From: TheRock1525 | Posted: 10/26/2011 5:03:25 AM | #067
Right, if the ratios were reversed, Dark Souls would be a casual game, and CoD would be a hardcore game.
"Hardcore" and "Casual" do not refer to quality. At all.
Never said a damn thing about quality in this argument.
A mainstream casual gamer is someone who only plays the biggest hits and nothing more.
Now what the f*** is this? A minute ago, you were pointing out how a casual gamer could play Dark Souls, and now it's suddenly they ONLY play the biggest hits? Considering the fact that Demons' Souls (no offense) finished 11th its first month out in NA, I doubt it can be considered one of the "biggest hits."?
You're misreading things. When I say that a casual player only plays the big hits, I mean that's generally what they do. It's not a rule that "if you play a hardcore game, you're a hardcore gamer". If someone's a casual gamer, they only play games every now and then, they're not going to be investing a lot of time in researching anything, they generally just going to pick up what they hear. This most often means they'll play the big games. They MIGHT pick up a more obscure game, but it's not common. There is no rule that if a casual gamer touches a hardcore gamer they're suddenly not casual. You are not casual for playing CoD, and you are not hardcore for playing Dark Souls. It's because someone is casual that it is less likely play something like Dark Souls.
But slap on a stupid tag like casual or hardcore and suddenly it can change based on something the game has no effect on.
No. NOTHING changes. The label of "hardcore" game and "casual" game DOES NOT affect the game. Just because a game is a casual game doesn't mean there's anything wrong with it. It's just a term for statistics. The casual games are the games everyone plays, whether you're well-versed in gaming, or just play every now and then.
Do you get my point now? Do you finally see why calling any game "casual" or "hardcore" doesn't make any sense? Do you see why it makes sense to label a game based on what it actually is, instead of what type of people like it?
I already told you: we DO label the people. They're the casual gamers and hardcore gamers. Hardcore games and a casual games are attributes of those labels, not the definitions. The definition of a casual gamer is someone that doesn't invest tons of time in gaming. Usually, if someone doesn't invest all their time in gaming, they'll only play the big titles. These are the casual games. Games that everybody knows, whether you're hardcore or casual.
You're looking at the label all wrong, applying a negative connotation where you shouldn't. There is a reason for this, because as I said earlier in the topic: there's two types of casual gamers. Mainstream casual, and partygame casual. Partygame casual is reletively new group that was heavily popularized by the Wii. THESE are the people that regular gamers, mainstream casual and hardcore, often look down on. They play the deamed "nongames" or "toy games", of Just Dance, Wii Party, Wii Sports, etc.
As I said: these gamers are relatively new. Before this generation, the mainstream casuals were the ONLY casuals. They were THE casuals, and there was no negative connotation to being a "casual gamer", because all it meant is you like games, but you also have a life. Then Wii came along, popularizing a new type of casual gamers that play the "crap games" and are often blamed as the cancer of gaming today.
"Casual gamer" still applies to both types, because both types play games casually. When people talk about hating casuals, they don't mean the mainstream casuals (usually >_>), they mean the partygame casuals.
--
sig