@ I_are_Cake
I think you missed my point...
First and foremost, if you enjoy playing FPS, Point n' Clicks, Strategy games, or whatever, cool. I'm not mad at you or against you for doing so. Still, why should gaming to limited to just a handful of genres, and what makes you, me, or anyone else that plays games in perhaps a more dedicated manner more worthy of playing games than those who may be less dedicated? What you play or how long you play it is your business, but you or the games you play shouldn't be labeled in a derogatory sense, the way the "casual" term is used in the video game world today. I also agree that the "hardcore" term is no better, but in the sense that it is used in this industry for the most part to imply superiority in some way. BOTH terms should be done away with, never to return or be replaced by similar terms again, or otherwise, the gaming industry may be in trouble sooner than many realize.
At the end of the day, you just never know who will draw interest in what. Perhaps one day, someone that started off playing Wii Sports will eventually get into strategy games, point n' click games, heck, even FPSs. And guess what? That would be a positive for the industry as a whole. However, no one will everyone know if the industry and and many of its dedicated masses treat the so-called "casuals" as inferior. Nothing positive tends to come out of exclusive philosophies of this sort, and shunning newcomers that gain an interest in gaming in way of questionable terms and stereotypes is a very exclusive philosophy. Even if newcomers just continue to enjoy what got in into gaming, it's better than not having them around at all. I, for one, enjoy it whenever I see a kid playing a DS game or watch a news article of a group of senior citizens playing Wii Sports bowling, as it means they're understanding the appeal of video games and may be interested in exploring more about them, even if they eventually don't.
Last but not least, there is significant substance in simplicity. Not every game has to be a grand, "epic" opus that many high profile games are today, and to be able to create quality pick up-and-play titles that can be played an innumerable amount of times, regardless of how long they're being played at any one stretch, takes brilliance and incredible game design in its own right, especially in this day and age. The fact that Nintendo has been by far the most successful at creating the various types of 'simple' games the past few years, while everyone else have drawn mostly blanks, should be enough to indicate that it does require something special to make them and make them appealing to players of all ages and backgrounds. Does that mean everyone will enjoy them? Of course not, but they are relevant to the industry's success and many of its consumers, and should be respected as such.
I may not enjoy FPSs much (even though I have been capable to account for quite a few headshots in my Goldeneye 007 days, lol), but I'm not against them. I am, however, against them and the other games that appeal to the limited 18-35 "hardcore" crowd out there being the only gaming options I have one day, especially when they're not my favorite kinds of games to play. I'd like to have a gaming future to look forward to where I can not only play games alone, but play along with my younger relatives, future kids, or whoever has an interest in joining me for the ride. So if you find my comments as a way of 'worrying', I guess in a sense I am, but not just for the so-called "casual gamers" of the world. I question whether or not the gaming universe with the way most see it today will even have a place for me down the line, to be honest.
Madmangamer364
As long as there's PC gaming, gaming will stay unique. My question is why should young kids & seniors play video games when there are so many other activities for them to do (for seniors, there's a bucket list)? Most seniors have no interest in video games (unless you count this 
Log in to comment