Has Nintendo Abandoned the Hardcore Gamer?

This is one of the hot potatoes of the gaming realm. Is Nintendo to focused on the casual gamer to make games for the hardcore gamer?

(If you don't want to read all this just watch the video at the bottom, and yes, the video is my video so it's still my original work)

Nintendo, savior of the gaming world once, Giant in gaming revolution, advocate to the casual, abandoned-er of their supporters. I've heard Nintendo called all of these things and more in recent times. While these conclusions are partially true that Nintendo has shifted to towards the casual market they haven't abandoned the hardcore gamer all together.

How can I say this? Have I seen the Wii market? Yes. Yes I have. I completely realize that something like 85-90% of the Wii market is casual games/mini-games, but is that really Nintendo's fault? No. Nintendo doesn't make all of these mini-game games that are on their system, they just allow them to be there. And why not? Nintendo makes a percentage of all of the game's sold for it's system so why not let developers develop and sell these games, it doesn't cost Nintendo money.

So why do we only really see casual games/mini-games on the Wii? Good question. It's really a very simple answer. Hardware. From a technical standpoint the Wii is inferior to the Xbox 360 and PS3. It doesn't have the hardware to play games like Killzone, Halo, inFamous, or Fallout. This really started back with the N64 but became apparent during the Gamecube age. The N64 had good hardware but was limited in one major aspect. It used cartridges instead of discs. That's why games like Final Fantasy jumped ship and went to the PSone, they could fit more higher quality material on a disc than a cartridge. The Gamecube really expanded that gap when they released hardware that was inferior (When I say hardware I mean the internals) to the PS2 and the newly released Xbox. Developers really started to move away from Nintendo's system because they couldn't make their games with it's hardware. While some games looked absolutely beautiful on the Gamecube (Metal Gear Solid, Metroid Prime, Resident Evil 4), most developers decided not to work with it, when they could get better on another console. That gap became a huge divide when the Wii was released. Nintendo wanted to keep their console at an affordable price and so they had to sacrifice their hardware to do that. The hardcore developers, Bethesda, Guerrilla Games, Bungie, Infinity ward, saw this and said (I imagine) "Why would we waste our time trying to make a game on that when we could make a better game on these other consoles" And their absolutely right. Why should they? And more importantly why would you want them to? Imagine I present you with two cars, One's a BMW, and one's a Buick. They cost the same, but the BMW has leather interior, power steering, air conditioning, satellite radio, and free maintenance for life. The Buick has has fabric interior with coffee stains, no power steering, no air conditioning, no limited radio, and limited maintenance. Which would you choose? I think the choice is obvious. That's kind of the way it is with the Wii and Xbox or PS3.

But there are some Hardcore games on the Wii, how do you explain those? Simple. Some developers saw potential for what they could do on the Wii and went with it. But let's look at some of these hardcore games; Deadspace extraction, I'm sorry to say, I really am because I really enjoyed this game, that it did not sell way. In fact it could almost be considered a flop. Madworld, same thing as Deadspace, it just couldn't find a market on the Wii. The second type of hardcore games on the Wii are Nintendo owned games. Legend of Zelda, Mario, Metriod (either owned or first party). All three of these were actually made or owned by Nintendo, and you know what, they were all fun. Could they be considered hardcore? More or less.

The hardcore developers have moved away from the Wii for two major reasons. 1st. The lack of hardware, and 2nd. They have a hard time finding a market on the Wii.

So did Nintendo really abandon the Hardcore gamer in favor of the casual gamer? Yes and No. Nintendo made a choice to make their console more affordable and in doing so they sacrificed hardware. The developers moved away from Nintendo because of the lack of hardware. The lack of hardcore developers meant the lack of hardcore games. The lack of hardcore games meant the lack of hardcore gamers. That left it open for the casual gamers and casual developers to move in.

So again I ask, did Nintendo abandon the hardcore gamer. Not exactly, did they set up the situation that led to the loss of their hardcore crowd? Absolutely.

[iamnsuperman]

This generation they saw a smart business move to fill a void and it has paid off. I am not holding my breath for the project cafe to be fully hardcore but it is possible going to have a hardcore element. The next move will be the defining moment to do we call Nintendo a harcore platform. I am expecting them too innovate but how we just do not know yet.

[lex-1020]

You're very right. I am interested to see what Nintendo decides to do with project Cafe. It should be innovative because Nintendo seems to understand that they need to continuously expand, but I'm curious how.

[Active Reload]

I think with the new console they're bringing out, that they obviously are targeting the core audience. I also think they can let devs do whatever they want with the system and throw the money they made from the casuals toward the hard-core audience. That may sound underhanded, but I don't think the "casuals" will mind. It's kind of like vegetables not voicing an opinion on the fact they're being eaten.

[Maddens Raiders]

only since 2006.

[-Alpha]

I don't think they have. They have a great amount of hardcore titles, but are largely overlooked much like the PC's exclusives.

http://www.metacritic.com/b...

The hardware is not the most advanced, the shovelware is plentiful, but I much prefer Nintendo to Microsoft this gen, and in some respects to Sony (handhelds specifically, I prefer the DS)

Speaking of which, the DS has a killer lineup of exclusives that are "hardcore". Their RPG lineup is incredible and I feel that in general, Nintendo games retain a feeling of simplicity that you cannot find on a 360 or PS3/PSP game

[_Q_]

I think the conscientiously did so this gen.

I think they did it this way to ensure the success of its console. When you've been getting reamed by your competitor for a decade(sans the DS of course). You better come out swinging...That's exactly what they did. They saw that they had to take back living rooms and the gamers they raised(My generation) had out grown them. So when you cant sell it to a certain group, you sell it to all the others. This part was the gamble that seriously paid off. Ninty gambles all the time. People just forget them so quickly. The DS and Wii are like GB,NES and SNES...Good gambles. Think of Virtua Boy, N64 disc,Gamecube and now 3DS as Ninty taking risks on a bad call.. With the Wii being a success Ninty can now fund their next gamble...making a console to win back the hardcore they purposely abandoned to survive. Well played Nintendo..

[DonnieDarko]

Totally abandoned us. The gamecube was pants too. The n64 was cool, I preferred it to psone due to mariokart, goldeneye and Zelda.

Nintendo won't come back to hardcore gamers till the casual bubble bursts

[Nes_Daze]

No, but they sure as hell aren't focusing on it.

[GodofSackboy]

Obviously, theres not even an argument here, of course they have

[DelbertGrady]

Exactly what is a "hardcore gamer"?

The first thing that comes to my mind is someone who plays games like Counterstrike and Starcraft 2 competitively, with a mouse that has retractable weights in it.

When it comes to consoles I see the harcore gamer as someone who likes challenging games, wether it be Demon's Souls, Super Meat Boy or Super Mario Galaxy 2. Sure, SMG 2 has an easy learning curve (a good one) but getting all the stars requires skill.

I feel that many use the term "hardcore" for games that have a "hardcore" look, or are marketed exclusively at an adult audience. For me though, being a hardcore console gamer means playing challenging games regardless of genre or artstyle. And playing them a lot. :)

[lex-1020]

You made a good point and I should have clarified. To me a hardcore gamers is a gamer that plays games with a story line to the. The i/e not minigames.

[bigjclassic]

I am as hardcore as they come. As long as Nintendo never stops making Mario, Zelda and SSBB then I will always stay.

As soon as those franchises die, then my time as a gamer dies as well.

Also there is a difference between true "hardcore" and "fratcore" gamers..

[Trroy]

Nintendo made these decisions, knowing that it would cost them the hardcore, and reached out to the Blue Ocean as their market instead.

So yes, Nintendo intentionally abandoned the hardcore gamer (i.e. gamers who play 10+ hours/week, and have a high attach ratio, IMO). Don't kid yourself into thinking otherwise. They knew the Blue Ocean was where it was at... at least in terms of hardware and accessory sales. They did a great job of making their stockholders money, which is their main objective, not pleasing the hardcore gaming crowd.

The Cafe project is an attempt to recapture some of that audience before the generation ends -- an ingenious plan, really. They get to be the top hardware for a couple years, and make it all the harder for their competitors to bring new hardware to the table.

At a time when backwards compatibility is next to impossible (because CPU speed upgrades come from parallelism now, not clock and architectural improvements), if the competition wants to really shake up the hardware (for the sake of performance), this is a powerful, powerful strategy. Those new consoles will have to start their libraries from scratch, unless they are so similar to their predecessors that the Cafe is not dissimilar in power.

Nintendo is creating a "rock" and "hard place" for their competition this time around. They will have the advantage of 3rd parties not having to spend millions to develop new game engines.. because they can simply upgrade their existing 360 engine to work on the Cafe. They will have the advantage of lower dev costs, much as the Wii did, but will have a large hardcore install base by the time the competition ships, which wasn't the case with the Wii. They'll be cheaper. The gap in power will be lesser than the Wii/360 gap. Advantage after advantage -- they are totally catering to 3rd party publishers with the Cafe. Brilliant plan to recapture the hardcore.

[lex-1020]

Yes and no. You certainly have some interesting points, however I predict one flaw. I've hear talk that Cafe will be able to produce PS3 or better graphics. While this would certainly put Cafe in a good position it would come at a cost. Price. Nintendo can't create something with hardware that rivals the Ps3/Xbox without having similar pricing. While most of us hardcore gamers wouldn't be bothered by this the casual audience would be less likely to buy it due to an increase in price. So what I see is that Nintendo either creates a new console with less hardware than PS3 or Xbox or they have to make something more expensive.

[Trroy]

When I stated that the Cafe would be cheaper than the competition, I meant cheaper than the next gen. It will likely cost $300-$350 when it releases in 2012.

By the time the competition ships, however, it'll definitely be the cheapest option alongside the PS4 and XBox 720 (or whatever). It will also have a decent install base (like the 360 did near the end of 2006), and have the advantage of having lots of pre-made game engines right from the get-go -- an advantage which the 360, as the first HD, truly parallel console, did not have in 2005.

In a sense, Nintendo is replicating Microsoft's strategy with the 360, but with several extra advantages. They release 1st, the 3rd parties already have working engines, and it'll be the cheapest at the beginning of the next gen. Although the Wii is, essentially, a GameCube on steroids, many publishers did not have up-to-date GameCube engines to work with, due to the limited popularity of the GC, or if they did, they didn't bother to harness what extra the Wii brought to the table. The Cafe's design similarity to the 360 is, I'm certain, not a coincidence.

The only real downside to Nintendo's strategy is that the Cafe will certainly be in the same position as the Wii was, technologically, relative to the PS4 and 720... maybe a little better, but not a ton. Because the leap to HD happened this current gen, however, I think the perception of quality differences will not be as great as they were with the Wii vs the HD consoles. The Cafe may be seen as a strong contender, in both the eyes of the 3rd parties and the consumers, for relatively longer than the Wii.

[lex-1020]

@Trroy

Again you have good points but if you are comparing Cafe to the PS4 and Xbox 720 I think PS4 and 720 will jump in hardware significantly again and Cafe will be left far behind again. And yes the Wii should have a good library by the time the next gen comes out. And you said Wii vs. HD consoles wont be an issue because Cafe will have HD, but what I see happening is Ps4 being fully 3D, Xbox 720 being full 3D and tv's being 3D capable without glasses. If that's true and Cafe is just now stepping into HD than it's going to be just like the market is now.

[young7yang]

in the usa yes!

in japan no!

japan gets all the games we want

xenoblade
pandoras tower
last story
tales of grace

i own a total of 4 game for my Wii

all of the above except pandoras tower ( ill get it next month)