Definition Wars: Hardcore vs. Casual
There’s a good article on the Escapist by Richard Aihoshi called The Future of Massively Multiplayer Isn’t You. That said, I’m not so much going to talk about the article as I am going to pull a quote from the article and use it the basis for my own article. It’s a subject we all hate to love to discuss. It’s a subject everyone has an opinion on, and most of it just has to do with terminology. It’s hardcore vs. casual. What’s the difference? What do they mean? Is time a factor?
Richard Aihoshi on the Escapist:
Goslin thinks “the big difference between casual and hardcore gamers is the amount of time they are willing to invest. To attract the former, you have to get them engaged faster, because their time is limited. Once they’re playing, however, the game needs to be challenging, deep and fun, if you want them to continue. If you succeed in creating a game that’s challenging, deep and fun for a casual player, it will likely also be fun for a hardcore gamer.”
While this is in part a simple question of terminology, this statement is still fundamentally incorrect. Time is not a factor when determining the difference between a hardcore and casual gamer as it applies to game design; hardcore gamers may be more willing to dedicate a lot of time to a game in general, but casual gamers can spend a ton of time playing games, and hardcore gamers can spend very little. In fact, I believe it is an outright fallacy, even when creating a niche game for hardcore gamers, to design around the assumption that players will be willing to dedicate a huge amount of time to the game.
For example, I am a hardcore min/max style gamer. I almost never spend more than 10 hours a week playing any given MMO these days, but the time I do spend is carefully approached and maximized for efficiency.
On the flip side, I’ve met a number of gamers I would consider casual, in that they spend most of their time in the game hanging out and slowly advancing, but they play games 4+ hours a day. They never maximize efficiency, watching TV while playing or wandering in and out of the room, casually chatting with friends, hanging out, etc.
I understand part of this can be that who I view as a hardcore player has different goals than a casual player (character advancement being one of them), but I look at a casual player as being someone who simply doesn’t put forth a great deal of effort while they are playing a game as compared to a hardcore player (whether their motives are character advancement, monetary gain, socialization, or otherwise).
Here’s where I attempt to define the terms everyone loves to argue about:
Hardcore Gamer: A player who is willing–and usually desires–to delve into the intricacies of a game, and who strives to meet his or her goals actively.
Casual Gamer: A player who generally does not desire to delve into the intricacies of a game, and who strives to meet his or her goals passively.
Simply put, I believe a hardcore gamer is willing and able to put forth a lot of effort to learn how a game is played best in at least one aspect. A hardcore gamer can focus (in an MMO) on character advancement, exploration, socialization, or anything else, but the overriding factor is that they are willing to dedicate the effort required to meet their goals. Hardcore gamers often desire (or at least tolerate) complexity in a game. This lends well to dedicating a large portion of time to games, but doesn’t require it.
A casual gamer is someone who is more likely just to play a game to have fun, and may not even have particular goals beyond having fun (though many do). They passively play a game, meaning they don’t intend to put forth a great deal of effort toward accomplishing their goals, and therefore will meet their goals at a slower hour for hour pace than a hardcore gamer. Casual gamers often desire simplicity in a game. This style usually lends well to someone who dedicates less time to a game, but some will play for many hours.
Anyway, I believe that time is not a factor when considering the terms “hardcore” and “casual.” When we develop for these audiences, time is not what we need to keep in mind. Instead, it has a lot more to do with play styles, player skill, and a willingness to get into the nitty gritty of a game.
Time, however, is absolutely a consideration when talking about and creating massively multiplayer games. If you want to appeal to players who have short play sessions, you need to make it possible for players to accomplish their goals in short play sessions. But, that’s another subject entirely.
Another factor to consider is player skill. At the risk of offending anyone who believes they are casual gamers, hardcore gamers tend to be more skilled at playing games, in part due to their willingness to delve into the details of a game. This is not always true, but it’s a generalization, hence my not including it in the definition. There are plenty of casual gamers who are quite skilled, and plenty of hardcore gamers who aren’t particularly skilled.
In summary, the difference between a hardcore and casual gamer is their willingness (or unwillingness) to actively dedicate themselves to accomplishing their self-imposed goals–hardcore gamers actively seek to accomplish their goals, while casual gamers more passively accomplish their goals.
Note: Read the comments. Ideas are developing below that are probably more interesting than the initial post, and I will follow this one up with another post after I’ve thought them through further.
s a subject everyone has an opinion on, and most of it just has to do with terminology. It’s hardcore vs. casual. What’s the difference? What do they mean? Is time a factor? (more…) posted by Ryan Shwayder @ 16:00 Comments Off
[...] Definition Wars: Hardcore vs. Casual [...]
One important difference is commitment to any game. A casual gamer has zero commitment to any particular game. If it gets boring, they drop it. Immediately. If it doesn’t grab them within ten minutes, they drop it.
Casual gamers tend to try a lot more games. They are reluctant to go pay for any game “on-spec” because hey, it might not work for them.
A free client is a good way to attract the casual gamer. Subscriptions are actually a good way to deter them. Packages can work for them if they’re of the “pay $5, get 10 games!” variety.
A casual game should be something you can pick up and immediately play without having to do “kill ten rats” quests or other such inanities. It should be something you can walk away from at any time without penalty of any description. You should be able to leave a casual game for indefinite periods of time without any penalty (such as being outlevelled, etc).
Racing games work as casual games. Many FPS games do, too. “RPGs” do not, whether they are genuine Role Playing Games or just the usual MMO-Roguelike (which has nothing to do with roleplaying).
Although ‘casual vs. hardcore’ is a standby for playing the forum game I’ve largely lost interest in the definitions. I only care about a games attributes as they relate to whether or not I want to play the game and the reality of my gaming is limited time. Period.
I must admit that, although I see myself as a casual gamer even by Grumpy Gnome standards [e.g. casual players are slackers lacking active dedication] I don’t exactly fit the mold that Rich lays out.
“One important difference is commitment to any game. A casual gamer has zero commitment to any particular game. If it gets boring, they drop it. Immediately.”
I fit this to a T.
“If it doesn’t grab them within ten minutes, they drop it.”
Not at all. Every MMORPG comes with a free first month these days. That’s how long I give a game, 1 month calendar time; roughly 40 hours of playing.
“Casual gamers tend to try a lot more games.”
I fit this to a T.
” Subscriptions are actually a good way to deter them.”
Not me. The price for the box is roughly 2 cheap movies or 1 with concession stand stuff. Even the worst POS game will give me more hours of fun than that. There’s a disposable income dimension here that makes a big difference…
“Racing games work as casual games. Many FPS games do, too. “RPGs” do not, whether they are genuine Role Playing Games or just the usual MMO-Roguelike (which has nothing to do with roleplaying).”
This is a matter of taste not playstyle. I’ve never played a racing game; I’d rather watch static on the screen. Ditto FPS games [unless Planetside is in this category for you]. I only play MMORPGs
I wrote this a few months back. Hardcore is a mindset not a measurable demographic.
It was alluded to earlier, but ‘Casual’ vs. ‘Hardcore’ may not be a binary/black & white issue. I believe there are shades of gray betwixt the two. Although some folks may say that if you’re not a Hardcore gamer, then everything else is a shade of Casual.
Is it a personality, or a mood? I have toons that I play “hardcore” style, when I feel like it (grinding for a specific pvp item, for instance) — and toons that I play when I’m just in the mood to play, but not necessarily worry about getting raid invites because I have to make dinner in 45 minutes.
If I don’t feel like standing around the Town Square, spamming the Trade channel because that time could be used to go grind out some more gold/xp/etc. — does that make me HardCore? Or is it ‘lower level’ than that — the fact that I actually considered the opportunity cost trade-0ff between the two makes me [more or less] HardCore, and not the decision itself?
What separates Casual/Hardcore is not what the players do. The same actions (long play sessions, forum presence, etc) can be done for different reasons.
But neither is it why they play. There are great differences between the PvPer, the RPer, the market player, the socializer, and any other psychographic we can define. But any of these types can be hardcore or casual.
What defines the Hardcore player is how they play. The attention to detail and focus on a goal. Perhaps the right word is “intensity.” Accordingly, these are the people who point out (and exploit) imbalances, while casual players are happily oblivious to them.
As a quick little challenge based on a conversation I had at work today, I’m going to attempt to differentiate hardcore gamers from casual gamers using time in the definition. Uh oh.
A hardcore gamer will advance toward his goals more on a per-hour basis than a casual gamer.
There you go. A hardcore gamer actually has to dedicate less play time in order to reach his goals in comparison to a casual gamer.
Really, it’s a question of semantics when it all comes down to it. There are various types of hardcore gamers who fall into different categories…
Categories such as Time, Skill, Game Depth, etc.
I am personally Time Casual, Depth Hardcore, and Skill Hardcore… at least right now. That means I don’t spend a ton of time playing MMOs at the moment, but I still get into the intricacies of the game and I’m good at them overall.
It may be worthwhile to create a quadrant-based system for Hardcore vs. Casual in various respects. I don’t know. Maybe it’s something I’ll attempt to communicate visually at some point.
I’m a former hardcore gamer who is now a hardcore dad (2yr old boy and boy due in 8 weeks) who just doesnt have time for whats invovled in playing “hardcore”. I quit EQ2 to play WoW because I can accomplish stuff on my schedule.
It is a time thing for most casual people, we lead busy lives and finding a block of 4 hours to put together to run an instance for what is usually a small amount of XP and a possible maybe chance at an item is just not gonna happen.
I used to raid 6+ hours a night, now I get to game maybe 3 hours total. 3 hours os barely enough time to get too and from an instance with 5 other people in some games (Eq2 especially) let alone complete it. WoW allows me to solo my way to 70 prety much, or has some better “time sink avoidance” devices than alot of other games.
All of that for me, = fun. Get in, kill stuff, get the loot, get out.
Another element is the battlegrounds. Generally very little wait, right into the action and its tons and tons of fun. There is very little downtime.
Four categories of hardcore:
Time: The amount of time a player will dedicate to a game. The Time-focused player will play a game a lot.
Knowledge: The amount of knowledge the player intends to acquire. The Knowledgeable player will know a lot about the game’s intricacies.
Efficiency: The efficiency quotient of a player. An Efficiency player will strive to reach her goals in as efficient a way possible. This is someone with a strong desire to min/max her experience.
Skill: The amount of inherent skill a player has. A Skilled player has greater potential for being a badass at the game than others do simply because he is better at playing games.
You can combine any of these together as well. For example, a Knowledge-Efficiency Hardcore player will be a great min/maxer (whether that is knowledge of the game mechanics, quest progression, or anything else. These are goal-ambiguous classifications).
A Time Hardcore player will dedicate a lot of time to the game, but won’t advance as quickly as a Time-Skill Hardcore player because he is not as good at games.
This may be worth exploring further… I’ll follow up with a subsequent post after I’ve thought this through a bit more.
I think there is one catagory missing. Perhaps calling it the “Depth” catagory. Or the “Immersion” catagory.
Those who play the game to immerse themselves. Those who really don’t care about the intricacies of the game (and by this, I’m guessing you mean how the backend of things work?) but intend to explore the world, and become a part of it.
Here’s an example (though from a single player game, though the same holds true when I play MMO’s, though to a lesser degree):
When Baldur’s Gate was first released, I became so immersed in the world, so involved in it (without spending large amounts of time playing), that I became almost obsessive in my need to free each map of it’s Fog of War. I needed to see every inch of the place. I didn’t care about battles, or leveling up. I didn’t care about how faithful (or unfaithful) the game was to the dnd ruleset. I just needed to see every wave come in on shore, and every rabbit hopping through the forest.
I get enough of “life”. I play my games to become immersed in it. I play my games to become lost in the world (whichever it may be). I play my games to BE that fighter, mage, cleric, gnome (well no, not a gnome, anything but a gnome), whatever …
There are a number of folks I know who play for the same reason.
Hmm… I originally had the “Efficiency” category called “Intensity,” which umbrellas efficiency and that kind of dedication to something a little better. “Knowledge” and “Depth” elicit similar imagery for me, but I’m sure there’s a perfect word here somewhere.
Maybe “Dedication” is the proper word. If you are dedicated to reaching your goals, you are likely to attempt to be efficient. If you are dedicated to exploring a map, you explore the heck out of the map.
I had hoped by the end of my post, I would have found the word. I think it would have made my post much shorter, but that word is eluding me. But, based on your reply, you “get” what I’m trying to say lol
I think, because this is a new word for me, I’ll go with “profundity” as the word.
I want to try a perspective on this definition too! o.O
The casual gamer approaches gameplay through simple control systems and direct game mechanics. (The casual gamer worries little about the volume or details of abstract game system, the casual gamer explore these abstracted levels of gameplay leisurly.)
The hardcore gamer approaches gameplay at a higher level of abstraction than the casual gamer. (The harcore gamer already understands how the direct game systems work and conquer these through a brief learning process, escalating the gameplay quickly to worry about more abstract mechanics.)
For an mmorpg direct game systems are such as attacking, equipping items, chatting.. Abstract game systems are such as guilds, raids, pvp, server-firsts, world-firsts, optimized UI addons..
My own definition is not truly descriptive of a “casual gamer”. However, it is descriptive of the gamer who chooses to play “casual games”. And that is what the Escapist article talks about, that is where the biggest gaming market is and it’s where anyone with half a brain is attempting to recruit players for any type of game – including MMOs.
Given that this is the case, we must observe the qualities that make a casual game what it is. So far, only Puzzle Pirates does this to any extent and even that is limited.
Other than, of course, PlanetSide.
[...] Thursday, March 22nd, 2007 in General Design Just a brief musing inspired by the Grouchy Gnome’s post (Nerfbat) titled Definition Wars: Hardcore vs. Casual. [...]
This has been a great thread btw. My definition of great here is ‘I don’t think about the topic the same way after reading the posts as I did before reading the posts’.
At the moment, I think I’m going with these four: Time, Depth, Commitment, Skill. They remain goal-ambiguous, but so far seem like they encapsulate all the behaviors I’m trying to.
This’ll be a fun article to write up after I’ve thought the hypothesis through and come up with a theory. The idea is to be able to use this in application when developing games (especially MMOs, since that’s what I make). Meaning, these classifications can be act as categories for various behaviors, with a Casual/Hardcore scale on each of them.
It won’t be a nice quadrant-based graphical representation, because they don’t actually oppose each other (and instead the 1-10 rating of a specific person in each of the four categories would rate as the opposition), but I’m sure there’s some nice spoke or wheel thing that I can come up with and put dots on for people.
If nothing else, I’d deffinitely like to see some sort of wheel with dots. Just make it graphically appealing, and it’s sure to be a success
Just thoughts to ponder in the hardcore vs. casual gamer argument. I think it can be more of an attitude than a style or type. The four categories you came up with, Ryan, can still apply to some of the things I’m about to bring up.
What is the measure of someone who likes to immerse themselves in the lore and exploration while in a game? Am I any more hardcore or casual because I actively ran all over a zone trying to uncover my map? Or that I seek out story-telling NPCs to learn about the zone I’m in? Just because I didn’t rack up a ton of XP by grinding kills or bring home a bunch of loot doesn’t mean I’m any less hardcore.
Are you limiting the definition to just “in-game” play. Are people any less or more hardcore if in their time out of game they discuss issues on the message boards? What if you are not able to login to the game for various reason (travel, at work, etc.) but you visit game sites to plan out your next session?
How hardcore is someone who enjoys writing guides for a game? It really says something for both a player and a game when when someone spends the time to write up a race, class, mob, quest, geographic, etc. guide.
Most of this can be lumped in with other themes within the discussion, but I think a player’s focus both in and out of a game are important.
Just my 2 cents
The hardcore gamer thinks and theorizes about the game when they’re not even playing. They try different things to see what will happen. They apply the scientific method, and will try even more elaborate things as their knowledge of the game grows.
The casual gamer is more along for the ride. While they might experiment while playing the game; they’ll seldom think about it once they’re away from the computer.
One cannot be hardcore about every game. There are a couple of games that I daydream about, wondering “what if I try…?”, and many other games that I play once through (or not even) and never look at again.
Ryan, I agree the proposition that one may be hardcore in some aspects, but not others. One could probably create a sort of Briggs-Meyer or Personalysis graph that illustrates this for each of us.
Makkaio: “What is the measure of someone who likes to immerse themselves in the lore and exploration while in a game?”
I view those as goals. The way what I’m trying to define applies is: How do you try to achieve those goals?
Do you spend a lot of time exploring and immersing yourself? Then you’re Time-Hardcore.
Do you plot out your exploration courses before exploring? That’s Commitment-Hardcore.
Do you intend to learn all the ins and outs of the lore in the game, priding yourself in your thoroughness of knowledge? Then you’re Depth-Hardcore.
I’m not sure if Skill-Hardcore actually applies to lore, exploration, or immersion. Although, if you can get to places others can’t because it takes a particular finesse, perhaps you’d call that a Skill-Hardcore explorer.
How about a mechanics differentiator in there, or maybe a process/data such as
Data Hardcore: Focus on lore, stats, places, names etc. This becomes some type of content optimizer hardcore player. (The human Thottbot.)
Process Hardcore: Focus on mechanics and systems, some type of performance optimization.
“
”
I strongly disagree. Time is the main factor. I feel this is why designers fail allot to capture the right mix in games. They refuse to acknowledge that time investments and time to play are a factor.
Wolfe:: “Data Hardcore: Focus on lore, stats, places, names etc. This becomes some type of content optimizer hardcore player. (The human Thottbot.)
Process Hardcore: Focus on mechanics and systems, some type of performance optimization.”
Right now those are both covered by Depth Hardcore. I view the focus on mechanics vs. content as a player-driven goal in the current model, but it could be useful to separate the two out. I’ll have to ponder that.
Trucegore: “I strongly disagree. Time is the main factor. I feel this is why designers fail allot to capture the right mix in games. They refuse to acknowledge that time investments and time to play are a factor.”
I’ll recommend reading all the comments. At the moment, I’m thinking that Time Hardcore is its own type of hardcore that must be considered (note: I’ve always believed you have to take time into consideration, but didn’t consider that as part as “hardcore” and instead it was its own variable).
But yeah, time investment is a huge factor when designing the game.
If you take the red pill, you will wake up and think “hardcore game” and “hardcore gamer” are oxymorons and that there is no such thing.
If you take the blue pill, you will wake up and think everyone is hardcore about SOMETHING. For me, I am a hardcore beer drinker, scoring high on all of your criteria listed above. Granted, not much skill factor with that game, but I do know to order the 9% IPAs when I’m seeking to reach my objective efficiently. Does that count?
You can take both pills, but I imagine the hangover would be brutal.
Casual is used in many ways – to describe a play-style (non-commital), to describe a demographic (those that do not self-subscribe as gamers, yet play), and to describe a time commitment.
The last seems to most easy to identify. Time commitment is not about total time played, but about the amount of time committed to each session. Bejewelled may give me four hours of fun, but it is in four minute increments.
I wrote a little more on this – and what, by consequence, a “casual MMO” is, here:
http://nabeel.typepad.com/brinking/2007/01/what_makes_an_o.html
[...] Ryan Shwayder over at the nerfbat has begun a discussion on the definitions of Hardcore and Casual. [...]
I honestly believe that casual and hardcore are definitions that cannot be used by developers to define and create content because there is such a huge, indefinable grey area that the vast majority of all players will touch.
Considering that not a one of us can agree on a definition for either term I think its pretty obvious that it is not something that we can use to define anything.
I will freely admit that when these games first came out you could use these definitions because in many respects you had to spend a hardcore amount of time to achieve the most notable carrots. But a maturation of the genre itself has created a much broader spectrum of carrots that tends to blur the lines and definitions that were initially created.
As to the Time, Knowledge, Efficiency, and Skill….there is just too much overlap in each area to achieve a clearer definition than casual or hardcore. You can be casual time, hardcore skill, hardcore knowledge and very casual in Efficiency and you have effectively just struck a grey area again. You have a bit more detail about where the casual or hardcore lies for that individual but in the end you aren’t any further out of the grey area because each individual will be different in different ways and at different times of their gaming career.
I think in many ways you can define players much easier using terms that you would apply to the games themselves. Such as gear centric, skill oriented, fast paced, PvP oriented, etc, etc. I think we need to start defining players by what they do in the game world rather than how they go about doing it. Once you start doing that then it won’t matter if the person is hardcore or casual because you will have them covered by designing for a game play style rather than an arbitrary definition.
Developers aren’t creating games anymore, they are building hobbies. Hobbies can be serious or something extremely minor, but when we start looking at them as something that can only be defined by the individual hobbyist is the point at which the broadest spectrum of players will fit under the umbrella of a games play.
Uh…
This thread has been catassed! Immersion and goal-focussing does not and cannot help us to identify market segments. Your “casual” and “hardcore” types are both happy (enough) with the same games – they spend money on them.
Therefore, why bother seperating them? Surely the challenge lies in producing revenue from those gamers who aren’t prepared to go out and buy Vanguard.
I don’t think the goal is to build 1 game for each type of player.
The goal here is to define what each type of player is, and how that is defined. Then use that during the design process to keep all types of players in mind.
It’s simple really, define who the end user is, and define the various styles of play, and use that in your design.
What laethyn said. I’m not trying to identify various categories of hardcore/casual games (and gamers) to make a game that fits one segment, I’m trying to identify the categories to see if we can slot in particular goals and preferences, and attribute them to each category.
The idea is to find out what appeals to people in each area, and make features in such a way that they can appeal across the boundaries (or make different features appeal to different categories, not specifically to different people).
Meaning, if you want to make a really Casual game, you don’t just remove Time commitment, you need to consider Skill, Depth, and Commitment as well. Maybe you want to make a Skill Hardcore game that doesn’t require a good deal of Time, which allows for varying degrees of Depth and Commitment (Counter-Strike).
I should really define user goals in addition to simply defining aspects of hardcore, because it seems to be confusing to a lot of people why I want to define these.
I’m sure someone has a good list of goals out there already. Off the top of my head (when talking about traditional MMOs):
- Lorekeeping: Learning about the story of a game.
- Exploration: Seeing various areas in the world.
- Functional Item Acquisition: Acquiring functional items in a game.
- Flavor Item Acquisition: Acquiring visual or flavor items in a game.
- Adventure Advancement: Advancing a character or other in-game representation through combat.
- Tradeskill Advancement: Advancing a character or other in-game representation through tradeskilling.
- Monetary Advancement: The acquisition and increase of in-game currency.
- Other Advancement: Insert advancement goal here (varies per game).
- Social Advancement: Improving your (or a particular group’s) social status in the game.
- Immersion: Suspension of disbelief, or feeling like part of the world.
- Fun: Enjoyment. Removing boredom.
These are all in-game goals, and I guarantee you I left some out because I really didn’t think about them too much. There are out-of-game goals that should be considered as well (forums, RL meet-ups, etc.), but that’s entirely separate and doesn’t apply to my aspects of hardcore, though maybe it’s worth covering later.
Man. You got it! Someone in the gaming industry finally understands! I was a fan but now I am psycho for you…in a man to man way…ah you know what I mean.
I don’t know if hardcore and time invested can be completely separated, although I agree they are not analogous.
While I agree that there are different facets of a game which a player can dive into in full hardcore mode, to achieve the status of a hardcore in any one of them there is a significant time component involved in my mind.
At level 1, for example, are any players “hardcore?” I would say no, although some may have a hardcore mindset.
Does a player which quickly achieves in-game goals because they establish a proficiency with certain game-play mechanics become “hardcore?” I would again, say no because they have yet to show a dedication to pursue that level of proficiency beyond what a “casual” player might. For example, just because I am a better enchanter than one who started on the same calendar day who is 15 levels higher than me, am I more hardcore? I would argue that I am less hardcore because despite a lack of superior skills, through persistence and time invested the lesser skilled enchanter has achieved more towards the end game goal.
If I had to do this non-graphically, but statistically, I’d say that a hardcore gamer has a high level of game area proficiency: accomplishments / time ratio and also a significant game time commitment at least +1 standard deviation above mean time invested per day in whatever that particular area might be.
What about RL advancement? Although it’s entirely seperate, these days, there are more and more playing games in an attempt to “make a buck”. Selling characters, in-game items, gold, etc. etc.
[...] Blog · MMOs · Links · Forum · Login · Register Nerfbat – Definition Wars: Hardcore vs. Casual http://www.nerfbat.com/2007/03/20/definition-wars-hardcore-vs-casual/ "There’s a good article [...]
Im not so sure differentiating skill and time is going to help a lot. A better differentiator might be between skill and downtime.
A typical casual game like Bejeweled requires a significant time investment if you want to play skillfully. I believe this is always applicable to all games where the player has not already have mastered the pattern of the game system. A master player of Counter Strike can import knowledge about the game pattern and quickly master many parts of Battlefield, but still need several weeks of training to get anywhere noteworthy in Bejeweled.
Something that definately can differentiate a casual from a hardcore in some dimension is the willingness to put up with downtime. This is where the mmorpg genre really screws up because almost every player will be ready to advance to a higher level of mastery long before the game gives them access to more advanced game systems. Some types of casual players put up with the downtime because they dont play the game mechanics, they might be doing other things like learning game data, looking at art or reading lore.
If you look at games like solitaire you will find that a lot of the playing habits are similar to those of a WoW player, but the probability of a player fitting a specific pattern differens noticeably between the game, however the time axis has similar min and max values. The willingness to put up with downtime when comparing the two types of players will however differ a great lot. Following this discussion I definately agree that the “hardcore-casual” debate might benefit from mapping players (or game designs) in a pokemon-style matrix with some well defined axis.
The ones I come up with without much further thought might look something like these:
Art (casual art accepts programmer art, hardcore art demand crysis)
Skill (casual skill like random systems, hardcore skill prefer chess)
Process (casual process like linear puzzles, hardcore prefer clever computer brain challenges)
Data (casual Data like checkers, hardcore prefer Thottbot content)
Abstraction (casual Abstraction like point and click, hardcore prefer complex linked game systems)
Tempo (casual Tempo like an optimal learning curve, hardcore prefer long term challenges)
Note that the Tempo axis becomes the Downtime component. Any game probably maps within this type of system, but I dont think its right yet. The axis in most need of better definition are probably Process and Abstraction, since I think most people will read these as being roughly the same thing where they are not.
[...] question of what a ‘hardcore’ gamer is vs. a casual gamer. This time, the culprit is Ryan, who ends up where most other pundits seem to. But I’ve never felt comfortable with that [...]
It seems like every few months, someone wants to reopen the question of what a ‘hardcore’ gamer is vs. a casual gamer. This time, the culprit is Ryan, who ends up where most other pundits seem to. But I’ve never felt comfortable with that direction of thought, which always seems to end up with the games industry making games for other gamers, while making light-weight fluffy crap for anyone else.
[...] Definition Wars: Hardcore vs. Casual @ Nerfbat.com [...]
Nice post, with some interesting comments after.
For me the difference between Hardcore and Casual is very hard to pin down, and applies differently to different games in different ways. Hence we will no doubt be discussing this again on another blog in about 3 months time lol.
For me though, this is how I see it
Hardcore
They can invest a substantial amount of time into one game, and here’s the key point, in one sitting. Meaning, they can play for 4-6 hours uninterrupted in one go.
They generally have a number of like minded players they will group with often, and will burn through content very quickly, again, in one sitting.
This invariably means that for a Hardcore player, 4-6 hours gametime will generate a lot more advancement/cash/skills than for someone who invest 4-6 hours in 2 or 3 sittings.
Casual
They can invest up to 2-3 hours in one sitting.
They often do not have a regular group wlaways on at the same time, but are often either solo, or part of a large group of players who drift in and out depending on the time.
Because fo this, unless they ‘maximise their efficiency’ they invariably spend a significant amount of time, not advancing (LFG, Skill grinding, Trading etc). Doing the thigns that a Hardcore gamer will do to pass the time until their core players come online.
This invariably means that only 60% of their time is used well, and because it is in short sittings, they do not advance as quickly as a hardcore player.
I am of the latter. This is in no way a complaint, I enjoy being a Casual gamer. I find it frustrating that I cannot do high end content, or get the top rewards, but accept that they are for players who can invest the time/dedication to get them.
What I would like to see is a way of a casual player gaining access to rewards which can be comparable to top tier rewards, but achieved in a different way.
Classic example – A Raid will often take 20+ people 4-5 hours to complete, giving a large proportion of them a shot at some very nice loot. Hence this is the equivalent of 100 Hours game time for these players.
I would like an option for a casual gamer to do a quest, which takes as long (100 hours), but has regular break points, so that they can pick it up and put it down as needed. It would be an epic quest, and should giev you the same sense of achievement as finally taking down the Boss Mob after a 5 hours of raiding.
This also applies for quests which require groups. If it will take a group 2 hours, then make a solo version which will take 12 hours. Give people the option, and maybe make it a series of steps so each step has the option.
I know this leads on to the old debate of Solo or Group Orientated. But with todays MMOs and the wonders they have achieved so far, I see no reason that content cannot be built with different styles of play in mind.
Anyway, thats enough from me!
gamer demographic. These people could be casual Sims players but what they are looking to achieve in the game differs from that of other players the game appeals to. When we refer to Hardcore players are we really talking about goal oriented players? Nerfbat certainly thought this had something to do with it. Perhaps, then, it is just a confusion in terminology. Games, to be widely successful, need to have an ability to be picked up and played while also providing enough depth to capture people’s interest
[...] to be implied when Damion talks about his mother playing Solitaire. But Damion, Ryan Shwayder (whose post Damion is responding to), and Richard Aihoshi (whose article Ryan is responding to) are all [...]
game design, game mechanics or even working in the game industry, be sure to check it out. Some highlights that I liked from this month’s carnival include reflections on intellectual property and gaming, what complex AI would do to gaming as well as an analysis of just how to define casual and hardcore.
[...] Definition Wars: Hardcore vs. Casual @ Nerfbat.com [...]
While there are a ton of valid points and arguments on the definition of “hardcore” and “casual” gamers, I don’t see anyone really addressing the issue of why “hardcore vs casual” has come about. Understand what the words mean in correlation to how one plays the game is fine, but what truly separates the two and creates these two “factions” is now how or why they play the game, but the reward for doing so.
I think the biggest difference between the two, is that a “hardcore” player feels that the reward for playing a game should be equivalent to the time spent playing/advancing. A hardcore player wants to be recognized for the effort they put forth, much more so than a casual player. This is the reason for the “war” of casual vs hardcore gamers.
Coming from a very hardcore gaming background (Played Everquest for 6 years of my life, with nearly 2 years of actual online time), I understand many of the reasons for the casual/hardcore debates; and it’s simple. A hardcore player wants to be better (in more of a in-game status sense) than other players. They feel that if they play 10x more than another player, their character should be 10x farther advanced and 10x better geared.
There was once a time when that was exactly the case with MMO’s. The most hardcore gamers/guilds were known throughout their servers, simply by their accomplishments, and the items they’d acquired. This caused unrest amongst “casual” players because it made them feel inferior. They were unable (or didn’t desire) to spend the amount of effort/time needed to be on par with the “hardcore” players, which lead to lots of complaints. I pay the same amount of money to play as they do, why shouldn’t I be able to experience the same things they do?
And thus the Casual vs Hardcore gamer war began. Unfortunately, for hardcore gamers, the majority of players prefer the casual style of gaming. Money controls the market, and the majority controls the money, at least when it comes to developing games.This lead to much more watered down and easy MMO’s (ex: World of Warcraft). Easier more “casual” games lead to increased sales (WoW most successful MMO of all time, income wise).
Somewhere a long the line, Hardcore gamers were overlooked. Oh, there are still people who are “hardcore” that play. Some because they truly enjoy mmo’s, others because they are more of an mmo addict, than a hardcore gamer (different discussion). The problem these days is true hardcore players are finding it harder and harder to be “recognized” in their respective mmo communities.
Catering to the casual gamers made acquiring good loot easier, advancing easier in general, and pretty much created “equality” amongst the community. Equality is something hardcore gamers loathe. Someone who plays 30 hours a week WANTS to be better known, better geared, better experienced than the person who plays 3 hours a week, but the separation between what a casual and hardcore gamer can accomplish has become very insignificant.
I’ll use myself, and everquest to serve as a better example. A raid in everquest could take anywhere from 30-60 organized and well geared characters and take anywhere from 3 to 6 hours (on average, I won’t get into the 15 hour raids I’ve been on), to receive possibly 4-5 pieces of premium gear. People in my guild had items that many people dreamed of having. The guilds that raided the highest end content, and got the best loot, were known by reputation across the entire server, even across multi-servers in some instances.
I was the 2nd best geared of my class on my server, with somewhere around 6500 hp, when the average character of my class had about 3000 hp. People I’d never met or heard of knew me simply because of the items I had, and the guild I was in. When a new expansion came out and the level cap increased, everyone knew the people who would maximize the levels first.
Now, in Everquest 2, I went at the game just as hardcore as I did in EQ1 (at least for a while). I quickly leveled up and spent countless hours doing quests and getting the best items I could. I joined a pretty decent raid gear and had quite nice gear. The problem was, people who did no raiding at all, still had very comparable gear and stats, furthermore, the long time characters with all the best gear in the game, weren’t that much better than me statistically. There was no real feeling of accomplishment. When an expansion came out, I was simply 1 of 300000000 people who achieved max level soon after.
Raids no longer took mass cooperation. 20 people could get some of the best gear in the game in an hour or 2 of raiding. To top it all off, an infinite number of 20 man raids could be raiding the exact same zone, at the exact same time, and there was generally much more loot to be had, per encounter.
Everyone pretty much became equal, no real separation in status. And it’s that exactly that puts so many “hardcore” gamers in an uproar. The amount of time and effort they put into the game is no longer equal to the reward gained. Every casual player can pretty much get the same rewards, while possibly waiting a tiny bit longer.
The goal of a hardcore gamer is to achieve more than other people. Casual players want to be able to achieve the same things hardcore gamers can, without having to wait or put in as much effort.
It’s impossible to please both sides, thus the war “Hardcore vs Casual”
I think you are missing the essence of a hardcore gamer as I,and a multitude of other players have always know them as. Someone who plays the game to win, to accomplish everything there is too accomplish before anyone else. This means they are efficient in maximizing game play hours, this means they min/max, this means they compete against other hardcore players as described, this means the more time the play the better chance they will have at achieving their goals and beating the competition ie. other hardcore players.
So, in effect I say the fundamental requirements for a hardcore gamer as described by the criteria above is the desire to be “first” which is facilitated by time spent playing.
As an example, I used to play EQ 18 hours a day. Then my roommate would play while I slept (yes no life). The majority of players at the top are usually comparable in skill and all other aspects so time is pretty much always the deciding factor.
So to sum up, yes a casual player may actually play many hours online, but they may not be trying to be “first” in the game. Instead they may be cybering or chatting or teaching n00bs how to play etc. BUT, and this is a guess, I would venture to say its still rare that a player not trying to be first is spending 18 hours online daily. Therefore it is logical to say that hardcore players, the ones who want to be “first” will play the most hours online because they are competing with other players of equal skill and can only facilitate their goals by spending the more time than any other player trying to achieve them. So whereas the casual player is willing to invest enough time in the game to enjoy it, the hardcore player will invest the MOST time in the game to win.
Its tough and ultimately needs proper critera to define terms.
Teren Kanan, you post is fantastic and hits the nail on the head as far as the definitions of hardcore and casual gamer go. I was trying to refute the initial main point of this thread that time invested is the defining factor between the casual and hardcore gamer.
So when Goslin says about the casual gamer “… you have to get them engaged faster, because their time is limited” it makes sense. You prove this by saying that casual players want what hardcore players have (to be first or achieve) but without as much (time and) effort. So if you remove the time constraints and effort involved in achieving and accomplishing in mmo’s then you appeal more to the casual gamer who cannot or is not willing to put as much time and effort. So in that regard Goslin would appear to be correct. Where he in fact seems to be wrong is in suggesting that if a casual player enjoys elements of a game designed for him/her then it will be fun for a hardcore player. In fact, you would have to include elements for both. Such as in Guild Wars where they have silly titles you can get for all sorts of crazy things like clearing every zone in the game on hard mode… hardcore gamers like to have other players say “holy crap… that person is either a loser, or craZy… I wish I had the time to get that title” ;p