|
Post by Manspeed on Jun 25, 2008 16:10:59 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Arcadenik on Jun 25, 2008 16:55:39 GMT -5
It was a very good read! A long, long read... but still a good read nonetheless. What if Nintendo makes Wii RPG? Hey, it could be Nintendo's way of introducing new gamers to the RPG genre.
|
|
|
Post by Fryguy64 on Jun 26, 2008 3:11:11 GMT -5
I concur... a good read, took me half an hour to get through it. And I didn't have my glasses on, so now I have a headache. But it was worth it It is an interesting way to look at Nintendo's strategy. I've suspected much the same since I first saw the DS, and it's great to see the argument put so clearly and distinctly, and to cover so many side topics.
|
|
|
Post by Old Man Rupee on Jun 26, 2008 4:34:35 GMT -5
Great article, it makes a lot of sense. I'd personally love to see a bridging RPG. I welcome the influx of gamers with open arms - its good business
|
|
|
Post by Fryguy64 on Jun 26, 2008 5:55:32 GMT -5
It highlights for me something I've thought for a long time. When I first became a gamer, the only thing stood between me and the game were a D-Pad and 2 buttons. Of course, back then games had to be simple, because that's all they could be. Even the punishingly difficult ones were based on the most basic principles, and it was a matter of learning the basics and becoming good at them over a set number of levels. Nowadays, most games have to come with a massive introductory section where every move is made. Some games do a better job of introducing the control scheme than others: Some tie them into an unfolding narrative (Halo, Ocarina of Time), some take your abilities away and give them to you as you need them (Metroid) and some give you all your abilities, but won't tell you what to do until you do need them (SM64/Galaxy). But the vast majority of games just throw you into an artificial (and often unskippable) training section. I still make a habit of avoiding instruction manuals if I can, but I can't imagine doing that if I was new to the hobby. I imagine most people try, and that's why most people avoid games. I was introduced to today's complex titles slowly but surely through many layers of complexity. One of my first games was Super Mario Bros., but if this was released today, it would be a casual game. Purely hypothetical of course, because we all know that had SMB not been made, the games industry would probably be dead by now I too bemoan the lack of decent "hardcore" software on the Wii, but that's not Nintendo's fault (exclusively). This article highlights that third parties have nobody but themselves to blame. Capcom's doing a good job, and I'm intrigued by Sega's offerings to come... but there's many more companies out there than those three. What are they making? The hundreds of games on the Wii shelf I wouldn't look at twice... and neither would a "casual"... that's what they're making... I'm still waiting for the Wii to "pull a DS" and start coming out with some amazing titles. It's getting there - but much more slowly than I'd like.
|
|
|
Post by TV Eye on Jun 26, 2008 8:14:36 GMT -5
Well, nowadays what does the DS even have?
My portable gaming experience had been so dead before I bought my PSP because I had played all the good DS games, and nothing else up to my standards seemed to get released.
It seems after the Wii was released, Nintendo kinda gave up on the DS.
|
|
|
Post by Manspeed on Jun 26, 2008 8:19:23 GMT -5
I find it funny how the games industry grew the way it did as I got older. It's almost as if they were watching me from a distance, tailoring games the current games to whatever age I was at.
|
|
|
Post by Hiker of Games on Jun 26, 2008 9:28:05 GMT -5
It seems after the Wii was released, Nintendo kinda gave up on the DS. The DS is thriving, so they're going to be dedicating their best to the Wii. After all, it's getting plenty of good 3rd party games that use the DS in new and unique ways. 3rd parties still flounder on the Wii, so naturally Nintendo is going to focus their titles there until 3rd parties can sustain the Wii and give Nintendo the freedom to do what they want on either console.
|
|
|
Post by Fryguy64 on Jun 27, 2008 2:19:51 GMT -5
Indeed. Third parties are finally supporting the DS as heavily as they did the GBA. Now Nintendo has to recreate that on the Wii. The first step was getting a huge user-base.
The added benefit of the Wii being low-tech is that good third party games are going to be system-exclusive (now that the last-gen ports are running out). The more system-exclusives, the more people want a Wii, the more people want a Wii for the system exclusives, the more system exclusives we get.
Nintendo really have rocked the boat with this one.
|
|
|
Post by mrmolecule on Jun 28, 2008 21:34:37 GMT -5
"Casual gaming" IS a hoax. Want "casual gaming"? Go play SimCity, not Diner Dash clones.
EDiT: Regarding the feature curve, SimCity gradually climbed it, hit peak at SC2K, fluctuated with SC3K, overshot for SC4 and went to the far left for "SimCity Societies".
|
|
|
Post by Koopaul on Jun 29, 2008 0:10:36 GMT -5
The only issue is that while "hardcore" and "casual" are on everyone's mouths, what about the "fans"?
The fans are the least catered people on the market. Both "hardcore" and "casual" are somewhat responsible.
Let me ask you this. What would you rather see? Mario hopping on Goombas and fighting foes? Or Mario having parties and playing baseball.
I assure you that fans would applaud the Goomba squashing. But "hardcore" and "casual" gamers wouldn't care. As long as the "hardcores" got complex gameplay that requires skill, and that the "casuals" got an easy to pick up fun game, it wouldn't matter if Mario was saving the day or hitting homeruns.
|
|
|
Post by TV Eye on Jun 29, 2008 1:07:30 GMT -5
The only issue is that while "hardcore" and "casual" are on everyone's mouths, what about the "fans"? The fans are the least catered people on the market. Both "hardcore" and "casual" are somewhat responsible. Um...aren't hardcore and casual fans still... fans?
|
|
|
Post by 8bitretroshit on Jun 29, 2008 3:48:02 GMT -5
I like how he kept referring back to 'birdmen' throughout the article.
Nice article, thanks for the link.
Also: 'Will casual games cause the downfall of the hardcore games? Let me write many editorials about this!' Every ''gaming journalist'' and his mother wrote an article about it and it's really annoying.
|
|
|
Post by nocturnal YL on Jun 29, 2008 9:06:30 GMT -5
Done the reading. For twice I was like opposing Nintendo's orientation to make games pointed at a wide audience. I like the idea of expanding the gaming population, but I was afraid that this would shift away Nintendo's focus and we will not be able to see the next Metroid or Fire Emblem. As time went on, more and more "traditional" games like ones we have seen in the older days came up. Some, like Mario Galaxy, appeared perfectly "traditional" in style and fresh in terms of gameplay, and balancing it well. Although I still miss the old days where games are made in a great amount (3 SMBs in a row in the mid-late 1980's), I started to agree on Nintendo's marketing way. Although I still want a more traditional design of the Wii Menu. The only issue is that while "hardcore" and "casual" are on everyone's mouths, what about the "fans"? The fans are the least catered people on the market. Both "hardcore" and "casual" are somewhat responsible. Let me ask you this. What would you rather see? Mario hopping on Goombas and fighting foes? Or Mario having parties and playing baseball. I assure you that fans would applaud the Goomba squashing. But "hardcore" and "casual" gamers wouldn't care. As long as the "hardcores" got complex gameplay that requires skill, and that the "casuals" got an easy to pick up fun game, it wouldn't matter if Mario was saving the day or hitting homeruns. Referring to your Mario case, I guess there are BOTH main games and spinoffs relesed in recent times. And when you look at the Wii, you can see that "non-traditional gamer oriented" games didn't take all of it.
|
|