What kind of gamer are you?

You seem to have missed out the 'Caring' category from this small-minded list. I have been playing videogames for a few years now - I use an Xbox 360 entertainment system - and it seems to me that these distinctions between casual and hardcore and newb are all a bit silly. Should we not be breaking these down into things like, Caring, Uncaring, Violent, Playful and Sporty? That way we - and the makers of games - could get a clearer idea of what kind of games they should be creating and selling.

After all, as far as I can see in the next two decades everybody will be playing videogames. The age of the non-videogame player is surely over (save in third world or developing countries of course) and we can't box ourselves in as we have done?

So isn't it time to expand our horizons a little.

Just a thought as it is sunny and the you have got to make the most of that, right?

You know what? He's right!

It's summer for flip's sake! It's periodically sunny and almost warm at times.

We shouldn't be inside wondering about whether we're hardcore enough!

We shouldn't be inside playing Mario Kart or Ratchet and Clank!

We should be outside, in the sun, with real people, down the park...

...playing Mario Kart DS or Secret Agent Clank!

If you're gonna go that way, where are Ginger, and Baby? And Dopey and Grumpey for that matter. What is this, the Spice Dwarves?

I'm a belligerent yet sensitive gamer, with dyed hair, and all my own teeth, and some other people's too.

Hey, let's throw some more on the pile;
Conciousness
Intelligent
Belligerent
Twitch
Fastidious
Completist
Shoot First, Ask Later
Ask First, Shoot Later
Jumper
Crawler
Turn Stuff Around 'Til It Fits-er
Anally Retentive
Facetious

Now, on a slightly more serious note, I would have liked to have been able to choose "Casual Hardcore"

I think that sums my style up perfectly. I don't play games every day - there are other important things I must do like watch Panorama or Private Practice - things that begin with a "P".

So, I play quite sporadically, until I play a game that snares me. Then I can't put the fscker down, and play night after night through to 3am until I've finished it. So I'm pretty casual until I come across a game that engages me, then I get all hardcore on its ass.

Then I go back to watching my "P"-based telly.

In a post where you ask we don't "box ourselves in" this seems like a pretty blanket statement. While I agree that video games penetration will continue to increase as the generations that grow up with them get older, it will not get to the point in the next 20 years where "everybody" will play video games. Not everybody watches TV today.


More blanket statements. The age of the non video games is not over, and will not be for... well maybe ever. While there is a choice, some people will take it. Until we are all locked in boxes and forced to play video games so that the ruling elite can harvest our brain energy - the non-video gamer will always be with us.

Is there any harm in blunt categorisations?

They do not preclude more precise ones below them. We all fall one side of the hardcore or casual fence. We may also be caring or violent - but that doesn;t stop you being hardcore or casual. You may be hardcore and caring, or casual and caring, or hardcore and violent. The finer detail does not preclude (and is possibly not even a subset of) the broader brush categorisation.

Well, yes. It was. Why? Problem?



I see, the insertion of a the word 'maybe' excludes what you say from being a blanket?



Apparently only if they are included in blanket statements.



Pomposity is not at a premium on this forum then? Of course they don't - that's why I want more detail. If your happy enough sitting inside 'casual' and 'hardcore' and not looking out, thats fine.

its a straw poll dude not the 1901 census

Veteran

Veteran! Now that is a good 'un.

Yep, I'm a veteran casual hardcore gamer.

but the thing i think he is getting at, is the types of categories that were used non?

like the difference between hardcore and casual. i dont think it is as simple as that. i hardly play games these days, but i read about them a lot. i own a lot of games (through the years) and sometimes i'll get into a game and play it loads. (super mario galaxy im looking at you) but on the whole, i play maybe between 0-2 hours a week. alot of the time, its on the side of zero. so am i casual, because i dont play games that often. but i dont play "casual" games.

at the moment i am playing (1 hour this week) crisis core, which is such a fanboy type game. not something yoru granny will be playing any time soon. i also started no more heros. (3 hours so far) once again, one of the more "hardcore" games on the wii, though im sure thats an oximoron.

but what does that make me dr dee. hmmm!!! tell me!! I need to know.!!!!!


also, another point i think he was trying to get at, was you dont call film goers hardcore or casual, people like, action, romance, comedies, and what have you. its more, relevent categorisation. not just, casual or hardcore.

id also like to point out, i didnt read the poll, just the comments.....

You're right, it is a very broad brush, but I think if you define what hardcore and casual means, you can slot yourself right in. Of course, we'd first have to agree on that definition. Here's my take;

Hardcore gamer - tends to play more involving games that require a play investment of 30 minutes plus per sitting. Their interest in games is such that they actively seek out information on forthcoming titles in various media.

Casual gamer - tends to play games that provide rapid reward, thus have a pick-up/put-down period under 30 minutes. They typically take little more than a passing interest in the games industry beyond word of mouth/social networks and mainstream media such as TV, newspapers and weekly rag mags.

Anyone wanna build on this?

its true, i think its more your interest, if its your hobby, ie you take an interest in it, more so than simply, i'll have a go on game A, for 30 minutes. such as reading magazines, looking up release dates, getting excited over little bits of news that to someone on the outside doesnt matter. then you are a (hard)core gamer. otherwise youre casual.

i mean you could have bought a ps3/360 to play GTA, which is a huge slab of money. but can still be referred to as casual. but then you may play for more than 30 minutes a go. and then it gets complicated again.

cant we all just play the games we like, and be happy about it?

not looking anyone in particular.

To that I would add something about how a casual gamer will tend to stick to key titles in several popular genres, such as racing and sport. Less conventional genres will be indulged in once they have expensive branding or hype attached, such as GTA or movie tie-ins. They also tend to buy seasonal updates of established titles (see FIFA, Formula 1, Gran Turismo) and see how different they are once they've got them, rather than find out in advance.

The hardcore gamer will seek out reviews beforehand and base much of their purchasing decision upon either such scores, or just as likely make a balanced decision in conjunction with the text in the review. They will also be aware of more obscure games that either have yet to become established, or never will because of how unusual they are (see the Katamari series, Advance Wars or previously Metal Gear Solid).

Casual gamers will also go towards a particular console because of key attractions, such as Playstation branding, or heavy promotion from Microsoft on say, Guitar Hero, but quite likely not be able to compare the relative differences between consoles.

Hardcore gamers will, on occasion drift into fanboyism (see.. okay that's too easy, we all know who we're talking about here) but regardless of preference be able to compare and contrast the hardware and indeed software on offer.

Casual gamers will know the name of the game they're buying and usually the characters involved if they're licensed - see again sports games, and movie tie-ins.

Hardcore gamers will know the publisher, and usually development team as well.

(Please note these are generalisations but within generalisations there are often, but not always, truths)

I like to build on them by saying their flawed because 1) they're clearly made by a "hardcore" gamer who makes the fault of taking himself as the point of reference. Your "hardcore gamer" is based on your subjective view of it. How about all the soccer moms and teenage girls who play Animal Crossing or the Sims for hours on end?
Your "Casual Gamer" is flawed becaus it doesn't take into account "hardcore gamers" who play handheld games for 15 minutes on the bus and therefore need to buy such games.

In the end , the criteria is wrong, being games (what is a hardcore game really? Any definition in this regard is subjective). A more objective criteria is time. The difference between a casual and a hardcore gamer can be determined by the time spend gaming and all kind of actions around gaming (visiting gaming websites, talking about games with your friends, thinking in terms of games, ect.). This method allows for people to be seen as "hardcore" even if they don't game a lot but do spend a lot of time visiting gaming sites and others.

Then again, this also needs more tiers of gamers like hardcore, regular, below-regular, above-casual ect. Clearly my method needs a lot more testing and surveying to determine plausible weekly hours spend gaming and actions around it and the tier associated with it.

A hardcore gamer has gaming as their primary pass time. A casual gamer does not.

This rules me out as a hardcore gamer, and I'm actually very comfortable with that even though I've been gaming since about '83. Sure, I was hardcore for a while in my teens to early 20s, but I've lapsed now and spend roughly equal amounts of time on gaming, watching TV, reading and <shudder> walking.