Support NeoGAF

[Metallix87]

ITT, people don't know the definiton of a core market. People that play COD, FIFA, etc. are the core gamer.

Core gamer is the nice way of saying dudebro.

 

[flatearthpandas]

That's a bizarre interpretation. NPD chose a market segment definition to intentionally offend? They chose it because it's a term that's regularly used, often to describe the market in the age range that buys the types of games described. It's a term often used to describe the demographics that third parties target their games towards. It's a term that investors, publishers, buyers, whomever reading the report will be able to discern meaning from - as again, at a basic level core means central/primary - rather than a word I made up in this thread.

Intentionally was the wrong term. Knowingly. Being involved in the industry, one could expect major players to also know, as you did, that gamers outside of that "definition" identify with the term "core gamers" in various ways. Even if the intent was not to offend, they either knew it would offend or are ignorant of the market.

No, I object to the use of such terms in general, the why is already outlined above. It has nothing to do with naming of market segments.

As do most people. I like to think most don't object merely to terms that dehumanize people though. I like to think we usually object to terms that needlessly marginalize people for arbitrary reasons.

I'll ask you specifically:
Do you believe it is okay to name things with any word? Do you think that the names of things are meaningless?

Yes, because it's a term without a universally defined meaning. And they're still free to identify with the term as much as they want. They can shout it from the rooftops. People who feel "marginalized" over something so utterly trivial need to get some perspective on the world.

In other words, no sympathy for people who feel marginalized by being arbitrarily excluded from something they identify with.

They aren't "arbitrary" reasons. The reasons have already been stated numerous times.

This is from Ubisoft (one of the publishers that does make a reasonable proportion of its sales from titles outside of the market segment described by NPD) who just released their financials.

5% of their sales in the last quarter came from Nintendo's platforms. 1% of their sales came from handhelds in general.

These are the people looking for insights from NPD reports. These are the people NPD design their studies for.

Those are good reasons for including those systems in the category. Those are not good reasons for calling the category "core gamers." Especially with full knowledge that people on other systems also identify as "core gamers." There is not a word that specifically describes

anyone who plays five hours or more on Microsoft or Sony consoles, PC, or Mac, and plays in certain genres (action, adventure, fighting, flight, MMOs, racing, real-time strategy, RPGs, shooters, or sports games) on those platforms

and so any word assigned to that definition is chosen arbitrarily. And ill-chosen, if it is assigned with full knowledge that there are people outside of that definition who identify themselves as core gamers.

I guess my final question is:
Why do you believe it is better for this category to be named in such a way that knowingly excludes people who identify with the term "core gamer" than for it to be named in a way that doesn't?

Regardless of whether you believe their feeling are warranted, wouldn't it be better to not knowingly offend people from the start?

Why not just name the category "people AAA third-party publishers care about" if we want to give it a name that describes "the demographics that third parties target their games towards." Surely, that's a much more clear name "that investors, publishers, buyers, whomever reading the report will be able to discern meaning from"

Certainly much better than a word that people who AAA third-party publishers don't care about still identify with.

 

[foxuzamaki]

Uh, makes sense to me. Who the fuck would buy a multiplat on Wii u?

Ps I own a Wii u

wut

 

[QuickSilverD]

Just found out today that I am a filthy casual.

But seriously between work and school it is hard to get 5 hours a week of play :/

 

[TheSpaceBetween]

Haha. Funniest shit I read all day.

 

[shinra-bansho]

I don't think it's okay to name things words that are quite universally (outside of bigots who use them) considered offensive and used as derogatory slurs.

I think it's perfectly fine to call a market segment something entirely innocuous that's already been used to describe it. You seem to be under the impression that this is the first time that the term core gamer is used in such a fashion. It's been used in such a fashion before. It's used in such a fashion by publishers. It's used in such a fashion by analysts like Wedbush. And it's used by trackers like NPD. It's a term that the readership are already aware of and already use or associate in such a manner.

Again, taking offense to something so utterly trivial? Feeling marginalized? No one is infringing on you in any way. No one is imposing on you in any way.

Choosing a market segmentation that is the most relevant to your own reports target readership is a perfectly adequate reason for excluding certain other parts of the market.

Get a grip and realise what the report is, what the purpose of the report is, and who the report is for.

 

[flatearthpandas]

Choosing a market segmentation that is the most relevant to your own reports target readership is a perfectly adequate reason for excluding certain other parts of the market.

Get a grip and realise what the report is, what the purpose of the report is, and who the report is for.

Choosing a market segmentation is totally irrelevant to our discussion. Naming that market segment is what we're discussing.

I realize what the purpose of the report is and who it is for. I'll repeat my question for you.

Why do you believe it is better for this category to be named in such a way that knowingly excludes and minimalizes people who identify with the term "core gamer" than for it to be named in a way that doesn't?

I'll also remind you that we've both agreed "core gamer" has no inherent meaning and so is certainly not a necessary word to describe the category. Regardless of whether you believe people's feelings are warranted or important, wouldn't it be better to not knowingly offend people?

Why not name the category something that people who AAA third-party publishers don't care about don't identify with? Surely any word that also has no inherent meaning applicable to the category would be more suitable if it also didn't alienate people who identify with the word.

 

[shinra-bansho]

We both agreed it had no universally agreed upon meaning.
Wedbush uses the term to describe people who "purchased a disproportionate number of games and formed the target audience for many of the industry’s best-selling titles, driving a proliferation of testosterone-charged games" in their Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc report earlier in the year.

I didn't say it was better than any possible term. I did say it was better than a nonsensical word like googlymoogly. And I don't see any issue with core gamer being used for such a definition. It's concise as short-hand, recognizable to the readership, and already used in such a fashion by them.

You keep asserting NPD "knowingly offended people", when the reality is there's nothing to suggest the sort. NPD produced a report for their readership about a given market segmentation, using a term that's commonly used and commonly used to describe that segment, and people happened to take irrational offense to being excluded from the cohort.

They segmented the most relevant market, named the segment nothing inherently offensive, they could have named it something else, they didn't, it doesn't impact people in any significant manner that they did. End of.
If the sum of discussion in the thread is going to be the naming of the cohort, rather than the findings of the study, then I've no real interest in continuing said discussion.

 

[flatearthpandas]

Assuming they knew there are people outside of their definition who associate with the term "core gamer," then they knowingly excluded people. It's either that or they're ignorant of the demographic outside of spending habits.

Anyway, i empathize with being tired of this conversation. But you do realize we're in a thread about the NPD definition of core gamer, right? There's another thread about their findings.

 

[Asmodai48]

How is mac on the list and not Nintendo?

 

[Nilaul]

It kind of is. Fire Emblem tho? Well they did add a "casual" difficulty to the last one!

Donkey Kong WiiU was so casual in terms of difficulty that reviewers literally gave up on it.

 

[Dr.Bergenstein]

Nintendo exclusion is their own fault. They've mismanaged themselves into irrelevancy.

 

[Sothpaw]

5 hours a day?

They didn't limit it to college kids no.

 

[CesspoolofHatred]

5 hours per week is a rather interesting minimum threshold for a "core gamer". Although the 22 hours seems like a pretty reasonable average to me. I spend around that much time myself playin' Kirbeh on my 3DS this week.

Spoiler

also I first read the title as "NPD shaves their definition of core gamers" and immediately assumed that they just booted Nintendo and handhelds out of the definition.

 

[Eusis]

5 hours per week is a rather interesting minimum threshold for a "core gamer". Although the 22 hours seems like a pretty reasonable average to me. I spend around that much time myself playin' Kirbeh on my 3DS this week.

Spoiler

also I first read the title as "NPD shaves their definition of core gamers" and immediately assumed that they just booted Nintendo and handhelds out of the definition.

Well, we have our off weeks, whether it's due to other concerns or just not interested in playing games for whatever reason.

Though I guess that can make cutting off Nintendo seem sort of odd. But then 5 hours is probably enough for whoever casually follows the latest releases. But this is why I would prefer to refer to at least part of that group as mainstream, as in the people who follow the major, AAA releases but may not delve too deeply into obscure stuff, though they may know enough about the systems.