What's with all this Casual Vs Harcore Stuff?

imo i think its used as a marketing thing if

IF YOUR A HARDCORE GAMER YOULL PLAY THIS..........RAWR

or they could just mean the really competitive gamers

i dont know i play just to have fun

Well.. the market is going towards (or is for) the casual gamer. Games get to easy or simplistic for some players. Dunno were I'm going with this, but it sucks :PRiisu

The truth is that few games market to only the casual user. This is why games have an expert setting. This is why in SSBB you can turn off items. The vast majority of games have both casual and hardcore appeal. Think Rock Band, SSBB, Halo 3, and these types of games. They all appeal to casual people and hardcore, because the gamers chose to what extent they want to play.

Developers know that if they don't appeal to both casual and hardcore, their game will not be as successful. Games might become more casual, but they will always appeal to hardcore players.

i think that casual gamers are ones who play sport games, shooting games, and gimmickk ones like GH

I think the definiton for hardcore gamers is ones who play them all the time, and for those who play games with stories, like rpgs, and other involved games like MGS.

The "hardcore gamer" title was probably thought up by people with alot of time on their hands. They think that if you don't play certain types of games an X amount of hours per week than your just a "casual gamer." What's next, "hardcore television watcher', or "hardcore food eater?" The possibilities are endless.

I classify myself as a casual hardcore gamer.

I absolutely love games but I play them casually.

casual - games which attempt to appeal to the casual player tend to strive for simple rules and ease of game play, the goal being to present a pick-up-and-play experience that people from any age group or skill level could enjoy

from Wiki, seems to fit pretty well. nothing for Hardcore, but i think you could just reverse that for hardcore.

Some people think that their being "hardcore" in some way makes them "better gamers" than those who are "casual."

The terms "hardcore gamer" and "casual gamer" only specify how much money you have invested in the hobby and have no bearing on what kinds of games you play or how "good" of a gamer you are.foxhound_fox

riiiiiight. that has no bearing what so ever

riiiiiight. that has no bearing what so everChogyam

[QUOTE="Chogyam"]riiiiiight. that has no bearing what so everfoxhound_fox

reiteration still does not prove you're point

reiteration still does not prove you're pointChogyam

[QUOTE="Chogyam"]reiteration still does not prove you're pointfoxhound_fox

but you said the same thing twice. lol. more words, but the same thing non the less. :P

This should help clearify things.

Defining Gamers

What is a Video Gamer first off? VGs are anyone who plays video games; defined as 1st it must run on a system with a input/output (I/O) system, 2nd it must have game play: a series of tasks/activities with a clearly defined goal (points, mission objectives, boss fights, etc.), 3rd it can't be possible in real life (relative to the age in which it's created) and/or is too dangerous to do for entertainment. There are several types of VGs: Pure Gamers, Pro Gamers, Specialist Gamers, Hardcore Gamers, MMO Gamers, Average Gamers, Casual Gamers.

Pure Gamers: the rarest and most devoted gamers. Pures play many genres of VGs but not necessarily all genres, and have little interest in other mediums (IE: film, literature, etc). Pures are very defensive of the VG and look down on Non-Gamers.

Pro Gamers: Pros are gamers who play competitive games for prize money and sponsorships, they are very skilled at FPSs, TPSs, and RTSs but maybe skilled in other genres. Unlike Pures Pros may have interests outside of gaming and are not quite as defensive of the VG.

Specialist Gamers: Specialist only play one or two genres but are masters at them. They typically have interests in numerous other things then VGs and don't spend much time or energy on VGs other then their chosen genres.

Hardcore Gamers: Hardcores only play Macho Male games, VGs are sort of a guilty pleasure of theirs and they look other forms of gamers as odd or strange. They typically are more interested in sports and girls then using their brains or VGs.

MMO Gamers: MMOs are gamers who play Massively Multiplayer Online games, they often have little interest in other genres and spend great deals of time and money on their MMO characters. They are prone to VG addiction and real world social issues, they have been known to spend upwards of 20 hours a day in a MMO game.

Average Gamers: Averages play a few games here and there but their lives are no where near focused on gaming and their collections are often tiny in comparison to most other forms of gamers.

Casual Gamers: Casuals only play simple cheap games, often digitized forms of board games, VGs are a distraction for when they have nothing better to do. This type of gamer is made up of women more then any other type.

This should help clearify things.

Defining Gamers

What is a Video Gamer first off? VGs are anyone who plays video games; defined as 1st it must run on a system with a input/output (I/O) system, 2nd it must have game play: a series of tasks/activities with a clearly defined goal (points, mission objectives, boss fights, etc.), 3rd it can't be possible in real life (relative to the age in which it's created) and/or is too dangerous to do for entertainment. There are several types of VGs: Pure Gamers, Pro Gamers, Specialist Gamers, Hardcore Gamers, MMO Gamers, Average Gamers, Casual Gamers.

Pure Gamers: the rarest and most devoted gamers. Pures play many genres of VGs but not necessarily all genres, and have little interest in other mediums (IE: film, literature, etc). Pures are very defensive of the VG and look down on Non-Gamers.

Pro Gamers: Pros are gamers who play competitive games for prize money and sponsorships, they are very skilled at FPSs, TPSs, and RTSs but maybe skilled in other genres. Unlike Pures Pros may have interests outside of gaming and are not quite as defensive of the VG.

Specialist Gamers: Specialist only play one or two genres but are masters at them. They typically have interests in numerous other things then VGs and don't spend much time or energy on VGs other then their chosen genres.

Hardcore Gamers: Hardcores only play Macho Male games, VGs are sort of a guilty pleasure of theirs and they look other forms of gamers as odd or strange. They typically are more interested in sports and girls then using their brains or VGs.

MMO Gamers: MMOs are gamers who play Massively Multiplayer Online games, they often have little interest in other genres and spend great deals of time and money on their MMO characters. They are prone to VG addiction and real world social issues, they have been known to spend upwards of 20 hours a day in a MMO game.

Average Gamers: Averages play a few games here and there but their lives are no where near focused on gaming and their collections are often tiny in comparison to most other forms of gamers.

Casual Gamers: Casuals only play simple cheap games, often digitized forms of board games, VGs are a distraction for when they have nothing better to do. This type of gamer is made up of women more then any other type.

console-deity

:cry: oh jesus.

Bunch of stuff console-deity

First, before anyone misjudges me, please read my bio..

I believe that most hardcore gamers have brought this upon themselves. As I discussed in my most recent blog, People have become so obsessed with graphics that they ignore all else. A game can be challenging, fun, innovative.. none of that seems to matter without impressive graphics.

Look at what this attitude has done for Nintendo's reputation. They were once the kings of the videogame industry. Now they get a bad rap for "catering to casual gamers".The Wii forces people to get off the couch and get physically involved with their gaming experience and it provides a wide variety of games. True, most 3rd-party developers are @##h?**s who like making money cranking out cheap shovelware while putting talent and effort into decent games for the other two consoles, just to cater to "hardcore" gamers obsessed with graphics.

People need to be more objective and more open-minded. A game doesn't just have to have great graphics to be hardcore. If it is challenging and innovative, that's good enough. Not some simple, anyone can play kind of game, but one that requires a little time and effort, and maybe some passion.

On a side note, I can't wait to see what Nintendo does with their next console..

[QUOTE="Chogyam"]riiiiiight. that has no bearing what so everfoxhound_fox

That's a nonsensical definition. Under your definition, Bill Gates ordering his secretary to buy 10 thousand dollars in games and dump then into a closet or something would make him a hardcore gamer whereas a guy who spent 600 bucks a year but actually played his games on a regular basis would be a casual gamer.

Casual games are games which are simpler and less demanding than traditional games. Nintendo spent a long time talking about how the games industry wasn't as big as it could be because hardcore games and modern controllers either didn't interest (seventy year old women don't want to play as ninjas) or intimitated people (controllers were so complex that some people were afraid to pick them up). Some (including me) scoffed, but it turns out they were right.

Nintendo, various publishers of casual games and the umbrella group the Casual Games Association offer a simple, concise definition of casual games which makes more sense than the bizarre theory you are advancing (if you only buy games to play them and not to collect dust on a shelf you are casual! ).

Moving on to the main topic, I think vs threads are kind of silly. Casual vs hardcore is like romance movies vs action movies. They appeal to largely different audiences (though there is overlap), so there isn't a negative relationship between them.

First, before anyone misjudges me, please read my bio..

I believe that most hardcore gamers have brought this upon themselves. As I discussed in my most recent blog, People have become so obsessed with graphics that they ignore all else. A game can be challenging, fun, innovative.. none of that seems to matter without impressive graphics.

Look at what this attitude has done for Nintendo's reputation. They were once the kings of the videogame industry. Now they get a bad rap for "catering to casual gamers".The Wii forces people to get off the couch and get physically involved with their gaming experience and it provides a wide variety of games. True, most 3rd-party developers are @##h?**s who like making money cranking out cheap shovelware while putting talent and effort into decent games for the other two consoles, just to cater to "hardcore" gamers obsessed with graphics.

People need to be more objective and more open-minded. A game doesn't just have to have great graphics to be hardcore. If it is challenging and innovative, that's good enough. Not some simple, anyone can play kind of game, but one that requires a little time and effort, and maybe some passion.

On a side note, I can't wait to see what Nintendo does with their next console..

EnigManic

Your claim that a world which over the past five years made GTA the biggest franchise of all time and the PS2 the bestselling system of all tie is obsessed with graphics makes zero sense, but I agree with you that its kind of weird that Nintendo's rep has taken a beating of late.

Sure, they are offering a lot of casual games, but they are cranking out their old hardcore franchises faster than ever so people who were happy with the GC should be happier with the Wii.

Your complaints about the way third parties have treated the Wii also fall into the zero sense category though. Nintendo has offered two types of games, casual games and hardcore sequels to games which sold well on the GC (Mario, Zelda and what have you). In treating the Wii like the GC2, third parties have behaved no worse than Nintendo has.

If Nintendo really wanted third parties to offer more in the way of hardcore games, they could demonstrate that there is a market for such games by using some of the dumptruck loads of money they are making to contract the services of a talented developer (say, a maker of real time strategies or first person shooters) or even buy them outright, but they haven't done so because they don't really care. Right now they are making big budget no risk hardcore games whose sales are guaranteed (such as Mario and Zelda) and low budget medium risk casual games (success is not guaranteed, but failure isn't costly) and making quite a bit of money. Why upset the applecart by offering an expensive game people might not want?

In order to get a look at what a company does when it really wants to convince third parties to cast against type, look no further than MS and jrpgs (it has funded games and paid for exclusives).

There's no casual and hardcore, there's games for people who care about games in general, and games for people who don't.

[QUOTE="Chogyam"]reiteration still does not prove you're pointfoxhound_fox

The burden didn't shift because you never gave any support for your assertion. I hate to break this to you: you're not a dictionary. Make a Dictionaries are Overrated thread.

Because casual gaming makes money, more money than hardcore. Hardcore games will become more casual. Just look at the most recent Rainbow Six. There's a boss fight against a chopper...that's not Rainbow Six...:|Bloodbath_87

There's no casual and hardcore, there's games for people who care about games in general, and games for people who don't.

nopalversion

Because casual gaming makes money, more money than hardcore. Hardcore games will become more casual. Just look at the most recent Rainbow Six. There's a boss fight against a chopper...that's not Rainbow Six...:|Bloodbath_87

I enjoyed the original, but Rainbow Six Vegas 2 kind of sucked. In the wake of Call Of Duty 4, I found the gameplay sluggish and the design choices to be questionable (a sprint button that causes slowdown in battle, WTF?).

[QUOTE="console-deity"]Bunch of stuff BladesOfAthena

You got to be kidding me.

Why can't we just Play the games that we like And leave it at that?PlayBox39

I think its pretty easy to define casual and hardcore. Its simply a matter of how much time is dedicated to gaming related things. Most gaming companies define their users by how many hours a week they spend gaming or playing their games.

Every casual game has one thing in common: The game can provide a reasonable sense of progression or satisfaction with minimal time invested. 20 or 30 minutes to beat a stage, level, quest, or whatever. Something that feels like you've been rewarded for a little time.

Hardcore games tend are designed to reward players after many hours of playing. That doesn't necessarily mean they require the player to put in many hours, but often times the greatest rewards come from long hours.

The best and most popular games are designed to appeal to both crowds.

Take Diablo for instance. 15 or 20 minutes is enough to feel like you've accomplished something. A bit closer to levelling up. Maybe get a quest done. Maybe find a new cool item. Yet, Diablo can be played for 8 hours straight and still feel rewarding - the story unfolds and its random loot means that more time invested means a much higher chance of finding good loot as luck plays less and less of a factor.

I think the conflict lies when developers of a series that used to cater to one crowd, or both crowds, begins to slowly shift to cater to only one crowd when it was 2, or to the other crowd that they may no longer be a part of. Its a bit understandble for fans of the title to be disappointed. Unfortunately, it's becoming a somewhat common trend to see hardcore games get more and more focused on the casual crowd. This causes some hardcore gamers to show resentment. Its probably ill deserved since its really the developer's fault for the change, but its the casual crowd that is "stealing" their game away.

I don't understand how so many people could be conflicted about the definitions.

A hardcore gamer, generally, is someone who is passionate and competitive about videogames, plays them often and is reasonably skilled.

A hardcore game is a quality game which provides an adaquate challenge as well as enjoyment.

A casual gamer is someone who doesn't play videogames all the time or isn't highly skilled but just plays them for fun.

A casual game is one that is simply intended to be fun without focusing on being very challenging.

The burden didn't shift because you never gave any support for your assertion. I hate to break this to you: you're not a dictionary. Make a Dictionaries are Overrated thread.

appleater

Just saying something is "wrong" or "right" doesn't make it so, you have to support your argument with at least a single point and when you say something is "wrong" you must then proceed to refute that point with your own argument and points.foxhound_fox

That may be true, but it helps to support your argument with some accurate facts.

[QUOTE="Chogyam"]riiiiiight. that has no bearing what so everfoxhound_fox

The problem is when you say, quote, "THAT is the definition of hardcore and casual gamers." You're not a widely recognized source of information on anything.

Your definition of hardcore and casual is eccentric, like all of your ideas. You say overrated everytime a game is good, and the one time you said a game you like, the game had a giant wall you have to read and teddy bears. That's fine.

And the sad thing is you don't even understand you didn't make an argument. You have no premise or inference, just a circular conclusion. You assume your eccentric definition and then repeat it. The arguments have come from people showing your definition is too strict and would be absurd in the real world.

[QUOTE="Chogyam"]riiiiiight. that has no bearing what so everfoxhound_fox

Self-contradiction is fatal in every sphere of argument, even to teddy bears.