I think nintendo may have the wrong message all along.

Some consumer electronics can still be called TOYS!nintendoboy16

They can also be considered toys I guess.

But then my smartphone plays games, the iPad plays games, my laptop and PC play games... and I wouldn't really consider those toys. Likewise I don't really consider my PS3 a toy, although it doesn't really bother me if people do I guess.

[QUOTE="munchlax99"]

[QUOTE="edo-tensei"] Lol then I guess gaming will never be as mainstream as music or movies. A market that won't grow as much as people claim is doing.edo-tensei

wait so there are no video games for kids? am i missing something?

so basically video games will crash and burn sometime?

[QUOTE="GD1551"]

[QUOTE="KBFloYd"]

nintendo makes consoles and games that appeal to everyone...

if the wii is a toy then so is the ps3 and 360.

Bigboi500

Nintendo only makes games for their fans and casuals. Sony is the only one tha provides games for everyone.

Some just do it better than others, like Super Mario Galaxy for example. It appeals to children and adults by having something for both, or everyone. Children can pick it up and play it and have fun, and those gamers who expect something deeper and challenging can enjoy the deep gameplay that exists within the game by accessing the more difficult parts that children and casuals will not be able to reach. That's why it's such a masterpiece and critically acclaimed as such. Kinect's Sesame Street on the other hand is solely focused on young children and has no attractive value for more dedicated gamers and adults.

By games for everyone I don't mean that their games can appeal to anyone. I mean that they provide games for different tastes. Like racing? Got GT5! Like FPS? Got KZ and Resistance. Like TPS? Got uncharted. Like Action Adventure? Got infamous etc etc etc

[QUOTE="Bigboi500"]

[QUOTE="edo-tensei"]

For starters, some words used to describe this industry like "video games" are not the best use of those words, and I'll leave it at that... Also, I wasn't implying that nintendo is a toy, I said that their add campain aims for that opinion, which isn't helping this industry at all. But then again money is money , companies don't really care for the well being of an industry as log as they maximize profits.

edo-tensei

OK, I read through all your posts and still don't know what you want. Is it just a matter of symantics, as in "those aren't comics, they're graphic novels", or "those aren't dolls, they're action figures?"

Video games are, for lack of a better term, . . . games. You want the gaming idustry to have more respect from whom? I generally have more respect for the gaming industry than I do for the music industry or the television industry. Honestly, the highest rated show for the 18-25 demographic is The Jersey Shore. How much respect can you have for that industry?

So again, I would ask you what is your point?

I wouldn't really call game consoles "toys" -- I would call them entertainment devices. The word "toy" has a connotation that something only children play with, which is not the case; the average gamer is actually much older. Maybe this is just semantics though.

It is true that Nintendo does cater to a younger audience than either Sony or Microsoft (or many third parties) because it tries to cater to everyone, but that much has always been true, really. To say that is the "wrong message" is rather debatable, considering how much the Wii and DS have sold, and how great many of their recent games have been. So I'm not sure what you're getting at here.

PoindeJ

[QUOTE="KBFloYd"]

nintendo makes consoles and games that appeal to everyone...

if the wii is a toy then so is the ps3 and 360.

GD1551

Nintendo only makes games for their fans and casuals. Sony is the only one tha provides games for everyone.

And Sony does not make games for everyone. Most games on the PS3 are not kid friendly. The 360 at least has Kinect for that audience.

[QUOTE="GD1551"]

[QUOTE="KBFloYd"]

nintendo makes consoles and games that appeal to everyone...

if the wii is a toy then so is the ps3 and 360.

jimkabrhel

Nintendo only makes games for their fans and casuals. Sony is the only one tha provides games for everyone.

And Sony does not make games for everyone. Most games on the PS3 are not kid friendly. The 360 at least has Kinect for that audience.

[QUOTE="GD1551"]

Nintendo only makes games for their fans and casuals. Sony is the only one tha provides games for everyone.

And Sony does not make games for everyone. Most games on the PS3 are not kid friendly. The 360 at least has Kinect for that audience.

Not to burst anyone's buble who is saying that video games are toys. But following that same definition, you would say that any medium is a form of toy to begin with or many forms of art--maybe you'll conceede to that, sure, but would toys really come to your mind when talking about a painting?

I don't see anything wrong with a person that has such a big passion for gaming, to consider the medium to go beyond the status quo of a toy. Quite frankly, I think this is one of the biggest problems the industry has today--simply that the general audience and gamers themselves look at gaming as a very superficial form of creativity. And by not taking their standards further with the industry, we're always to expect a certain level of mediocrity from it.

Now before you throw me a quote of C.S. Lewis, or tell me that I'm just insecure, or that I value video games too much to a point where my view on it is distorted, or that I'm not mature enough, I don't feel that strongly about it at all. I just find it a negative on the industry. One, that above all else, stands as the biggest obstactle the industry has for its growth in general.

And untill the industry is taken out of this spectrum, we will continue to see it like this. Having a view that the industry is a toy, will only degrade it further, why? Well because that's the general view people have on the subject--that's why when you ask someone if they consider films as toys, the general answer would probably be a no. Hell would you even ask this, or even consider it to begin with? Video games to me are a form of diversion sure, but they also gave me experiences that go way beyond that.

This mod is going to be so mad at me :P

Anyway, my post above kind of seems like a contradiction to some of the stances that I've had before--like people putting too much attention in the maturity value of video games in gerenal--and IT standing as an obstacle for its growth. I still stand by that view.

It's just that a lot of people in this thread are so quick to categorize video games as a toy, with the same commitment and ferver a lot of people place in how the medium should be viewed as a mature one. It seems like a kind of contradiction towards the whole mature argument. It's like reading Roger Ebert's take on video games not being art, without him classifiying what art is.

So my question would be, why exactly are video games toys to you? What is a toy to you? If a toy is close to a trifle to you, is the experience video games have offered you not much better than such a categorization? Have video games ever provided an experience that you remember fondly? Or more than other mediums out there?--both in significance and staying power?

Of course, I would expect a lot of other things in your life to take precedence over a video game, but I'm just curious to see what exactly makes it a toy in your opinion. I'm perfectly aware that this post will probably be ignored, but it would still be interesting to see some of the answers.

Not to burst anyone's buble who is saying that video games are toys. But following that same definition, you would say that any medium is a form of toy to begin with or many forms of art--maybe you'll conceede to that, sure, but would toys really come to your mind when talking about a painting?

I don't see anything wrong with a person that has such a big passion for gaming, to consider the medium to go beyond the status quo of a toy. Quite frankly, I think this is one of the biggest problems the industry has today--simply that the general audience and gamers themselves look at gaming as a very superficial form of creativity. And by not taking their standards further with the industry, we're always to expect a certain level of mediocrity from it.

Now before you throw me a quote of C.S. Lewis, or tell me that I'm just insecure, or that I value video games too much to a point where my view on it is distorted, or that I'm not mature enough, I don't feel that strongly about it at all. I just find it a negative on the industry. One, that above all else, stands as the biggest obstactle the industry has for its growth in general.

And untill the industry is taken out of this spectrum, we will continue to see it like this. Having a view that the industry is a toy, will only degrade it further, why? Well because that's the general view people have on the subject--that's why when you ask someone if they consider films as toys, the general answer would probably be a no. Hell would you even ask this, or even consider it to begin with? Video games to me are a form of diversion sure, but they also gave me experiences that go way beyond that.

StealthSting

As far as trying to make non-gamers see our hobby as something respectable, I just don't see it happening and frankly, I don't give a damn if they like it or understand it, because some people, most people will always see things differently and based on their own experiences and rarely will they ever try to see things from other's point of view.

In my personal experiences when dealing with non-gamers, I find them to be very hypocritical because they look down on gaming and say gamers are obsessive and hide from reality in their hobby, yet they turn around and obsess themselves in what celebrities are doing, or on shoes, or cars and so on.

Most video games are technically toys. Many are exceptions though. And the ones that are toys are usually very fun ones. Just Cause 2 is like the toy you had the most fun with as a kid. You just keep playing it.

@stealthsting

I hate to give such a simple answer to your well thought out posts, but... they are video GAMES. Games that we PLAY.

They are simply a form of entertainment. Not something to put up on a pedestal and act all pretentious about (not calling you pretentious btw).

I view games and gaming consoles as toys. I dont see the word toy as being a negative description. Just an accurate one.

Chess is a game typically played by adults and often considered a thinking mans game. Even so I still consider it a toy. That does not necessarily mean that it is childish, or immature to enjoy such a game.

I couldn't care less about the ideas held by non-gamers regarding video games. The world is full of ignorant people forming opinions and beliefs about things they do not know or understand. You just have to let it slide.

You're free to look at it however you like. I just see them as toys because they are played with. I'm not one who believes that only children have the right to play and have fun, or that adults have to always be serious and responsible.

As far as trying to make non-gamers see our hobby as something respectable, I just don't see it happening and frankly, I don't give a damn if they like it or understand it, because some people, most people will always see things differently and based on their own experiences and rarely will they ever try to see things from other's point of view.

In my personal experiences when dealing with non-gamers, I find them to be very hypocritical because they look down on gaming and say gamers are obsessive and hide from reality in their hobby, yet they turn around and obsess themselves in what celebrities are doing, or on shoes, or cars and so on.

Bigboi500

Very good points, and I actually agree with them.

The following questions aren't directed at you Bigboi500, I'm just trying to give some sort of view of what I'm asking here in general.

The only thing I'm arguing is perspective. In the sense that if you find video games toys, but not other forms of expression, then why is that distinction there? For instance, if I don't find a painting to be a toy, and since I've had more meaningful experiences playing games than looking at a lot of paintings, why would I consider games as toys and not those painting specificaly?

If they're toys to you, is it just the platform that they're one? Or the experience of the game itself?--depending on the game. Do you see the medium as a toy because games are superficial when in comparison to other mediums, and if so, wouldn't this kind of mentality be a significant cause for it?

Meh, I'm putting too much thought into it, maybe my view in the subject, is extremely biased:o

@stealthsting

I hate to give such a simple answer to your well thought out posts, but... they are video GAMES. Games that we PLAY.

sandbox3d

Hmm, with this I have a problem with. It was one of the reasons why I disagreed with Roger's general view on gaming. He based his assumptions of the gaming medium, on the name of the medium itself. You're right, it is, in a way, what we are essentially doing in a game. But can you make a distinction between Play or Games in relation to some of the experiences and feelings they can extract from us? What I mean is, would you say that it's reasonable to think that the name of the medium is superficial, in relation to some of the experiences it can offer?

If a game offers a very meaningful experience, why should the enteractivity within it only be viewed in relationship to playing. Which brings me to the point. What exactly is playing to you in a video game?

If it's starting to sound like some kind of meaningless take on Socratic method, I'm sorry, you're probably right. The argument won't take us anywhere, but it's interesting to think about it.

And hell, I'm starting to take this to the next level perhaps I shouldn't :lol:

They are simply a form of entertainment. Not something to put up on a pedestal and act all pretentious about (not calling you pretentious btw).

sandbox3d

Lol no need to be cautious, I know you're not(even though I can be sometimes), and I agree with the point.

I view games and gaming consoles as toys. I dont see the word toy as being a negative description. Just an accurate one.

Chess is a game typically played by adults and often considered a thinking mans game. Even so I still consider it a toy. That does not necessarily mean that it is childish, or immature to enjoy such a game.

I couldn't care less about the ideas held by non-gamers regarding video games. The world is full of ignorant people forming opinions and beliefs about things they do not know or understand. You just have to let it slide.

sandbox3d

I agree with this as well.

This mod is going to be so mad at me :P

Anyway, my post above kind of seems like a contradiction to some of the stances that I've had before--like people putting too much attention in the maturity value of video games in gerenal--and IT standing as an obstacle for its growth. I still stand by that view.

It's just that a lot of people in this thread are so quick to categorize video games as a toy, with the same commitment and ferver a lot of people place in how the medium should be viewed as a mature one. It seems like a kind of contradiction towards the whole mature argument. It's like reading Roger Ebert's take on video games not being art, without him classifiying what art is.

So my question would be, why exactly are video games toys to you? What is a toy to you? If a toy is close to a trifle to you, is the experience video games have offered you not much better than such a categorization? Have video games ever provided an experience that you remember fondly? Or more than other mediums out there?--both in significance and staying power?

Of course, I would expect a lot of other things in your life to take precedence over a video game, but I'm just curious to see what exactly makes it a toy in your opinion. I'm perfectly aware that this post will probably be ignored, but it would still be interesting to see some of the answers.

StealthSting

For me, a toy is an object that I interact with for the sheer pleasure of it. Thus, something like a car could be a toy if I just want to have fun driving it. Other cars, used more for transportation, would not be toys. ATV's, jetskis, and pleasure boats are mostly toys, though some people may use them for non-pleasure purposes.

Music, books, television, and movies are not interactive. My actions while listening, reading, or viewing these types of media have no affect on the outcome. Thus, I see these passive excersises as not toys. Cell phones are used as toys sometimes, and other times as tools. The same goes for computers.

Sometimes I watch movies on my 360, so it isn't always a toy, but it mainly is. On a few occasions, I used my Wii to make quick photo slideshows, but it is normally a toy as well.

Calling any of these items toys does not devalue them in any way. Cars that are more fun (more toy like) than other cars are more expensive and more desirable. Speed boats are more expensive than fishing boats. The same is true with cell phones and computers. A computer that is simply capable of running a word processor and spreadsheet program is far less expensive than a gaming machine.

So, I ask you, what is your concern with using the term "toy" when talking about gaming systems?

You can't "play" with a movie or TV, or books, or music, or art. They don't have rules, objectives, players, and so forth.

Games do, that's why they are toys. They are play things. They are puzzles and challenges. Much like sports.

To think that toys are only for kids is silly and immature. If people look down at games for being toys, that's not the game's fault, it's the person's fault.

Very good points, and I actually agree with them.

The following questions aren't directed at you Bigboi500, I'm just trying to give some sort of view of what I'm asking here in general.

The only thing I'm arguing is perspective. In the sense that if you find video games toys, but not other forms of expression, then why is that distinction there? For instance, if I don't find a painting to be a toy, and since I've had more meaningful experiences playing games than looking at a lot of paintings, why would I consider games as toys and not those painting specificaly?

If they're toys to you, is it just the platform that they're one? Or the experience of the game itself?--depending on the game. Do you see the medium as a toy because games are superficial when in comparison to other mediums, and if so, wouldn't this kind of mentality be a significant cause for it?

Meh, I'm putting too much thought into it, maybe my view in the subject, is extremely biased:o

StealthSting

They are toys because my or your experience does not change their nature. Hundreds of novels have been written inspired on D&D sessions, some of them are pretty damn good, but D&D is still a game, a toy, something you play with. I could intuitively learn a crapton of stuff about finances while playing Monopoly, but that won't magically make Monopoly an educational tool as valuable as Krugman's books. Monpoly will reamain a board game, a toy.

And no, video games are not art either. D&D books have incredibly awesome illustrations and you could say that some of those illustrations may have some artistic merit, but that doesn't make tabletop RPGs a form a art. Monopoly is a toy, D&D is a toy, video games are toys. That doesn't take anything away from any of those things; it's just what they are.

[QUOTE="GD1551"]

[QUOTE="KBFloYd"]

nintendo makes consoles and games that appeal to everyone...

if the wii is a toy then so is the ps3 and 360.

jimkabrhel

Nintendo only makes games for their fans and casuals. Sony is the only one tha provides games for everyone.