Bobcat: "Hardcores" and "Casuals": The Whole Damn Melting Pot.

Textbook Bobcat

New member
Sep 9, 2009
250
0
0
The need for branding. Most of society requires some form of separating groups from one another. You have your Mods and Rockers, your Hippies and Skinheads, your Skaters and Townies and even in a work environment I experience unnecessary branding and division.

An individual's constant craving to measure themselves against a yard stick; that no matter how far up said stick they go there is always a yard further to travel.

With branding comes competition, and from competition comes rivalry. This brings me to the groups presented in gaming: "Hardcores" and "Casuals". For the longest time there was no such division within the gaming community. Gaming was a niche interest, surrounded by misinformation (of course this hasn't changed but switched to different topics) and doubt. "Nerds" they were labelled as a whole.

Then the community grew larger, and with a larger group came the mass need to differentiate from one another. Now today we have our "Hardcores" and "Casuals", and once more another once unified group has divided into sub sets.

"If you don't play everyday you're not a real gamer", "If you can?t complete the hardest difficulty you're not a real gamer", "If you don't know the ins and outs of a duck's ass about the neighbourhood the main hero grew up in you're not a real gamer" shout the "Hardcores".

"?" respond the "Casuals". And that's the key thing here, only the "Hardcores" bother with such trivial pigeon holing. Only "Hardcores" feel the need to elevate themselves above the commoner. The foolish commoner who is only here to have fun. How dare the "Casuals" be content with just defeating the final boss on easy mode and seeing the credits roll; they must grind themselves to the bone, turning the game into a chore to see every last collectable AIDS vial, every last menial addition to add and artificially notch up the hours boasted in the blurb on the box.

I touched upon the word fun, and wish to highlight it's significance. I also wish to bring into play Achievements, the bane and absolution, the great invention and terrible monstrosity all rolled into one.

Achievements take advantage of the yard stick of gaming; the need for a hi score on your game. The need for your game to be "complete".

On paper achievements are fantastic; they give rise to the potential of new levels of gaming, the potential to "prove" to your friends how adept you are at a game. "Wow", says Timmy, "Matthew beat the Giant Dog with Springs for Legs and Horses for Courses without using a continue" as he surveys Matthew's Gamercard.

However, this wonder unfortunately is buried under "Wow, Matthew sure is a dick, he rented Avatar just for an extra thousand Gamerscore; the very opposite of an achievement as someone fresh out the womb could attain the exact same thing."

I'll linger on this for one more moment. A game such as Kung Fu Panda could be described as a "Casual" game, and as such would be played by "Casual" gamers. The same game also has easy achievements, and will therefore also be played by "Hardcores"?

"Casual" games. Argued by "Hardcores" to be the destruction of the gaming industry. Why will developers bother to make block buster games when they can churn out "Rayman Party 67" or "Dance with the Cheshire Cat: Hot Tin Roof Edition". However "Hardcores" can also be blamed for any fear of the gaming industry being "destroyed" by rewarding developers for putting in easy achievements and punishing those with difficult ones.

Too many times I see "Not buying this game, MP achievements" to which I think "What the Hell". A game that you planned on purchasing, has been taken off your wish list because of (at the end of the day: worthless) score being assigned to challenging activities. You're denying yourself fun - a returning theme - for something meaningless. We could get into philosophical levels of debate here and state gaming, working, relationships and even existing is all meaningless but let's keep things in perspective shall we ladies and gentlemen?

Why would a developer waste their time creating blockbusters/challenging games when they can bring out "Piss Easy 1k"? Sure we'll still have a pioneers wanting to go down in history for creating the next Bible, but they'll outnumbered by the hordes.

The group that prevails when competition is presented is the one that attracts the greater benefit for the whole. In the games industry, this means money.

"Casuals" crave "Casual" games, "Hardcores" crave "Casual" games. If two thirds of the market (One third is never mentioned in "Wars", and is the group I belong to: "The don't give a shitters as long as it's FUNNERS") crave the same thing; the market will shift to meet that demographic.

If there's equal demand for all colours of the spectrum, all colours of the spectrum shall be supplied. Again, there will be exceptions, I'm sure there are "Hardcores" that want Gamerscore but only via normal game playing, but that doesn't make you a true "Hardcore". read:irony

Cease the pigeon holing, the console wars, the flaming and focus on the fun. I can safely say collectively "Hardcores" have less fun as they're too worried about their next chance to express their "Elitism" or inflate their Gamerscore.

Christ, I sometimes think that if the government invented mobile ID cards that assigned score to actions we'd have a fucking utopia.

Forgive me if this article lacks a conclusion for your tastes, or gives the overall impression of a meandering conversation with myself. I don't give a shit, it was fun writing it.
 

More Fun To Compute

New member
Nov 18, 2008
4,061
0
0
The "blockbuster" game industry as you put it has grown fat making big, time consuming games for their audience and things like achievements are just one of the latest ways of targeting people. People who are locked into an achievement mindset and are willing to buy a lot of games are good customers. The only thing they need to worry about is that their games industry will grow bloated and poisonous on it's own success and lose too much money trying to outdo itself or antagonizing it's more picky customers.

So called casual games are not really a threat at all. The blockbuster industry hates them because there is a lot of money on the table there that isn't going to them but there is no reason for gamers to care either way. Unless they enjoy some of the games and then they should be happy about it.
 

Kiutu

New member
Sep 27, 2008
1,787
0
0
Labels arent bad, only how they are treated are. A real gamer is someone who plays real games. I actually divide casual gamer even more, with real casual, and neo casual. Real Casual (or classic if you will) are ones who play games that we hardcore gamers play, but casually. Someone who maybe owns only a few games, and plays occasionally for fun. Neo Casual are this new wave of grandmas and children playing on the Wii. I don't use any in a bad way though.
 

Avatar Roku

New member
Jul 9, 2008
6,169
0
0
I've felt the same way about this for a while. Why must we divide ourselves? How about, if you play games, you're just a gamer?
 

More Fun To Compute

New member
Nov 18, 2008
4,061
0
0
Kiutu said:
Neo Casual are this new wave of grandmas and children playing on the Wii. I don't use any in a bad way though.
Except that lapsed gamers and retro gamers also play on the Wii. A lot of people were driven away from gaming by continuing game industry trends and are happy with what the Wii an DS give them.
 

Kiutu

New member
Sep 27, 2008
1,787
0
0
More Fun To Compute said:
Kiutu said:
Neo Casual are this new wave of grandmas and children playing on the Wii. I don't use any in a bad way though.
Except that lapsed gamers and retro gamers also play on the Wii. A lot of people were driven away from gaming by continuing game industry trends and are happy with what the Wii an DS give them.
I dont mean playing a Wii makes you a casual gamer, but that the Wii has created this third group.
 

More Fun To Compute

New member
Nov 18, 2008
4,061
0
0
Kiutu said:
I dont mean playing a Wii makes you a casual gamer, but that the Wii has created this third group.
Those people have been playing on the PC for years. Children always had something to play on consoles, except maybe the odd platform like XBox which only appeals to narrow groups of people.
 

Kiutu

New member
Sep 27, 2008
1,787
0
0
More Fun To Compute said:
Kiutu said:
I dont mean playing a Wii makes you a casual gamer, but that the Wii has created this third group.
Those people have been playing on the PC for years. Children always had something to play on consoles, except maybe the odd platform like XBox which only appeals to narrow groups of people.
Those people werent as powerful or mainstream as now though.
 

More Fun To Compute

New member
Nov 18, 2008
4,061
0
0
Kiutu said:
More Fun To Compute said:
Kiutu said:
I dont mean playing a Wii makes you a casual gamer, but that the Wii has created this third group.
Those people have been playing on the PC for years. Children always had something to play on consoles, except maybe the odd platform like XBox which only appeals to narrow groups of people.
Those people werent as powerful or mainstream as now though.
Maybe, but the games industry and press did a much better job of ignoring them and minding their own business than when Nintendo got involved. That's for sure.
 

Proteus214

Game Developer
Jul 31, 2009
2,270
0
0
I don't think that it really has to do with how people play the games they do, but why they play them. Do you pick up a new title because you like the way it looks? Do you just want to play through it and be done with it? Do you want to master the multiplayer aspect and tear up the online leaderboards? Do you want to comb the game for achievements or other easter eggs?
 

SilentStranger

New member
Sep 21, 2009
149
0
0
I'm pretty much a casual gamer. I dont like online or multiplayer much, there can be days between gaming sessions, and I play for story and fun, NOT for challenge, or for an arbitrary score contest. I even *gasp* only play through games once!
 

Gigantor

New member
Dec 26, 2007
442
0
0
It's unfortunate that there is little dialogue between the hardcore and the casual. Casual gamers, by definition (if a definition could be agreed upon, which I think we can all agree it can't), probably won't be spending their time on the forums of a gaming website. Hardcore gamers do a lot of their complaining on forums like this, or in the comments of gaming videos. There doesn't appear to be a lot of overlap between the groups.

People like myself certainly don't help. I take games fairly seriously, and often feel uncomfortable talking to real, physical people about gaming. If I'm drinking with somebody and they say something gamee related which I could shoot down easily enough, I tend not to. I feel like I'm taking something too seriously, and that the other person is treating it as what it should be: a diversion and an aid to their everyday life.

I'm only a proud gamer in certain environments. But the person talking about Brain Training never seems to share my pathetic hang-ups and inhibitions and complexes. i assume this is how it is with a lot of people, and this is why some gamers find it comforting to say they are a different "type" of gamer, and that casual gamers will gabber away in bars and at yoga classes, and the hardcore conduct their discussions in a measured, thoughtful way on the internet, because that's how seriously it deserves to be taken, but deep down they feel a bit weird abouit taking it too seriously. What a wretched matter it all is.

Anyway... what was the question? I don't care about gamerscores, or difficulty levels, presumably all tied into my fundamental discomfort with showing everybody else how seriously I take games. I play games because they make me think- something in the medium makes me want to write, and I like writing. So I'm not hardcore, casual, or elite, or a nerd. I just like to play games and then write about them. Having a few labels and boxes around doesn't really bother me: I don't think I fit any one of them, but that's fine. People need the labels, or it makes arguing a lot harder, and people need to argue.

I suppose the most constructive thing I could do in trying to rid the world of such pigeon-holing would be to talk openly and frankly about gaming, and try not to think of people as casual or hardcore, but, as people have suggested, people who play for enjoyment and people who seem to have no damn idea why they play.

Or maybe just divide everyone into hippies and skinheads and be done with it.
 

funguy2121

New member
Oct 20, 2009
3,407
0
0
If the "casuals" are only casually interested, then won't they eventually pawn their wii when boredom sets in? Seems to me, they'd either do that or progressively take more interest until they became "hardcores."

Of course, I'm referring here to housewives, grandmothers, small children and those who only play shovelwear and party games like Wii Sports and WarioWear. I could fairly be called "casual." I bought the Wii for 2 specific reasons: I'm a Nintendo whore from way back, and I haven't the time/money to invest in gaming that I used to have. I've recently started a new career; before that, I spent 70 hours a week in school/work/my car. So I was happy to get a cheaper system that would only see 3-4 really great games per year, and maybe a small handful of good games.

But I DO beat every game on the hardest difficulty level, and I usually take the sidequests. And I get pissed when Wii owners only get a bastard port of Ultimate Alliance, and no Splinter Cell at all.

I guess you could call me "part time, hardcore." See, there are women out there.
 

Textbook Bobcat

New member
Sep 9, 2009
250
0
0
More Fun To Compute said:
The "blockbuster"... ...more picky customers.
It did indeed, whilst the only market available was the "nerd". Now there is an entirely new market out there, the "Time poor, cash rich" market.

Why lock your customers into year long battle royales when you can churn out ten hour wonders? Sure rentals will increase, but so will turnover. If you're using the same engines and your licences to use certain items is time based you can do the math.

So called... ...about it.
They should care, if "Hardcores" are picky about good games, but clamour for the "Casual" games for varying reasons, they are telling the developers with their wallets (The most powerful tool in the entire world I will add here) this is what they want more.

Kiutu said:
Except that lapsed gamers and retro gamers also play on the Wii. A lot of people were driven away from gaming by continuing game industry trends and are happy with what the Wii an DS give them.
And your comment here cements my above point, the shift of the demographic - the main consumer base - the pinata full of cash just waiting to be broken open.

SilentStranger said:
I'm pretty much a casual gamer. I dont like online or multiplayer much, there can be days between gaming sessions, and I play for story and fun, NOT for challenge, or for an arbitrary score contest. I even *gasp* only play through games once!
I salute you, fun is a long lost operative that many forget should be applied to games at all times.

A box should arrive every hour (Doctor's advisory note: take a break at this time) to ask "Are you having fun?" Press A for Yes, Press B for No. THis may also satisfy the increasing need for QTEs...

Gigantor said:
It's... ...groups.
Indeed, the phrase "The wisdom of the internet should be ignored, as all myths are".

If the internet begs you to add more explosions to Nintentogs you should definitely ignore it.

People... ...life.
I believe this is circling the misinformation surrounding the gaming medium as a whole that I touched upon at the beginning.

A little of myself: I'm an actuary, I attend MMA classes (mainly BJJ and Muay Thai) and certainly enjoy social events such as a Friday night out. However, I still get branded as "sad" or "time wasting" when I pursue gaming.

The media says we all sun avoiders, so thus that must be true, no matter how much evidence experienced personally. This is something I have learnt to accept, much like how it is pointless discussing religion with someone who is devout.

I'm only... ...it all is.
Inferiority complexes.

Anyway... ...argue.
A passion for writing is what we share. I could be termed as "Hardcore" for having said passion I suppose.

I suppose... ...with it.
Amen.
 

More Fun To Compute

New member
Nov 18, 2008
4,061
0
0
Textbook Bobcat said:
More Fun To Compute said:
The "blockbuster"... ...more picky customers.
It did indeed, whilst the only market available was the "nerd". Now there is an entirely new market out there, the "Time poor, cash rich" market.

Why lock your customers into year long battle royales when you can churn out ten hour wonders? Sure rentals will increase, but so will turnover. If you're using the same engines and your licences to use certain items is time based you can do the math.
That's the way some people in the industry wish it was. If only I could make short and simplified games then all those cash rich and time poor "casuals" would be able to play my glorious masterpiece. That pisses off people who want a complicated 100 hour game and they blame it on the "casuals" when they have no part in the process.

They don't want 10 hour long story games with simplified play. They definitely don't want to pay for 1 hour long story games with no gameplay. What they want are pick up and play arcade type experiences with great gameplay.
 

Asimov

New member
Oct 13, 2009
92
0
0
I hate this split between casual and hardcore gamers. Casual games are not killing the game industry because while casual games do make lots of money, this causal/hardcore war has demonstrated that many gamers hate those games, so other games will be made to tap the whole gaming fanbase. Also, most hardcore gamers I know don't play casual games for the achievements because they don't like casual games and also hardcore games will often have some easy achievments.
I consider myself a mix between the two. I play hardcore games but I don't really get into them like hardcores do. I play a game for the fun of it. Also, I like some achievments. I don't care about the ones awarded for beating a chapter, winning the game, etc. but I love the ones that require you to do something out of your way, like many of them in Fable II. They provide an extra bit of gameplay. Also, I love secrets or the same reason. I rented Arkham Asylum and loved it and I'm considering re-renting it just so I can find the riddler challenges and beat the challenge rooms.
 

Jenniphurr

New member
Nov 3, 2009
37
0
0
stuff like this is always going to happen. its always better when its new and not many people know about it.
funny how in school i was looked at different cause i played video games. now those same people are talking to me about FPS's, and MMO's. all i can think of is, hey didn't you use to call me a nerd cause i did this stuff? hypocrites...
 

funguy2121

New member
Oct 20, 2009
3,407
0
0
Jenniphurr said:
stuff like this is always going to happen. its always better when its new and not many people know about it.
funny how in school i was looked at different cause i played video games. now those same people are talking to me about FPS's, and MMO's. all i can think of is, hey didn't you use to call me a nerd cause i did this stuff? hypocrites...
Funny the way that works, huh? The average gamer is now over thirty - and I know plenty who neglect their families and waste hours playing on a daily basis. But I was a "loser" for playing Goldeneye in high school. Yeah. That makes sense. Enjoy your Halo, buddy, while I buy your girlfriend a drink.
 

Jakkal

New member
Apr 21, 2009
76
0
0
More Fun To Compute said:
The "blockbuster" game industry as you put it has grown fat making big, time consuming games for their audience and things like achievements are just one of the latest ways of targeting people. People who are locked into an achievement mindset and are willing to buy a lot of games are good customers. The only thing they need to worry about is that their games industry will grow bloated and poisonous on it's own success and lose too much money trying to outdo itself or antagonizing it's more picky customers.

So called casual games are not really a threat at all. The blockbuster industry hates them because there is a lot of money on the table there that isn't going to them but there is no reason for gamers to care either way. Unless they enjoy some of the games and then they should be happy about it.
Personally, I hate the casually gaming industry because they put too little time and effort for their games to be over $5