I would be remiss in starting my rant without citing my sources. While not relating at all to the views presented by
BlindsideDork, or to the rather lengthy reply by
GuitarAtomik, the forthcoming cluster of words has everything to do with their arguements.
You see, at the heart of their debate is one word: "hardcore." This term is one I've had a problem with, because there is no one definition of hardcore gaming, and when I hear the "hardcores" picking on the "casuals" I have to ask myself just what the difference is.
My girlfriend loves Katamari.
Loves it. If she didn't have to work in order to make money to pay the electric bill to keep the PS2 running, she would play Katamari to the exclusion of all other things. What's the catch? Katamari is the only game she likes. She plays Tetris every now and again, but she refuses to touch any game -- and I'm using her words here -- "with a plot".
This makes her a "casual" gamer. She doesn't like games with any kind of story. She couldn't care less about your Master Chief or your Liu Kang. She doesn't think she should have to learn strings of button-presses to play a game. Hell, she doesn't play games with buttons. But is there not a hint of hardcore in her complete willingness to remove your eye from it's socket using the left hand of a Mr. Potato Head in order to get an advance copy of Beautiful Katamari?
Would a person that devotes themself to one game exclusively be demeaned -- because let's be real, we say "casual" with a hint of vitrol, don't we? -- by the "casual" tag if that game was Counterstrike? Halo? Madden? Final Fantasy? If your child went through a period (like many children do) of only eating hot dogs, would you call your child a casual eater? Would you say they didn't really like food and call their plates stupid?
What about my roommate and myself? We both work about 50 hours a week. We've played games all of our lives, and we love just about every kind of game there is. Between us, we've put in close to 400 hours on Oblivion, and we still don't have any of the expantions. The fact is, though, that we don't have nearly as much free time as we used to. Between work and girlfriends, our choices are limited.
He's taken to playing Rayman: Raving Rabbids. He likes it because it fits his schedule. He needs a game that he can pick up and put down without feeling tied to. The fact that it saves his progress every ten minutes or so is a huge bonus.
Unfortunately, by the definition I understand, his playing a minigame compilation for fifteen minutes at a time makes him a casual gamer. Does it matter that he spends 90% of his free time playing video games, or is his status decided only by how long he plays in hours? He hasn't unlocked an achievement or fragged a noob since he started his second job, but does the fact that he wants to count?
I, on the other hand, have been trying to play Twilight Princess. I don't like to play it for any less than three hours at a time, because I don't feel like I'm getting anything done otherwise. The problem is that it's hard for me to find that kind of time. I only get around to playing it once a week or so. Can I still be hardcore if I only really play once a week? Does it count that my sessions last forever? Does it make a difference that I'm playing it on a Wii?
My point with all this is that casual and hardcore are very fluid concepts. And in the end, does it matter which is which? What's the point of standing on one side of the line cursing the other? As long as people are playing games and enjoying themselves, shouldn't we welcome them into the fold? Just because someone doesn't enjoy the same games you do in the same way you do doesn't mean they don't enjoy games.
To conlcude, STFUAJPG.
I first off admit that I have not read this article...but responding to the title.
The difference is the people who don't own a system and will randomly play for 5 minutes or so at a store or friends house is "casual."
"Hardcores" have systems, buys games, spends all their time on blogs and have no life...*cough* snaileb *cough*. Basically most people on this site and others who don't go on the site.
Another muddy water casual is the one who owns a system but only plays like one or two games. These games are the BIG mainstream/blockbuster hits. A main culprit...MADDEN! That and GTA. I feel people who only play those games (and maybe Halo with the frat boys) are casual. THe kind who bought a PS2 and use it to play GTA, Madden, and watch DVDs. Of course this can lead to them being hardcore buy getting more games and playing more and more.
Also depends on how much time you invest in it.
BSD
Good post. Perfect example.
I had the same problem with Twilight Princess. I played it a few days around launch and then very sporadically after that. I didn't sit down for real with it until May, once college was done for the year. Then I plowed through it in about four days.
The issue with casual games is not that they're bringing in new players. The new players generally don't care about being gamers and are just looking for a quick diversion. That's fine, no one says that games have to be deep, just fun. The concern lies in the fact that with a growing casual game market, there's a fear the developers will focus their energy on cheap fun instead of meaty hardcore games.
I tried Nintendo's casual DS games like Nintendogs and Big Brain Academy, and while I appreciated where they were going with them, they weren't my cup of tea. That's fine, because there are lot of other hardcore games out there. Just imagine, though, if the majority of games completely abandoned tenets of solid game design for a casual diversion. You would see fewer games like Bioshock and more games like Brain Age.
I don't think there needs to be a giant concern about making this distinction, and that the distinction is generally there just to identify what games are over the head for new and casual gamers. However, I really hope that this current trend of casual games is only a new part of the industry and not its mainstream future; the producer of Panzer Dragoon was lamenting how the Japanese market has become saturated with non-games, and I think he has a point that they don't have enough substance and meaning compared to "real games."
I think the title is a little off, but I agree with the words you wrote below it. I think that ALL gamers like different things, have different amounts of time to play, etc...
I dont mind the terms, I just hate the way people use them sometimes (ie to paint a game in a negative light because it's 'casual' and therefore no one should like it, and 'casual' gamers aren't real gamers)
Yah I agree, you cannot classify 2 different groups of people that play games... there are millions of different gamers with millions of different preferences, styles, and schedules. Trying to lump them into 2 groups (Casual vs Hardcore) is, in my opinion, futile.
I think a huge problem is that what most people consider hardcore games and casual games are not played exclusively by the respective 'hardcore' and 'casual' gamer crowds. Someone can be 'hardcore' into a casual game, and someone can be 'casual' about a hardcore game.
Really it all comes down to the fact that 'Casual Gaming' is nothing more than a catch phrase used to lure a whole new demographic into gaming. Some of the 'casual' games of today are more complicated than the 'hardcore' games of the golden age of gaming, arcades. 'Casual Gaming' is a nice way for the new demographic to be able to separate itself from the stigma of being a gamer. Up until these past few years, video gamers were depicted as fat, acne ridden, nerds left over from the D&D era. Then, it eventually blossomed into the visor wearing, profusely swearing frat boy 'pwning joo in teh intertubes'. Now adults, can feel more 'respectable' by claiming, "Oh, I'm only a casual gamer, I don't get THAT into it."
It's all PR, and it worked.
I was about to read the post, then I became too shocked when I saw JACK posted something positive. About Blindside none-the-less. FRONT PAGE! lol
Seriously, the casual gamers fucked our way of playing games. Imagine the Wii aimed at hardcore gamers. It would've never sold though.
Snaileb
LOL, as long as I get Brawl & Galaxy & the Next Zelda I could care less about what happens to the Wii.
Nintendo is pissing me off. Catering to the casual is a great way to expand the market, and it makes me happy. I'm not being racist, but just because they are trying to appeal to the casual, doesn't mean Nintendo needs to disreguard our needs.
JACK isn't being an ass? I think he needs a big fat hug from Gaybear.
I hate all titles, casual and hardcore. You either play games or you do not. The games you play do not determine what kind of gamer you are, and the term 'hardcore' is just an identifier by gamers which translates to little more than, 'I'm a nerd for games'. That's what a hardcore gamer is, a video game nerd. Get over yourselves, we're all gamers, and the differences between us are the levels of dedication, not the genre of games we play.
DJ
I will pass lol
@Snalieb
Yeah, it's unfortunate for us hardcore (ok i did that one on purpose) gamers, the direction Nintendo is taking. I have been a long time fan (and even ex-fanboy) of Nintendo, but over the years they lost me. I just get more of what I want out of my other systems (ok I lied, I would have gotten more out of a Wii than my PS3 so far)
dammit, that's a good first blog. Well played sir...well played. You forgot to mention that everyone you know has plugged in about 100+ hours into every incarnation of one of the most casual game series ever: Mario Party. Is knowing every little trick in every little mini-game in every little revamp of Mario Party mean that you are a hardcore gamer for that game/series? Or are you doomed to hold the moniker of "casual" because the game is "casual" in form?
You're right though. It doesn't matter what labels we use (excluding noob...we gotta keep noob). STFUAJPG
Dammit, that's a good post. Man, I said "hardcore" so many times in my head while reading your post, the responses, and my response that the word has lost all its meaning.
...
dirt