more dev support shifting to the Wii!! (bye bye next gen rofl)

[QUOTE="Teufelhuhn"]nor is any Final Fantasy only enjoyable because the combat sequences are "fun".

Dencore

Because the game sucks complete butt, that's why. Final Fantasy is a franchise that's completly built off of presentation and it is games like these that are soely ruining gaming.

[QUOTE="GunSmith1_basic"]you're over generalizing.The wii is not for casuals and non gamers only. Hardcore devs do not share your bias and will but a lot of deep gameplay on the wii, rest assured.subrosian

I'll admit this much: it is possible that the wii could turn out the way you say. I heard project hammer was cancelled so the studio could make casual games, and that the next zelda will be casualized. I also hear that nintendo is getting concerned because miyamoto has upped the difficulty on galaxy to the point where it will be the hardest mario game ever made. In the end, you would have to believe a lot of rumour to get caught up in this kind of specualation anyway.

I'm seeing people talking about a possible crash :o ... The speculation, will, of course, continue its course; it will only get worse from here on out... Just for some of you to not get a nervous attack, because we wouldn't want that :P :

"The shift does not represent any shunning of the Xbox or Sony consoles, but rather an elevation of the Wii's status - one that was clear in many conversations with developers and publishers at E3"

"I don't think you'll see any big shifts to one platform because you're supporting so many"

[QUOTE="Teufelhuhn"]nor is any Final Fantasy only enjoyable because the combat sequences are "fun".

Dencore

Because the game sucks complete butt, that's why. Final Fantasy is a franchise that's completly built off of presentation and it is games like these that are soely ruining gaming. People just don't know what makes a good video game anymore.

[QUOTE="Teufelhuhn"][QUOTE="GunSmith1_basic"]

So yes, it would be expensive to make a great game on the wii, but it would be many times more expensive to create a game of equal greatness on the ps3.

GunSmith1_basic

unless you mean if it were released as it were on the wii on the ps3, in which case, yes. It's all about exploiting hardware. On the ps3, if you want to stand out you have to invest piles of money programming every little detail in the game. On the wii, devs have to use their imaginations more in how to use the wiimote, and spend money on testing and researching the best way. The ps3 does not have the wii's unique hardware so it cannot duplicate thegame's experience any more than the wii could duplicate the amazing visuals in a ps3 game

[QUOTE="GunSmith1_basic"]you're over generalizing.The wii is not for casuals and non gamers only. Hardcore devs do not share your bias and will but a lot of deep gameplay on the wii, rest assured.subrosian

100 million people around the world bought the PS2. It was the ultimate casual/nongamer console. It recieved a lot of crap too. We are none the worse off for it. I think many in this thread are assuming things not explicitly stated in the article. The 5-6 Wii pitches in no way should mean they would take those millions and split it up.

I have a Wii and I really enjoy it. I agree thereare a lot of crap games for it. But dont you think that hypothetically speaking, if the PS3 was more afordable, those casual/nongamer PS2 owners would have bought scads of them? Therefpre; would we not be seeing the same influx of crap for the PS3?

You somehow added my name to a quote I did not use. >_>DaAznSaN

Lol, not sure how that happened. Sorry bout that. :oops:

That really disgusts me... but im sure that high budget titles will be found on the Wii.

I think people forget that when a market becomes crouded with small games tha, I am assuming, will make up a lot of mini-game collections, and arcade junk, that people stop buying it because they already have 3 other budget titles that do the same thing. When this happens higher budget titles have to fill in with larger and longer experiences where there are fewer games in that area.

If 3rd parties are successful with titles like Final Fantasy:tCB, Zack and Wiki, RE:UC, DQ:S, and Trauma Center, and developers see that... they will know that there is a market wanting meaty experiences.

This is why the delay of Manhunt 2 truely hurt the Wii... it could have easily opened up a new market for it that people were not aware of.

[QUOTE="GunSmith1_basic"][QUOTE="Teufelhuhn"][QUOTE="GunSmith1_basic"]

So yes, it would be expensive to make a great game on the wii, but it would be many times more expensive to create a game of equal greatness on the ps3.

Teufelhuhn

unless you mean if it were released as it were on the wii on the ps3, in which case, yes. It's all about exploiting hardware. On the ps3, if you want to stand out you have to invest piles of money programming every little detail in the game. On the wii, devs have to use their imaginations more in how to use the wiimote, and spend money on testing and researching the best way. The ps3 does not have the wii's unique hardware so it cannot duplicate thegame's experience any more than the wii could duplicate the amazing visuals in a ps3 game

but yes, exactly. A game like trauma center shows this well. That game is hard enough for any gamer, it took nothing to make really, and slicing and zapping with the wiimote is a blast. It is a current gen experience because it could not be duplicated last gen

[QUOTE="subrosian"][QUOTE="GunSmith1_basic"]you're over generalizing.The wii is not for casuals and non gamers only. Hardcore devs do not share your bias and will but a lot of deep gameplay on the wii, rest assured.gromit007

100 million people around the world bought the PS2. It was the ultimate casual/nongamer console. It recieved a lot of crap too. We are none the worse off for it. I think many in this thread are assuming things not explicitly stated in the article. The 5-6 Wii pitches in no way should mean they would take those millions and split it up.

I have a Wii and I really enjoy it. I agree thereare a lot of crap games for it. But dont you think that hypothetically speaking, if the PS3 was more afordable, those casual/nongamer PS2 owners would have bought scads of them? Therefpre; would we not be seeing the same influx of crap for the PS3?

[QUOTE="Dencore"]

[QUOTE="Teufelhuhn"]nor is any Final Fantasy only enjoyable because the combat sequences are "fun".

Teufelhuhn

Because the game sucks complete butt, that's why. Final Fantasy is a franchise that's completly built off of presentation and it is games like these that are soely ruining gaming. People just don't know what makes a good video game anymore.

That's just the thing, we haven't been using stick figures anymore, and people in games actually look like people. There really is no need to move on, as we move forward small devs are hurting, and THEY are the ones that make the hardcore games and they can't afford to go on. So people shove them to XBLA to make a bunch of simple games instead of making the REAL games they want to make like JRPG's, WRPG's, FPS's, Adventure Platformers, etc. Maybe most people don't agree with you that photorealistic graphics and real-life physics *pretty much every single game genre but the shooter has to have sur-real phyics and A.I.*, and the market is obviously showing this. So no, I'd say YOU are in the minority not me. Seriously your complaining about games not having "presentation"...

That really disgusts me... but im sure that high budget titles will be found on the Wii.

I think people forget that when a market becomes crouded with small games tha, I am assuming, will make up a lot of mini-game collections, and arcade junk, that people stop buying it because they already have 3 other budget titles that do the same thing. When this happens higher budget titles have to fill in with larger and longer experiences where there are fewer games in that area.

If 3rd parties are successful with titles like Final Fantasy:tCB, Zack and Wiki, RE:UC, DQ:S, and Trauma Center, and developers see that... they will know that there is a market wanting meaty experiences.

This is why the delay of Manhunt 2 truely hurt the Wii... it could have easily opened up a new market for it that people were not aware of.

kansasdude2009

"let's cancel Final Fantasy X, and instead make six less expensive projects." Why? Because FF X was the route to making a lot of money.

subrosian

This is seriously sig. worthy, your complaining about casual games and you use Final Fantasy X as an example of a "core" game? :lol:

What's next Kingdom Hearts?

what's ruining gaming is a publisher deciding to cancel the next series on the quality level of Final Fantasy, in exchange for six "Cooking Mama" clones.
subrosian

If a developer does make 6 Cooking Mama clones... they will not all sell. The DS is proof of this with its "Brain Age" games. Nintendo made A LOT of money off of the Brain Age games in Japan, America, and Europe. All of a sudden we have 6 other Brain Age titles coming to the DS from several 3rd party developers. Guess how they sold? Not even CLOSE to how Brain Age sold... because everyone already had a "brain" game.

Developers are not stupid... if a genre is filled to the brim... they know that there game wont sell. What they would need to do is make a unique experience for players to get interested in. In order to do that... they would split that 20 million and make 2 games for the Wii instead. They still make more money, and their game will sell better than another cooking mama clone.

[QUOTE="subrosian"]
what's ruining gaming is a publisher deciding to cancel the next series on the quality level of Final Fantasy, in exchange for six "Cooking Mama" clones.
kansasdude2009

If a developer does make 6 Cooking Mama clones... they will not all sell. The DS is proof of this with its "Brain Age" games. Nintendo made A LOT of money off of the Brain Age games in Japan, America, and Europe. All of a sudden we have 6 other Brain Age titles coming to the DS from several 3rd party developers. Guess how they sold? Not even CLOSE to how Brain Age sold... because everyone already had a "brain" game.

Developers are not stupid... if a genre is filled to the brim... they know that there game wont sell. What they would need to do is make a unique experience for players to get interested in. In order to do that... they would split that 20 million and make 2 games for the Wii instead. They still make more money, and their game will sell better than another cooking mama clone.

Fun fact every single minigame/casual third party game on the Wii *except Rayman* and last gen port *except RE4* has yet to break 100,000 out of the over dozen games that have.

Fun fact #2 the only games that have broke 200,000 on the Wii that are third party *except RE4* are all the games that were developed solely with the Wii in mind *Tiger, Sonic, Monkey Ball, etc.*

Ignore the fanboys, they're just pulling stuff out of there butt because they are too scared that they won't see their pretty graphics and won't kill all the small devs.

[QUOTE="subrosian"]
what's ruining gaming is a publisher deciding to cancel the next series on the quality level of Final Fantasy, in exchange for six "Cooking Mama" clones.
kansasdude2009

If a developer does make 6 Cooking Mama clones... they will not all sell. The DS is proof of this with its "Brain Age" games. Nintendo made A LOT of money off of the Brain Age games in Japan, America, and Europe. All of a sudden we have 6 other Brain Age titles coming to the DS from several 3rd party developers. Guess how they sold? Not even CLOSE to how Brain Age sold... because everyone already had a "brain" game.

Developers are not stupid... if a genre is filled to the brim... they know that there game wont sell. What they would need to do is make a unique experience for players to get interested in. In order to do that... they would split that 20 million and make 2 games for the Wii instead. They still make more money, and their game will sell better than another cooking mama clone.

[QUOTE="kansasdude2009"]

That really disgusts me... but im sure that high budget titles will be found on the Wii.

I think people forget that when a market becomes crouded with small games tha, I am assuming, will make up a lot of mini-game collections, and arcade junk, that people stop buying it because they already have 3 other budget titles that do the same thing. When this happens higher budget titles have to fill in with larger and longer experiences where there are fewer games in that area.

If 3rd parties are successful with titles like Final Fantasy:tCB, Zack and Wiki, RE:UC, DQ:S, and Trauma Center, and developers see that... they will know that there is a market wanting meaty experiences.

This is why the delay of Manhunt 2 truely hurt the Wii... it could have easily opened up a new market for it that people were not aware of.

subrosian

wow... doom theory indeed. History repeats itself I see? As this is your theory to the matter, I can not argue your opinion... but know that that is all it is, a theory.

I think it should be noted that this piece of information comes with no actual proof of this happening... of turning a 20 million dollar project into 5 separate projects. It should also be noted that developers with the resources of receiving 20 million dollars for a single game must be a highly intelligent developer who creates good games... this is a larger market then back in the 80's and larger developers, with the resources to compete with Nintendo's own 1st party line-up can.

I can understand you point... but good developers will not settle for mediocrity.

Subrosian, you do realize that because of the lighter hardware it costs alot less to make a game on the system right? It costs 30 million dollars to develop the average title on the 360 or ps3, while it only costs 5 million on the wii, same as games for last gen, but like last gen that doesn't automatically mean inferiority.yoshi-lnex

[QUOTE="kansasdude2009"]

[QUOTE="subrosian"]
what's ruining gaming is a publisher deciding to cancel the next series on the quality level of Final Fantasy, in exchange for six "Cooking Mama" clones.
subrosian

If a developer does make 6 Cooking Mama clones... they will not all sell. The DS is proof of this with its "Brain Age" games. Nintendo made A LOT of money off of the Brain Age games in Japan, America, and Europe. All of a sudden we have 6 other Brain Age titles coming to the DS from several 3rd party developers. Guess how they sold? Not even CLOSE to how Brain Age sold... because everyone already had a "brain" game.

Developers are not stupid... if a genre is filled to the brim... they know that there game wont sell. What they would need to do is make a unique experience for players to get interested in. In order to do that... they would split that 20 million and make 2 games for the Wii instead. They still make more money, and their game will sell better than another cooking mama clone.

If this happens, the Wii will simply die out. Good games will not stop existing because there are developers out there that are amazing and will not settle for this. If you are worried about the gaming industry as a whole, I really would not worry. This is not a total domination by nintendo...

I, personally do not see this happening for the same reason that Nintendo stopped it from happening by putting limits on their 3rd party developers back in the 80's. So, do not worry about the industry as a whole... but if you want to worry about the Wii... go ahead.

[QUOTE="subrosian"][QUOTE="kansasdude2009"]

That really disgusts me... but im sure that high budget titles will be found on the Wii.

I think people forget that when a market becomes crouded with small games tha, I am assuming, will make up a lot of mini-game collections, and arcade junk, that people stop buying it because they already have 3 other budget titles that do the same thing. When this happens higher budget titles have to fill in with larger and longer experiences where there are fewer games in that area.

If 3rd parties are successful with titles like Final Fantasy:tCB, Zack and Wiki, RE:UC, DQ:S, and Trauma Center, and developers see that... they will know that there is a market wanting meaty experiences.

This is why the delay of Manhunt 2 truely hurt the Wii... it could have easily opened up a new market for it that people were not aware of.

kansasdude2009

wow... doom theory indeed. History repeats itself I see? As this is your theory to the matter, I can not argue your opinion... but know that that is all it is, a theory.

I think it should be noted that this piece of information comes with no actual proof of this happening... of turning a 20 million dollar project into 5 separate projects. It should also be noted that developers with the resources of receiving 20 million dollars for a single game must be a highly intelligent developer who creates good games... this is a larger market then back in the 80's and larger developers, with the resources to compete with Nintendo's own 1st party line-up can.

I can understand you point... but good developers will not settle for mediocrity.

No. You're combining casual and non-gamer here as though they're the same audience, they're not. The non-gamer was not the focus of the PS2 - most developers were focusing their efforts on tapping that core gamer. Look at the JRPG library on the PS2, again, there's a reason for that. Square-Enix would never have said "let's cancel Final Fantasy X, and instead make six less expensive projects." Why? Because FF X was the route to making a lot of money.

Now, for the first time since the Atari, we're seeing the "shotgun" software development strategy. That means there's a different, unpredictable audience on the Wii, one they don't know how to target, so they're betting on quantity. With a hardcore / casual mix audience, you know where to target - you know to get Singstar out for the rhythm gamers, you know to get Final Fantasy out for the cores, and Ratchet & Clank and Madden out for the casuals.

Those games are silver bullets - they're all very effective sellers in their target demographics. What we have with the Wii are these "non-gamers" who (obviously) they're unable to target properly, so they're loading up their shotguns with loads of cheap titles, scared to take risks on a $15 million project, instead betting that half-a-dozen cheaper titles gives them more chance of success.

It's a different situation, we're getting a different kind of crap than the usual movie-based games and yearly Tony Hawk / Madden remake - we're getting crap that clogs the pipeline and prevents better games from getting through - we're getting quality titles actually ground up to make half-a-dozen lesser titles that can all be given that $50 pricetag and shoved out the door.
subrosian

I think you assume way too much. The article does in NO WAY state devs were going to take that money and split it among different projects. Its more like "Hey, we really need Wii pitches. We ignored Nintendo for too long with the 'Cube. Give us some pitches and we will gladly give you (an unspecified amount of) money to make two or three. We dont want to invest that much money fornon guaranteed moneymaker."

By a quick check, there were nearly 1800 games released for the PS2. Thats 4-5 games a week for that one system. Talk about 'shotgun' strategy. The VAST majority was utter crap. The game industry is still fine. BTW I owned a PS2.

[QUOTE="kansasdude2009"][QUOTE="subrosian"][QUOTE="kansasdude2009"]

That really disgusts me... but im sure that high budget titles will be found on the Wii.

I think people forget that when a market becomes crouded with small games tha, I am assuming, will make up a lot of mini-game collections, and arcade junk, that people stop buying it because they already have 3 other budget titles that do the same thing. When this happens higher budget titles have to fill in with larger and longer experiences where there are fewer games in that area.

If 3rd parties are successful with titles like Final Fantasy:tCB, Zack and Wiki, RE:UC, DQ:S, and Trauma Center, and developers see that... they will know that there is a market wanting meaty experiences.

This is why the delay of Manhunt 2 truely hurt the Wii... it could have easily opened up a new market for it that people were not aware of.

subrosian

wow... doom theory indeed. History repeats itself I see? As this is your theory to the matter, I can not argue your opinion... but know that that is all it is, a theory.

I think it should be noted that this piece of information comes with no actual proof of this happening... of turning a 20 million dollar project into 5 separate projects. It should also be noted that developers with the resources of receiving 20 million dollars for a single game must be a highly intelligent developer who creates good games... this is a larger market then back in the 80's and larger developers, with the resources to compete with Nintendo's own 1st party line-up can.

I can understand you point... but good developers will not settle for mediocrity.

If you gave an inteligent developers 2.5 million dollars to work with... they would spit in your face. Developers do have a say in what goes out in the market, because they make the titles. As I have said... good games will not stop from being made because there are good developers out there that will not accept a low budget.

If anything... the Wii will die out because of the flood of those titles. I dont think this will happen, but you never know. The PS3 and 360 are pretty much safe though.

I think you assume way too much. The article does in NO WAY state devs were going to take that money and split it among different projects. Its more like "Hey, we really need Wii pitches. We ignored Nintendo for too long with the 'Cube. Give us some pitches and we will gladly give you (an unspecified amount of) money to make two or three. We dont want to invest that much money fornon guaranteed moneymaker."

By a quick check, there were nearly 1800 games released for the PS2. Thats 4-5 games a week for that one system. Talk about 'shotgun' strategy. The VAST majority was utter crap. The game industry is still fine. BTW I owned a PS2.

gromit007

I seriously find the gaming community of today just flatout patheitc. Small developers MAKE the hardcore games, but oh yeah I forgot amazing level design or a skillful tacitiful combat system doesn't make a game "hardcore", voice acting and high res. graphics do.Dencore

You speak the Truth, FFXIII is so hardcore XD.

If you gave an inteligent developers 2.5 million dollars to work with... they would spit in your face. Developers do have a say in what goes out in the market, because they make the titles. As I have said... good games will not stop from being made because there are good developers out there that will not accept a low budget.

If anything... the Wii will die out because of the flood of those titles. I dont think this will happen, but you never know. The PS3 and 360 are pretty much safe though.

kansasdude2009

[QUOTE="gromit007"]

I think you assume way too much. The article does in NO WAY state devs were going to take that money and split it among different projects. Its more like "Hey, we really need Wii pitches. We ignored Nintendo for too long with the 'Cube. Give us some pitches and we will gladly give you (an unspecified amount of) money to make two or three. We dont want to invest that much money fornon guaranteed moneymaker."

By a quick check, there were nearly 1800 games released for the PS2. Thats 4-5 games a week for that one system. Talk about 'shotgun' strategy. The VAST majority was utter crap. The game industry is still fine. BTW I owned a PS2.

subrosian

you are seriously over blowing this. Let me ask... are you worried about the Wii or the Gaming industry?

[QUOTE="yoshi-lnex"]Subrosian, you do realize that because of the lighter hardware it costs alot less to make a game on the system right? It costs 30 million dollars to develop the average title on the 360 or ps3, while it only costs 5 million on the wii, same as games for last gen, but like last gen that doesn't automatically mean inferiority.subrosian

Quality has always helped to sell games, good ratings on gaming sites, magazines or simple word of mouth means more sales, and that wouldn't change simply because the avarage gamer is a bit more casual.

[QUOTE="gromit007"]

I think you assume way too much. The article does in NO WAY state devs were going to take that money and split it among different projects. Its more like "Hey, we really need Wii pitches. We ignored Nintendo for too long with the 'Cube. Give us some pitches and we will gladly give you (an unspecified amount of) money to make two or three. We dont want to invest that much money fornon guaranteed moneymaker."

By a quick check, there were nearly 1800 games released for the PS2. Thats 4-5 games a week for that one system. Talk about 'shotgun' strategy. The VAST majority was utter crap. The game industry is still fine. BTW I owned a PS2.

subrosian

But why, ultimately, does the industry NEED $30 million dollar games in order keep going? And you did not replay to the 1800 PS2 titles part. It is sad to assume that a gamer can just take for granted that the Wii wont have any good titles coming.

[QUOTE="subrosian"][QUOTE="gromit007"]

I think you assume way too much. The article does in NO WAY state devs were going to take that money and split it among different projects. Its more like "Hey, we really need Wii pitches. We ignored Nintendo for too long with the 'Cube. Give us some pitches and we will gladly give you (an unspecified amount of) money to make two or three. We dont want to invest that much money fornon guaranteed moneymaker."

By a quick check, there were nearly 1800 games released for the PS2. Thats 4-5 games a week for that one system. Talk about 'shotgun' strategy. The VAST majority was utter crap. The game industry is still fine. BTW I owned a PS2.

kansasdude2009

you are seriously over blowing this. Let me ask... are you worried about the Wii or the Gaming industry?

[QUOTE="Dencore"]I seriously find the gaming community of today just flatout patheitc. Small developers MAKE the hardcore games, but oh yeah I forgot amazing level design or a skillful tacitiful combat system doesn't make a game "hardcore", voice acting and high res. graphics do.GundamGuy0

You speak the Truth, FFXIII is so hardcore XD.

Final Fantasy = :lol:

Square-Enix = :lol:

Mistwalker = :lol:

Eternal Sonata = :lol:

I can't believe that people actually believe that these are hardcore games.

[QUOTE="subrosian"][QUOTE="yoshi-lnex"]Subrosian, you do realize that because of the lighter hardware it costs alot less to make a game on the system right? It costs 30 million dollars to develop the average title on the 360 or ps3, while it only costs 5 million on the wii, same as games for last gen, but like last gen that doesn't automatically mean inferiority.yoshi-lnex

Quality has always helped to sell games, good ratings on gaming sites, magazines or simple word of mouth means more sales, and that wouldn't change simply because the avarage gamer is a bit more casual.

[QUOTE="yoshi-lnex"]

[QUOTE="subrosian"][QUOTE="yoshi-lnex"]Subrosian, you do realize that because of the lighter hardware it costs alot less to make a game on the system right? It costs 30 million dollars to develop the average title on the 360 or ps3, while it only costs 5 million on the wii, same as games for last gen, but like last gen that doesn't automatically mean inferiority.subrosian

Quality has always helped to sell games, good ratings on gaming sites, magazines or simple word of mouth means more sales, and that wouldn't change simply because the avarage gamer is a bit more casual.

If that were to happen, I'd imagine that that the big 3 would come up with restrictions on how many games a company can publish within a certain period of time. Nintendo did that right after the crash with a market of nothing butcasuals and people buying games at random, and that turned out fine.

Also, the better established companys aren't going to allow for dips in quality themselfs because they know that there is a large "gaming community" that is well informed and would stop buying their games.

Well the people working at best buy are, in general, gaming nerds, so it's up to them to save us it seems :cry:

If that were to happen, I'd imagine that that the big 3 would come up with restrictions on how many games a company can publish within a certain period of time. Nintendo did that right after the crash with a market of nothing butcasuals and people buying games at random, and that turned out fine.

Also, the better established companys aren't going to allow for dips in quality themselfs because they know that there is a large "gaming community" that is well informed and would stop buying their games.

yoshi-lnex

At some point in their life, all gamers were nongamers. So yes, lets get rid of the nongamers and put the brakes on this reckless industry. We dont need the noobs ruining the fun for all of us. Gaming is ours, and shall be FOREVER. hhahahahahaha

sarcasm...in case your detectors are broken

At some point in their life, all gamers were nongamers. So yes, lets get rid of the nongamers and put the brakes on this reckless industry. We dont need the noobs ruining the fun for all of us. Gaming is ours, and shall be FOREVER. hhahahahahaha

sarcasm...in case your detectors are broken

gromit007

That's just the thing, we haven't been using stick figures anymore, and people in games actually look like people. There really is no need to move on, as we move forward small devs are hurting, and THEY are the ones that make the hardcore games and they can't afford to go on. So people shove them to XBLA to make a bunch of simple games instead of making the REAL games they want to make like JRPG's, WRPG's, FPS's, Adventure Platformers, etc.

Dencore

Maybe most people don't agree with you that photorealistic graphics and real-life physics *pretty much every single game genre but the shooter has to have sur-real phyics and A.I.*, and the market is obviously showing this. So no, I'd say YOU are in the minority not me. Seriously your complaining about games not having "presentation"...

Dencore

[QUOTE="gromit007"]

At some point in their life, all gamers were nongamers. So yes, lets get rid of the nongamers and put the brakes on this reckless industry. We dont need the noobs ruining the fun for all of us. Gaming is ours, and shall be FOREVER. hhahahahahaha

sarcasm...in case your detectors are broken

subrosian

But that wasn't your definition a few posts up...

"Not casual. NON-GAMER. They're not casuals, they're people who quite literally are new to videogaming."

Everyones gotta start somewhere. Even people that think the PS3 or 360is the best thing to happen to gaming had to be a nongamer at some point. Thats what makes the industry...new gamers.

[QUOTE="GundamGuy0"]

[QUOTE="Dencore"]I seriously find the gaming community of today just flatout patheitc. Small developers MAKE the hardcore games, but oh yeah I forgot amazing level design or a skillful tacitiful combat system doesn't make a game "hardcore", voice acting and high res. graphics do.Dencore

You speak the Truth, FFXIII is so hardcore XD.

Final Fantasy = :lol:

Square-Enix = :lol:

Mistwalker = :lol:

Eternal Sonata = :lol:

I can't believe that people actually believe that these are hardcore games.

Ugh, I have nothing against Nintendo and I love a few of their first party franchises (I grew up with them after all) but this is horrible news for gamers IMO.

Instead of making a decent to superb game on the 360/PS3 many developers will now use that one game's budget to make 5 or 6 poor cash-in titles on the Wii. When a huge portion of your demographic is non-gamers you don't even have to worry about quality, just pump out 5 or 6 mediocre titles and they'll sell like mad.

I don't blame the developers, they're just trying to run their businesses in the most financially sensible ways possible.... but this will be a horrible trend for actual gamers if it comes to fruition.

[QUOTE="subrosian"][QUOTE="gromit007"]

At some point in their life, all gamers were nongamers. So yes, lets get rid of the nongamers and put the brakes on this reckless industry. We dont need the noobs ruining the fun for all of us. Gaming is ours, and shall be FOREVER. hhahahahahaha

sarcasm...in case your detectors are broken

gromit007

But that wasn't your definition a few posts up...

"Not casual. NON-GAMER. They're not casuals, they're people who quite literally are new to videogaming."

Everyones gotta start somewhere. Even people that think the PS3 or 360is the best thing to happen to gaming had to be a nongamer at some point. Thats what makes the industry...new gamers.

But why does gaming NEED these huge budgets? I see it as a step towards bankruptcy myself. You gotta look at the dangers of both sides.

With that...g'night.