Maintenance for the week of June 1:
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – June 1
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – June 1
ESO Future for hardcore players
-
Clerics1985✭✭✭Clerics1985 wrote: »Is ZOS a U.S Developer? If so then there is a Painfully obvious Reason for the "shift" of Games Getting Easier.
It's called the "No child left behind" clause
Haha, that is what really has going on my nerves in Bleakrock island - once you start the quest with Captain Rana there, the other officer at it's town square always says "make sure that everyone is accounted for - no one is left behind" - then I think about that, what you just said.
I know it was so perfect xD0 -
Lysette✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Callous2208 wrote: »cosmic_niklas_93b16_ESO wrote: »
The casual crybaby whiners needs to have everything handed to them without any effort though, it's not ok for a few games to be challenging so that they need to use that mush they call brains a bit.
You don't have a clue what you're talking about. The crying generally comes from the so called "hardcore" after spending weeks glued to their tv/monitors. They can't understand why all the gaming companies are moving away from catering to this slowly dieing out, minority demographic. They consume a months worth of content in 2 days by playing more than any healthy or sane person should and then scream that it wasn't enough. Flocking online to bash the game before moving on to the next. Inevitably, this cycle will continue, as no title will be able to keep up with their demands.
And on a side note, no-life grinding in a video game does not equate to you being skilled, or more deserving of reward than a casual to moderate player.
False. Hardcore gamers still generate more profits for companies than casual gamers despite the changing demographics of gamers. I don't know where you got this information from, but its false.
My history in sales tells me one thing..... Repeat customers will ALWAYS buy more if you provide a good service.... New customers are great and can expand that, but always iffy on a product or company, but your repeat customers are your honeyhole
Internet works differently than a local shop - there are plenty of new customers out there, you have to cater for their first experience with you and a few follow ups - rest is not important - you will get enough new ones. Just make new customers who are satisfied to write a review and the stream of new customers will never run dry - there is no need to cater for long-term customers, who are demanding - new ones take it like it is, far easier to deal with.
Thats the lazy way of doing customer service, if you have a revolving door on a long standing product, it never grows the new customers may "take it as it is" just becomes an excuse to put out shallow broken content.
If you focus on keeping long term customers, who actually care about the life of the game and the content, bringing good and albiet bad ideas to the table, but thats why you have alpha and beta phases. Those long term customer will bring their friends over, and they become long term players, grows the company and you dont need to keep reinvesting in short ROI cycles but can show a slower growth that will be more and more consistant with less cost involoved... Again what happens when they blow through all of the content? they stop activly playing until you put out another shallow DLC
Once they have bought all the content, why would I even want to keep them - nothing to gain from them, good when they leave. You can see it here in the forums - all they do, when you keep them, is toxicate the community - so better, they leave.
The toxicity comes from a very small minority that do eventually leave, though some stay for some reason or another.... If in my line of work (I do a lot of big business online) If I just said, oh you bought my product good, now scram, I wouldnt be in my position or business very long, repeat customers buy more everytime anyone in any kind of sales/retail customer service will tell ya.... I forgot the actual number but each sale with a repeat customer can generate 2-4% (ill have to look for the exact figure) more profit than just a typical new customer (outside the occasional laydown). Need to have a balance
If i would have to do a business like that, I would go for the push through method - create an amazing first experience with some follow up and then let it run out - something what is effectively consumable and has an end to it - but where I can pump through a whole lot of people, and milk them off in the hot phase - with an amazing first experience and followup only.
Thats fine and dandy, but where does your longevity come from? Bringing in more customers? What about service if something goes wrong? Going to push them through with that as well? Once they buy your product you're done with them? So they all burn through your short conent now what? Make another one? they come back, guess what you just created a LONG TERM REPEAT CUSTOMER. If you are working on just quick games to get them by, thats what Skyrim did and does. Would work for a single player game or other consumable, but something with staying power wont last too long, name one game that is an MMO that has lasted more than 5 years with a good stable game, and good customer base that isnt Second life as we are talking MMOs not Sims Online
What longevity - the asian market shows how this is done - med-term products only - which expire - and then run the next one - there is no need to focus on just one product, you do multiple in parallel or in sequence or both.
Asian markets are different from like the US market... In Asian markets they thrive on more of the Mobile quick games and PC games. Take China as an example, up until recently consoles where banned, so they either where smuggled in or they moved to PC games or mobile games, which brought up a strange market in the gaming community there, with short hyper games, ever wonder why asians are always so good at games like SC2? Where as in the States, we have both PC and consoles, now throwing in mobile gaming.... We have a more diverse market for games, where we do both long standing MMOs.... WoW and quickly consumed and forgotten games *insert any single player game*
Now this means that there is more competition outside of the style of gaming, PC game developers have to worry about Consoles and tablet/mobile devices pulling away from the customer base
Nah, the asian market is far bigger than the american or western world markets. And it is far more suited to that model, which I favorized if I would have to run such a business - it is perfect for push through, some follow up, and let it cool off - and go to the next one. And that is how they do it in that market - because it makes sense and is highly profitable.0 -
Gothren✭✭✭✭✭Callous2208 wrote: »Callous2208 wrote: »cosmic_niklas_93b16_ESO wrote: »
The casual crybaby whiners needs to have everything handed to them without any effort though, it's not ok for a few games to be challenging so that they need to use that mush they call brains a bit.
You don't have a clue what you're talking about. The crying generally comes from the so called "hardcore" after spending weeks glued to their tv/monitors. They can't understand why all the gaming companies are moving away from catering to this slowly dieing out, minority demographic. They consume a months worth of content in 2 days by playing more than any healthy or sane person should and then scream that it wasn't enough. Flocking online to bash the game before moving on to the next. Inevitably, this cycle will continue, as no title will be able to keep up with their demands.
And on a side note, no-life grinding in a video game does not equate to you being skilled, or more deserving of reward than a casual to moderate player.
False. Hardcore gamers still generate more profits for companies than casual gamers despite the changing demographics of gamers. I don't know where you got this information from, but its false.
My history in sales tells me one thing..... Repeat customers will ALWAYS buy more if you provide a good service.... New customers are great and can expand that, but always iffy on a product or company, but your repeat customers are your honeyhole
my point was only to highlight that hardcore competitive gamers are more profitable for companies than casual gamers. Casual gamers spend less time and money compared to hardcore competitive gamers. This is not my opinion its a gaming industry fact.
no it isn't - I would like to see statistics about it.
Spending less time is a good thing, not a bad one - less drain on the servers.
And what about MMOs which do not have competitive players at all - like Second Life. They are highly profitable, spending about a million US$ every day in player interaction - real US dollars.
Im talking about the gaming industry as a whole. That includes everything from console games, pc gaming tablets, smartphones,etc. MMO's do have a competitive player base. Look at the market leader for consoles Sony PlayStation. Sony is number one in worldwide sales for its console. Its market position is dedicated to hardcore competitive gamers. Why? Because they generate the most profits compared to casual gamers. Nintendo capitalized on the growing trend in casual gamers around 2009, but has since lost market share to other platforms such as tablets, smartphones,etc that cater to the casual gamer segment. Sony's competitor, Microsoft, is also dedicated more to hardcore gamers and is right behind Sony when it comes to console sales.
Different companies cater to different segments within the gaming industry. This is why market leaders, such as Sony, specifically target hardcore competitive gamers more. They generate more sales. This is not say that there is not a market for casual gamers because there are. Companies like nintendo target casual gamers and build their brand image around that.
and then there is second life - which is just a player-driven and player-created world, for people to create their alternative 2nd life - there is no competitive gameplay at all, there is not even a goal other to enjoy yourself and socialize and have fun interacting with other people. This does not even need new content - just a working sandbox, where people can create and live their dreams. You said that competiitve gamers are most profitable - I say, no, there is a lot of potential in those, who are not even gamers, but normal people with a life, who might not even have a lot of time to get involved with a virtual world - which does not necessarily have to be a game at all - second life is for example not a game - it is a virtual world.
Im sorry but you have no argument what so ever. You keep bringing up ONE game when im talking about the entire gaming industry. start making some valid points or your not worth my time to debate with.
Well, I made a couple of valid points - movie industry, single player games, online casual games, asian MMO - if that is not convincing, then we better stop arguing.
you did NOT present anything at all. Not even any research or graphs to help your position. your argument is nonexistent. come back when you have one or at least a counter argument.
Again, the info in your graph had nothing to support your own argument. So perhaps you should come back when you have something worthwhile to present as well.
Then tell me why market leaders choose products,services, and segments within their industry that ARE THE MOST PROFITABLE. Then tell me why these companies are so successful if they are not choosing to target casual gamers. Number one ranked companies get to choose the most profitable segments because they have the economies of scale to do so.0 -
Gothren✭✭✭✭✭Callous2208 wrote: »cosmic_niklas_93b16_ESO wrote: »
The casual crybaby whiners needs to have everything handed to them without any effort though, it's not ok for a few games to be challenging so that they need to use that mush they call brains a bit.
You don't have a clue what you're talking about. The crying generally comes from the so called "hardcore" after spending weeks glued to their tv/monitors. They can't understand why all the gaming companies are moving away from catering to this slowly dieing out, minority demographic. They consume a months worth of content in 2 days by playing more than any healthy or sane person should and then scream that it wasn't enough. Flocking online to bash the game before moving on to the next. Inevitably, this cycle will continue, as no title will be able to keep up with their demands.
And on a side note, no-life grinding in a video game does not equate to you being skilled, or more deserving of reward than a casual to moderate player.
False. Hardcore gamers still generate more profits for companies than casual gamers despite the changing demographics of gamers. I don't know where you got this information from, but its false.
My history in sales tells me one thing..... Repeat customers will ALWAYS buy more if you provide a good service.... New customers are great and can expand that, but always iffy on a product or company, but your repeat customers are your honeyhole
my point was only to highlight that hardcore competitive gamers are more profitable for companies than casual gamers. Casual gamers spend less time and money compared to hardcore competitive gamers. This is not my opinion its a gaming industry fact.
no it isn't - I would like to see statistics about it.
Spending less time is a good thing, not a bad one - less drain on the servers.
And what about MMOs which do not have competitive players at all - like Second Life. They are highly profitable, spending about a million US$ every day in player interaction - real US dollars.
Im talking about the gaming industry as a whole. That includes everything from console games, pc gaming tablets, smartphones,etc. MMO's do have a competitive player base. Look at the market leader for consoles Sony PlayStation. Sony is number one in worldwide sales for its console. Its market position is dedicated to hardcore competitive gamers. Why? Because they generate the most profits compared to casual gamers. Nintendo capitalized on the growing trend in casual gamers around 2009, but has since lost market share to other platforms such as tablets, smartphones,etc that cater to the casual gamer segment. Sony's competitor, Microsoft, is also dedicated more to hardcore gamers and is right behind Sony when it comes to console sales.
Different companies cater to different segments within the gaming industry. This is why market leaders, such as Sony, specifically target hardcore competitive gamers more. They generate more sales. This is not say that there is not a market for casual gamers because there are. Companies like nintendo target casual gamers and build their brand image around that.
and then there is second life - which is just a player-driven and player-created world, for people to create their alternative 2nd life - there is no competitive gameplay at all, there is not even a goal other to enjoy yourself and socialize and have fun interacting with other people. This does not even need new content - just a working sandbox, where people can create and live their dreams. You said that competiitve gamers are most profitable - I say, no, there is a lot of potential in those, who are not even gamers, but normal people with a life, who might not even have a lot of time to get involved with a virtual world - which does not necessarily have to be a game at all - second life is for example not a game - it is a virtual world.
Im sorry but you have no argument what so ever. You keep bringing up ONE game when im talking about the entire gaming industry. start making some valid points or your not worth my time to debate with.
Well, I made a couple of valid points - movie industry, single player games, online casual games, asian MMO - if that is not convincing, then we better stop arguing.
you did NOT present anything at all. Not even any research or graphs to help your position. your argument is nonexistent. come back when you have one or at least a counter argument.
Well, I guess you are perfectly capable to google for the revenue of Zynga for example - I do not have to do that for you. There is as well a lot of information on the web about the revenue of movies, single player games and so on - I gave the idea, you can verify it yourself, the information is there, I do not have to work for you. If you want to know, google yourself.
present your articles, graphs, and research on here like i have. its painfully obvious you have never debated or presented anything in your life. How old are you?0 -
Lysette✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Callous2208 wrote: »Callous2208 wrote: »cosmic_niklas_93b16_ESO wrote: »
The casual crybaby whiners needs to have everything handed to them without any effort though, it's not ok for a few games to be challenging so that they need to use that mush they call brains a bit.
You don't have a clue what you're talking about. The crying generally comes from the so called "hardcore" after spending weeks glued to their tv/monitors. They can't understand why all the gaming companies are moving away from catering to this slowly dieing out, minority demographic. They consume a months worth of content in 2 days by playing more than any healthy or sane person should and then scream that it wasn't enough. Flocking online to bash the game before moving on to the next. Inevitably, this cycle will continue, as no title will be able to keep up with their demands.
And on a side note, no-life grinding in a video game does not equate to you being skilled, or more deserving of reward than a casual to moderate player.
False. Hardcore gamers still generate more profits for companies than casual gamers despite the changing demographics of gamers. I don't know where you got this information from, but its false.
My history in sales tells me one thing..... Repeat customers will ALWAYS buy more if you provide a good service.... New customers are great and can expand that, but always iffy on a product or company, but your repeat customers are your honeyhole
my point was only to highlight that hardcore competitive gamers are more profitable for companies than casual gamers. Casual gamers spend less time and money compared to hardcore competitive gamers. This is not my opinion its a gaming industry fact.
no it isn't - I would like to see statistics about it.
Spending less time is a good thing, not a bad one - less drain on the servers.
And what about MMOs which do not have competitive players at all - like Second Life. They are highly profitable, spending about a million US$ every day in player interaction - real US dollars.
Im talking about the gaming industry as a whole. That includes everything from console games, pc gaming tablets, smartphones,etc. MMO's do have a competitive player base. Look at the market leader for consoles Sony PlayStation. Sony is number one in worldwide sales for its console. Its market position is dedicated to hardcore competitive gamers. Why? Because they generate the most profits compared to casual gamers. Nintendo capitalized on the growing trend in casual gamers around 2009, but has since lost market share to other platforms such as tablets, smartphones,etc that cater to the casual gamer segment. Sony's competitor, Microsoft, is also dedicated more to hardcore gamers and is right behind Sony when it comes to console sales.
Different companies cater to different segments within the gaming industry. This is why market leaders, such as Sony, specifically target hardcore competitive gamers more. They generate more sales. This is not say that there is not a market for casual gamers because there are. Companies like nintendo target casual gamers and build their brand image around that.
and then there is second life - which is just a player-driven and player-created world, for people to create their alternative 2nd life - there is no competitive gameplay at all, there is not even a goal other to enjoy yourself and socialize and have fun interacting with other people. This does not even need new content - just a working sandbox, where people can create and live their dreams. You said that competiitve gamers are most profitable - I say, no, there is a lot of potential in those, who are not even gamers, but normal people with a life, who might not even have a lot of time to get involved with a virtual world - which does not necessarily have to be a game at all - second life is for example not a game - it is a virtual world.
Im sorry but you have no argument what so ever. You keep bringing up ONE game when im talking about the entire gaming industry. start making some valid points or your not worth my time to debate with.
Well, I made a couple of valid points - movie industry, single player games, online casual games, asian MMO - if that is not convincing, then we better stop arguing.
you did NOT present anything at all. Not even any research or graphs to help your position. your argument is nonexistent. come back when you have one or at least a counter argument.
Again, the info in your graph had nothing to support your own argument. So perhaps you should come back when you have something worthwhile to present as well.
Then tell me why market leaders choose products,services, and segments within their industry that ARE THE MOST PROFITABLE. Then tell me why these companies are so successful if they are not choosing to target casual gamers. Number one ranked companies get to choose the most profitable segments because they have the economies of scale to do so.
But your graphs do not support the claim, that they would go for hardcore gamers nor the other way round - that are just graphs about the market share and nothing else - it does not say anything in regards to your claims.1 -
Lysette✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Callous2208 wrote: »cosmic_niklas_93b16_ESO wrote: »
The casual crybaby whiners needs to have everything handed to them without any effort though, it's not ok for a few games to be challenging so that they need to use that mush they call brains a bit.
You don't have a clue what you're talking about. The crying generally comes from the so called "hardcore" after spending weeks glued to their tv/monitors. They can't understand why all the gaming companies are moving away from catering to this slowly dieing out, minority demographic. They consume a months worth of content in 2 days by playing more than any healthy or sane person should and then scream that it wasn't enough. Flocking online to bash the game before moving on to the next. Inevitably, this cycle will continue, as no title will be able to keep up with their demands.
And on a side note, no-life grinding in a video game does not equate to you being skilled, or more deserving of reward than a casual to moderate player.
False. Hardcore gamers still generate more profits for companies than casual gamers despite the changing demographics of gamers. I don't know where you got this information from, but its false.
My history in sales tells me one thing..... Repeat customers will ALWAYS buy more if you provide a good service.... New customers are great and can expand that, but always iffy on a product or company, but your repeat customers are your honeyhole
my point was only to highlight that hardcore competitive gamers are more profitable for companies than casual gamers. Casual gamers spend less time and money compared to hardcore competitive gamers. This is not my opinion its a gaming industry fact.
no it isn't - I would like to see statistics about it.
Spending less time is a good thing, not a bad one - less drain on the servers.
And what about MMOs which do not have competitive players at all - like Second Life. They are highly profitable, spending about a million US$ every day in player interaction - real US dollars.
Im talking about the gaming industry as a whole. That includes everything from console games, pc gaming tablets, smartphones,etc. MMO's do have a competitive player base. Look at the market leader for consoles Sony PlayStation. Sony is number one in worldwide sales for its console. Its market position is dedicated to hardcore competitive gamers. Why? Because they generate the most profits compared to casual gamers. Nintendo capitalized on the growing trend in casual gamers around 2009, but has since lost market share to other platforms such as tablets, smartphones,etc that cater to the casual gamer segment. Sony's competitor, Microsoft, is also dedicated more to hardcore gamers and is right behind Sony when it comes to console sales.
Different companies cater to different segments within the gaming industry. This is why market leaders, such as Sony, specifically target hardcore competitive gamers more. They generate more sales. This is not say that there is not a market for casual gamers because there are. Companies like nintendo target casual gamers and build their brand image around that.
and then there is second life - which is just a player-driven and player-created world, for people to create their alternative 2nd life - there is no competitive gameplay at all, there is not even a goal other to enjoy yourself and socialize and have fun interacting with other people. This does not even need new content - just a working sandbox, where people can create and live their dreams. You said that competiitve gamers are most profitable - I say, no, there is a lot of potential in those, who are not even gamers, but normal people with a life, who might not even have a lot of time to get involved with a virtual world - which does not necessarily have to be a game at all - second life is for example not a game - it is a virtual world.
Im sorry but you have no argument what so ever. You keep bringing up ONE game when im talking about the entire gaming industry. start making some valid points or your not worth my time to debate with.
Well, I made a couple of valid points - movie industry, single player games, online casual games, asian MMO - if that is not convincing, then we better stop arguing.
you did NOT present anything at all. Not even any research or graphs to help your position. your argument is nonexistent. come back when you have one or at least a counter argument.
Well, I guess you are perfectly capable to google for the revenue of Zynga for example - I do not have to do that for you. There is as well a lot of information on the web about the revenue of movies, single player games and so on - I gave the idea, you can verify it yourself, the information is there, I do not have to work for you. If you want to know, google yourself.
present your articles, graphs, and research on here like i have. its painfully obvious you have never debated or presented anything in your life. How old are you?
Your graphs where about market shares, and none did support any of your claims.0 -
kevlarto_ESO✭✭✭✭✭
✭If I left the game, because I was out of content, I don't think two 4 man dungeons would be enough for me to come back to the game, this whole meta of people leaving and coming back might show that trend, but you have to have something for them for them to come back to, the dlc's need more not less. You want to get people back this game needs a large expansion, something that has lots of content, new features, increases the size of the world, then you would have those players back for that 2 to 3 months or longer if the content has some meat on the bones.
I know it takes a lot of time to make a real expansion, but while it is being worked on you would still release dlc's, I remember when mmo's used to have depth and replay ability, and you felt like your toon lived in the world not just playing through the world.Edited by kevlarto_ESO on June 30, 2016 5:03PM1 -
Callous2208✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭Callous2208 wrote: »Callous2208 wrote: »cosmic_niklas_93b16_ESO wrote: »
The casual crybaby whiners needs to have everything handed to them without any effort though, it's not ok for a few games to be challenging so that they need to use that mush they call brains a bit.
You don't have a clue what you're talking about. The crying generally comes from the so called "hardcore" after spending weeks glued to their tv/monitors. They can't understand why all the gaming companies are moving away from catering to this slowly dieing out, minority demographic. They consume a months worth of content in 2 days by playing more than any healthy or sane person should and then scream that it wasn't enough. Flocking online to bash the game before moving on to the next. Inevitably, this cycle will continue, as no title will be able to keep up with their demands.
And on a side note, no-life grinding in a video game does not equate to you being skilled, or more deserving of reward than a casual to moderate player.
False. Hardcore gamers still generate more profits for companies than casual gamers despite the changing demographics of gamers. I don't know where you got this information from, but its false.
My history in sales tells me one thing..... Repeat customers will ALWAYS buy more if you provide a good service.... New customers are great and can expand that, but always iffy on a product or company, but your repeat customers are your honeyhole
my point was only to highlight that hardcore competitive gamers are more profitable for companies than casual gamers. Casual gamers spend less time and money compared to hardcore competitive gamers. This is not my opinion its a gaming industry fact.
no it isn't - I would like to see statistics about it.
Spending less time is a good thing, not a bad one - less drain on the servers.
And what about MMOs which do not have competitive players at all - like Second Life. They are highly profitable, spending about a million US$ every day in player interaction - real US dollars.
Im talking about the gaming industry as a whole. That includes everything from console games, pc gaming tablets, smartphones,etc. MMO's do have a competitive player base. Look at the market leader for consoles Sony PlayStation. Sony is number one in worldwide sales for its console. Its market position is dedicated to hardcore competitive gamers. Why? Because they generate the most profits compared to casual gamers. Nintendo capitalized on the growing trend in casual gamers around 2009, but has since lost market share to other platforms such as tablets, smartphones,etc that cater to the casual gamer segment. Sony's competitor, Microsoft, is also dedicated more to hardcore gamers and is right behind Sony when it comes to console sales.
Different companies cater to different segments within the gaming industry. This is why market leaders, such as Sony, specifically target hardcore competitive gamers more. They generate more sales. This is not say that there is not a market for casual gamers because there are. Companies like nintendo target casual gamers and build their brand image around that.
and then there is second life - which is just a player-driven and player-created world, for people to create their alternative 2nd life - there is no competitive gameplay at all, there is not even a goal other to enjoy yourself and socialize and have fun interacting with other people. This does not even need new content - just a working sandbox, where people can create and live their dreams. You said that competiitve gamers are most profitable - I say, no, there is a lot of potential in those, who are not even gamers, but normal people with a life, who might not even have a lot of time to get involved with a virtual world - which does not necessarily have to be a game at all - second life is for example not a game - it is a virtual world.
Im sorry but you have no argument what so ever. You keep bringing up ONE game when im talking about the entire gaming industry. start making some valid points or your not worth my time to debate with.
Well, I made a couple of valid points - movie industry, single player games, online casual games, asian MMO - if that is not convincing, then we better stop arguing.
you did NOT present anything at all. Not even any research or graphs to help your position. your argument is nonexistent. come back when you have one or at least a counter argument.
Again, the info in your graph had nothing to support your own argument. So perhaps you should come back when you have something worthwhile to present as well.
Then tell me why market leaders choose products,services, and segments within their industry that ARE THE MOST PROFITABLE. Then tell me why these companies are so successful if they are not choosing to target casual gamers. Number one ranked companies get to choose the most profitable segments because they have the economies of scale to do so.
Sony's original marketing campaign has no bearing on their continued success. Despite what you may believe, both Sony and Microsoft are indeed banking heavily on the casual gaming market. You have no graph to prove otherwise, just as I have none to prove my point. But let's look at what they're doing. Look at the titles that come out. Look at their miniscule amount of content. Look at the bite sized dlc's. Look how fast the next in the series drops and abandons support for the last one. This is not how you cater to a hardcore crowd. This is how you milk casual gamers without them knowing it. Everyone has moved towards this. MMO's are no different.0 -
Gothren✭✭✭✭✭Callous2208 wrote: »Callous2208 wrote: »cosmic_niklas_93b16_ESO wrote: »
The casual crybaby whiners needs to have everything handed to them without any effort though, it's not ok for a few games to be challenging so that they need to use that mush they call brains a bit.
You don't have a clue what you're talking about. The crying generally comes from the so called "hardcore" after spending weeks glued to their tv/monitors. They can't understand why all the gaming companies are moving away from catering to this slowly dieing out, minority demographic. They consume a months worth of content in 2 days by playing more than any healthy or sane person should and then scream that it wasn't enough. Flocking online to bash the game before moving on to the next. Inevitably, this cycle will continue, as no title will be able to keep up with their demands.
And on a side note, no-life grinding in a video game does not equate to you being skilled, or more deserving of reward than a casual to moderate player.
False. Hardcore gamers still generate more profits for companies than casual gamers despite the changing demographics of gamers. I don't know where you got this information from, but its false.
My history in sales tells me one thing..... Repeat customers will ALWAYS buy more if you provide a good service.... New customers are great and can expand that, but always iffy on a product or company, but your repeat customers are your honeyhole
my point was only to highlight that hardcore competitive gamers are more profitable for companies than casual gamers. Casual gamers spend less time and money compared to hardcore competitive gamers. This is not my opinion its a gaming industry fact.
no it isn't - I would like to see statistics about it.
Spending less time is a good thing, not a bad one - less drain on the servers.
And what about MMOs which do not have competitive players at all - like Second Life. They are highly profitable, spending about a million US$ every day in player interaction - real US dollars.
Im talking about the gaming industry as a whole. That includes everything from console games, pc gaming tablets, smartphones,etc. MMO's do have a competitive player base. Look at the market leader for consoles Sony PlayStation. Sony is number one in worldwide sales for its console. Its market position is dedicated to hardcore competitive gamers. Why? Because they generate the most profits compared to casual gamers. Nintendo capitalized on the growing trend in casual gamers around 2009, but has since lost market share to other platforms such as tablets, smartphones,etc that cater to the casual gamer segment. Sony's competitor, Microsoft, is also dedicated more to hardcore gamers and is right behind Sony when it comes to console sales.
Different companies cater to different segments within the gaming industry. This is why market leaders, such as Sony, specifically target hardcore competitive gamers more. They generate more sales. This is not say that there is not a market for casual gamers because there are. Companies like nintendo target casual gamers and build their brand image around that.
and then there is second life - which is just a player-driven and player-created world, for people to create their alternative 2nd life - there is no competitive gameplay at all, there is not even a goal other to enjoy yourself and socialize and have fun interacting with other people. This does not even need new content - just a working sandbox, where people can create and live their dreams. You said that competiitve gamers are most profitable - I say, no, there is a lot of potential in those, who are not even gamers, but normal people with a life, who might not even have a lot of time to get involved with a virtual world - which does not necessarily have to be a game at all - second life is for example not a game - it is a virtual world.
Im sorry but you have no argument what so ever. You keep bringing up ONE game when im talking about the entire gaming industry. start making some valid points or your not worth my time to debate with.
Well, I made a couple of valid points - movie industry, single player games, online casual games, asian MMO - if that is not convincing, then we better stop arguing.
you did NOT present anything at all. Not even any research or graphs to help your position. your argument is nonexistent. come back when you have one or at least a counter argument.
Again, the info in your graph had nothing to support your own argument. So perhaps you should come back when you have something worthwhile to present as well.
Then tell me why market leaders choose products,services, and segments within their industry that ARE THE MOST PROFITABLE. Then tell me why these companies are so successful if they are not choosing to target casual gamers. Number one ranked companies get to choose the most profitable segments because they have the economies of scale to do so.
But your graphs do not support the claim, that they would go for hardcore gamers nor the other way round - that are just graphs about the market share and nothing else - it does not say anything in regards to your claims.
Sony's market position is clearly dedicated to hardcore gamers lol. That statement clearly shows how little you know about the gaming industry.
Here is Sony's market position. Their marketing is fantastic and you get to see who they are targeting their customer base towards:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QOdW1OuZ1U0 0 -
Lysette✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Callous2208 wrote: »cosmic_niklas_93b16_ESO wrote: »
The casual crybaby whiners needs to have everything handed to them without any effort though, it's not ok for a few games to be challenging so that they need to use that mush they call brains a bit.
You don't have a clue what you're talking about. The crying generally comes from the so called "hardcore" after spending weeks glued to their tv/monitors. They can't understand why all the gaming companies are moving away from catering to this slowly dieing out, minority demographic. They consume a months worth of content in 2 days by playing more than any healthy or sane person should and then scream that it wasn't enough. Flocking online to bash the game before moving on to the next. Inevitably, this cycle will continue, as no title will be able to keep up with their demands.
And on a side note, no-life grinding in a video game does not equate to you being skilled, or more deserving of reward than a casual to moderate player.
False. Hardcore gamers still generate more profits for companies than casual gamers despite the changing demographics of gamers. I don't know where you got this information from, but its false.
My history in sales tells me one thing..... Repeat customers will ALWAYS buy more if you provide a good service.... New customers are great and can expand that, but always iffy on a product or company, but your repeat customers are your honeyhole
my point was only to highlight that hardcore competitive gamers are more profitable for companies than casual gamers. Casual gamers spend less time and money compared to hardcore competitive gamers. This is not my opinion its a gaming industry fact.
no it isn't - I would like to see statistics about it.
Spending less time is a good thing, not a bad one - less drain on the servers.
And what about MMOs which do not have competitive players at all - like Second Life. They are highly profitable, spending about a million US$ every day in player interaction - real US dollars.
Im talking about the gaming industry as a whole. That includes everything from console games, pc gaming tablets, smartphones,etc. MMO's do have a competitive player base. Look at the market leader for consoles Sony PlayStation. Sony is number one in worldwide sales for its console. Its market position is dedicated to hardcore competitive gamers. Why? Because they generate the most profits compared to casual gamers. Nintendo capitalized on the growing trend in casual gamers around 2009, but has since lost market share to other platforms such as tablets, smartphones,etc that cater to the casual gamer segment. Sony's competitor, Microsoft, is also dedicated more to hardcore gamers and is right behind Sony when it comes to console sales.
Different companies cater to different segments within the gaming industry. This is why market leaders, such as Sony, specifically target hardcore competitive gamers more. They generate more sales. This is not say that there is not a market for casual gamers because there are. Companies like nintendo target casual gamers and build their brand image around that.
and then there is second life - which is just a player-driven and player-created world, for people to create their alternative 2nd life - there is no competitive gameplay at all, there is not even a goal other to enjoy yourself and socialize and have fun interacting with other people. This does not even need new content - just a working sandbox, where people can create and live their dreams. You said that competiitve gamers are most profitable - I say, no, there is a lot of potential in those, who are not even gamers, but normal people with a life, who might not even have a lot of time to get involved with a virtual world - which does not necessarily have to be a game at all - second life is for example not a game - it is a virtual world.
Im sorry but you have no argument what so ever. You keep bringing up ONE game when im talking about the entire gaming industry. start making some valid points or your not worth my time to debate with.
Well, I made a couple of valid points - movie industry, single player games, online casual games, asian MMO - if that is not convincing, then we better stop arguing.
you did NOT present anything at all. Not even any research or graphs to help your position. your argument is nonexistent. come back when you have one or at least a counter argument.
Well, I guess you are perfectly capable to google for the revenue of Zynga for example - I do not have to do that for you. There is as well a lot of information on the web about the revenue of movies, single player games and so on - I gave the idea, you can verify it yourself, the information is there, I do not have to work for you. If you want to know, google yourself.
present your articles, graphs, and research on here like i have. its painfully obvious you have never debated or presented anything in your life. How old are you?
I am not doing a presentation here - I said your claim is not correct, you have to prove your claim, I do not have to show, why it is not. If you claim something, you have to prove it, not someone else to prove that you are not right.
I have done a lot of presentations in my life and given talks world-wide - because I am a scientist - but whenever I do that, I do not have to bring evidence, when this evidence is available elsewhere, I just have to make a reference to it. It would hinder the process of a presentation or a talk, if this would have to be done. If they want to know, they can do that by themselves, the information is available, I do not have to do their work for them.
I am 28, bioinformatician and biochemist (both master degrees) and run a Biotech company in south africa, specializing in Biorobotics with a focus on autonomous drones.0 -
Gothren✭✭✭✭✭Callous2208 wrote: »Callous2208 wrote: »Callous2208 wrote: »cosmic_niklas_93b16_ESO wrote: »
The casual crybaby whiners needs to have everything handed to them without any effort though, it's not ok for a few games to be challenging so that they need to use that mush they call brains a bit.
You don't have a clue what you're talking about. The crying generally comes from the so called "hardcore" after spending weeks glued to their tv/monitors. They can't understand why all the gaming companies are moving away from catering to this slowly dieing out, minority demographic. They consume a months worth of content in 2 days by playing more than any healthy or sane person should and then scream that it wasn't enough. Flocking online to bash the game before moving on to the next. Inevitably, this cycle will continue, as no title will be able to keep up with their demands.
And on a side note, no-life grinding in a video game does not equate to you being skilled, or more deserving of reward than a casual to moderate player.
False. Hardcore gamers still generate more profits for companies than casual gamers despite the changing demographics of gamers. I don't know where you got this information from, but its false.
My history in sales tells me one thing..... Repeat customers will ALWAYS buy more if you provide a good service.... New customers are great and can expand that, but always iffy on a product or company, but your repeat customers are your honeyhole
my point was only to highlight that hardcore competitive gamers are more profitable for companies than casual gamers. Casual gamers spend less time and money compared to hardcore competitive gamers. This is not my opinion its a gaming industry fact.
no it isn't - I would like to see statistics about it.
Spending less time is a good thing, not a bad one - less drain on the servers.
And what about MMOs which do not have competitive players at all - like Second Life. They are highly profitable, spending about a million US$ every day in player interaction - real US dollars.
Im talking about the gaming industry as a whole. That includes everything from console games, pc gaming tablets, smartphones,etc. MMO's do have a competitive player base. Look at the market leader for consoles Sony PlayStation. Sony is number one in worldwide sales for its console. Its market position is dedicated to hardcore competitive gamers. Why? Because they generate the most profits compared to casual gamers. Nintendo capitalized on the growing trend in casual gamers around 2009, but has since lost market share to other platforms such as tablets, smartphones,etc that cater to the casual gamer segment. Sony's competitor, Microsoft, is also dedicated more to hardcore gamers and is right behind Sony when it comes to console sales.
Different companies cater to different segments within the gaming industry. This is why market leaders, such as Sony, specifically target hardcore competitive gamers more. They generate more sales. This is not say that there is not a market for casual gamers because there are. Companies like nintendo target casual gamers and build their brand image around that.
and then there is second life - which is just a player-driven and player-created world, for people to create their alternative 2nd life - there is no competitive gameplay at all, there is not even a goal other to enjoy yourself and socialize and have fun interacting with other people. This does not even need new content - just a working sandbox, where people can create and live their dreams. You said that competiitve gamers are most profitable - I say, no, there is a lot of potential in those, who are not even gamers, but normal people with a life, who might not even have a lot of time to get involved with a virtual world - which does not necessarily have to be a game at all - second life is for example not a game - it is a virtual world.
Im sorry but you have no argument what so ever. You keep bringing up ONE game when im talking about the entire gaming industry. start making some valid points or your not worth my time to debate with.
Well, I made a couple of valid points - movie industry, single player games, online casual games, asian MMO - if that is not convincing, then we better stop arguing.
you did NOT present anything at all. Not even any research or graphs to help your position. your argument is nonexistent. come back when you have one or at least a counter argument.
Again, the info in your graph had nothing to support your own argument. So perhaps you should come back when you have something worthwhile to present as well.
Then tell me why market leaders choose products,services, and segments within their industry that ARE THE MOST PROFITABLE. Then tell me why these companies are so successful if they are not choosing to target casual gamers. Number one ranked companies get to choose the most profitable segments because they have the economies of scale to do so.
Sony's original marketing campaign has no bearing on their continued success. Despite what you may believe, both Sony and Microsoft are indeed banking heavily on the casual gaming market. You have no graph to prove otherwise, just as I have none to prove my point. But let's look at what they're doing. Look at the titles that come out. Look at their miniscule amount of content. Look at the bite sized dlc's. Look how fast the next in the series drops and abandons support for the last one. This is not how you cater to a hardcore crowd. This is how you milk casual gamers without them knowing it. Everyone has moved towards this. MMO's are no different.
you clearly do not know what a market position is. come back when you do. also watch the video0 -
Lucious90✭✭✭Callous2208 wrote: »cosmic_niklas_93b16_ESO wrote: »
The casual crybaby whiners needs to have everything handed to them without any effort though, it's not ok for a few games to be challenging so that they need to use that mush they call brains a bit.
You don't have a clue what you're talking about. The crying generally comes from the so called "hardcore" after spending weeks glued to their tv/monitors. They can't understand why all the gaming companies are moving away from catering to this slowly dieing out, minority demographic. They consume a months worth of content in 2 days by playing more than any healthy or sane person should and then scream that it wasn't enough. Flocking online to bash the game before moving on to the next. Inevitably, this cycle will continue, as no title will be able to keep up with their demands.
And on a side note, no-life grinding in a video game does not equate to you being skilled, or more deserving of reward than a casual to moderate player.
False. Hardcore gamers still generate more profits for companies than casual gamers despite the changing demographics of gamers. I don't know where you got this information from, but its false.
My history in sales tells me one thing..... Repeat customers will ALWAYS buy more if you provide a good service.... New customers are great and can expand that, but always iffy on a product or company, but your repeat customers are your honeyhole
Internet works differently than a local shop - there are plenty of new customers out there, you have to cater for their first experience with you and a few follow ups - rest is not important - you will get enough new ones. Just make new customers who are satisfied to write a review and the stream of new customers will never run dry - there is no need to cater for long-term customers, who are demanding - new ones take it like it is, far easier to deal with.
Thats the lazy way of doing customer service, if you have a revolving door on a long standing product, it never grows the new customers may "take it as it is" just becomes an excuse to put out shallow broken content.
If you focus on keeping long term customers, who actually care about the life of the game and the content, bringing good and albiet bad ideas to the table, but thats why you have alpha and beta phases. Those long term customer will bring their friends over, and they become long term players, grows the company and you dont need to keep reinvesting in short ROI cycles but can show a slower growth that will be more and more consistant with less cost involoved... Again what happens when they blow through all of the content? they stop activly playing until you put out another shallow DLC
Once they have bought all the content, why would I even want to keep them - nothing to gain from them, good when they leave. You can see it here in the forums - all they do, when you keep them, is toxicate the community - so better, they leave.
The toxicity comes from a very small minority that do eventually leave, though some stay for some reason or another.... If in my line of work (I do a lot of big business online) If I just said, oh you bought my product good, now scram, I wouldnt be in my position or business very long, repeat customers buy more everytime anyone in any kind of sales/retail customer service will tell ya.... I forgot the actual number but each sale with a repeat customer can generate 2-4% (ill have to look for the exact figure) more profit than just a typical new customer (outside the occasional laydown). Need to have a balance
If i would have to do a business like that, I would go for the push through method - create an amazing first experience with some follow up and then let it run out - something what is effectively consumable and has an end to it - but where I can pump through a whole lot of people, and milk them off in the hot phase - with an amazing first experience and followup only.
Thats fine and dandy, but where does your longevity come from? Bringing in more customers? What about service if something goes wrong? Going to push them through with that as well? Once they buy your product you're done with them? So they all burn through your short conent now what? Make another one? they come back, guess what you just created a LONG TERM REPEAT CUSTOMER. If you are working on just quick games to get them by, thats what Skyrim did and does. Would work for a single player game or other consumable, but something with staying power wont last too long, name one game that is an MMO that has lasted more than 5 years with a good stable game, and good customer base that isnt Second life as we are talking MMOs not Sims Online
What longevity - the asian market shows how this is done - med-term products only - which expire - and then run the next one - there is no need to focus on just one product, you do multiple in parallel or in sequence or both.
Asian markets are different from like the US market... In Asian markets they thrive on more of the Mobile quick games and PC games. Take China as an example, up until recently consoles where banned, so they either where smuggled in or they moved to PC games or mobile games, which brought up a strange market in the gaming community there, with short hyper games, ever wonder why asians are always so good at games like SC2? Where as in the States, we have both PC and consoles, now throwing in mobile gaming.... We have a more diverse market for games, where we do both long standing MMOs.... WoW and quickly consumed and forgotten games *insert any single player game*
Now this means that there is more competition outside of the style of gaming, PC game developers have to worry about Consoles and tablet/mobile devices pulling away from the customer base
Nah, the asian market is far bigger than the american or western world markets. And it is far more suited to that model, which I favorized if I would have to run such a business - it is perfect for push through, some follow up, and let it cool off - and go to the next one. And that is how they do it in that market - because it makes sense and is highly profitable.
Asia over all yes, breaking them down country by country, China (the largest) barely beats us. And between Them and US we take half of the industry
https://newzoo.com/insights/articles/us-and-china-take-half-of-113bn-games-market-in-2018/
Again that works in the Asian Market as there isnt as much competition. US has a lot more diverse market, and more competition, we already have outlets for highly consumable video games CSO, Star Craft, Over Watch, COD, BF, LoL DOTA HotS. and every single player game. In the MMO industry, there is a reason why Wow is still the most popular and lasts this long.
And even ZOS model shows the Asian model doesnt work well outside of the Asian Market, bad game stability, constant DLC, terribad customer service such as customer getting responses saying that they are too busy to help because outside of costantly throwing money back into the server they dont have a whole lot to invest elsewhere.... So I will ask you, name one MMO that uses the Asian model that is sustainable and last longer than 5 years with a large customer baseXbox/NA
Naturegoat - Stam Warden
Healgoat- Mag temp
Staticgoat- Stam Sorc1 -
Lysette✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Callous2208 wrote: »Callous2208 wrote: »cosmic_niklas_93b16_ESO wrote: »
The casual crybaby whiners needs to have everything handed to them without any effort though, it's not ok for a few games to be challenging so that they need to use that mush they call brains a bit.
You don't have a clue what you're talking about. The crying generally comes from the so called "hardcore" after spending weeks glued to their tv/monitors. They can't understand why all the gaming companies are moving away from catering to this slowly dieing out, minority demographic. They consume a months worth of content in 2 days by playing more than any healthy or sane person should and then scream that it wasn't enough. Flocking online to bash the game before moving on to the next. Inevitably, this cycle will continue, as no title will be able to keep up with their demands.
And on a side note, no-life grinding in a video game does not equate to you being skilled, or more deserving of reward than a casual to moderate player.
False. Hardcore gamers still generate more profits for companies than casual gamers despite the changing demographics of gamers. I don't know where you got this information from, but its false.
My history in sales tells me one thing..... Repeat customers will ALWAYS buy more if you provide a good service.... New customers are great and can expand that, but always iffy on a product or company, but your repeat customers are your honeyhole
my point was only to highlight that hardcore competitive gamers are more profitable for companies than casual gamers. Casual gamers spend less time and money compared to hardcore competitive gamers. This is not my opinion its a gaming industry fact.
no it isn't - I would like to see statistics about it.
Spending less time is a good thing, not a bad one - less drain on the servers.
And what about MMOs which do not have competitive players at all - like Second Life. They are highly profitable, spending about a million US$ every day in player interaction - real US dollars.
Im talking about the gaming industry as a whole. That includes everything from console games, pc gaming tablets, smartphones,etc. MMO's do have a competitive player base. Look at the market leader for consoles Sony PlayStation. Sony is number one in worldwide sales for its console. Its market position is dedicated to hardcore competitive gamers. Why? Because they generate the most profits compared to casual gamers. Nintendo capitalized on the growing trend in casual gamers around 2009, but has since lost market share to other platforms such as tablets, smartphones,etc that cater to the casual gamer segment. Sony's competitor, Microsoft, is also dedicated more to hardcore gamers and is right behind Sony when it comes to console sales.
Different companies cater to different segments within the gaming industry. This is why market leaders, such as Sony, specifically target hardcore competitive gamers more. They generate more sales. This is not say that there is not a market for casual gamers because there are. Companies like nintendo target casual gamers and build their brand image around that.
and then there is second life - which is just a player-driven and player-created world, for people to create their alternative 2nd life - there is no competitive gameplay at all, there is not even a goal other to enjoy yourself and socialize and have fun interacting with other people. This does not even need new content - just a working sandbox, where people can create and live their dreams. You said that competiitve gamers are most profitable - I say, no, there is a lot of potential in those, who are not even gamers, but normal people with a life, who might not even have a lot of time to get involved with a virtual world - which does not necessarily have to be a game at all - second life is for example not a game - it is a virtual world.
Im sorry but you have no argument what so ever. You keep bringing up ONE game when im talking about the entire gaming industry. start making some valid points or your not worth my time to debate with.
Well, I made a couple of valid points - movie industry, single player games, online casual games, asian MMO - if that is not convincing, then we better stop arguing.
you did NOT present anything at all. Not even any research or graphs to help your position. your argument is nonexistent. come back when you have one or at least a counter argument.
Again, the info in your graph had nothing to support your own argument. So perhaps you should come back when you have something worthwhile to present as well.
Then tell me why market leaders choose products,services, and segments within their industry that ARE THE MOST PROFITABLE. Then tell me why these companies are so successful if they are not choosing to target casual gamers. Number one ranked companies get to choose the most profitable segments because they have the economies of scale to do so.
But your graphs do not support the claim, that they would go for hardcore gamers nor the other way round - that are just graphs about the market share and nothing else - it does not say anything in regards to your claims.
Sony's market position is clearly dedicated to hardcore gamers lol. That statement clearly shows how little you know about the gaming industry.
Here is Sony's market position. Their marketing is fantastic and you get to see who they are targeting their customer base towards:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QOdW1OuZ1U0
And why would that prove exactly that they are aiming at hardcore gamers?- do you think that casuals do not have an urge to play that as well - this proves exactly nothing.Edited by Lysette on June 30, 2016 5:17PM0 -
Gothren✭✭✭✭✭Callous2208 wrote: »cosmic_niklas_93b16_ESO wrote: »
The casual crybaby whiners needs to have everything handed to them without any effort though, it's not ok for a few games to be challenging so that they need to use that mush they call brains a bit.
You don't have a clue what you're talking about. The crying generally comes from the so called "hardcore" after spending weeks glued to their tv/monitors. They can't understand why all the gaming companies are moving away from catering to this slowly dieing out, minority demographic. They consume a months worth of content in 2 days by playing more than any healthy or sane person should and then scream that it wasn't enough. Flocking online to bash the game before moving on to the next. Inevitably, this cycle will continue, as no title will be able to keep up with their demands.
And on a side note, no-life grinding in a video game does not equate to you being skilled, or more deserving of reward than a casual to moderate player.
False. Hardcore gamers still generate more profits for companies than casual gamers despite the changing demographics of gamers. I don't know where you got this information from, but its false.
My history in sales tells me one thing..... Repeat customers will ALWAYS buy more if you provide a good service.... New customers are great and can expand that, but always iffy on a product or company, but your repeat customers are your honeyhole
my point was only to highlight that hardcore competitive gamers are more profitable for companies than casual gamers. Casual gamers spend less time and money compared to hardcore competitive gamers. This is not my opinion its a gaming industry fact.
no it isn't - I would like to see statistics about it.
Spending less time is a good thing, not a bad one - less drain on the servers.
And what about MMOs which do not have competitive players at all - like Second Life. They are highly profitable, spending about a million US$ every day in player interaction - real US dollars.
Im talking about the gaming industry as a whole. That includes everything from console games, pc gaming tablets, smartphones,etc. MMO's do have a competitive player base. Look at the market leader for consoles Sony PlayStation. Sony is number one in worldwide sales for its console. Its market position is dedicated to hardcore competitive gamers. Why? Because they generate the most profits compared to casual gamers. Nintendo capitalized on the growing trend in casual gamers around 2009, but has since lost market share to other platforms such as tablets, smartphones,etc that cater to the casual gamer segment. Sony's competitor, Microsoft, is also dedicated more to hardcore gamers and is right behind Sony when it comes to console sales.
Different companies cater to different segments within the gaming industry. This is why market leaders, such as Sony, specifically target hardcore competitive gamers more. They generate more sales. This is not say that there is not a market for casual gamers because there are. Companies like nintendo target casual gamers and build their brand image around that.
and then there is second life - which is just a player-driven and player-created world, for people to create their alternative 2nd life - there is no competitive gameplay at all, there is not even a goal other to enjoy yourself and socialize and have fun interacting with other people. This does not even need new content - just a working sandbox, where people can create and live their dreams. You said that competiitve gamers are most profitable - I say, no, there is a lot of potential in those, who are not even gamers, but normal people with a life, who might not even have a lot of time to get involved with a virtual world - which does not necessarily have to be a game at all - second life is for example not a game - it is a virtual world.
Im sorry but you have no argument what so ever. You keep bringing up ONE game when im talking about the entire gaming industry. start making some valid points or your not worth my time to debate with.
Well, I made a couple of valid points - movie industry, single player games, online casual games, asian MMO - if that is not convincing, then we better stop arguing.
you did NOT present anything at all. Not even any research or graphs to help your position. your argument is nonexistent. come back when you have one or at least a counter argument.
Well, I guess you are perfectly capable to google for the revenue of Zynga for example - I do not have to do that for you. There is as well a lot of information on the web about the revenue of movies, single player games and so on - I gave the idea, you can verify it yourself, the information is there, I do not have to work for you. If you want to know, google yourself.
present your articles, graphs, and research on here like i have. its painfully obvious you have never debated or presented anything in your life. How old are you?
I am not doing a presentation here - I said your claim is not correct, you have to prove your claim, I do not have to show, why it is not. If you claim something, you have to prove it, not someone else to prove that you are not right.
I have done a lot of presentations in my life and given talks world-wide - because I am a scientist - but whenever I do that, I do not have to bring evidence, when this evidence is available elsewhere, I just have to make a reference to it. It would hinder the process of a presentation or a talk, if this would have to be done. If they want to know, they can do that by themselves, the information is available, I do not have to do their work for them.
I am 28, bioinformatician and biochemist (both master degrees) and run a Biotech company in south africa, specializing in Biorobotics with a focus on autonomous drones.
every single debate has an argument and a counter argument. what do you have? nothing. not one outside source. yet, people who are losing a debate will often say you look it up. uummm no thats why your debating in the first place. why are you here if i have to do YOUR work for you.
also your speaking with business major. if you don't understand these simple business terms then you need to google them.1 -
Lysette✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Callous2208 wrote: »cosmic_niklas_93b16_ESO wrote: »
The casual crybaby whiners needs to have everything handed to them without any effort though, it's not ok for a few games to be challenging so that they need to use that mush they call brains a bit.
You don't have a clue what you're talking about. The crying generally comes from the so called "hardcore" after spending weeks glued to their tv/monitors. They can't understand why all the gaming companies are moving away from catering to this slowly dieing out, minority demographic. They consume a months worth of content in 2 days by playing more than any healthy or sane person should and then scream that it wasn't enough. Flocking online to bash the game before moving on to the next. Inevitably, this cycle will continue, as no title will be able to keep up with their demands.
And on a side note, no-life grinding in a video game does not equate to you being skilled, or more deserving of reward than a casual to moderate player.
False. Hardcore gamers still generate more profits for companies than casual gamers despite the changing demographics of gamers. I don't know where you got this information from, but its false.
My history in sales tells me one thing..... Repeat customers will ALWAYS buy more if you provide a good service.... New customers are great and can expand that, but always iffy on a product or company, but your repeat customers are your honeyhole
Internet works differently than a local shop - there are plenty of new customers out there, you have to cater for their first experience with you and a few follow ups - rest is not important - you will get enough new ones. Just make new customers who are satisfied to write a review and the stream of new customers will never run dry - there is no need to cater for long-term customers, who are demanding - new ones take it like it is, far easier to deal with.
Thats the lazy way of doing customer service, if you have a revolving door on a long standing product, it never grows the new customers may "take it as it is" just becomes an excuse to put out shallow broken content.
If you focus on keeping long term customers, who actually care about the life of the game and the content, bringing good and albiet bad ideas to the table, but thats why you have alpha and beta phases. Those long term customer will bring their friends over, and they become long term players, grows the company and you dont need to keep reinvesting in short ROI cycles but can show a slower growth that will be more and more consistant with less cost involoved... Again what happens when they blow through all of the content? they stop activly playing until you put out another shallow DLC
Once they have bought all the content, why would I even want to keep them - nothing to gain from them, good when they leave. You can see it here in the forums - all they do, when you keep them, is toxicate the community - so better, they leave.
The toxicity comes from a very small minority that do eventually leave, though some stay for some reason or another.... If in my line of work (I do a lot of big business online) If I just said, oh you bought my product good, now scram, I wouldnt be in my position or business very long, repeat customers buy more everytime anyone in any kind of sales/retail customer service will tell ya.... I forgot the actual number but each sale with a repeat customer can generate 2-4% (ill have to look for the exact figure) more profit than just a typical new customer (outside the occasional laydown). Need to have a balance
If i would have to do a business like that, I would go for the push through method - create an amazing first experience with some follow up and then let it run out - something what is effectively consumable and has an end to it - but where I can pump through a whole lot of people, and milk them off in the hot phase - with an amazing first experience and followup only.
Thats fine and dandy, but where does your longevity come from? Bringing in more customers? What about service if something goes wrong? Going to push them through with that as well? Once they buy your product you're done with them? So they all burn through your short conent now what? Make another one? they come back, guess what you just created a LONG TERM REPEAT CUSTOMER. If you are working on just quick games to get them by, thats what Skyrim did and does. Would work for a single player game or other consumable, but something with staying power wont last too long, name one game that is an MMO that has lasted more than 5 years with a good stable game, and good customer base that isnt Second life as we are talking MMOs not Sims Online
What longevity - the asian market shows how this is done - med-term products only - which expire - and then run the next one - there is no need to focus on just one product, you do multiple in parallel or in sequence or both.
Asian markets are different from like the US market... In Asian markets they thrive on more of the Mobile quick games and PC games. Take China as an example, up until recently consoles where banned, so they either where smuggled in or they moved to PC games or mobile games, which brought up a strange market in the gaming community there, with short hyper games, ever wonder why asians are always so good at games like SC2? Where as in the States, we have both PC and consoles, now throwing in mobile gaming.... We have a more diverse market for games, where we do both long standing MMOs.... WoW and quickly consumed and forgotten games *insert any single player game*
Now this means that there is more competition outside of the style of gaming, PC game developers have to worry about Consoles and tablet/mobile devices pulling away from the customer base
Nah, the asian market is far bigger than the american or western world markets. And it is far more suited to that model, which I favorized if I would have to run such a business - it is perfect for push through, some follow up, and let it cool off - and go to the next one. And that is how they do it in that market - because it makes sense and is highly profitable.
Asia over all yes, breaking them down country by country, China (the largest) barely beats us. And between Them and US we take half of the industry
https://newzoo.com/insights/articles/us-and-china-take-half-of-113bn-games-market-in-2018/
Again that works in the Asian Market as there isnt as much competition. US has a lot more diverse market, and more competition, we already have outlets for highly consumable video games CSO, Star Craft, Over Watch, COD, BF, LoL DOTA HotS. and every single player game. In the MMO industry, there is a reason why Wow is still the most popular and lasts this long.
And even ZOS model shows the Asian model doesnt work well outside of the Asian Market, bad game stability, constant DLC, terribad customer service such as customer getting responses saying that they are too busy to help because outside of costantly throwing money back into the server they dont have a whole lot to invest elsewhere.... So I will ask you, name one MMO that uses the Asian model that is sustainable and last longer than 5 years with a large customer base
You just do not understand the asian market - the goal of those is to NOT last long - but be consumable - and then they do the next one, which is just the same consumable - it has an end and that is intended. Advantage of that approach, it is always NEW, can be hyped and players need to buy all newly - what is not the case with long-term players - that is why they do short-term consumable games.Edited by Lysette on June 30, 2016 5:21PM0 -
Lysette✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Callous2208 wrote: »cosmic_niklas_93b16_ESO wrote: »
The casual crybaby whiners needs to have everything handed to them without any effort though, it's not ok for a few games to be challenging so that they need to use that mush they call brains a bit.
You don't have a clue what you're talking about. The crying generally comes from the so called "hardcore" after spending weeks glued to their tv/monitors. They can't understand why all the gaming companies are moving away from catering to this slowly dieing out, minority demographic. They consume a months worth of content in 2 days by playing more than any healthy or sane person should and then scream that it wasn't enough. Flocking online to bash the game before moving on to the next. Inevitably, this cycle will continue, as no title will be able to keep up with their demands.
And on a side note, no-life grinding in a video game does not equate to you being skilled, or more deserving of reward than a casual to moderate player.
False. Hardcore gamers still generate more profits for companies than casual gamers despite the changing demographics of gamers. I don't know where you got this information from, but its false.
My history in sales tells me one thing..... Repeat customers will ALWAYS buy more if you provide a good service.... New customers are great and can expand that, but always iffy on a product or company, but your repeat customers are your honeyhole
my point was only to highlight that hardcore competitive gamers are more profitable for companies than casual gamers. Casual gamers spend less time and money compared to hardcore competitive gamers. This is not my opinion its a gaming industry fact.
no it isn't - I would like to see statistics about it.
Spending less time is a good thing, not a bad one - less drain on the servers.
And what about MMOs which do not have competitive players at all - like Second Life. They are highly profitable, spending about a million US$ every day in player interaction - real US dollars.
Im talking about the gaming industry as a whole. That includes everything from console games, pc gaming tablets, smartphones,etc. MMO's do have a competitive player base. Look at the market leader for consoles Sony PlayStation. Sony is number one in worldwide sales for its console. Its market position is dedicated to hardcore competitive gamers. Why? Because they generate the most profits compared to casual gamers. Nintendo capitalized on the growing trend in casual gamers around 2009, but has since lost market share to other platforms such as tablets, smartphones,etc that cater to the casual gamer segment. Sony's competitor, Microsoft, is also dedicated more to hardcore gamers and is right behind Sony when it comes to console sales.
Different companies cater to different segments within the gaming industry. This is why market leaders, such as Sony, specifically target hardcore competitive gamers more. They generate more sales. This is not say that there is not a market for casual gamers because there are. Companies like nintendo target casual gamers and build their brand image around that.
and then there is second life - which is just a player-driven and player-created world, for people to create their alternative 2nd life - there is no competitive gameplay at all, there is not even a goal other to enjoy yourself and socialize and have fun interacting with other people. This does not even need new content - just a working sandbox, where people can create and live their dreams. You said that competiitve gamers are most profitable - I say, no, there is a lot of potential in those, who are not even gamers, but normal people with a life, who might not even have a lot of time to get involved with a virtual world - which does not necessarily have to be a game at all - second life is for example not a game - it is a virtual world.
Im sorry but you have no argument what so ever. You keep bringing up ONE game when im talking about the entire gaming industry. start making some valid points or your not worth my time to debate with.
Well, I made a couple of valid points - movie industry, single player games, online casual games, asian MMO - if that is not convincing, then we better stop arguing.
you did NOT present anything at all. Not even any research or graphs to help your position. your argument is nonexistent. come back when you have one or at least a counter argument.
Well, I guess you are perfectly capable to google for the revenue of Zynga for example - I do not have to do that for you. There is as well a lot of information on the web about the revenue of movies, single player games and so on - I gave the idea, you can verify it yourself, the information is there, I do not have to work for you. If you want to know, google yourself.
present your articles, graphs, and research on here like i have. its painfully obvious you have never debated or presented anything in your life. How old are you?
I am not doing a presentation here - I said your claim is not correct, you have to prove your claim, I do not have to show, why it is not. If you claim something, you have to prove it, not someone else to prove that you are not right.
I have done a lot of presentations in my life and given talks world-wide - because I am a scientist - but whenever I do that, I do not have to bring evidence, when this evidence is available elsewhere, I just have to make a reference to it. It would hinder the process of a presentation or a talk, if this would have to be done. If they want to know, they can do that by themselves, the information is available, I do not have to do their work for them.
I am 28, bioinformatician and biochemist (both master degrees) and run a Biotech company in south africa, specializing in Biorobotics with a focus on autonomous drones.
every single debate has an argument and a counter argument. what do you have? nothing. not one outside source. yet, people who are losing a debate will often say you look it up. uummm no thats why your debating in the first place. why are you here if i have to do YOUR work for you.
also your speaking with business major. if you don't understand these simple business terms then you need to google them.
I will end this debate now - I do not see any progress in you understanding what I am talking about nor do you have given any prove to your claim - so be it - I am out of here.0 -
Lucious90✭✭✭Callous2208 wrote: »cosmic_niklas_93b16_ESO wrote: »
The casual crybaby whiners needs to have everything handed to them without any effort though, it's not ok for a few games to be challenging so that they need to use that mush they call brains a bit.
You don't have a clue what you're talking about. The crying generally comes from the so called "hardcore" after spending weeks glued to their tv/monitors. They can't understand why all the gaming companies are moving away from catering to this slowly dieing out, minority demographic. They consume a months worth of content in 2 days by playing more than any healthy or sane person should and then scream that it wasn't enough. Flocking online to bash the game before moving on to the next. Inevitably, this cycle will continue, as no title will be able to keep up with their demands.
And on a side note, no-life grinding in a video game does not equate to you being skilled, or more deserving of reward than a casual to moderate player.
False. Hardcore gamers still generate more profits for companies than casual gamers despite the changing demographics of gamers. I don't know where you got this information from, but its false.
My history in sales tells me one thing..... Repeat customers will ALWAYS buy more if you provide a good service.... New customers are great and can expand that, but always iffy on a product or company, but your repeat customers are your honeyhole
my point was only to highlight that hardcore competitive gamers are more profitable for companies than casual gamers. Casual gamers spend less time and money compared to hardcore competitive gamers. This is not my opinion its a gaming industry fact.
no it isn't - I would like to see statistics about it.
Spending less time is a good thing, not a bad one - less drain on the servers.
And what about MMOs which do not have competitive players at all - like Second Life. They are highly profitable, spending about a million US$ every day in player interaction - real US dollars.
Im talking about the gaming industry as a whole. That includes everything from console games, pc gaming tablets, smartphones,etc. MMO's do have a competitive player base. Look at the market leader for consoles Sony PlayStation. Sony is number one in worldwide sales for its console. Its market position is dedicated to hardcore competitive gamers. Why? Because they generate the most profits compared to casual gamers. Nintendo capitalized on the growing trend in casual gamers around 2009, but has since lost market share to other platforms such as tablets, smartphones,etc that cater to the casual gamer segment. Sony's competitor, Microsoft, is also dedicated more to hardcore gamers and is right behind Sony when it comes to console sales.
Different companies cater to different segments within the gaming industry. This is why market leaders, such as Sony, specifically target hardcore competitive gamers more. They generate more sales. This is not say that there is not a market for casual gamers because there are. Companies like nintendo target casual gamers and build their brand image around that.
and then there is second life - which is just a player-driven and player-created world, for people to create their alternative 2nd life - there is no competitive gameplay at all, there is not even a goal other to enjoy yourself and socialize and have fun interacting with other people. This does not even need new content - just a working sandbox, where people can create and live their dreams. You said that competiitve gamers are most profitable - I say, no, there is a lot of potential in those, who are not even gamers, but normal people with a life, who might not even have a lot of time to get involved with a virtual world - which does not necessarily have to be a game at all - second life is for example not a game - it is a virtual world.
Im sorry but you have no argument what so ever. You keep bringing up ONE game when im talking about the entire gaming industry. start making some valid points or your not worth my time to debate with.
Well, I made a couple of valid points - movie industry, single player games, online casual games, asian MMO - if that is not convincing, then we better stop arguing.
you did NOT present anything at all. Not even any research or graphs to help your position. your argument is nonexistent. come back when you have one or at least a counter argument.
Well, I guess you are perfectly capable to google for the revenue of Zynga for example - I do not have to do that for you. There is as well a lot of information on the web about the revenue of movies, single player games and so on - I gave the idea, you can verify it yourself, the information is there, I do not have to work for you. If you want to know, google yourself.
present your articles, graphs, and research on here like i have. its painfully obvious you have never debated or presented anything in your life. How old are you?
I am not doing a presentation here - I said your claim is not correct, you have to prove your claim, I do not have to show, why it is not. If you claim something, you have to prove it, not someone else to prove that you are not right.
I have done a lot of presentations in my life and given talks world-wide - because I am a scientist - but whenever I do that, I do not have to bring evidence, when this evidence is available elsewhere, I just have to make a reference to it. It would hinder the process of a presentation or a talk, if this would have to be done. If they want to know, they can do that by themselves, the information is available, I do not have to do their work for them.
I am 28, bioinformatician and biochemist (both master degrees) and run a Biotech company in south africa, specializing in Biorobotics with a focus on autonomous drones.
every single debate has an argument and a counter argument. what do you have? nothing. not one outside source. yet, people who are losing a debate will often say you look it up. uummm no thats why your debating in the first place. why are you here if i have to do YOUR work for you.
also your speaking with business major. if you don't understand these simple business terms then you need to google them.
First off IDC what you do for a living, it has no bearing on the topic at hand and whether you need to bring evidence to the table we are here to discuss the topic of hardcore end gamers with ESO. If thats the case, I am a Computer Science Major with a Business Minor as well as exensive experience within the business side of computers, sales websites for multimillion dollar companies, sales its self both as a sales rep and Manager to put me through school, and how to reach customers and run a business.
@Gothren this isnt pointed towards you, you bring up the point beautifullyXbox/NA
Naturegoat - Stam Warden
Healgoat- Mag temp
Staticgoat- Stam Sorc0 -
Callous2208✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭Callous2208 wrote: »Callous2208 wrote: »Callous2208 wrote: »cosmic_niklas_93b16_ESO wrote: »
The casual crybaby whiners needs to have everything handed to them without any effort though, it's not ok for a few games to be challenging so that they need to use that mush they call brains a bit.
You don't have a clue what you're talking about. The crying generally comes from the so called "hardcore" after spending weeks glued to their tv/monitors. They can't understand why all the gaming companies are moving away from catering to this slowly dieing out, minority demographic. They consume a months worth of content in 2 days by playing more than any healthy or sane person should and then scream that it wasn't enough. Flocking online to bash the game before moving on to the next. Inevitably, this cycle will continue, as no title will be able to keep up with their demands.
And on a side note, no-life grinding in a video game does not equate to you being skilled, or more deserving of reward than a casual to moderate player.
False. Hardcore gamers still generate more profits for companies than casual gamers despite the changing demographics of gamers. I don't know where you got this information from, but its false.
My history in sales tells me one thing..... Repeat customers will ALWAYS buy more if you provide a good service.... New customers are great and can expand that, but always iffy on a product or company, but your repeat customers are your honeyhole
my point was only to highlight that hardcore competitive gamers are more profitable for companies than casual gamers. Casual gamers spend less time and money compared to hardcore competitive gamers. This is not my opinion its a gaming industry fact.
no it isn't - I would like to see statistics about it.
Spending less time is a good thing, not a bad one - less drain on the servers.
And what about MMOs which do not have competitive players at all - like Second Life. They are highly profitable, spending about a million US$ every day in player interaction - real US dollars.
Im talking about the gaming industry as a whole. That includes everything from console games, pc gaming tablets, smartphones,etc. MMO's do have a competitive player base. Look at the market leader for consoles Sony PlayStation. Sony is number one in worldwide sales for its console. Its market position is dedicated to hardcore competitive gamers. Why? Because they generate the most profits compared to casual gamers. Nintendo capitalized on the growing trend in casual gamers around 2009, but has since lost market share to other platforms such as tablets, smartphones,etc that cater to the casual gamer segment. Sony's competitor, Microsoft, is also dedicated more to hardcore gamers and is right behind Sony when it comes to console sales.
Different companies cater to different segments within the gaming industry. This is why market leaders, such as Sony, specifically target hardcore competitive gamers more. They generate more sales. This is not say that there is not a market for casual gamers because there are. Companies like nintendo target casual gamers and build their brand image around that.
and then there is second life - which is just a player-driven and player-created world, for people to create their alternative 2nd life - there is no competitive gameplay at all, there is not even a goal other to enjoy yourself and socialize and have fun interacting with other people. This does not even need new content - just a working sandbox, where people can create and live their dreams. You said that competiitve gamers are most profitable - I say, no, there is a lot of potential in those, who are not even gamers, but normal people with a life, who might not even have a lot of time to get involved with a virtual world - which does not necessarily have to be a game at all - second life is for example not a game - it is a virtual world.
Im sorry but you have no argument what so ever. You keep bringing up ONE game when im talking about the entire gaming industry. start making some valid points or your not worth my time to debate with.
Well, I made a couple of valid points - movie industry, single player games, online casual games, asian MMO - if that is not convincing, then we better stop arguing.
you did NOT present anything at all. Not even any research or graphs to help your position. your argument is nonexistent. come back when you have one or at least a counter argument.
Again, the info in your graph had nothing to support your own argument. So perhaps you should come back when you have something worthwhile to present as well.
Then tell me why market leaders choose products,services, and segments within their industry that ARE THE MOST PROFITABLE. Then tell me why these companies are so successful if they are not choosing to target casual gamers. Number one ranked companies get to choose the most profitable segments because they have the economies of scale to do so.
Sony's original marketing campaign has no bearing on their continued success. Despite what you may believe, both Sony and Microsoft are indeed banking heavily on the casual gaming market. You have no graph to prove otherwise, just as I have none to prove my point. But let's look at what they're doing. Look at the titles that come out. Look at their miniscule amount of content. Look at the bite sized dlc's. Look how fast the next in the series drops and abandons support for the last one. This is not how you cater to a hardcore crowd. This is how you milk casual gamers without them knowing it. Everyone has moved towards this. MMO's are no different.
you clearly do not know what a market position is. come back when you do. also watch the video
Yea I think we can all move on from trying to be civil with you. Your entire position is based on falsehoods. Or perhaps it is your definition of a hardcore gamer that is causing your lack of understanding. Sony wants you to believe that the cool kid gamers use their product. They are hyping you up as an individual and putting you on a pedastal. They aren't foolish enough to alienate the majority by insulating they are for the hardcore crowd only. Lol, nothing in that video insinuates your claims. In fact, it does the opposite, proclaiming every Tom, ***, and Harry is special in gaming. You know, those casual common folks. Just stop trying now, it's embarrasing.
Edit: You have now posted two pieces of evidence. Neither of which back up your claims.Edited by Callous2208 on June 30, 2016 5:28PM0 -
Gothren✭✭✭✭✭Callous2208 wrote: »Callous2208 wrote: »cosmic_niklas_93b16_ESO wrote: »
The casual crybaby whiners needs to have everything handed to them without any effort though, it's not ok for a few games to be challenging so that they need to use that mush they call brains a bit.
You don't have a clue what you're talking about. The crying generally comes from the so called "hardcore" after spending weeks glued to their tv/monitors. They can't understand why all the gaming companies are moving away from catering to this slowly dieing out, minority demographic. They consume a months worth of content in 2 days by playing more than any healthy or sane person should and then scream that it wasn't enough. Flocking online to bash the game before moving on to the next. Inevitably, this cycle will continue, as no title will be able to keep up with their demands.
And on a side note, no-life grinding in a video game does not equate to you being skilled, or more deserving of reward than a casual to moderate player.
False. Hardcore gamers still generate more profits for companies than casual gamers despite the changing demographics of gamers. I don't know where you got this information from, but its false.
My history in sales tells me one thing..... Repeat customers will ALWAYS buy more if you provide a good service.... New customers are great and can expand that, but always iffy on a product or company, but your repeat customers are your honeyhole
my point was only to highlight that hardcore competitive gamers are more profitable for companies than casual gamers. Casual gamers spend less time and money compared to hardcore competitive gamers. This is not my opinion its a gaming industry fact.
no it isn't - I would like to see statistics about it.
Spending less time is a good thing, not a bad one - less drain on the servers.
And what about MMOs which do not have competitive players at all - like Second Life. They are highly profitable, spending about a million US$ every day in player interaction - real US dollars.
Im talking about the gaming industry as a whole. That includes everything from console games, pc gaming tablets, smartphones,etc. MMO's do have a competitive player base. Look at the market leader for consoles Sony PlayStation. Sony is number one in worldwide sales for its console. Its market position is dedicated to hardcore competitive gamers. Why? Because they generate the most profits compared to casual gamers. Nintendo capitalized on the growing trend in casual gamers around 2009, but has since lost market share to other platforms such as tablets, smartphones,etc that cater to the casual gamer segment. Sony's competitor, Microsoft, is also dedicated more to hardcore gamers and is right behind Sony when it comes to console sales.
Different companies cater to different segments within the gaming industry. This is why market leaders, such as Sony, specifically target hardcore competitive gamers more. They generate more sales. This is not say that there is not a market for casual gamers because there are. Companies like nintendo target casual gamers and build their brand image around that.
and then there is second life - which is just a player-driven and player-created world, for people to create their alternative 2nd life - there is no competitive gameplay at all, there is not even a goal other to enjoy yourself and socialize and have fun interacting with other people. This does not even need new content - just a working sandbox, where people can create and live their dreams. You said that competiitve gamers are most profitable - I say, no, there is a lot of potential in those, who are not even gamers, but normal people with a life, who might not even have a lot of time to get involved with a virtual world - which does not necessarily have to be a game at all - second life is for example not a game - it is a virtual world.
Im sorry but you have no argument what so ever. You keep bringing up ONE game when im talking about the entire gaming industry. start making some valid points or your not worth my time to debate with.
Well, I made a couple of valid points - movie industry, single player games, online casual games, asian MMO - if that is not convincing, then we better stop arguing.
you did NOT present anything at all. Not even any research or graphs to help your position. your argument is nonexistent. come back when you have one or at least a counter argument.
Again, the info in your graph had nothing to support your own argument. So perhaps you should come back when you have something worthwhile to present as well.
Then tell me why market leaders choose products,services, and segments within their industry that ARE THE MOST PROFITABLE. Then tell me why these companies are so successful if they are not choosing to target casual gamers. Number one ranked companies get to choose the most profitable segments because they have the economies of scale to do so.
But your graphs do not support the claim, that they would go for hardcore gamers nor the other way round - that are just graphs about the market share and nothing else - it does not say anything in regards to your claims.
Sony's market position is clearly dedicated to hardcore gamers lol. That statement clearly shows how little you know about the gaming industry.
Here is Sony's market position. Their marketing is fantastic and you get to see who they are targeting their customer base towards:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QOdW1OuZ1U0
And why would that prove exactly that they are aiming at hardcore gamers?- do you think that casuals do not have an urge to play that as well - this proves exactly nothing.
what this proves is you do not understand 1. what a market position is 2. how to identify a market position. Sony PlayStation's current slogan is "Greatness Awaits". Why? Because it is position its brand image towards hardcore competitive gamers.1 -
Gothren✭✭✭✭✭Callous2208 wrote: »cosmic_niklas_93b16_ESO wrote: »
The casual crybaby whiners needs to have everything handed to them without any effort though, it's not ok for a few games to be challenging so that they need to use that mush they call brains a bit.
You don't have a clue what you're talking about. The crying generally comes from the so called "hardcore" after spending weeks glued to their tv/monitors. They can't understand why all the gaming companies are moving away from catering to this slowly dieing out, minority demographic. They consume a months worth of content in 2 days by playing more than any healthy or sane person should and then scream that it wasn't enough. Flocking online to bash the game before moving on to the next. Inevitably, this cycle will continue, as no title will be able to keep up with their demands.
And on a side note, no-life grinding in a video game does not equate to you being skilled, or more deserving of reward than a casual to moderate player.
False. Hardcore gamers still generate more profits for companies than casual gamers despite the changing demographics of gamers. I don't know where you got this information from, but its false.
My history in sales tells me one thing..... Repeat customers will ALWAYS buy more if you provide a good service.... New customers are great and can expand that, but always iffy on a product or company, but your repeat customers are your honeyhole
my point was only to highlight that hardcore competitive gamers are more profitable for companies than casual gamers. Casual gamers spend less time and money compared to hardcore competitive gamers. This is not my opinion its a gaming industry fact.
no it isn't - I would like to see statistics about it.
Spending less time is a good thing, not a bad one - less drain on the servers.
And what about MMOs which do not have competitive players at all - like Second Life. They are highly profitable, spending about a million US$ every day in player interaction - real US dollars.
Im talking about the gaming industry as a whole. That includes everything from console games, pc gaming tablets, smartphones,etc. MMO's do have a competitive player base. Look at the market leader for consoles Sony PlayStation. Sony is number one in worldwide sales for its console. Its market position is dedicated to hardcore competitive gamers. Why? Because they generate the most profits compared to casual gamers. Nintendo capitalized on the growing trend in casual gamers around 2009, but has since lost market share to other platforms such as tablets, smartphones,etc that cater to the casual gamer segment. Sony's competitor, Microsoft, is also dedicated more to hardcore gamers and is right behind Sony when it comes to console sales.
Different companies cater to different segments within the gaming industry. This is why market leaders, such as Sony, specifically target hardcore competitive gamers more. They generate more sales. This is not say that there is not a market for casual gamers because there are. Companies like nintendo target casual gamers and build their brand image around that.
and then there is second life - which is just a player-driven and player-created world, for people to create their alternative 2nd life - there is no competitive gameplay at all, there is not even a goal other to enjoy yourself and socialize and have fun interacting with other people. This does not even need new content - just a working sandbox, where people can create and live their dreams. You said that competiitve gamers are most profitable - I say, no, there is a lot of potential in those, who are not even gamers, but normal people with a life, who might not even have a lot of time to get involved with a virtual world - which does not necessarily have to be a game at all - second life is for example not a game - it is a virtual world.
Im sorry but you have no argument what so ever. You keep bringing up ONE game when im talking about the entire gaming industry. start making some valid points or your not worth my time to debate with.
Well, I made a couple of valid points - movie industry, single player games, online casual games, asian MMO - if that is not convincing, then we better stop arguing.
you did NOT present anything at all. Not even any research or graphs to help your position. your argument is nonexistent. come back when you have one or at least a counter argument.
Well, I guess you are perfectly capable to google for the revenue of Zynga for example - I do not have to do that for you. There is as well a lot of information on the web about the revenue of movies, single player games and so on - I gave the idea, you can verify it yourself, the information is there, I do not have to work for you. If you want to know, google yourself.
present your articles, graphs, and research on here like i have. its painfully obvious you have never debated or presented anything in your life. How old are you?
I am not doing a presentation here - I said your claim is not correct, you have to prove your claim, I do not have to show, why it is not. If you claim something, you have to prove it, not someone else to prove that you are not right.
I have done a lot of presentations in my life and given talks world-wide - because I am a scientist - but whenever I do that, I do not have to bring evidence, when this evidence is available elsewhere, I just have to make a reference to it. It would hinder the process of a presentation or a talk, if this would have to be done. If they want to know, they can do that by themselves, the information is available, I do not have to do their work for them.
I am 28, bioinformatician and biochemist (both master degrees) and run a Biotech company in south africa, specializing in Biorobotics with a focus on autonomous drones.
every single debate has an argument and a counter argument. what do you have? nothing. not one outside source. yet, people who are losing a debate will often say you look it up. uummm no thats why your debating in the first place. why are you here if i have to do YOUR work for you.
also your speaking with business major. if you don't understand these simple business terms then you need to google them.
I will end this debate now - I do not see any progress in you understanding what I am talking about nor do you have given any prove to your claim - so be it - I am out of here.
well goodbye with your weak sauce arguments. so called "scientist"0 -
Lucious90✭✭✭Callous2208 wrote: »Callous2208 wrote: »cosmic_niklas_93b16_ESO wrote: »
The casual crybaby whiners needs to have everything handed to them without any effort though, it's not ok for a few games to be challenging so that they need to use that mush they call brains a bit.
You don't have a clue what you're talking about. The crying generally comes from the so called "hardcore" after spending weeks glued to their tv/monitors. They can't understand why all the gaming companies are moving away from catering to this slowly dieing out, minority demographic. They consume a months worth of content in 2 days by playing more than any healthy or sane person should and then scream that it wasn't enough. Flocking online to bash the game before moving on to the next. Inevitably, this cycle will continue, as no title will be able to keep up with their demands.
And on a side note, no-life grinding in a video game does not equate to you being skilled, or more deserving of reward than a casual to moderate player.
False. Hardcore gamers still generate more profits for companies than casual gamers despite the changing demographics of gamers. I don't know where you got this information from, but its false.
My history in sales tells me one thing..... Repeat customers will ALWAYS buy more if you provide a good service.... New customers are great and can expand that, but always iffy on a product or company, but your repeat customers are your honeyhole
my point was only to highlight that hardcore competitive gamers are more profitable for companies than casual gamers. Casual gamers spend less time and money compared to hardcore competitive gamers. This is not my opinion its a gaming industry fact.
no it isn't - I would like to see statistics about it.
Spending less time is a good thing, not a bad one - less drain on the servers.
And what about MMOs which do not have competitive players at all - like Second Life. They are highly profitable, spending about a million US$ every day in player interaction - real US dollars.
Im talking about the gaming industry as a whole. That includes everything from console games, pc gaming tablets, smartphones,etc. MMO's do have a competitive player base. Look at the market leader for consoles Sony PlayStation. Sony is number one in worldwide sales for its console. Its market position is dedicated to hardcore competitive gamers. Why? Because they generate the most profits compared to casual gamers. Nintendo capitalized on the growing trend in casual gamers around 2009, but has since lost market share to other platforms such as tablets, smartphones,etc that cater to the casual gamer segment. Sony's competitor, Microsoft, is also dedicated more to hardcore gamers and is right behind Sony when it comes to console sales.
Different companies cater to different segments within the gaming industry. This is why market leaders, such as Sony, specifically target hardcore competitive gamers more. They generate more sales. This is not say that there is not a market for casual gamers because there are. Companies like nintendo target casual gamers and build their brand image around that.
and then there is second life - which is just a player-driven and player-created world, for people to create their alternative 2nd life - there is no competitive gameplay at all, there is not even a goal other to enjoy yourself and socialize and have fun interacting with other people. This does not even need new content - just a working sandbox, where people can create and live their dreams. You said that competiitve gamers are most profitable - I say, no, there is a lot of potential in those, who are not even gamers, but normal people with a life, who might not even have a lot of time to get involved with a virtual world - which does not necessarily have to be a game at all - second life is for example not a game - it is a virtual world.
Im sorry but you have no argument what so ever. You keep bringing up ONE game when im talking about the entire gaming industry. start making some valid points or your not worth my time to debate with.
Well, I made a couple of valid points - movie industry, single player games, online casual games, asian MMO - if that is not convincing, then we better stop arguing.
you did NOT present anything at all. Not even any research or graphs to help your position. your argument is nonexistent. come back when you have one or at least a counter argument.
Again, the info in your graph had nothing to support your own argument. So perhaps you should come back when you have something worthwhile to present as well.
Then tell me why market leaders choose products,services, and segments within their industry that ARE THE MOST PROFITABLE. Then tell me why these companies are so successful if they are not choosing to target casual gamers. Number one ranked companies get to choose the most profitable segments because they have the economies of scale to do so.
But your graphs do not support the claim, that they would go for hardcore gamers nor the other way round - that are just graphs about the market share and nothing else - it does not say anything in regards to your claims.
Sony's market position is clearly dedicated to hardcore gamers lol. That statement clearly shows how little you know about the gaming industry.
Here is Sony's market position. Their marketing is fantastic and you get to see who they are targeting their customer base towards:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QOdW1OuZ1U0
And why would that prove exactly that they are aiming at hardcore gamers?- do you think that casuals do not have an urge to play that as well - this proves exactly nothing.
what this proves is you do not understand 1. what a market position is 2. how to identify a market position. Sony PlayStation's current slogan is "Greatness Awaits". Why? Because it is position its brand image towards hardcore competitive gamers.
I will say that slogan is very ambiguous, and open for interpritation, so though it shows your point of market position, I feel its more of make it what you want it to mean. Now if they start buying deals for a lot of big esports games, or start catering their services towards competitive play thats a better understanding of where they are moving towardsXbox/NA
Naturegoat - Stam Warden
Healgoat- Mag temp
Staticgoat- Stam Sorc0 -
Lysette✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Callous2208 wrote: »Callous2208 wrote: »cosmic_niklas_93b16_ESO wrote: »
The casual crybaby whiners needs to have everything handed to them without any effort though, it's not ok for a few games to be challenging so that they need to use that mush they call brains a bit.
You don't have a clue what you're talking about. The crying generally comes from the so called "hardcore" after spending weeks glued to their tv/monitors. They can't understand why all the gaming companies are moving away from catering to this slowly dieing out, minority demographic. They consume a months worth of content in 2 days by playing more than any healthy or sane person should and then scream that it wasn't enough. Flocking online to bash the game before moving on to the next. Inevitably, this cycle will continue, as no title will be able to keep up with their demands.
And on a side note, no-life grinding in a video game does not equate to you being skilled, or more deserving of reward than a casual to moderate player.
False. Hardcore gamers still generate more profits for companies than casual gamers despite the changing demographics of gamers. I don't know where you got this information from, but its false.
My history in sales tells me one thing..... Repeat customers will ALWAYS buy more if you provide a good service.... New customers are great and can expand that, but always iffy on a product or company, but your repeat customers are your honeyhole
my point was only to highlight that hardcore competitive gamers are more profitable for companies than casual gamers. Casual gamers spend less time and money compared to hardcore competitive gamers. This is not my opinion its a gaming industry fact.
no it isn't - I would like to see statistics about it.
Spending less time is a good thing, not a bad one - less drain on the servers.
And what about MMOs which do not have competitive players at all - like Second Life. They are highly profitable, spending about a million US$ every day in player interaction - real US dollars.
Im talking about the gaming industry as a whole. That includes everything from console games, pc gaming tablets, smartphones,etc. MMO's do have a competitive player base. Look at the market leader for consoles Sony PlayStation. Sony is number one in worldwide sales for its console. Its market position is dedicated to hardcore competitive gamers. Why? Because they generate the most profits compared to casual gamers. Nintendo capitalized on the growing trend in casual gamers around 2009, but has since lost market share to other platforms such as tablets, smartphones,etc that cater to the casual gamer segment. Sony's competitor, Microsoft, is also dedicated more to hardcore gamers and is right behind Sony when it comes to console sales.
Different companies cater to different segments within the gaming industry. This is why market leaders, such as Sony, specifically target hardcore competitive gamers more. They generate more sales. This is not say that there is not a market for casual gamers because there are. Companies like nintendo target casual gamers and build their brand image around that.
and then there is second life - which is just a player-driven and player-created world, for people to create their alternative 2nd life - there is no competitive gameplay at all, there is not even a goal other to enjoy yourself and socialize and have fun interacting with other people. This does not even need new content - just a working sandbox, where people can create and live their dreams. You said that competiitve gamers are most profitable - I say, no, there is a lot of potential in those, who are not even gamers, but normal people with a life, who might not even have a lot of time to get involved with a virtual world - which does not necessarily have to be a game at all - second life is for example not a game - it is a virtual world.
Im sorry but you have no argument what so ever. You keep bringing up ONE game when im talking about the entire gaming industry. start making some valid points or your not worth my time to debate with.
Well, I made a couple of valid points - movie industry, single player games, online casual games, asian MMO - if that is not convincing, then we better stop arguing.
you did NOT present anything at all. Not even any research or graphs to help your position. your argument is nonexistent. come back when you have one or at least a counter argument.
Again, the info in your graph had nothing to support your own argument. So perhaps you should come back when you have something worthwhile to present as well.
Then tell me why market leaders choose products,services, and segments within their industry that ARE THE MOST PROFITABLE. Then tell me why these companies are so successful if they are not choosing to target casual gamers. Number one ranked companies get to choose the most profitable segments because they have the economies of scale to do so.
But your graphs do not support the claim, that they would go for hardcore gamers nor the other way round - that are just graphs about the market share and nothing else - it does not say anything in regards to your claims.
Sony's market position is clearly dedicated to hardcore gamers lol. That statement clearly shows how little you know about the gaming industry.
Here is Sony's market position. Their marketing is fantastic and you get to see who they are targeting their customer base towards:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QOdW1OuZ1U0
And why would that prove exactly that they are aiming at hardcore gamers?- do you think that casuals do not have an urge to play that as well - this proves exactly nothing.
what this proves is you do not understand 1. what a market position is 2. how to identify a market position. Sony PlayStation's current slogan is "Greatness Awaits". Why? Because it is position its brand image towards hardcore competitive gamers.
Ok, last reply to this - and why do you think, that the common Joe, who has a family and not that much time to play, does not want to have this greatness, what awaits him?- Do you think he cannot achieve that as well over time?- You have such a distorted view on people, who are gaming, but cannot put in 10 hours per day, but at most per week - if they are lucky. But they have dreams as well and escape for a while into a world, where greatness awaits - this is not aimed at all at hardcore gamers. For a casual gamer it is not even important to ever reach this greatness - but the possibility is there and he can be part of it and dream about it - maybe some day he will get there. It inspires him.Edited by Lysette on June 30, 2016 5:35PM0 -
Gothren✭✭✭✭✭Callous2208 wrote: »Callous2208 wrote: »cosmic_niklas_93b16_ESO wrote: »
The casual crybaby whiners needs to have everything handed to them without any effort though, it's not ok for a few games to be challenging so that they need to use that mush they call brains a bit.
You don't have a clue what you're talking about. The crying generally comes from the so called "hardcore" after spending weeks glued to their tv/monitors. They can't understand why all the gaming companies are moving away from catering to this slowly dieing out, minority demographic. They consume a months worth of content in 2 days by playing more than any healthy or sane person should and then scream that it wasn't enough. Flocking online to bash the game before moving on to the next. Inevitably, this cycle will continue, as no title will be able to keep up with their demands.
And on a side note, no-life grinding in a video game does not equate to you being skilled, or more deserving of reward than a casual to moderate player.
False. Hardcore gamers still generate more profits for companies than casual gamers despite the changing demographics of gamers. I don't know where you got this information from, but its false.
My history in sales tells me one thing..... Repeat customers will ALWAYS buy more if you provide a good service.... New customers are great and can expand that, but always iffy on a product or company, but your repeat customers are your honeyhole
my point was only to highlight that hardcore competitive gamers are more profitable for companies than casual gamers. Casual gamers spend less time and money compared to hardcore competitive gamers. This is not my opinion its a gaming industry fact.
no it isn't - I would like to see statistics about it.
Spending less time is a good thing, not a bad one - less drain on the servers.
And what about MMOs which do not have competitive players at all - like Second Life. They are highly profitable, spending about a million US$ every day in player interaction - real US dollars.
Im talking about the gaming industry as a whole. That includes everything from console games, pc gaming tablets, smartphones,etc. MMO's do have a competitive player base. Look at the market leader for consoles Sony PlayStation. Sony is number one in worldwide sales for its console. Its market position is dedicated to hardcore competitive gamers. Why? Because they generate the most profits compared to casual gamers. Nintendo capitalized on the growing trend in casual gamers around 2009, but has since lost market share to other platforms such as tablets, smartphones,etc that cater to the casual gamer segment. Sony's competitor, Microsoft, is also dedicated more to hardcore gamers and is right behind Sony when it comes to console sales.
Different companies cater to different segments within the gaming industry. This is why market leaders, such as Sony, specifically target hardcore competitive gamers more. They generate more sales. This is not say that there is not a market for casual gamers because there are. Companies like nintendo target casual gamers and build their brand image around that.
and then there is second life - which is just a player-driven and player-created world, for people to create their alternative 2nd life - there is no competitive gameplay at all, there is not even a goal other to enjoy yourself and socialize and have fun interacting with other people. This does not even need new content - just a working sandbox, where people can create and live their dreams. You said that competiitve gamers are most profitable - I say, no, there is a lot of potential in those, who are not even gamers, but normal people with a life, who might not even have a lot of time to get involved with a virtual world - which does not necessarily have to be a game at all - second life is for example not a game - it is a virtual world.
Im sorry but you have no argument what so ever. You keep bringing up ONE game when im talking about the entire gaming industry. start making some valid points or your not worth my time to debate with.
Well, I made a couple of valid points - movie industry, single player games, online casual games, asian MMO - if that is not convincing, then we better stop arguing.
you did NOT present anything at all. Not even any research or graphs to help your position. your argument is nonexistent. come back when you have one or at least a counter argument.
Again, the info in your graph had nothing to support your own argument. So perhaps you should come back when you have something worthwhile to present as well.
Then tell me why market leaders choose products,services, and segments within their industry that ARE THE MOST PROFITABLE. Then tell me why these companies are so successful if they are not choosing to target casual gamers. Number one ranked companies get to choose the most profitable segments because they have the economies of scale to do so.
But your graphs do not support the claim, that they would go for hardcore gamers nor the other way round - that are just graphs about the market share and nothing else - it does not say anything in regards to your claims.
Sony's market position is clearly dedicated to hardcore gamers lol. That statement clearly shows how little you know about the gaming industry.
Here is Sony's market position. Their marketing is fantastic and you get to see who they are targeting their customer base towards:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QOdW1OuZ1U0
And why would that prove exactly that they are aiming at hardcore gamers?- do you think that casuals do not have an urge to play that as well - this proves exactly nothing.
what this proves is you do not understand 1. what a market position is 2. how to identify a market position. Sony PlayStation's current slogan is "Greatness Awaits". Why? Because it is position its brand image towards hardcore competitive gamers.
Ok, last reply to this - and why do you think, that the common Joe, who has a family and not that much time to play, does not want to have this greatness, what awaits him?- Do you think he cannot achieve that as well over time?- You have such a distorted view on people, who are gaming, but cannot put in 10 hours per day, but at most per week - if they are lucky. But they have dreams as well and escape for a while into a world, where greatness awaits - this is not aimed at all at hardcore gamers.
you watched the video but do not understand it. look at EVERYTHING. every imagery, music, and words have meaning in marketing. Do you really think this ad is targeting casual gamers lol. absolutely not.0 -
Gothren✭✭✭✭✭Callous2208 wrote: »Callous2208 wrote: »cosmic_niklas_93b16_ESO wrote: »
The casual crybaby whiners needs to have everything handed to them without any effort though, it's not ok for a few games to be challenging so that they need to use that mush they call brains a bit.
You don't have a clue what you're talking about. The crying generally comes from the so called "hardcore" after spending weeks glued to their tv/monitors. They can't understand why all the gaming companies are moving away from catering to this slowly dieing out, minority demographic. They consume a months worth of content in 2 days by playing more than any healthy or sane person should and then scream that it wasn't enough. Flocking online to bash the game before moving on to the next. Inevitably, this cycle will continue, as no title will be able to keep up with their demands.
And on a side note, no-life grinding in a video game does not equate to you being skilled, or more deserving of reward than a casual to moderate player.
False. Hardcore gamers still generate more profits for companies than casual gamers despite the changing demographics of gamers. I don't know where you got this information from, but its false.
My history in sales tells me one thing..... Repeat customers will ALWAYS buy more if you provide a good service.... New customers are great and can expand that, but always iffy on a product or company, but your repeat customers are your honeyhole
my point was only to highlight that hardcore competitive gamers are more profitable for companies than casual gamers. Casual gamers spend less time and money compared to hardcore competitive gamers. This is not my opinion its a gaming industry fact.
no it isn't - I would like to see statistics about it.
Spending less time is a good thing, not a bad one - less drain on the servers.
And what about MMOs which do not have competitive players at all - like Second Life. They are highly profitable, spending about a million US$ every day in player interaction - real US dollars.
Im talking about the gaming industry as a whole. That includes everything from console games, pc gaming tablets, smartphones,etc. MMO's do have a competitive player base. Look at the market leader for consoles Sony PlayStation. Sony is number one in worldwide sales for its console. Its market position is dedicated to hardcore competitive gamers. Why? Because they generate the most profits compared to casual gamers. Nintendo capitalized on the growing trend in casual gamers around 2009, but has since lost market share to other platforms such as tablets, smartphones,etc that cater to the casual gamer segment. Sony's competitor, Microsoft, is also dedicated more to hardcore gamers and is right behind Sony when it comes to console sales.
Different companies cater to different segments within the gaming industry. This is why market leaders, such as Sony, specifically target hardcore competitive gamers more. They generate more sales. This is not say that there is not a market for casual gamers because there are. Companies like nintendo target casual gamers and build their brand image around that.
and then there is second life - which is just a player-driven and player-created world, for people to create their alternative 2nd life - there is no competitive gameplay at all, there is not even a goal other to enjoy yourself and socialize and have fun interacting with other people. This does not even need new content - just a working sandbox, where people can create and live their dreams. You said that competiitve gamers are most profitable - I say, no, there is a lot of potential in those, who are not even gamers, but normal people with a life, who might not even have a lot of time to get involved with a virtual world - which does not necessarily have to be a game at all - second life is for example not a game - it is a virtual world.
Im sorry but you have no argument what so ever. You keep bringing up ONE game when im talking about the entire gaming industry. start making some valid points or your not worth my time to debate with.
Well, I made a couple of valid points - movie industry, single player games, online casual games, asian MMO - if that is not convincing, then we better stop arguing.
you did NOT present anything at all. Not even any research or graphs to help your position. your argument is nonexistent. come back when you have one or at least a counter argument.
Again, the info in your graph had nothing to support your own argument. So perhaps you should come back when you have something worthwhile to present as well.
Then tell me why market leaders choose products,services, and segments within their industry that ARE THE MOST PROFITABLE. Then tell me why these companies are so successful if they are not choosing to target casual gamers. Number one ranked companies get to choose the most profitable segments because they have the economies of scale to do so.
But your graphs do not support the claim, that they would go for hardcore gamers nor the other way round - that are just graphs about the market share and nothing else - it does not say anything in regards to your claims.
Sony's market position is clearly dedicated to hardcore gamers lol. That statement clearly shows how little you know about the gaming industry.
Here is Sony's market position. Their marketing is fantastic and you get to see who they are targeting their customer base towards:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QOdW1OuZ1U0
And why would that prove exactly that they are aiming at hardcore gamers?- do you think that casuals do not have an urge to play that as well - this proves exactly nothing.
what this proves is you do not understand 1. what a market position is 2. how to identify a market position. Sony PlayStation's current slogan is "Greatness Awaits". Why? Because it is position its brand image towards hardcore competitive gamers.
I will say that slogan is very ambiguous, and open for interpritation, so though it shows your point of market position, I feel its more of make it what you want it to mean. Now if they start buying deals for a lot of big esports games, or start catering their services towards competitive play thats a better understanding of where they are moving towards
finding a company market position can be hard. However, you need to look at the video based on every little detail in order to determine who it is targeting0 -
Callous2208✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭Callous2208 wrote: »Callous2208 wrote: »cosmic_niklas_93b16_ESO wrote: »
The casual crybaby whiners needs to have everything handed to them without any effort though, it's not ok for a few games to be challenging so that they need to use that mush they call brains a bit.
You don't have a clue what you're talking about. The crying generally comes from the so called "hardcore" after spending weeks glued to their tv/monitors. They can't understand why all the gaming companies are moving away from catering to this slowly dieing out, minority demographic. They consume a months worth of content in 2 days by playing more than any healthy or sane person should and then scream that it wasn't enough. Flocking online to bash the game before moving on to the next. Inevitably, this cycle will continue, as no title will be able to keep up with their demands.
And on a side note, no-life grinding in a video game does not equate to you being skilled, or more deserving of reward than a casual to moderate player.
False. Hardcore gamers still generate more profits for companies than casual gamers despite the changing demographics of gamers. I don't know where you got this information from, but its false.
My history in sales tells me one thing..... Repeat customers will ALWAYS buy more if you provide a good service.... New customers are great and can expand that, but always iffy on a product or company, but your repeat customers are your honeyhole
my point was only to highlight that hardcore competitive gamers are more profitable for companies than casual gamers. Casual gamers spend less time and money compared to hardcore competitive gamers. This is not my opinion its a gaming industry fact.
no it isn't - I would like to see statistics about it.
Spending less time is a good thing, not a bad one - less drain on the servers.
And what about MMOs which do not have competitive players at all - like Second Life. They are highly profitable, spending about a million US$ every day in player interaction - real US dollars.
Im talking about the gaming industry as a whole. That includes everything from console games, pc gaming tablets, smartphones,etc. MMO's do have a competitive player base. Look at the market leader for consoles Sony PlayStation. Sony is number one in worldwide sales for its console. Its market position is dedicated to hardcore competitive gamers. Why? Because they generate the most profits compared to casual gamers. Nintendo capitalized on the growing trend in casual gamers around 2009, but has since lost market share to other platforms such as tablets, smartphones,etc that cater to the casual gamer segment. Sony's competitor, Microsoft, is also dedicated more to hardcore gamers and is right behind Sony when it comes to console sales.
Different companies cater to different segments within the gaming industry. This is why market leaders, such as Sony, specifically target hardcore competitive gamers more. They generate more sales. This is not say that there is not a market for casual gamers because there are. Companies like nintendo target casual gamers and build their brand image around that.
and then there is second life - which is just a player-driven and player-created world, for people to create their alternative 2nd life - there is no competitive gameplay at all, there is not even a goal other to enjoy yourself and socialize and have fun interacting with other people. This does not even need new content - just a working sandbox, where people can create and live their dreams. You said that competiitve gamers are most profitable - I say, no, there is a lot of potential in those, who are not even gamers, but normal people with a life, who might not even have a lot of time to get involved with a virtual world - which does not necessarily have to be a game at all - second life is for example not a game - it is a virtual world.
Im sorry but you have no argument what so ever. You keep bringing up ONE game when im talking about the entire gaming industry. start making some valid points or your not worth my time to debate with.
Well, I made a couple of valid points - movie industry, single player games, online casual games, asian MMO - if that is not convincing, then we better stop arguing.
you did NOT present anything at all. Not even any research or graphs to help your position. your argument is nonexistent. come back when you have one or at least a counter argument.
Again, the info in your graph had nothing to support your own argument. So perhaps you should come back when you have something worthwhile to present as well.
Then tell me why market leaders choose products,services, and segments within their industry that ARE THE MOST PROFITABLE. Then tell me why these companies are so successful if they are not choosing to target casual gamers. Number one ranked companies get to choose the most profitable segments because they have the economies of scale to do so.
But your graphs do not support the claim, that they would go for hardcore gamers nor the other way round - that are just graphs about the market share and nothing else - it does not say anything in regards to your claims.
Sony's market position is clearly dedicated to hardcore gamers lol. That statement clearly shows how little you know about the gaming industry.
Here is Sony's market position. Their marketing is fantastic and you get to see who they are targeting their customer base towards:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QOdW1OuZ1U0
And why would that prove exactly that they are aiming at hardcore gamers?- do you think that casuals do not have an urge to play that as well - this proves exactly nothing.
what this proves is you do not understand 1. what a market position is 2. how to identify a market position. Sony PlayStation's current slogan is "Greatness Awaits". Why? Because it is position its brand image towards hardcore competitive gamers.
OR it's a message of empowerment to all gamers since Sony isn't dumb enough to alienate the many to stroke the ego of the few. You must have just started your studies in this field. You've a lot to learn.0 -
Gothren✭✭✭✭✭Callous2208 wrote: »Callous2208 wrote: »Callous2208 wrote: »cosmic_niklas_93b16_ESO wrote: »
The casual crybaby whiners needs to have everything handed to them without any effort though, it's not ok for a few games to be challenging so that they need to use that mush they call brains a bit.
You don't have a clue what you're talking about. The crying generally comes from the so called "hardcore" after spending weeks glued to their tv/monitors. They can't understand why all the gaming companies are moving away from catering to this slowly dieing out, minority demographic. They consume a months worth of content in 2 days by playing more than any healthy or sane person should and then scream that it wasn't enough. Flocking online to bash the game before moving on to the next. Inevitably, this cycle will continue, as no title will be able to keep up with their demands.
And on a side note, no-life grinding in a video game does not equate to you being skilled, or more deserving of reward than a casual to moderate player.
False. Hardcore gamers still generate more profits for companies than casual gamers despite the changing demographics of gamers. I don't know where you got this information from, but its false.
My history in sales tells me one thing..... Repeat customers will ALWAYS buy more if you provide a good service.... New customers are great and can expand that, but always iffy on a product or company, but your repeat customers are your honeyhole
my point was only to highlight that hardcore competitive gamers are more profitable for companies than casual gamers. Casual gamers spend less time and money compared to hardcore competitive gamers. This is not my opinion its a gaming industry fact.
no it isn't - I would like to see statistics about it.
Spending less time is a good thing, not a bad one - less drain on the servers.
And what about MMOs which do not have competitive players at all - like Second Life. They are highly profitable, spending about a million US$ every day in player interaction - real US dollars.
Im talking about the gaming industry as a whole. That includes everything from console games, pc gaming tablets, smartphones,etc. MMO's do have a competitive player base. Look at the market leader for consoles Sony PlayStation. Sony is number one in worldwide sales for its console. Its market position is dedicated to hardcore competitive gamers. Why? Because they generate the most profits compared to casual gamers. Nintendo capitalized on the growing trend in casual gamers around 2009, but has since lost market share to other platforms such as tablets, smartphones,etc that cater to the casual gamer segment. Sony's competitor, Microsoft, is also dedicated more to hardcore gamers and is right behind Sony when it comes to console sales.
Different companies cater to different segments within the gaming industry. This is why market leaders, such as Sony, specifically target hardcore competitive gamers more. They generate more sales. This is not say that there is not a market for casual gamers because there are. Companies like nintendo target casual gamers and build their brand image around that.
and then there is second life - which is just a player-driven and player-created world, for people to create their alternative 2nd life - there is no competitive gameplay at all, there is not even a goal other to enjoy yourself and socialize and have fun interacting with other people. This does not even need new content - just a working sandbox, where people can create and live their dreams. You said that competiitve gamers are most profitable - I say, no, there is a lot of potential in those, who are not even gamers, but normal people with a life, who might not even have a lot of time to get involved with a virtual world - which does not necessarily have to be a game at all - second life is for example not a game - it is a virtual world.
Im sorry but you have no argument what so ever. You keep bringing up ONE game when im talking about the entire gaming industry. start making some valid points or your not worth my time to debate with.
Well, I made a couple of valid points - movie industry, single player games, online casual games, asian MMO - if that is not convincing, then we better stop arguing.
you did NOT present anything at all. Not even any research or graphs to help your position. your argument is nonexistent. come back when you have one or at least a counter argument.
Again, the info in your graph had nothing to support your own argument. So perhaps you should come back when you have something worthwhile to present as well.
Then tell me why market leaders choose products,services, and segments within their industry that ARE THE MOST PROFITABLE. Then tell me why these companies are so successful if they are not choosing to target casual gamers. Number one ranked companies get to choose the most profitable segments because they have the economies of scale to do so.
But your graphs do not support the claim, that they would go for hardcore gamers nor the other way round - that are just graphs about the market share and nothing else - it does not say anything in regards to your claims.
Sony's market position is clearly dedicated to hardcore gamers lol. That statement clearly shows how little you know about the gaming industry.
Here is Sony's market position. Their marketing is fantastic and you get to see who they are targeting their customer base towards:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QOdW1OuZ1U0
And why would that prove exactly that they are aiming at hardcore gamers?- do you think that casuals do not have an urge to play that as well - this proves exactly nothing.
what this proves is you do not understand 1. what a market position is 2. how to identify a market position. Sony PlayStation's current slogan is "Greatness Awaits". Why? Because it is position its brand image towards hardcore competitive gamers.
OR it's a message of empowerment to all gamers since Sony isn't dumb enough to alienate the many to stroke the ego of the few. You must have just started your studies in this field. You've a lot to learn.
The company has one market position and one only. Over diversification of its products and market position can distort a companies brand image and hurt sales. Consumers are bombarded with marketing everyday and having an unclear market position can impact the company's profits.
Edited by Gothren on June 30, 2016 5:45PM0 -
ShedsHisTail✭✭✭✭✭
✭Callous2208 wrote: »cosmic_niklas_93b16_ESO wrote: »
The casual crybaby whiners needs to have everything handed to them without any effort though, it's not ok for a few games to be challenging so that they need to use that mush they call brains a bit.
You don't have a clue what you're talking about. The crying generally comes from the so called "hardcore" after spending weeks glued to their tv/monitors. They can't understand why all the gaming companies are moving away from catering to this slowly dieing out, minority demographic. They consume a months worth of content in 2 days by playing more than any healthy or sane person should and then scream that it wasn't enough. Flocking online to bash the game before moving on to the next. Inevitably, this cycle will continue, as no title will be able to keep up with their demands.
And on a side note, no-life grinding in a video game does not equate to you being skilled, or more deserving of reward than a casual to moderate player.
False. Hardcore gamers still generate more profits for companies than casual gamers despite the changing demographics of gamers. I don't know where you got this information from, but its false.
My history in sales tells me one thing..... Repeat customers will ALWAYS buy more if you provide a good service.... New customers are great and can expand that, but always iffy on a product or company, but your repeat customers are your honeyhole
my point was only to highlight that hardcore competitive gamers are more profitable for companies than casual gamers. Casual gamers spend less time and money compared to hardcore competitive gamers. This is not my opinion its a gaming industry fact.
no it isn't - I would like to see statistics about it.
Spending less time is a good thing, not a bad one - less drain on the servers.
And what about MMOs which do not have competitive players at all - like Second Life. They are highly profitable, spending about a million US$ every day in player interaction - real US dollars.
Im talking about the gaming industry as a whole. That includes everything from console games, pc gaming tablets, smartphones,etc. MMO's do have a competitive player base. Look at the market leader for consoles Sony PlayStation. Sony is number one in worldwide sales for its console. Its market position is dedicated to hardcore competitive gamers. Why? Because they generate the most profits compared to casual gamers. Nintendo capitalized on the growing trend in casual gamers around 2009, but has since lost market share to other platforms such as tablets, smartphones,etc that cater to the casual gamer segment. Sony's competitor, Microsoft, is also dedicated more to hardcore gamers and is right behind Sony when it comes to console sales.
Different companies cater to different segments within the gaming industry. This is why market leaders, such as Sony, specifically target hardcore competitive gamers more. They generate more sales. This is not say that there is not a market for casual gamers because there are. Companies like nintendo target casual gamers and build their brand image around that.
Well, since we're looking at the industry as a whole...
Might as well consult the most recent ESA (Entertainment Software Association) report released a couple months ago.
Submitted for your reading pleasure: http://essentialfacts.theesa.com/Essential-Facts-2016.pdf
It's only 16 pages and it's mostly pictures, but I' like to point your attention to pages 10 and 11 which show the most popular genres on each platform (the report refers to consoles as "Video Games" and PC as "Computer Games"). whe can see that, while you're not wrong about console gamers liking their competitive action oriented games, you might also notice the overwhelming majority of PC players enjoying a more laid back strategy, casual, RPG experience.
While their definitions of each of these things might differ somewhat from ours, I think the trend is clear. Console gamers tend to prefer fast paced gaming while PC users still prefer a more long-term, time-consuming game they can get invested in. Incidentally, I looked at ESA reports going back as far as 2010 and the trend is the same. So, with ESO being first released on PC, I think we can get a pretty clear idea of what manner of gaming experience they were planning to deliver to their target audience; despite heavily promoting the PvP experience.
EDIT: Just since I know it's going to be the next line of discussion... Here's a comparison of PC to Console game sales in 2015 from Nvidia:
And another with future projections:
Edited by ShedsHisTail on June 30, 2016 5:54PM"As an online discussion of Tamrielic Lore grows longer, the probability of someone blaming a Dragon Break approaches 1." -- Sheds' Law
Have you seen the Twin Lamps?2 -
Callous2208✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭Callous2208 wrote: »Callous2208 wrote: »Callous2208 wrote: »cosmic_niklas_93b16_ESO wrote: »
The casual crybaby whiners needs to have everything handed to them without any effort though, it's not ok for a few games to be challenging so that they need to use that mush they call brains a bit.
You don't have a clue what you're talking about. The crying generally comes from the so called "hardcore" after spending weeks glued to their tv/monitors. They can't understand why all the gaming companies are moving away from catering to this slowly dieing out, minority demographic. They consume a months worth of content in 2 days by playing more than any healthy or sane person should and then scream that it wasn't enough. Flocking online to bash the game before moving on to the next. Inevitably, this cycle will continue, as no title will be able to keep up with their demands.
And on a side note, no-life grinding in a video game does not equate to you being skilled, or more deserving of reward than a casual to moderate player.
False. Hardcore gamers still generate more profits for companies than casual gamers despite the changing demographics of gamers. I don't know where you got this information from, but its false.
My history in sales tells me one thing..... Repeat customers will ALWAYS buy more if you provide a good service.... New customers are great and can expand that, but always iffy on a product or company, but your repeat customers are your honeyhole
my point was only to highlight that hardcore competitive gamers are more profitable for companies than casual gamers. Casual gamers spend less time and money compared to hardcore competitive gamers. This is not my opinion its a gaming industry fact.
no it isn't - I would like to see statistics about it.
Spending less time is a good thing, not a bad one - less drain on the servers.
And what about MMOs which do not have competitive players at all - like Second Life. They are highly profitable, spending about a million US$ every day in player interaction - real US dollars.
Im talking about the gaming industry as a whole. That includes everything from console games, pc gaming tablets, smartphones,etc. MMO's do have a competitive player base. Look at the market leader for consoles Sony PlayStation. Sony is number one in worldwide sales for its console. Its market position is dedicated to hardcore competitive gamers. Why? Because they generate the most profits compared to casual gamers. Nintendo capitalized on the growing trend in casual gamers around 2009, but has since lost market share to other platforms such as tablets, smartphones,etc that cater to the casual gamer segment. Sony's competitor, Microsoft, is also dedicated more to hardcore gamers and is right behind Sony when it comes to console sales.
Different companies cater to different segments within the gaming industry. This is why market leaders, such as Sony, specifically target hardcore competitive gamers more. They generate more sales. This is not say that there is not a market for casual gamers because there are. Companies like nintendo target casual gamers and build their brand image around that.
and then there is second life - which is just a player-driven and player-created world, for people to create their alternative 2nd life - there is no competitive gameplay at all, there is not even a goal other to enjoy yourself and socialize and have fun interacting with other people. This does not even need new content - just a working sandbox, where people can create and live their dreams. You said that competiitve gamers are most profitable - I say, no, there is a lot of potential in those, who are not even gamers, but normal people with a life, who might not even have a lot of time to get involved with a virtual world - which does not necessarily have to be a game at all - second life is for example not a game - it is a virtual world.
Im sorry but you have no argument what so ever. You keep bringing up ONE game when im talking about the entire gaming industry. start making some valid points or your not worth my time to debate with.
Well, I made a couple of valid points - movie industry, single player games, online casual games, asian MMO - if that is not convincing, then we better stop arguing.
you did NOT present anything at all. Not even any research or graphs to help your position. your argument is nonexistent. come back when you have one or at least a counter argument.
Again, the info in your graph had nothing to support your own argument. So perhaps you should come back when you have something worthwhile to present as well.
Then tell me why market leaders choose products,services, and segments within their industry that ARE THE MOST PROFITABLE. Then tell me why these companies are so successful if they are not choosing to target casual gamers. Number one ranked companies get to choose the most profitable segments because they have the economies of scale to do so.
But your graphs do not support the claim, that they would go for hardcore gamers nor the other way round - that are just graphs about the market share and nothing else - it does not say anything in regards to your claims.
Sony's market position is clearly dedicated to hardcore gamers lol. That statement clearly shows how little you know about the gaming industry.
Here is Sony's market position. Their marketing is fantastic and you get to see who they are targeting their customer base towards:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QOdW1OuZ1U0
And why would that prove exactly that they are aiming at hardcore gamers?- do you think that casuals do not have an urge to play that as well - this proves exactly nothing.
what this proves is you do not understand 1. what a market position is 2. how to identify a market position. Sony PlayStation's current slogan is "Greatness Awaits". Why? Because it is position its brand image towards hardcore competitive gamers.
OR it's a message of empowerment to all gamers since Sony isn't dumb enough to alienate the many to stroke the ego of the few. You must have just started your studies in this field. You've a lot to learn.
The company has one market position and one only. Over diversification of its products and market position can distort a companies brand image and hurt sales. Consumers are bombarded with marketing everyday and having an unclear market position hurts sales.
This statement is correct, but still doesn't change the fact that such a harsh line would not be drawn. It is not worth the risk to ignore an entire, larger body of customers in an effort to stand out in the eyes of the few. Hence, the video, and their message. Greatness indeed Awaits. Never do they imply that that Greatness is only for the gaming elite. So it is fair to assume that the message was meant to strike a cord with all demographics. Over diversification can indeed lead to trouble. But pigeon holing your product and selling to one group while insinuating you were not meant for others, is the worst move you could possibly make in the entertainment industry.0 -
KloudKotuzai✭✭The reason for this is because ESO didn't design a combat system that really requires skill, their AI's are limited all they can do is out number you or do more damage to make it more harder. There's no room for improvement in difficulty, you cant challenge a boss that will out play you. If they improved their combat then definitely it can become how skilled you're and equipment just helps.0 -
Gothren✭✭✭✭✭ShedsHisTail wrote: »Callous2208 wrote: »cosmic_niklas_93b16_ESO wrote: »
The casual crybaby whiners needs to have everything handed to them without any effort though, it's not ok for a few games to be challenging so that they need to use that mush they call brains a bit.
You don't have a clue what you're talking about. The crying generally comes from the so called "hardcore" after spending weeks glued to their tv/monitors. They can't understand why all the gaming companies are moving away from catering to this slowly dieing out, minority demographic. They consume a months worth of content in 2 days by playing more than any healthy or sane person should and then scream that it wasn't enough. Flocking online to bash the game before moving on to the next. Inevitably, this cycle will continue, as no title will be able to keep up with their demands.
And on a side note, no-life grinding in a video game does not equate to you being skilled, or more deserving of reward than a casual to moderate player.
False. Hardcore gamers still generate more profits for companies than casual gamers despite the changing demographics of gamers. I don't know where you got this information from, but its false.
My history in sales tells me one thing..... Repeat customers will ALWAYS buy more if you provide a good service.... New customers are great and can expand that, but always iffy on a product or company, but your repeat customers are your honeyhole
my point was only to highlight that hardcore competitive gamers are more profitable for companies than casual gamers. Casual gamers spend less time and money compared to hardcore competitive gamers. This is not my opinion its a gaming industry fact.
no it isn't - I would like to see statistics about it.
Spending less time is a good thing, not a bad one - less drain on the servers.
And what about MMOs which do not have competitive players at all - like Second Life. They are highly profitable, spending about a million US$ every day in player interaction - real US dollars.
Im talking about the gaming industry as a whole. That includes everything from console games, pc gaming tablets, smartphones,etc. MMO's do have a competitive player base. Look at the market leader for consoles Sony PlayStation. Sony is number one in worldwide sales for its console. Its market position is dedicated to hardcore competitive gamers. Why? Because they generate the most profits compared to casual gamers. Nintendo capitalized on the growing trend in casual gamers around 2009, but has since lost market share to other platforms such as tablets, smartphones,etc that cater to the casual gamer segment. Sony's competitor, Microsoft, is also dedicated more to hardcore gamers and is right behind Sony when it comes to console sales.
Different companies cater to different segments within the gaming industry. This is why market leaders, such as Sony, specifically target hardcore competitive gamers more. They generate more sales. This is not say that there is not a market for casual gamers because there are. Companies like nintendo target casual gamers and build their brand image around that.
Well, since we're looking at the industry as a whole...
Might as well consult the most recent ESA (Entertainment Software Association) report released a couple months ago.
Submitted for your reading pleasure: http://essentialfacts.theesa.com/Essential-Facts-2016.pdf
It's only 16 pages and it's mostly pictures, but I' like to point your attention to pages 10 and 11 which show the most popular genres on each platform (the report refers to consoles as "Video Games" and PC as "Computer Games"). whe can see that, while you're not wrong about console gamers liking their competitive action oriented games, you might also notice the overwhelming majority of PC players enjoying a more laid back strategy, casual, RPG experience.
While their definitions of each of these things might differ somewhat from ours, I think the trend is clear. Console gamers tend to prefer fast paced gaming while PC users still prefer a more long-term, time-consuming game they can get invested in. Incidentally, I looked at ESA reports going back as far as 2010 and the trend is the same. So, with ESO being first released on PC, I think we can get a pretty clear idea of what manner of gaming experience they were planning to deliver to their target audience; despite heavily promoting the PvP experience.
EDIT: Just since I know it's going to be the next line of discussion... Here's a comparison of PC to Console game sales in 2015 from Nvidia:
And another with future projections:
very great artiicle love it. im looking at it right now. However, on page 11 i really don't see a clear breakdown on whether some of these genres are more for hardcore or casual gamers. I also find it interesting how well phones and tablets are doing. I know these devices have become a threat to consoles these past few years, but this clearly show just how much of a threat that is. Im also curious to see if the casual gaming trend persists then will the major consoles reposition itself to target them if they become profitable enough for them to risk it.0