Hardcore vs. Casual what's the difference?
#1
Posted 06 June 2008 - 10:40 PM
No, I've played some E games that are more hardcore than some M games.
I'll give you that Twilight Princess could almost be called hardcore. Almost.
I guess you could read this. It might tell you, though I'm too lazy to read it myself, the title looks promising. http://www.g4tv.com/thefeed/blog/post/6830...core_Games.html
#3
Posted 06 June 2008 - 10:49 PM
So first, I'll say that Oblivion was marketed moreso to be "casual" than any ES game before it. It was made to the stupid mainstream market that plagues console gaming.
Morrowind is much more hardcore with it's huge amount of skills, resting for an hour does not heal you all the way, casting spells wasn't as simple as pressing "C" on your keyboard.
If you don't get that, then I'll put it this way. What's the difference between Carnival Games and Call of Duty 4?
#5
Posted 06 June 2008 - 10:53 PM
Eugine, on Jun 6 2008, 09:51 PM, said:
I guess in very simple terms that would be it.
You could say a hardcore game appeals to a very specific audience of dedicated gamers whereas a casual game can appeal to anyone, but too much pisses off the hardcore audience mentioned before. And that's sort of what's happening to the Wii.
#6
Posted 06 June 2008 - 11:05 PM
It's all a personal preference, my young padawan.
Being "casual" is playing a game every now and then, for short amounts of time. I'm a "casual" PC gamer. I play HL2 every now and then, for about 30 minutes at a time.
Being "hardcore" is playing a game a lot, for long periods of time. I play Zelda probably too much more than I should, so you could call me a "hardcore" Zelda gamer.
"Casual" and "hardcore" also have nothing at all to do with the difficulty of the game, a that's a personal preference as well. For example, most gamers find Zelda 2: The Adventure of Link to be a very difficult game, but I find it to be pretty easy.
Now, with your example of Carnival Games and Call of Duty 4, it's not "casual" VS "hardcore". It's how deep, or big, the game is. Carnival Games is a very simple game from the looks of it, and Call of Duty 4 is a deeper game, meaning theres more to it. That doesn't mean Carnival Games is "casual" and Call of Duty 4 is "hardcore". I play Call of Duty 4 every now and then when I'm at my friend's house who has a 360. I consider myself a "casual" Call of Duty 4 gamer. Somebody might be a "hardcore" Carnival Games gamer (although I doubt that; the game is terrible xd). Hell, I've gotten into some Wii Sports Baseball games, when I'm down by a few runs in the last inning.
#7
Posted 06 June 2008 - 11:35 PM
If somebody enjoys a casual game and winds up playing it for hours on end, that doesn't make it any less of a casual game.
#8
Posted 06 June 2008 - 11:50 PM
A hardcore game has a wide range of difficulties in the tasks involved, provides a deep and engaging style of gameplay and appeals the most to people who are willing to dedicate themself to it for huge amounts of time. A casual game is just something you can pick up and play whenever you want, with none or few goals to work towards. Those are the two extremes; most games fall somewhere in between.
#9
Posted 06 June 2008 - 11:58 PM
lmao...you're really that naive to believe that a personal preference is a fact?
#10
Posted 07 June 2008 - 12:10 AM
Zeypher, on Jun 6 2008, 10:58 PM, said:
That's right. You certainly can't just pick up and play Morrowind whenever you want; you have to put time aside for it to accomplish anything.
Sounds to me like you haven't played enough games Zephy.
#13
Posted 07 June 2008 - 12:23 AM
Split Infinity, on Jun 6 2008, 11:50 PM, said:
Quote
IMO, you guys are too influenced by modern gaming.
#15
Posted 07 June 2008 - 12:26 AM
#20
Posted 07 June 2008 - 12:32 AM
#21
Posted 07 June 2008 - 12:33 AM
Quote
#22
Posted 07 June 2008 - 12:33 AM
For me, the difference between hardcore and casual games is immersion. Hardcore games for me are epics that place the player in the game itself, sucks you in, and - most importantly - removes the interface/input for the gamer. That is, you begin to "play" within the game itself, not on the surface inputting buttons to proceed in it.
Casual games are just the opposite - they rely on the awareness of the person actively using the control scheme to control what's on the screen, not actually removing that "in-between" and allowing full immersion.
#23
Posted 07 June 2008 - 12:39 AM
And Zeypher, the fact that a game is easy to pick up is completely unreliant on the genre. I know a good few flash games which involve guns; would you call them hardcore? I doubt it.
#26
Posted 07 June 2008 - 12:44 AM
Wind Dude, on Jun 7 2008, 12:43 AM, said:
I've been playing games since ALttP game out on the SNES.
Quote
lmao. Of course I'm going to be defensive. I get a ton of **** on this forum, and most of it comes from people who can't comprehend the meaning of things.
#28
Posted 07 June 2008 - 12:46 AM
Frankly I'm not even that crazy about shooters. I'm getting sort of bored of them, actually.
#29
Posted 07 June 2008 - 12:49 AM
And as for my tastes as a gamer, games that make me think are the type I tend to like more, and exploring open worlds. That's probably why I like Zelda and Metroid a lot...
And just for the record, I own an NES, SNES, N64, GCN, Wii, DS, PS1, PS2, used to have a PSP, and a 360. The NES, SNES, and 360 don't count I suppose, since they're all broken.
#30
Posted 07 June 2008 - 12:56 AM
Name a couple of games that you own which you would describe as hardcore, then.
#32
Posted 07 June 2008 - 12:58 AM
Quote
In that article, it showed Gears as a "hardcore" game, iirc. And just incase you haven't noticed, a lot of teens refer to FPS/TPS as "hardcore". At least all the ones I know do >.>
Quote
Any Zelda, really, except for PH, didn't enjoy it too much xd
Super Metroid
All the Metroid Prime games
Shining Force
Brawl
No More Heroes
Red Steel
Any Final Fantasy
That's what I got off the top of my head...
And some games I consider to be "casual" would be Defend Your Castle...although I have a friend on another forum that totally gets into that game, so it's more "hardcore" for him.
#33
Posted 07 June 2008 - 12:59 AM
Split Infinity, on Jun 7 2008, 02:56 AM, said:
I think we have to be careful here and not mix up "hardcore" with "difficult".
For example, for me, I'd say Super Mario Galaxy is a hardcore game. Hands down. However, it happens to be an incredibly easy hardcore game - so much that it's accessible enough for casual gamers - but it still has the qualities of a hardcore title, that is full immersion. It wasn't designed from the ground-up as a purely casual title.
#34
Posted 07 June 2008 - 01:01 AM
GL, I wouldn't call SMG a casual game, but I'd say it's a fair bit more leaned towards it than your average hardcore title.
#35
Posted 07 June 2008 - 01:02 AM
#38
Posted 07 June 2008 - 01:04 AM
#40
Posted 07 June 2008 - 01:05 AM
God I'm so sick of using that word now...
#41
Posted 07 June 2008 - 01:07 AM
Split Infinity, on Jun 7 2008, 03:01 AM, said:
Fair enough, SMG is certainly a bit of a tough example to justify as a hardcore title, I'll admit. But I'm curious, what made you not outright call it a "casual game"? What vestiges of a hardcore title did it have still?
Wind Dude, on Jun 7 2008, 03:02 AM, said:
Also fair enough. Immersion for me is a big part of what separates hardcore and casual games, and if a game can get me to fully immerse in it and "remove" the control scheme from me, then I consider it hardcore.
#43
Posted 07 June 2008 - 01:09 AM
Wind Dude, on Jun 7 2008, 01:07 AM, said:
It's probably in this topic, since GL moved everything.
Quote
Immersion = fun, no?
#44
Posted 07 June 2008 - 01:10 AM
Golden Legacy, on Jun 7 2008, 05:07 PM, said:
Because the game involves a considerable amount of progression, instead of staying the same every time you play. That's one of the key difference between the two styles.
Actually now that I think about it, that's a terrible description.
#45
Posted 07 June 2008 - 01:12 AM
I guess I find the difficulty factor to play a large role in hardcore vs. casual, more than the immersion.
As it stands, the word itself "hardcore" implies a very specific and elite audience. Does one have to be hardcore to play an immersive game?
#46
Posted 07 June 2008 - 01:14 AM
Quote
My dad plays HL, and that's immersive IMO, but that's all he plays, so no.
#48
Posted 07 June 2008 - 02:16 AM
that's what casual games are.
#49
Posted 07 June 2008 - 04:05 AM
Zeypher, on Jun 7 2008, 06:05 AM, said:
It's all a personal preference, my young padawan.
Being "casual" is playing a game every now and then, for short amounts of time. I'm a "casual" PC gamer. I play HL2 every now and then, for about 30 minutes at a time.
Being "hardcore" is playing a game a lot, for long periods of time. I play Zelda probably too much more than I should, so you could call me a "hardcore" Zelda gamer.
"Casual" and "hardcore" also have nothing at all to do with the difficulty of the game, a that's a personal preference as well. For example, most gamers find Zelda 2: The Adventure of Link to be a very difficult game, but I find it to be pretty easy.
Now, with your example of Carnival Games and Call of Duty 4, it's not "casual" VS "hardcore". It's how deep, or big, the game is. Carnival Games is a very simple game from the looks of it, and Call of Duty 4 is a deeper game, meaning theres more to it. That doesn't mean Carnival Games is "casual" and Call of Duty 4 is "hardcore". I play Call of Duty 4 every now and then when I'm at my friend's house who has a 360. I consider myself a "casual" Call of Duty 4 gamer. Somebody might be a "hardcore" Carnival Games gamer (although I doubt that; the game is terrible xd). Hell, I've gotten into some Wii Sports Baseball games, when I'm down by a few runs in the last inning.
No, you're wrong.
I dont play gears of war very much, does that mean it's a casual game?
Quote
Gears isnt hardcore because it's an FPS, Gears is hardcore because of the rock hard difficulty. Thats not to say thats the only thing the makes a game hardcore, but it helps.
A game being hardcore or not is not dependant upon the genre, it's generally a game that requires an above average skill level, for example Ninja Gaiden is an extremely hardcore game, Gears of War is a hardcore game.
There's hardcore gamers, and hardcore games. There's a massive difference.
Quote
Actually, it comes from people who arent biased to the point that they cut themselves when they lose an arguement over their precious company.
#50
Posted 07 June 2008 - 04:24 AM
Zeypher, on Jun 7 2008, 03:58 PM, said:
lmao...you're really that naive to believe that a personal preference is a fact?
I agree with WD. Games like Fire Emblem-Raidant Dawn I would set aside time for, because I knew due to it's RPG nature where one turn can screw up a whole map, and its difficulty I wouldn't be able to play for 5 minutes and stop.
Whereas Super Mario Bros. I can play for 5 minutes to kill time and stop whenever, because it's a easy, mass appealing game.
Oh and Zeypher, you're a rather rude person in arguments. You don't acknowledge other people's opinions, and tirelessly defend your shoddy, untrue arguments.
Stop trying to prove other people's thoughts wrong with your own thoughts.
#51
Posted 07 June 2008 - 04:26 AM
So if you play Nintendogs for hours on end, your the leetest guy ever?
#52
Posted 07 June 2008 - 05:08 AM
in regards to the term 'Casual'
"wiki" said:
and regards to the term 'hardcore'
if you use it for anything other than lulz, skin yourself and jump into a vat of aftershave because you're officially retarded
#53
Posted 07 June 2008 - 06:00 PM
#54
Posted 07 June 2008 - 06:10 PM
#55
Posted 07 June 2008 - 06:19 PM
#56
Posted 07 June 2008 - 06:38 PM
#57
Posted 07 June 2008 - 06:40 PM
#58
Posted 07 June 2008 - 06:51 PM
Stop making up crap.
#59
Posted 07 June 2008 - 06:52 PM
If we go back to what Toasty's saying about time - if you played a hardcore game and a casual game for the exact same amount of time, you will find that you have "accomplished" more in the former, and not as much in the latter - or moreso, you will find that you had a far greater capacity and options to do in the hardcore game than in the casual, in the same amount of time.
#60
Posted 07 June 2008 - 06:55 PM
#61
Posted 07 June 2008 - 06:57 PM
If that simplifies it.
#62
Posted 07 June 2008 - 07:00 PM
From what i've gathered, everybody in this topic so far is using hardcore as a much too general term though.
#63
Posted 07 June 2008 - 09:04 PM
Caael, on Jun 7 2008, 05:51 PM, said:
Stop making up crap.
I'm not making up crap, numbnuts. Notice how I used "In general" and "Usually". How long do you think it takes to complete a single level in SMG? About 10 minutes on average, I'd guess. I've spent ore than that on a number of levels in Gears with a friend. The reason why SMG takes longer is that it has more levels.
How long does it take to complete a session of brain age? No where near as long as it does to complete a level in Fire Emblem, or Advanced Wars. Those two titles probably don't fit the 'hardcore' image, but they're not casual games in any sense (except maybe the first few levels).
#64
Posted 08 June 2008 - 04:35 AM
#65
Posted 08 June 2008 - 03:08 PM
get your terms right before starting retarded arguements, its only a matter before good old captain circular logic shows his face again
#69
Posted 29 June 2008 - 11:34 AM
Some might find it interesting. I didn't read the whole damn thing but I read a lot of it.
#71
Posted 04 October 2008 - 06:27 PM
http://img361.imageshack.us/img361/1971/1223164515139zk0.png
Only change I would make is Halo 3 to Casual.
#72
Posted 04 October 2008 - 07:13 PM
#75
Posted 04 October 2008 - 07:29 PM
If it was a casual game, it wouldn't be 16+
#76
Posted 04 October 2008 - 08:04 PM
Caael, on Oct 4 2008, 06:29 PM, said:
If it was a casual game, it wouldn't be 16+
Yet there are what sounds like 5 year olds on the game.
Halo takes no skill other then knowing how to move, shoot and aim. We've been over this a million times.
#77
Posted 04 October 2008 - 09:41 PM
A casual game is a game that can be picked up by anyone 4 and older, and be easily played anywhere from instantaneously to five hours of play time.
Many people may be able to pick up Halo and get used to it quickly, but I don't think my mom would ever be able to land a kill even on me without luck, and I suck at Halo compared to most other people here.
#78
Posted 04 October 2008 - 09:59 PM
#79
Posted 04 October 2008 - 10:11 PM
#80
Posted 04 October 2008 - 10:16 PM
#81
Posted 05 October 2008 - 02:14 AM
Toasty, on Oct 5 2008, 01:41 PM, said:
I played Halo 3 for the first time at a party the other day. Managed to kill the best guy in the group over a dozen times, and I barely ever play shooters, let alone console ones.
#82
Posted 05 October 2008 - 02:26 AM
#83
Posted 05 October 2008 - 02:35 AM
#84
Posted 06 October 2008 - 12:25 AM
The only times I've ever beaten the best guys I know (at halo), it was either luck, or they were pre-occupied in a conversation with eachother.
#85
Posted 06 October 2008 - 12:31 AM
Just for comparison, the Sixaxis connects by itself in about three seconds. xP
#86
Posted 06 October 2008 - 12:31 AM
#87
Posted 06 October 2008 - 12:33 AM
@WD: I have. In terms of how often I win and lose, it's the same for halo as far as my experiences go. I got pretty good at knifing people though. =P
And I've also spent far more time in Halo 3 than COD4.
#88
Posted 06 October 2008 - 12:34 AM
#89
Posted 06 October 2008 - 12:37 AM
I mean, I love the Halo universe. The story's pretty good and the music is epic. SHAME ABOUT THE GAME THOUGH.
#92
Posted 06 October 2008 - 12:42 AM
I've always wondered why they don't try to take the first-person genre beyond shooters. I mean, there's a lot of potential stemming from that single viewpoint.
#93
Posted 06 October 2008 - 12:43 AM
Split Infinity, on Oct 5 2008, 01:14 AM, said:
Back when I was playing Halo2 for the first time, my two brothers and I played against this one guy who was really good. The three of us working together could only kill him once or twice, while he destroyed us. So it must take some skill to play.
#94
Posted 06 October 2008 - 09:33 AM
Split Infinity, on Oct 6 2008, 07:31 AM, said:
Just for comparison, the Sixaxis connects by itself in about three seconds. xP
only connecting it for the first time. If you're connecting your controller to a friends, you have to hold down the connect button on the 360 and controller for about 3 seconds for it to connect to the console. After that just hold the guide button for about 2 seconds and it connects.
#95
Posted 07 October 2008 - 01:08 AM
Split Infinity, on Oct 5 2008, 11:42 PM, said:
There's a first person free-running kind of game that's comming out for the Wii. It's gotten a lot of praise from people who've played the demos. some even claimed to have gotten vertigo.
Also, most racing games offer first person views, sooo.....:(
Miley Cyrus, on Oct 5 2008, 11:43 PM, said:
Yeah, Halo does take at least some skill. I couldn't get even one kill on any of my friends when I first played Halo 2. It stayed that way for quite a while. Even now, I still get lucky with most of my kills.
#96
Posted 07 October 2008 - 01:12 AM
Toasty, on Oct 7 2008, 06:08 PM, said:
You're not thinking of Mirror's Edge, are you?
#97
Posted 07 October 2008 - 08:43 AM
but yah, looks awesome. read an interview about it in a magazine and it sounds incredible.
#98
Posted 07 October 2008 - 09:33 AM
#99
Posted 07 October 2008 - 02:34 PM
#100
Posted 07 October 2008 - 02:40 PM
Wind Dude, on Oct 5 2008, 11:37 PM, said:
I mean, I love the Halo universe. The story's pretty good and the music is epic. SHAME ABOUT THE GAME THOUGH.
TF2 has >>>>> music.