The gamer defines the game. Games might be "casual" or "hardcore" but that is only because their majority audience is that particular type of gamer. No game is inherently "casual" or "hardcore." Games might be made to appeal to certain audiences but again, that doesn't make them inherently "casual" or "hardcore."
If I were to play a "casual" game like Wiisports, that doesn't make me a casual gamer. I am still hardcore because I have a large collection that spans many genres and eras and a huge interest in the inner workings of the industry.foxhound_fox
I understand that, I already showed with an example. Yet that minority itself labels it too along with the majority, you may say there are no casual/hardcore games but when you see a game like Wiisports you know it's not the same as say Ikagura in aspects that would mark one as casual and other as hardcore in the way you have to play them and the way they appeal.
[QUOTE="Dystopian-X"] Yes but still the whole there's no casual/hardcore game argument is flawed. I know there might be a ''person'' who would play kitty luv more hardcore than NG, but that would be a rare case.
These games can be labeled as casual/hardcore by looking at the audience they are targeted to, not just a minority that might play them on a different level.
ZIMdoom
Objects can not be hardcore or casual. People put those labels on things so that when they buy them, they feel better about themselves. They believe they are more hardcore if they buy something they've convinced themselves is hardcore. Essentially it boils down to whatever they think is "cool" enough to show off to their immature, casual buddies is "hardcore", and anything else is casual.
What you are confusing as "casual" or "hardcore" is meaningles BS. The marketing, or advertising, or simplicity of the game. That has nothing to do with hardcore/casual. That is marketing. That is trying to appeal to a certain audience. And look at the result. Developers are doing that with the Wii, making games they think should appeal to casual gamers, and instead they flop becuase they are making a crap game.
And if you honestly think that games can be labelled by looking at the audience they are targeted to, then the games most people call "hardcore" (fps, most fighters, racers, etc) are really the most casual because they are advertised to the majority of the gaming audience today...who is casual gamers that only care about playing what is cool and about showing off graphics or owning the games their friends own.
So if there is any flawed thinking, it is the people who confuse 8 year olds and grandmothers with the TRUE casual gamers. The TRUE casual gamers are the people who only cared about gaming when it became popular, and only care about gaming as an accessory...something to make them more popular by taking part in it. Something they can buy to show off and brag about, not because they actually care about videogames or the indutry. They care about the TREND. THe people you are confusing for casual gamers are actually NON-gamers. They don't care about videogames at all. They just like being able to play a simple game for a few minutes and then put it down. These people may be playing a videogame, but they are no more a "gamer" than the grandmother who does a crossword puzzle in the morning.
Then again, when the casual gamers take over the market, they lower the bar. They make themselves, their way of thinking, and their standards the new "norm" and anything less is the new casual.
Yes, those are labels ppl give, but it's not really bad, it's not always about either one being ''cool/uncool'', just know the difference. Some those games you mention are actually considered as both. You are even using and giving good examples and explaining of really casual games yourself.
Log in to comment