Support NeoGAF

[nincompoop]

You will find eyetoylay at number 12 with 4 million sold.

 

[Vinci]

We've talked about this before: The only reason the PS2 was this massive franchise machine you're talking about is because it was led into by the PS1. Comparing its current situation to the Wii's is massively unfair given each system's predecessor. As I've said before, if the GameCube had been the equivalent of the PS1, the Wii would've had all the awesome games and we'd be wondering what Sony and MS are even doing here. Regardless of the massive hardware advantage.

 

[Zek]

You will find eyetoylay at number 12 with 4 million sold.

Fair enough, but I think we can safely conclude that very few people bought a PS2 just for games like Eyetoy.

 

[Mario]

Fair enough, but I think we can safely conclude that very few people bought a PS2 just for games like Eyetoy.

I disagree such a conclusion is safe. As a flimsy anecdotal counter to your assertion, I put forward that I know of several individuals who bought a PS2 just for Eyetoy, Singstar, and/or Buzz (somewhat analogous to Wii Sports, Wii Play and Wii Fit I guess). These individuals were mainly female but my own guess is the practice is not uncommon.

 

[the_zombie_luke]

We've talked about this before: The only reason the PS2 was this massive franchise machine you're talking about is because it was led into by the PS1. Comparing its current situation to the Wii's is massively unfair given each system's predecessor. As I've said before, if the GameCube had been the equivalent of the PS1, the Wii would've had all the awesome games and we'd be wondering what Sony and MS are even doing here. Regardless of the massive hardware advantage.

That's true, but even the third place GameCube had much better third party support at this point in time than the Wii does now. Everyone understands the reasons about the third party situation, but that doesn't really change anything. It's not unreasonable to expect a system to have a fairly balanced library in two years time. The GameCube did it, the Xbox did it, the PS2 did it, the PS3 has done it, the 360 did it, and the Wii has not yet.

 

[bdouble]

That's true, but even the third place GameCube had much better third party support at this point in time than the Wii does now. Everyone understands the reasons about the third party situation, but that doesn't really change anything. It's not unreasonable to expect a system to have a fairly balanced library in two years time. The GameCube did it, the Xbox did it, the PS2 did it, the PS3 has done it, the 360 did it, and the Wii has not yet.

I don't agree that the GC had better third party support at this point. Only reason you could argue that is because it was of equal power and got all the multiplayform games. The wii is in a very uniquie situation. It doesn't get those games but it has more exclusive 3rd party title right now or at least a lot more than GC did and that number us growing very steadily. Deadly creatures, HoTDOK and tenchu in just the last week and we all know what 09 looks like. Now even with multiplayform games you are seeing much higher quality offering for the Wii and in some instances surpassing it's HD counter parts. Especially with the sports titles.

As has been said devs brushed the Wii off in the becoming and ignored it. They were locked into the 360/ps3. Just now its getting real support that's far and away better than the cube ever had. Hell even without the support things like Z&W, NMH, and deblob made it worthwhile. Cube didn't have titles like that.

 

[Version 3.0]

The PS2 was as hardcore a console as any other console ever has been, it was just affordable and very very successful. Its success had to do mostly with a huge library of "core" games. Look at the whole list of best selling PS2 games and you won't find a single thing like Wii Play:



What this means is that all the people who own PS2s can generally be thought of as fans of traditional core games. So the fact that 71% of the Wii ownership, enough in and of itself to put the console in first place, consists of these people shows that the myth that the console is primarily made for non-gamers is absurd.

I don't think that list contrasts all that much with the Wii's top-selling game list, the only thing about the Wii list is that it's almost all Nintendo games. (this list is NPD)

1. Wii Play
2. Mario Kart
3. Super Smash Bros. Brawl
4. Wii Fit
5. Super Mario Galaxy
6. Guitar Hero III
7. Mario Party 8
8. The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess
9. Mario & Sonic: Olympic Games
10. Link's Crossbow Training

I don't see how a publisher can look at this list and decide to make some of the crap out there. Looking at this, it's obvious that having a Mario/Sonic/Link mascot of some kind is a huge deal. And you can certainly argue that including a special controller or accessory of some kind helps, as does the "Wii" name (and kudos to We Ski for that one).

But I see absolutely nothing to indicate that a successful PS2 (say Maximo or Metal Gear), Gamecube (say Soul Calibur or Timesplitters) or even Xbox (say Splinter Cell) franchise wouldn't be well-received, and certainly nothing to indicate that Imagine: Babiez or the like is the way to go. So even the argument that 3rd parties are "just copying Nintendo" when they make a party game rather than an adventure game or platformer or other traditional genre is BS.

 

[Zek]

I disagree such a conclusion is safe. As a flimsy anecdotal counter to your assertion, I put forward that I know of several individuals who bought a PS2 just for Eyetoy, Singstar, and/or Buzz (somewhat analogous to Wii Sports, Wii Play and Wii Fit I guess). These individuals were mainly female but my own guess is the practice is not uncommon.

But if you added up every person who owns a PS2 for no other reason than to play those games, what percentage of overall PS2 owners do you honestly think it would account for?

We've talked about this before: The only reason the PS2 was this massive franchise machine you're talking about is because it was led into by the PS1. Comparing its current situation to the Wii's is massively unfair given each system's predecessor. As I've said before, if the GameCube had been the equivalent of the PS1, the Wii would've had all the awesome games and we'd be wondering what Sony and MS are even doing here. Regardless of the massive hardware advantage.

I don't think that's true at all. Look at what happened to Nintendo when the PS1 showed up, and Sony after the PS3. Brand loyalty doesn't count for much in this industry. In any case, the respective reasons for the original success of the PS2 and Wii is irrelevant as far as I'm concerned. The point I'm trying to make is that probably 90+% of PS2 owners are people who have at some point expressed interest in "core" games like GTA, Madden, GT, etc. If those people make up 71% of Wii owners, not even taking into account people who owned other consoles, that's already a substantial market for traditional games but publishers are acting as if they don't exist. They put out a half-hearted effort that doesn't sell, scoff about casuals and Nintendo competition, and run back to the comfort of the control pad consoles. Their fear of change is biting them in the ass because now they're selling games with far higher development costs to an only marginally larger audience(counting both 360 and PS3).

By far the majority of Wii owners are gamers(hardcore or casual) who bought the system because they have an interest in motion controlled games. Developers need to ignore Nintendo's advertising and put real effort into making good games for the gamers and advertising them. And don't make them kiddy just because it's the Wii either.

 

[Version 3.0]

Z&W, NMH, and deblob made it worthwhile. Cube didn't have titles like that.

Sure it did. The Cube had plenty of games like that. Viewtiful Joe, Killer 7, Beyond Good & Evil, Metal Arms, Prince of Persia, Second Sight, Soul Calibur, Super Monkey Ball, Timesplitters, and so on--and that's just glancing over at my game rack. People forget how strong the 3rd-party support on the Cube was, especially its first few years. It was just exclusive 3rd-party support that was lacking.

 

[bdouble]

Sure it did. The Cube had plenty of games like that. Viewtiful Joe, Killer 7, Beyond Good & Evil, Metal Arms, Prince of Persia, Second Sight, Soul Calibur, Super Monkey Ball, Timesplitters, and so on--and that's just glancing over at my game rack. People forget how strong the 3rd-party support on the Cube was, especially its first few years. It was just exclusive 3rd-party support that was lacking.

right they weren't exclusive and weren't all in the first 2 years. Those were spread out all over last yen. They might have been good but every game you mentioned was multiplat. The wii didn't get multi play titles like WaW and Shaun White the first year or so. Hell Dead Space and Hawks are coming now too. I can't believe your arguing the GC had strong 3rd party support that rivals the Wii's. MH and DQ say hi.

 

[Neo C.]

I don't think that's true at all. Look at what happened to Nintendo when the PS1 showed up, and Sony after the PS3. Brand loyalty doesn't count for much in this industry.

A brand doesn't make a company invincible, but it can help a lot and covers some mistakes of the console. The PS2 for example is quite difficult for the developers to create games for it, and it was really expensive in Europe in the first year. Yet the console didn't have any real problems to sell in a huge amount in a short time frame.

The reason why the N64 and the PS3 fail to succeed is because both companies made mistakes which were too big to recover from them. I mean, when my friend who is a loyal playstation gamer thinks that the PS3 is too pricy and recognizes the other consoles as alternatives, then it's clear that Sony went overboard. The reason why the PS3 still gets its share of third party games is the strong position of the PS2, because publishers thought it will be the market leader.

 

[Version 3.0]

right they weren't exclusive and weren't all in the first 2 years. Those were spread out all over last yen. They might have been good but every game you mentioned was multiplat. The wii didn't get multi play titles like WaW and Shaun White the first year or so. Hell Dead Space and Hawks are coming now too. I can't believe your arguing the GC had strong 3rd party support that rivals the Wii's. MH and DQ say hi.

Okay...the Wii launched Nov 2006, it's now Feb 09. The equivalent spot in the Gamecube's life would be Feb 04, since it launched Nov 01. By that month, these were the 3rd party games just from my own game library:

Beach Spikers
Beyond Good & Evil
Bloody Roar: Primal Fury
Burnout
Burnout 2: Point of Impact
Defender
Ikaruga
I-Ninja
James Bond 007: NightFire
Madden NFL 2002
P.N.03
Rayman 3: Hoodlum Havoc
Resident Evil (Remake)
Resident Evil Zero
Sega Soccer Slam
Simpsons Road Rage
Smuggler's Run: Warzones
Sonic Adventure 2: Battle
Sonic Mega Collection
Soul Calibur II
Sphinx and the Cursed Mummy
Spider-Man: The Movie
SSX 3
SSX Tricky
Star Wars Jedi Knight II: Jedi Outcast
Star Wars Rogue Squadron II: Rogue Leader
Star Wars Rogue Squadron III: Rebel Strike
Super Monkey Ball
Super Monkey Ball 2
TimeSplitters 2
Vexx
Viewtiful Joe

That's 32 games. I currently own 25 3rd party Wii games. I'll say again: you're drastically underestimating the support the Gamecube received. The 25 Wii games, for the record, are these:

Boom Blox
Call of Duty 3
Call of Duty: World at War
Castle of Shikigami III
de Blob
Dewey's Adventure
Geometry Wars Galaxies
Kororinpa Marble Mania
Medal of Honor Heroes 2
Mercury Meltdown Revolution
Metal Slug Anthology
No More Heroes
Okami
Rayman: Raving Rabbids
Resident Evil 4: Wii Edition
Resident Evil: Umbrella Chronicles
Rubik's World
Samba De Amigo
SSX Blur
Super Monkey Ball: Banana Blitz
Super Swing Golf
Tiger Woods PGA Tour 07
Trauma Center: New Blood
Trauma Center: Second Opinion
Zack & Wiki: Quest for Barbaros' Treasure

 

[Amir0x]

Leondexter, no offense, but if you're considering like half of that horrific software in the Gamecube list "support", then this debate isn't fair anyway. Because now it's a fact someone can come up with a similarly atrocious list of Wii games to defend the level of support.

 

[m3k]

just watched, am late... what the guy says is true to an extent but i hope hes wrong

its a bit of a shame but i think game companies will by the end of the year be putting out or announcing more 'hardcore games'... or rather bigger budget and more ambitious games for the wii

i still feel like developers are only now warming to the wii and not having to follow nintendo's lead of 'mini game compilations'

i just think the output of the wii's 3rd party support is shifting, not for everyone, but positively away from copycat

im sure you can proove me wrong with anecdotes and listwars, my 2 cents thats all

 

[Turrican3]

I believe it's not fair comparing GC to Wii, the latter being in a completely different situation from day one.

Software support to PS3/360(/PC) has been a must in this generation, probably due to rising developing costs. The Wii simply didn't fit into the equation, as most 3rd parties thought it would have bombed and chose to go the HD route. Then it started breaking all sales records (and yes, it IS selling "traditional" games too) and now some of them (EA anyone? which, to be honest, was definitely NOT the worse in terms of hardcore releases) are turning back...

Of course not all of them will. I can't see a single reason why an Epic, an Id or even a post-FreeRadical-acquisition Crytek would decide to seriously support the Wii: they not only produce games, they also have strong interests in the technology -engines- behind them so I believe they will remain focused on so-called nextgen hardware.

But what about the others? I mean, we have a huge, and I mean REALLY huge gap in the Wii lineup. There are entirely genres which are almost non-existant, while others which seems perfectly suited for that controller (FPS/RTS) are scarcely produced. Not to mention the usual long development times of AAA first party titles like Zelda and Mario main series: IMHO second half of 2008 was not as terrible (as incredible as it can sound, once in a while NoE has delivered more than NoA, and I'm happy since I live in Europe ) as many people argue thanks to some interesting 3rd party effort like, for example, de Blob, but surely it wouldn't had hurt if there had been more polished titles available.
Those gaps have to be filled, and I believe they will. I mean, how can you sell 1.5 million RE4 on a console which is already able to play the GC version and ignore this potential?!

As long as Mario, Smash, Zelda & Co. continues to sell well IMHO there will always be a market for so-called "serious", properly marketed titles with comparable or even (I know it's not THAT easy to beat Nintendo but one can always hope ) better quality.

 

[Version 3.0]

Leondexter, no offense, but if you're considering like half of that horrific software in the Gamecube list "support", then this debate isn't fair anyway. Because now it's a fact someone can come up with a similarly atrocious list of Wii games to defend the level of support.

Those are the games I purchased, nothing more or less. There's nothing on there any less worthy of being called "support" than Rubik's World, which is on my Wii list.

Sorry to go into "list wars", though, I guess. But how anyone can say the Wii has received the support it deserves is beyond me. I don't think it's been awful, but it hasn't been any better than the Gamecube got up to this point.

 

[Vinci]

I don't think that's true at all. Look at what happened to Nintendo when the PS1 showed up, and Sony after the PS3. Brand loyalty doesn't count for much in this industry.

It has nothing to do with brand loyalty and everything to do with support coming for an incumbent's next system. Everyone - and I mean everyone - knew the PS2 was going to slaughter every other system released against it. This was certain. Not simply because it was Sony's next console (and everyone just loves Sony), but because the absolute shit-ton of support announced for it from the 3rd parties was obscene. You don't get that level of support if your previous console was in last place. Not ever.

The fact that it had DVD playback only helped its chances.

The point I'm trying to make is that probably 90+% of PS2 owners are people who have at some point expressed interest in "core" games like GTA, Madden, GT, etc. If those people make up 71% of Wii owners, not even taking into account people who owned other consoles, that's already a substantial market for traditional games but publishers are acting as if they don't exist. They put out a half-hearted effort that doesn't sell, scoff about casuals and Nintendo competition, and run back to the comfort of the control pad consoles. Their fear of change is biting them in the ass because now they're selling games with far higher development costs to an only marginally larger audience(counting both 360 and PS3).

By far the majority of Wii owners are gamers(hardcore or casual) who bought the system because they have an interest in motion controlled games. Developers need to ignore Nintendo's advertising and put real effort into making good games for the gamers and advertising them. And don't make them kiddy just because it's the Wii either.

Okay, all of this I agree with.

 

[Man God]

Leondexter, no offense, but if you're considering like half of that horrific software in the Gamecube list "support", then this debate isn't fair anyway. Because now it's a fact someone can come up with a similarly atrocious list of Wii games to defend the level of support.

Actually most of those Gamecube Games are really good.

Defender, Spinx, Vexx and Nightfire are the only ones I wouldn't even bother with.

On second thought, Nightfire is worth a rent.

I'd say if anything his Wii purchases are the weaker of the two third party libraries.

 

[SturokBGD]

Gamecube doesn't have GeoWars Galaxies or anything as remotely awesome as GeoWars Galaxies.

PEWPEWPEW at you, shitty Gamecube! PEWPEWPEW, I say!

 

[Version 3.0]

Actually most of those Gamecube Games are really good.

Defender, Spinx, Vexx and Nightfire are the only ones I wouldn't even bother with.

On second thought, Nightfire is worth a rent.

I'd say if anything his Wii purchases are the weaker of the two third party libraries.

See this? You can only go so far when debating quality. My least favorite game on that list was actually Sphinx, which I know a lot of people liked. My point stands: the Gamecube received a decent level of support, at least for a few years. Wii support has been at the very least no better, and I'd say it still is barely to the point of "crossing streams" as Gamecube support along the same timeline decreases.

By the way, Man God, what Wii games would you recommend that I've missed? I really feel like I've bought almost everything worth owning for the thing, subject to my tastes, of course.

 

[Link]

Of course not all of them will. I can't see a single reason why an Epic, an Id or even a post-FreeRadical-acquisition Crytek would decide to seriously support the Wii: they not only produce games, they also have strong interests in the technology -engines- behind them so I believe they will remain focused on so-called nextgen hardware.

The irony is that I'll bet the first company to create a really solid engine for the Wii is going to have money pouring in by sourcing it out. High Voltage may be setting themselves up for some serious success here.

 

[Vinci]

The irony is that I'll bet the first company to create a really solid engine for the Wii is going to have money pouring in by sourcing it out. High Voltage may be setting themselves up for some serious success here.

Here's hoping. I'm impressed by how hard they're trying with Conduit, even if their art design is spotty at best. Give that engine to a dev with strong artistic sensibilities and it would be amazing.

 

[JJConrad]

See this? You can only go so far when debating quality. My least favorite game on that list was actually Sphinx, which I know a lot of people liked. My point stands: the Gamecube received a decent level of support, at least for a few years. Wii support has been at the very least no better, and I'd say it still is barely to the point of "crossing streams" as Gamecube support along the same timeline decreases.

By the way, Man God, what Wii games would you recommend that I've missed? I really feel liked I've bought almost everything worth owning for the thing, subject to my tastes, of course.

I see two problems with this method of comparison that I'll roll into one.
Is that Gamecube list in same timeframe that the games where released or the same timeframe that you purchased those games. I look at your GC list and its a lot like mine, but I know I waited on most of those until later to buy them. My Wii library is currently weaker than my GC library, but I doubt it will still look that way by the end of the generation and I've bought a bunch of those games I've been waiting on.

I agree with you that the GC had better third party support at the beginning of its life. However, we're also passed the GC's prime. By this time last gen, Lucasart had dumped the system, the Capcom 5 were starting to fall apart, and the rest the time was mostly waiting for some older japanese games to make it over the ocean. The two systems are no longer comparable.

 

[Version 3.0]

I see two problems with this method of comparison that I'll roll into one.
Is that Gamecube list in same timeframe that the games where released or the same timeframe that you purchased those games. I look at your GC list and its a lot like mine, but I know I waited on most of those until later to buy them. My Wii library is currently weaker than my GC library, but I doubt it will still look that way by the end of the generation and I've bought a bunch of those games I've been waiting on.

I agree with you that the GC had better third party support at the beginning of its life. However, we're also passed the GC's prime. By this time last gen, Lucasart had dumped the system, the Capcom 5 were starting to fall apart, and the rest the time was mostly waiting for some older japanese games to make it over the ocean. The two systems are no longer comparable.

Those aren't even the Gamecube games that I own released in that timeframe, those are the ones I purchased in that timeframe (I have a spreadsheet with purchase date, not release date). I probably picked up more later on, used or discounted.

I agree, though, the two systems are hard to compare in any case, as they're almost polar opposites: the Gamecube started okay and then declined (an accelerating decline), while Wii started like a bullet and is still on its way up, in sales and support. The Gamecube by this time next year was coasting on fumes, with RE4 being its last hurrah. Next year, the Wii should have even stronger support, or at least equal to this year, which is starting off nicely.

 

[nincompoop]

Actually most of those Gamecube Games are really good.

Defender, Spinx, Vexx and Nightfire are the only ones I wouldn't even bother with.

On second thought, Nightfire is worth a rent.

I'd say if anything his Wii purchases are the weaker of the two third party libraries.

Sphinx is excellent. Beats the shit out of BG&E at the very least.

How is Rubik's World, by the way Leondexter? Made by the same company as Toki Tori, so I can't imagine it being THAT bad.

 

[Version 3.0]

Sphinx is excellent. Beats the shit out of BG&E at the very least.

How is Rubik's World, by the way Leondexter? Made by the same company as Toki Tori, so I can't imagine it being THAT bad.

I didn't mean that it's bad, just that it's irrelevant, not even a blip on the radar. I've only played a little, honestly--Valkyria Chronicles took my attention about then, and then I went on a trip for Christmas--but it was okay. I toyed with the puzzle modes just a little and got a bit of Boom Blox vibe from a couple, and some Tetrisphere puzzle mode vibe from others. One of these days I'll have to give it a better look.

I'm a Rubik's nut, though, so most of the time I spent with it was just solving the "real" cubes, which is better done in the real world, of course.

 

[AColdDay]

Here's hoping. I'm impressed by how hard they're trying with Conduit, even if their art design is spotty at best. Give that engine to a dev with strong artistic sensibilities and it would be amazing.

I remember an interview with someone from HVS and they asked them about sourcing out their engine. The guy basically said that they have no interest in sourcing it out because it would be too hard to modify. Something along those lines at least, but the point stands that I doubt we'll ever see anything but The Conduit on that engine.

 

[boiled goose]

i think wii's third party support has been better, first party coresupport about equal. (prime ,galaxy, melee=brawl, kart, zelda, etc). wii also has much more casual support, which despite what ppl say tend to be great for multiplayer. (nintendo's efforts at least) gamecube never had wii sports, fit, wario ware, etc... all great fun.

To me the wii has a stronger library now than the gamecube ever had. it may have less multiplats, but at least the good ones it gets tend to be unique as supposed to gimped or equal versions the gamecube got.

ignoring first party,

the wii has gotten a lot of quality, exclusive niche games( nmh, de blob, z&w,etc)
it also has great party stuff like rock band and guitar hero , which gamecube never had.
+ 2009 which looks great

my gc third party collection was stuff like rogue squadron, soul calibur, timesplitter. re4, etc.
most of which were great but equivalent on other platforms. (except rogue squadron)

 

[boiled goose]

Also, Zack & Wiki had an indentity crisis. :lol

it does...
fairly complicated puzzle solving (hardcore, slanted for older games)
graphics (broad appealing to young tilted)
overly cutely style (young tilted)
name (completely retarded and unappealing (not mainstream)

i think it would be hard for it to be anything more than niche...
a true hardcore game

edit: sorry dp.... posted at >20min apart...

 

[Arpharmd B]

I think the Genesis was more like Teddy Ruxpin.

Awesome then they added a bunch of pointless add-ons (Grubby, that book game with the 4 colored buttons). Ok Grubby was pretty awesome but come on he was only had like 3 stories!

Or more like the n64 because they never updated him past the old cassette tapes. And we all know how limited in space those were for "next gen" fairy tales.

 

[Shin Johnpv]

Whatever, nobody has ever known what any of these arbitrary phrases actually mean anyway. This discussion is about the Wii, and this gen, when people talk about "casual games" they usually mean things like Wii Sports that are aimed at Nintendo's new demographic(who I think could more accurately be called non-gamers). These are the types of games that devs try to emulate with their rushed minigame compilations. Wii critics, including devs and publishers, claim that the system only appeals to this demographic when in reality the large majority of Wii owners were already playing traditional games on traditional consoles last gen.

If the discussion is about Wii and this gen, then why did you bring up the PS2 and its list of top sellers? I disagree that casuals are non-gamers, and that Wii Sports is in the same boat as the mini game compilations 3rd parties throw out there. Anyone who plays a game is a fucking gamer. I don't care if that game is bejewlled, diamond detective, wii sports, Mario galaxy, Dead Space, or Mirrors Edge. If they play games they're a gamer.

Notice that I specifically avoided using the phrase "hardcore" because it is bullshit. Compared to the everyday populace, every person here is a hardcore gamer, but if you ask half the people here to define it they'll always point at someone more obsessed than themselves.

Then why use the term casual. If you accept one thing, then you have to accept its opposite. Something is defined by its opposite.

Why don't you tell me in clear and unambiguous terms how you would define a "core game"? It seems to me that your only criteria is popularity - if too many people buy it, it's casual bullshit. Unless of course you like the franchise.

My point, which you seemed to let fly right over your head, is that you can't define core/casual. That its going to totally depend on the person viewing the games. To me as some one who started gaming back in the 2600 days, stuff like Madden, GTA, and the 15 million FPS released every year, are the casual/mainstream fluff. Hell I clearly remember the 16bit days when it was the mainstream madden bullshit that was going to destroy gaming. Real gamers played RPGs, platformers, and vertical shooters. None of these bullshit sports games.

Again what's casual/mainstream tripe to one generation is just part of the regular core gaming of following gens. Looking at that list of PS2 top sellers, as a 16bit hardcore gamer, I see a shit ton of casual/mainstream crap. Most people who started gaming in the PS, or PS2 era see core gaming experiences. Just the same way some one who starts gaming now will look at Mario Galaxy and Wii Sports the same way.

 

[Vinci]

Again what's casual/mainstream tripe to one generation is just part of the regular core gaming of following gens. Looking at that list of PS2 top sellers, as a 16bit hardcore gamer, I see a shit ton of casual/mainstream crap. Most people who started gaming in the PS, or PS2 era see core gaming experiences. Just the same way some one who starts gaming now will look at Mario Galaxy and Wii Sports the same way.

This is perhaps why I feel such a disconnect with many young gamers. I've been playing since Rogue, ffs, though for whatever reason I've never truly been against any aspect of gaming. To me, there's little real difference between Wii Sports and Mass Effect; I simply appreciate them for different reasons.

 

[Christine]

I think the Genesis was more like Teddy Ruxpin.

Awesome then they added a bunch of pointless add-ons (Grubby, that book game with the 4 colored buttons). Ok Grubby was pretty awesome but come on he was only had like 3 stories!

Or more like the n64 because they never updated him past the old cassette tapes. And we all know how limited in space those were for "next gen" fairy tales.

That wasn't a Teddy Ruxpin add-on, it was a stand-alone product. It didn't have a data or signal track, it just used both sides of the cassette to provide a total of 4 selectable audio tracks, chosen by whichever button was depressed. Playskool and Fisher-Price each had a version, and they could all play the same tapes. I'll be damned if I can remember the name of the product, there's next to no information about them on the internet.

 

[A Twisty Fluken]

This is perhaps why I feel such a disconnect with many young gamers. I've been playing since Rogue, ffs, though for whatever reason I've never truly been against any aspect of gaming. To me, there's little real difference between Wii Sports and Mass Effect; I simply appreciate them for different reasons.

The first shift is always the most traumatic, it's like your first big breakup. Turn back the clock and our generation had its own low moments (as another one who started with Rogue, Moon Patrol, the Apple][e and the NES) I can't say I handled the shift to 3D all that maturely. Then again, I was in my early teens, so yeah.

 

[Turrican3]

The irony is that I'll bet the first company to create a really solid engine for the Wii is going to have money pouring in by sourcing it out. High Voltage may be setting themselves up for some serious success here.

Yeah, but please don't misunderstand me: it's not the strategy of selling your tech that I classify as flawed, it's just that I believe Id/Epic/etc. would more than likely prefer to go the high-end route; or, let's say the Wii is not the "right" platform for them (assuming nowadays this still makes sense someway - aren't devs supposed to do whatever they can to earn lots of money?!).

 

[Vinci]

Yeah, but please don't misunderstand me: it's not the strategy of selling your tech that I classify as flawed, it's just that I believe Id/Epic/etc. would more than likely prefer to go the high-end route; or, let's say the Wii is not the "right" platform for them (assuming nowadays this still makes sense someway - aren't devs supposed to do whatever they can to earn lots of money?!).

This is why disruptions happen. THIS right here. But as usual, these companies are too stupid to notice it.

 

[SLYspyda]

I've never played a Pikmin game before. Should I wait for Pikmin with New Play Controls, or go ahead and get Pikmin 2?

thanks

 

[Vinci]

I've never played a Pikmin game before. Should I wait for Pikmin with New Play Controls, or go ahead and get Pikmin 2?

thanks

I'd wait.

 

[Christine]

Ah! It's Talk 'N Play, and I was wrong - it was done by Child Guidance and later picked up by Playskool.

 

[Zek]

If the discussion is about Wii and this gen, then why did you bring up the PS2 and its list of top sellers? I disagree that casuals are non-gamers, and that Wii Sports is in the same boat as the mini game compilations 3rd parties throw out there. Anyone who plays a game is a fucking gamer. I don't care if that game is bejewlled, diamond detective, wii sports, Mario galaxy, Dead Space, or Mirrors Edge. If they play games they're a gamer.

Then why use the term casual. If you accept one thing, then you have to accept its opposite. Something is defined by its opposite.

My point, which you seemed to let fly right over your head, is that you can't define core/casual. That its going to totally depend on the person viewing the games. To me as some one who started gaming back in the 2600 days, stuff like Madden, GTA, and the 15 million FPS released every year, are the casual/mainstream fluff. Hell I clearly remember the 16bit days when it was the mainstream madden bullshit that was going to destroy gaming. Real gamers played RPGs, platformers, and vertical shooters. None of these bullshit sports games.

Again what's casual/mainstream tripe to one generation is just part of the regular core gaming of following gens. Looking at that list of PS2 top sellers, as a 16bit hardcore gamer, I see a shit ton of casual/mainstream crap. Most people who started gaming in the PS, or PS2 era see core gaming experiences. Just the same way some one who starts gaming now will look at Mario Galaxy and Wii Sports the same way.

Look, it's completely meaningless to have any kind of argument if you can't even agree on the semantics. The reason why these debates so often go to shit is because everybody's arguing with their own definitions which causes them to interpret other people's posts in ways they weren't intended. They're just words, if people can't agree on this set of them then we should use different ones. Terms like hardcore and casual are too controversial to be productive in a debate. Are you a hardcore gamer if you play obscure and difficult titles for a couple hours a week? What if you spend hours every day playing Solitaire?

Whatever you want to call them, the point in question here is the significance of the Wii's new target demographic, the people who never or very rarely played games before. These are the people who buy the console for Wii Sports and have no interest in anything but minigame collections. Wii critics would like us to believe that the majority of the Wii's massive sales are because of these people, and thus there's no market for traditional games there. But if it's a facts that 71% of Wii owners are interested enough in gaming to have bought a PS2(which is a completely traditional console), and I'm guessing at least 80% owned a console last gen, then obviously the majority of Wii owners actually would be interested in playing traditional games on it. Thus this myth that the Wii isn't suitable for these kinds of games is nonsense. I would argue that pretty much every person posting here is a hardcore gamer, and there's no shortage of interest in the Wii here, just disappointment in lack of dev support.

 

[Version 3.0]

Wii critics would like us to believe that the majority of the Wii's massive sales are because of these people, and thus there's no market for traditional games there. But if it's a facts that 71% of Wii owners are interested enough in gaming to have bought a PS2(which is a completely traditional console), and I'm guessing at least 80% owned a console last gen, then obviously the majority of Wii owners actually would be interested in playing traditional games on it. Thus this myth that the Wii isn't suitable for these kinds of games is nonsense.

Exactly.

But I think some of these publishers take a different view. I think they know very well that Wii owners are the same people who used to have a PS2 (or whatever) and casually played Gran Turismo or Madden or GTA last gen. And they're right, that's certainly true. Now those people are playing Wii Sports--and whatever else they decide to buy after that, of course (and they do buy more games, it's an indisputable fact).

But the view that I think these publishers are taking is that these people will buy whatever is available. They take the same view as many people around here: they think Wii Sports, etc are stupid games, and the people buying them are too dumb to know a good game from a bad one. So they plan to cash in with cheap games. They know they're peddling shit, but they like the low risk. Ubisoft definitely falls into this camp. It remains to be seen whether the return--which I think is considerably is lower than they anticipated--is low enough to change their strategy.

 

[Captain Smoker]

Another Casual/Hardcore - discussion?


Since 2005 the same old arguments... wtf, seriously?

 

[Mario]

But if you added up every person who owns a PS2 for no other reason than to play those games, what percentage of overall PS2 owners do you honestly think it would account for?

As pure speculation, given the massive popularity of those titles I mentioned, probably a couple million people, possibly a lot more.

 

[poppabk]

Another Casual/Hardcore - discussion?


Since 2005 the same old arguments... wtf, seriously?

No the 2005 argument was that the Wii was the new Tickle Me Elmo.
People looked at all the facts and data:
-looked at how third party sales were greater on Wii than 360 over the holiday period
-took on board the serious 3rd party efforts like The Conduit, Shaun whites Snowboarding, Madworld, Deadly Creatures and HOTD:Overkill
-noticed the move by major publishers to port "HD" games such as Dead Space and COD:WaW and in the latter case make dedicated Wii TV commercials
-acknowledged major Japanese franchises such as Dragon Quest and Monster Hunter getting (exclusively) greenlit for Wii
-realized that major franchises like Guitar Hero were now more successful on Wii

And they decided that they really have a handle on it now, and that all things considered, it is less like Tickle Me Elmo and more like Teddy Ruxpin.

 

[truly101]

I'm not sure why people keep using the eye toy as some sort of valid comparision to the Wii and the wii-mote. The Eye toy is not the primary interface of the PS2 and probably less than 5% of PS2 games released for the system use the eye toy, not a good comparision to another system's primary controller. You might want to try the balance board instead.

 

[Version 3.0]

And they decided that they really have a handle on it now, and that all things considered, it is less like Tickle Me Elmo and more like Teddy Ruxpin.

:lol

You know, I've forgotten what the reference was with Teddy Ruxpin, it was a throwaway line at the beginning of the video (which I can't see from work). What was it again? Obviously something about the Wii not being "hardcore".


Whatever it was, it's not very catchy. The duct tape comment was much more memorable and funny...and relevant.

 

[SturokBGD]

And they decided that they really have a handle on it now, and that all things considered, it is less like Tickle Me Elmo and more like Teddy Ruxpin.

:lol

Post of the day, for sure.

 

[Christine]

I'm not sure why people keep using the eye toy as some sort of valid comparision to the Wii and the wii-mote. The Eye toy is not the primary interface of the PS2 and probably less than 5% of PS2 games released for the system use the eye toy, not a good comparision to another system's primary controller. You might want to try the balance board instead.

The comparison as I've usually seen it is EyeToy Play being compared to Wii Play, which isn't completely insane.

 

[truly101]

The comparison as I've usually seen it is EyeToy Play being compared to Wii Play, which isn't completely insane.

Ok that makes sense.

 

[frailimbnursry]

I owned a Teddy Ruxpin and at least one of his videos. Good memories.

This is entirely the wrong thread but since it regards the Wii and because the following does not need it's own separate thread:

I owe my mother ~$350. She wants me to buy a Wii or Rock Band 2 for the PS3 for the house and call it even. She's leaning toward RB2 but since it's for the house my sister has cast her vote for the Wii. Obviously if I buy RB2 that's more money leftover in my pocket but the Wii affords a variety of experiences (and I really want to play SMG, probably the only thing I'm excited to play on the Wii). Unfortunately, anyone I know with a Wii completely neglects it these days. Therefore, I ask GAF, what would you purchase and why? You've got 30 minutes before I make a purchase so make my decision for me.