I'm not sure what to think.

[Tupin]

http://gonintendo.com/?p=48703

Ok, so that article gives a couple of very good points on how casual game makers are dumbing down games for them to appeal to a wider audience, like Ubisoft with Beyond Good and Evil 2.

I wouldn't normally post an article like this because it is an argument waiting to happen, but one of its biggest points is also it's most valid. Original experiences like Boom Blox will be beaten out time and time again by Petz and Imagine: Babies. This is mainly because of aggressive marketing tactics on the part of the people who make the bad games. Of course, a game based on a TV show or movie will sell well because a kid liked the movie and doesn't know he/she can get better for their $50.

Like I said in the title, I don't know if this "opened my eyes" or not, all I know is that I like Metal Gear Solid as well as Peggle, Mario Galaxy as well as CrossworDS DS, GTA as well as Animal Crossing. Those types of casual games are great, and like the article said, they could be classified as "good" games. Games like Petz would fall into "bad" games.

Maybe it's not casual games ruining the industry, instead, it's bad games in general and the companies who make them.

[Cardinal]

Aintercourse ingmen.

I call myself a casual gamer. I don't play that much, and when I do, it's most likely a pick-up-and-play game. I hate it when people say casual games are ruining the industry, because look at Brain Age. Still tearing up sales. Look at Wii Fit, creating HUGE demand.

Casual games aren't ruining the market, it's poopty bargain bin games that are killing it.

[Linkman]

Agreed.

[Tupin]

Aintercourse ingmen.

I call myself a casual gamer. I don't play that much, and when I do, it's most likely a pick-up-and-play game. I hate it when people say casual games are ruining the industry, because look at Brain Age. Still tearing up sales. Look at Wii Fit, creating HUGE demand.

Casual games aren't ruining the market, it's poopty bargain bin games that are killing it.

Are you saying "aintercourse ingmen" to me or the guy who wrote the article?

Yeah, but sometimes those last two walk hand in hand. Not always, but sometimes.There are some very good casual games.

Most of the bargain bins around here are full of Brain Age/Nintendogs rip-offs.

[HTA!]

All casual games are not bad games and all hardcore games are not good games.
But which takes less time to make, and sells regardless of its quality?

Even if you aren't hardcore, or are somewhere in between casual and pro (:P) you make up a very very very small percentage.
Really, the average person goes into a store, says "Oh that looks like fun!", barely gives it a second thought, and buys the thing. And because of this, companies know they can make s***ty games and yet they will see some kind of income. We can whine and moan all we want, but really the hardcore gamer is losing the ability to sustain himself.

You can buy Brawl, for example, as an avid gamer and expect a good/decent experience because there is at least some standard within the inner circle of game designers who care if there work is good or not. But really even these games can be tainted by the goal to make more money. Its just more profitable to market games to a more wide-spread audience, and quite frankly its the best possible business move companies can make at this day and time. Lets say you consider games a type of art form, like most art forms you are free to express things the way you want, be radical, play out your dreams. But when making a game, how well it sells is directly related to how long you keep your job. So if a designer needs to cut core gameplay for useless bells and whistles that will make the game sell to the average consumer, then he will.

Why spend time when money is assured? Sure, Nintendo (as you are referring) makes a lot of casual games, and hardly meets the standards the avid gamer needs. But really, its either get lower standards or move on, we are infinitely disposable and Ninty will make money no matter what.

The market seems ruined from our eyes, but really the big 3 are doing pretty well for themselves. >_<

[Tupin]

All casual games are not bad games and all hardcore games are not good games.
But which takes less time to make, and sells regardless of its quality?

Even if you aren't hardcore, or are somewhere in between casual and pro (:P) you make up a very very very small percentage.
Really, the average person goes into a store, says "Oh that looks like fun!", barely gives it a second thought, and buys the thing. And because of this, companies know they can make s***ty games and yet they will see some kind of income. We can whine and moan all we want, but really the hardcore gamer is losing the ability to sustain himself.

You can buy Brawl, for example, as an avid gamer and expect a good/decent experience because there is at least some standard within the inner circle of game designers who care if there work is good or not. But really even these games can be tainted by the goal to make more money. Its just more profitable to market games to a more wide-spread audience, and quite frankly its the best possible business move companies can make at this day and time. Lets say you consider games a type of art form, like most art forms you are free to express things the way you want, be radical, play out your dreams. But when making a game, how well it sells is directly related to how long you keep your job. So if a designer needs to cut core gameplay for useless bells and whistles that will make the game sell to the average consumer, then he will.

Why spend time when money is assured? Sure, Nintendo (as you are referring) makes a lot of casual games, and hardly meets the standards the avid gamer needs. But really, its either get lower standards or move on, we are infinitely disposable and Ninty will make money no matter what.

The market seems ruined from our eyes, but really the big 3 are doing pretty well for themselves. >_<

Well yeah, you can sell anything to anyone if you have the right marketing strategy. Why do you think games like 50 Cent: Bulletproof are get sequels? It's because the original sold well despite it being terrible, and the reason the original sold so well was because it was 50 Cent related. The problem is less with casual gamers and more with uninformed gamers. If they just did a little research, maybe pulled up a review or two of the game, they would know whether the game is worthwile or not.

[HTA!]

All casual games are not bad games and all hardcore games are not good games.
But which takes less time to make, and sells regardless of its quality?

Even if you aren't hardcore, or are somewhere in between casual and pro (:P) you make up a very very very small percentage.
Really, the average person goes into a store, says "Oh that looks like fun!", barely gives it a second thought, and buys the thing. And because of this, companies know they can make s***ty games and yet they will see some kind of income. We can whine and moan all we want, but really the hardcore gamer is losing the ability to sustain himself.

You can buy Brawl, for example, as an avid gamer and expect a good/decent experience because there is at least some standard within the inner circle of game designers who care if there work is good or not. But really even these games can be tainted by the goal to make more money. Its just more profitable to market games to a more wide-spread audience, and quite frankly its the best possible business move companies can make at this day and time. Lets say you consider games a type of art form, like most art forms you are free to express things the way you want, be radical, play out your dreams. But when making a game, how well it sells is directly related to how long you keep your job. So if a designer needs to cut core gameplay for useless bells and whistles that will make the game sell to the average consumer, then he will.

Why spend time when money is assured? Sure, Nintendo (as you are referring) makes a lot of casual games, and hardly meets the standards the avid gamer needs. But really, its either get lower standards or move on, we are infinitely disposable and Ninty will make money no matter what.

The market seems ruined from our eyes, but really the big 3 are doing pretty well for themselves. >_<

Well yeah, you can sell anything to anyone if you have the right marketing strategy. Why do you think games like 50 Cent: Bulletproof are get sequels? It's because the original sold well despite it being terrible, and the reason the original sold so well was because it was 50 Cent related. The problem is less with casual gamers and more with uninformed gamers. If they just did a little research, maybe pulled up a review or two of the game, they would know whether the game is worthwile or not.

Why would they do that?

[Tupin]

All casual games are not bad games and all hardcore games are not good games.
But which takes less time to make, and sells regardless of its quality?

Even if you aren't hardcore, or are somewhere in between casual and pro (:P) you make up a very very very small percentage.
Really, the average person goes into a store, says "Oh that looks like fun!", barely gives it a second thought, and buys the thing. And because of this, companies know they can make s***ty games and yet they will see some kind of income. We can whine and moan all we want, but really the hardcore gamer is losing the ability to sustain himself.

You can buy Brawl, for example, as an avid gamer and expect a good/decent experience because there is at least some standard within the inner circle of game designers who care if there work is good or not. But really even these games can be tainted by the goal to make more money. Its just more profitable to market games to a more wide-spread audience, and quite frankly its the best possible business move companies can make at this day and time. Lets say you consider games a type of art form, like most art forms you are free to express things the way you want, be radical, play out your dreams. But when making a game, how well it sells is directly related to how long you keep your job. So if a designer needs to cut core gameplay for useless bells and whistles that will make the game sell to the average consumer, then he will.

Why spend time when money is assured? Sure, Nintendo (as you are referring) makes a lot of casual games, and hardly meets the standards the avid gamer needs. But really, its either get lower standards or move on, we are infinitely disposable and Ninty will make money no matter what.

The market seems ruined from our eyes, but really the big 3 are doing pretty well for themselves. >_<

Well yeah, you can sell anything to anyone if you have the right marketing strategy. Why do you think games like 50 Cent: Bulletproof are get sequels? It's because the original sold well despite it being terrible, and the reason the original sold so well was because it was 50 Cent related. The problem is less with casual gamers and more with uninformed gamers. If they just did a little research, maybe pulled up a review or two of the game, they would know whether the game is worthwile or not.

Why would they do that?

To see if other people like the game. Most casual gamers I know always look up a game online to see if other people like it so they don't waste their money.

[Jono2]

nintendo hasn't made an actual "hardcore" game in ages.  I should've seen this since the Wii launched, and bought an Xbox 360 instead...

but now the PS3 is looking like the best choice (as I have said all along it would become).

[HTA!]

All casual games are not bad games and all hardcore games are not good games.
But which takes less time to make, and sells regardless of its quality?

Even if you aren't hardcore, or are somewhere in between casual and pro (:P) you make up a very very very small percentage.
Really, the average person goes into a store, says "Oh that looks like fun!", barely gives it a second thought, and buys the thing. And because of this, companies know they can make s***ty games and yet they will see some kind of income. We can whine and moan all we want, but really the hardcore gamer is losing the ability to sustain himself.

You can buy Brawl, for example, as an avid gamer and expect a good/decent experience because there is at least some standard within the inner circle of game designers who care if there work is good or not. But really even these games can be tainted by the goal to make more money. Its just more profitable to market games to a more wide-spread audience, and quite frankly its the best possible business move companies can make at this day and time. Lets say you consider games a type of art form, like most art forms you are free to express things the way you want, be radical, play out your dreams. But when making a game, how well it sells is directly related to how long you keep your job. So if a designer needs to cut core gameplay for useless bells and whistles that will make the game sell to the average consumer, then he will.

Why spend time when money is assured? Sure, Nintendo (as you are referring) makes a lot of casual games, and hardly meets the standards the avid gamer needs. But really, its either get lower standards or move on, we are infinitely disposable and Ninty will make money no matter what.

The market seems ruined from our eyes, but really the big 3 are doing pretty well for themselves. >_<

Well yeah, you can sell anything to anyone if you have the right marketing strategy. Why do you think games like 50 Cent: Bulletproof are get sequels? It's because the original sold well despite it being terrible, and the reason the original sold so well was because it was 50 Cent related. The problem is less with casual gamers and more with uninformed gamers. If they just did a little research, maybe pulled up a review or two of the game, they would know whether the game is worthwile or not.

Why would they do that?

To see if other people like the game. Most casual gamers I know always look up a game online to see if other people like it so they don't waste their money.

My point was, why should any given casual gamer look up the game, and why should companies expect them to?
Many people buy games on a whim, so really unless the game is so unbearably horrible that it gets say a 1/10, most people won't care.

And really, the games we see as bad are all in our perspective. A casual gamer really doesn't care all that much, they buy the game, play it for a while, and then let it gather dust.

[Kilroy]

You're 100% correct, Tuppy. How many times is that, now? >_>

If these poopty games and ports didn't exist, we might think the Video Gaming world would be better, but what would keep the business going between big titles?

50 Cent: Bulletproof or another James Bond game is what fuels the 1st parties for the huge great new games, even though most of the profits might go to the 3rd party that made it, they still have to pay the 1st parties to get it on their system.

[Gwen Khan]

why does Ubisoft keep pumping out all there crap on only Nintendo systems?

[えっちーせんぱい]

Developers just need to stop being lazy is all. If they make better games people won't be forced to accpet what the hell they put out.


But most people are too lazy to complain.

[Tupin]

Developers just need to stop being lazy is all. If they make better games people won't be forced to accpet what the hell they put out.


But most people are too lazy to complain.

People complain, but companies like Ubisoft have too much money in their ears to hear them.

Ubisoft is the main culprit. Red Steel may be mediocre, but it sold well and showed how well they could make a Wii game. But no, they keep pumping out Petz and Rabbids. 

[えっちーせんぱい]

Developers just need to stop being lazy is all. If they make better games people won't be forced to accpet what the hell they put out.


But most people are too lazy to complain.

People complain, but companies like Ubisoft have too much money in their ears to hear them.

Ubisoft is the main culprit. Red Steel may be mediocre, but it sold well and showed how well they could make a Wii game. But no, they keep pumping out Petz and Rabbids. 

Its still people's fault for buying crap.