Author Topic: Has Nintendo forgotten the hardcore gamer? (Read 10428 times)

Jman · « **on:** January 30, 2009, 02:17:00 PM »

I've been on various forums lately, and I've noticed that a lot of people have gotten uptight about Nintendo making such casual fare as Wii Fit and Wii Music. Even I admit to playing my SNES and N64 more often than my Wii lately. Sure, we have our fair share of franchise games such as Super Mario Galaxy, Twilight Princess, and so on, but I see a lot more games aimed at the casual crowd on the Wii. I don't think Nintendo has forgotten hardcore gamers, I just think they're more concerned about getting "everyone" to play their games. What are your opinions on this matter?

CrossEyed7 · « **Reply #1 on:** January 30, 2009, 02:36:07 PM »

They need to survive, just like anyone else. They tried catering to the hardcore on the GameCube, and almost went bankrupt for it. They only survived last generation because everyone and their mother bought a GBA. The NES didn't appeal to the hardcore gamer, it appealed to everyone. In fact, the hardcore gamer of the day didn't even think the NES, with its inferior 8-bit technology and lack of serious games like text-based adventures and arcade shooters, even counted as a game.

Nintendo's market share has been successively declining since the day the SNES came out, because they kept trying to appeal to gamers instead of people. Their goal now is to make video games a medium and not just a subculture. Everyone watches movies. Everyone reads books. Everyone listens to music. But ever since the 16-bit days, only gamers have played games.

Hardcore gamers will still have a place, just as there's still a place for movie buffs. But we'll need to get used to other people using consoles to play games we don't like, or that don't even fit any previous definition of what games are -- some that don't even try to be games -- just as most of us accept that Requiem for a Dream, Barney's Big Adventure, and Tony Little's exercise videos can all be played on the same DVD player.

The Chef · « **Reply #2 on:** January 30, 2009, 02:57:47 PM »

They haven't forgotten us. They just don't advertise to us. What I'd like to see is them start advertising "hardcore" games to "casual" gamers. Then we'd be in business.

Glorb · « **Reply #3 on:** January 30, 2009, 03:17:27 PM »

Quote from: CrossEyed7 on January 30, 2009, 02:36:07 PM

Requiem for a Dream, Barney's Big Adventure, and Tony Little's exercise videos can all be played on the same DVD player.

Mine's configured to turn all DVDs played in it into Tropic Thunder.

BP · « **Reply #4 on:** January 30, 2009, 06:59:02 PM »

All I'm asking for is more Zelda and some F-ZERO. And all the Star Fox fans are dying for more of that.

If you think about it it's gotten all the helpings of each franchise the GameCube and 64 got, just lacking one or two games here and there. Mario sports games are declining in number (yay) and Mario Kart Wii sucked (booo) and that's about it. 2008 was a crappy year for the Wii (except for Brawl). I believe they'll start picking back up soon.

You just don't remember much of what you have because it's drowned in shovelware. But the NES was completely submerged in shovelware itself.

ShadowBrain · « **Reply #5 on:** January 30, 2009, 09:56:04 PM »

My opinion is implied.

TEM · « **Reply #6 on:** January 30, 2009, 10:16:13 PM »

This is based off of many years of intense study.

FlamingBlueMario · « **Reply #7 on:** January 31, 2009, 12:50:13 AM »

Quote from: Bird Person on January 30, 2009, 06:59:02 PM

And all the Star Fox fans are dying for more of that.

Yeah! What happen to Star Fox? No debut on the Wii yet?

I really don't know if I'm a hardcore gamer or not. This is my games list http://themushroomkingdom.net/board/index.php?topic=8883.msg532886#msg532886. I think I'm inbetween casual and hardcore...I don't know. But Nintendo seems to be struggling. They're starting to sell a lot of "weak" First party games like SMG and maybe even TP. Super Mario Galaxy was great, but...it left me wanting more. I have yet to play Twilight Princess, but
I'm sure it's "ok" (don't hurt me, Zelda fans).

Chupperson Weird · « **Reply #8 on:** January 31, 2009, 01:17:15 AM »

I lost all interest in Star Fox because of Star Fox Command. And I loved Star Fox before that.
Super Mario Galaxy is no less substantial than the last regular Mario titles of the past decade.
Twilight Princess is really really great, even if it is easy.

This thread is a copy of all other threads on this forum and Jman should have just read all of them instead.
In response to CrossEyed7's post, I don't believe there was such a thing as a "hardcore gamer" in 1985. Bird Person is correct about NES being covered in shovelware, but when you get right down to it, 99% of games for every system are terrible junk. Possibly 99.9% of say, Atari or NES games were junk. Again, I don't think there was a concept of shovelware in the '80s, because while most games were just made to turn a quick profit, the difference was that back then, all games were made by teams of about 5 people. Anyway, TEM is right.
Also, you look at Wii, you see casual gamer shovelware.
But look at Xbox or something, and there's tons and tons of shovelware too. It's just bad in a different way. Cheap terrible games are cheap terrible games no matter who they're targeting. PS2 is probably king of terrible games just because it's king of having the most games anyway.
I don't really understand why the GameCube failed, but oh well.

I bought a PSP this week.

SolidShroom · « **Reply #9 on:** January 31, 2009, 08:33:08 AM »

The DS is doing everything right for gamers at this point. It seems like it maintains an excellent balance of shovelware, fun--yet short and not very in depth--games, and "hardcore" games that appeal to people who play games a lot, probably because of excellent third party support.

Turtlekid1 · « **Reply #10 on:** January 31, 2009, 09:08:17 AM »

Quote from: FlamingBlueMardio on January 31, 2009, 12:50:13 AM

I really don't know if I'm a hardcore gamer or not. This is my games list http://themushroomkingdom.net/board/index.php?topic=8883.msg532886#msg532886. I think I'm inbetween casual and hardcore...I don't know.

I think I'm probably somewhere in between, too. I think we need a more substantial "middle class," if you will.

FlamingBlueMario · « **Reply #11 on:** January 31, 2009, 11:37:27 AM »

I agree. It should be "Middle Gamer" or "Balanced Gamer" something. But what we really need to ask ourselves is what defines a hardcore gamer and what defines a casual gamer? Aren't casual gamers people who play video games in a leisurely manner? But then once they like a game they try to improve at it and thus becoming a hardcore gamer? ...Or is a hardcore gamer really just about points, leader boards, rankings and bragging rights? I really do think that casual gamers "evolve" into hardcore gamers over time. That's all.

Chupperson Weird · « **Reply #12 on:** January 31, 2009, 12:06:16 PM »

Hardcore gamers read Hardcore Gaming 101. Casual gamers don't know that most games exist.

TEM · « **Reply #13 on:** January 31, 2009, 01:48:21 PM »

In the most all encompassing definition of Hardcore vs. Casual, I would say this is the line: Hardcore gamers actively care about video games, casual gamers may play video games, but they don't care about them. Casuals don't nitpick, or compare, or know who the developers are, they play a game and either think it is fun or don't. Casuals don't know about what games are coming out (as someone mentioned) or what new system is about to be unveiled. They don't care. Under this definition, the term "Casual Gamer" is a misnomer, because you'd be hesitant to call them a "gamer" at all. (I personally don't like the term Gamer, but that's another conversation)

I think the gap between these two types is the most distinct, a person can go from being casual to hardcore in a matter of seconds, but once the gap is crossed the change in attitude towards video games is very distinct. As we get into categorizing within the aforementioned hardcore category, the distinctions get less defined. Examples being quibbling about who is more hardcore: who has more games, who is a bigger fan, who plays the game for 8 hours a day, etc., etc.

BP · « **Reply #14 on:** January 31, 2009, 02:12:14 PM »

Quote from: TEM on January 31, 2009, 01:48:21 PM

I personally don't like the term Gamer, but that's another conversation

Actually I'd like to hear you talk about this. My definition of "gamer" is someone who spends a majority of their spare time gaming and a majority of their time talking to other people talking about gaming, I guess. That's really true of me--a lot of my life seems to revolve around video games. I seek a career in the video game industry. I prepare for that by drawing stuff from video games or modifying things in video games. My friends and I talk a lot about video games because it's something we have in common. i listen to music from video games, or remixes thereof. I eat and sleep in hopes to survive another day for more gaming. But see, I have a life, and a good one--it's just built on video games.

You are right about "casual gamers" really not being gamers... but then again you could call a dude who goes fishing every once in a while a fisherman in the context of fishing.

Chupperson Weird · « **Reply #15 on:** January 31, 2009, 02:39:49 PM »

Quote from: TEM on January 31, 2009, 01:48:21 PM

Examples being quibbling about who is more hardcore: who has more games, who is a bigger fan, who plays the game for 8 hours a day, etc., etc.

i.e. Lizard Dude and bobman vs. anyone sane.

Anyway, I believe I have expressed similar distaste with the term "gamer" in the past. I like to play video games. But I don't really consider myself a "gamer". I consider myself a person. I own 300 games, but they aren't the most important part of my life. They are an escape from real life. This is why I don't like work simulators such as WoW or The Sims. (These are games played by tons of casual gamers, incidentally.)
I do plan on writing music for games, but I've recently come to the conclusion that that's way too narrow an area of work. Motoi Sakuraba does all sorts of other projects, so I can too.

The Chef · « **Reply #16 on:** January 31, 2009, 03:19:09 PM »

Well, I care about the game industry to a point. I know a bit about a wide variety of games, but I haven't exactly played much outside a fraction of the usual Nintendo library.

I used to want to work in the game industry myself, but then I realized that the main reason I liked Nintendo's games was for stylistic reasons. Currently I'm working towards being a cartoonist/animator.

TEM · « **Reply #17 on:** January 31, 2009, 03:24:42 PM »

I dislike the term "gamer" because it is a component of big busines's'es' attempts to create a "gamer culture" that they can market to. Instead of an activity/product that some people enjoy, it is turned into a trendy fad that creates all sorts of divisions between people who play video games and people who don't, and in-fighting as well. This is probably all just a subjective observation, though, there are probably people older than me who say this happened when video games started being mass produced and sold for money, or perhaps when people started taking "sides" during a console war.

Reading · « **Reply #18 on:** February 02, 2009, 04:39:01 PM »

I might be considered a "hardcore" gamer due to my fondness for video games and my knowledge relating to them, but really, that's about it. I don't care about console wars, online competition, "gamer culture", or even game critics. I think the word "hardcore" itself implies something about mindset; someone whose life basically revolves around video games, or at least has a very strong mindset regarding them...which isn't the way I am. I just play games and enjoy them.

Incidentally, I wasn't always this way. I can say that I was definitely a "hardcore" gamer a few years back by most definitions. I was definitely on Nintendo's side and no other side, and I sometimes tried to convince my friends that the Gamecube really was the best system and the others were bad. Which was pretty foolish, considering I'd never even touched an Xbox or Playstation 2. Beginning around 2006, however, my hardcore attitude sort of gradually dissipated as I accepted the merits of other game consoles. I'm not sure exactly when I definitely decided not to be a Nintendo fanboy, but it probably came with my more encompassing "attitude overhaul" at the beginning of 2008. My getting an Xbox 360 at Christmas of that year was still quite a surprise to my friends. I supplied my 360 and both Rock Band games at the all-nighter I went to this weekend. :P

BP · « **Reply #19 on:** February 02, 2009, 06:35:48 PM »

Console wars aren't hardcore or cool by any means anyway. Those are for little kids.

But you know, that's to be expected. I think young players are best off playing Nintendo and should start playing more when they're ready, and a split occurs when the kids who want to feel older put down those kids and play games way over their age demographic.

I think I grew up right. Mario and Pokémon starting at age five, played my first M-rated game at fifteen or so (Metal Gear Solid: The Twin Snakes, not too intense or gory), and got a 360 one month ago, and one month from now I'll be able to buy M-rated games on my own even if I get carded (17). I've been pretty close to the intended age for the games I play for my whole life, just a little quicker. But it's not the same as kids' shows or toys. I still play Mario and Pokémon games (the good ones, anyway). Some people still try to pull the "omg ur immature u play kiddie game" trick at this age, but you can tell that they're usually the ones who either don't play video games or don't play good ones.

Weegee · « **Reply #20 on:** February 02, 2009, 07:36:10 PM »

I believe that it really boils down to how one defines "hardcore". If the term has come to be a synonym for "M-rated", then one could easily argue that Nintendo has most certainly lost its hardcore...ness in the flood of crappy movie-licensed games we've seen being released out the wazoo during the last four or five years. Even though Sony and Microsoft have seen their share of cash-in kiddie titles during the last two console generations, most of it has certainly been loaded onto Nintendo due to its seemingly-unshakeable reputation as a child-oriented label.

However, if one regards the term "hardcore gamer" as one who anticipates, loves and obsesses over quality video games, then it's hard to say that The Big N has lost a stitch of care for them. Zelda: Twilight Princess is just as "hardcore " as Nintendo games have ever been, and Super Mario Galaxy, at least as far as I'm concerned, caters equally to novice gamers and experienced Mario fanatics expecting the utmost in quality the company has to offer. Oh, and let's not forget the triumphal return of an ever-increasing number of Nintendo classics being offered on the Wii's Virtual Console. These may not be new games per se, but their appearance certainly goes to show that our boys back in Japan have not forgotten those of us who appreciate quality games.

Glorb · « **Reply #21 on:** February 03, 2009, 02:45:56 PM »

The main concern isn't that Nintendo has abandoned hardcore gamers (that's just hyperbole; Nintendo hasn't announced that they're only releasing casual titles), but that they're releasing high-quality, long, deeply engaging action-adventure games ("hardcore") with less and less frequency. Which is why it sort of gets on my nerves that SMG and TP are the only two examples ever offered of "hardcore" games by those defending Nintendo. Both of them came out close to two years ago, and there haven't been any "hardcore" (read: high-quality, long, deeply engaging action-adventure games) since.

BP · « **Reply #22 on:** February 03, 2009, 06:59:11 PM »

Super Paper Mario and Brawl are pretty good too (except for Brawl, that's just plain awesome and everyone who wants to say Melee is better is either a pr0 who wants his wavedashing or someone who wants to complain about something). And there's WarioWare.

But like I said before, I predict that things will be picking up for the Wii soon. The SNES got really good around 1995. The 64 had to wait until 1998 just for its first Zelda, and the beloved Paper Mario came around towards its very end. And again, the shovelware for Wii is probably not even as bad as the NES had. It's just that it's advertised that you think there's so much more of it. But I mean, can you blame Nintendo for that? They don't NEED to advertise Mario or Smash Bros. One word and the Internet takes care of the rest. Advertising the crap for the people just looking for a spare time killer is making them rich.

Chupperson Weird · « **Reply #23 on:** February 03, 2009, 08:25:36 PM »

Shovelware for Wii is about on par with NES at this point, I have to say. Tons of short (~5 levels?) games with minimal graphics and sound that aren't very fun either.

Fragile is pretty much the only thing I'm looking forward to on Wii at this point, and it hasn't even been announced for America yet (grrrr...)
Namco also put the second Tales of Symphonia game on Wii, which I heard wasn't as good as the first (although ToS1 isn't the most awesome, it's decent.)

Tingrio · « **Reply #24 on:** February 10, 2009, 07:32:18 PM »

I believe that Nintendo's only forgotten the hardcore gamer to a certian extent. Such hits like Brawl, Super Mario Galaxy, Super Paper Mario, Metroid Prime 3 and Twlight Princess are what I consider hardcore since for one thing, they retain most of their original elements and can be very difficult to beat. Some games like Galaxy and MP3 have created some new original elements while keeping some of the old ones.

When some of the Wii features are realized and utilized by both Nintendo and 3rd-party companies, we may see a new generation of hardcore gamers; maybe even redefine the term hardcore. For now, we'll just have to wade through the 'dry spell' the Wii is under so nothing is certian about the hardcore gaming world for Nintendo. I haven't played video games in awhile so I may be a little rusty in what I've said.

Glorb · « **Reply #25 on:** February 10, 2009, 08:43:01 PM »

Quote from: Tingrio on February 10, 2009, 07:32:18 PM

Such hits like Brawl, Super Mario Galaxy, Super Paper Mario, Metroid Prime 3 and Twlight Princess are what I consider hardcore

Chupperson Weird · « **Reply #26 on:** February 10, 2009, 10:03:16 PM »

Quote from: Tingrio on February 10, 2009, 07:32:18 PM

. . . maybe even redefine the term hardcore.

I don't think that's possible since no one really has any idea what it means in the first place.

CrossEyed7 · « **Reply #27 on:** February 10, 2009, 10:22:03 PM »

"Would you like a little more tea?"
"Well, I haven't had any yet, so I can't very well take more."
"Ah, you mean you can't very well take less."
"Yes. You can always take more than nothing."

Lizard Dude · « **Reply #28 on:** February 11, 2009, 05:15:05 PM »

Quote from: Chupperson Weird on February 10, 2009, 10:03:16 PM

I don't think that's possible since no one really has any idea what it means in the first place.

It means your core is hard.

ShadowBrain · « **Reply #29 on:** February 11, 2009, 06:30:28 PM »

Glorb, I believe it's your turn to make a dirty joke?

Words can't describe the feelings of vindication this stirred in me.

nensondubois · « **Reply #30 on:** February 11, 2009, 07:06:59 PM »

When your core is hard, play your Wii!

Too bad Nintendo will never live up to what hard core is for the XBOX 360 and PS3 because Nintendo is feeding the casual gamers like guppies in a pond that they feed with coins instead of fish food like what they really should have.

Chupperson Weird · « **Reply #31 on:** February 11, 2009, 07:39:55 PM »

Wii mainly needs some obscure RPGs and it will be hardcore again.

Toad · « **Reply #32 on:** February 11, 2009, 07:46:13 PM »

You mean the NES RPG's they haven't put on the VC yet? Not many people remember those..

nensondubois · « **Reply #33 on:** February 11, 2009, 07:52:25 PM »

Mother!

Toad · « **Reply #34 on:** February 11, 2009, 08:01:46 PM »

I am not your mother.

Chupperson Weird · « **Reply #35 on:** February 11, 2009, 10:36:04 PM »

They need a translated version of Lagrange Point NOW.
But no, I mean that there need to be companies publishing games for it that you'd only know about if you knew about them (i.e. what happens on PS2 all the time).

Toad · « **Reply #36 on:** February 12, 2009, 02:02:36 AM »

I knew what you meant, I just thought it'd be funny to say that.

World 6 Retainer · « **Reply #37 on:** February 12, 2009, 07:13:22 PM »

Yes, it has.

Not even Metroid is sacred anymore, but at least it doesn't market itself to small children.