Your views of Casual vs Hardcore gaming.

[Denamic]

Casual gamers are people who play games.
Hardcore gamers are xenophobic gamers.

 

[Canadamus Prime]

Gamers have been fighting for years to get gaming recognized as a form of entertainment in society and now that it is, don't go whining because more people are starting to get into it.

There is a difference between what they were fighting for and what we have become recognized for.

This pretty much sums it up. In spoiler due to size of comic.


All credit to original author. However Nothing I've seen so far sums it up so well as I wish they were my own words.

Meh beggers can't be choosers.

 

[DaOysterboy]

How so? It has all the majors, Mario, Zelda, Metroid, Smash Bros, the list goes on. That's about as Hardcore as Nintendo games get, and you have plenty of other options RE4, Mad World, several FPSs, and about a dozen fighting games, not including Smash Bros. Add that with the Virtual Console and Backwards Compatibility, and you have nearly ever game from about 2000 back, as well as any Gamecube game you damn well please. So again what's the problem? It seems to me to be the most "Hardcore" Nintendo has ever gotten

I completely agree, it had plenty of hardcore titles right around launch, which had me playing the Wii for about 4 months.

The problem was after that, they just stopped consistently releasing quality non-casual titles, the few that were released were far apart, and barely any were console exclusive.

Also, I don't really consider backwards-compatibility something that makes a new console a hardcore gaming system, all those gamecube games for me are filed under "gamecube" and not "wii"

Well since the Wii is the only current generation console with it as a standard feature (as in you don't have to go out of your way to get it), I count it. And my original question is still unanswered, what's the real difference between Hardcore and Casual games, length, difficulty, the amount of blood? Come on tell me already.

Go play Portal, and then go play Carnival Games for the Wii, and believe me, you'll know the difference.

And I have to be firm that I really don't count backwards compatibility, as I am saying they denied hardcore gamers a NEW hardcore gaming Nintendo platform, and gamecube games aren't new generation, yes it's a merit to the console, but not as a NEW hardcore gaming experience, I still have my gamecube, which I play occasionally.

EDIT: I guess if I had to put one characteristic that I believe mainly separates hardcore and casual gaming (which is hard to do, and probably wrong to generalize like this) I would say that it is NOT the amount of blood, or a first person perspective, or any of that, I would say the main characteristic I look for when determining if a game is hardcore is a story arc. Something you could turn into a book (probably a crappy one, but doable). If the game has a story arc, I more often than not consider it hardcore and not casual. See if you can find a story arc in Wii Sports or Carnival Games, I dare ya!

So racing games and sports games are casual (really, that'd be the worst book ever. "And then they drove around the track for the 373rd time. And then they drove around the track for the 374th time. And then they made a pit stop. And then they drove around the..."). Braid is hardcore (that book would be as good as Portal i.e. both would probably not be good at all).

OT: I'm against the genres. Most of my games are "hardcore" games, but I don't play them like a hardcore player (I think Koreans with Starcraft when I hear the term). Seriously though I had games for my Sega Master System when I was a kid that were unbelievably tough. They were cutesy and had me blowing up aliens with happy smiling faces and bright red cheeks, but one hit and you died, and the game took over 3 hours to beat. No saves. No continues. Just do it you pansy. Nowadays games just aren't challenging on normal mode, but they take place in outer space and have 56 bazillion guns and star "grizzled good looking antihero #87,421" and they're considered hardcore. I guess that's why I prefer hardcore games. They're generally easier. And I like to see how my games end. The term was made up by 13 year-old boys with insecurity that somebody might question their masculinity. If you have to categorize games for yourself do it in a way that makes sense. "Games I like," and "games I don't like."

 

[Canadamus Prime]

Gamers have been fighting for years to get gaming recognized as a form of entertainment in society and now that it is, don't go whining because more people are starting to get into it.

There is a difference between what they were fighting for and what we have become recognized for.

This pretty much sums it up. In spoiler due to size of comic.


All credit to original author. However Nothing I've seen so far sums it up so well as I wish they were my own words.

Meh beggers can't be choosers.

Clearly you haven't been on the internet long. Ever visit by wow's official forums?

And clearly you're fond of making ignorant presumptuous statements. And no, I don't play WoW, so I don't have any reason to go on their forums.

 

[Danpascooch]

How so? It has all the majors, Mario, Zelda, Metroid, Smash Bros, the list goes on. That's about as Hardcore as Nintendo games get, and you have plenty of other options RE4, Mad World, several FPSs, and about a dozen fighting games, not including Smash Bros. Add that with the Virtual Console and Backwards Compatibility, and you have nearly ever game from about 2000 back, as well as any Gamecube game you damn well please. So again what's the problem? It seems to me to be the most "Hardcore" Nintendo has ever gotten

I completely agree, it had plenty of hardcore titles right around launch, which had me playing the Wii for about 4 months.

The problem was after that, they just stopped consistently releasing quality non-casual titles, the few that were released were far apart, and barely any were console exclusive.

Also, I don't really consider backwards-compatibility something that makes a new console a hardcore gaming system, all those gamecube games for me are filed under "gamecube" and not "wii"

Well since the Wii is the only current generation console with it as a standard feature (as in you don't have to go out of your way to get it), I count it. And my original question is still unanswered, what's the real difference between Hardcore and Casual games, length, difficulty, the amount of blood? Come on tell me already.

Go play Portal, and then go play Carnival Games for the Wii, and believe me, you'll know the difference.

And I have to be firm that I really don't count backwards compatibility, as I am saying they denied hardcore gamers a NEW hardcore gaming Nintendo platform, and gamecube games aren't new generation, yes it's a merit to the console, but not as a NEW hardcore gaming experience, I still have my gamecube, which I play occasionally.

EDIT: I guess if I had to put one characteristic that I believe mainly separates hardcore and casual gaming (which is hard to do, and probably wrong to generalize like this) I would say that it is NOT the amount of blood, or a first person perspective, or any of that, I would say the main characteristic I look for when determining if a game is hardcore is a story arc. Something you could turn into a book (probably a crappy one, but doable). If the game has a story arc, I more often than not consider it hardcore and not casual. See if you can find a story arc in Wii Sports or Carnival Games, I dare ya!

So racing games and sports games are casual (really, that'd be the worst book ever. "And then they drove around the track for the 373rd time. And then they drove around the track for the 374th time. And then they made a pit stop. And then they drove around the..."). Braid is hardcore (that book would be as good as Portal i.e. both would probably not be good at all).

OT: I'm against the genres. Most of my games are "hardcore" games, but I don't play them like a hardcore player (I think Koreans with Starcraft when I hear the term). Seriously though I had games for my Sega Master System when I was a kid that were unbelievably tough. They were cutesy and had me blowing up aliens with happy smiling faces and bright red cheeks, but one hit and you died, and the game took over 3 hours to beat. No saves. No continues. Just do it you pansy. Nowadays games just aren't challenging on normal mode, but they take place in outer space and have 56 bazillion guns and star "grizzled good looking antihero #87,421" and they're considered hardcore. I guess that's why I prefer hardcore games. They're generally easier. And I like to see how my games end. The term was made up by 13 year-old boys with insecurity that somebody might question their masculinity. If you have to categorize games for yourself do it in a way that makes sense. "Games I like," and "games I don't like."

I must have mentioned like 15 times how this was not a be-all-end-all difference, and that it was imperfect, but the closest thing I could find to a single characteristic difference.

I even specifically mentioned in my OP edit that while the best single characteristic I could find, it didn't work for some genres LIKE RACING GAMES.

 

[DaOysterboy]

-snip-

Then give more examples. All I have to go on is "Portal is hardcore, Wii Sports is not." Is Pac-man hardcore? Choplifter (oh God... Choplifter... you bastard). Guitar Hero? Monkey Island? Because my general perception on the difference between hardcore and casual is "unless you killed something in the last 30 seconds it can't be a hardcore game." So here's your new challenge: describe a hardcore game where A) you don't hold any weapons, B) there are no explosions, C) you are not under threat of dying by being shot at, blown up, or attacked by hideous monsters.

 

[kickyourass]

How so? It has all the majors, Mario, Zelda, Metroid, Smash Bros, the list goes on. That's about as Hardcore as Nintendo games get, and you have plenty of other options RE4, Mad World, several FPSs, and about a dozen fighting games, not including Smash Bros. Add that with the Virtual Console and Backwards Compatibility, and you have nearly ever game from about 2000 back, as well as any Gamecube game you damn well please. So again what's the problem? It seems to me to be the most "Hardcore" Nintendo has ever gotten

I completely agree, it had plenty of hardcore titles right around launch, which had me playing the Wii for about 4 months.

The problem was after that, they just stopped consistently releasing quality non-casual titles, the few that were released were far apart, and barely any were console exclusive.

Also, I don't really consider backwards-compatibility something that makes a new console a hardcore gaming system, all those gamecube games for me are filed under "gamecube" and not "wii"

Well since the Wii is the only current generation console with it as a standard feature (as in you don't have to go out of your way to get it), I count it. And my original question is still unanswered, what's the real difference between Hardcore and Casual games, length, difficulty, the amount of blood? Come on tell me already.

Go play Portal, and then go play Carnival Games for the Wii, and believe me, you'll know the difference.

And I have to be firm that I really don't count backwards compatibility, as I am saying they denied hardcore gamers a NEW hardcore gaming Nintendo platform, and gamecube games aren't new generation, yes it's a merit to the console, but not as a NEW hardcore gaming experience, I still have my gamecube, which I play occasionally.

EDIT: I guess if I had to put one characteristic that I believe mainly separates hardcore and casual gaming (which is hard to do, and probably wrong to generalize like this) I would say that it is NOT the amount of blood, or a first person perspective, or any of that, I would say the main characteristic I look for when determining if a game is hardcore is a story arc. Something you could turn into a book (probably a crappy one, but doable). If the game has a story arc, I more often than not consider it hardcore and not casual. See if you can find a story arc in Wii Sports or Carnival Games, I dare ya!

Well with your example I SHOULD see a difference, they're two entirely different things. I'm not sure about you, but unless it's an RPG (Preferably a Bioware RPG) I play games to have fun, not story, games like Carnival games and Wii Sports, let me do exactly that. You do realize they video games are essentially toys, right? Sure going through a game and experiencing all the story and emotions and stuff right there with the characters can be excellent when done properly, but since few games outside RPGs seem to care about doing that part right, I stick to what I know I'll enjoy.

 

[MetalDooley]

I agree to this, my main problem is that Casual gaming has denied the hardcore gamers a real Nintendo console for this generation

Actually you could argue that it's the "hardcore" gamers that are at fault here.Nintendo's previous two consoles were excellent machines that were just as good(if not better)than their competitors.What happened?Well they both sold poorly because all the "hardcore" gamers jumped on the Sony bandwagon.Can't blame Nintendo for trying to appeal to a different audience really.

And I'm not going to get into the whole "real console" bit here.Suffice to say I own a wii and use it regularly and most of the games I own/play would be non-casual

Good list, most of those I either beat in the three months before I decided the Wii wasn't worth any more time, or I played them for another console.

Quick question here.If you bought a Wii at launch and played it for 3 months before giving up on it then how have you played most of those games?Quite a few of the games Furburt mentioned came out much later than 3 months after launch and are wii exclusives so you couldn't have played them on another system

 

[Danpascooch]

-snip-

Then give more examples. All I have to go on is "Portal is hardcore, Wii Sports is not." Is Pac-man hardcore? Choplifter (oh God... Choplifter... you bastard). Guitar Hero? Monkey Island? Because my general perception on the difference between hardcore and casual is "unless you killed something in the last 30 seconds it can't be a hardcore game." So here's your new challenge: describe a hardcore game where A) you don't hold any weapons, B) there are no explosions, C) you are not under threat of dying by being shot at, blown up, or attacked by hideous monsters.

The Sims 3

 

[Danpascooch]

How so? It has all the majors, Mario, Zelda, Metroid, Smash Bros, the list goes on. That's about as Hardcore as Nintendo games get, and you have plenty of other options RE4, Mad World, several FPSs, and about a dozen fighting games, not including Smash Bros. Add that with the Virtual Console and Backwards Compatibility, and you have nearly ever game from about 2000 back, as well as any Gamecube game you damn well please. So again what's the problem? It seems to me to be the most "Hardcore" Nintendo has ever gotten

I completely agree, it had plenty of hardcore titles right around launch, which had me playing the Wii for about 4 months.

The problem was after that, they just stopped consistently releasing quality non-casual titles, the few that were released were far apart, and barely any were console exclusive.

Also, I don't really consider backwards-compatibility something that makes a new console a hardcore gaming system, all those gamecube games for me are filed under "gamecube" and not "wii"

Well since the Wii is the only current generation console with it as a standard feature (as in you don't have to go out of your way to get it), I count it. And my original question is still unanswered, what's the real difference between Hardcore and Casual games, length, difficulty, the amount of blood? Come on tell me already.

Go play Portal, and then go play Carnival Games for the Wii, and believe me, you'll know the difference.

And I have to be firm that I really don't count backwards compatibility, as I am saying they denied hardcore gamers a NEW hardcore gaming Nintendo platform, and gamecube games aren't new generation, yes it's a merit to the console, but not as a NEW hardcore gaming experience, I still have my gamecube, which I play occasionally.

EDIT: I guess if I had to put one characteristic that I believe mainly separates hardcore and casual gaming (which is hard to do, and probably wrong to generalize like this) I would say that it is NOT the amount of blood, or a first person perspective, or any of that, I would say the main characteristic I look for when determining if a game is hardcore is a story arc. Something you could turn into a book (probably a crappy one, but doable). If the game has a story arc, I more often than not consider it hardcore and not casual. See if you can find a story arc in Wii Sports or Carnival Games, I dare ya!

Well with your example I SHOULD see a difference, they're two entirely different things. I'm not sure about you, but unless it's an RPG (Preferably a Bioware RPG) I play games to have fun, not story, games like Carnival games and Wii Sports, let me do exactly that. You do realize they video games are essentially toys, right? Sure going through a game and experiencing all the story and emotions and stuff right there with the characters can be excellent when done properly, but since few games outside RPGs seem to care about doing that part right, I stick to what I know I'll enjoy.

Again, I am not saying this is what makes hardcore games better, I am just saying that this is a main difference I tend to see that correlates with the categories.

I personally think hardcore games are more satisfying because of the time investment and skill development, it makes it much more rewarding when you accomplish something difficult.

 

[Danpascooch]

I agree to this, my main problem is that Casual gaming has denied the hardcore gamers a real Nintendo console for this generation

Actually you could argue that it's the "hardcore" gamers that are at fault here.Nintendo's previous two consoles were excellent machines that were just as good(if not better)than their competitors.What happened?Well they both sold poorly because all the "hardcore" gamers jumped on the Sony bandwagon.Can't blame Nintendo for trying to appeal to a different audience really.

And I'm not going to get into the whole "real console" bit here.Suffice to say I own a wii and use it regularly and most of the games I own/play would be non-casual

Good list, most of those I either beat in the three months before I decided the Wii wasn't worth any more time, or I played them for another console.

Quick question here.If you bought a Wii at launch and played it for 3 months before giving up on it then how have you played most of those games?Quite a few of the games Furburt mentioned came out much later than 3 months after launch and are wii exclusives so you couldn't have played them on another system

I meant the ones I liked (twilight princess, Mario galaxy, and a few others) were the ones I played in those 3 months.

 

[DaOysterboy]

-snip-

Then give more examples. All I have to go on is "Portal is hardcore, Wii Sports is not." Is Pac-man hardcore? Choplifter (oh God... Choplifter... you bastard). Guitar Hero? Monkey Island? Because my general perception on the difference between hardcore and casual is "unless you killed something in the last 30 seconds it can't be a hardcore game." So here's your new challenge: describe a hardcore game where A) you don't hold any weapons, B) there are no explosions, C) you are not under threat of dying by being shot at, blown up, or attacked by hideous monsters.

The Sims 3

See my point is that I don't think people have solidly defined what a hardcore game is. I know a lot of people who WOULDN'T call the Sims games hardcore.

 

[rescuer86]

When I think of the term "hardcore gamer" I picture the antagonist off the "Make Love, Not Warcraft" episode of South Park. "How can you kill that which has no life?" But, that's not fair, either, is it? I think the only people who wish to classify gamers into categories are just as close minded as those people who call F.P.S.s "mass-murder simulators." These are the guys who scream "n00b!" into their headsets because I zig when I should zag. Forgive me for sounding too much like a hippy, but why is it human nature to classify and divide everything? Maybe I am globalizing the issues of a small community. I am just so tired of R.P.G. fans hating shooter fans for being Neanderthals, and shooter fans for hating R.P.G. fans for being nerds and dorks. I enjoy games. Simple. Every person who posts on this site enjoys games. Every person you meet in WoW, XBox Live, PSN, or any of the dozens of gaming networks likes games. This has gone so far that when you create an XBox Live gamertag, it asks you what kind of gamer you consider yourself. This is more of a rant than anything, and I apologize for that, but division like this makes me blind with rage. Just. Stop.

 

[Danpascooch]

How so? It has all the majors, Mario, Zelda, Metroid, Smash Bros, the list goes on. That's about as Hardcore as Nintendo games get, and you have plenty of other options RE4, Mad World, several FPSs, and about a dozen fighting games, not including Smash Bros. Add that with the Virtual Console and Backwards Compatibility, and you have nearly ever game from about 2000 back, as well as any Gamecube game you damn well please. So again what's the problem? It seems to me to be the most "Hardcore" Nintendo has ever gotten

I completely agree, it had plenty of hardcore titles right around launch, which had me playing the Wii for about 4 months.

The problem was after that, they just stopped consistently releasing quality non-casual titles, the few that were released were far apart, and barely any were console exclusive.

Also, I don't really consider backwards-compatibility something that makes a new console a hardcore gaming system, all those gamecube games for me are filed under "gamecube" and not "wii"

Well since the Wii is the only current generation console with it as a standard feature (as in you don't have to go out of your way to get it), I count it. And my original question is still unanswered, what's the real difference between Hardcore and Casual games, length, difficulty, the amount of blood? Come on tell me already.

Go play Portal, and then go play Carnival Games for the Wii, and believe me, you'll know the difference.

And I have to be firm that I really don't count backwards compatibility, as I am saying they denied hardcore gamers a NEW hardcore gaming Nintendo platform, and gamecube games aren't new generation, yes it's a merit to the console, but not as a NEW hardcore gaming experience, I still have my gamecube, which I play occasionally.

EDIT: I guess if I had to put one characteristic that I believe mainly separates hardcore and casual gaming (which is hard to do, and probably wrong to generalize like this) I would say that it is NOT the amount of blood, or a first person perspective, or any of that, I would say the main characteristic I look for when determining if a game is hardcore is a story arc. Something you could turn into a book (probably a crappy one, but doable). If the game has a story arc, I more often than not consider it hardcore and not casual. See if you can find a story arc in Wii Sports or Carnival Games, I dare ya!

WTF man portal and carnival games could be on the same bloody disk they are so similar. The only thing seperating them in the graphics. If you think portal is a hardcore game then wtf do you consider casual. Portal doesnt really have a story at all untill the final level and thats not really a story.

Il give you a big hint here, there is no casual or hardcore there is simply games that are designed for different audiences and you cant compare then against each other. Thats like comparing a a comedy isnt a real movie because its not a horror film.

First of all, god I hope you're joking.

Secondly, Portal didn't hand its story to you, it developed it over time and let you fill in a lot, that was part of it's genius.

and BTW, saying there is no casual or hardcore, simply games made for different audiences is idiotic, because that's exactly what hardcore and casual is! GAMES MADE FOR DIFFERENT AUDIENCES

 

[Jaded Scribe]

I have little problems with casual gamers, as long as they "know their place"

Read my full post about ithere [http://jadedscribe.blogspot.com/2010/04/hardecore-vs-casual-bloody-war.html]

But when I see a good game like WoW getting progressively watered down by "casuals" (I use the quotes because I usually refer to this subset of casuals as the Lazy Whiners) who believe that the concept of the game should be changed just because they want to see everything without investing the time.

 

[Onyx Oblivion]

At this point, I consider Call of Duty, Halo, and Left 4 Dead as casual titles.