Direction of the gaming industry

Recently I've been following a very good podcast for gaming and it's been bringing up some interesting topics. For those wondering, I'm listening to 4playerpodcast. Search it up if you want.

I've been brought to attention to where the industry of gaming is gearing towards nowadays and I would like to hear some thoughts on this.

Although I'm not too sure if many of you guys have heard of the game Just Dance but it is a wii game that supposedly wants to follow the moves of a silhouette of a famous singer. This game is rated rather poorly. 47 from metacrtic, 2.0 from IGN and probably more. Bayonetta (360), an incredibly well made game (9.1 on metacrtic), No More Heroes 2, also well received (8.8), sold reasonably well. And yet, Just Dance sold more than both these games combined for the month of January

On the note of Bayonetta (360) as well, Mario Kart DS outsold this game during that month. Bayonetta was released January of 2010. Mario Kart DS was released in 2005. Personally, I think this is rather ridiculous. A 2005 game beating a game of such high standards on release month.

Tatsunoku vs Capcom, another game rated rather well sold a measely 50 000 units. So much for expecting another vs game.

Overall sales, the NPDs gave out the top 5 games sold in 2009. 4/5 of the top games are wii games.
1. CodMW2 (11.86 mil)
2. Wii Sports Resort (7.57 mil)
3. New Super Mario Bros Wii (7.41 mil)
4. Wii Fit Plus (5.80 mil)
5. Wii Fit (5.44 mil)

Uncharted 2 is only nearing 3 million. Mass effect 2 reaches 3.9 mil as of Feb 9. Why produce a game of such high quality boasting incredible graphics, voice acting, polished mechanics, deep storyline and othe aspects only to be beaten by a game such as NSMBW? These two games undoubtedly put more effort into making their game. Yes, it can be argued that some of these games are indeed good, but nonetheless, you know these games are more suited for a casual audience than hardcore.

I may not be 100% sure on some of the figures, but my question still stands, do you think the industry is going to head more towards casual in the future, drowning out some of the more hardcore games? Or can companies and developers continue to find the business incentive to create high quality games for the more dedicated players?

Or perhaps, do you agree with the direction of moving towards the casual audience more than the dedicated?

You bum, you left out my argument we had earlier, anyways in a nutshell, since the topic is focused on sales vs quality, there are multiple points to make:

- Mario is huge and is probably the most recognized character in the gaming world, whether you like it or not, everyone has played AT LEAST[B] one Mario game in their life, and if not, they have at least heard of him. Mario has a fanbase that's incredibly huge I image (I don't know as I'm not a huge Mario fan) however it also has a past of many successful games. While Sonic originally had really well made games on the Sega Genesis, he slowly became mediocre at best due to idea of the game, 3D does NOT work with Sonic games, Sonic Rush and the Sonic Adventure 2 Battle had the formula right but still as of yet to create a decent game, albeit Unleashed was decent for the speed portions but the Beast part was just unnecessary. Even other games may have a huge fan base, but Mario has had the time to develope and prospure, it's been around 20 years now since Mario has been out, while CoD has around 6 or so years? (again, I don't have exact dates).

- While Bayonetta and No More Heroes 2 were rated fairly high, there is one component they lack, online multiplayer. Now even though MW2 has multiplayer, the ratings play a part in the sales. Mario Kart DS for example is rated a simple E for everyone, which, while appealing to most casual gamers, also is good for the hardcore gamers as well (i.e. snaking), while that may be considered cheating/glitching, you can argue the same thing about Super Smash Brothers Melee with waveshine, it adds to the gameplay even though it was not intentional.[/B] Melee appeals to casual and hardcore. Now I agree, Bayonetta and No More Heroes 2 are NOT SUITED FOR MULTIPLAYER[B], it wouldn't work nor should it.[/B] Mario Kart DS is portable and has multiplayer which means the necessity for a TV and controller are not necessary, the DS sells range from $50~150 or so while a Xbox360 is about 200~400 and a Wii is around 200 I believe.

- Now looking at the ratings, Bayonetta and No More Heroes 2 were rated M for Mature (+17 years old) which means most casual gamers are not going to get it, simply by the age requirement. You posed a question earlier that an older sibling would buy it for them, but what older sibling buys a game for their younger sibling? (albeit this is somewhat biased now) Odds are that sibling would play the game or wouldn't buy it in the first place. Mario games are rated E for everyone, which means their parents won't question the content of the game.

- People also appeal towards simplicity rather than complexity. This is the problem of the hardcore games. While casual games are easy to pick up and very simplistic, they have a small risk rate compared to hardcore games since casual games are meant to appeal to everyone with the neglection of good gameplay. I'm not saying Mario is stupid or anything nor am I saying Mario is a bad franchise, but adults do not look at content unless the rating indicates something. Adults buy what the child wants without question when it comes to Wii games, because the Wii is designed as a casual player console, which also explains why TvC did not sell well, most hardcore gamers DO NOT BUY[B] Wiis.[/B] You can't expect Hardcore games to sell well on a Casual Console. Hardcore games have an unpredictable success rate, due to the complexity that comes with the game. If the complexity and mechanics don't work, it does not sell well, but when they do work, they stil lsell but not as well as a casual game because GOOD hardcore games are released rarely =/.

As a gamer, I have to say that gaming nowadays are more so for casual young-adults or for older adults. Or at least, they're starting to attract older audiences. Back in the days, only little children played games as a source of entertainment. These days, games can be played for other things:

Ex: Guitar Hero because it resembles real-life bands. Wii-fit because it can help people to get into shape. Wii-sports because it simulates sports, etc.

Games like MegaMan, Pokemon, etc. will eventually become a thing of the past, because the gaming industry are starting to head towards a new direction. Hardcore games will eventually appeal to people less, not to say that they will not attract any people. RPGs are still doing well, same for MMOs. As technology gets better, games will get better. I never expected the gaming industry to target older audiences though, that was new to me. I knew they were going to be more advanced, but not like this. I'm sorta neutral on this.

Games today might be more mature than they were back during the Nintendo times, but they're only getting easier and easier. Every little kid wants to be the big shot mature gamer, and the game industry doesn't hesitate to hand this title to any five year old shopping with his mom at Wal-Mart.



Here's a nice example of what I'm trying to get at. When you start off the game, you can't do anything but walk around. You try that out, but looking at that screen, where do you want to go first? That cave! It's the only unique tile on the screen (other than Link). It draws you toward it naturally, drawing you immediately into the overworld's exploration gameplay. Nowadays, games would block off the west, north, and eastern exits until you got the sword, and the sword guy would tell you how to use the sword, and then he'd make you do it a few times to make sure you knew how to use it.

And then they would do that with every item. Take a look at some of your favorite games as a kid, and look at them today. Maybe once or twice a year, a balls-to-the-wall hard game is released and it drops down to $20 a couple of months after because nobody is interested in playing a game that doesn't hold their hand throughout the entire game. Even in competitive games that are made specifically for the "hardcore gamer", little kids abuse glitches and either take the fun out of what could've been a good game, or the rules change completely. In every online game, there's always one thing that your opponent does that makes them "cheap". If you do THAT, then you're CHEAP

THEY'RE NOT BEING CHEAP. YOU JUST AREN'T GOOD ENOUGH. YOU'RE NOTHING BUT A SISSY SHI'T CASUAL THAT CAN'T HANDLE BEING BEAT. CAN'T HANDLE BEING BEAT BECAUSE FOR AS LONG AS YOU'VE PLAYED VIDEO GAMES YOU'VE HAD HINTS AND TIPS FROM THE IN-GAME MOMMY THAT LEADS THE WAY FOR YOU. i so mad

This kind of question has come up for me many times, although I've never had the chance to actually apply it for real. Would it be better to pour out all my heart, soul, and passion into a kickass, well-polished game that's going to be respected by gamer fans? Or would it be better to just make a casual game where things are quite easy because you're given the tools to do it?

Personally I'd like to go with "kickass game" production, because then it'd be something you'd be proud of, and you'd get all these fancy accolades and whatnot. However, the economical choice would be the casual way. No matter how you look at it, if the goal for the consumers is to have fun, by all means let them. There's way more people that can and will feel proud over getting 90% or higher over a simple trivia test than those who will take on an onslaught of hardcore trivia like that found on *insert gameshow here*.

Then there's the problem of titles. Classic titles: everyone knows them, everyone knows what to expect (mostly), and they're proven games. New titles (read: MANY PC and 360 games) on the other hand suffer because they seem a whole lot like anything else without having to actually play 30% through the game or reading up a chunky review on it. Who wants to do that? And my personal favorite problem: not enough time or will not devote the time.

I'd like to argue the point of difficulty.

Games used to be harder, yes, but not because of skill or anything. They were harder because of limitations of the system they were on. Difficult games were often difficult because of the gameplay mechanics. You had to rely on extreme memorization and perfect timing to complete them.

I like games that are difficult because they test your ability to play them, not your memory.

Making games easier and having difficulty levels makes sense. It makes games more accessible. Tutorials, too, if you create a game that you have to have a shitton of previous knowledge to get anywhere in the only people that are going to buy it are the absolute hardcore. And they make up the vast minority. Yeah, a lot of games do baby you through, but a lot of games you can disable that.

One more thing I'd like to add, sometimes, it's the gaming-community for specific games that makes the games more appealing and challenging. I want to pull Smash into this, but you guys already know, so no need. Same goes for Pokemon Netbattle, competitive players are the reason why NB spiked up on activity back in the days. The more people that plays, the higher the likelihood that others will join as well. Look up on "Theory of Conformity", this applies for everything. Players will make the game harder for themselves by looking more into the game.

Ex:

NB = online Pokemon 'metagame', in which players will learn and use Effort Values (EVs) and maximize their team's power, and by using certain strategic movesets to counter and retaliate.
Smash = learning about the game in ways that the designer did not participate (my bad) anticipate, but in a way that created a more fierce competition.

You might call both of these 'glitching', but if people are looking at games in a different perspective that makes the game more challenging (and not easier), it makes for a better community. NB is like that too.

[COLOR="Green"]The reason such casual games are selling so well is because everyone from a 5 year old to your mom are playing them. It's so easy for them to play that anyone and everyone could play.

Most games nowaday piss me off simply because there's no sense of personal decisions. Games either draw a straight line for you, blocking off any chance of exploring, or are so open that you never know what to do because there's barely a plot to follow.[/COLOR]

I just don't like how the gaming industry has become like party politics. There used to be a wide variety of games with a middle ground of difficulty. Now and days it's purely Hardcore VS. Casual. I mean, they even list those descriptions when you rate a game on the Wii. I'm just disappointed that it seems all games now are either casual + mini game + gimic, OR FPS hardcore, with the rare gems in between. Where has the original "Adventure" genre gone? This is part of the reason I've only been buying ports and old games for the duration of this generation.

On a positive note, as less and less appeals to me, maybe I can finally drop games once and for all and move on with my life.

P.S. 16-Bit era > All