Nintendo: we're "not good" at core games

[GSZX1337]

Since I derailed this thread, I'll try to get it back on track. My main point was that Hardcore doesn't always mean Underground/Obscure. If I were to describe Hardcore I'd say it was a state-of-mind regardless of the game. Shit, someone can be a hardcore Peggle player. (Keep in mind, Peggle keeps score.)

Yes, but that makes you a Hardcore Peggle Player. Not a Hardcore Gamer. It means that you have a strong, unswerving devotion to Peggle - just as a Hardcore Gamer has a strong, unswerving devotion to the gaming world.

A Hardcore Gamer wouldn't be 'Hardcore' in just one area - they would have knowledge of all areas. A Hardcore Gamer, thus, wouldn't just be knowledgeable of the games put out by the biggest publishers.

Most Peggle Players don't just limit themselves to Peggle, though. (At least not in my experience.) Pop Cap shoves their games in your face all the time so a Hardcore Peggle Player can soon be a Hardcore Zuma Player and a Hardcore Plants vs. Zombies Player. If anything, being a Hardcore Peggle Player can be a first step.

[the7k]

But you are still limiting yourself to a one genre.

"Yes, I'm a hardcore movie goer. Love me some movies."
"So, did you see Alice In Wonderland?"
"Nah, I don't care for Disney flicks."
"What'd you think of The Crazies?"
"Eh, I hate horror movies."
"Is Cop Out any good?"
"Man, comedy movies suck. I wouldn't see that if you paid me for it."
"... have you seen any movies lately?"
"Of course! I've seen every action movie out there! Like I said, I'm a hardcore movie goer."

I'd expect a hardcore gamer to be well versed in a multitude of genres - not just a couple. I'd also expect them to be knowledgeable of lesser known titles, just as a movie buff would know of obscure movies that got limited release.

[GSZX1337]

I guess there needs to be a term that lies in between hardcore and casual. My definition of hardcore seems to be the 'mainstream' definition, and your definition of hardcore seems to be the 'uber' definition.

[Lord_Santa]

the terms they are-a-changin', huh?

I thought they were talking about their "core-games"; as in Zelda, Mario, etc.

I'm not even going to debate "hard-core", as it has little-to-no-value in the greater sense of things (games, that is)

I don't own a Wii, mainly because the 360 was helluva-lot cheaper (I traded a PS2 and a bunch of games for it)

I do own several Nintendo machines (GBC, NES, N64, GC) and I've always loved Nintendo for what they *don't* do

they do *not* pump out the generic *insert generic genre here* as the 360/PS3

hell, even during the NGC/PS2/Xbox1 era they were making *quality* games, over *quantity*

Nintendo appeals to me; I'm 32 years old and the best thing I know is a Quake1 DeathMatch (DM6)

Animal Crossing is my favorite game on the GC; as well as my DS

why?

they're simplisitic
they've got potential
and they *will* appeal to my (eventual) children

there's no need to become the "third wheel" in the console-industry; let MS and Sony deal with all the "Game of the Century" games, that keep pumping out like shovelware every month

Nintendo should stay as a wheel of it's own; giving us perhaps 5 *great* titles per generation; and several "'good*

it's what they've always done; it's what they always should do

[GSZX1337]

I just remembered an article about how Nintendo says there are no Casual Gamers.
http://www.wired.com/gamelife/2008/05/nintendo-no-suc/

[pepharytheworm]

I just remembered an article about how Nintendo says there are no Casual Gamers.
http://www.wired.com/gamelife/2008/05/nintendo-no-suc/

I agree that "casual" is equated to mean "easy" to often by people. Play the game first people.

[the7k]

I just realized something.

What do Fatal Frame IV, Zangeki no REGINLEIV, Captain Rainbow, Disaster: Day of Crisis and Another Code R all have in common?

They're 'Core' games that Nintendo of America (and more specifically, Reggie) flat out refuse to bring to America. Even though these games (Fatal Frame IV and Zangeki no REGINLEIV especially) would boost their image with the Core gamer TREMENDOUSLY, they flat out refuse to take the risk.

But I guess I can't blame them. Maybe if they were in first place in the console wars by the widest margin we've seen possibly ever, they could afford to take risks on core games.

Oh wait...

[Cov238]

recently nintendo has had its hit and miss with "core" games but when they do a 1st party game it hardly ever is bad. agree?