Why isn't casual gaming respected?

[Dragonclaw]

Yeah, I think some people are FAR too into their "I'm a gamer" status...I remember picking up War For Cybertron and my son tried to play the online...only to have a couple grownups swearing at him over their mics that ne "needed to be better" or should "get the f*ck out of the game until he learned better"

...he's 9...

...they're adults...

...and it was the day the game came out...

...a toy related video game...

casual gamers may not be the best, but I've seen more "hardcore gamers" be total douchebags than casual gamers causing problems.

 

[-Samurai-]

How about you follow your own advice and read what I wrote? If you do there's a chance you'll notice the part with "And while there's nothing wrong with shitty casual games[...]". If you spend some more time reading that post you might even come to the conclusion that I don't, at any point, blame casual gamers or casual games for the state of the industry. With the part "I don't see how gamers deserve any respect, casual or hardcore." I thought I made it reasonably clear that I don't put a ">" between Hardcore gamers and Casual gamers. False assumption on your part - am I not being explicit enough?

You do realize that the last three paragraphs were to reinforce my original point, right? No? It figures. Let me explain it to you then.

My last three paragraphs were to reinforce my original point.

Clear enough? I hope so.

And that part about me having to adapt to the changing industry is bullshit. I can adjust to a changing economy, I can adjust to higher taxes, I can adjust to a new job. There are many things I can and do adjust to, but games aren't one of them, because they're an entertainment product I buy to enjoy. How do you make a Bridge player enjoy switching over to playing War? Take an icepick and lobotomize him?

You don't make a Bridge player enjoy War, you let them keep playing Bridge, which is kinda the whole point(that you still seem to be missing).

No one is forcing you to play the new games if you don't like them. Stick to what you like and there isn't a problem.

With demos and rentals widely available, you can check out a game before you commit to buying it. If you don't like it, don't play it. It's really that simple. Don't ***** about the people that do enjoy it, and complain about how they're ruining your games. Let them like what they like.

Edit: As for you, the problem with your attitude is that you claim "let people like what they like" and a few sentences later tell me that my taste in games is outdated, elitist, wrong and should be "adjusted". Anybody tell you today that you're a massive hypocrite?

Yeah, you did just a few minutes ago. Though I'm not sure where you saw me use the words "outdated" or "wrong", and you seem to misunderstand what "elitist" is.

Could you point out the part where I told that you should, or had, to adjust? Or can you only point out the part where I said you can't?

So basically you're saying those who have been playing different games all their life should just shut up, hop on the industry bandwagon of simple games and COD clones. That doesn't seem fair to them why should they change their personal taste for those that never really gave a fuck about gaming until a few years ago.

No one is asking you to change your taste. Stick to the games you like, and stop bitching about the people that enjoy the ones you don't. They're not hurting you.

And since when does playing games for longer make you better than those that just got into games? I've been gaming for nearly 20 years. That doesn't make my opinion or taste more important than someone that played Fallout 3 for the first time yesterday. We're both paying customers with equal pull in the industry(none).

 

[ThisIsZen]

Okay, it's like trying to make a music album for a deaf person. Better? My comparisons weren't perfect in the way they were structured, but I think you understood the point I was trying to get across. That being the case, arguing semantics is pointless.

I'm not denigrating casual gamers, just the developers who would rather listen to a larger potential audience than the very real base that they've already got. Casual gamers are another subject entirely. And FYI, I'd define a casual gamer as somebody who only plays casual games, like the shit on Facebook or Peggle. Not somebody who plays Fallout: New Vegas, but can only play for three hours a week. That person would simply be a gamer.

"Voting with my goddamn wallet" is getting harder each and every year. In 2011, it seems there will only be two games with the type of change I'd like to see in the future. Giving $60 to the two developers of those games is something I highly doubt will suddenly change the entire industry. What you're describing is "free market" economics, and it doesn't work. As highlighted by the economic crash of 2008/early 2009.

That last statement was aimed at the thread in general, not just at you, but I'll admit that one person alone can't change the market. That one person can, however, feel good about not supporting an industry shift they dislike, rather that continuing to put money into it. It's the conflict between buying a game you enjoy from a developer you hate, or keeping the money, losing out on experiencing the game but knowing that dev didn't get your cash. It's aimed at the people who continue to play WoW but ***** about every change that opens up content to more people, or who continue to buy the next game in a franchise despite complaining that it's dumbed down compared to the last. It's general frustration with people who'll wait until the ship is totally sunk (not to claim it's sinking) before they pull their money out, rather than letting devs know via decreased revenue what they want.

Honestly, if you have no big issue with casual gamers, then I don't have much of a quarrel with you, at least over this. I'd read all three es of the thread though and had a bunch of things I wanted to say, competing to be posted where they probably wouldn't have been wholly relevant - frustration might've played a part. I will say however that I disagree with you that broadening the appeal of the medium is inherently a bad thing. There are wrong ways to go about it, don't get me wrong, but the actual act of doing so is not, I don't think.

(Oh, yeah, and deaf people can still enjoy the rhythm of music, by feeling the beat, and I'm sure there are some CDs put out specifically for them. ::semantics:

 

[9Darksoul6]

Why isn't casual gaming respected?

Because masochism still looks cools in the gaming community.
I mean, we're making progress, for starters, things like the 2D Castlevania series aren't considered fun anymore, and saving game progession is something that has been done for a decade now, but there's still much to change. What some hardcore really gamers really need is an efficient dominatrix, not harder games to beat.

I don't believe, however, that dumbing down games is a solution to gaming's most intricate flaws - and, yes 'dumbing' is a primary design philosophy in casual gaming - but the point is: new ideias never hurt, and what casual gaming brought to the table isn't all bad.
I play mainly 'hardcore' games, I hate companies like BigFishGames, and I hate the fact that consoles are dumbing gaming and focusing the industry on FPSs set either on the Middle East or on alien planets; but seriously, some people need to fucking chill out. Here are three simple design lessons that casual (and indie) games prove, and which harcore titles could improve on:
1) You don't need to have your player kill things to make a fun game. Even Tetris is a proof of concept for this one.
2) You don't need failure and frustration to make your player win; ex: you don't lose when playing trying to solve a Rubik's cube.
3) A good game doesn't need to be complicated; ex: there are not that many rules in chess and yet it's amazingly complex.

Besides, causal gaming isn't hurting harcore crowd: more causal games doesn't necessarily mean less harcore games, and if less harcore games were being made, it'd be because publishers would stop giving a fuck about them, not because of casual gaming/gamers.

 

[Robert Ewing]

It just seems like casual gaming is... cheating a bit? Like when you have a job at a factory, and then you get replaced by a much faster, more efficient, much more economical machine to do your job.

Casual gaming is quicker to develop, reigns in the cash with no problem, and because of the nature of them and popularity, they often leave behind nice little culture implants.

Back to the machine in the factory thing, Casual gaming is not needed, yet it's a much encouraged boost to the gaming industry as a whole. All the big un-casual games COULD make the amount of money casual games make, but it would be too time consuming.





Also this new Captcha system sucks, get rid. Or I sacrifice many goats.

 

[Beertaster]

I think most people who don't like casual games or casual gamers are simply resisting a necessary and unstoppable change. That is There will be no small hardcore group of gamers who Identify themselves with playing major titles (Halo, Fallout, COD, Star craft, ECT). Instead you are being forced into playing with a vast majority who are now coming around to games, instead of shunning them (parents, politicians, the world). Although I can sympathize with you. Communities of people who are intimately knowledgeable about all the best games for now and before are sharing space with people who think you speak a foreign language. However, Ultimately many more games will adopt multi-player like matchmaking. That will kill off more communities to make way for the masses driving their way to make video games mainstream, and just as accepted as books, movies, and tv.

 

[Tax_Document]

No idea why. I don't see any reason to have a problem with it. Maybe it's that some people see the title of "Gamer" as a badge that has to be earned or something, and don't want their community of "gamers" populated by people who think that since they play Peggle or Angry Birds they're a "gamer".

Or, sometimes it's the CoD/Battlefield/Halo/etc people getting a superiority complex. These people seem to be the ones to usually argue with no end to the rage about how CoD is better than Battlefield or Halo is better than X or what have you, so it's just an extension of that argument into "my types of games are better than yours".

Frankly, "causal gamers" and "hardcore gamers" are crowds that basically never mix. People who put many many many hours into Oblivion or the FPS of your choice or Starcraft or Civilization or whatever are usually not going to be hanging out around the people who play Peggle or Angry Birds on the bus in the morning/evening or who play Bubbleshooter to burn some time. It seems just as stupid as a prolific novelist criticizing a small-time poet because they're "a casual writer", having not invested as much time into the act. The fundamental logic seems to be "do it all the time or don't do it at all because I don't want you ruining my hobby", which I don't see how that can even be done.

They make the game significantly easier for the casual market? That's how casuals ruin games.

 

[Harbinger_]

Same reason as why people that drink alot of alcohol don't have alot of respect for people that drink maybe a single light beer when they drink a ton of regular or more heavy stuff.

 

[MenthoL809]

I don't understand.

Why do you feel the need to be thanked for playing games, "casual" or otherwise? Do you expect to get thanked for watching films as well? You purchase a game and your return is enjoyment.

 

[aegix drakan_v1legacy]

Because they start playing less casual games then complain that they are too hard. Then the developers see this and make games easier. The average "real" gamer should not have to play on the hardest difficulty to have the slightest challenge. Furthermore, having difficulty levels usually only means the AI has unfair advantages rather than actually being better.

Pretty much this. I honestly wish developers would balance their games to the veteran gamer, and then add easier modes for the casual crowd, not the other way around.

I don't mind casual gamers, and I play a bit more casually than I used to. But I want at least some challenge. If ganon can hit me with this EPIC looking attack and I only lose half a heart....something is wrong. Why the hell does Nintendo not add difficulty levels?

 

[jpblade666]

I'm a gamer. I dislike "casual" and "hardcore" titles. "Hardcore" gamers piss me off because they don't like people playing small games to get into the medium and demand that someone has to play a game with super intense difficulty and spend 10 hours a day in a game, effectively making it a job. Your "hardcore" games won't get dumbed down because "the casual plague" demands easier games. and if your "hardcore" game gets "dumbed" down maybe you should STOP giving developers your money if you don't like how they do business. "FUCK THIS GAME! THEY DUMBED IT DOWN! I MEAN I JUST PAYED 60 BUCKS FOR IT AND PLAYED IT FOR LIKE 10 HOURS TODAY BUT FUCK THE COMPANY! FUCK CASUALS!" Hmm, if I was a developer I would continue doing whatever it was that pissed you off because hey, you gave me your money, that means I did a good job, right?

 

[Zantos]

It's a good way to get into gaming, and I do respect the people that start casual and then try new things and work their way up. In team games however, although I don't mind giving a little extra support to newcomers, someone who has been playing a while but not really investing themselves in it to get better can be annoying.

My problem with this is that I'm a hardcore gamer, I've played maybe ten thousand hours of video games in my life, all across the board of genres, systems, difficulties, etc, and I bought TF2 before it became F2P. But I barely ever play it. When I do, I go on there to have fun and enjoy playing a game, not to win or read up on strategies. I don't want to make a focused effort to go out and improve. I'm not going to do terrible on purpose and I'm not going to fail to learn from my mistakes and successes when I can, and I won't plug my ears when I get real advice, but I'm not going out of my way to figure out the best loadouts and strategies to stick to, because that's not how I want to play.

Thing is with that though, if you're a hardcore gamer you're still familiar with the controller and standard controls, even if you're not too well versed on the specific game. I'm more talking about the people who are still having to look down at their hands to see which button is which.

 

[mrdude2010]

most casual games are time based, like farmville or mafia wars so gamers with quick reflexes don't like that they have no control over what the numbers in the computer say happened

the industry caters to casual gamers, making serious gamers feel left out. have you noticed how much easier games are now sometimes? it's not always because the UI or controls are better- it's usually because the game is just simply easier. things die harder when you shoot them and you die less hard when things shoot you, at least on the default settings. things can still be hard on higher settings, but it's less common.

 

[Naeo]

No idea why. I don't see any reason to have a problem with it. Maybe it's that some people see the title of "Gamer" as a badge that has to be earned or something, and don't want their community of "gamers" populated by people who think that since they play Peggle or Angry Birds they're a "gamer".

Or, sometimes it's the CoD/Battlefield/Halo/etc people getting a superiority complex. These people seem to be the ones to usually argue with no end to the rage about how CoD is better than Battlefield or Halo is better than X or what have you, so it's just an extension of that argument into "my types of games are better than yours".

Frankly, "causal gamers" and "hardcore gamers" are crowds that basically never mix. People who put many many many hours into Oblivion or the FPS of your choice or Starcraft or Civilization or whatever are usually not going to be hanging out around the people who play Peggle or Angry Birds on the bus in the morning/evening or who play Bubbleshooter to burn some time. It seems just as stupid as a prolific novelist criticizing a small-time poet because they're "a casual writer", having not invested as much time into the act. The fundamental logic seems to be "do it all the time or don't do it at all because I don't want you ruining my hobby", which I don't see how that can even be done.

They make the game significantly easier for the casual market? That's how casuals ruin games.

That's not casual gamers ruining games. That's economics ruining games. The game companies see a chance to appeal to a larger demographic--the casual gamers in addition to the majority of their current customer base. And if the company can sell more games that way, they'll do it. So blame economics/capitalism, not people spending their own money for their own enjoyment.

 

[manythings]

Casual gaming communities have ruined a lot of good games like LoL,

Yes, in LoL (and all other DotA copies) its definitely the casual crowd that ruins the community. *snicker*




At least...that was sarcasm, right?

I have to agree with that. It's the psychos who makes those games unplayable. The only way to stand a chance is to basically spend hours working on your in-game strategy and once you have to work to play a game it ceases to be a game, it's a fucking job.

thank you for proving a point here.
the exact point is that for a seriously hardcore gamer it's not a game UNLESS you need to put in that kind of effort. they think it's fun to speend that time an energy on the game. but they are denied that fun because casuals demand that they too should be alowed to play the game even if they are not the target audience. it's like me saying i demand to play in the soccor world cup despite not wanting to put any effort into it what so ever. because hey soccor is just a game right?
if a game wasn't designed with your playstyle in mind you truely are one of the most selfrigthous and obnoxious people around when you complain that the people it is designed for is getting more out of the game. that is why casual gamers don't get respect. because of the amount of "it's all about me" people among them. and i'm not saying the hardcore people are any better in that regard though they at least have a bit more of a reason to cry. they are the ones the gameing companies abandon.

Ok... so about how you're wrong.

No, they don't do it for fun they do it to prove they can wear big boy pants. It's ego not enjoyment.

The target audience? Whoever wants to play. That's how this industry makes money, by creating products that as many people as possible can enjoy. Fewer players means fewer customers, fewer customers means fewer micro-transactions, and so on. Your soccer analogy is ridiculous since, get this, that's a professional tournament. If LoL had a professional league (or anything resembling match fixing) this problem disappears.

I'm not self-righteous or obnoxious genius, I used a gaming product and it's issues were readily apparent. Yes it's the entitled little maniacs who foam at the mouth because that one guy on the team wasn't uber-super-leet like them and ruined everything forever. It's also people who refuse to learn to play but, funnily enough, try checking out the fresh player turnover and you'll see they disappear fast because the ones who are there make the environment so hostile it renders the game a sufferance not a source of fun.

The hardcore gamers that are getting abandoned? They make up such a tiny segment of the population but are among the biggest contributors of problems as well. A lot of them are decent, helpful and even a great source of in-game help for the devs but the screaming, poisonous minority cost them money. Why would you want to keep the worst customers and make it impossible for new ones to come along?

Games are meant to be a source of enjoyment, when the playerbase is what removes the enjoyment they are an issue not a perk.

 

[SinisterGehe]

Because you have turned the games, to which I enjoyed putting time and effort, to something in which there is no point of putting time and effort since there isn't anything extra behind the time and effort since everything can be achieved without time and effort. Basically, you have rendered the work and time I have put into the games worthless...

It is like you spend lot of time and effort scourging trough sand to find piece of gold only to realize that the market price of gold has dropped so low it was totally pointless for you to spend that time finding that gold nugget.

 

[MLChanges]

Personally i avoid them like the plague and if and when i rarely play tf2 then i join servers with no f2p-players so the casual community is kept behind a steelfence, guarded by firelions, on a different continent...in space

I know right? Whenever I'm talking about reading with my friends and they mention that they go to the library to read I hiss and run away to my fortress. 'cause the only healthy way of making your hobby more accepted, mainstream and friendly is to spit on those that are taking a cautionary glance into your world.

I mean, if we let anyone in, imagine what it would do to the gaming gene pool, won't anyone think of the children?

funny. Whenever I'm talking about reading with my friends who are non/casual readers I get blank stares unless I can say "you know that movie XXXXX? It's based on this book.". While most "casual" games are F2P, F2P is another argument. F2P=/=casual.

I think the casual, hardcore argument is almost about 2 different mediums like books and movies. Both can be entertaining and convey a great story but one requires far more investment from the audience and is generally in the opinion of that audience far more rewarding while that may not be the case with the audience of the other medium.

 

[similar.squirrel]

Why don't I respect casual gamers? Because I'm an enthusiast of simulation gaming, a genre that is about as involved as it gets and typically needs a lot of work to be even competent, let alone a master. Casual gamers wouldn't last twenty seconds in a race in Grand Prix Legends, and wouldn't even get past the runway in a proper flight simulator. These games need commitment and labour to be played successfully, both traits which casual gamers are unwilling to put into their games. They want cheap gratification, while I often hunger after a deeper experience that only comes with experience.

Conversely, simulation enthusiasts could be regarded with derision for investing so much energy in something so ultimately meaningless and, I suspect, deeply unfulfilling.
The same could also be said of sportsmen and artists, I suppose. It's a funny old business.