Slashdot Mirror
An Older Demographic May Soon Dominate Gaming
Reservoir Hill writes "An article from last week runs down the new mass audience for gaming among families, women and older people. The importance of the mass audience in gaming's spectacular growth is seen most clearly in the success of Nintendo's Wii, which is far outselling its more technically advanced hardware competitors, the Xbox 360 from Microsoft and PlayStation 3 from Sony. Wii Play was the No. 2-selling game of last year even though it received an abysmal score of 58 out of 100 at Metacritic, which aggregates reviews. The Times says that as video games become more popular hard-core gamers are becoming an ever smaller part of the audience. 'Paradoxically, at a moment when technology allows designers to create ever more complex and realistic single-player fantasies, the growth in the now $18 billion gaming market is in simple, user-friendly experiences that families and friends can enjoy together.'"
...How many politicians are going to go after games continually when they gain the same status as movies in the public eye?
If you've ever played Wario Ware or Mario Party with a bunch of friends while half drunk, you know how fun it can be.
Games don't have to have top of the line graphics to be fun. Nintendo got it right with the Wii.
But its only 10 bucks. Face it, you were going to get the second controller anyway, why not spend 10 bucks and get a handful of mini games out of it too.
"In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson
The reason Wii Play sold so well: $10 game with the purchase of a Wiimote.
See my Home Theater
Wii Play sold so well because it costs about the same as a Wii Remote and it comes with a Wii Remote, so you basically got the game for free. Many people bought Wii Play the same day they bought their Wii console.
I don't disagree with the general premise of the article, but using Play as a data point is pretty weak. The game itself is only $10, since its bundled with a $40 controller that is required for almost all games. As a bargain game, I don't think it competes at the same level as say Bioshock or Metroid.
http://bgcommonsense.blogspot.com
Wii Play was "best-selling" because it included a controller. Given the choice between buying a controller or buying Wii Play for nearly the same price, Wii Play was a brain-dead choice. That doesn't mean that old people are dominating gaming. I'd be much more interested to see how other Wii games stacked up.
~ roscivs
The new emerging Wii market can't simply be lumped into the same hardcore gaming market.
The Wii market is separate from 360 and PS3 so trying to figure out why Wii is outselling the PS3 and 360 doesn't work.
It's not simply about being a "Gamer" now. The way most Wii games work isn't in any way similar to the traditional gaming market. Stop treating it like the same thing.
Not everyone feels like getting off their ass and actually moving.
shows this new demographics buys games, we can talk about a shift in the industry. Until then, it's just a reporter trying to predict an industry shift that shows no signs of actually happening yet. Say what you will, they might be massively more expensive to product, but hardcore gamers actually BUY hardcore games. I'm 40 and I have spent every free minute since last August trying to keep up with the great load of games for the 360 and PS3 and am currently splitting my time between multiplayer COD4 and Ratchet & Clank Future.
I love the Wii, but you can't use Wii Play as any kind of reliable metric for the popularity of that kind of game. It's essentially a $10 game bundled with a $40 remote that most console owners were intending to buy anyway.
Like any genre, the Minigame phenomenon is only as strong as the title itself. Raving Rabbids was actually pretty solid; Carnival Games is utter garbage. Unfortunately, publishers see the unintentional success of games like Wii Play and assume that's what people want.
Mario Party is a classic, so that's going to be popular. Raving Rabbids is a solid enough game that makes good use of the controller. Wario Ware is goofy and fun, but is becoming tired and cliche.
Frankly, the less party games we see, the better off the few that remain will be. Otherwise it all becomes shovelware at some point.
When you look at board games which do you think do better, the really complex Avalon Hill games that target a very select audience or Candy Land and Life?
As much as I live Settlers of Cattan and Axis and Allies, I see Monopoly on more shelves at homes than of the previous.
When you make something easier to understand, you're going to get more market share: lowest common denominator, right?
Ask not what you can do for your country. Ask what your country did to you
Finally maybe the games industry will realise that great graphis does not equal a great game. It's always been about the gameplay. It's that certain something something that means you can pick it up and get hooked and just keep on playing.
Where are the great graphics in Tetris, in Pac Man, and others. Games that are constantly played all over the world all the time. They're simple, easy to play, hard to master fun games.
This is what the Wii does best. Gameplay.
My kids can play the Wii, my mother in law can play the Wii, I can play.. guess what is the most played console in the house? Oh, and we can all play and interact together. Not all people who want to play video games live in their mother's basements. Games manufacturers are finally realizing this. Enough ultra-graphic-environment-Doom-clones, lets do something different - like actually interact with each other. Just think of "group-play" as a feature that they are working on... like graphics. So the Wii made a huge step in that direction, and didn't need to worry about building state of the art graphics. (yet)
meh
Constantly I see games that are visually appealing receiving glowing reviews, but if you want to know what the best game in the history of console gaming is, odds are its on NES. My guess would be Mario. Horrible graphics, bad storyline, greatest game ever. Even today, I can still sit there and play these games and find them very entertaining. Sometimes simplicity isn't such a bad thing.
Not to mention the Wii Play was bundled with a second remote which together cost less than many of these amazing other games...that had to factor into its sales figures.
I imagine this also has something to do with penetration of relatively cheap gaming consoles vs. high-end PC hardware - and it's not to say that sales of BioShock were shabby, is it? Just lower.
So the NYT is just confirming what those of us who have played games from the '80 and early '90s have known for years.
Yep. Maybe with some luck, the lords of the game studios will read the article. As many have already noted, the folks at Nintendo figured this out a long time ago. But hard-core gamers are the folks making most of the games. It reminds me a bit of designers and websites. A few years ago many designers simply made sites for other designers. Now most of the designers have realized that they're not designing for themselves and their friends, but for a larger audience. Web design has evolved. There are still designer-oriented sites, but for the most part mass market professional sites do a much better job of serving the broader audience than they did even five years ago.
There will still be room for ultrageek games that require the latest hardware and suck up dozens of hours a week. But the race for that juicy mass market is on, and Nintendo has an early lead.
Read the EFF's Fair Use FAQ
Sometimes complexity gets in the way of a fun experience. Both have their place. Sometimes you want a game you have to master and struggle with. But if it is too complex, I lack the time to master it as I get older. For those reasons, the Wii seems to fill a badly needed niche.
Except for ending slavery, the Nazis, communism, & securing American independence, war has never solved anything.
People don't buy Wii Play for the games, they get it to get a second controller.
The wii vs. ps3 and xbox 360 remind me of D&D vs. aD&D. D&D is way more accessible than the sometimes cumbersome rules and other overhead of AD&D. The wii is similarly accessible to a much larger audience, and once the hardcore gamers have bought their one 'must have' ps3 game, their purchases are done, whereas a family system can fuel years of continuous purchasing.
stuff |
for games to take off with non gaming crowds it requires a new way of thinking from them. rather than passively watching TV/films and listening to music, they should want to take part in their chosen game. virtual soap operas? virtual Will Smith adventures?
and who knows, if everyone starts taking part in things (life, elections, etc) the world might become a better place.
I have excellent Karma and I am not afraid to Troll it.
Can my fellow UK slashdotters join me in a moment of silence for Amiga Power. The magazine that was smart, funny, and knew how to use a percentage scale properly.
If we can put a man on the moon, why can't we shoot people for Apollo-related non-sequiturs?
Balls out boys! It's Wii strokin' time!
All the while, there has been a genre of games that this same gaming media chose to ignore, and often ridicule - i.e. often in reference to low cost games such as Deer Hunter, simple adventure games like Myst, compilations and remakes of old games, Flash games, and kids games like the Barbie properties. People who like these types of games had to find them on their own, without any help from the hardcore gaming media.
All the while, Nintendo went blissfully on even though that the gamecube and n64 were largely ignored in the ps2/xbox war. And now, it's somehow become news and a surprise to everyone that there are more people than just the hardcore gamer that loves games too.
... but playing with my Wii and playing with my family are two mutually exclusive activities.
That company must have gone ages ago, after all, you say there is not enough of a market compared to simpler games, so since they were founded in 1958, by now they should have gone belly up.
Ah but no, Avalon Hill has spend decades succesfully making a profit selling extremely complex games. Way more complex then Monopoly, and still somehow making a profit, enough to satisfy the parent company Hasbro. Mmm, were have I heard that name before. Hasbro, don't they also own Parker Brothers, the publishers of Monopoly?
Why on earth would Hasbro publish both a lowest common denominator game like monopoly (fans, please lynch the OP for those words, not me) and extremely complex games?
Because unlike you the managers at Hasbro ain't completely devoid of any business sense whatsoever.
You can't sell the maximum amount of goods if you only sell to the majority. The smart person will identify the various groups that exist and try to meet each of them with their own line of products.
Idiots MBA's often just don't get this most basic premise, they see a the majority market (and often get that wrong as well) and then think EVERY product should be aimed at that market. It is extremely short-sighted especially when that market is already being dominated with an other product. Don't try to out Coca-Cola Coca-Cola. Don't try to out WoW WoW.
This is what Nintendo did with the Wii, realizing they could NOT compete directly with Sony or Microsoft they instead tapped in another segment of the market although it is important to note that the Wii has more "adult" games then the Gamecube had before. Even nintendo seems to realize that trying to shoot for just one corner of a market at the expense of all others isn't smart which is why you got violent shooters on a Nintendo a console giant who in the west once censored blood and anything nasty or naughty.
What gets me in stories like these is that some people seem to think market share is important, it isn't. Profit is. If you can make a living selling a product to 10 people out of 6 billion you got a lousy market share, but are still a success.
It is almost like saying that simple movies get the largest audiences so everyone should make simple movies. TV execs already live by this rule, does gaming have to follow?
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
ironically, most true Hardcore gamers first got into gaming with Hardcore games like Super Mario Brothers on the original NES...
Nintendo has always and always will be a fun, family oriented system. The other systems don't do that as well. Most true "hardcore" gamers from the first generation of video game consoles are now getting older, getting kids... They, ironically, don't want their kids to play games like GTA Vice City since that'd get the kiddies in to finding out about stuff like the Hot Coffee Mod that daddy used to play... Gamer Wives also have something to do with some of the new trends...
From the article:
Film, books and music (and food, for that matter) have been around long enough to have developed highly sophisticated cognoscenti whose tastes have little to do with the mass audiences that still drive those markets. Food critics have as much sway over Red Lobster as book critics do over Danielle Steel.
With this article and others like it, the media ate campaigning hard to make gaming a "mass-market only" medium. Imagine if from the beginning that mass produced summer blockbusters had the clout they have today. There would be no Citizen Kane. Hitchcock would have directed musicals and comedies of errors, if he could get a job. If books received the same treatment, the "classics" would all be boddice ripping fantasy tales of romance. Works like The Grapes of Wrath would have had small print runs compared to the equivalent of a Stephen King tale or John Grisham lawyer thriller. To this day, the Times edits romance novels out of its "best selling" books list.
TV has been relegated as an opiate for the masses for decades now. Games have the potential to make people think, but old media wants to lump it in with TV as purely a social platform instead. The second people stop playing Wii Sports, they will be first to declare that gaming is dead.
Even their coverage of the top ten list is questionable/dishonest. "Guitar Hero" made the list, which is pretty good for a 3 year old game. Guitar Hero 2 and 3 may have made the list, or the GH franchise, but *not* Guitar Hero. Because it is a "social music game", the sequel part of its title mysteriously disappeared.
On the list itself, the article says Wii Play was #2 and Mario Part 8 was #10, but what about the rest of the list? Halo 3, CoD4, and Assasin's Creed made the list, but it doesn't say where. And it felt obligated to point out that BioShock, Mass Effect and God of War II didn't make the list while failing to point out that all three were console exclusives (while GH and CoD4 were not), Mass Effect was on the market for a little over a month in 2007, BioShock was sold out for a solid month after its release, and God of War II was an M-rated tiltle, barely marketed and for a "last generation" system.
There have always been girls and women in gaming.
Gamers have always come in different races and ages and income brackets.
Someone who plays Tetris for an hour at a time three times a week is a video game consumer, just as someone who raids in WoW for five hours a night is.
Nintendo hasn't so much blown open the demographics -- though they have -- as they've blown open the debate and the recognition.
No-one has said, in eighty years, "all watchers of movies fit the same demographic." Television has ten networks PER demographic. So why this overwrought, antiquated insistence that All Gamers Are Of The Same Ilk?
I worked for Gamestop for a year, in 2005, and I developed my own admittedly anti-PC gamer categories. One of the MANY demographcis I saw represented was the fratboy/thug gamer: the white or hispanic males between ages 18 and 24, who were buying every sex and violence 360 title they could snap up. To so much of the world, they are the only gamers. To us, they were about 20% of our patrons.
If the rest of the world is finally, FINALLY starting to recognize that "gamer" means a lot, LOT more than just the fratboy/thug or the EQ addict in mom's basement, then so much the better.
" ...the growth in the now $18 billion gaming market is in simple, user-friendly experiences that families and friends can enjoy together.'"
I continually look for games that my 11-year old son and my wife and I can all play together and those are rather hard to find. I would rather the entire family play together on the 360 instead of my son playing on his XBox in his room, my wife watching TV in the living room and with myself playing GOW in the basement.
We used to play Crash Team Racing together, but it didn't appeal to my wife too much. ACME Arsenal looks promising though co-op mode is only 2-player and my wife isn't big on multi-player, "kill everyone else" battles (available for 1-4 players in A.A.). Of course, we haven't tried it yet-maybe she would enjoy it. Funny, silly, simple games (like, perhaps A.A. is) are what appeals to her. We enjoy playing Toe Jam and Earl (now available for the 360 too), but again, it is only 2-player co-op.
At the very least, we always look for 2-player co-op games that we can play. "Destroy All Humans 2" and "MW: Lone Wolf" are games that my son and I enjoy playing together, but unfortunately, "Ace Combat 6" is only 1 player. Fortunately, we have Halo 1, 2 and 3 to enjoy and GOW when he gets older. However, when we look for new games, it seems we find many more single-player games than 2-player co-op (or 3 player co-op). If MS hopes to make the Xbox the center of the family living room, (which they do), then they need to hurry up and do it (this article says that is what they are planning to do. I'm still waiting.
Veritas patesco per quaestio questio. Truth is revealed through questions.
The Times says that as video games become more popular hard-core gamers are becoming an ever smaller part of the audience.
No; adolescent males are becoming an ever-smaller part of the audience. More mature gamers, both older and younger, both hardcore and casual, want something very different from the testosterone-soaked boom-fest FPS of the month.
I wrote about a similar demographic shift a few months ago, with regard to parents becoming more involved in video gaming with their children (and how the Wii and games like Guitar Hero help that process immensely).
Giving even one ounce of attention to a virtual reality takes an equal amount of attention away from physical reality. It's another opiate for the masses that opens the flood gates for a total control. We all know how video games are addictive (WoW?). So what happens when government funded psychologists start to highly recommend playing an alternate reality game as a stress reliever? Or as a way to safely fulfill fantasies in a way not disruptive to society? Then we are set up for a government funded Second Life (America's Army?).
This is scary. Beyond belief. Just because a movie hasn't been made on it yet doesn't mean that it's not starting to happen.
Do you see this happening? If you do, are you working for a company that is part of the gaming community aggregately pointing in this direction?
Of course it will happen, it means more $ for them.
So I guess that the new demographic Nintendo is going for are the wiitirees? Mario Shuffleboard? Early Bird Revolution? Mario Kart will include an Oldsmobile with the left blinker left on? Wii Sports includes "Getting the kids off the lawn" and Bingo?
Kwisatz Haderach
Sell the spice to CHOAM
This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
And think that a Wii-enabled Light Saber Dueling League is not far behind.
...
Is this gaming? Sure.
Is it FPS? Usually not.
Is it about time? Yes.
Now excuse me while I use my Wii light saber to chop the head off of the guy who keeps stealing my team's bowling ball bags
*bzzzt* *thud*
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
This could help hardcore games by reducing pressure on them to appeal to a wide audience, since there's no way they could compete with the general-audience games coming out now. It's a common process, where one splits into two, allowing better targeting for both, where before the one had to meet the needs of both markets.
no one is playing monopoly or life because they think those are the greatest games in the world.
... failing to pull off FUN, NOW.
No, they're playing Monopoly because it's sufficiently fun, 1 to >8 can play, most people already have it, and most people already know how to play it. Starting is simply a matter of "anyone up for Monopoly?", dump the contents on the table, and look up the starting $$$ distribution. The goal is FUN, NOW.
That in contrast with "the greatest game in the world", which probably requires conneseurship to appreciate, has player restrictions, few have it (from both cost & awareness), and takes 30 minutes just trying to read & explain the rules. Starting is a matter of a sales pitch on why anyone would want to play, figuring out what the heck is going on, and playing several rounds just to get the idea. The cost is complexity and education time
Can we get a "-1 Wrong" moderation option?
I for one look forward to the next generation of consoles. I've been a gamer ever since I was 7 years old, and now at 28 I am getting that little kid feeling all over again. I played Wii Sports after Thanksgiving Dinner with my 7 year old cousin, 45 y/o Aunt, and my Grandpa. A little toasted, and well... high, I took a moment to reflect while relaxed in the chase lounge waiting my turn to "bowl". I saw a really good time being had by 4 generations of family (myself included). As a gamer, it was a beautiful moment because what was once "my thing", referring to gaming, was being heavily enjoyed by people who I would convince to play Call of Duty 4 with me. I think we've finally reached a point of acceptance in gaming as another entertainment form thanks to the innovation of Nintendo. That being said, look at Microsoft *ducks*. Xbox Live on the 360 is simply the best gaming I've ever had in my life. Now that my friends are scattered across the country, XBL allows us to play together, and message/video conference very easily. I realize this has been available on PC forever, I've been doing it... but to be able to chill out in front of the fireplace on the couch instead of a office chair that I'm in 8 hours a day at work too is awesome. To get to my point, the 360 despite it's hardware flaws is innovative in a whole other direction, some might call "hardcore gaming". The future will just get better. Imagine the posibilities of taking Wii interface innovation and combining it with an Xbox live experience.
"The irony when tending a flock of sheep is the dogs you put in place to protect them are genetically mutated wolves"
Wi-Play is selling because it comes with a controller. You know the ones that were as hard to find as the console.
I find being offended by me offensive.
We decided last summer to get a Wii because it was more family-friendly. My wife and I enjoy playing the WiiPlay games and my two-year-old enjoys watching Mommy and Daddy smack-talk each other while they fish and cow race. Plus, it's easy to put the game down, unlike a Final Fantasy game with an endless cutscene that cannot be paused or replayed (sorry if that's no longer true, FFVII was the last one I played.)
Casual games are the biggest market out there. My wife spends hours playing games on Kongregate, more than I spend playing something like Twilight Princess or Far Cry. And I thought I was the hardcore gamer in the house.
I hope that Nintendo doesn't get cocky, now that millions (?) of Wii consoles are in living rooms, and continues to encourage quality games, not shovelware. As long as they can still publish good, single-person games (not crippled versions of other console's games, I'm looking at you Force Unleashed) for gamers like me to play after toddlers go to bed. A diverse catalogue is what is going to keep people playing Wii for the next few years.
Take a look at many of the "classic" toys made from wood, rope and metal chains. They're all deceptively simple-looking things, until you pick them up and start playing around with them. Then you realize the hidden challenge to them. Cracker Barrel restaurants sell modern "replicas" of many of these puzzle games... things where you have to remove a pole from a knot of rope, for example - or twist things around to unlink a chain. Many of the classic Asian toys were like this too. Simple but ingeniously designed. My friend brought back a flying bird from Japan, for example. It was powered by a rubber band. Very basic deal where you turned a plastic crank in the back of the bird to wind up the rubber-band and then let go. But it was still clever how they managed to create flapping wings that were powered that way, all in a toy that only cost a few bucks to make. It flew really well too. I remember it accidentally landing on our roof several times!
The problem is, the big gaming companies would literally go out of business if they had to wait for each time something that unique and creative was developed. In the 80's, none of it existed yet, so everything somebody wrote seemed like a "first" (unless they were purposely copying off another newly release title). I think most of the concepts were done by the 90's though -- so you had to find other ways to sell a game title. That meant constant improvements on graphics and sound. (Literally, yes, you COULD sell a load of copies of Pac-Man all over again, if you really beefed up the graphics and sound, and made it into some weird 3D, first-person maze runner with really scary ghosts chasing after you, etc. etc. It sure wouldn't be original, but it'd generate sales since it's based on a tried-and-true game formula, but with a whole new "look and feel".)
Apparently I am "hardcore". I mean, I play Sam and Max and Puzzle Quest, but I also enjoy Mass Effect and Half Life 2 (single player). I can't pull off a headshot to save my life, but still, since I don't particularly enjoy a certain vendor's hardware or games, I'm some sort of "hardcore" type, an irrelevant dinosaur, a dying breed.
So great, fine, I really just don't care any more. If the market segments significantly along these lines, maybe it'll segment more ways and we'll stop lumping in all people who play a video game as "gamers" the same way we don't really talk about "moviegoers" or "tv watchers" (except in terms of ratings and gross receipts). Maybe the discussion will finally mature so that we can stop with the labels and the smug insular elitism that goes with them.
Done with slashdot, done with nerds, getting a life.
Personally I'm a big PC fan. Seeing consoles with games that have the equivalent difficulty of "whack the mole" (except you're a plumber and you're jumping on mushrooms)is kind of disappointing. No one likes the complex and challenging games such as the Civilization series, or even relatively simple yet challenging games such as Ikaruga (http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=ikaruga). This really shows that the largest demographic consists of people that refuse to challenge themselves. The most successful games seem to have one simple objective and very few ways to accomplish it. Bringing back Mario as an example you have to basically get from point A to B and kill everything in your path by simply jumping or smashing it (though they incorporate a few other things that you may shoot every now an then). There's a reason why very young children can play and win the game. It takes time and careful planning for games such as Civilization IV (so long as you play in the higher difficulties). Sure a simple game game can be fun, but people need to look beyond the psychological reward that an easy game offers and challenge themselves. I know many may argue that a simple game can be challenging, but if you want your kids to develop better thinking skills, try and move them up in both difficulty and complexity.
Help fight spam
Um depending on what you classify as "Older", I believe that intersection has passed sometime ago.
I am 30 years old, and still play video games. So do most people I know. I grew up in the Nintendo generation, (really all console and computer gaming really from C-64 to present. Thats Celceo vision, Atari, Nintendo, 64, Cube, Wii, Neo-Geo, Turbo Grafix 16, Sega Gennsis, Saturn, Dreamcast, X-box, x-box360, TRS-80, 086, 286, 486, Pentium, 1,2,3,4, AMD equivalents, 64bit, Dual Core). If I actually tried to list games I would be hear a long time. Seeing all this, I think my generation has probably wasted more time playing vids than any other to date!
Also as to quality of games. A good game is a good game period. Better graphics can certainly help, but it is not everything. I have an modified version of Masters of Orion 2 on my Vista box when I need a fix. I got really excited when I heard you could play Catan on the Xbox360. AI is getting better, but playing against people is still king. The best enhancement in my view over the last 10 years is the advancement and ease of playing online (there wasn't even online (anyone remember TEN and how much it sucked)when I was playing - Get off my lawn!) games now. In the beginning folks were limited to playing with friends (usually 4 or less) at home. Then came direct connections via cable or modem, then some networks, then some online gaming services, then some online games, private and publicly hosted servers, Massive Multi playing, Persistent universe, you don't know how good you got it today! These days I mostly just play Quake Wars and WOW, mostly because I lack the time to play more.
There's been a lot of ink on Wii Play and the innovative controller. But it bears repeating. It's not just that the Wii is family friendly and attracts a lot of non-traditional gamers, it's that the controller lets you interact with the game on a whole new level.
When you have to swing your arms to swing a sword or tennis racket, you're engaging whole other parts of your brain that bring you into the experience. Working up a sweat playing tennis against my wife is something that's never happened to me before, and I played Pong and dumped buckets of quarters into Double Dragon like anyone else.
Even traditional FPS titles like Call of Duty are more intense on the Wii. When you have to pump your fists in the air during hand-to-hand combat with the Kraut who ambushed you, it's freaky.
So there's a hook for traditional gamers who want to experience old genres in a new way.
Do what you can, with what you have, where you are.
'Paradoxically, at a moment when technology allows designers to create ever more complex and realistic single-player fantasies, the growth in the now $18 billion gaming market is in simple, user-friendly experiences that families and friends can enjoy together.' I played through Mass Effect as a Paragon. I had a save near the end that allowed me to see the four Paragon endings with the minimum of fuss. Great. Can't be bothered to go through the whole game again to see the four Renegade endings, at least not any time soon. All those endings, all the cinematics and voice-overs, they all cost money - animators, actors, studio time. Wii boxing can have exactly one of two endings - you win or you lose, and the same code handles both. Yes, technology allows designers to create huge complex worlds, but with great complexity comes a great price. The demographic of gamers seems to be skewing older, as people who gamed as kids grow up and get jobs. For me, this certainly means there's less time to sit down and immerse myself in (say) Fable for hours on end, but an hour or so playing winner-stays-on boxing, or bowling on the Wii with wife and son after dinner is a good way to get some exercise and spend some fun time with my family. Now if they made a multi-player Fable, with different characters, maybe viewed from a top-down perspective, we'd play that together as well. Can't think of anything like that on the market though...
Agreed. A better example of a popular Wii game with excellent gameplay but graphics that wouldn't challenge a SNES is Geometry Wars (yes, I know it's also available on XBOX360 and PC, but it really shines on the Wii). It also scores a respectable 80 on Metacritic.
Support Right To Repair Legislation.
Back in the late 70's and early 80's this happened. New studios sprung up to jump on the video game band wagon. Games were rushed out, poorly designed riding the coattails of the market paved from quality and a strong user base. Then the bottom fell out of it and didn't come back until the a little company in Japan spent a huge amount of their own resources so that a few stores in NYC would even consider putting something called the NES on their store shelves.
How ironic. The very company that resurrected the US gaming market is now going to kill it.
New studios will pop up to create these new casual/family games. They are going to be backed by investors looking to cash in on this new trend. It will most likely do well for a few years until the quality just gets too low to hold their dumbed down target audiences attention. Stocks will fall, smaller studios will declare bankruptcy or be bought up buy the few left after the dust settles.
The average consumer doesn't want to spend their money on those easy casual games anymore.
Gaming goes back to the hardcore.
That said, it doesn't take genius to figure out that there is a bigger market for casual games than the hard-core, as the majority of the population isn't willing to put 40 hours+ per week into playing WoW (I'm quite amazed that WoW has attracted as many players as it has - it looks like hard work instead of play to me).
At least here in Europe, the casual trend preceded the launch of the Wii, and games like Buzz, Guitar Hero and Singstar have been doing very well in the top-ten sales lists for a long time.
What amazes me is that Sony and Nintendo seem to get it, the Xbox games lineup seems to consist of 70% FPS, with a few sports and driving games thrown in for good measure. Viva Pinata and Scene it don't really measure up to the Sony and Nintendo titles. And, it seems that most Xbox titles are optimized for Live, and that there are very few titles that are actually geared towards multiple players playing on the same console. To me, this is the most fun part of console gaming, ever since I played 4-player paddle games on the Atari 2600. Microsoft, you need to wake up here! (A 6-month licensing ban on FPSes would be a good start)
Really, I've never seen a game "push graphics over gameplay". The games I hear people talk about--Bioshock, Half-Life and progeny, Halo, etc.--are all focused on gameplay and story. Maybe it was like that in the 90s when we first started to have decent graphics and maybe it's like that on the console market where you're just starting to have decent graphics but most PC games aren't like that.
Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
It is a social catalyst. Wii games are designed so you can do crazy stuff with your hands and have fun with your friends. The Wii does not bring a social aspect to gaming, it brings a veneer of gaming to socialization.
Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
Didn't I read something around Christmas that Wiis were flying off the shelves with a much lower attachment rate than the 360s or PS3s? If so, then big fscking deal.
:-)
My 70yo grandfather used to have a NES. Why? Just to play golf. It was kind of endearing and in a way is similar to this Wii phenomenon. But that was the only game he ever had (aside from Mario 3, which came with it).
You may have 50 million "new old gamers" out there because of the Wii. Let's say that they buy 3 games over the lifecycle of the console. Personally, I think that sounds high, but I'm being generous. Compare that to a COMBINED 50 million PS3 or 360 owners (combined because so few games are exclusive these days), who probably buy 6 games over the lifecycle of their consoles. These numbers are made up, but if you find real stats I bet they're mighty telling.
So I don't care how many of these new converts there are. They don't buy as many software titles, don't buy as many peripherals and aren't going to buy the NEXT new console "just to have it". The old gamers may have a lot more disposable income in total, but they're less likely to blow thousands on this particular hobby. For another ten years, at least...when the "Nintendo generation" hits their forties.
I keep trying to pick fights, but I can't shake this Excellent karma.
I'm sorry my fellow Americans, I do agree than nuking Mexico over oil drilling rights was a bad idea, I didn't know the radiation would spread into the United States, and I didn't know the environmental effects would turn the great plains into a desert, and I didn't know that every other country in the world would proceed to bomb us afterwards, but don't worry, I'll just reload from 4 years ago and everything will be OK!
All misspellings and grammatical errors in the above post are intentional and part of my artistic expression.
You damn kids! Get off of my virtual lawn!
It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
FarCry there's only so much eye orgy a gamer can take while you're bored out of your mind while you're sniping the 305th stupid enemy.
I always thought of Creationism as the Raving Right's version of the Loony Left's Anthropogenic Global Warming-brightmal
In the mid to long term, consuption and supply of chilled urine bevarage's must balance out via the price mechanism. It's economic's 101.
I for one am buying frosty piss futures, given the likely heatwave in May/June.
I will have a sig when the market demands it.
Jack Thompson claims that Mario Kart is to blame for those "White Haired Devils" poor driving habits, sues Nintendo. He claims the Wii is corrupting our elderly.
It seems worth asking again a question I have asked before:
How many developers whose names do not begin with the letter "R" have been unable to launch an "M" rated title without a PR blow-back as fierce as "Manhunt 2?"
_____
This year's "Golden Tomato" Award for best-reviewed film went to "Ratatouille."
Ratatouille won a Grammy for best musical score and an Oscar nomination for best screen play.
It will likely win the Animated Feature Oscar, which is as close as the Academy gets these days to honoring the traditional Hollywood production. The films the audiences line up to watch.
If you want to win over an adult audience for your video game, then write and produce a game for adults and not the adolescent grossing out over a pirated download of "Saw."
I love my Wii quite a bit, and Nintendo has put out some fantastic games for it. But Nintendo, from my perspective, still has the same issue that it had before -- Nintendo is the only reason to buy the console if you're a regular gamer. Looking at my list of games, most of them came entirely from Nintendo, with the exception of a few games here and there. The interface for the Wii and the DS have inspired absolute tons of games of the "mini-game" variety, and this is frustrating. That's not to say that they number of good games have decreased, but there's a great deal more useless crap to wade through. Any look at the "Reviews" list on a gaming site shows a large number of disappointing and half-baked games.
I understand that there's new people that they're selling to, but it is frustrating to look at what's coming out and seeing 5 separate versions of Sudoku. Observing my family and friends, this "new" group of gamers seem unlikely to buy more games because of the nature of the games they buy. Most gamers play a game for a while, finish it, and then move on to the next game. These new gamers are very content to simply play Wii Bowling for years. They don't seek improvements, they don't seek new experiences, they're comfortable with what they know and love. I suspect many of these companies putting these games out are thinking they've hit the jackpot, and when the new demographic gets bored, or is completely happy with what they already have, they'll fall flat.
the 30-45 dominate gaming. And it would be even bigger if the industry would start to develop games towards that demographic.
FYI: Largest single demographic of WoW is women around 40. Think about that.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
omnia tua castra sunt nobis
Meanwhile, a quick google revealed many vendors in the US (not including individuals hawking them on e-bay and the like) possess stock. I could order one from Red Octane, for example, but by the time they add on the cross-border shipping, extra tax and duty, etc., the price of the game doubles! And since Toronto is in the top 10 MSA's in North America, I can't understand why it should be easier to find the game in, say, Buffalo, than in Toronto.
So, I decided to contact Activision. I went to their website, and tried to send a message using their contact form. Howeve, every time I chose "Consumer Support", my message disappeared and I was automatically sent to page reporting bug fixes and the like. Not at all what I wanted.
My next step was to select the "Contact Us" option, and take down their phone number, which their site lists at 310-252-2200. I called that today at lunch. To my surprise, I was answered by Mattel's automatic attendant system. After navigating through their Byzantine menus, I finally reached a human being, and asked "What's up with Guitar Hero for the Wii?". The representative was quite confused - "What's a Wii?" she wanted to know. I told her, and explained why and how I'd gotten to her. She put me on hold for a few minutes, and then came back to explain that Activision licenses the Mattel trademark. I then asked her why AV's website listed Mattel's phone number as their contact number. She couldn't answer that. I suggested she might want Mattel's legal department to investigate. She replied, quite firmly, "You bet I will!".
Quite curious, in my mind. Anyone out there know what's going on behind this?
What was once true, is no longer so
it depends on your definition of "better." Monkey Island is an excellent example of the problem. Version 1 had artist drawn close-up shots that looked beautiful. Version 2 had no close-ups, but real charm. Version 3 had a simplified cartoon style in order to allow smooth animation. Version 4 had an even simpler style that lacked any personality, in order to achieve 3D. And so on. Simpler art allows the artist to spend more time on each frame. And requires the artist to use the viewer's imagination. Lara Croft can render at 120 frames per second. The Mona Lisa renders at one frame per thousand years. Which looks better?
Even then, I wish some of the more popular games (Resident Evil 5, Grand Theft Auto 4, Assassin's Creed, Metal Gear Solid, etc) would get ported to Wii. I really don't care if they have stripped-down graphics & watered-down textures... I really don't even care if it's just bare gouraud-shaded polys, as long as I can play with the Wiimote instead of a gamepad. Some games that will go on to sell tons of copies only come out for the 360 and PS3 on the premise that people wouldn't want to play a scaled-back version, but that simply is not true. Give it to me on Wii!
Twinstiq, game news
Rock Band is by far one of the most fun and engaging 2-4 player co-op experiences (assuming you all have at least a little bit of interest in music). Lego Star Wars is also an awesome co-op title (and here's hoping Lego Indiana Jones and Lego Batman turn out decent too).
Thank you for helping us help you help us all.
With every year that passes, gamers seem older and older. How are we to stop this?!? In March I'll be 50. A 50 year old gamer! That's not possible!
Don't piss off The Angry Economist
Yes, most of the console systems coming out are geared for the living room experience. Escpecially the XBOX 360 and Playstation series with the included DVD. I can see the game system being dominate in home entertainment systems
"Wii Play was the No. 2-selling game of last year even though it received an abysmal score of 58 out of 100 at Metacritic, which aggregates reviews. "
I think this however completely ingore the fact that Wii play came with a controller that were even thougher to find on their own than the rare Wiis.
People bought this because it was the only way they could get their hands on a second controller.
WiiPlay costs $5 more than a controller alone; just the fact that it *is* a controller, when supply is not always what it could be, is enough to make it a best-seller. Find out how many people would pay for WiiPlay if it cost, say, $20.