
Originally Posted by
Dynamo of Eternia
I really don't see what "hardcore" gamers have to be so jaded about with the Wii.
We knew up front that it wasn't going to be the graphics-extravaganza that the PS3 and 360 are, and it was going to be a very different type of system overall.
Sure, there are a lot of crap games on the system, but those are mostly 3rd party "shovelware" games (even the PS2, the #1 system of the last generation, had A LOT of crap games on it in addition to the ones that were good). Most of the first party stuff on the Wii is pretty top-notch, as it typically has been for Nintendo's past consoles. And there is enough of it to make the system worth owning (at least in my opinion).
Granted, it's not the system that I use the most currently (that tends to be the PS3 in my case), but I'm still very glad to own the Wii for the games that are good on it.
I do understand and agree with the frustration regarding having to enter all of those codes to compete online, but that's the only significant complaint that I can really see with the system.
Frankly the worst thing about this generation of consoles has been this whole "hardcore VS. casual gamers" nonsense and what makes someone one type of gamer or another .... as if everyone falls squarely within one category or the other. Frankly, in my case, compared to most truly "hardcore" gamers, I'd probably be considered pretty casual (i.e. I'm not really that competitive online or anything like that), but given the amount of systems and games that I own and play, I would look pretty "hardcore" compared to very, very casual gamers.
Additionally, the labeling of systems as being for "casual" or "hardcore" gamers has really gotten out of hand. Sure, I can see where out of the 3 systems, the Wii would be the most attractive to casual gamers.... there is a lot more stuff available for it that people can just pick up and play without having a ton of past gaming experience. But at the same time, there's enough good material (mainly in the way of first party games) that many serious gamers would be and are interested in to keep them occupied as well.
Not to mention that is seems like (based on what stereotypically defines a "hardcore" gamer) you aren't considered a "hardcore gamer" unless you spend over 90% of your gaming time playing first person shooters in online-multiplayer mode. Well excuse me if those games don't interest me much.
Frankly, I think too many people have more or less been brainwashed into these relatively new stereotypes of what constitutes a casual or hardcore gamer that have popped up within the past few years and jump on that bandwagon if their basic preferences happen to be somewhat in line with the stereotype (which doesn't mean the stereotype is correct, it just means their specific opinions, which not everyone agrees with, happen to align with certain aspects of the stereotype).
If you happen to not have much interest in the Wii, that's fine.. maybe it's not your cup of tea. It doesn't mean that everyone else who likes it and even prefers it to the other systems is automatically not a "hardcore" gamer, nor does it make it strictly a "casual" system just because it doesn't happen to float your boat.
Nor does it mean that the 360 or the PS3 can't appeal to more casual gamers. Perhaps some people who aren't really big into gaming still want to play a few things, and maybe the offerings on PS3 or 360 just happen to appeal a bit more to them (possibly including some of those 1st person shooters that so often "define" a "hardcore" gamer).
The whole thing is ridiculous.