A co-worker asked me today if Guitar Hero drum sets work with Rock Band 2. The only noteworthy aspect of this is that this co-worker is 67 years old. With the recent expansion of the video game industry in the mainstream market, could video games be losing the "elite niche" appeal that powered them through the 1990's?

Any MMO-player or gadget guy knows exactly how vital exclusivity is. There is a direct ratio of how appealing something is and how widespread it is, especially in geek territory. The "coolness" factor of your new iPhone correlates directly to how many people around you own one. Thus, with the rabid success of the Wii, and Microsoft and Sony's recent forays into mass market gaming via accessibility, will the industry lose the appeal that allowed it to stay afloat during the 1980's, and made it a popular pastime in the 1990's? Or will the whole industry simply become segregated into hardcore and casual audiences?

The hurdle that the industry giants must now cross is to find a manner in which to support both the hardcore and the casual gamer. Certain platforms certainly seem to be more apt at supporting one or the other. The casual gamer might not find it worthwhile to invest in the PS3 (until a price drop, perhaps), while the hardcore can have trouble finding their desired experience on the Wii. The attraction to the casual audience that motion control offers seems to lack the precision and style that is firmly set in hardcore country. Developers will need to find a way to integrate the requisites of the hardcore audience (a deep PvP experience, skill-based games, and dedicated communities) into the mechanics of the casual experience. This should be possible with enough steps forward in the tech of motion controls, so that skill can be valued alongside accessibility, instead of in place of it.

However, integration of the casual audience into the hardcore experience seems impossible. The very heart of the hardcore is the winning record, the value of a good Kill/Death spread, and the dedication of many, many hours towards every aspect of a game. This immediately eliminates the casual audience, as this is clearly not their desired experience. Counter-Strike servers will be up for years, because of the hardcore community. But increasing the player base is made impossible by the skill of the players, their dedication, and the inability of a new player to really enjoy playing with others online. This exclusivity is exactly what keeps the hardcore so satisfied with their experience, and developers providing easy accessibility (the soul of casual gaming) destroys the essence of the hardcore gaming experience.

Where the industry once valued exclusivity over accessibility, the opening of the new casual market should not be cause for concern. Some game models, like Counter-Strike and Nintendogs, exhibit both ends of the spectrum, but the proper execution of a balanced middle ground is possible, and indeed already exists. World of Warcraft is a perfect example of a game that allows the two audiences to coexist. The spectrum within the game is so wide, that one can be preoccupied with myriad experiences, from 25-man raids or strict PvP, to collecting mounts and exploring the world. Hardcore dedication is not required for an immensely satisfying experience, but it is offered in spades, and rewarded in kind. Being accessible, skill-based, but with exclusive upper tiers proves to be a gaming model that provides both experiences, while excluding neither.

This all assumes the fact that the two communities must coexist. In Blizzard's case, doing so can prove extremely lucrative. But with E3's showcase, the direction of the industry seems to be moving toward offering separate environments, one for hardcore, and one for casual. Fortunately, with the current size of the industry, the future prospects for both audiences still look very bright indeed.