The wii Can onyl handel casual game,s just look at The conudit or Mad oWrld, which would have been beatter if they weryent' on the Wii and forcedto sue the waggle.

again im durnk

Our point is that that's all well and good but we don't have to like it, and when Sony and Microsoft look to be trying the same thing and we feel that that will create a market less geared towards us, we have every right to be upset and not want that thing.

For the sake of this argument, casual games are stuff like, "My Little Pony and Sonic the Hedgehog Go To Candy Mountain" or "Help Grandma Find Her Teeth Mini-Game Collection 9000".

yea but, nothing you can do about it. Even if every hardcore gamer quit it would still be more profitable to aim at the casual crowd

I can be a whiny bitch and annoy people. Sithdarth told me so.

You really missed the entire point didn't you.

This right here is the problem. There were legitimate reasons for the delay and they still get blasted for it. Imagine the outcry if the forced you to buy a second motion sensitive controller in addition to a normal controller instead of putting them both into one much more convenient package.

Fine you are entitled to that opinion but you are not the entirety of the market and they are exactly as entitled to their opinion as well. Both sides are also entitled to enjoy what they enjoy in peace without being slandered by the other side.

The point is that on occasion things generally have gone way past complaining about the direction things have headed and into being out right insulting about whoever doesn't agree. Further bitching has in no way every theoretically helped prevent something from happening. Except for perhaps the thing the bitching was against. See when you annoy people that don't completely agree with you they are less inclined to agree with you. Its kind of this thing humans do. You can be vocal but there are two caveats to that. The first is expect and accept the possibility of negative reactions. The second is stay as far way from negative connotations and subjective arguments and opinions as possible. If you could actually give an objective argument beyond motion control sucks and I hate waggling your position would both be stronger and less annoying possibly to the point of not being annoying at all.

1) Not all insults are overt.

2) Sometimes people take offense to things you don't think are offensive.

3) Using words or phrasings that have or suggest negative connotations can be construed as insulting.

4) Segregating yourself from another group of people that share some of the same interest as you because of a few differences generally carries a negative connotation.

5) Being negative about or dismissive towards something other people like simply because you don't agree is often seen as insulting.

In this particular case my use of the word insulting did not indicate overt verbal assault. Instead it indicated an overall tone or attitude that would indicate veiled hostility or disdain of a person or group of people. Discussions can be had without this rather ominous cloud hanging over them and in general end up the better for it. At this point though even mentioning video game preferences is getting to the point of better known topics that should never be discussed on the internet.

Dude i feel like i should buy you a Gatorade right now.

Still, strangely enough you kinda have a point there... i mean, it's not for nothing that the guys behind Arc Rise Fantasia and No More Heroes and leaving the Wii and looking only at the PS3 and Xbox for future games...

In the end we all loose, because, to be honest, none of us are part of that larger group of people who think Tits are game features, and that Kingdom Hearts should be Darker and Edgy.

... Just saying, in the end, we're all on the same ship. The true entirety of the market is just pretty fucking stupid...

Dudw whomissed the point, Nocnon for not getting that the Wii controls 'arent' all that bad' or you for not noticing that there are better alternatives that are readily available last console generation.

What part of 'we can have our oppion' do you not get man?

You're more thon welcome tod defend this point but tosing about 'well they do what works" as though we totally ditn't know and I didn't spend ad runken post establishing we know thtat is just condescending.

"We couldn't afford it so we're making you pay for it" is legitimate somehwo?

Hell with this, I'm out, ouu guys havefun.

I bet this wouldn't happen if the Wiimote was an optional peripheral that enhanced the experience but wasn't necessary to it like I suggested several posts earlier. But nah, that'd be crazy talk.

I haven't seen any slandering except of the sort where people defending casual gamers and the casual market from mud-slinging that ISN'T HAPPENING IN THIS CONVERSATION have treated core gamers as hateful, angry jerks.

You mean like saying that dodging was smoother and more responsive in God Hand than in MadWorld because it used a thumbstick and not a nunchuck? You're right. I should get on that-OH WAIT.

My favorite part about this is how I've made a post about how the casual market isn't a bad thing and it's its own separate market and how my problem was with the Wii itself than with the market, and this utterly ignores that. That's okay though because I suggested that companies' attempts to appeal to that market over another market were a bad thing. GODDAMN I HATE THEM MOTHERFUCKING CASUAL GAMERS.

Source?

casual crowd disagrees, and like it or not they are currently a much larger portion of the consumer base

Which is why people are upset.

When it was just the Wii? Not a big deal. We could all quietly just glare at the Wii, maybe mention that the waggle controls are shitty when it was specifically brought up that they're oh so great or whatever, but for the most part? Well we still had our two consoles that didn't have shitty waggle controls.

That is no longer going to be the case.

Now there's not a market for 'different people to like different things'. There's a market for people who like flailing their arms around randomly, with the stupid controls not registering half the time because you moved too fast on the action that you only have a couple of seconds to perform, while the market for people that prefer controllers and pushing buttons--because they WORK RIGHT--no longer have a console.

P.S. Mirai--stop posting. You're going to see this shit tomorrow and be like "Jesus fuck, what was I thinking posting while I was that hammered? Did my hands turn into giant fucking hams or something? What the hell?" Just... just a friendly piece of advice.

Either that or go make a giant drunk post rant.

Fair enough but I'm half a bottle of Catp Morgan PArrot Bay in and I can still see all the godawful strawmen in Sithdart'h's posts, what with 'calling Company X evil' and all.

I'm done with the argument anyway so yah have fun gusy.

Objectively speaking if the company profits and the actions taken were legal and ethical then the decision was not bad. There has been no indication of either illegal or unethical conduct and profits have not decreased. Ergo good decisions were made.

Not at all mostly because that post in its entirety wasn't directed at anyone person, comment, or even side of the debate. Further, 90% seems high especially if you remove the objectively horrible shovelware that makes it onto any system. Further, if "casual" gamers did spend 90% of the money the deserve 90% of the attention.

I think perhaps your state of mind as left you unable to properly judge what is being said.

Which is exactly the problem I'm getting at. Running around calling something that isn't objectively horrible trash because you don't like it is insulting and aggravating to the people that do like it simply because they like different things.

So says you with no objective reasoning.

Neither are remotely close to the point and yet serve to illustrate that point being made.

I said what I said because it was necessary to frame the argument I was making. It could have been worded better though.

Not really going to argue this point because I think it is clear where it came from and why its a very bad point.

The problem here is that Nintendo knew full well after trying with the Gamecube they were never going to compete on the same turf as Sony and Microsoft. They knew they needed to do something different and motion control was a good call. As such their games would have to rely primarily on that to compete and because of the lack of pure power on the system so would any other games. It really wasn't a choice for them. It was motion control all the way or turn into Sega.

See exactly my point about you never know what is going to insult someone and how people get upset about things that aren't meant as insults. Of course responding negatively instead of trying to come to a mutual understanding is where things go really wrong. Also, I personally find the connotations that people seem to be placing on the word waggle negative and mildly insulting.

Maybe it was to you because you are just wired that way. I haven't played God Hand but I've never had a problem dodging in MadWorld not that I need to all that much. Further people rant and rave about how much better and more precise a keyboard and mouse is for FPS play. Frankly I can barely move around in WoW with a keyboard and mouse. It bears repeating that different people are different in many ways. A lot of what makes a person prefer one control style over another is linked to how they naturally think and process information.

Again I was making general blanket statements about both sides in the beginning of my post though with my obvious bias. I do believe I did point that out though probably not as well as I should have. Further, neither post was directed at any specific person. It was a general indictment of this type of discussion in general.

At this point the PS3 and XBox versions seem to be exactly what NonCon wanted from the Wii. An accessory that can be used or not as the developers see fit and a normal controller separate from that. Its should be the ideal situations. I don't think motion control will completely swamp the market to the point no one makes anything else ever. Heck the fact we still have new 2D games coming out should indicate well enough that its hard to kill the classics that work well. If anything it will force non-motion games to get better and more focused will all the usual crap gets forced over to motion control.

Calling was a bad word. Implying would have been appropriate because the implications are clearly there on both sides of the argument. Evil was possibly also too strong a word but I'm not sure of a suitable replacement.

Why should I give half a shit what Nintendo 'needs' to do to stay afloat? From the perspective of a customer, Nintendo's role is to entertain me. If they fail to do that to the degree that I expect, especially after paying for a product, I have every right to complain.

Yeah, except I never implied anything negative about casual gamers, whereas I saw several instances of people implying that hardcore gamers were a bunch of jerks who hated people with different tastes.

Has nothing to do with being wired that way. It has to do with:

1. A flick of the thumb is simpler and quicker.

2. The controller reads it quicker and more accurately than the Wii does a nunchuck flip.

3. If you didn't need to dodge often you obviously did not play the game on Hard difficulty.

If people are discussing Star Wars, it would be rather bad form of me to start bitching them out about being rude/insensitive to people who liked the new trilogy when absolutely no such discussion has been going on in the thread, don't you think?

Mirai, you're my hero.

I disagree on every single fucking thing you've said, but damn you're the best thing to come out of this thread.

Sobering up :(

Yeah, 'clearly,' except nobody took insult to anything that was said until you came along.

Oh man... i can't recall the source right now. I Know Kotaku -also- reported on it. I need to get some sleep now, but i'll get you back on that when i can recall the full source.

I do recall Marvelous Entertainment (Publishers of No More Heroes and Publisher/developer of Arc Rise Fantasia) stating that they were severely disappointed with the reception their games got on the Wii and felt that their games would be better served if offered on a HD Platform...

It's worth noting that they also have hands on Little King's Story, Rune Factory Frontier, Oboro Muramasa Yōtōden and Harvest Moon: Magical Melody. All for the Wii. So, it's a honest statement to say that it's a HUGE 3rd party loss. They delivered some really great games.

You gave meaning to this sorry excuse of a console war thread.

You deserve a fucking medal.

Just stating that I wouldn't consider myself to be a hardcore gamer - I do keep up with the news and the games, though I mostly use my excess money on booze. Which I guess makes me an alcoholic. Anyway, I'm defining myself as a casual gamer.

That being said, I don't want Virtual Reality/Motion Sensing/Whatever Else It Is. I'm perfectly happy with pushing buttons. Really, the only reason for having the controller there in the first place is to control the game. So if the controller works, why try to fix it?

And Mirai, props on being drunk. You might want to re-read your posts before you pass out to make sure they're grammatically correct, though.

Anyways, I dislike the motion controls. They're interesting - they allow for new and unique ways to control the game. However, quite literally every gamer I know bar... two or three, specifically bought other consoles because they felt that they didn't need to physically move to control their fictional people.

EDIT

See how many of these people you can find in the below links.

What The Market Feels About Motion Control
Another Audience
A Slashdot Article On The Subject

I don't know maybe because Nintendo would find it very difficult to continue to fulfill its role of entertaining you if it goes out of business. Perhaps also because it has a responsibility to the people it employs and its investors to remain profitable to honor their commitment to the company which is much greater than yours. Just saying.

Again the fact that you can't see it doesn't mean it isn't there and my points weren't specifically addressed to you.

Maybe for you. I've rather messed up my left thumb so its kind of sluggish. The fine motor control in my fingers is actually a bit sluggish in general. Also, I'd wager it takes considerably less neurons and muscles to move your wrist then a single finger.

Probably true but my general ineptitude with fine motor control of my thumb more than makes up that difference.

1) Perfect example of negative connotations and implications even if you don't see it.

2) There is also the possibility I simply approach the game with a different strategy and don't mind getting slaughtered a bit while a work out my own play style.

This would be true except for the fact that it was happening in this thread. Not to the extent I made it seem but that was poor word choice on my part. Clearly I was not the only one to think so I just choose to be a bit more vocal.

Perhaps no one mentioned it but it certainly did exist as a possibility as indicated by this:

and this:

and this:

Of course those are just the more recent accessible examples there are probably others from the other side as well.

Edit: It should be pointed out that my argument actually applies more readily to Microsoft and Sony. There were a lot of negative implications being thrown around about them in terms of introducing motion control that were generally unwarranted.

If they can't compete by satisfying me, something other companies do just fine, I still have every right to bitch that I'm not being satisfied.

Just because what would, otherwise, be an inferior control system is preferable to you does not change the fact that for everyone else it is an inferior control system. Also, the number of muscles and neurons is irrelevant. It is a shorter, quicker motion, which is the important part.

No, you're misinterpreting it. I can't be held responsible for that. I played the game on Hard. I did this because I enjoy a challenge. Not being able to dodge as smoothly and quickly as I would were I using a regular controller increases the difficulty in a negative way. As for the second point: YOU NEED TO DODGE TO PLAY IT ON HARD BECAUSE YOU HAVE ZERO LIVES AND IF YOU DIE YOU HAVE TO START THE WHOLE DAMN LEVEL OVER AGAIN EVEN IF YOU WERE AT THE FUCKING BOSS BECAUSE THERE ARE NO DAMN CHECKPOINTS WHAT THE FUCK IS THIS SHIT DAMNDAMNDAMN*.

*This is me bitching at the game not you.

You have a right to an opinion but you don't have a right to be insulting about it.

Just because you happened to not like it and found it lacking doesn't mean everyone else does.

Not at all. Fewer neurons and muscles mean faster response times from when the command is sent to when it is executed. Its also simpler to memorize and perfect.

I have never found it necessary to move my wrist all that far. The total range of motion wasn't all that different from normal thumb movements. Also in general larger joints controlled be larger muscles move faster.

In terms of what is insulting there isn't a lot of ground to stand on in terms of misinterpretation. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and all of that. Further, you are responsible for your reactions to my reactions. You could attempt to figure out what seemed insulting and make attempts to correct any misunderstandings. Arguing with the person that you never said anything offensive isn't exactly the best way to accomplish this and instead leads to worse things.

Your experiences are not universal.

Would the game be objectively better with check points? Yes. Do I find it as frustrating as you? No. Personally I have much more fun murdering my way through the level then fighting the boss anyway. Though too many times through and it might get annoying. Further, looking for an obscene challenge and then complaining that challenge is too hard, especially when there are options to reduce it, seems somewhat illogical to me. But again that is just me.

Unless it is actually flawed. I mean, I feel like I'm arguing that the sky is blue, and you're saying that it's green. I can argue all day long about how the sky is blue, but when you're only counter-argument is that it looks green to you, I really don't know where I can go from here.

I inferred something based on your experience with the game that was a logical conclusion based on my experience with the game and with how the game works. That you interpreted that to be me dissing you for not playing on Hard is all you.

I explained what I actually meant. Unless you want me to write a three paragraph apology in response to you reading too much into my posts in some misguided attempt to be offended, I really don't know what else I can do.

How in any way does that counter what you quoted? I played MadWorld. I played God Hand. God Hand had a more reliable, and generally better working dodge mechanic. MadWorld's lack of one increased the difficulty in a negative way. That is my experience. I'm pretty sure that that is sufficient experience to make that judgement, and that I don't need to have played every motherfucking game of every motherfucking type on the whole goddamned Earth to make this assessment.

I exaggerated my frustration to make a point about one of the game's flaws in shallowly humorous manner. THIS IS THE FIRST TIME ANYONE HAS DONE THIS.

I could make the video game difficult by smashing every bone in my fingers. That would not make the experience more enjoyable. I enjoy a challenge when it is the result of good game design, and I overcome the challenge through growing as a player and getting better at the game. I don't like a challenge that exists because of shitty game design or broken controls. What is so hard to understand about that?

Not really the same thing. You have made the point that it is different. You have not made the point that it is objectively a flaw.

Not at all. The way you word things is important to how other people perceive your intentions. This fact cannot be ignored. Connotations exist and the only appropriate way I've found with dealing with this messy aspect of language is to attempt to clarify statements that other people take as offensive. Telling them it's their fault for thinking its offensive and telling them they simply can't understand you is basically telling them that there is something wrong with them and calling them stupid for not being able to read your mind. Neither of which is going to get you any closer to a resolution. However, at this point I've repeated myself far to many times and this line of discussion is far to off topic to continue.

Yes you eventually did but you continued to make the argument that any misinterpretation was solely my fault and indicating there was something wrong with me or my thought process. Aside form the negative connotations those things carry themselves they were totally ancillary to any explanation of what you meant and would have been better left unsaid.

What I meant by universal is that your experiences are not universal to every other person on the planet. My fault for poor wording. For that matter neither are my experiences. We cannot extrapolate from either of our experiences what everyone else thinks about that experience. Really we can't even trust what we hear about said experience because not everyone vocalizes their feelings. The best evidence we potentially have is game sales but I lack those figures and so reserve and judgment.

It is very hard to tell humorous exaggeration from yelling in text especially when using all caps. Further the over all tone you have used as been one of serious anger, or so it seems to me, and therefore it was basically impossible to see the switch without some other indication.

Its not that you didn't enjoy the challenge as much as that you didn't take steps to alleviate said not enjoying the challenge by taking the very easy steps to reduce the challenge to a enjoyable level. You may very well have done this but you have given no indication that this was the case. Given what you have said the only conclusion is that you forced your way through Hard difficulty despite not fully enjoying it for no discernible rational reason when you could have potentially gotten more utility from a lower difficulty setting.

How is the nunchuck not being as responsive, thumb/wrist skills aside, not a flaw? You even agreed that this was likely the case but still preferred nunchuck because of your poor fine motor skills, but your poor fine motor skills don't change the fact that it is flawed.

So? They don't need to be. It is inferior. I've explained why. Your reason for preferring it, at least in this instance, stems from poor fine motor skills. If people agree with you they are completely welcome to the opinion that it is preferable, but it is still objectively inferior, and hampers my enjoyment. As a consumer, my only priority is my enjoyment. That's how the system works.

No, I could have gotten more utility from a responsive dodge mechanic. I didn't slug my way through, I stopped playing after beating it on easy because the game's flaws, which were a result of the control system.

Because the motions are different and the body parts used are different adding up to something that is different enough that you can't really objectively call it a flaw with the anecdote provided. It certainly would be better for you if it were more responsive but I would gain nothing. Therefore I can't objectively call it a flaw. Further, my poor fine motor skills are limited mostly to my thumb and first two fingers. Though in any properly functioning human a flick of the wrist should still be faster and easier than any finger movement by virtue of the distance to the brain and the number of muscles involved. You can slap a giant button much faster than you can press a smaller one with a finger.

They do in fact need to be when you make statements like everyone else or you want someone to accept it as fact.

You've explained why it is inferior for you. You have not demonstrated it as objective verifiable fact. All you have demonstrated is there are differences and those differences make it harder for you. Personally I've never met a dodge mechanic I didn't think was flawed in some way but I'm not going to present that as objective fact.

Your opinion does not constitute objective fact. Just because a certain input mode doesn't work well for you does not mean it is objectively bad. For an example of objectively bad see Red Steel. There is a difference here.

This would have been useful information from the beginning. This is a logical course of action. What you seemed to be implying before did not seem to be a logical course of action.

Do you see how much better things go when you stick to clarifying points and leave out anything extraneous?

HRRRRRRRNGH-Okay I'm done here.

Actually studies have shown the finger is in fact more accurate and faster than the wrist [J.A. Scott Kelso, Human Motor Behavior] (It is also faster and more accurate than the thumb, which we use for almost all of our gameplay)

Also, I would like to dispel a Myth that basically this entire conversation is apparently based on.

Myth: The "Casual Gamer" spends more money and therefor rules the market.

Fact: to date, 50 Million Wii's have been sold in worldwide, while 53 Million PS3s and XBox 360s combined have been sold. And while no PS3 or XBox 360 games can touch the top 5 selling Wii games, PS3 and 360 games all combined outsell Wii games all combined. Looks to me like the "hardcore gamer" geared systems outsell the "casual gamer" geared system. BUT they have to split their market, while Nintendo outright owns the other.

The question is what kinds of movements did they compare. I can totally see a simple finger twitch being faster the a wrist twitch. However, in the sense of gaming you need a well aimed deliberate movement with your finger. On the other hand you just need a wrist twitch. It would seem that the twitch would be slightly faster than the deliberate movement but I have no actual data to back that up.

I think the statement was more like "Casual Gamers" rule the Wii's market.

Number of consoles and games is misleading. The actual costs of all that combined would be a better gauge. There is also the fact that not all "Casual Gamers" just own a Wii or own a Wii only. The other consoles do offer a little something for everyone. By the same token the Wii itself is not nothing but games for "Casual Gamers." Not to mention it doesn't really indicate people that own more than one system and I doubt it takes into account resales of used games and systems. The breakdown is much more complex the that. Of course that being said if you've got a competitor that basically has a demographic all to themselves and is doing basically twice as well as you there because of it then its make sense to do whatever you can to gain access to that. Though they need to tread carefully and not alienate their old demographic or they could wind up with neither.

Edit: It would be much more educational to see actual profits really. After all its the net profit that matters in terms of a companies success not so much the gross they get.

Okay, well, here's what I remember:
-Marvelous said their Wii sales (this is in Japan now) weren't that good and they were gonna try porting some of their games to HD consoles
-Wada says Marvelous is having trouble selling because they don't have brand recognition and they need to build that up
-Suda says, tech-wise, he's looking to consoles other than the Wii for his future games (NHM3?)

I may well be wrong but don't remember much along the lines of "well screw this Wii crap, it gets no sales, from now on we gotta stick to making PS360 games."


Jeez guys, we're really having an in-depth discussion of Madworld's controls? Specifically the dodge? Wow. Well, FWIW, I don't believe I've ever had a problem dodging in Madworld. Other motion controls, yes; dodging, no. And yes, I've beaten it on both difficulties without the extra weapons.

'Core' gamers are more likely to own, say, a 360 and a Wii, than what we're calling casual gamers who would just have a Wii. They might have a PS3, but that'd just be as a cheap Blu-Ray player.

Personally money permitting I've never found a compelling reason not to own as many consoles as companies are willing to produce. Aside for the possibility of one being horrible. I don't think I could really get along for very long without my Wii, PS3, 360, and PC. Of course I have a notoriously short attention span for games so I tend to hop back and forth in regards to which one I spend the most time on from month to month. PC gaming has gotten much better now that I have a 360 controller that plugs into it. Seriously I'm shit with a keyboard and mouse for some reason.

Aren't you the one who was saying that experiences aren't universal, or some such?

'Casual' gamers, for all that term means(Very little, and even less within this conversation), aren't going to see much interest in games outside of stuff like mini game collections or Wii Fit, or Wii Sports, or Wii Do Something Silly.

EDIT: I never said the dodge mechanic was inferior. I played an earlier game by the same company and it had a better dodging mechanic, one of the best mind you, because it used a controller and not waggle. I do wonder why I didn't bring up the numerous times Jack wouldn't swing his chainsaw or go into a chainsaw battle thing because the Wiimote is stupid, though. As soon as you brought it up, I recalled it happening several times, and being very inconvenient.

This would be why I used like personally and I which indicate this was an anecdote in order to illustrate that exceptions do in fact exists and generalization are almost universally wrong and dangerous to make.

Again generalizations are bad. The fact that you had to qualify the term as being essentially meaningless in context indicates perhaps there exists a better way to phrase it initially. Especially since its been made clear there are people in this very thread that are self described "Casual" gamers whose interests are much more varied and sometimes do not include those games. Also calling it Wii do something silly has negative connotations regardless of what you actually mean. Wii do Something would have worked just as well without the negative connotations.

edit:
Uh just going to point out.

Yeah this thread has been going on for 12 pages (seriously, WTF) and I still have no clue what a casual gamer is or, even more so, a casual game. Cause people play games, they play games that they like. Some play less, some play more, I totally don't see any fundamental difference. I've been playing games all my life and have played most of the classics but I don't play much now as I don't have time to play and I think the 360 is pretty shit overall and basically a repackaged Xbox- what does that make me?

And no other medium do we really define casual/hardcore. LIke I watch an absolute fuckton of films and if I start slagging everyone off over not watching as many films sd me and only going to see blockbusters and not the defining films of the generation (as I have done before) people would scream shit at me. Let's say I started saying films shouldn't be made for anyone except ridiculous artsy film buffs or that people who go to see blockbuster films have no taste you wouldn't accept it- as I have done in the past and you didn't.

I'm not seeing it as anything more than petty elitism. If someone can clarify it better I would appreciate it. Especially define what you actually mean by a casual gamer.

Long story short, there's a bigger market than most realized on this level of motion control and Nintendo jumped on it first. Sony and Microsoft are businesses out to make money so they're going to join in and try to split the market.

Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. Now let's all play the games we like and be done with it!

Hahahah RT repped me for being drunk while doing a console wars argument.

Awesome!

I honestly think he's looking for excuses to be offended. I mean really.
 

Was a mis-type on my behalf. I meant to say awful or some such modifier. Will fix eventually.

Also, at what point do we not consider Wii Rock, Wii Cheer, Wii Ski, Wii Dance, Wii Whatever to have not reached the point of all falling under the Wii Do Something Silly category?

@SMB: I use the term as merely a way of representing different demographics, different in the sense of how an action movie is targeted towards different audiences than a romance movie. Neither is inherently bad/better. I think the Wii Everything games are a good example for what I think would be considered the 'casual' group, or at least what is marketed towards them. The main complaints about the casual market, at least from what I've seen, isn't against the actual casual gamers, but against the marketing towards them. I think there are a fair amount of people who'd consider themselves core gamers who thought that the Wii would have games geared towards them, and the majority of third-party games have been marketed and made for this other market. You also have a few first party stuff like Wii Fit that makes them feel like Nintendo themselves don't care about core gamers anymore, though I wouldn't say that was the case. Compare that with both the PS3 and 360 that have both first and third party games marketed towards those who'd consider themselves core. Those people found satisfaction from these companies. 'Core' gamers worry, not without reason, that Sony and Microsoft's attempts to copy/one-up Nintendo will result in a similar gaming experience to that of the Wii, which is, to them, disappointing. I similarly have those worries, but my main problem stems from that I prefer button-control to motion-control, and would prefer that motion control didn't become the standard playing setup for the next video game generation.

EDIT: Plus, I mean, going to the movies doesn't have a several hundred dollar entry bar.

Sithdarth I'm sorry but if you want us to argue with you legitimately you're going to have to do better than "The way you put it hurts my feelings."

I wonder how much this thread would actually change if I just CTRL+F and Found and Replaced "casual" with "kids." That's really the only pattern I see. :p

Personally I think DDR and Guitar Hero and its various clones are silly. I don't go around advertising that fact especially in potential earshot of people that don't think they are silly. I like to think of it as being courteous really.

That was a very small part of my argument. I fail to see the problem with at least making the attempt to use neutral words or at the very least acknowledging that fact that people have feelings and sometimes the things we say can effect them negatively. I can't really have a decent discussion with someone that refuses to acknowledge that words of connotations which can obscure what is being said and as such it is important to be cognizant of them if you wish to be properly understood.

You see, the problem with this is that I find I'm much more likely to enjoy a Mario game or Pikmin or Animal Crossing or Klonoa, which to me seem marketed towards kids, than Wii Cheer or Wii Ski which are I don't even know.

I take it you find the fake posters for 'THE NEXT MICHAEL BAY FILM: PEOPLE WITH GUNS SHOUTING IN FRONT OF EXPLOSIONS!" to be especially offensive towards people who liked Transformers and a sign of poor manners and frequently decry them as such?

Different situations. If those posters were brought into a discussion of Michael Bay films which contained both people for and against then that is in fact bad form and poor manners. This is the situation in which we find ourselves now.

Sorry for thinking people could take a joke, especially one based around the Wii's punerific naming scheme.

Good thing we don't do that around here.

Seriously man keep going, you're hilarious.

Just because it happens doesn't change the fact it is rude. Sometimes its ok and goes over well especially when the discussion remains light. Either way its still better to avoid it especially in a more serious discussion. Further, you can't do something like that and then act surprised or mad when someone does eventually get offended.

Your change to Wii Whatever conveyed the same kind of humor and joking quality without the negative connotations and was welcomed change.

Although this has became stupidly offtopic and should stop here.

Yes, but Whatever is not a verb and wii cannot do it.

It would be certainly interesting to try and or see. Also, neither is something or silly. So perhaps Wii do Whatever.

I've been thinking and I think just Wii Do is a great pun for those types of games. It serves the double purpose of following the Wii [verb] format and being punrific.

Wii puns are a lot more annoying for Nintendo thinking they're funny.

I'm still waiting for Wii Starve: A realistic simulator of living in a third world country.

No, its job is to make money, its a business. If it makes more money ignoring you, then its going to ignore you. You seem to have the mistaken impression a multi-billion dollar foreign company actually cares what you think. A better question is, as you put it, Why should Nintendo give half a shit what you 'need'? Answer, it doesn't. You aren't what made the wii profitable, you aren't the one buying most of the games on the system, as far as they are concerned as a company, you dont matter. They are under no obligation to entertain you or any other individual person.

Yes but the point is that the movies I want to see don't get made because the movies that sell are generic box-officey crap. And while I could bitch about itand make little cliches and sneer at "casual" filmgoers I have to accept that they are the market force and the market pleases them. It's the way the system works.
Unles you guys want to come live in my communist utopia.

In case my movie analogy is a bit muddied, this phenomenon happens in every art-form/medium ever. There are always the "hardcore" disappointed by the casual mobs. You look down on casual games and gamers, in other fields people do the same to you. Evewn if you don't look down on them so much as feel left apart, well that is the same- the hardcore fans of anything are never as important as where the money is. It is not a gaming only phenomenon.

if I might point this out. The real problem is supply and demand. The demand for casual games is massive and there is only one system that really supplies it. While the supply of hardcore games more then meets the demand. This is why there is so much casual shovelware. If more companies focus on them casual games will improve. As this happens there is a chance the supply of hardcore games will lessen, but this can be good. As that happens there is less competition and the hardcore crowd becomes more profitable.

Just as a company noticed the casual market was being neglected someone will notice the hardcore group is being ignored and cater to it.

Besides, eventually casual gamers will become hardcore ones, and the hardcore market will be better then ever thanks to the new influx of customers. If it doesn't, well then it looks like hardcore games were the real fad

I want to believe the "fad" is everyone raving about being hardcore and being casual but that's just wishful thinking.

I know everyone seems to love arguing on how hardcore they are. Yes, there's plenty of casual games on the Wii and the DS, but there's a lot of games that aren't easy, games people think are meant for the hardcore crowd. There's also the deal that those hardcore gamers simply shun casual games.

And you know what I think? I think that's just people being stupid. The more time you spend arguing at how you're superior to another gamer, the less time you have to play your so-called superior games. Shut it and go have fun.

And, on Nintendo: They're a business. The money of hardcore gamers is as good as the game of the casual ones, remember? If they radically change their focus to turn in more profit and it works, they don't care about the other people complaining. They can make games that a small crowd likes for guaranteed profit, but if they can do something different to a bigger crowd? They will. More money to them.

Your movie analogy is muddled because there's just not a comparison to be made here. At least not a valid one.

Your indie movies are more like the Myst series of games, which, honestly, even lots of 'hardcore' gamers didn't like. They were too esoteric.

A more compelling comparison would be the original Star Wars trilogy to say... Veggie Tales.

Is the original trilogy the deepest thing ever? No. No it is not. It does, however, have some depth, decent acting, and, moreover, good production values.

Veggie tales has none of these things.

The core gamers aren't asking for every game to be Shadow of Colossus (or whatever indie movie you love more than anything), they're asking for every game to NOT be Rig Racer 2 (or Veggie Tales).

Sure Rig Racer 2 and Veggie Tales have their place in the market, but they should not be the biggest place.

Honestly, Veggie Tales isn't even a good example, as Veggie Tales is better than most shovelware. I mean, it had the pirates that don't do anything.

And, really, I wouldn't even call myself hardcore these days. I've gotten older. Have less time and money for video games. Lots of games slip through the cracks that maybe shouldn't--but I just can't justify spending as much time as I used to. That said--when I play a game, I want the game to have high production values. I want it to be something that's fun, and engaging. I don't want shovelware.

I consider the more indie sorts of movie as an analogy for "hardcore" as it attracts a more dedicated movie base, one who watches lots of movies old and new, who analyses them to death and argue about them on the internet. That was my line of thinking anyway.
But I get your point and that videogames certainly get away with a lot lower standard than your average movie which are mostly entertaining on some level compared to a lot of shovelware which is just bleh. So I guess I'll concede this.

your analogy is flawed as well. Casual doesn't mean 'bad', it doesn't mean 'low production values' it means something to appeal to people that dont spend hours a day playing games. Movies cant really be used as an analogy to the video game market. Genres are too evenly distibuted. Thats why every year you have a roughly equal amount of each. Only way it would work is if a genre, lets say comedy dwarfed the rest of the market

140 posts plus I'm not sure where this thread is at relative to the original topic so, closing, feel free to make whichever continuation for whichever topic being discussed here.