I have no ill feelings towards the casual market...
- Thread starter Aircross
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Because the Sims is the only simulator game in the entire industry... He didn't even mention it.aguspal said:
It seems to be, since casuals bring more money and publishers seem to think there's no point to releasing any game that won't do COD numbers.Anthraxus said:
There is a huge leeway between indie games and AAA games.Atrocious Joystick said:
People like to pretend that there is nothing between $100 million cinematic shooters, and Kickstarter-funded 2D games, but there is.
If a game was already made, and it is profitble, then dumbing it's sequel down just to reach an even bigger audience, is nothing but greed.
I do as they have destroyed media and gaming I'd rather have my life back than slog through chucky sewage to find the rare none raped and flushed product..........
Normally "catering to casuals" (as some people would call it) pretty much creates a flat out regression in the design of the game, normally as some manipulative marketing ploy. Streamlining should be a process of taking out meaningless mechanics, which is a way to keep the game's depth while making it less annoying.
Everyone (casuals and core gamers alike) deserves better.
Everyone (casuals and core gamers alike) deserves better.
I'm ok with it all honestly.
I really don't care about the Dead Space 3 debacle where the game is being "streamlined to fit a larger audience", I couldn't care less.
I won't argue that Dead Space is a great game but being realistic, it wasn't challenging or even really that scary but it did have an atmosphere about it.
Giving it more guns won't really change anything in that game and so what if it gets "more actiony" it was a very action orientated game anyway for the most part and the only part keeping it in the horror genre was the slow lumbering walks between fights.
To me catering to casuals is something that only really applies to a more competitive gaming like in MMOS/FPS or the MOBA genre.
When you start balancing a game for everyone to enjoy that has a direct and negative impact on a competitive scene then you're messing with two demographics worth of enjoyment for one.
I had the extreme displeasure of suffering the Cataclysm raid boss nerf the very next day after we almost downed Nefarian.
With a 20% nerf on all bosses it was a cake walk to simply roll up to BWD and clean house, that achievement was always a bitter pill.
The same goes for League of Legends and that I used to enjoy that game a lot but with Riots intent to continue shoveling out flashy heroes who don't differ too much from the last than bringing out quality mechanics, then I'm done.
Riots current procedure is to buy their way into tournaments and the E-sports scene rather than nurture their own growth through a highly competitive game.
I really don't care about the Dead Space 3 debacle where the game is being "streamlined to fit a larger audience", I couldn't care less.
I won't argue that Dead Space is a great game but being realistic, it wasn't challenging or even really that scary but it did have an atmosphere about it.
Giving it more guns won't really change anything in that game and so what if it gets "more actiony" it was a very action orientated game anyway for the most part and the only part keeping it in the horror genre was the slow lumbering walks between fights.
To me catering to casuals is something that only really applies to a more competitive gaming like in MMOS/FPS or the MOBA genre.
When you start balancing a game for everyone to enjoy that has a direct and negative impact on a competitive scene then you're messing with two demographics worth of enjoyment for one.
I had the extreme displeasure of suffering the Cataclysm raid boss nerf the very next day after we almost downed Nefarian.
With a 20% nerf on all bosses it was a cake walk to simply roll up to BWD and clean house, that achievement was always a bitter pill.
The same goes for League of Legends and that I used to enjoy that game a lot but with Riots intent to continue shoveling out flashy heroes who don't differ too much from the last than bringing out quality mechanics, then I'm done.
Riots current procedure is to buy their way into tournaments and the E-sports scene rather than nurture their own growth through a highly competitive game.
Because it costs a lot more to start up a new IP than it does to modify an existing one. A lot more.Aircross said:
Things change, IPs too, and there's no really much you can do about it. That said, the release of a new casual version of a game you liked, doesn't destroy the old game, and it doesn't take away the fun you had with it. It's weird because you wouldn't see people throwing a temper tantrum (most of the time) just because an old game they like hasn't released a sequel. But if an old game they liked released a sequel with changes that they didn't like it's an epic shit storm. It's weird because it's not as if there's any real difference in terms of the effect of the two scenarios on the fan of the original. In both cases the gamer doesn't get the game they're looking for.
Maybe it's just that "poke the bear effect," where the changing of an old IP rubs salt in a wound while the lack of a sequel doesn't? Either way however, I don't think it gets anyone anywhere to complain. The fact of the matter is that IP owners can do whatever the hell they want with their own IPs. It's a waste of time to get upset because of a sequel, much better is taking the opportunity to be thankful for the one you did enjoy.
I think that the issue isn't casuals, or marketing games to them. It's the increasing sameness of games, based on the model of 'X was successful, we must make our game more like X in order to be successful as well'. An example: Dead Space was originally a horror/survival horror third person shooter. Now, in the third game, it seems to have lost the psychological edge of the first two games. Yes, I know, people will say 'oh, the monsters weren't that scary', but then again...were they ever meant to be as disturbing as what happened to the people in the game?
It seems like every game MUST be dumbed down to a grey-brown shooter, or last big success of the type of game (third person shooter, racing, etc) in order to be marketed. Of course, by doing so, many publishers are losing their target audiences. A quality title will sell, and the market is glutted anyways.
It seems like every game MUST be dumbed down to a grey-brown shooter, or last big success of the type of game (third person shooter, racing, etc) in order to be marketed. Of course, by doing so, many publishers are losing their target audiences. A quality title will sell, and the market is glutted anyways.
But you're assuming game X was made with the intention of pleasing a particular group that for example, has a hard on for inventory management. If game X was supposed to reach a wider audience than that, and the developer/publisher feels that they didn't reach enough people it is not odd to change some things to reach the audience that they were always shooting for.Entitled said:
And yes, there are of course games between the budgets of nothing at all to double or even triple digit millions. But generally, the games that people complain about being "dumbed down" are sequels to games that fit in the higher budget brackets and aim for an audience called everyone.
I agree. Each game is a unique experience, and I'm getting really annoyed by series that I play catering to the mass market and sacrificing some of their individuality while they're at it. It's one thing to have a franchise or game that is specifically targeted for 'casual gamers'. But it is another thing entirely to find a game that you end up really liking for one reason or another, and to have that taken away in an effort to broaden the playing audience. Ultimately though, I am convinced this will be the downfall (possibly amongst other things) of the large franchises; every game will become so much the common denominator of its genre that there is nothing, to a casual gamer, to justify buying one over the other. So the mass market will be split equally between the soulless games, becoming less and less profitable, while new franchises fill the specialised gaps and satisfy the former playerbases. Like a whirlpool, with new and innovative games starting on the outside and working their way in, where they are eaten by sharks (established franchises that will never die, like CoD) unless they...swim...outwards...with new...ideas? Ah, analogies.
A half-baked theory, but who knows, perhaps I have not finished baking it yet.
A half-baked theory, but who knows, perhaps I have not finished baking it yet.