A better player (more skilled) will find games to be less hard than an inferior player. But we're not comparing players, we're comparing games. That skilled player will find harder games to be more hard than easier games.
Fixed for you. Hardcore isn't a synonym for hard you know.
And did you know that the whole point of this discussion is to define the term that you're just arbitrarily defining?
Hardcore players will tend to play harder games. It's evident everywhere you look. The people who play WoW hardcore are raiding and pvping. The people who play difficult games like stacraft are known for playing them for a long time and for long sessions. Darkfall is mechanically harder than most MMOs and it houses a large proportion of hardcore players.
Hardcore players does not necessary play harder games, that is not entirely true.
I am not 100% sure, but Hardcore players tend to play games which with that hardwork and dedication they can achieve above what others can not. If a game offers that possibility, then Hardcore players will work at it to get to that 1%
Regardless if the game is Hard or Easy.
Hardwork and dedication at what? Getting better at the game. You have more of an opportunity to outplay somebody in a game that has a high skill cap; in a game that is difficult. Again, hardcore players tend to play more difficult games. So you can deduce that casual players tend to play easier games. So a "casual friendly" game will TEND to be easier. It doesn't mean all casual players are noobs who suck at videogames, but it does mean that if you're making a game that is targeting casual players, you're not going to want it to be super difficult.
This whole statement is just false.
High skill cap does not equal difficult game.
Again, hardcore players tend to play more difficult games. This is an unsupported assumption.
So you can deduce that casual players tend to play easier games. This is an unsupported conclusion based on an unsupported assumption.
So a "casual friendly" game will TEND to be easier. This is an unsupported conclusion based on an unsupported assumption.
If your targeting casual players you will make your content, however hard it is, able to be broken down, or accomplished in shorter time periods.
So you just don't agree that the people playing the mechanically difficult games are in general more "hardcore" than the people playing mechanically easy games? It's an unsupported claim in that it's impossible to prove or disprove, but it's freaking obvious man. This is like a kid putting his fingers in his ears because he doesn't want to hear the truth. But you're right, I can't prove it. SC2 players are more hardcore than bejeweled players. TFC players are more hardcore than solitaire players. Hardcore players will seek out the more mechanically difficult games more than casual players will. Call it ego if you want, but it's true.
At any rate, he said this:
"Hardcore players tend to play games which with that hardwork and dedication they can achieve above what others can not"
I agree with him. And what this means is that a difficult game with a high skill cap will attract hardcore players. You say that difficulty isn't the same as saying a game has a high skill cap. They're different terms obviously but again, they're related. A mechanically easy game is going to have a lower skill cap than a mechanically difficult game. If it's harder, it'll take longer to master, which means it has a higher skill cap.
No response to the SC2 thing? This is why arguing on the internet is pointless.
There's nothing more to discuss. You find SC2 mechanics hard, I find it easy. SC2 is a casual game. Theres nothing more to discuss. Good luck however in your mission.
You don't get to fall back on "It's my opinion, you can't say I'm wrong." You don't find SC2 mechanics easy. You are not performing them correctly or competently. You can find them easy to understand, but not easy to perform. That's what difficult means.
Hear hear, and with that I have nothing left to say. New topic please
/laugh
The only way to win is stop replying to his circular arguments
You're clearly biased. Nothing I've said is circular. In fact Venge is the one that is constantly relying on his own arbitrary definition to prove.... his arbitrary definition. That's circular.
If you would, please show me an example of a circular argument I've used. If not, please don't barge into the middle of a discussion and insult me.
Hear hear, and with that I have nothing left to say. New topic please
/laugh
The only way to win is stop replying to his circular arguments
Ya. I have to stop doing that. It's takes too much time, I'm becoming a hardcore forum poster, egads.
You could just admit you're wrong when you contradict yourself with your own sources and the definitions of words don't line up with the definition you're trying to use. That would be a way to end it. Also, it takes two to tango.
Hardwork and dedication at what? Getting better at the game. You have more of an opportunity to outplay somebody in a game that has a high skill cap; in a game that is difficult. Again, hardcore players tend to play more difficult games. So you can deduce that casual players tend to play easier games. So a "casual friendly" game will TEND to be easier. It doesn't mean all casual players are noobs who suck at videogames, but it does mean that if you're making a game that is targeting casual players, you're not going to want it to be super difficult.
I think you are generalizing a bit too much here. There are hardcore players of casual games too. Take a game like Bejeweled for example and you'll find there are hardcore enthusiasts who play that. I consider myself as hardcore as they come and I play casual games from time to time. Some hardcore gamers play a wide variety of genres while others stick to only a single genre or even game and play that exclusively. To clarify a Hardcore gamer to me is someone who plays 20 hours or more (probably closer to 40) a week on games.
I define Hardcore games a bit differently. To me Hardcore games aren't necessarily about difficulty (though by nature because they tend to be so unforgiving they are time consuming and can be regarded as difficult) but a game with very unforgiven mechanics. Things like Permadeath for example are Hardcore mechanics. Hardcore games cannot be played in short 5-30 minute sittings like Casual games and generally require 2+ hours of gametime to make any sort of minimal progress on. From a MMO perspective games like Eve, Ultima Online, and Darkfall are hardcore while games like SW:TOR and WoW are less so and some browser MMOs like Realm of the Mad God would be considered casual. As someone who considers themselves a hardcore gamer I actually prefer the in between over casual or hardcore, but that's just personal preference.
1. I don't blame you for not knowing this because this discussion has been going on for like 20 pages but the question is which type of game will attract which kind of player. Yes, hardcore players can play casual games. The question is what features should your game have if you want to attract a "casual gamer." Like you say, time requirement is one thing. A casual gamer will probably tend to want to jump in and out easily. They may not devote as much time. But if a casual gamer wants to be able to casually play a game, it stands to reason that he/she isn't going to want to play a game that is so difficult that you have to devote a lot of time to become competent at it. Right? If it's impossible to improve at SC2 (because it's so difficult) in short amounts of time, how does that fit in the description of a casual game?
2. This is minor but UO would not be considered a hardcore game by your definition. There is fast travel and no instances. You can play for 5 minutes or 5 hours. Yet it has a reputation for being hardcore. In fact, WoW probably ties you down more than these hardcore games do which instanced dungeons/raids. Yet WoW is considered casual friendly.
Wow, 5 in a row instead of your standard 2 in a row.
I've never heard anyone define their game by calling it "hardcore" before. I've heard people call games casual. I heard people call other people hardcore gamers (which describes a time commitment). It looks to me like you really, REALLY want to be able to call some games "hardcore" for some reason when almost nobody on the planet actually uses the term to describe games. I think that's why your argument sounds so ridiculous right now.
Wow, 5 in a row instead of your standard 2 in a row.
I've never heard anyone define their game by calling it "hardcore" before. I've heard people call games casual. I heard people call other people hardcore gamers (which describes a time commitment). It looks to me like you really, REALLY want to be able to call some games "hardcore" for some reason when almost nobody on the planet actually uses the term to describe games. I think that's why your argument sounds so ridiculous right now.
I'm responding to people who responded to me. Would you rather I just ignore them? What a weird thing to complain about.
Also I may be using the word "hardcore" as shorthand for a game that attracts hardcore players. It's kind of nebulous to call a game hardcore, but really I mean a game that hardcore players will play. Basically in the context of this debate it's the opposite of a casual game, which is just a game that attracts casual players.
You're just not familiar with the discussion that's going on. This has nothing to do with me really wanting to call any game hardcore. This is about what determines how casual/hardcore a game is. Does difficulty play any role? And I say yes, of course it does. If it's just about time commitment, the time commitment is based on how difficult the game is, inherently.
The members of this site seem to specialize in complaining.
I dont think anything was accomplished here.
I don't think watching a small group of people club each other over the head saying "fork" "spoon" for 40 pages is really forum PvP at it's finest. Typical for here maybe...but not it's finest
The members of this site seem to specialize in complaining.
I dont think anything was accomplished here.
I don't think watching a small group of people club each other over the head saying "fork" "spoon" for 40 pages is really forum PvP at it's finest. Typical for here maybe...but not it's finest
Not the finest but definitely enjoyable sometimes.
Originally posted by Distopia Why should the "new generation" understand anything about things they never experienced? You're in their world, they're not in yours. The current crop is the current crop, tendency is going to be based on the norm today, just as taste will depend on today's experiences.
The point is not to change the New Generation, but to help them understand that there is something more to the MMO genre than what is being offered today.
Maybe they don't need to know about it, but it won't hurt the Genre, it will only improve it. That's what the discussion is about, not about which is better than the other, but what we can do as gamers to help the MMO genre to become the Juggernaut that it is. And keeping it there so more and more MMO comes out for all to play.
Life is a Maze, so make sure you bring your GPS incase you get lost in it.
A better player (more skilled) will find games to be less hard than an inferior player. But we're not comparing players, we're comparing games. That skilled player will find harder games to be more hard than easier games.
Fixed for you. Hardcore isn't a synonym for hard you know.
And did you know that the whole point of this discussion is to define the term that you're just arbitrarily defining?
Hardcore players will tend to play harder games. It's evident everywhere you look. The people who play WoW hardcore are raiding and pvping. The people who play difficult games like stacraft are known for playing them for a long time and for long sessions. Darkfall is mechanically harder than most MMOs and it houses a large proportion of hardcore players.
Hardcore players does not necessary play harder games, that is not entirely true.
I am not 100% sure, but Hardcore players tend to play games which with that hardwork and dedication they can achieve above what others can not. If a game offers that possibility, then Hardcore players will work at it to get to that 1%
Regardless if the game is Hard or Easy.
Hardwork and dedication at what? Getting better at the game. You have more of an opportunity to outplay somebody in a game that has a high skill cap; in a game that is difficult. Again, hardcore players tend to play more difficult games. So you can deduce that casual players tend to play easier games. So a "casual friendly" game will TEND to be easier. It doesn't mean all casual players are noobs who suck at videogames, but it does mean that if you're making a game that is targeting casual players, you're not going to want it to be super difficult.
This whole statement is just false.
High skill cap does not equal difficult game.
Again, hardcore players tend to play more difficult games. This is an unsupported assumption.
So you can deduce that casual players tend to play easier games. This is an unsupported conclusion based on an unsupported assumption.
So a "casual friendly" game will TEND to be easier. This is an unsupported conclusion based on an unsupported assumption.
If your targeting casual players you will make your content, however hard it is, able to be broken down, or accomplished in shorter time periods.
So you just don't agree that the people playing the mechanically difficult games are in general more "hardcore" than the people playing mechanically easy games? It's an unsupported claim in that it's impossible to prove or disprove, but it's freaking obvious man. This is like a kid putting his fingers in his ears because he doesn't want to hear the truth. But you're right, I can't prove it. SC2 players are more hardcore than bejeweled players. TFC players are more hardcore than solitaire players. Hardcore players will seek out the more mechanically difficult games more than casual players will. Call it ego if you want, but it's true.
At any rate, he said this:
"Hardcore players tend to play games which with that hardwork and dedication they can achieve above what others can not"
I agree with him. And what this means is that a difficult game with a high skill cap will attract hardcore players. You say that difficulty isn't the same as saying a game has a high skill cap. They're different terms obviously but again, they're related. A mechanically easy game is going to have a lower skill cap than a mechanically difficult game. If it's harder, it'll take longer to master, which means it has a higher skill cap.
I don't think anyone is disagreeing with you that Harder games attract Hardcore players, I think what everyone is disagreeing with you about is that Hard = Hardcore.
Harder games attract Hardcore players and casual players alike, more hardcore players maybe
But Easier games also attract Hardcore players, because they can be less Hardcore but still hardcore enough.
I am using Hardcore in the definition of " A player that spends enormously amount of time to prepare, train and study the game as they play and before they play, either competitively or non competitively"
But your argument of difficulty is just based off preference once again, because something that is difficult to one person, might not be difficult to another. I have seen players play " Meatboy" without a single death, they are just that good, but to that person, its just natural for them. Again, difficult to me, cause I kept dying but to other players its an easy game.
You can give me 100 keyboard controls that I must memorize to be good, another player will use their personal computer skills and build macros to tie those 100 controls into 10 controls. The game just got that much easier for that particular gamer, but for me its till a hard game to beat.
Life is a Maze, so make sure you bring your GPS incase you get lost in it.
A better player (more skilled) will find games to be less hard than an inferior player. But we're not comparing players, we're comparing games. That skilled player will find harder games to be more hard than easier games.
Fixed for you. Hardcore isn't a synonym for hard you know.
And did you know that the whole point of this discussion is to define the term that you're just arbitrarily defining?
Hardcore players will tend to play harder games. It's evident everywhere you look. The people who play WoW hardcore are raiding and pvping. The people who play difficult games like stacraft are known for playing them for a long time and for long sessions. Darkfall is mechanically harder than most MMOs and it houses a large proportion of hardcore players.
Hardcore players does not necessary play harder games, that is not entirely true.
I am not 100% sure, but Hardcore players tend to play games which with that hardwork and dedication they can achieve above what others can not. If a game offers that possibility, then Hardcore players will work at it to get to that 1%
Regardless if the game is Hard or Easy.
Hardwork and dedication at what? Getting better at the game. You have more of an opportunity to outplay somebody in a game that has a high skill cap; in a game that is difficult. Again, hardcore players tend to play more difficult games. So you can deduce that casual players tend to play easier games. So a "casual friendly" game will TEND to be easier. It doesn't mean all casual players are noobs who suck at videogames, but it does mean that if you're making a game that is targeting casual players, you're not going to want it to be super difficult.
This whole statement is just false.
High skill cap does not equal difficult game.
Again, hardcore players tend to play more difficult games. This is an unsupported assumption.
So you can deduce that casual players tend to play easier games. This is an unsupported conclusion based on an unsupported assumption.
So a "casual friendly" game will TEND to be easier. This is an unsupported conclusion based on an unsupported assumption.
If your targeting casual players you will make your content, however hard it is, able to be broken down, or accomplished in shorter time periods.
So you just don't agree that the people playing the mechanically difficult games are in general more "hardcore" than the people playing mechanically easy games? It's an unsupported claim in that it's impossible to prove or disprove, but it's freaking obvious man. This is like a kid putting his fingers in his ears because he doesn't want to hear the truth. But you're right, I can't prove it. SC2 players are more hardcore than bejeweled players. TFC players are more hardcore than solitaire players. Hardcore players will seek out the more mechanically difficult games more than casual players will. Call it ego if you want, but it's true.
At any rate, he said this:
"Hardcore players tend to play games which with that hardwork and dedication they can achieve above what others can not"
I agree with him. And what this means is that a difficult game with a high skill cap will attract hardcore players. You say that difficulty isn't the same as saying a game has a high skill cap. They're different terms obviously but again, they're related. A mechanically easy game is going to have a lower skill cap than a mechanically difficult game. If it's harder, it'll take longer to master, which means it has a higher skill cap.
I don't think anyone is disagreeing with you that Harder games attract Hardcore players, I think what everyone is disagreeing with you about is that Hard = Hardcore.
Harder games attract Hardcore players and casual players alike, more hardcore players maybe
But Easier games also attract Hardcore players, because they can be less Hardcore but still hardcore enough.
I am using Hardcore in the definition of " A player that spends enormously amount of time to prepare, train and study the game as they play and before they play, either competitively or non competitively"
But your argument of difficulty is just based off preference once again, because something that is difficult to one person, might not be difficult to another. I have seen players play " Meatboy" without a single death, they are just that good, but to that person, its just natural for them. Again, difficult to me, cause I kept dying but to other players its an easy game.
You can give me 100 keyboard controls that I must memorize to be good, another player will use their personal computer skills and build macros to tie those 100 controls into 10 controls. The game just got that much easier for that particular gamer, but for me its till a hard game to beat.
This is a mistake that people keep making. You say that some games may be difficult to some players and not to others. Of course! Nobody is disputing that. You're comparing players to other players in that point, but what we're talking about is comparing games to other games. What makes a game more likely to attract a casual player? In other words, casual friendly. To nail this down you can also look at the reverse, what kind of games attract a hardcore player. If difficulty is one of the things that attracts a hardcore player, it's logical to assume that difficulty at least plays a role in determining how casual/hardcore a game is.
Also I should clarify that I'm not saying, nor have I ever said that hard = hardcore. I'm not saying that. I'm saying that when determining which type of player a game will attract, difficulty matters. I'm not saying it's all that matters, but it does matter. You can't have a game that is a hit with the "casual player" demographic and also have it be incredibly mechanically difficult.
Wow, 5 in a row instead of your standard 2 in a row.
I've never heard anyone define their game by calling it "hardcore" before. I've heard people call games casual. I heard people call other people hardcore gamers (which describes a time commitment). It looks to me like you really, REALLY want to be able to call some games "hardcore" for some reason when almost nobody on the planet actually uses the term to describe games. I think that's why your argument sounds so ridiculous right now.
I'm responding to people who responded to me. Would you rather I just ignore them? What a weird thing to complain about.
Also I may be using the word "hardcore" as shorthand for a game that attracts hardcore players. It's kind of nebulous to call a game hardcore, but really I mean a game that hardcore players will play. Basically in the context of this debate it's the opposite of a casual game, which is just a game that attracts casual players.
You're just not familiar with the discussion that's going on. This has nothing to do with me really wanting to call any game hardcore. This is about what determines how casual/hardcore a game is. Does difficulty play any role? And I say yes, of course it does. If it's just about time commitment, the time commitment is based on how difficult the game is, inherently.
I've read the thread and am familiar with watching you struggle to repeat the same things over and over again using different phrases. I think this even bled over here from another thread at some point.
If I were to follow you into your argument about how higher difficulty = higher time commitment, I would just say they are unrelated. For instance, when things get too difficult for people, they often stop playing the game. That means lower time commitment to it. Also, extremely low difficulty often leads to enormous time commitments. Look at the people that have been playing WoW for 9 years and have never beat a raid boss or gotten over 1300 arena rating. Time commitment is not based on how difficult a game is inherently.
I'll let you guys get back to it. I expect at least 2 posts in a row after this otherwise I'll be disappointed.
Wow, 5 in a row instead of your standard 2 in a row.
I've never heard anyone define their game by calling it "hardcore" before. I've heard people call games casual. I heard people call other people hardcore gamers (which describes a time commitment). It looks to me like you really, REALLY want to be able to call some games "hardcore" for some reason when almost nobody on the planet actually uses the term to describe games. I think that's why your argument sounds so ridiculous right now.
I'm responding to people who responded to me. Would you rather I just ignore them? What a weird thing to complain about.
Also I may be using the word "hardcore" as shorthand for a game that attracts hardcore players. It's kind of nebulous to call a game hardcore, but really I mean a game that hardcore players will play. Basically in the context of this debate it's the opposite of a casual game, which is just a game that attracts casual players.
You're just not familiar with the discussion that's going on. This has nothing to do with me really wanting to call any game hardcore. This is about what determines how casual/hardcore a game is. Does difficulty play any role? And I say yes, of course it does. If it's just about time commitment, the time commitment is based on how difficult the game is, inherently.
I've read the thread and am familiar with watching you struggle to repeat the same things over and over again using different phrases. I think this even bled over here from another thread at some point.
If I were to follow you into your argument about how higher difficulty = higher time commitment, I would just say they are unrelated. For instance, when things get too difficult for people, they often stop playing the game. That means lower time commitment to it. Also, extremely low difficulty often leads to enormous time commitments. Look at the people that have been playing WoW for 9 years and have never beat a raid boss or gotten over 1300 arena rating. Time commitment is not based on how difficult a game is inherently.
I'll let you guys get back to it. I expect at least 2 posts in a row after this otherwise I'll be disappointed.
I've responded once to each post directed at me or about me. I'm not sure what the problem is. If there is one, please explain it. If there isn't, please stop being condescending about it.
As for the rest of the post, I don't really follow your meaning. I don't see how somebody quitting a game because it's too difficult is relevant to the discussion. The discussion is basically what attracts casual players. What makes a game "casual friendly." I say lower difficulty than a comparable "hardcore friendly" game, on average.
I've read the thread and am familiar with watching you struggle to repeat the same things over and over again using different phrases. I think this even bled over here from another thread at some point.
If I were to follow you into your argument about how higher difficulty = higher time commitment, I would just say they are unrelated. For instance, when things get too difficult for people, they often stop playing the game. That means lower time commitment to it. Also, extremely low difficulty often leads to enormous time commitments. Look at the people that have been playing WoW for 9 years and have never beat a raid boss or gotten over 1300 arena rating. Time commitment is not based on how difficult a game is inherently.
I'll let you guys get back to it. I expect at least 2 posts in a row after this otherwise I'll be disappointed.
I've responded once to each post directed at me or about me. I'm not sure what the problem is. If there is one, please explain it. If there isn't, please stop being condescending about it.
As for the rest of the post, I don't really follow your meaning. I don't see how somebody quitting a game because it's too difficult is relevant to the discussion. The discussion is basically what attracts casual players. What makes a game "casual friendly." I say lower difficulty than a comparable "hardcore friendly" game, on average.
Actually, you said, "time commitment is based on how difficult the game is, inherently." Which is not true. But you can keep shifting over farther and farther. Right now you are at the point where you are saying "on average," so at least you are admitting that they are not directly related like you were before.
I think that for a game to be consider Casual it has to be able to be completed while on the toilet as you are doing your business. I think Totalbiscuit said that once and I do agree with him. It has to be short, segmented so I can pick it up and play again where I left off. But the game can be easy or difficult depending on what I feel like playing.
Its really hard to get Modern Player to understand the Pen and Paper feel of the Old School MMO, that feeling of getting transported into a fantasy realm and fighting to survive in it.
Its almost like the feeling of the 80's Scifi and fantasy movies, when compared to the modern version, because of CGI and what modern technology allows, some of that Magic is definitely lost now
Life is a Maze, so make sure you bring your GPS incase you get lost in it.
There should really be a "Harcore vs. Casual" sticky here as it is a pretty debated topic. Personally I go back to a dictionary:
Casual
:done without much thought, effort, or concern
3
a (1): feeling or showing little concern :nonchalant casual approach to cooking> (2): lacking a high degree of interest or devotion <casual sports fans><casual readers> (3): done without serious intent or commitment.
I've read the thread and am familiar with watching you struggle to repeat the same things over and over again using different phrases. I think this even bled over here from another thread at some point.
If I were to follow you into your argument about how higher difficulty = higher time commitment, I would just say they are unrelated. For instance, when things get too difficult for people, they often stop playing the game. That means lower time commitment to it. Also, extremely low difficulty often leads to enormous time commitments. Look at the people that have been playing WoW for 9 years and have never beat a raid boss or gotten over 1300 arena rating. Time commitment is not based on how difficult a game is inherently.
I'll let you guys get back to it. I expect at least 2 posts in a row after this otherwise I'll be disappointed.
I've responded once to each post directed at me or about me. I'm not sure what the problem is. If there is one, please explain it. If there isn't, please stop being condescending about it.
As for the rest of the post, I don't really follow your meaning. I don't see how somebody quitting a game because it's too difficult is relevant to the discussion. The discussion is basically what attracts casual players. What makes a game "casual friendly." I say lower difficulty than a comparable "hardcore friendly" game, on average.
Actually, you said, "time commitment is based on how difficult the game is, inherently." Which is not true. But you can keep shifting over farther and farther. Right now you are at the point where you are saying "on average," so at least you are admitting that they are not directly related like you were before.
Time commitment IS based on how difficult the game is. It's also based on other things. I'm not shifting anything. Time commitment is going to be a function of the length of the task and how difficult it is to complete.
And when I said "... on average", it wasn't about time commitment, it was about what game a type of player will choose. You're like a whole lot of condescension with not much content.
I've read the thread and am familiar with watching you struggle to repeat the same things over and over again using different phrases. I think this even bled over here from another thread at some point.
If I were to follow you into your argument about how higher difficulty = higher time commitment, I would just say they are unrelated. For instance, when things get too difficult for people, they often stop playing the game. That means lower time commitment to it. Also, extremely low difficulty often leads to enormous time commitments. Look at the people that have been playing WoW for 9 years and have never beat a raid boss or gotten over 1300 arena rating. Time commitment is not based on how difficult a game is inherently.
I'll let you guys get back to it. I expect at least 2 posts in a row after this otherwise I'll be disappointed.
I've responded once to each post directed at me or about me. I'm not sure what the problem is. If there is one, please explain it. If there isn't, please stop being condescending about it.
As for the rest of the post, I don't really follow your meaning. I don't see how somebody quitting a game because it's too difficult is relevant to the discussion. The discussion is basically what attracts casual players. What makes a game "casual friendly." I say lower difficulty than a comparable "hardcore friendly" game, on average.
Actually, you said, "time commitment is based on how difficult the game is, inherently." Which is not true. But you can keep shifting over farther and farther. Right now you are at the point where you are saying "on average," so at least you are admitting that they are not directly related like you were before.
Time commitment IS based on how difficult the game is. It's also based on other things. I'm not shifting anything. Time commitment is going to be a function of the length of the task and how difficult it is to complete.
And when I said "... on average", it wasn't about time commitment, it was about what game a type of player will choose. You're like a whole lot of condescension with not much content.
But it's not. That's what everyone has been trying to tell you. There are difficult casual games and easy games that require massive time commitments. If you make a game more difficult, it doesn't add to the time commitment, it only adds to the difficulty. If players are still able to play in bite sized chunks, the game remains casual no matter the difficulty. If players must commit a massive amount of time to accomplish anything, then it is not casual. Difficulty is a separate entity and can sometimes be related to how long a specific person plays but in no way does difficulty change the intended time commitment required to accomplish something.
There should really be a "Harcore vs. Casual" sticky here as it is a pretty debated topic. Personally I go back to a dictionary:
Casual
:done without much thought, effort, or concern
3
a (1): feeling or showing little concern :nonchalant casual approach to cooking> (2): lacking a high degree of interest or devotion <casual sports fans><casual readers> (3): done without serious intent or commitment.
I've read the thread and am familiar with watching you struggle to repeat the same things over and over again using different phrases. I think this even bled over here from another thread at some point.
If I were to follow you into your argument about how higher difficulty = higher time commitment, I would just say they are unrelated. For instance, when things get too difficult for people, they often stop playing the game. That means lower time commitment to it. Also, extremely low difficulty often leads to enormous time commitments. Look at the people that have been playing WoW for 9 years and have never beat a raid boss or gotten over 1300 arena rating. Time commitment is not based on how difficult a game is inherently.
I'll let you guys get back to it. I expect at least 2 posts in a row after this otherwise I'll be disappointed.
I've responded once to each post directed at me or about me. I'm not sure what the problem is. If there is one, please explain it. If there isn't, please stop being condescending about it.
As for the rest of the post, I don't really follow your meaning. I don't see how somebody quitting a game because it's too difficult is relevant to the discussion. The discussion is basically what attracts casual players. What makes a game "casual friendly." I say lower difficulty than a comparable "hardcore friendly" game, on average.
Actually, you said, "time commitment is based on how difficult the game is, inherently." Which is not true. But you can keep shifting over farther and farther. Right now you are at the point where you are saying "on average," so at least you are admitting that they are not directly related like you were before.
Time commitment IS based on how difficult the game is. It's also based on other things. I'm not shifting anything. Time commitment is going to be a function of the length of the task and how difficult it is to complete.
And when I said "... on average", it wasn't about time commitment, it was about what game a type of player will choose. You're like a whole lot of condescension with not much content.
But it's not. That's what everyone has been trying to tell you. There are difficult casual games and easy games that require massive time commitments. If you make a game more difficult, it doesn't add to the time commitment, it only adds to the difficulty. If players are still able to play in bite sized chunks, the game remains casual no matter the difficulty. If players must commit a massive amount of time to accomplish anything, then it is not casual. Difficulty is a separate entity and can sometimes be related to how long a specific person plays but in no way does difficulty change the intended time commitment required to accomplish something.
This is all just going right over your head, I think. I'm not saying an easy game can't be time consuming. And I'm not saying a hard game is always time consuming. I'm saying the time required to do something in the game is based on difficulty. So when figuring out the time commitment to do something in a game, it's going to be based on a number of different things, including difficulty. How long is it gonna take for me to beat this level? Well if it's really hard I could be here all night.
Shorter play sessions can be more relaxing to some people. Longer play sessions can be more relaxing to some people. The relaxing is not what defines a casual game.
Historically casual games have been defined as short play sessions, not about how relaxing it is, not about how difficult it is, only about time.
Casual was always just about time. I know this hurts your feelings, but you don't get to change how it has been used just because you don't like it.
A casual game is one that lets someone make meaningful progress in short periods. Thats it nothing more.
I'm sure you will reply that I'm wrong. But as we are now just circling each other with no forward progress I will end this debate now.
VengeSunsoar I fully agree
To me I play certain games casual only because I lack time to play them. I played SWG allot more hardcore as I had allot more time on my hand due to at the time I had a totally different form of work (free-lance sound-engineer)
I still long for the same type of game experiance I had in SWG. It just takes will take me allot of more time to do so because I play the game casual play the game casual.
I actually never understood why there are people who for some reason think casual = easy mode and hardcore =hard mode.
As you said the difference between playing a game casual or hardcore can only be time.
Another example: The hardcore player might want to gain a next level or perhaps even the next 5 levels before going to sleep. Me the casual player might still have 2k xp to gain before the next level but for me tomorrow there is another day to pursue the next level. The hardcore might sets his goals on a daily basis while the casual player playing the same game might set his goals on a weekly or even a monthly basis.
How long is it gonna take for me to beat this level? Well if it's really hard I could be here all night.
Or, if it's a casual game, you could stop playing and pick up the difficult game whenever you want. Only a hardcore player actually sticks with it all night.
Comments
Ya. I have to stop doing that. It's takes too much time, I'm becoming a hardcore forum poster, egads.
So you just don't agree that the people playing the mechanically difficult games are in general more "hardcore" than the people playing mechanically easy games? It's an unsupported claim in that it's impossible to prove or disprove, but it's freaking obvious man. This is like a kid putting his fingers in his ears because he doesn't want to hear the truth. But you're right, I can't prove it. SC2 players are more hardcore than bejeweled players. TFC players are more hardcore than solitaire players. Hardcore players will seek out the more mechanically difficult games more than casual players will. Call it ego if you want, but it's true.
At any rate, he said this:
"Hardcore players tend to play games which with that hardwork and dedication they can achieve above what others can not"
I agree with him. And what this means is that a difficult game with a high skill cap will attract hardcore players. You say that difficulty isn't the same as saying a game has a high skill cap. They're different terms obviously but again, they're related. A mechanically easy game is going to have a lower skill cap than a mechanically difficult game. If it's harder, it'll take longer to master, which means it has a higher skill cap.
You don't get to fall back on "It's my opinion, you can't say I'm wrong." You don't find SC2 mechanics easy. You are not performing them correctly or competently. You can find them easy to understand, but not easy to perform. That's what difficult means.
You're clearly biased. Nothing I've said is circular. In fact Venge is the one that is constantly relying on his own arbitrary definition to prove.... his arbitrary definition. That's circular.
If you would, please show me an example of a circular argument I've used. If not, please don't barge into the middle of a discussion and insult me.
You could just admit you're wrong when you contradict yourself with your own sources and the definitions of words don't line up with the definition you're trying to use. That would be a way to end it. Also, it takes two to tango.
1. I don't blame you for not knowing this because this discussion has been going on for like 20 pages but the question is which type of game will attract which kind of player. Yes, hardcore players can play casual games. The question is what features should your game have if you want to attract a "casual gamer." Like you say, time requirement is one thing. A casual gamer will probably tend to want to jump in and out easily. They may not devote as much time. But if a casual gamer wants to be able to casually play a game, it stands to reason that he/she isn't going to want to play a game that is so difficult that you have to devote a lot of time to become competent at it. Right? If it's impossible to improve at SC2 (because it's so difficult) in short amounts of time, how does that fit in the description of a casual game?
2. This is minor but UO would not be considered a hardcore game by your definition. There is fast travel and no instances. You can play for 5 minutes or 5 hours. Yet it has a reputation for being hardcore. In fact, WoW probably ties you down more than these hardcore games do which instanced dungeons/raids. Yet WoW is considered casual friendly.
Wow, 5 in a row instead of your standard 2 in a row.
I've never heard anyone define their game by calling it "hardcore" before. I've heard people call games casual. I heard people call other people hardcore gamers (which describes a time commitment). It looks to me like you really, REALLY want to be able to call some games "hardcore" for some reason when almost nobody on the planet actually uses the term to describe games. I think that's why your argument sounds so ridiculous right now.
Forum PvP at its finest... -_-
The members of this site seem to specialize in complaining.
I dont think anything was accomplished here.
I'm responding to people who responded to me. Would you rather I just ignore them? What a weird thing to complain about.
Also I may be using the word "hardcore" as shorthand for a game that attracts hardcore players. It's kind of nebulous to call a game hardcore, but really I mean a game that hardcore players will play. Basically in the context of this debate it's the opposite of a casual game, which is just a game that attracts casual players.
You're just not familiar with the discussion that's going on. This has nothing to do with me really wanting to call any game hardcore. This is about what determines how casual/hardcore a game is. Does difficulty play any role? And I say yes, of course it does. If it's just about time commitment, the time commitment is based on how difficult the game is, inherently.
I don't think watching a small group of people club each other over the head saying "fork" "spoon" for 40 pages is really forum PvP at it's finest. Typical for here maybe...but not it's finest
Not the finest but definitely enjoyable sometimes.
The point is not to change the New Generation, but to help them understand that there is something more to the MMO genre than what is being offered today.
Maybe they don't need to know about it, but it won't hurt the Genre, it will only improve it. That's what the discussion is about, not about which is better than the other, but what we can do as gamers to help the MMO genre to become the Juggernaut that it is. And keeping it there so more and more MMO comes out for all to play.
Life is a Maze, so make sure you bring your GPS incase you get lost in it.
I don't think anyone is disagreeing with you that Harder games attract Hardcore players, I think what everyone is disagreeing with you about is that Hard = Hardcore.
Harder games attract Hardcore players and casual players alike, more hardcore players maybe
But Easier games also attract Hardcore players, because they can be less Hardcore but still hardcore enough.
I am using Hardcore in the definition of " A player that spends enormously amount of time to prepare, train and study the game as they play and before they play, either competitively or non competitively"
But your argument of difficulty is just based off preference once again, because something that is difficult to one person, might not be difficult to another. I have seen players play " Meatboy" without a single death, they are just that good, but to that person, its just natural for them. Again, difficult to me, cause I kept dying but to other players its an easy game.
You can give me 100 keyboard controls that I must memorize to be good, another player will use their personal computer skills and build macros to tie those 100 controls into 10 controls. The game just got that much easier for that particular gamer, but for me its till a hard game to beat.
Life is a Maze, so make sure you bring your GPS incase you get lost in it.
This is a mistake that people keep making. You say that some games may be difficult to some players and not to others. Of course! Nobody is disputing that. You're comparing players to other players in that point, but what we're talking about is comparing games to other games. What makes a game more likely to attract a casual player? In other words, casual friendly. To nail this down you can also look at the reverse, what kind of games attract a hardcore player. If difficulty is one of the things that attracts a hardcore player, it's logical to assume that difficulty at least plays a role in determining how casual/hardcore a game is.
Also I should clarify that I'm not saying, nor have I ever said that hard = hardcore. I'm not saying that. I'm saying that when determining which type of player a game will attract, difficulty matters. I'm not saying it's all that matters, but it does matter. You can't have a game that is a hit with the "casual player" demographic and also have it be incredibly mechanically difficult.
I've read the thread and am familiar with watching you struggle to repeat the same things over and over again using different phrases. I think this even bled over here from another thread at some point.
If I were to follow you into your argument about how higher difficulty = higher time commitment, I would just say they are unrelated. For instance, when things get too difficult for people, they often stop playing the game. That means lower time commitment to it. Also, extremely low difficulty often leads to enormous time commitments. Look at the people that have been playing WoW for 9 years and have never beat a raid boss or gotten over 1300 arena rating. Time commitment is not based on how difficult a game is inherently.
I'll let you guys get back to it. I expect at least 2 posts in a row after this otherwise I'll be disappointed.
I've responded once to each post directed at me or about me. I'm not sure what the problem is. If there is one, please explain it. If there isn't, please stop being condescending about it.
As for the rest of the post, I don't really follow your meaning. I don't see how somebody quitting a game because it's too difficult is relevant to the discussion. The discussion is basically what attracts casual players. What makes a game "casual friendly." I say lower difficulty than a comparable "hardcore friendly" game, on average.
Actually, you said, "time commitment is based on how difficult the game is, inherently." Which is not true. But you can keep shifting over farther and farther. Right now you are at the point where you are saying "on average," so at least you are admitting that they are not directly related like you were before.
I think that for a game to be consider Casual it has to be able to be completed while on the toilet as you are doing your business. I think Totalbiscuit said that once and I do agree with him. It has to be short, segmented so I can pick it up and play again where I left off. But the game can be easy or difficult depending on what I feel like playing.
Its really hard to get Modern Player to understand the Pen and Paper feel of the Old School MMO, that feeling of getting transported into a fantasy realm and fighting to survive in it.
Its almost like the feeling of the 80's Scifi and fantasy movies, when compared to the modern version, because of CGI and what modern technology allows, some of that Magic is definitely lost now
Life is a Maze, so make sure you bring your GPS incase you get lost in it.
There should really be a "Harcore vs. Casual" sticky here as it is a pretty debated topic. Personally I go back to a dictionary:
Casual
:done without much thought, effort, or concern
3
a (1): feeling or showing little concern : nonchalant casual approach to cooking> (2): lacking a high degree of interest or devotion <casual sports fans><casual readers> (3): done without serious intent or commitment.
I think "Casual" MMOs are as such mostly because of the time investment needed to reasonably succeed. This can dig into how hard it is however because if you keep dying and starting over then it requires more time. IMO this is why devs should focus on both ends. If you have hardcore goals (long time) that vary from easy to hard and also casual goals that vary from easy to hard you have a complete spectrum.
Time commitment IS based on how difficult the game is. It's also based on other things. I'm not shifting anything. Time commitment is going to be a function of the length of the task and how difficult it is to complete.
And when I said "... on average", it wasn't about time commitment, it was about what game a type of player will choose. You're like a whole lot of condescension with not much content.
But it's not. That's what everyone has been trying to tell you. There are difficult casual games and easy games that require massive time commitments. If you make a game more difficult, it doesn't add to the time commitment, it only adds to the difficulty. If players are still able to play in bite sized chunks, the game remains casual no matter the difficulty. If players must commit a massive amount of time to accomplish anything, then it is not casual. Difficulty is a separate entity and can sometimes be related to how long a specific person plays but in no way does difficulty change the intended time commitment required to accomplish something.
I agree with this definition.
Harder = more effort. Depending on the type of game harder could mean more thought as well.
This is all just going right over your head, I think. I'm not saying an easy game can't be time consuming. And I'm not saying a hard game is always time consuming. I'm saying the time required to do something in the game is based on difficulty. So when figuring out the time commitment to do something in a game, it's going to be based on a number of different things, including difficulty. How long is it gonna take for me to beat this level? Well if it's really hard I could be here all night.
VengeSunsoar I fully agree
To me I play certain games casual only because I lack time to play them. I played SWG allot more hardcore as I had allot more time on my hand due to at the time I had a totally different form of work (free-lance sound-engineer)
I still long for the same type of game experiance I had in SWG. It just takes will take me allot of more time to do so because I play the game casual play the game casual.
I actually never understood why there are people who for some reason think casual = easy mode and hardcore =hard mode.
As you said the difference between playing a game casual or hardcore can only be time.
Another example: The hardcore player might want to gain a next level or perhaps even the next 5 levels before going to sleep. Me the casual player might still have 2k xp to gain before the next level but for me tomorrow there is another day to pursue the next level. The hardcore might sets his goals on a daily basis while the casual player playing the same game might set his goals on a weekly or even a monthly basis.
Or, if it's a casual game, you could stop playing and pick up the difficult game whenever you want. Only a hardcore player actually sticks with it all night.