I just saw video of Contra Rebirth. I don’t get it. I don’t get why folks would buy older games, or even games in older styles like that.
I just can’t wrap my head around it.
You’re just not hardcore, dude.
Why? This whole argument is weird, because it seems to be ignoring history. Let’s say I’ve had the following game experiences over the course of the past couple of decades:
Colecovision
NES
Gameboy
Genesis
SNES
TurboGrafx 16
Playstation
Dreamcast
X-Box
Gamecube
Gamboy Advance
Playstation 2
Nintendo DS
PC games (including being there for the original Wolfenstein 3D, Doom, Command & Conquer, Warcraft, and being actively involved in PC gaming even as they were phased out in favor of consoles and MMOs…but I’ve still got a Steam account and TF2)
It’s a pretty substantial gaming history, right? Up until the most recent generation, anyone would look at that list and say, “Yeah, you’re a pretty serious gamer.” Am I right? (Well, I’m sure some people would insist on an actual list of games, but that would take far too long for the point I’m making.)
Now, I look at the current crop of consoles and decide the one I want to play most is the Wii, and I only buy that one. Have I suddenly lost my “core gamer” status? Why does the appeal of having SNES games to play again not count, considering the SNES was at its day the “core system”?
It could be. It could very well be.
No, but adding in the games that you’ve bought or played as games that you’re still playing and then counting them as games for your current system seems a little off.
In any case, I’m tired of the hardcore and regular gamers. We’re all hardcore, I just don’t like the Wii.
That’s pretty much how this entire thread looks from over here. =P
No More Heroes actually had a Director’s Cut edition released for PS3 and 360 (though I think the re-release isn’t being shipped out of Japan so you may not count it for purposes of a Wii-exclusive discussion).
ETA: Director’s Cut may not be accurate, it has some new gimmicky features and a graphics update, but not really “extended” like Director’s Cut implies.
You can be a hardcore gamer and play only Combat on an Atari 2600 as your only console, over and over and over again.
By the standards set in this thread, Steve Wiebe isn’t even a hardcore gamer. Even though in reality the guy is one of the most hardcore gamers on the planet.
In fact, the “director” wasn’t even involved with that project.
The claim originally wasn’t about being a “hardcore gamer”, just a “core gamer”. And I don’t think it’s unreasonable to suggest that a “core gamer” is someone that plays “core games”.
Seriously (speaking of which, I just met Steve Wiebe a few days ago at GDC–very nice guy).
At any rate, I’ve worked for two of the largest gaming publications around, have played all three current generation systems, and yet the Wii is unquestionably my favorite of the trio.
Am I not a “core” gamer?
What, pray tell, is the exact distinction between “core” and “hardcore.” God knows the definition we had been using for “hardcore” was flimsy and arbitrary enough as is.
Maybe we can explain it to you if you explain why you only would play newer games?
I mean, I’m not the biggest retro-gamer out there, but when a game is fun, it’s fun. Yeah, sometimes new developments make fun old games utterly frustrating, irrelevant, and unpleasant to look at, but some genres are static enough that it’s still fun. If nothing else, 2D Platformers and Side-Scrolling shooters are definitely among these, and these are the dominant targets of “nostalgia games.” That is to say, for every bell and whistle added on to the 2D platformer genre in the past 20 years said bell or whistle mostly has remained as a gimmick or hook in the series or company it originated from. If you think about it, there’s really not too much of a difference between New Super Mario Bros and Super Mario World, except they have different (not necessarily better or worse in either iteration) power ups, and one is prettier (which is also, I suppose, debatable depending on whether you like sprite animation or 2.5D more). Oh, and co-op, but if you play single player that’s a non-issue. Or for another example, take Megaman–still hard as hell, and the gameplay is still fun, so why wouldn’t it still be relevant to buy or play for people who enjoy that sort of gameplay?
I’m not saying it’s wrong you’re not into older-style games, if that’s not your cup of tea, I’m not crying. I’m sure there are games you like that I don’t, for instance, I dislike Halo, though that’s a little more narrow than “all old games.” I’m just trying to perhaps explain the appeal a little.
I’d say that “core” is defined by genre, actually. You may be a “core” CRPG player (eats up every semi-good CRPG out there), but not a “core” puzzle game player. A “core” general gamer would eat up every or most “AAA” games (I suppose defined by hype and/or critical and popular acclaim) he has access to. Still arbitrary, but hey.
“Hardcore” I’d define as the players of longevity: your achievement whores, your platinum league ladder players, your tournament clannites, your min/maxing RPG metagamers; the sort of people who are going to stay longer than is healthy for a weak exploring everything in a game they get, even if they’re not “core” they may be a “hardcore” player of a certain game or genre. Again, a “general” hardcore gamer would probably do this for more games than a more focused one.
Such as . . . Mario Galaxy? Twilight Princess? New SMB? Punch Out? The Metroid series? Super Paper Mario? de Blob? Super Smash Brothers Brawl? Bloom Blox? Mario Kart Wii? No More Heroes? Mad World? Can the Sony and Microsoft fans be core gamers while missing out on these games?
Seriously? I loved Mario Galaxy, don’t get me wrong, but I thought the entire thing was FAR too easy
um, yes, easily. Don’t get me wrong, I love my wii, but from everything I’ve played on the wii there are, quite honestly, better versions of games available on other systems, be they current gen or previous gen. I haven’t played De Blob or Mad World, but while Mario Galaxy was good Mario 64 was better. Super Paper Mario was “meh” in almost every way, imo, Brawl was decent but basically the same as Melee in every way other than a ridiculously long and boring “story” mode. Mario Kart Wii was ok, but nothing new. No More Heroes was fun, but again, nothing super special there. Bloom Blox I might actually give you as that was a fun party game. We’ve been over Twilight Princess and the Metroid series time and time again, so I won’t go into it again…
But New SMB Wii? Seriously? The game is fun, but basically every Super Mario Bros ever was better. Hell, 'splosion man on the x360 is MUCH better, much more innovative/original, and much more fun. I enjoy playing NSMBW every now and again, but it represents the pinnacle of lazy game design. They gave us 3 new power ups, the spin hat thing (which isn’t as good as the cape or the tanuki tail from SMW or 3), the ice flower and the penguin suit which are very similar. So we can really boil that down to 1 new power up, freeze balls. The level design is fun, better than NSMBDS, but everything else about the game is just rehashed. THey didn’t even bother giving us 4 unique characters to play in multiplayer, which is just insulting. I dunno, that game just pisses me off
Did you get every star or merely beat the game? Beating the game = very easy. Getting every last %^damn %^&ing star = not very easy. Luigi’s Purple Coins comes to mind as one of the hardest boards in any game, ever.
I couldn’t disagree more. I currently have and have recently played both, and there’s just no comparison to me. Galaxy took what 64 started and made it better in every reasonably conceivable way.
I actually agree, but I listed it because so many others love it.
Actually I definitely see your point here. I was frustrated with what I felt to be a lack of creativity in level design and powerups, HOWEVER . . . I played the shit out of it, so, despite my best efforts, I still loved it. I’m trying to convince myself that they were just leaving a lot of room for improvement in the sequel.
But I could make the same or similar complaints about most 360/PS3 games. So many of them have badass graphics and cutscenes, and often even cool stories, but just. aren’t. fun.
It all boils down to image and marketing. PS3 and 360 have established themselves as the “cool” systems, so no matter how great the games on the Wii are, it’s always gonna be the “girlie” system with the “casual party games.”
The point is that Nintendo has been a staple of console gaming for two decades now. Twenty years. If anything can lay claim to the term “core,” it’s the Mario franchise.
Edit: Cisco snuck in ahead of me. This was in response to PopeJewish.
This is such a ridiculous assertion. I could say the same thing about PS3 or 360.
Bioshock: System Shock was better
Halo 3: Halo 1 was better.
Modern Warfare: Call of Duty 2 was better
Heavy Rain: Indigo Prophecy was better
Etc, etc, etc. Just because a game isn’t as good as another doesn’t preclude it from being really fucking awesome.
Good question. I grew up with a Commodore 64, then a NES, a SNES, and then an N64. After that, I didn’t have a game system. Instead, I kept playing over at my friends’ house, where they had a PlayStation 2 and an Xbox. I played Mario 3. I played all the 2D games. I don’t want to go backwards. One of the things I wanted most when playing Street Fighter 2 on the Super Nintendo was the ability to play against other people I had never met before and to see how good or bad I was. I could play the single-player game all day and night, but it’s not the same as playing another person. I don’t usually buy games for the single-player mode (if it has a multiplayer mode). I don’t have any interest in a story. It’s all about replayability for me. It’s all about playing with and against people I know either personally, or over the Internets, meeting new people, and playing against them.
I’ve never played Braid. I’m not going to play Xplosion Man. I’m not going to play Mega Man 9. I’ve already played those games, I’ve already played that genre, and there’s nothing more it can offer to me. If someone put a copy of the game in my hand, I’d play it, but I wouldn’t seek it out. That’s pretty much how I got exposure to Super Mario Galaxy. My girlfriend’s brother, who loves open source software and won’t touch anything Microsoft gave it over to us to try out. Good game, but I’d have never got it otherwise. To return the favor, I brought my Xbox over and made him play Left 4 Dead. After he got used to the controller (he had never used a controller with two analog sticks), he liked it, so horizons have been broadened.
Super Mario Wii sounds intriguing, but I won’t pull the trigger because I’ve got games I’m playing now that I really enjoy, with other titles that I anticipate on the way.
Also, my Wii won’t turn on.