David Perry on Wiis future

[corkcrumbs]

I'm not trying to burn you at all. Just taking a little dig at you. I apologise if I caused offence.

It's ok. It's ok. No, I didn't get that offended, it would have been weak if it really would have hurt me, lol :P

Your point was good, so I'm glad it got mentioned.

[Noku]

For desperate comments also check sony's lollipop comment.

 

For those among you who are like me, I'll save you the trouble:

 

“I think the PS3 is the Surf ‘n Turf*, the PS2 is your favorite burger restaurant… [Wii] is a lollipop, and I’m too old for lollipops. And the [Xbox 360] I get sick from once in a while because the cook isn’t always reliable.â€

 

*And for those among you who are still like me:

 

An American slang menu term for an entrée that includes both seafood and meat, such as a lobster tail and a beef filet.

 

 

So there you have it: the PS3 is a gastronomical abomination.

[Jasper]

Wii is a lollipop! Cheap and nice, and even at my age we like to suck on one. Lollipops are for all ages, but once you're over 18 you feel like you shouldn't because society tells you to 'grow up'. Come on, we all know we want lollipops!

 

However I have a few questions concerning the things said in this thread. Why isn't there anyone who sees a little logic in Perry's point? Back in the day, the NES pad was a revelation. A great new way to interact with games. But after a while, they did have to focus on the horsepower. Once we get accustomed with the Wii's control interface, we will shift focus back on graphics. The difference is: if you're selling a product, it's easier to attract people with fancy images than with with the way to use it.

 

Example: Windows Vista looks good, but is still incredibly complicated to get running on a two-screen setup. Believe, I tried it once and I couldn't find anything in the configuration. Why is it so complicated? So here you go: attract people with a fancy makeover and great graphics, but make it a hurdle to control.

 

The other way around, although, doesn't look that attractive. There are better computer interfaces than Vista out there, but they look as if God himself forgot to color inside the lines. They look plain bad. Ubuntu is a great interface method, but compared to Vista it looks like Hell.

 

Let's not forget why television ads make more money than radio spots. Simply because seeing is believing, and not 'touching is believing'. But hey, I'm still totally behind Nintendo, but I'm sure that Perry made a good comment saying that once we get used to it, we want something new and fancy and unless Nintendo can keep the pheripheral factory running with bright ideas, we'll look at graphics.

[mcj metroid]

What does sony mean by' cook isn’t always reliable' with 360?

 

The ps2 was the worst console of all time for good:bad ratio and ps3 has very few really quality games.

 

Sony barely has a cook I mean their main first party title is killzone 2.

[Jasper]

What does sony mean by' cook isn’t always reliable' with 360?

 

The ps2 was the worst console of all time for good:bad ratio and ps3 has very few really quality games.

 

Sony barely has a cook I mean their main first party title is killzone 2.

 

It means that it's marketed as a fancy restaurant, but it has a high failure rate so you have a chance of 1 out of 3 to be screwed over by a cook who actually just guesses the ingredients. Aka, Red Rings of Death.

[corkcrumbs]

Wii is a lollipop! Cheap and nice, and even at my age we like to suck on one. Lollipops are for all ages, but once you're over 18 you feel like you shouldn't because society tells you to 'grow up'. Come on, we all know we want lollipops!

 

However I have a few questions concerning the things said in this thread. Why isn't there anyone who sees a little logic in Perry's point? Back in the day, the NES pad was a revelation. A great new way to interact with games. But after a while, they did have to focus on the horsepower. Once we get accustomed with the Wii's control interface, we will shift focus back on graphics. The difference is: if you're selling a product, it's easier to attract people with fancy images than with with the way to use it.

 

Example: Windows Vista looks good, but is still incredibly complicated to get running on a two-screen setup. Believe, I tried it once and I couldn't find anything in the configuration. Why is it so complicated? So here you go: attract people with a fancy makeover and great graphics, but make it a hurdle to control.

 

The other way around, although, doesn't look that attractive. There are better computer interfaces than Vista out there, but they look as if God himself forgot to color inside the lines. They look plain bad. Ubuntu is a great interface method, but compared to Vista it looks like Hell.

 

Let's not forget why television ads make more money than radio spots. Simply because seeing is believing, and not 'touching is believing'. But hey, I'm still totally behind Nintendo, but I'm sure that Perry made a good comment saying that once we get used to it, we want something new and fancy and unless Nintendo can keep the pheripheral factory running with bright ideas, we'll look at graphics.

 

But right now, the only console that has the new controls is wii, thus nintendo didn't need to focus as much on the graphics this generation as sony and microsoft. Ok, so actually they didn't focus much on the graphics because they felt that the whole horsepower race was pretty saturated by now, which I in a sense agree with.. at least if the kind of products you want to sell are more like creative flair and less "mimic our reality as precise as possible"...

So nintendo has the controls and sony and microsoft has the graphics BUT... :P nintendo also got the imagination, which means they can come up with mario galaxy, zelda wind waker and titles like that, which places them close to sony and microsoft on the graphics front even though they don't have as much horsepower...

[Cube]

I have a Wii, I bought it the second it came out, I play it often and pretty much every time someone comes over that can't understand how to play Guitar Hero. (By the way when given a choice Guitar Hero wins every time.) Bowling or Tennis is a GREAT backup for example.

 

They love it and have a great time.

 

If my visitors are able to handle full (more complicated) games, then it's out with Gears of War or something like that. Their jaws are on the floor and they have a great time.

 

If I'm playing alone, I'm more likely to fire up something on PC. I've just been playing through Lost Planet on PC for example. If I have any spare time travelling, I'm on DS or PSP. Currently going through Lego Star Wars on PSP after just finishing all 6 Metal Slug games for a bit of Nostalgia.

 

I play every kind of game and have every machine. I've shipped games on endless platforms, including Nintendo.

 

The Wii is selling amazingly and personally I'm most impressed at how Nintendo was willing to simplify the controls in a world where everyone chooses complexity. Apple is famous for making the same decision with the iPod and it's a smart decision.

 

I've met Miyamoto many times and love the guy, when I first met him he told me that Earthworm Jim was one of his favorite Western Characters, Howard Lincoln (who was the head of Nintendo USA) wrote to me to say he had an Earthworm Jim picture hanging in his son's bedroom! So I'm no Nintendo hater, the problem is that when I say how impressed I am with the design of the new controller, nobody could care less. When I say that I think the new games on PS3 and Xbox 360 are going to make heads turn away from the Wii, then I must be on crack.

 

So maybe I should be more clear on that. If you are a hardcore gamer, tell me you don't want to play the list below (in HD.)

 

If you are a hardcore gamer, I stand by what I say.

 

 

Assassains Creed

Killzone 2

Halo 3

Crysis

Metal Gear Solid 4

Gran Turismo 5

Little Big Planet

Resident Evil 5

The Simpsons Game

Guitar Hero III

Drake's Fortune

Haze

Call of Duty 4

Ratchet and Clank

Grand Theft Auto IV

Rock Band

Lair

Madden & FIFA 08

Mass Effect

 

etc.

 

I will be playing ALL of these games the first chance I get and I don't want to play any of them on the Nintendo Wii hardware.

 

He's an idiot.

 

As a "hardcore" gamer, I care about gameplay more than graphics. I don't even care for most of the games he listed.

 

I have Sky HD, half the time I can't be bothered going to Sky One HD because It doesn't really look that much better anymore - I just hit 106 and watch from there.

 

The same would apply to games. I want games that are nice to look at. When a game boasts "realistic" graphics, all I see are the many parts that are a mess. I can see plenty of things graphically wrong with Kilzone 2, Halo 3, etc. Because of that, they look ugly to me.

 

Mario Galaxy and MP3 look nice, they are pleasant to look at and easy on the eye. That's all I want. That's all most people want.

[jammy2211]

Short post to sum up why this guys an idiot.

 

He probably invested a huge amount of money into Sony and the PS3. Bought the shares, expected huge returns. Now he's about to lose the same sort of dosh he did on the PSP, he's crying about it.

 

His points are moot, and he's well out his league. End of the day, this is the guy who made games which were pretty much forgotten because Nintendo made better games, shame.

[Jasper]

Short post to sum up why this guys an idiot.

 

He probably invested a huge amount of money into Sony and the PS3. Bought the shares, expected huge returns. Now he's about to lose the same sort of dosh he did on the PSP, he's crying about it.

 

His points are moot, and he's well out his league. End of the day, this is the guy who made games which were pretty much forgotten because Nintendo made better games, shame.

 

You know, as I have said before, Dave Perry does have a point, actually. If Nintendo doesn't keep swinging out the pheripherals, gamers will move over to PS3 or 360. But here's even worse: when Nintendo announced Wii Fit and the Balance board, I told the local game shop guy that I rather had bought a PS3 or 360 and play games on it. I'm a Nintendo fan and I don't care that much for the prettier graphics, but the core gameplay of the old-fashioned titles it just better right now. There are barely any DS games that would play worse on PSP. There are barely any DS games that use the two screens for added functionality and not another map.

 

I'm not saying he's completely right, but he's got a point. Only time can tell what will happen and I will follow Nintendo nonetheless, but if it turns out Perry's right after all, it'll be shame on you guys.

[corkcrumbs]

when Nintendo announced Wii Fit and the Balance board, I told the local game shop guy that I rather had bought a PS3 or 360 and play games on it.

 

That's the nintendo strategy: new peripherals = fresh take on old games, and open up a market of new games.

The Wii Fit board will make snowboarding games, skiing games more fun, and it can be used as an exercise tool.

When you refer to playing "games games", do you mean action adventure games and platformers specifically?

Wii will see Galaxy this year and Resident Evil UC...

 

There are barely any DS games that would play worse on PSP. There are barely any DS games that use the two screens for added functionality and not another map.

 

Nintendogs, Big Brain Academy, Brain Training, PPL (the multiplayer aspects of seeing what the other/s are doing on the left screen), Elite Beat Agents (maybe put to weak usage here, I haven't gotten it yet, so I don't know, but having a story play out on the upper screen while ure playing is kinda funny I guess), Metroid Prime: Hunters, Zelda: PH and a bunch of other games, but I agree.. Nintendo should have made both screens touch sensitive for DS.. since as it is now it makes the upper screen static in some cases..

[jammy2211]

You know, as I have said before, Dave Perry does have a point, actually. If Nintendo doesn't keep swinging out the pheripherals, gamers will move over to PS3 or 360.

 

Why? Because you think so? I couldn't care less for Wii Fit and don't intend to buy a 360 or Ps3. What you think of gamers and what gamers are, most likely are two very different things. Nintendo have alot of challenges ahead of them, but I think they can fulfil keeping people interested with just the Wii Remote and Nunchuk combination, we haven't even scratched the surface of it's potential.

 

But here's even worse: when Nintendo announced Wii Fit and the Balance board, I told the local game shop guy that I rather had bought a PS3 or 360 and play games on it. I'm a Nintendo fan and I don't care that much for the prettier graphics, but the core gameplay of the old-fashioned titles it just better right now.

 

So Nintend annouced one game that you don't like, and that completely ruins the fact they're releasing 4 absolutely huge games in a short time span (SMG, MP3, SSBB and Mario KArt) along with other great hits such as battalion Wars 2 and Fire Emlem? You're over reacting or something, cause I still see a huge amount of potential in the Wii line up.

 

There are barely any DS games that would play worse on PSP. There are barely any DS games that use the two screens for added functionality and not another map.

 

I really don't know what DS games you're playing, I'm seriously lost on that one. Buy some games like Elite Beat Agents and Taiko Drum MAster. Just look at Phantom Hourglass, controlled entirely with the Touch screen, and receiving huge praise for it - do you even own a DS? :S

 

I'm not saying he's completely right, but he's got a point. Only time can tell what will happen and I will follow Nintendo nonetheless, but if it turns out Perry's right after all, it'll be shame on you guys.

 

There is no limit on creativity, as long as there is a games designer out there with a new, unique and innovative idea then the Wii could see amazing games. The PS3 / 360 can reach a dead end in terms of realistic graphics, but gameplay and artistic value have no limit, no matter what the hardware restrictions.

[Jasper]

That's the nintendo strategy: new peripherals = fresh take on old games, and open up a market of new games.

The Wii Fit board will make snowboarding games, skiing games more fun, and it can be used as an exercise tool.

When you refer to playing "games games", do you mean action adventure games and platformers specifically?

Wii will see Galaxy this year and Resident Evil UC...

 

Fun snowboarding games? Did you just fall of your board there? Since apart from being able to perform stupif moves on a board and look like a total jerk, it sounds like a stupid concept in the whole. Games games are games with buttons. No offense, but I downloaded Paper Mario recently and I finally had the experience Nintendo hadn't offered me in a year or two. Do we really want this? Games for everyone? Is it good for anything but Nintendos cashfund?

 

I'm not against the Wiimote - great concept. I'm not totally against the Balance Board, but as I said before - we're paying way to much for useless pheripherals. Like the Wii Zapper - it is a useless piece of plastic. Like the Wheel - it is a useless piece of plastic. But a balance board? That feels indrecibly stupid. And again, I need to find a place to put that thing when it's not in use. And I need a pair of abtteries to use it, too.

 

I have always thought that if Nintendo did the even smarter thing and made their console as powerfull as their competitors and then added the new remote, it would have been a better console. It would have make them stand out. Now PS3 and 360 stand out in graphics and Wii in GamePlay. Let me draw you a graph, here.

 

 

As you can read an see, no-one stands out exceptionally this generation. Now couldn't Nintendo have increased their graphics and then added gameplay. It would really make them stand out.

[DCK]

No, they couldn't have. The Wiimote is a far more versatile control method than buttons will ever hope to be, and graphics are not the way forward. They might enhance some games, but don't pretend the graphics 'compensate' for a Wiimote. You can't add up quality like that.

[Jasper]

Why? Because you think so? I couldn't care less for Wii Fit and don't intend to buy a 360 or Ps3. What you think of gamers and what gamers are, most likely are two very different things. Nintendo have alot of challenges ahead of them, but I think they can fulfil keeping people interested with just the Wii Remote and Nunchuk combination, we haven't even scratched the surface of it's potential.

 

 

 

So Nintend annouced one game that you don't like, and that completely ruins the fact they're releasing 4 absolutely huge games in a short time span (SMG, MP3, SSBB and Mario KArt) along with other great hits such as battalion Wars 2 and Fire Emlem? You're over reacting or something, cause I still see a huge amount of potential in the Wii line up.

 

Four greats games in a short span of time. And what after that? What if they first wave of big titles is over? What will they do the year after? I'm pretty sure the other consoles have great plans for that, but Nintendo itself hasn't announced any great new franchises since they announced 'Wii Whatever', sticking Wii with a nice little word and hoping it appeals everyone. What after is the most important question. There's potential, but what will be the control method for shooters? It'll be thee bogstandard that Red Steel and Metroid Prime 3 left behind. Everyone will copy that control sheme and gone is innovation once again. And you all know it, so don't try.

 

I really don't know what DS games you're playing, I'm seriously lost on that one. Buy some games like Elite Beat Agents and Taiko Drum MAster. Just look at Phantom Hourglass, controlled entirely with the Touch screen, and receiving huge praise for it - do you even own a DS? :S

 

On these shores the best games use the second screen as a map. That doesn't make the games bad, though. It's just so innecessary to have a second screen. I would have been pleased by a Game Boy with Touch Screen and better graphics than the Advance (the DS graphics are top for that size of screen, anyway).

 

There is no limit on creativity, as long as there is a games designer out there with a new, unique and innovative idea then the Wii could see amazing games. The PS3 / 360 can reach a dead end in terms of realistic graphics, but gameplay and artistic value have no limit, no matter what the hardware restrictions.

 

And why exactly can't the PS3 or 360 have innovative titles, too? My Beautifull Katamari was released on PS2 - don't forget that. And the Katamari creator is working on another innovative game. FLoW is out on PS3 - isn't that innovative? Innovation is possible as well on those consoles as on Wii.

 

Why doesn't anybody get that the games we all know and love to play with added Wii-mote functionality isn't enough for some people? Just adding Wiimote functionality is not good enough. And untill Nintendo can prove me that the Wiimote is really suited for everything, I will remain sceptical. Really since with Wii Fit they've proven that you can buy another pheripheral and forget about the Wiimote, while we're not even accustomed to it yet. Don't you see where I'm taking this? I'm trying to ask an important question here. Does gameplay really matter if you have to chunk out another $/£/€250 to play? I really don't get it.

 

I love the Wii Remote, but adding functionality and innovation bgy adding another pheripheral is just sad.

[DCK]

Four greats games in a short span of time. And what after that? What if they first wave of big titles is over? What will they do the year after? I'm pretty sure the other consoles have great plans for that, but Nintendo itself hasn't announced any great new franchises since they announced 'Wii Whatever', sticking Wii with a nice little word and hoping it appeals everyone. What after is the most important question. There's potential, but what will be the control method for shooters? It'll be thee bogstandard that Red Steel and Metroid Prime 3 left behind. Everyone will copy that control sheme and gone is innovation once again. And you all know it, so don't try.

Maybe your problem is a hopeless pessimistic attitude towards Nintendo. Why would they stop making good games after they released some of their biggest franchises? Don't act as if Nintendo is some retard company that has no idea of what they're doing.

 

About that control issue - you pick an easy genre for your argumentation. FPSes don't innovate, ever. And even so, if this control innovation is copied over and over, it is still much (very much) better than the dual stick controls of the other console.

 

On these shores the best games use the second screen as a map. That doesn't make the games bad, though. It's just so innecessary to have a second screen. I would have been pleased by a Game Boy with Touch Screen and better graphics than the Advance (the DS graphics are top for that size of screen, anyway).

Just because some games use a map doesn't render the second screen useless. Games like Hotel Dusk, AWDS and Metroid Prime Hunters make good use of the second screen, and for those games it's justified. Not all games have to innovate just because it's an innovative console.

 

And why exactly can't the PS3 or 360 have innovative titles, too? My Beautifull Katamari was released on PS2 - don't forget that. And the Katamari creator is working on another innovative game. FLoW is out on PS3 - isn't that innovative? Innovation is possible as well on those consoles as on Wii.

All innovation on the other consoles is rather limited and comes from wacky (don't mean bad) ideas rather than genre innovations. Those are possible on Wii too. The Wii's innovation is broader, as can be seen in examples like the Star Cursor in Mario Galaxy or any random racer's Wii controls.

 

Why doesn't anybody get that the games we all know and love to play with added Wii-mote functionality isn't enough for some people? Just adding Wiimote functionality is not good enough. And untill Nintendo can prove me that the Wiimote is really suited for everything, I will remain sceptical. Really since with Wii Fit they've proven that you can buy another pheripheral and forget about the Wiimote, while we're not even accustomed to it yet. Don't you see where I'm taking this? I'm trying to ask an important question here. Does gameplay really matter if you have to chunk out another $/£/€250 to play? I really don't get it.

I get it, I'm like that too. I too want better graphics but until Wii2 the Wii is _the_ console, no question about it.

 

Also, your logic is wrong. It's not 'does the Wiimote suit everything?' but 'does everything suit the Wiimote?'. The Wii is not a console on which you can port everything that existed last generation - it's not a 360. Games need to be redefined on it sometimes.

 

By the way, do graphics really matter if you have to chuck out another $/€400 to play?

 

I love the Wii Remote, but adding functionality and innovation bgy adding another pheripheral is just sad.

I don't get where you get that peripheral idea, most are just options anyway. I don't go calling the PS2 sad for the Eye Toy either. If they make for fun games, why are they sad?

[jammy2211]

Four greats games in a short span of time. And what after that? What if they first wave of big titles is over? What will they do the year after? I'm pretty sure the other consoles have great plans for that, but Nintendo itself hasn't announced any great new franchises since they announced 'Wii Whatever', sticking Wii with a nice little word and hoping it appeals everyone. What after is the most important question. There's potential, but what will be the control method for shooters? It'll be thee bogstandard that Red Steel and Metroid Prime 3 left behind. Everyone will copy that control sheme and gone is innovation once again. And you all know it, so don't try.

 

We don't know what happens in 2008, that's probably because we're still in 2007. Microsofts E3 conference was dedicated entirely to games coming out in 2007, what happens after Halo 3? We don't know, but we know it'll still have some kick arse games, as all consoles will.

 

Nintendo will have plans ahead for 2008, we know of 5 games (Kirby, Pikmin 3, Disaster: Day of Crisis, Animal Crossing, Mario KArt) and really it's not worth speculating what comes next.

 

We really can't predict what will happen with the control scheme. Metoird Prime 3 has received huge critical acclaim in hands-on previews, and if it's as perfect as it's suggested to be, then the Wii no doubt has a great future in the FPS genre. Companies keep saying the PS3 still has alot of potential etc, but so do the Wii Controls, companies arn't just going to run out of ideas.

 

 

On these shores the best games use the second screen as a map. That doesn't make the games bad, though. It's just so innecessary to have a second screen. I would have been pleased by a Game Boy with Touch Screen and better graphics than the Advance (the DS graphics are top for that size of screen, anyway).

 

It's what you prefer, some people much prefer having two screens and just getting rid of the fact you have to push start to get to your menu interface is good. The second screen has been used very effectively to make games impossible on another console, some games don't need it but that's the beauty of both the Wii and DS, they're still allowing tradition games if that's what is going to be made.

 

 

 

And why exactly can't the PS3 or 360 have innovative titles, too? My Beautifull Katamari was released on PS2 - don't forget that. And the Katamari creator is working on another innovative game. FLoW is out on PS3 - isn't that innovative? Innovation is possible as well on those consoles as on Wii.

 

It is possible, no one said it isn't. All we're saying is, how can the Wii run out of potential or life when this innovation is present, and even more possible on the Wii. All the unique and innovative games will be developed on the Wii, simply due to it's much cheaper developement costs, who is going to risk developing a completely unproven-yet-innovative idea for $20 million on a ps3 or 360?

 

Why doesn't anybody get that the games we all know and love to play with added Wii-mote functionality isn't enough for some people? Just adding Wiimote functionality is not good enough. And untill Nintendo can prove me that the Wiimote is really suited for everything, I will remain sceptical. Really since with Wii Fit they've proven that you can buy another pheripheral and forget about the Wiimote, while we're not even accustomed to it yet. Don't you see where I'm taking this? I'm trying to ask an important question here. Does gameplay really matter if you have to chunk out another $/£/€250 to play? I really don't get it.

 

I love the Wii Remote, but adding functionality and innovation bgy adding another pheripheral is just sad.

 

Nintendo arn't aiming Wii Fit at you, it's purpose is to aim at a different market who alot of don't ever play games, or people who might buy a Wii for their son but then buy this to keep fit. Not every game Nintendo make is designed around your needs, welcome to the real world.

 

The WIi Remote is still unproven in my eyes, but I don't think we've honestly had any of the best games yet. A few games were impressive controls (Godfather, Scarface) but lets wait until we get things like Super Mario Galaxy, Metroid Prime 3 and Zack and Wiki before judging it completely. As I said, the DS features were not being utilized very well in the first year of it's life span.

[Jonwah]

Are we soley arguing wii + gamers now? Or wii + gamers + non-gamers?

I don't want to sound harsh, but it doesn't matter what we think. Whether or not we like the balance board or the wii's graphical capabilities. We're not non-gamers so we aren't Nintendo's current main target audience.

They're a business and it's their job to make money. Fair enough, they often do it in a fun and innovative way, but still, it doesn't matter what we want if they're aiming their products at somebody else.

We should just get used to it. And enjoy what we're getting. And I guess... enjoy their current financial success. Because it's gonna keep going on like this as long as there are more non-gamers than gamers.

[jammy2211]

Are we soley arguing wii + gamers now? Or wii + gamers + non-gamers?

I don't want to sound harsh, but it doesn't matter what we think. Whether or not we like the balance board or the wii's graphical capabilities. We're not non-gamers so we aren't Nintendo's current main target audience.

They're a business and it's their job to make money. Fair enough, they often do it in a fun and innovative way, but still, it doesn't matter what we want if they're aiming their products at somebody else.

We should just get used to it. And enjoy what we're getting. And I guess... enjoy their current financial success. Because it's gonna keep going on like this as long as there are more non-gamers than gamers.

 

Nintendo are still making alot of games aimed at us though... it doesn't seem like they've forgotten us, just that they're going after other markets at the same time.

[Cube]

Nintendo are still making alot of games aimed at us though... it doesn't seem like they've forgotten us, just that they're going after other markets at the same time.

 

With the success of Mario Kart, Zelda, New Super Mario Bros and the like on DS; they are doing rather well with games that suit both markets. We'll probably see more and more.

 

 

It's funny.... last generation Gran Turismo 5, Guitar Hero, Grand Theft Auto, Movie tie-ins and EA Sports games were considered "casual" games. Kinda shows how much the market has expanded, doesn't it?

[DCK]

Back then casual gamers were still people our age. Now casual gamers are people living in retirement homes...

[Cube]

Back then casual gamers were still people our age. Now casual gamers are people living in retirement homes...

 

True, back then they were my age. (I was 8 or 9 when I got GTA, I was a casual gamer back then).

[Caris]

I agree with him.

[Jonwah]

I still often think of myself as a casual gamer because although I love games, I don't get to play them that often. But that's not what it means anymore is it? I'm nowhere near what a 'casual gamer' has turned into now. A casual gamer is someone who knows absolutely nothing about games except "swing the controller... and weigh yourself"

[Cube]

I still often think of myself as a casual gamer because although I love games, I don't get to play them that often. But that's not what it means anymore is it? I'm nowhere near what a 'casual gamer' has turned into now. A casual gamer is someone who knows absolutely nothing about games except "swing the controller... and weigh yourself"

 

"casual" and "hardcore" both have many, many different meanings. It's just PR crap, really.

[Jamba]

Hmmm... tbh I dont see the PS3s future looking so good if Epic can't pull their finger out of their ass and get U3E working on the platform. Too many games are becoming time exclusives for the 360 because of it so I think they should be more worried about things in their own camp.