Forgot password?  |  Register  |    
User Name:     Password:    
Blog - Staff Blog   

Bridging the Gap


On 12/05/2011 at 04:37 PM by Jesse Miller

See More From This User »

Gamers are creatures of habit.  Change comes to us slow, and when it does we lash out like a child getting a tetanus shot.  We would never admit this, though.  We’ll bitch and moan about how Activision shouldn’t release another Call of Duty game for a while, but when release date is upon us we’ll be lined up at midnight release parties, parting ways with a few dead presidents for the annual release in a series we earlier proclaimed as old and tired.

The new, scares us.  It takes us out of our comfort zone.  When something new comes around we stare at it from afar, wishing it was more like something old and familiar.  We don’t like taking chances.

We’re quick to doom something that veers from the status quo.  We don’t want innovation; we want improvement on what already works.  We stand by the old saying ‘if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it’ to a point that makes us seem antiquated.

These statements certainly aren’t representative of all gamers, but one has to admit that a large percentage of the ‘core’ community is reminiscent of the old man sitting on his porch, spouting off how things were better in the good old days.

I bring this up because of some of the reactions to the announcement of the Wii U.  While largely receiving positive feedback, the system has certainly been the focal point of Nintendo naysayers.  This group has made it clear that they believe that a system that they know next to nothing about is going to fail because it fails to excite the ‘core’ gamer.

This prompts the questions, “What does the ‘core’ crowd want?”

The answers are quite predictable.  They want something that will produce much better graphics than the Xbox and the Playstation; not just a minor upgrade.  They want a more ‘traditional’ controller.  They want ‘mature’ games.

Essentially they want more of the same. 

A very familiar sight

Between the 16bit and 32 bit generations there was some massive change.  We went from a cartridge standard format to disc.  We went from pixels to polygons.  We went from d-pads to analogue sticks.  There was a lot of change.

The next generation didn’t offer a whole lot of new content.  We experimented with online gaming, the Xbox introduced the internal hard drive and that’s about it.

The following generation merely refined what was already there.  Online came into its own, hard drives got bigger and controllers stayed the same.

Unless you owned a Wii.

‘Core’ gamers scoffed at the simplistic controller that offered new ways to play games.  It’s true that the system was less powerful than the competition, but it offered a wholly new experience that enticed non-traditional gamers to flock, in droves, to the stores to pick one up.

I don't know what that is, but it scares me

Yet the ‘core’ crowd still sees the Wii as a failure.  Even the fact that Nintendo produced the best selling console of this generation (so far) that has been profitable since day 1 (it took years for the other machines to turn a profit) didn’t matter to them.  The lack of sheer graphical power and a weird new controller turned them off.

Now, some people will say that the games weren’t there, but this is a weak argument.  Had the ‘core’ crowd embraced the console from the beginning the game developers would have followed suit.  Ultimately, developers go to where they can sell the most copies of a game (which is why the Playstation 2, which developed an enormous user base by offering a DVD player with the machine – DVD players were rare back then – was more successful than its more technologically superior competition).

The ‘core’ crowd is an elitist group.  They revel in the fact that they are a minority in the gaming world – as if they are an exclusive club.  I liken it to hockey fans (which I am one) and American soccer fans who scoff at new comers to the sport; alienating them because they just now took notice.  The ‘core’ crowd does this too, dismissing all the new gamers in the industry, being particularly harsh on the so called casual gaming crowd.

Only 'core gamers allowed

They clung to their ‘core’ machines and mocked those gamers that played on the Wii, smartphones and social networking sites.

And now Nintendo is releasing a system that could bridge the gap between ‘core’ and ‘casual.’ And this scares the shit out of them, because this will mean the end to their exclusive club.  I know, sometimes it sucks when a band you’ve been listening to for years goes mainstream, but ultimately that success is good for the band.  You should be happy for them; it’s selfish to think otherwise.  Same goes for our videogame industry.

Love it and learn to share it.

Add to the discussion by sounding off in the comments section below!

Happy Gaming.


 

Comments

Matt McLennan Staff Alumnus

12/05/2011 at 08:24 PM

The casual/hardcore crap gives me a headache and is stupid.

This type of whining was why the Operation Rainfall games almost never had a chance of coming over to North America.

...Why did I miss this blog post until now!? D:

Our Take

Esteban Cuevas Staff Alumnus

12/06/2011 at 05:58 AM

Lighting the fire...

A majority of gamers can be characterized as slow to change in that they buy yearly iterations of games in a series, this is true. However, it's that same community that bring titles like Catherine and El Shaddai to our attention. Titles like these are quite different, although the quality of some (El Shaddai got mixed reviews) are debatable. If the core gamer community is so adverse to change, these titles would not get the attention they did. I don't think its a matter of not liking change so much as it is games enjoy good games more than their moral beliefs in regards to the industry. Many thought they shouldn't buy Activision games after the Infinity Ward debacle but they did. We did. Maybe they believe that yearly installments in a franchise hurts it in the long run but that didn't stop them from buying Assassin's Creed Revelations because they enjoy the series more than that perspective, even though they were probably right.

In regards to Nintendo, there are several points I would like to address. I know many gamers who were excited for the Wii. The thought of motion controls were exciting. I remembering being so pumped for it. Not only because of the promises it was giving, but because Nintendo had in essence done it already. The DS is what got me into handheld gaming. It wasn't the Game Boy, or the Game Gear or even the Game Boy Advance. The reason was it worked. The DS did what the Wii later proved it couldn't: make controller-less gaming engaging and an essential part of the game's mechanics. I could not imagine playing Wario Ware: Touched with anything other than a stylist whereas I wish I could play Donkey Kong Country Returns on a controller. Now there are exceptions, including the packaged game Wii Sports, but in the grand scheme of things, the Wii was a failure in that it did nothing new from a game design point of view. Even great overlooked titles like No More Heroes is hampered by the motion controls. Doing wrestling moves with gestures isn't responsive. Hell, it's still in my backlog in part because I don't want to deal with the motion controls. But I digress.

There's a feeling that core gamers have been burned by Nintendo too many times and I think that's why that community bashes them. This is why the Wii U is the strangest idea I can think of. Now, the Wii sold big and will probably be the console winner in terms of overall sales. However, can you really call that a war won when Nintendo reported record losses this year? Anyways, the Wii U is an attempt to attract the hardcore, while maintaining their casual market. Now, that idea on paper sounds great. However, the product we were shown at E3 is ludicrous. First off, the casual market has learned to play without a traditional controller and this controller actually has more inputs than any other controller out now or before with the exception (maybe) of a keyboard. The touch screen possibilities are endless and then you have the traditional button layout on the sides of the screen. Mom is not going to want this thing. The hardcore audience is then granted with a console that's promising games we can play right now. Even with Nintendo saying it'll be 50% stronger than the Xbox 360, we're still getting games that will play the same on the current gen consoles. Also, I don't care what anyone says, there is no way that controller is comfortable. Even if it does somehow grip nicely around your palms and all the buttons are comfortable to get at and press, the weight of that screen has to grow tiresome in extended play times. So what I'm trying to say here is we have a console for a casual market that's already leaving if not gone already and a hardcore audience that already has a console for the games its promising. Nintendo is trying to appease everyone but not actually accomplishing anything. Nintendo is basically an ineffective Democrat president in this sense.

You say the hardcore doesn't like change but core gamers are complaining about Nintendo not changing. They're not doing anything innovative. Hell, they're not even trying. The Wii U is basically a greatest hits album featuring music (mechanics) from a band's (Nintendo) two different periods of music styles, except all rerecorded. Do you want to hear rerecorded versions of "Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous" back to back with "I Don't Wanna Be In Love"? Those are Good Charlotte songs, in case you don't know. The point I'm trying to make is Nintendo's attitude to bring gaming to all isn't what I'm upset about and I don't think gamers in general are adverse to. I think they do take offense in that Nintendo has given up on innovation in actual game productions itself. Nobody is as excited for Skyward Sword as they were for Ocarina of Time because it's the same game, even if the quality is great. Carnival Games may appeal to a lot of people but it's not an engaging game, which in turn makes it not a fun experience. Nintendo hasn't been able to merge the two together either and at this point, although it seems like they are, they're not even trying anymore. The casual market gets Transformers 2, which is visually appealing but empty in terms of content and the hardcore marker is get Saw VI, the sixth remake of a movie made six years ago (I believe). Sure it's successful overall in sales but, to use another music reference, so is Rihanna. She doesn't change at all and neither has Nintendo in the past five years (and in my opinion, aside from the motion controls, in fifteen years). By this logic, the hardcore should love them. But they don't, do they?

This has been a lot of Nintendo bashing but as crazy as it may seem, I want Nintendo to succeed. I will say that they are the only ones with a real desire (somewhere) to change how we play gaming. Sure Microsoft and Sony have motion controls now but it feels calculated. I personally want to see a console manifestation of the DS because that where this idea of expanding the market to everyone actually succeeded. I really want to see the 3DS succeed and with the recent games that have been released, it might. However, I still see problems with that, and Nintendo keeps on making announcements that seem bent on hindering any progress they may have with the handheld (redone classic games in 3D, second analog pad that requires a battery) and the Wii U is suffering the same fate. One thing about video games that's special to me is that it's my discovery. I love music but my tastes were defined by what my parents had in their collection. No one I knew at age six liked video games and I stumbled on this hobby on my own. No I would love nothing more than to share my discovery with everyone. Finding titles that everyone can understand and enjoy would be wonderful and Nintendo seems to think like this as well. Too bad they don't know how to do that.

There. There's my two (hundred) cents.

Esteban Cuevas Staff Alumnus

12/06/2011 at 06:03 AM

Oh and that's only about half the ideas I wanted to say about this post. I could actually write a whole blog as a response. I may disagree with you but thank you for posting such a thought provoking piece. Love it!

Nick DiMola Director

12/06/2011 at 09:21 AM

I think you're painting the Wii with a pretty wide brush, Esteban. There's no debating that the Wii has changed gaming forever, as did the DS. Motion controls and touch inputs are now standards in this industry and that's thanks solely to what Nintendo has done with both of their systems.

Bottom line, Nintendo doesn't make the games that the hardcore wants. They won't disagree that Nintendo's games are great, but they are simply not what the market is looking for. Don't get me wrong, Nintendo has far from perfect execution, but I can't say they are any better or worse than Sony and Microsoft. At least Nintendo keeps things interesting and throws all sorts of shit at the wall until something sticks. Sony and Microsoft don't do that and I don't think they are in a sustainable model for a growing market.

Like any business, change and growth is important, and neither Microsoft nor Sony have exhibited an ability to do so. They sell at a loss only to recoup years later, turning a small profit and subsequently dumping that right into R&D of their next system. That's a bad business model.

Nintendo (clearly) understands what makes a good business, though this year it's clear that some of their success caused them to lose sight of the goal. As for the Wii U, I'm excited, but like you said, I think it's a futile attempt.

The fundamental problem is that the casuals are gone and the hardcore doesn't give a shit about Nintendo. Nintendo *thinks* they can grab hold of the hardcore - they can't. The best they can do is prevent their own fans from buying other consoles by offering as much hardcore stuff as possible on the Wii U. That's not a good business model, but it's one that gives Nintendo complete control. As always, they'll bank on the hardware, they'll make the best games, and they'll continue to occupy that niche until their next breakout success.

I know the Wii gets a lot of hate, but I'd say the Wii had the most games I loved over the course of this generation. So many overlooked masterpieces that the hardcore ignore because it's on the Wii or uses motion control. The myopic views of the hardcore make me sick as a true enthusiast of gaming.

Our Take

Esteban Cuevas Staff Alumnus

12/06/2011 at 10:29 AM

That's just it however. I don't think the hardcore community is as elitist or shallow as many think. It's just a few loud people who feel this way. Many gamers I feel do have a substantial reason why they like the games they do and they aren't greedy in that they don't want to share their hobby. These are the same people who aren't praising Nintendo games and that's because while Nintendo tend to make games to showcase an idea or a control mechanic instead of creating a game that's in itself innovative or even fun. Kirby's Epic Yarn looked like a lot of fun and it's unique design made it the first Kirby game I was interested in. Then I played it and I was left with a pretty average platformer with a unique aesthetic. See, that's the problem. At the end of the day, video games are games and the point of them are to be fun. Most games for the Wii aren't. Many of the ones that are come from Nintendo and even that's not a guarantee.

Also, how is motion control the standard in the industry. I know there's Kinect and Move but neither are successful as the standard controlled games. If anything, the idea is dead and games like Skyward Sword are just trying to prove a technology that has proven itself to be either too young or a fad. Also if Nintendo's business model is so good, why did they lost money this year for the first time since they became a video game company?

Nick DiMola Director

12/06/2011 at 11:07 AM

Well first off, I disagree on the fun part. That's totally subjective. I loved Kirby's Epic Yarn and I'll surely be going back to it again and that's after completing it 100%. I won't bother naming all of the Wii games I've enjoyed (feel free to check my collection), but there have been plenty. And most of those experiences were ones that would've never found a home on either the 360 or the PS3. I think it's fair to say that the Wii just isn't for you. Nothing wrong with that, but it definitely doesn't make it a bad system, nor does it make it of spotty quality. Just a quality that doesn't align with your tastes.

In terms of motion control, Kinect is very much the centerpiece of Microsoft's focus, Move is advertised daily on TV. Obviously they aren't standards because they didn't launch with the system, but clearly that's their focus. The technology is young, for sure, but how else can it mature other than spending more time in the market?

In terms of Nintendo's business model, I'm not sure how 1 bad year in the history of the company means they have a bad model. Furthermore, they only posted a loss for the first half of the year. It was a big loss for sure, but they also didn't release a damn thing. Black Friday and this holiday season has been good for Nintendo, I wouldn't be surprised if they at least broke even at the end of the fiscal year, if not better. Figure that Sony and Microsoft post those same kind of losses or greater every console generation for years on end. You also have to take into account the 3DS launch and the cost associated there, it's a launch year and they are expensive. It's pretty unfair to say a company has a bad business model with 1 bad year on the books among decades of good ones.

Nick DiMola Director

12/06/2011 at 11:11 AM

Oh also worth mentioning, the dollar to yen conversion is absolutely killing Japanese business in general. US economy being in the shitter is hurting the global economy, especially places like Japan that relies so heavily on our market.

Jesse Miller Staff Writer

12/06/2011 at 11:36 AM

Concerning motion controls, it's obvious they aren't going away. I fully expect that the next Xbox will come standard with some version of the Kinnect built in with better technology. With that being standard, it'll be much more commonplace for developers to use the device more often in games - not as a singular controlling mechanism necessarily, but as a supplementary control device more along the lines of how it will be used in Mass Effect 3 and Ghost Recon.

And I'd side with Nick on the fun factor - plenty of people enjoyed Kirby's Epic Yarn, including myself. It may be a little harsh to call all "hardcore" gamers elitist, but I think that anyone who refers to themselves as hardcore and others as casual is being elitist. I don't like using the terms because it separates people when we should be embracing all types of gamers.

Our Take

Esteban Cuevas Staff Alumnus

12/06/2011 at 11:43 AM

I'm not saying the Wii didn't have good games but it failed on consistently having good games. That's why we're having discussions on what's next for the Wii and not for the 360 or PS3. As a contrast, Sony did not start this generation well. My favorite console this generation is the 360 because the PS3 had too many problems at launch and the Wii disappointed me. However, since the last time I had a PS3 (which was over three years ago), a lot has changed. They improved. That's why this holiday I'm getting one again. They were successful in persuading me that they had worthwhile games I want to play. Fun games. Varied games. Exclusive games. The Wii did the exact opposite. When it first came out, I love Wii Sports, Trauma Center, ExciteTruck, WarioWare: Smooth Moves and Rayman Raving Rabbids. Twilight Princess is still something I need to play again to remind me but I loved the launch. It was straight downhill from there. This is because Nintendo started spreading out their rosters and 3rd party developers weren't making engaging games. Sure, every now and again, there was a House of the Dead Overkill or Madworld but those moments were few and far between. Unfortunately, they never learned how to properly utilize the technology. Core gamers realized that. Maybe quality of games is subjective but if no one is buying these games and no one is praising them critically, then who is saying these are good? You say these just weren't for core gamers so the critically bashed it. Well, with a few exceptions like Just Dance and Carnival Games, the casual market wasn't buying these games either. Games like Madworld didn't sell well because by that time, it was too late. Core gamers weren't around anymore and the casual market was still happy with their copies of Wii Fit and Mario Kart Wii.

My point is that Nintendo aside, just because core gamers are not supportive of the Wii or Wii U doesn't equate to elitism. It equates to holding Nintendo to a higher standard or not finding a list of quality games or wanting something different. The other point of this post is that gamers don't like change. Although motion controls were new in 2006, it's hardly evolved since then. So Nintendo has been doing the same thing for about five years now. Core gamers should love Nintendo by that logic but they don't. They like change and Nintendo isn't changing, just using a well intention ed gimmick to sell games. Repackaging old ideas into new products. Taking David Bowie and calling it Lady Gaga. Oh and it's a bad business model because it was a short term model. That's why they made a lot before and nothing now. I'm talking about their recent business model which I'm sure has changed since, say the GameCube. Actually, their business model then must've been awesome. The GameCube struggled that whole console cycle but they remained profitable. Impressive! Bottom Line: Hating on Nintendo doesn't make you elitist and I don't think many gamers are like that.

Jesse Miller Staff Writer

12/06/2011 at 11:46 AM

I wouldn't say that core games like change. They may say they want change, but in reality most "core" games have remained mostly the same in terms of content since the PS2/Xbox.Gamecube days. I think they're more afraid of change than anyone else.

Esteban Cuevas Staff Alumnus

12/06/2011 at 11:47 AM

Oh and labeling as hardcore and casual may be elitist in its implication. Then again, by that I would say stop calling girls who play video games girl gamers or gamer girls. Which I'm actually for. So there's merit to that argument.

Nick DiMola Director

12/06/2011 at 11:58 AM

In response to your last comment Esteban, I'd say that a number of quality Wii games were released and subsequently hurt by the game media who I believe are biased against the Wii and have been from the get go. Great games on Wii have gotten a bad rap (see Fragile, Marble Saga Kororinpa, Excitebots, de Blob... and the list goes on from there) and mediocre games (like MadWorld) are praised for appealing to a crowd who didn't want the game anyway.

Having been entrenched in the Nintendo community for a long time, I can pretty confidently say that Nintendo fans enjoyed a vast number of games that were largely overlooked by the media, simply because they were on the Wii and sadly, because they weren't your typical rated M fare that seems to garner the most attention.

As backwards as this is going to sound - game media = worst thing that ever happened to gaming, IMO.

Esteban Cuevas Staff Alumnus

12/06/2011 at 12:18 PM

Hmm. de Blob is actually a game I still want to try. So is Excitebots. Never heard of the other two though. Let me just ask this. Nintendo has been the main example to the underlining issue and I think it's become about the Wii in general. Let's get to the main issue. Do you believe that the majority of gamers do not like change? If so, do you think the core audience's general dislike of the Wii is proof of this? Do you think a majority of core gamers express elitism? If so, do you think Nintendo's goal of marketing to those who don't normally play video games rubs these people the wrong way?

I personally don't like how Nintendo operates their business and many of their games (on their consoles) disappoint me in my mind. I'll admit that. However, I know I'm not alone in this belief and I don't think that equals elitism or a fear of change.

Nick DiMola Director

12/06/2011 at 01:09 PM

1). Do you believe that the majority of gamers do not like change?

I believe most gamers do not like changes in beloved series. I also think that they like what has been proven to work. That's not to say that they never want innovation, but I do think if you were to draw a continuum between innovation and stagnation, it would sit closer to stagnation.

2). If so, do you think the core audience's general dislike of the Wii is proof of this?

I believe that not liking the Wii has partially become a group think issue. It's an easy beating post and the media makes it a point to take digs at it whenever they can. I think gamers as a whole dismissed the Wii because they felt it was inferior. I think this was partly due to the system's lack of power, partially because third parties abandoned the console because they couldn't easily port games to it, and partially because gamers would prefer to play things they are comfortable with on a controller they're comfortable with. I like to play shooters with the Wii set up, but I also don't mind dual analog, or keyboard and mouse. But hardcore Xbox/PlayStation folks will have it no other way than dual analog.

3). Do you think a majority of core gamers express elitism?

I don't think elitism is the right word. I think they are exclusionary. They don't want stuff/people in their club that they don't want in their club - whatever that happens to be. I feel that the gaming media plays a large part in controlling mindshare and can easily mobilize readers to align with their viewpoints.

4). If so, do you think Nintendo's goal of marketing to those who don't normally play video games rubs these people the wrong way?

I don't think Nintendo's marketing is the issue. These people haven't liked Nintendo since the SNES. The Wii may have been the biggest console, but Nintendo's shrinking fandom has been an issue since the N64. They still own the portable market, 3DS problems be damned, but on the consoles, people don't care for what Nintendo's dishing out. That's why the Wii U is a problem for Nintendo. They want the hardcore, but the hardcore doesn't want them. The casuals have moved on to smart phone gaming and Facebook gaming, and all that's left are the hardcore Nintendo fans and a few new acquisitions from the Wii.

Nintendo's a company that can sustain themselves on their own hardware and software. They are a self serving company and always have been - even as far back as the NES. The Wii U's only benefit is that it will be equally/better powered than other consoles, so stuff will be ported there once again. Prepare for another Gamecube generation with the Wii U.

Esteban Cuevas Staff Alumnus

12/06/2011 at 01:50 PM

Well, the Wii U in all honest hasn't been released yet and there's still time to make changes. Maybe when we can see actual games instead of tech demos and a revised hardware (they have to be doing that right now) my impression will improve. The silver lining is that it has a touch screen like the DS, which they proved then can do. Also, no matter what, Nintendo is trying something new in hardware, if not software. I have to applaud that. Much better than the avalanche of shooters on the 360. My favorite aspect of the 360 is actually the XBLA games. I don't care too much for shooters. The quirky platformers like Splosion Man and puzzle games like Braid and RPGs like Bastion are what I dig.

I suppose we'll have to agree to disagree, Nick. While I do find it strange that the Wii was as underpowered as it was, it never really bothered me, as long as the games were good. They were for the most part at launch (and the 2010 holiday season, sort of). Other than that, it proved to be sparse for good gaming experiences in my opinion. I never considered myself a Nintendo fan but I adored the SNES. The N64 ruined that and I moved onto the PlayStation which is my favorite console ever and later the Saturn, which has proved to be a treasure in my mind. There was a misunderstood console! You can be a Nintendo fan and I'll be a Sega fan (which doesn't really exist anymore). I don't think many gamers practice exclusion-ism. I think a loud few do. I like innovations in games. I believe many core gamers share my taste for the alternative in games. So I guess we just disagree.

Nick DiMola Director

12/06/2011 at 02:13 PM

I think you should definitely look into some of the many sleeper titles of the Wii. There's a whole bunch of them that essentially boil down to XBLA games on discs. I too love XBLA and I think it offers an absolute ton of enjoyable, original games. I love the Wii for the exact same reason.

I can agree to disagree though - different strokes, different folks. I think without the Wii this would be a hollow generation devoid of much of the personality past generations have brought. Combine the Wii's offerings with the 360/PS3 and this generation is absolutely stellar, offering titles that range from AAA to cult classics.

Esteban Cuevas Staff Alumnus

12/08/2011 at 06:53 PM

I'm actually looking for Wii games to play, thanks to Gamefly. Up next is Call of Duty 4 on the Wii, a recommendation I remember about a month ago from Nate.

daRth_kiLL

12/14/2011 at 04:42 PM

just want to comment on motion controls....HATE THEM. It's why the Wii never got much play in my household.

the pending localized release of Xenoblade, however, has me rethinking. More than likely I'll be buying a used Wii....to play Xenoblade, as well as Luigi's Mansion. Vaccuuming ghosts looks like a fun time I can share with my wife and kid!!!

Log in to your PixlBit account in the bar above or join the site to leave a comment.