Lost Winds dev: Reviewers are a problem with low Wii metacritic scores

I read Metacritic scores for a reason. Games that I was excited for that get really bad reviews let me know to cool my heels and reconsider a $60 purchase based solely on my hope and desire for the game to be something great that I had been making it out to be, but just didn't happen. Likewise, games that I was not much interested in that get really good reviews have helped steer me towards some very good games I would not have otherwise played like Bioshock and Mass Effect. In short, I would rather spend my time and money, and support quality developed games rather than buying a game based on an awesome game trailer or box.

Casual gamers can and do benefit from this same argument. They can spend their money on good games they simply did not know about and avoid getting little Jimmy a big turkey game for Christmas. Therefore, the money goes to the good developers and sends a message to other companies to stop making crap games with a great looking box and trailer to simply cash in.

@Ben Gilbert

Hardcore != Core

The video game industry was built on 8-13 year old kids playing NES, SNES, and Genesis consoles, so kid and family gaming is the original "core". 20-somethings playing Xbox online came later as "hardcore" gamers. There's no doubt that hardcore gamers have become a core-demographic, they are not the exclusive "core" because there are still as many (if not more) 8-13 year old kids playing today as there were 20 years ago, and Christmas sales to parents (buying for their kids) is still a core driving force in the industry.

It was never core vs casual. It is good vs crap. I like my puzzle games and board games as much as the next guy. Those games are right along side my Mario and Unreal and Final Fantasy games. When talking about casual games, many people "forgive" horribly boring or broken gameplay. "Oh, well, it's casual. It's just to kill time with." Aren't all video games used to kill time and have fun doing it? Hardcore, core, and causal labels may be a good indicator about who is being marketed to or maybe what the complexity of the gameplay. It is NOT an indicator of quality or fun.

Well, here's the thing. 'Casual gamers', your mom's and pop's that are picking up Carnival games, they are not reading this website. They are not reading IGN, Gamespot, Kotaku, none of these sites. The people reading these sites are the 'core' gamers, and as such, it should continue catering to our needs.

As far as meta-critic scores go, I doubt that has anything to do with the low sales numbers of Wii software. At the end of the day, mom and pop are not checking meta-critic scores before they buy a game. They are most likely influenced by Licensed material, a property they can recognize. Or in the case of first party nintendo games, a property they can recognize, such as a Mario game. Everyone knows mario, and it's why it sells. High meta-critic scores have not spelled success for other third party games, and if it doesn't work in this direction, why would it influence sales negatively. The dilemna for the Wii is the huge amount of shovelware on the system. If you are a casual gamer and go to gamestop to pick up a Wii game, you are assaulted by a slew of software you have no idea what is good. So the casual gamer gravitates to something he recognizes, i.e. Mario Kart Wii, or a licensed property like High School Musical. Original great games like Madworld, Zak & Wiki, and The Conduit will get buried and will not jump out at the customer. So casual games developers should look elsewhere for blame on why they can't sell anything on the Wii.

As long as a reviewer isn't biased right out of the gate then I don't see the problem. An open mind is needed for a fair review. It should be based upon how well a game works on the system reviewed without the graphics being compared to the PS3 or 360. While it is unlikely that soccer moms read the review of a game before giving it to their children, I still believe that there is a place for the critics regardless. Bias is pretty transparent and turns people off so if the critic feels like he has alot to lose he wouldn't write a review that ignites a flame war. There have been lots of games that I liked that got low review scores simply because the gameplay was considered dated and not "the thing" when they came out and I am sure the critics didn't help sales whatsoever but predatory game developers who create feces shouldn't be allowed to sell crap as far as I'm concerned.

It's not that hard, just have a casual games reviewer and a coregamer reviewer.

Dennis Dyack was right.. those guys just don't get it...

The guy is right. The game sites are blood thirsty and sd aversive. They have too much invested in gamepads and the rates of sedentary behavior are higher than average among this crowd.

I never totally understood it.

I mean I can play "core" games and yet still have just as much fun playing a bud in WiiSports. It's the most revolutionary game of this generation.

The Core Game reviewer though says, the graphics are 1996 lol, there aren't 30 dozen modes, you can't play online, you can't control your guy in tennis and you can cheat by faking the motion. 6/10.

I'd say that Joystiq has to keep an eye on casual front.

As for me, "core gaming" is something stuck in SNES era and unwilling to leave the basement.

Casual gaming as it is now is something absolutely new (*). The problem with reviews is a sure sign of that. Loads of shovelware are inevitable. But still one has much more chances of finding a new gem among the games, rather than among remakes of rehashes of past successful sequels to the old franchises.

(*) Just think about it. First Mario game and (S)NES in its time had all chances to be written off as a casual shovelware by some. Video games were new and not that widely recognized/adopted as they are now. Whole generation grew on SNES success - and now it is widely accepted and recognized. Remember that some (== few) of the casual titles now would surely become a "classic" decade/two later.

Although i agree with what he's saying i think David Braben has gotten a bit arrogant, when he came into my Uni not long ago he was speaking to us and we just got the vibe that he thought he knew more about everything than anyone else.

Granted he has the game industry experience i suppose =/

I'll have it all, please. I would prefer to make my own decision based on all the information available, rather than a select bit that youv'e chosen for me. I subscribe to the ultrafeed for a reason!!

I hope Frontiers released this during a coffee break - they better not be wasting precious time that could be used to get LostWinds 2 on WiiWare. I have points waiting for them whenever they do.

Two years ago I would've said both. Back when the 'casual' games were still a novel idea and kinda fun. Now the market is flooded with them, and no self-respecting gamers care about them anymore, yet parents keep buying the rubbish for themselves, and for both older and very young relatives. I for one believe, having been a devout Nintendo gamer up until a year ago, that the core gamers need to make a stand and protest about the lack of proper games for their consoles. Yes, I know some good games are coming, but they're drowned out 20 to 1 by cheap 'me too!' casual games, which is what has prompted me, for one, to become much more interested in the PS3 and PSP in recent times. Not that I regret branching out, but it saddens me that I felt I needed to escape from just playing Nintendo consoles, and I know many other feel the same. So yeah, I guess my point is, focus on core games! ^_^;

Dont forget that video games are all about simulating reality in some way or other. You cant say if someone is going to love one game and hate another. In short, you have to cover all games for the sake of gamers and gaming. If the next version of 'my princess wardrobe' is an awsome addictive experience Im going to want to know about it. On the flip side, if the next version of Sega Virtua Tennis for Wii Motion plus sucks because it doesnt work like it should likely because it was rushed out the door to try and pip EAs Wii Motion plus tennis effort to the post then Im going to want to know about that too. Its all about the rough with the smooth, the peaks and the troughs, the lows that make the highs seem that much higher, waking up behind the sofa with your eyebrows shaved off and shaving foam in your boxer shorts.

a majority of wii games are absolute drivel, thats not the reviewers fault.

There should be more casual/family gaming blogs out there...

Metacritic can honestly suck it. Although it does give a nice amount of reviews they still let trash in like Gamespot, GI and Eurogamer.

Even some gaming websites that I've never heard. I honestly don't care what number it has, it should be by letter or just buy, rent or pass.

Or gaming magazines do it like EGM where they have about 4 people and take the average. I know Metacritic does the same thing however it's brought down by shitty reviewers.

Also if something like Castle Shikigami 4 comes out and gets an average of 6, that's fucking stupid imo. It's a shump it's suppose to be simple and yet hard.

Dumbass reviewers, review about content than the actual game sometimes.

I think you should review games, and review them as games. Why is there even need for a discussion? The only reason I come to Joystick is because of your dedicated part to Nintendo, otherwise you'd just be another site to read reviews on.
Me, I don't think I'll ever be a hardcore game. Halo and Gears bored me, I've been suck in Ravenholm in HL2 for two years, just finished God of War and found it kind of annoying, etc. I appreciate that people like them, and I like knowing what's going on in gaming, even though I'm not a big part of the whole experience.
So, yeah, like every other hardcore fanboy, I'd also like you to pander to me. Show me the fun games and help me evaluate whether I'd have fun with them.
Isn't that the point of the review industry?

It really all depends.

Casual people want to get their money's worth too. I'm glad I got steered towards Lego Star Wars (I would never have tried it on my own) and I WISH I'd read some Haze reviews before I played it. It goes both ways

Thats a pretty weak argument.

It does not take a genius to know that yes, reviewers review games for a more hardcore audience. Thats because casual gamers DONT READ REVIEWS. They don't care to frequent gaming websites, or read gaming magazines, they pick up something off the shelf that looks fun.

that makes a ton of sense, and i've thought that before because i remember when i was little my favorite SNES game was some mickey mouse thing, and i had mario too, but mickey mouse was just so much more appealing, which i can't really say now. so how about this? if you think its really just meant for a casual crowd and won't be enjoyed by a hard core crowd, then don't really review it, or like the first commenter said, make a joystiq KIDZ edition or something (to explain that we don't like it, but my lil brother will be entertained for months). but if you think its good no matter who you are (LBP for example...) then go ahead and review it, even if it only fairs like a B-

As a gaming hobbyist, I play and enjoy games of most genres across all platforms. The problem I see growing in this industry right now is that all these different control types (standard traditional controller, motion-control, camera, wiimote, and many more coming down the pipe) are creating an enormous strain on developer resources and essentially fragmenting the marketplace. All three of the console manufacturers debuted either an upgrade to or an outright new motion-sensing control interface at E3 due to the overwhelming success Nintendo's Wiimote has been, but I think that despite the great potential there is also very real danger.

Say you want a Wii 2 or an XBox 720 (as a couple of speculative examples) a few years from now. Let's look at what's going to be in the box, most likely; the console, the cables, and TWO controllers, but not in the traditional sense. There will be the old stand-by traditional controller as well as a motion-control device (Wiimote 2, etc). Why do I think this? Because any company wanting to attract BOTH the "hardcore" and the casual crowds will NEED both types of controller to compete in the next round of console wars; Sony and Microsoft covet Nintendo's newfound success, while Nintendo surely HAS to see that limiting the Wii's control scheme to the Wiimote has cost them dearly with regard to quality third-party support. But this is where the problem really starts. See those controllers? Say you want extras for your gaming buddies when they come over; at $50 (conservatively) a pop you'll be shelling out an extra $150 for three extras OF ONE TYPE for four-player play; $300 for three extra of BOTH types of controller, added to the initial cost of the system itself (expect the next round of consoles to all break the $300-500 barrier)--all before you even pay a cent for a GAME. It may be the stuff of dreams for gaming companies, but developers and hobbyists aren't enamored with the idea; it's going to create a permanent split in the marketplace. Hardcore enthusiasts, I hate to break it to you, but in this new war over "innovation in control" the first casualty will be the GAMES, and yes, I'm especially looking at you, Nintendo.

The winner of the next round of consoles will likely be determined by which company strikes the best balance, and let's face it, hardcore or casual, traditional or motion control, it's going to come down to the GAMES. I could care less about flailing around to make my character do things; the novelty of motion control WILL eventually wear off (for example, anybody out there actually prefer the Wii Wheel to the standard GameCube controller? Let's have a vote and see how many folks feel having to physically steer gives you any kind of competitive advantage). But as long as there are consumers willing to pay for gimmickry (I'm looking at you, Nintendo Vitality Sensor) we'll continue to see more MotionPlus equivalents come out at the expense of game development.

I've owned almost every game console and handheld since the Atari 2600, so believe me, I'm not being biased when I say that right now, Nintendo's appeal is fast dwindling to their long-time core audience. I saw only three Wii games at E3 that remotely appealed to me (New Super Mario Bros. Wii, Super Mario Galaxy 2, and Metroid: Other M), all are first-party, and the last two aren't even due out until NEXT YEAR. Why? Because if you noticed, virtually HALF of Nintendo's E3 show dealt with CONTROLLER ATTACHMENTS and stuff clearly aimed at holding onto that casual crowd (WiiFit Plus, anyone?). The XBox 360's star is fading fast, with a handful of exclusives left and a host of buyers who've been burned by the "Red Ring of Death" issue. To me, Sony was far and away the clear victor of this year's E3, because while they too unveiled a motion-sensing controller (and incidentally, one which looks to be far superior to the Wiimote and MotionPlus), it came second in priority to the GAMES themselves, which, let's face it, are now simply graphically untouchable even by the XBox 360 (Gran Turismo 5 and The Last Guardian really take my two "Best Graphics" honors this year).

Does that mean Nintendo is finished? With a staple of franchises like Zelda, Mario, Metroid, and many more, of course not. But watch for a paradigm shift in the big "N"'s focus over the next few years, especially as their next console launch nears. The good news is that their next console will likely be a graphical powerhouse to compete with the likes of Sony and Microsoft's machines, and they will likely employ, in some way, a more developer-friendly, traditional controller into the mix to attract more big third-party names and franchises. The bad news is, well, the good games that come out will likely still have to compete with a mountain of casual-centric shovelware, and the market will be split because of frankly too many different controllers, attachments, etc. Like it or not, the casual gamers are Nintendo's main focus and will be until the market dictates otherwise (i.e. they find some other novelty bandwagon to jump on). Until then, we hardcore folk are going to have to make do with the semi-annual or so "big release" title to tide us over.

Well, that's my little State of the Industry rant for now (Hey JoyStiq, you guys couldn't use a freelance writer by any chance, could you? Just thought I'd throw my hat into the ring). We'll see how things go from here, but the divide between casual and hardcore should only deepen as time passes, perhaps to the point where entire consoles will be dedicated to a specific type of audience.

let someone who has no background in journalism, video game technology, or even technology for that matter review our game. that way they have NO idea what to expect, what to compare/contrast to, look for, or even write about.

you know your game sucks when you're bashing critics, gamers, and journalists before your game even hits the market. should've thought about that before you decided to consider making a game for the Wii. Your game = GCN game + tacked-on motion controls/more weight-loss software

Well,

The way I look at it, nobody should put too much stock in the reviews anyway. To me, I'd rather look at the screenshots and get good, unbiased information about a game. To me, that seems something that can be done regardless of the type of game reviewed. Now, all subjective content is just the extra icing on the cake and I'm fine with the way things are on this site. I often do disagree, but I appreciate seeing the unique perspectives and witty comments here--you are a BLOG after all.

Peace,

manaman

No SIms, No Football/Sports, no Puzzle Games, No Mobile games?

I mean how do you label casual games? Just start reviewing them fairly.

It's insulting to say that it's not possible for "hardcore" reviewers to review casual, introduction to gaming style titles correctly. One important aspect of reviewing is to put yourself in to the mindset of the target audience and take that in to account with your final assessment.

There is however, no excuse for producing a terrible game, since there are LOADS of excellent casual titles out there to compare against. There are also loads of crap reviewers out there too, what a bucket of ugh!

What is a 'core' gamer? What is hardcore and what is casual?

Are Hardcore Games meant for Hardcore players? What exactly makes a Hardcore game Hardcore?

Frankly, the terms and labels that people have come up with are bullshit. A game is a game is a goddess be damned game. If you want to put labels on people for liking a certain genre, then get the fuck out, you're not a real gamer, you're just a wannabe fanboy that needs to grow up and get over yourself.

I'll never understand why people subject themselves to having only one console and bitch about the others, saying theirs is better and the other sucks and blahblahblah. That's your opinion, now keep it to yourself. Some of us might like those games.

Seriously, have any of the people that have ragged on the Imagine series from Ubisoft actually played them? I'm going to go and assume that the vast majority of naysayers about 'casual' games haven't. Also, people saying that 'casuals' are killing gaming? Yeah. Right. You're full of shit. Seriously, go smell yourself. One isn't just born into gaming right from the get go, people start in on it, enjoy it and pick up more.

I've noticed that the people complaining the loudest about this kind of thing also have the smallest game collections as well, what's up with that? Are you still hardcore if you only have 5-10 'hardcore' games? What about those 'casual' gamers that have about 30 different 'casual' games?

If someone has any answers to my above questions, I'd really appreciate your imput, honestly the above text isn't sarcasm for the most part. It really puzzles me on how people think like that.

I think it's time to eliminate the score system, only make reviews, I think most of the 'core' audience don't care about scores, and only read reviews too know what's the game about, how it plays, etc. And I think casual gamers know how to read.

cover whatever you like. i'm not into plastic instrument games, but i've seen post after post about them.

I am a 30 something mother of 2, we own all major consoles and handhelds. I have been gaming since I got my first Amiga at 14. I love casual games. I buy games for my children( 8 & 12) and they like games that are not too frustrating. My husband and I also have several FPS going on the bedroom PS3 right now. I also like to blow stuff up. In fact from where I am sitting, I can hear Ghostbusters on the Wii, my daughter is playing a Lego game on her DS (Batman perhaps?) and DH is playing Infamous. I am hoping to receive Mad World from Gamefly today, and also need to check in on Animal Crossing at some point.

Ok... we also do leave the house occasionally, but it is summer and we are playing catch-up as the kids don't have much screen time during the school year.
I enjoy being able to check out reviews on casual games and even crappy Wii Ware.
All gamers are not 16-24 yo males.

The thing is...its the hardcore that are reading these reviews. So to me, they're the right people.

Now if People magazine or Oprah wants to review a game, that's different. That's reaching mainstream. But the mainstream 'softcore' game player is not going to go to someplace like IGN to check out the score of a game. They're going to ask the nice boy at Toys R' Us if the game is any good for their kids.

Core gamers - ruining gaming one review at a time.

I think you can do both. Just keep in mind the target audience of whatever the game is, just like one would do when talking about a shooter or J-RPG. It's unnecessary to drop a whole demographic when you can simply be aware of how to handle them.

I'm not sure I agree with the whole core vs casual dichotomy. Be that as it may, I'd hate for you to not cover whole segments (or perceived segments) simply because you're not sure you can adequately address what you consider the target audience for a game. Should professional movie viewers not review children's movies because they are past puberty? Should men not review romantic dramedies or women not review gun-slingin' action flicks?

Who gets to draw the line, anyway?

The point is moot: most reviews are read by 'core' gamers anyway, and you should review whatever you like keeping in mind YOUR audience, not that targeted by the gaming industry. In short, keep reviewing whatever the hell you like, and don't let crybabies who get upset by your reviews change your coverage.

I have an idea. It's radical, so don't tell Microsoft or Sony. What if there were demos for the games. Someone could even rate the demo for others to see. That way casual gamers could rate casual games and hardcore games could be judged by hardcore gamers. When I got my first PC I wouldn't buy a game before trying out the freeware or shareware version first. Sorry, it's too crazy of an idea. It will never work. Forget I said anything Nintendo.

Don't cop out - the reviewers are giving us the best of what's available on each system, by and large. The target audience, or design philosophy (simple or complex? Realistic or representational? Violent or not?) plays a very small part in what constitutes "best". Witness positive feedback for titles like the Lego games, Braid, Katamari, etc. Like good journalistic entities, review sites also try to be fair, which means giving Nintendo equal attention. The readers (and reviewers) are smart enough to recognize the intended audience of the game put forward for review, and review it on that basis. If your simple, non-violent, representational games aren't being as well-reviewed as those of other systems, Nintendo, it could indicate a quality problem.
P.S. - Pandering and condescending towards children is insulting. Simple ideas still needs good execution to be quality, and even a baby knows crap by scent. These kids will be core gamers soon, and they'll remember who served them best when they start to spend their own money, and want more than "Mario goes to College".

I say definitely as a core game I still don't want to miss out on a potential fun casual experience. Its also important to be warned when a game is meant to be bought by just some parent for their child and to know to steer clear.

I am a 40 year old man who visits these hardcore game sites on a daily basis. My needs have changed over the years. I have 3 kids: 2 boys and a girl. It is very hard to determine what are good games for them that aren't crap. They are game novices and many of the games that I buy for myself are way too hard for them. The reviewers (mainly editors) at these hard core sites need to realize that their demographics are older and that many of their viewers have children who are also wanting to play games. We parents need to know what games to recommend for our kids at all age levels and what not to spend our money on. So, I really wish sites would review as many games as possible and review them from the point of view of the audience for whom the title is made for. Whether a game is simple enough and controls well is very important.

there are such things as crappy casual games, imo. just because a hardcore gamer is reviewing a casual game does not mean he doesnt look for the fundamental elements of what a good game is supposed to have.

littlebigplanet is considered a casual game, yet its been lauded for its unique build and broad options.

Straight up, only cover games that people who read the site will care about. That doesn't necessarily mean to cover just core games, but make certain that the casual titles covered would actually mean something to the bulk of your readership.

Do casual gamers even read reviews?

I don't see the point in departmentalizing people into Hard-Cord and Casual gamers. You have people who play games and people who don't. Some ply more than others (Shame on you too! Your brain will turn into Jell-O! ) A certain game may appeal to a certain type of gamer but I don't think you should divide your audience. I never liked the term 'Hard-Core Gamer' because its too restricted. You could be a hard core gamer and have only played Mario games. I think characterizing your audience by the types of games people enjoy is a better moethod.