Brothers, sisters! Let us resolve the hardcore debate!

[Silver Patriot]

A test delivered over the internet is destined for failure. I prepose a A.C.T. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ACT_(test)] test style. Instead of English, Math, Reading, Science Reasoning and Writing, we could seperate the tests by genre, or maybe time period. Or maybe by a better way I can not think of?

Once we get that down we need to discuss scoring. Something similer to the A.C.T. as well, or maybe the S.A.T. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SAT]?

 

[comadorcrack]

Possibly, I do remember the joyous days of GamesMaster and thinking that there is your expert gamers. But what then for the single player games? How is my performance at Max Payne or Vandal Hearts more or less impressive than another?

Hmmm... Good point, I'm afraid you've got me stumped their, unless you have some sort of Arkham Asylum Leader Board Challenge mode.

 

[BreakingEZRA]

Your hardcore if you play any console but the Wii, Unless its Mario or Zelda, Games that had no choice but to use Motion control.

At the moment the xbox and Ps3 dont have those *Active Games* But when they do, when you stand in Gamestop and Gears 3 is ther and beside it is Kinectamals id you buy Kinectamals then your not a hardcore gamer, even if you already own Gears 3

 

[Anticitizen_Two]

I have a way to settle the hardcore debate.

1. People stop making 20 topics a day about it.
2. People stop caring.

 

[almostnot]

A test delivered over the internet is destined for failure. I prepose a A.C.T. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ACT_(test)] test style. Instead of English, Math, Reading, Science Reasoning and Writing, we could seperate the tests by genre, or maybe time period. Or maybe by a better way I can not think of?

Once we get that down we need to discuss scoring. Something similer to the A.C.T. as well, or maybe the S.A.T. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SAT]?

I was just starting to think the same thing but from a different angle, thinking about the MOT for a car. Tests that define the appropriate fitness to be passed as a hardcore gamer, with specific criteria. Perhaps it could be continually assessed in the manner of modern National Vocational Qualifications (NVQs) with a number of criteria to be satisfied by written test or observations.

In the end if we make the whole think take 12 months and involve hours of work then we will either sperate the hardcore from the rest of us or make sure no-one ever brings the debate up again. Either way we may be getting close to the resolution...

 

[almostnot]

I have a way to settle the hardcore debate.

1. People stop making 20 topics a day about it.
2. People stop caring.

1. You just posted on a topic about it
2. If you don't care, see point 1.

j/k

 

[almostnot]

Your hardcore if you play any console but the Wii, Unless its Mario or Zelda, Games that had no choice but to use Motion control.

At the moment the xbox and Ps3 dont have those *Active Games* But when they do, when you stand in Gamestop and Gears 3 is ther and beside it is Kinectamals id you buy Kinectamals then your not a hardcore gamer, even if you already own Gears 3

Too simplistic, nothing to stop someone being a hardcore gamer and playing Wii games, eg. Metal Slug anthology, Resident Evil 4, Tatsunoko vs Capcom and as you mentioned Mario and Zelda games...

As for the other bit of your argument: Huh?

 

[Aurgelmir]

Hey all.

I been thinking. When I was in school I was defined by the tests I had passed and the grades I have acheived. In the UK if you want to become a full citizen of the country you have to demonstrate that you have certain knowledge and pass a test. Before you take your practical driving test you have to pass you theory test. Two steps of summative assessment which give you the credentials to claim to be a)a graduate, b)a citizen or c)a driver.

I propose we settle the hardcore debate with a series of questions, with a pass mark of 80% that a hardcore gamer must acheive before counting themself as one. Let's make this knowledge based folks.

I'm looking for question suggestions (do not include answers please) and a suggested number of how many questions should be involved.

Are you hardcore enough?

There are ALOT of problems with this.

1) The term "Hardcore" is not defined, so trying to quantify that by a series of answers is not going to be possible.

2) Because of 1) its hard to pick what questions to choose. Because what some might consider important to being "hardcore" other people might not even care about and still be considered hardcore.

3) Whats the point?


I once took this "How Otaku are you" test thing on the net once, and half of the questions did not relate to how I gained/watched/lived Anime/Manga at the time so I gained a low score. Even though I thought of myself as "Otaku" back then.

 

[pope_of_larry]

How many Pokemon are there?

151... dont any one tell me other wise.

 

[fletch_talon]

There should be one question only.

What is the difference between a hardcore and casual gamer?

Any answer that isn't along the lines of "those are meaningless terms used only to boost an individual's ego or e-penis" results in a big red F being stamped both on the test and the individual's forehead.

This thread is about resolving the debate, not starting a new, more violent debate. Chill.

Chill?

I'm sorry what gave you the impression that I was... not chilling?... simmering?
And for the record, I just solved the debate, there is no difference, a gamer is a gamer, you either like videogames and enjoy spending your time playing them, or you don't.

The point is there shouldn't be a debate in the first place because, as I said above (apparently in an overly aggressive manner) the entire concept is based on trying to elevate one group of gamers above another, essentially saying that they are more "gamer" than others.

Of course now you can tell me to chill because I get a tad irritated when people claim I need to chill because of a post that honestly doesn't warrant such a response.

 

[almostnot]

The answer is simple, because simplicity is the way.
Does one consider themselves as hardcore gamer? If yes, they are. If no, they are not.

Honestly this is by far the best answer i've read.

Casual gamers likely dont even consider themselves gamers its just something they happen to be doing at the moment, no different than watching TV or a movie.

Personally i would consider the community of The Escapist to be at the very least gamers. Seeking to define yourself as hardcore to set yourself above or better than the majority of the populace who enjoys the same hobby the rest of us is unseemly. Sadly, wanting to conform yourself to a clique of other hardcore gamers is nothing short of snobbery. Then i suppose there are snobs in everything why not gaming too.

For me, i'm to busy having fun blowing shit up too look down my nose at others.

The negativity in this forum as depressing at times, the presumptions people make are interesting tho. Perhaps it reflects the state of modern culture that we are quick to defend ourselves and seek the negatives.

I'm not trying to identify a way that we can all define ourselves as hardcore gamers so we can look down our noses at others. Why not look to define the experts and champions within the gaming community to turn to for opinions and gaming advice?

Edit: With that in mind I don't think it's good enough for people to simply label themselves as hardcore gamers, I could call myself a great artist if I wanted to but I wouldn't make me one...

 

[Keava]

The negativity in this forum as depressing at times, the presumptions people make are interesting tho. Perhaps it reflects the state of modern culture that we are quick to defend ourselves and seek the negatives.

I'm not trying to identify a way that we can all define ourselves as hardcore gamers so we can look down our noses at others. Why not look to define the experts and champions within the gaming community to turn to for opinions and gaming advice?

Ain't that more on the line of 'pro' gamers rather than hardcore? I mean, you can be hardcore AND suck. Its possible. You can know the theory, you can play 24/7, own every game on the market and be able to quote every line of Dragon Age dialogs with timestamps, but you can still have crappy strategy/manual skills.
Thats like 'troo hardcore'. *nod*

 

[almostnot]

There should be one question only.

What is the difference between a hardcore and casual gamer?

Any answer that isn't along the lines of "those are meaningless terms used only to boost an individual's ego or e-penis" results in a big red F being stamped both on the test and the individual's forehead.

This thread is about resolving the debate, not starting a new, more violent debate. Chill.

Chill?

I'm sorry what gave you the impression that I was... not chilling?... simmering?
And for the record, I just solved the debate, there is no difference, a gamer is a gamer, you either like videogames and enjoy spending your time playing them, or you don't.

The point is there shouldn't be a debate in the first place because, as I said above (apparently in an overly aggressive manner) the entire concept is based on trying to elevate one group of gamers above another, essentially saying that they are more "gamer" than others.

Of course now you can tell me to chill because I get a tad irritated when people claim I need to chill because of a post that honestly doesn't warrant such a response.

LOL, ok dude, sorry if I hurt your feelings. But you didn't solve the debate as far as I can see although I do appreciate your participation, again, sorry if I made out your comments were irrelevant.

However, your use of the plural 'people' and reference to 'when' suggests that I'm not the first person who has told you to chill so it may be that you do come across as (passive) agressive even if you don't realise. Just a thought, coming from a good place.

Peace and love.

 

[Omegatronacles]

Look, it's quite simple.

Have 20 questions in the test.

It doesn't matter what they are.

If the person taking the test answers any of the questions, they fail and are not a hardcore gamer, because they've stopped playing games to answer a silly test.

 

[almostnot]

The negativity in this forum as depressing at times, the presumptions people make are interesting tho. Perhaps it reflects the state of modern culture that we are quick to defend ourselves and seek the negatives.

I'm not trying to identify a way that we can all define ourselves as hardcore gamers so we can look down our noses at others. Why not look to define the experts and champions within the gaming community to turn to for opinions and gaming advice?

Ain't that more on the line of 'pro' gamers rather than hardcore? I mean, you can be hardcore AND suck. Its possible. You can know the theory, you can play 24/7, own every game on the market and be able to quote every line of Dragon Age dialogs with timestamps, but you can still have crappy strategy/manual skills.
Thats like 'troo hardcore'. *nod*

LOL, the thought of the terms True/Tru Hardcore did occur to me as well. It's such a downward spiral/slipperly slope.

However, if that person existed (and I'm sure they do) they would be an absolute font of information, no?

 

[almostnot]

Look, it's quite simple.

Have 20 questions in the test.

It doesn't matter what they are.

If the person taking the test answers any of the questions, they fail and are not a hardcore gamer, because they've stopped playing games to answer a silly test.

Well played Sir! Props for the funnies. Reminds me of Cassidy's quiche recipe...

 

[JoshGod]

i thought it was based on time put in to gaming.

 

[almostnot]

i thought it was based on time put in to gaming.

If you put all the hours you had into playing The Powerpuff Girls game for the PS1 would you be a hardcore gamer?

 

[Woodsey]

If I saw a hardcore gamer, I would be able to tell you that that's one.

I cannot give you a criteria on how to become one though.