Preaching to the Choir

 Pages 1 2 NEXT
 

Preaching to the Choir

Why don't we make games for anybody but gamers anymore?

Read Full Article

Well, if we don't keep those darn gamers apart and warring with each other, they might...you know... let people know that games are not just for spotty herberts in their parents basement.

And then where would we be? Games winning awards, being treated as important mediums for messages, allowed reign to explore thoughts and ideals other than our little categorizations? It doesn't bear thinking about.

We need to tell people which games are the ones we want them to play and which are the EVIL SATANIC ones which MAKE YOU KILL PEOPLE, and that's why we invented the word "casual". That and the fact that "as addictive as crack" was poo-poo'ed by our test audience.

"Casual" games, of course, aren't real games. They're perfectly safe. Keep buying those expansions, citizens.

I completely agree with the article all the way. I'd like to see games start being for everyone again. not just for one so-called 'group' or the other. As long as we keep these useless labels, the industry is in trouble.

The_root_of_all_evil:
Well, if we don't keep those darn gamers apart and warring with each other, they might...you know... let people know that games are not just for spotty herberts in their parents basement.

And then where would we be? Games winning awards, being treated as important mediums for messages, allowed reign to explore thoughts and ideals other than our little categorizations? It doesn't bear thinking about.

We need to tell people which games are the ones we want them to play and which are the EVIL SATANIC ones which MAKE YOU KILL PEOPLE, and that's why we invented the word "casual". That and the fact that "as addictive as crack" was poo-poo'ed by our test audience.

"Casual" games, of course, aren't real games. They're perfectly safe. Keep buying those expansions, citizens.

I knew there was a reason you were on my friends list :p

My good sir, one internets is being shipped to your location as we speak, for you have, fairly and honourably, won it.

Chipperz:

I knew there was a reason you were on my friends list :p

My good sir, one internets is being shipped to your location as we speak, for you have, fairly and honourably, won it.

Murky buckets. :)

Finally a reason to stop worrying about what games one players but instead encourage uniting and celebrating our hobby. The video game industry and the lucky few that made it in making all these huge decisions are really causing some major problems that founders of the industry would be shaking their head at. Yes one can market to a demographic but it is another thing to ensure that the game will make people want to play.

I love it how people are calling the New Super Mario bros wii "casual". By all intents and purposes calling Mario and casual does not really compute the same could be said if the word hardcore is applied. True Mario games can be hard (godforbid anyone who sweated past the entire Mario bros games without warp pipes) but they were fun to play despite their simplicity.

I just find that people in the new media and bloggers are more prone to hate instead of loving their passion and support the passion of others. People have made fans from hate but that is not right. My friend's website does everything he can to hate the wii and games for the wii despite the risks companies are making like the conduit to try to solidify the foundation that Red Steel left behind. Yet he embraces the iphone and all games created because it has "better" graphics. Hate like this should be shunned and not supported when people look for an audience.

We as gamers are much better off embracing a better lifestyle showing gamers are anything but shut-ins.

One day, all games will work on all consoles without requiring your to buy all three. Then, we can talk about gaming as a truly accessible mass market. Because only then, will publishers stop focusing development of games for specific consoles dependent on its perceived audience. Till then, the "casuals" will buy their Wii because its the only game that has a decently sized catalog of games that arnt aimed at indoctrinated gamers (Nintendo themselves perhaps being the exception, but since their games are exclusive to their consoles that doesnt matter); then find that theres nothing else available to take the next step without requiring a 200+ investment to buy the console that might have a game on it they'll like.

Christian Ward:
Had you filmed it, it would have looked just like one of those slightly pretentious Wii commercials (only with more alcohol and considerably more swearing), but it was one of the most entertaining evenings of gaming I've had in a long time.

Booze makes most gaming experiences better, but it's probably most fun when the audience is as invested into the game as the player is.


One of the things that a lot of people seem to be missing is that there are fewer "casual" games coming from Nintendo these days. Brain Age/Academy, Wii Play, Nintendogs, Warioware, all these sold well, but Nintendo hasn't made any more. The only people who are still making casual games for the Wii/DS are third-party publishers. Nintendo is moving away from casual games and taking a step towards "core" gameplay. Like you said, people call Mario games casual, but ask someone if they got every star, or equivalent, in any particular game, and they will say that that's only for people with too much time on their hands. It's not even a pure time investment, either. You have to be really good at Mario to be able to collect everything, so it's not just grinding, but people don't recognise it as a hard game because it's got more than three colors.

With Zelda and Metriod on the way, there iare going to be plenty of games for the people clamoring for non-casual games, but they will probably still complain because third-party studios will continue to make crappy games that nobody wants. Nintendo has acknowledged, publicly at E3, even, that they won't be targeting the non-gamers anymore because they've convinced as many people as they can to buy a Wii. What they are going to do now is start focusing more and more on getting the people who only own Wii Sports to buy and play other games. This is going to end up with Nintendo making titles similar to what the 360 and PS3 have now, but with a larger customer base while everybody else is still going to be trying to attract people with casual games and motion controls.

Cousin_IT:
One day, all games will work on all consoles without requiring your to buy all three. Then, we can talk about gaming as a truly accessible mass market. Because only then, will publishers stop focusing development of games for specific consoles dependent on its perceived audience. Till then, the "casuals" will buy their Wii because its the only game that has a decently sized catalog of games that arnt aimed at indoctrinated gamers (Nintendo themselves perhaps being the exception, but since their games are exclusive to their consoles that doesnt matter); then find that theres nothing else available to take the next step without requiring a 200+ investment to buy the console that might have a game on it they'll like.

See my above post on what Nintendo's doing in the long run. The reason Wii Sports is so popular, apart forom being "free," is that it's easy to understand how to play and is more fun to people who have not gotten into gaming than simply pushing buttons is. Nintendo hasn't actually released many, if any at all, "casual" games for a while and are starting to focus on getting the people who bought the Wii for tennis to try out other, more complicated, games. Once Nintendo moves it's attention towards these more complex games, like FPS's or action games, then they will have an audience that likes their console and will be able to play "core" games without buying more hardware. You can't say that the only thing Nintendo is good for right now is casual games unless you think that 100% completion of Mario Galaxy is easy.

randommaster:

Cousin_IT:
One day, all games will work on all consoles without requiring your to buy all three. Then, we can talk about gaming as a truly accessible mass market. Because only then, will publishers stop focusing development of games for specific consoles dependent on its perceived audience. Till then, the "casuals" will buy their Wii because its the only game that has a decently sized catalog of games that arnt aimed at indoctrinated gamers (Nintendo themselves perhaps being the exception, but since their games are exclusive to their consoles that doesnt matter); then find that theres nothing else available to take the next step without requiring a 200+ investment to buy the console that might have a game on it they'll like.

See my above post on what Nintendo's doing in the long run. The reason Wii Sports is so popular, apart forom being "free," is that it's easy to understand how to play and is more fun to people who have not gotten into gaming than simply pushing buttons is. Nintendo hasn't actually released many, if any at all, "casual" games for a while and are starting to focus on getting the people who bought the Wii for tennis to try out other, more complicated, games. Once Nintendo moves it's attention towards these more complex games, like FPS's or action games, then they will have an audience that likes their console and will be able to play "core" games without buying more hardware. You can't say that the only thing Nintendo is good for right now is casual games unless you think that 100% completion of Mario Galaxy is easy.

Im not saying Nintendo is only marketing to "casuals"; Im saying the Wii is the "casual" console, & there is no reason to buy a 360 or ps3 unless u are already a fully converted gamer who either owned a Ps2/Xbox/Gamecube, or u had an older sibling who did. Nintendo's established franchises are all aimed at a more "hardcore" audience. Indeed Mario, Zelda etc have been around longer than the current idea of "hardcore" gamers. But this article isnt about are Nintendo abandoning the "hardcore;" Its why is there this mutually exclusive distinction between hardcore & casual, with a gaping chasm in between (&, by extension, why the Wii's massive success doesnt translate into the Xbox360 & Ps3 selling more). I think the answer is that the industry, & thus the marketing which influences the consumers purchasing habits, has decreed that the Wii is the casual console, & the other two are for the hardcores. Consequently, every advert u see for a Wii game is Wii-Sports or Samba Di Amigo etc, while every Xbox/Ps3 game is COD4 etc. This means that those wanting to take the first step into gaming will go for the Wii, & find they havent a clue what to do next.


Oops, I kind of forgot to mention that part. Nintendo's looking to fill the gap between the core and casual games/gamers, but it will probably be another year or so until everyone notices. Once this happens, we will probably see an end of the categorizing of consoles for this generation.

They still want to be the "family console" in that they have good local multiplayer that you play with people in your house, so we will probably still have ads of people playing together, but we will probably also see more ads that focus on gameplay when it comes to core games.

I would happily describe myself as a casual gamer, but that doesn't mean anyone could predict which games (or consoles) I'd like and which I wouldn't. I've fallen for a number of games intended for the 'core audience'; I just play them casually.

See, if more designers were willing to see things like this, then gaming would probably stop being blamed for every single killing spree that takes place in America.

When I got in to gaming, these labels didn't even exist yet nor the concepts they are attached to.
In the early 1980s, one could catch sight of the occasional businessman or parents plunking a few quarters into a Pong or Pac-Man cabinet to unwind for a few minutes before returning to the grind of the Reagan-era workplace or house work.
They seemed to be viewed the same as a ping-pong or air hockey table or a pinball machine, amusements located in places where people congregate after the workday or school which gave everyone an activity to promote or reinforce social bonding with.
The Wii and handheld gaming devices could be the best bet for bringing this missing element back to gaming. The biggest problem with the Wii,directly related to developers not doing enough to cater to the Wii's strengths and over-reliance on toned down imports from other consoles,is a lack of quality to go along with that line-up diversity. It is doubtful that the developers which cater the the 'hardcore' are even capable of doing anything with a new control scheme. Maybe the Wii needs a tool such as XNA to allow independent developers and amateurs to produce games, making the system more accessible in terms of both games and the console itself. If they did, then they shouldn't be too strict with ratings systems, just quality control and game testing.
Now, if someone could figure out how to make a game with heavy socialization and immersion such as World of Warcraft or the Sims which is as accessible as Tetris (maybe some kind of online massively multi-player enabled arcade game?),it would probably bring waves of new blood in and end up in rec-rooms and laundromats across the globe (where such things exist,anyway).

I think the biggest issue is still money. I mean, why would a company like THQ bother putting in the hours and work it would take to make that kind of game when they can hash out a cheap, shovelware "casual" game and make loads of money with it anyway? Then focus another division to making the games that will appeal to the gaming "core" to get as much money out of them as possible! Big companies like THQ don't care about gamers or lessening the divide. They care about money and how they can get the most of it.

From the article "Core Games, Kids/Family/Casual Games, and Online." I definitely understand the separation between core game(r)s and casual/social/party game(r)s but what I do not understand is why there is a separate online section. What is that supposed to mean? Can't core games and casual games be online too? Are online games more for core gamers? What's up with that?

This has sort of mixed into my mind with a posting at the play this thing blog.

http://playthisthing.com/expert-problem-0

The industry is so filled with experts who know exactly what sort of game to make and how to market it that to the point that most of them cannot take a step back and just make a good new game for anybody who might want to play it. I think that some of the more vocal players are crippled by their own expertise as well. If a game doesn't look a certain way, play a certain way and have a certain type of content then the people who made it are "doing it wrong" and their fellow game buyers who enjoy it are retards.

Anyway I hate titles like casual or hardcore depending on how many hours a week you play. Some weeks there is nothing worth playing. Other weeks I have trouble going to bed because I just want to go that little bit longer.
Ya know what one of the best games I have played this year is? Plants vs Zombies. Shove that up your pretentious "hardcore" ass pipe and smoke it.

I hate to be the one who brings up Nintendo all the time but "core" has a definition. It's not a gaming-specific concept, it's a term for the old market in a disruption scenario. Core is NOT the opposite of "casual", it is the opposite of the new market. The expanded market is defined by its different values. In gaming the core market is the one that's pushing graphics while the new market is pushing controls as their primary value.

The difference between this split and the hardcore-casual split is that a game like The Conduit is not a core game. It is a game whose primary selling point is the interface, the improved controls. Sure, it has nice graphics but those are just a secondary value and wouldn't be enough to compete with the real core games since those still have better graphics. However none of the core games with HD graphics (outside of the PC which got disrupted back in the NES era) can compete with The Conduit's control scheme, being stuck with dual analog controls which are significantly inferior to the Wiimote for FPS controls. The Conduit exceeds core games at its primary value (which is not a part of the core market values) while losing out on the core market values.

If this sounds too much like marketing and business to you it's because that's what it is. Core is not about culture or art, it's a business term and that's the context it matters in. BTW, just being on the Wii doesn't automatically make something for the new market, it depends on the values a game tries to sell itself on (or more exactly which the customer buys it for which can often differ from what the designers of the game intended).

Tenmar:
I love it how people are calling the New Super Mario bros wii "casual". By all intents and purposes calling Mario and casual does not really compute the same could be said if the word hardcore is applied. True Mario games can be hard (godforbid anyone who sweated past the entire Mario bros games without warp pipes) but they
were fun to play despite their simplicity.

No, Super Mario Bros and really all arcade/NES era games were casual. Because casual means simple and arcade-like. Hardcore games are not arcade-like anymore, they're driven by constant progress and cinematics more than the basic challenge of progressing. Difficulty does not make a hardcore game, if you've ever seen a casual gamer get into a game you'll notice they hone it to perfection and often play it for WAAAAAAAAY longer than a hardcore gamer would because casual gamers have longer attention spans for individual games. Try playing Tetris against a casual gamer who loves Tetris, chances are you'll get slaughtered (and NEVER challenge my sister to a game of online mill). Casual gamers play individual games hardcore, hardcore gamers play individual games casually. Blame the people who made these labels up for the inconsistency.

BTW, I'm not sure I'd still call 3D Mario casual, it's leagues more complex and never was as popular as 2D Mario which is why they're FINALLY making a new 2D Mario for the Wii.

randommaster:
Nintendo has acknowledged, publicly at E3, even, that they won't be targeting the non-gamers anymore because they've convinced as many people as they can to buy a Wii.

Sorry but I'll have to call Citation Needed on that.

Every word of this article was truth. It's like the game industry in general, in their quest for the uber-hardcore game, has forgotten the very things that got them into gaming to begin with. (I'm sure a lot of people in the industry now grew up playing Super Mario Bros, after all.)

Try shooting for the ur-game instead of the uber-game, it might get more people.

My opinion?

Part of the issue is that games are not for fun anymore, its big business with all the corperate rubbish that comes with business.
We are talking Capital Investment, Corperate Ventures, Gains and Losses, Viable Market Strategy... when games first come out it was usually more words like... Fun , Playability , Optimised , Bug Free , Demos...

This is because it costs so much these days to make a game, it isnt a case of is the game fun these days, the big question is 'will it bring a return on the investment?'.
A lot of the greatest games of yesterday were created by individuals and small basement/garage studio groups, even seperated mod groups... when the games didnt have a multi million dollar development budget.

I say look to the independant game scene for the next great game, and try look beyond the freeware software generated graphics, and the downloaded midi tunes and free soundFX library sounds... and just see if the game is fun, are you enjoying playing it.

ASnogarD:
My opinion?

Part of the issue is that games are not for fun anymore, its big business with all the corperate rubbish that comes with business.
We are talking Capital Investment, Corperate Ventures, Gains and Losses, Viable Market Strategy... when games first come out it was usually more words like... Fun , Playability , Optimised , Bug Free , Demos...

This is because it costs so much these days to make a game, it isnt a case of is the game fun these days, the big question is 'will it bring a return on the investment?'.
A lot of the greatest games of yesterday were created by individuals and small basement/garage studio groups, even seperated mod groups... when the games didnt have a multi million dollar development budget.

Games have always been a business ever since Nolan Bushnell got rich by marketing the ideas someone else had. What went wrong is that many game companies are apparently run by clueless dipshits who completely forget what the customer is in this for and then wonder why their latest looks-so-real-but-plays-like-crap game doesn't perform to expectations. It's like they're running in a herd, trying to take first place in the herd but never really checking where the herd is going, just assuming that somebody has to know where it's supposed to go and will guide it the right way. Like any business it's about figuring out what a significant number of customers want and giving them that but the games industry seems to have forgotten about the customer somewhere along the way when DRM was invented. Now it seems everybody is following his own ideas of what people should want, whether they go for things that are predictably easy to make (good graphics) or things that stroke their own ego (artistic games) and when one of the games manages, more by accident than by design, to give a large number of people what they want they then attribute that success to the value the company has been pursuing without checking if that's what the customers have been buying it for. Often a failed "dumbed down" sequel fails because the people in charge failed to realize why their product sold and destroyed that value in a quest of making it more "mass market friendly" (which just means following the herd).

This was best demonstrated when the Wii came along and brought customers that didn't react to the traditional stimuli, the industry was just standing there confused because they had no idea how to actually figure out the customer's needs. Instead of analyzing the situation they just go "Wii owners are casual and don't buy games" or "only Nintendo games sell on Nintendo consoles" and form a herd around any bit of wisdom they can find, namely any Nintendo "casual" game that manages to sell. Then they misanalyze WHY those games sold and instead think that "casual gamers want minigame collections". Even better when they also talk about how casual gamers are supposedly retards who have no idea about quality.

Prehaps we should say then that the issue stems rather from the manner the studios and publishers have merged in many cases, whereas we used to have a studio who designed games and a publisher who then sold the games as products to the public... we could say that we now have publishers that own studios that make products for the publisher to market.

... in the end its accountants that dictate the direction and manner of gaming.

ASnogarD:
Prehaps we should say then that the issue stems rather from the manner the studios and publishers have merged in many cases, whereas we used to have a studio who designed games and a publisher who then sold the games as products to the public... we could say that we now have publishers that own studios that make products for the publisher to market.

... in the end its accountants that dictate the direction and manner of gaming.

Them and the PR people.

KDR_11k:

randommaster:
Nintendo has acknowledged, publicly at E3, even, that they won't be targeting the non-gamers anymore because they've convinced as many people as they can to buy a Wii.

Sorry but I'll have to call Citation Needed on that.

It was at this year's E3. I believe it was Fils-Amie who said that they've convinced all the non-gamers that they could to start again, so now they are going after the core market.

I'll get back to you with the citation, but you can faind it on this site.

Whilst I agree in principle with your argument, the day the middle stage between 'casual' and 'hardcore' appear is the day all our games go the way of Deus Ex 2 - dumbed down junk replacing the sprawling levels and multi-choice plot with shiny graphics and even more dead-eyed-ness in the NPCs.

Of course, the 'hardcore' can't survive forever without fresh blood, and I suspect that we'll get this if we like it or not.

Doug:
Whilst I agree in principle with your argument, the day the middle stage between 'casual' and 'hardcore' appear is the day all our games go the way of Deus Ex 2 - dumbed down junk replacing the sprawling levels and multi-choice plot with shiny graphics and even more dead-eyed-ness in the NPCs.

Of course, the 'hardcore' can't survive forever without fresh blood, and I suspect that we'll get this if we like it or not.

The current hardcore were raised up from non-gamers over the development of gaming. The games for all levels of experience can be found in that past. Go to the early years of gaming to find games for beginners, go a bit closer to now to find the games for intermediate gamers and go to now to find the absurdly complex preaching-to-the-choir games.

KDR_11k:

Doug:
Whilst I agree in principle with your argument, the day the middle stage between 'casual' and 'hardcore' appear is the day all our games go the way of Deus Ex 2 - dumbed down junk replacing the sprawling levels and multi-choice plot with shiny graphics and even more dead-eyed-ness in the NPCs.

Of course, the 'hardcore' can't survive forever without fresh blood, and I suspect that we'll get this if we like it or not.

The current hardcore were raised up from non-gamers over the development of gaming. The games for all levels of experience can be found in that past. Go to the early years of gaming to find games for beginners, go a bit closer to now to find the games for intermediate gamers and go to now to find the absurdly complex preaching-to-the-choir games.

True, but you do realise that rather than developing games for the 'hardcore' AND the 'casuals', the developers will on average switch purely to the casuals, especially if the 'casuals' are as easy to please with as the games on the Wii suggest.

I think the reason why game designers tend to focus on the "core" demographic is rooted in the fact that these guys are gamers who design things that they would want to play. Last I knew, guys who enter the games business don't go there because their parents told them they would make lots of money there. I don't think you'll find the same passion in guys who are aching to tap into the divide between casual and core. The guys that monster demographic will attract are the business-centric types, who are looking to maximize their investment regardless of what medium it is in.

I read the article, and I agree with it. We need nuanced games targeted at a "casual" audience.

Like Puzzle Quest.

Wait . . . I actually had a very similar conversation with friends less than a week ago. We all wondered why there were so many games made for casual players and "non-gamers" and what had become of the Hardcore Gamer as a market base. We were all in agreement that the demographic focus had shifted to the much larger subset of the Non-Gamer and shared a collective sense of dread as we traced the trend away from the kind of games we, as hardcore gamers, enjoyed.

I really don't know what industry you have been watching, but as far as my 360 is concerned I can count on my fingers the number of decent games targeted at a hardcore audience that have been released since Jan '08 and there weren't exactly a huge number in '07 or '06 either. Certainly the Wii has had fewer than 5, and I'm guessing that the PS3 isn't making up the difference. I can't imagine that there could possibly be a need for MORE non-gamer games, so to speak. Am I missing some irony here, or ?

Doug:
True, but you do realise that rather than developing games for the 'hardcore' AND the 'casuals', the developers will on average switch purely to the casuals, especially if the 'casuals' are as easy to please with as the games on the Wii suggest.

I think the "easy to please" thing is a myth anyway. Shovelware on the Wii occasionally sells but rarely consistently while Nintendo's "casual" offerings are breaking records. Wii Fit is approaching the PS3's total installed base! I don't see any third party games making that kind of impact and I don't think it's just the Nintendo name there (because Nintendo hasn't been a major name outside of gaming for at least a decade so I doubt these new gamers have much brand recognition for the name alone). Third parties lack a clue what makes "casual" games really sell and if you look at games like Plants vs Zombies, reportedly Pop Cap's best selling game, you'll notice that a game that works for all audiences sells better than one that thinks people fit neatly into these brackets. Let's keep in mind that Nintendo has ALWAYS said they're making games for everyone and that they're merely expanding the scope of that everyone, not that they're making "casual" games. They don't specifically shun veteran gamers and you'll even see many veterans who do enjoy the games that also appeal to the new gamers (Mario Kart is also among them BTW).

Shunning one audience for the other is a bad idea, a game that can be enjoyed by both is the best bet and quite possible though requiring skill on the part of the game developer. Of course some people will complain that the games are childish or something but those are a tiny minority and can safely be ignored, the vast majority of gamers from all levels of experience doesn't care.

"Why don't we make GAMES for anybody but GAMERS anymore?." you answered your own question......
Core gamers don't care if they make casual games, Core gamers care when the games they love get screwed over to accommodate casual players.

Christian Ward:
Preaching to the Choir

Why don't we make games for anybody but gamers anymore?

Read Full Article

Boy oh boy oh boy. I feel about two feet tall after reading that article (I'm actually a smidgen over six foot nothing in real life). What elitist snobs we gamers (and games designers) are!

Oh wait... except that we're really, really not.

- If any single voice derides the "n00b" in a Steam forum, they get corrected immediately by the masses of sane, sensible people who understand that for an online game to be successful, it needs as big and as dedicated a community as possible.

- I've been to LAN parties and play a few online games now, and I've never yet heard anybody even use the term "casual" games, let alone use it with contempt.

- Not only do most of the males of my age that I know play videogames occasionally, so do a lot of the females. It's just different games. And bar a little ribbing (generally directed from people at other people who play the same types of games - WoW addicts jostling each other for example) there's no belittlement from either side. People accept each others' different tastes and get on with each other despite those tastes, imagine that!

Y'know, we live in an age where factory workers and manual labourers not only have the ability to read (something that would have been unimaginable five hundred years ago) but can pick up anything from the latest John Grisham thriller to a renaissance-age classic in their local newsagent or railway station. We're in a golden age of literature, on a scale that's never been seen before, and one that will probably keep growing thanks to the Internet and other recent technologies. We have more choice than ever before. And yet so-called "critics" are STILL whinging about the "dumbing down" of books and reading in general.

Well, look at the games market. In the past week I've played a couple of classic games released years ago (System Shock 2, Transport Tycoon); an online flash game developed by a guy in his bedroom; a multi-layered epic RPG blockbuster, and two online community-based games that I can pick up and play whenever I want to, no hassle involved. I could point you to websites that review the latest indie games or blockbuster games; I could provide details of other sites that sell new games, old games, online games, classic games... the list is endless. And we're not supposed to be catering to the MAINSTREAM?

Please.

If there's one thing more irritating than "elitism", it's people who make a huge deal out of problems that don't actually exist.

Whooaaa there buddy who wrote this article. You mean the balls to not give a damn about the millions of other fair weather fans who will not buy your game or sequels, will possibly burn it, download it, and then bad talk it online? You want someone to put gaming in the hands of the sheep? You sound like a wolf my friend. Do you work for EA or something?

Let the sheep play their Wii and DS Parker Bros. games man, they break that bad boy out on the regular. Let the ignorants play Xbox 360 that will break if you play it too long. I had to play Mass Effect in 2 hour installments. I guess the Xbox 360 is built to help you save on your light bill.

There is no complaining now dude. If you got the money, you can buy PS3 or a PC and enjoy hardcore games like MGS4, Left 4 Dead, Crysis, FF XIII and eventually XIV. Shit if you are really strapped for cash and want some crack real quick, the PS2 is still churning out games with a hardcore library that rivals Dreamcast and the original PS.

I know what is really going on. People want these hardcore super graphics games to be cheaper. Noooooo my friend. If you can't afford to pay the 60-70 price tag each month for the best looking games, then go play that Warcraft or FFXI. If you are too broke to cop a PS3 or a high end PC, then go play the Wii or PS2. If you are too broke for most games in general, go play Nintendo or Super Nintendo. If that's not possible, get on Google Books. Can't do that? Oh well, your finances and math skills are screwed then. Too bad man, everyone needs to stay in their lane from now on because hardcore games are for the hardcore who can afford them. Sorry if it sounds elite but it is what it is. Not everyone can be the Michael Jordan of gaming.

 Pages 1 2 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here