, make AAA games for them. some went the 360 is going to win, make AAA games for them. pretty much EVERY 3rd party dev house/game console expert went the revolution is going to tank...so didn't bother doing AAA games for it.


then the consoles came out...

and pretty much all major 3rd parties had jack and shit for the wii (several notable exceptions)

with the expanded audience for the wii, the money men for the devs house did not want to take a CHANCE on a flop for the wii, so did b and c quick cash in waggle games for the wii with a few solid B games, while spending their resources on the 15-35 yr old male demographic that they have been targeting for the past 15ish years...who love pretty graphics and guns. they also thought that the wii would be a short lived fad..

well the wii has not been a short lived fad, and to date there really has not been a solid AAA game for the wii that has had a major 3rd party dev houses full backing including a HUGE advertising budget-except for MH3 in japan.
Dev houses took the "safe route" and now complain about the wii sales wise of their games...and it IS their own fault this happened the way it came out- RE:uc has good sales, make more rail shooters- now the genre is pretty saturated on the wii.

wii sport/mario party/mario kart do great sales wise, quick make cheap knock off games similar...

they devs haven't shown the inclination to change as of yet and it won't change now. sure we might get some better games, but until NEXT generation, the Wii owner will have to suffer with just the best selling games from a single developer this generation...Nintendo itself.

 

[justchris]

To better explain the differences between the upmarket and the downmarket, let us assume the upmarket game is not Modern Warfare 2, but is instead a game based on the Twilight series of books.

An epic romantic fairytale, where you can choose to play either Edward or the other guy that likes the main character, the werewolf, and you have a romance meter, and your goal is to win Bella's heart by performing romantic acts, protecting her, and other such things. While demographically it is well suited to the Wii, it's not really a downmarket game, as it would sell almost entirely on its presentation, its ability to recreate the characters and the events of the story, to draw you in and make you feel romantic, something that could be better accomplished in 1080p with surround sound than by any amount of waggle.

It's basically the same reason why Natal (focusing on technology and presentation) is an upmarket device while the Wiimote (focusing on interactivity and simplicity) is a downmarket device. Even though they both are made to accomplish basically the same thing, their value focus is different.

 

[Black-Wind]

Wow, he-who-shall-not-be-named broke his lil "Im not posting any more cause of Wii cases" promise to lick "Mario 5's" balls and claims more crazy shit about Zelda Wii (it would appear that now he likes Nintendo again because he thinks they are tossing Zelda Wii to the Wolves . . . because its filled with the wrong ideas and "Mario 5" knocked enuff since into Nintendo to show them the light . . .)

Only posting this because, like always, he took some Gaffer's post from this thread (Opiate) and made a essay around it.

I thought he was gonna stop. >_>

 

[selig]

I have an important question that i dont know where else to ask, so here it is:

What exactly is this Wii HD everyone keeps talking about?

Imo it sounds as if Pachter will "win" his prediction no matter what, because when the next Nintendo home console is launched OF COURSE it will feature HD. But afaik what Pachter actually meant was an actual Wii JUST with HD-video output, which i dont believe will ever come.

In short: If Nintendo releases a "Wii 2" at the end of 2010 or some time 2011 that features HD, but obviously is the Wii´s successor, will it still count as Wii HD? I´d really like for Pachter to clarify his prediction, afaik he´s posting here on Gaf.

 

[Grampa Simpson]

What exactly is this Wii HD everyone keeps talking about?

It could be any number of things, but it's safe to say that it will play Wii games, and can output at HD resolutions. Past that is unknown to the likes of us.

 

[carlo6529]

I have an important question that i dont know where else to ask, so here it is:

What exactly is this Wii HD everyone keeps talking about?

Imo it sounds as if Pachter will "win" his prediction no matter what, because when the next Nintendo home console is launched OF COURSE it will feature HD. But afaik what Pachter actually meant was an actual Wii JUST with HD-video output, which i dont believe will ever come.

In short: If Nintendo releases a "Wii 2" at the end of 2010 or some time 2011 that features HD, but obviously is the Wii´s successor, will it still count as Wii HD? I´d really like for Pachter to clarify his prediction, afaik he´s posting here on Gaf.

When it comes to Wii, Pachter has made so many predictions now that have failed to come true. He expected Wii HD in 2009, then moved it to 2010. Won't be long until he moves it to 2011(if he hasn't already)) but at that point it will have been over 5 years so really, who gives a shit.

All I know is, he did predict a 3 year life cycle for the Wii at one point.