CrunchinJelly
formerly cjelly
Yup, seems to be working wonders for Sony.WrikaWrek said:Know what would be really great now?
If MS used this success and momentum, and came out with some new big core games. Wouldn't that be wonderful?
Yup, seems to be working wonders for Sony.WrikaWrek said:Know what would be really great now?
If MS used this success and momentum, and came out with some new big core games. Wouldn't that be wonderful?
cjelly said:Yup, seems to be working wonders for Sony.
AdventureRacing said:He didn't say they should abandon the casual market completely. It shouldn't be an either or situation. I think MS should be trying to get into a situation where they have enough exclusive SW to target both.
I also think the type of games referred to as 'core' games on GAF also have a lot of casual appeal. COD for instance is a casual title that appeals to the core. Thats the sort of thing MS should be looking at (though obviously you don't have to match the ridiculous COD franchise).
Edit: MS really need to get some more kinect titles out there. Right now there is very little on the release schedule and that could really hurt kinects momentum going forward.
That sounds fine until you realise that the PS3 had some fairly significant stock shortages in January 2010.canova said:PS3
Year over year number is the same, and it's only in January.
Brashnir said:To the bolded - What? Seriously? COD is a casual title now? Come on, man.
cjelly said:Yup, seems to be working wonders for Sony.
lowrider007 said:Who cares if it's working for Sony, it's working for the consumers, Sony are catering to the 'core' market and good them I say, I'd rather they be in third place with a great selection of core exclusives tbh, Sony are hardly doomed as so many people seem to be proclaiming in this thread, as long they keep on delivering the games I'm happy.
get2sammyb said:You have to wonder why Pepsi have bothered selling soft-drinks all these years. They're never going to sell more than Coca-Cola.
The label casual and core don't make any sense at all. Are we talking about the gameplay machanics or about how much a game sells?Brashnir said:To the bolded - What? Seriously? COD is a casual title now? Come on, man.
I don't think it's either of these. You can have casual gamers - people who play games casually. They can be playing Wii Sports casually or any so-called "core" game casually.TheOddOne said:The label casual and core don't make any sense at all. Are we talking about the gameplay machanics or about how much a game sells?
This pretty much the only reason I could think up too. Thanks for the intresting writeup.Parl said:In conclusion, the casual/core/hardcore/non-game set of terms were defined by elitist traditional gamers, to create the illusion that their tastes and gaming habits are superior.
The word casual was not invented in 2005 y'know. Doing something casually means doing it with little prep, little time investment, low dedication, and still getting the results you want. Any game with a low skill ceiling lends itself to casual play.TheOddOne said:The label casual and core don't make any sense at all. Are we talking about the gameplay machanics or about how much a game sells?
Thats rediculous, how would you define somebody that plays 100 hours of a simple game?Rolf NB said:The word casual was not invented in 2005 y'know. Doing something casually means doing it with little prep, little time investment, low dedication, and still getting the results you want. Any game with a low skill ceiling lends itself to casual play.
With the skill ceiling being specifically how easy it is to play instead of how easy it is to do well. So many fighting games, puzzle games, etc, can be played casually even if the same games have a very dedicated, very skilled fanbase. This whole core/casual game thing is pure balderdash.Rolf NB said:The word casual was not invented in 2005 y'know. Doing something casually means doing it with little prep, little time investment, low dedication, and still getting the results you want. Any game with a low skill ceiling lends itself to casual play.
I wish they would so we can see the Dead Space 2 split.speculawyer said:i.e. MS can publish xbox numbers and sales of games they sell.
Parl said:I don't think it's either of these. You can have casual gamers - people who play games casually. They can be playing Wii Sports casually or any so-called "core" game casually.
Then you have non-casual gamers who play games often, so again, could have been the Wii Sports gamers who played it really often - obviously not casual at all in these cases, or the many people who play games a lot - these aren't casual gamers.
Even though it seems impossible for something to be a casual game (as that implies it's only sometimes a game, mostly not - maybe games that are very cut-scene driven?), I guess the only reasonable definition would be for games that lend themselves to be played casually.
But this doesn't create this core/casual divide. Mario Kart is a casual game in that people can play it casually (unlike say an RPG), and many I'm sure do. But it has many dedicated players who spent hours at a time on it.
In conclusion, the casual/core/hardcore/non-game set of terms were defined by elitist traditional gamers, to create the illusion that their tastes and gaming habits are superior.
Parl said:This whole core/casual game thing is pure balderdash.
Is it any different/worse from script galleries winning GOTY awards over the last few years?lowrider007 said:I strongly disagree, I'll never class all video games the same, ever, and I'm sure I'm not alone, I never want to see a game like Angry Birds winning overall game of the year outside of a 'casual' or 'puzzle' category.
Write an essay in this style on this topic. No joke: a periodical would publish it.Goldmund said:Unlike hardcore, the term casual is still very useful when you remove it from its genesis and formation (arguably PR speak and segregation). It allows you to distinguish between games while ignoring their distinguishing characteristics (appeal is not a characteristic, it's a blank space and I'm waiting for you to fill it, hurry up!). It's almost dialectical. ARMA 2 and Call of Duty can both reasonably be qualified as hardcore, but only the latter as casual. Man, I think it's spiritual, an aura, and I'd learn something about God if I elaborated even more. I better stop. Ignore this!
canova said:PS3
I don't think Sony gonna drop the price this year. Year over year number is the same, and it's only in January. The game line-up is great, there are more big games to come.
360
360 picked up some casuals, let it be. It's not the crowd I want Sony to focus anyway, heck if all the 3 big threes focus on casuals, I might as well quit gaming
Wii
It's Nintendo that has to drop the price, 30% drop is bad and no games coming out in the horizon.
onipex said:The PS3 may need a price drop later in the year. Software has rarely given it a boost in sales.
This is an NPD thread, so as far as this thread goes, the US/North America is the only picture.canova said:May not give it a boost, but should be enough to maintain it
I think it's better off for them to wait to drop the price next year, when the game line-up is thinner. This year they may get by by bundling PS3 with their 1st party library.
Also US is just half of the picture.
_Alkaline_ said:It's the definition of a mainstream game.
TheOddOne said:Thats rediculous, how would you define somebody that plays 100 hours of a simple game?
This. Not that I think it should be won by one whose mechanics were ripped straight out of free flash games, though.szaromir said:Is it any different/worse from script galleries winning GOTY awards over the last few years?
My issue is with the terms themselves and the idea traditional games are superior regardless of taste, rather than an attempt at categorising. Targeted game development is fine and dandy (though I'd argue that the even the way in which publishers have tried to categorise has been a big reason for the inability to replicate Nintendo's success in the low-end categories except stuff like Just Dance).REMEMBER CITADEL said:And the division wasn't defined by elitist gamers, it was defined by publishers, analysts and other industry observers to separate different types of video game consumers (so they could more easily target them, observe their habits and so on).
Psychotext said:That sounds fine until you realise that the PS3 had some fairly significant stock shortages in January 2010.
Parl said:My issue is with the terms themselves and the idea traditional games are superior regardless of taste, rather than an attempt at categorising.
Liabe Brave said:Well, they may all be making money now, but considering that Microsoft and Sony both dug themselves multibillion dollar holes getting to this point might have something to do with folks' gloomy view of the industry.
Sounds... sexy.Curufinwe said:Coresual.
apana said:COD is a "core" game as the industry defines it. It has violence, cinematics, and the people who buy it are young males. COD is the ultimate hardcore game.
Microsoft has game announcements planned on February 24, we just don't know what they are, when they'll launch or where they're coming from. People assumed the parts of Rare that weren't into the Kinect Sports thing would show something soon but due to recent developments it seems very unlikely.WrikaWrek said:Know what would be really great now?
If MS used this success and momentum, and came out with some new big core games. Wouldn't that be wonderful?
get2sammyb said:How dare you forget that a system that sells fewer than another system is totally doomed?
You have to wonder why Pepsi have bothered selling soft-drinks all these years. They're never going to sell more than Coca-Cola.
EDIT: On topic, I agree. I really think some people enjoy playing sales more than games sometimes. It's nonsense to suggest Sony STOP putting out these quality titles we all want to play because it's not putting them first in the console race. I understand the interest in sales in this particular thread, but that's absurd. Would people rather Sony stopped making great games because it's not putting them in first-place? I mean, what exactly do you want?
They've probably lost in North America now. Mistakes were made, blah blah. They can continue to stay relevant by putting out great content that appeals to gamers though. That's what they are doing, and it is working. Despite being a significantly higher price and less mind-share (forget the success of the PS2, that's gone), they're still within touching distance of the other platforms. Is it ideal? No. Are they doomed? Far, far from it.
FINALFANTASYDOG said:The thing is every month on Gamasutra it says thanks for NPD's cooperation with this article, that means to me they either give the numbers to Matt or they confirm to him that the leaked numbers are real.
FINALFANTASYDOG said:Which leads me to if they are okay with mass-media publicly posting the numbers, why don't they do it in their own analysis?
FINALFANTASYDOG said:If the mass-media decides to do some article on Atlus is it okay to give all the numbers then?
canova said:May not give it a boost, but should be enough to maintain it
I think it's better off for them to wait to drop the price next year, when the game line-up is thinner. This year they may get by by bundling PS3 with their 1st party library.
Also US is just half of the picture.
canova said:May not give it a boost, but should be enough to maintain it
I think it's better off for them to wait to drop the price next year, when the game line-up is thinner. This year they may get by by bundling PS3 with their 1st party library.
Also US is just half of the picture.
REMEMBER CITADEL said:I think _Alkaline_ put it well, games like COD, FIFA, WOW and Madden are mainstream, but they're not casual, not in the currently most widely used meaning of the word. There's a clear distinction between that audience and people who mostly play things like Bejewled, Wii Sports and Kinect Adventures; you just cannot lump them together.
Parl said:My issue is with the terms themselves and the idea traditional games are superior regardless of taste, rather than an attempt at categorising.
Parl said:Targeted game development is fine and dandy (though I'd argue that the even the way in which publishers have tried to categorise has been a big reason for the inability to replicate Nintendo's success in the low-end categories except stuff like Just Dance).
AdventureRacing said:So what makes those games more casual? Thats just you making an arbitrary category based on your own personal taste.
All of the above is essentially true, with some caveats.donny2112 said:jvm might be able to give more details, but I get the impression that he asks for permission about the numbers he's going to use each month.
...snip...
Fewer numbers, the better, in their book.
...snip...
jvm is extremely careful with the numbers he gets (e.g. rounding, being somewhat vague), just to make sure that he doesn't give too much and make NPD upset.
REMEMBER CITADEL said:That has nothing whatsoever to do with my taste, I like most of those games. What makes them more casual, first and foremost, is the fact that they are far more accessible from the control standpoint and require far less from players, as far as traditional gaming motor skills go.
You could go deeper than that, but I won't, at least not right now as it's past 2AM over here and I'm just about to go to bed.
DD games are not tracked. And even if they were, I believe NPD ranks by revenue, so individual iOS games would rarely chart.Dante said:Are iOS games listed here? No? Later........
GhaleonEB said:I'm genuinely impressed that Microsoft was able to carry their momentum from the introduction of the slim model through Kinect and over to this year. That both the 360 and PS3 will likely see actual price cuts this year rather than just SKU adjustments means they could thump last year's performance. Sony's cut will need to come sooner rather than later.
AdventureRacing said:Deeper than what? I think even trying to get into a discussion about which is slightly more casual is ridiculous.