Player type

Question is Hardcore player, casual, Motion control hardcore, or motion control casual?

Actual question: Should developers spend more time talking about games for hardcore or casual or should it 50/50. Can Developers or Companys promote all the categories or is it fair ti shine more than the other. Do you think motion control gaming is the next Hardcore or will controllers all ways be first even 20 years from now. 



Discussion Info

Last updated July 4, 2018 Views 0 Applies to:

* Please try a lower page number.

* Please enter only numbers.

* Please try a lower page number.

* Please enter only numbers.

Its hard to say really, Motion control is better and more entertaining for casual players like children and family's. But for hardcore players the tech is just not there yet. The one problem I see is that FPS is the biggest format for any system and motion control cant yet exceed in this area.  And some players prefercontrollers because that's what they are used to and in some games its the only choice.

If you look back about 20 years ago, alot of systems used about 3-4 buttons and ran at about 8-16 bit graphics. 10-15 years l8r controllers have moved on to about 14-15 buttons. So yes I can see in about 20 years controllers will be replaced but motion control.

But motion control needs to be improved and also remain simple to use. If motion control becomes easier to use then a controller, then I think hardcore players may make the switch, however it isnt  for everyone so company's need to make sure they continue to develop games with still supports controllers. Or hardcore players may move onto a format with does support their play type.

Thanks for the response Imo I feel like motion control is feared. With every announcement like Graw's E3 demo or Fable alot people we turned off. I saw potential and I saw it being easier to use for some disabled people even ones wheel chair bound. I just don't want to have to stick with the controller now that I see the conrtroller is not important as it used to be.

Balance will benefit both.

I think it's important to satisfy every gamer, not just hardcore gamers, not just casual gamers, so I think a balance would also be fair.

Remember always log in to your windows live ID regularly and never wait 90 days between signing in.

I really don't see it lasting too long in the general gaming community, at least not as a replacement for traditional controllers. Look at the Wii... It sold ridiculously well, and now the majority of them collect dust. The ones that don't are pretty much limited to little kids, the handicapped & retirement homes. Move isn't exactly moving off shelves, and Kinect... Well, yes, it is selling, but so did Wii. There isn't much outside of fitness programs, some sports games (like bowling), and a few other very specific genres/games that controllerless control is really appropriate for, even if done well. I hate the terms casual & hardcore, and try to stay away from them, but motion control is only really well suited to casual type play. Maybe it will catch on, but as successful as the Wii has been, even Nintendo isn't continuing with it (at least not primarily) next generation. If Kinect is to become any new kind of standard, Microsoft is going to have to ram it down their player's throats & really give them no other choice.

TC, or anyone else interested in this subject, check out this book, recently read it myself-

I would consider myself hardcore-- though I don't have nearly as much time to play as I'd like, I get very deeply invested in my games, and have been playing since very young. I'd say my knowledge of gaming and the industry is above average, at least for an adult woman. Also, I do not like motion controls. First, the games I enjoy (RPGs and open-world do-anything games) really do not need them, second, I have plenty of hobbies that keep me active, and after a long, stressful day at work, I just want to plop back in my comfy papasan chair with a regular control and veg out.

I do see casual-hardcore as a spectrum with a lot of gray areas, though I do think that the one thing developers should NOT do try to appeal to both extremes of the spectrum with the same game. It never seems to work. Try to go after part of the spectrum, but not all. That said, I want them to develop both. I may not be into "casual" games as much (easy-to-learn games that require little time investment per session-- simple puzzle, games, solitare, ect.), though I admit I love ones like Tetris and Mah Jong, but I know the importance of the audience. Because of such games, gaming has become more the norm than NOT gaming.

Thanks I'll look in to the book.

I still have no idea how playing games can be considered 'hardcore.' Is it the amount of time you spend doing it? If so, then why are there 'types of games' that are supposed to cater to types of players. It really makes no sense. If a game is great, I'll   buy it, regardless of what it is supposed to cater to.

The controller based gamers that except nothing but a contoller these are the gamers that will spend a large amount of time finding new ways to always win and tune there style to suit any update that nerfs there weapon of choice

I'm not sure if you were answering what hardcore is xPlayBoyMagicx. I appreciate the attempt, if you were. I come from way back video games days, so I see all the breaking into groupings as a purely subjective idea. If there are some actual guidelines to all of it, I would find it interesting. I guess you may be saying that people who mainly use controllers, and to my experience, everyone fits that. So confusing.

* Please try a lower page number.

* Please enter only numbers.

* Please try a lower page number.

* Please enter only numbers.