Discussion Forums > Gaming

Nintendo's Stock Drops After Lackluster E3

<< < (6/9) > >>

SirSkyRider:

--- Quote from: vicious796 on June 12, 2012, 12:11:11 PM ---All evidence points to the contrary on both fronts. Consoles offer more than PC games do for the average person. They are DVD and Bluray players, they require little-to-no upgrades (both an expense issue and a knowledge issue), and the major 3rd party game manufacturers all design and build their big budget games for consoles with, more often than not, the PC being a port and/or afterthought. With increases in wireless speed and technology mixed in with the tech boosts the consoles are sure to receive every 5 years, there is no reason to consider them as pending on obsolete. I'd go so far to say that the only reason this console span has been so long is because of the recession. If Microsoft and Sony thought they'd have a selling market 2 years ago, they would have designed and shipped.
--- End quote ---

True. But on the other hand, gaming consoles are largely becoming more and more like PCs - we used to buy consoles because they offered the ability to immediately play every game available for it whereas PC gamers were forced to go through an installation process and often had to get patches and bugfixes over the internet (or buy a revised version of that game if they were unlucky). Problems which appear on consoles as well nowadays. Let me ask you: Is "console gaming" today really still "console gaming"? Or should we not better get a new name for today's gaming devices.


--- Quote from: vicious796 on June 12, 2012, 12:11:11 PM ---Also, I agree with your thought of what a hardcore gamer is, however that's not what the market dictates today. PC gaming is niche, right now. I work in a small office and there are 5 of us that are males under 35. Of those 5, all have at least 1 console that they play regularly but only I am a PC gamer. This is and has been the standard for the last 20 years. Nothing has changed.
--- End quote ---

Germany is still very strong in the hands of PC companies and I doubt there will be much change over the next years. The only consoles selling really well here are the Wii and the DS. I think we might need to talk about the same region here.

vicious796:
Germany is a small subsect of the second largest purchasing region for console games (generally speaking, there are some exceptions where Asia/Japan sells more than Europe as a whole... like the Pokemon franchise). That being said, EU sales as a whole generally fall at or below 50% of US sales. This isn't blind and arrogant patriotism - in fact it could be used as a sad statistic for America - but marketing facts. In Europe, your average citizen tends to be a tad more tech savvy - especially in Germany - than the average American by my personal experience. Granted, I've known less than 20 Germans in my life but all of them have been more "up to date" with computer science than my American friends.

Which is why it isn't surprising to see that Skyrim on the PC - which ranks 45th on the yearly charts right now, just to let you know - sold most in Europe. However, the European Skyrim PC sales (1.16 million, 53% of the total PC sales) are below the European PS3 sales (1.52m) and the 360 sales (1.82m). This is also nothing compared to the success of Gran Turismo 5 (a series that's never been that popular in the US) which sold 3.71m copies on the PS3 in Europe or FIFA 12 (another series not popular in America) which sold 3.73m copies in Europe on the PS3.

What's the best selling game on the yearly charts, though? CoD MW3 on the XBOX 360 - selling a total of 14.1m copies internationally, 8.75m of which were sold in the US. All of Europe's Skyrim sales come up to less than half of those of the US XBOX 360's version of MW3 alone.

This is what I meant by "the companies responsible for the games consider console FPS gamers to be the 'hardcore' ones". You give titles to those who give you the most money, after all. While I, personally, consider 'hardcore' gamers to be the PC gamers who dedicate hours to their craft, that's not what the market thinks. And, by the sales numbers, consoles are going nowhere.

As to your other question, I would still call consoles consoles and not something else. While they are beginning to have the processing power of computers, they still have limiting functionality. Sure, they're practical with their DVDs, Blurays, Netflix and Hulu streaming services, etc. However, they're limited to the fact that you need to connect them to a TV, you can't really use them for work, and they are not modifiable for and by the average user. Beyond that, though disc-less games are becoming more common for consoles, they are still not the norm. They are the norm for PC gamers.

Hadouken:

--- Quote from: vicious796 on June 11, 2012, 06:04:47 PM ---
--- Quote from: Nikkoru on June 11, 2012, 02:49:59 PM ---People seem to confuse "hardcore" games with bloodshed and adult content now. Hardcore gaming is not about ending every level in a thick pool of your enemies' blood, looking at the poorly rendered approximation of cleavage, or Micheal Bay style explosions every cutscene. These are just -- well -- what they are. Nintendo had a seemingly endless stream of games which were and still are genuinely hard. In the "Abandon all hope, ye who enter here" school of gaming. Then, they stopped. Hard was getting three stars instead of two, not about reaching the end of the game.

Still, running down hallways, killing everyone in the room, and then watching a cutscene -- rinse, repeat -- is not a hardcore game, however jobless monomaniacs with limited vocabularies make the multiplayer.

--- End quote ---

It's not a matter of people misunderstanding what a hardcore gamer is - it's the market. Right now, the market dictates that FPS games are the "hardcore" and dedicating hours and hours to them - and buying their constant DLC packs - is what is going to be considered "hardcore".

--- End quote ---
You aren't a hardcore gamer until you regularly participate in gaming tournaments like EVO or some other event imo. Buying DLC packs all the time? Just means you have money to burn.

SirSkyRider:
Does competing against yourself count too? Because any game can actually be competitive, even if it's limited to single player mode - like getting pure platinum medals in every chapter of Bayonetta on Infinity Climax or beating your best time with Cave Story. You don't compete against any real players but against yourself - something that makes a game have replay value.

Nikkoru:
Anyone can participate in competitive gaming now, that's the whole point of interjecting multiplayer everywhere -- it's as casual as posting on facebook or the clap. Owning a whole lot of games doesn't mean your a gamer anymore than having giant bookshelves full of impressive texts makes you a scholar.

Now, if you're in the ladder ranking, or physically going to tournaments and perhaps getting money from your gaming skills - then sure. Whatever you're about, hardcore means a level of zealous commitment -- obviously there are no specific guidelines. And no, companies don't set what hardcore means, the gamers do, anymore than they decide what's really cool or not. Gamers are a subculture, not simple customers - and if you want to be seen as one by any of your supposed peers, you've got to have some kind of credibility. Which is where playing gaming classics or legendary challenges comes in, respect through merit -- like a grail quest. You can also know a lot about the industry and its products -- take the clergy approach. Or, like a blood rite, sacrifice enough of your life on the alter of your hobby as to be canonized into gamerdom -- the suicide bomber approach. And yes, I'm capable of judging everyone from my lofty perch of self-importance.

Though I can't accept the premise that playing competitively online makes you hardcore - specifically because for 20 someodd years - competitive gaming meant standing side by side your competitor on an arcade game or kicking your brother's ass in Street Fighter on the crappy television your parents bought you so you wouldn't be in the way - and these experiences are no way dwarfed by every jackass with a WiFi connection. 99% of my competitive gaming experience has been in such mediums.

Though that's mostly because my mall had an awesome arcade, I'm not that genuinely old.

Also, how can owning an electronic gaming platform making you less of a gamer? Really?

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page