Onyxmeth said:
My point is that most games blur the line, which makes the purpose of having only one point of seperation useless. I differentiate games based on genre, and within genre, certain aspects that make them more or less accessible. I take the genre and have them on a list of general accessibility to gaming populace at large, with the most accessible games being downstream games and the least accessible being upstream games. The accessibility of these said games are not entirely intertwined with two competing factions of gamers, but they do help judge selling potential and market demographics. |
Well, I don't believe our definitions differ that much. You seem to break it down more, and make it more specific. As I said before, my definition is most dependant on how a game is designed. Mario would be a casual hardcore game. Meaning a hardcore game mith mass appeal. Halo 3 is more or less the same. When I say casual however I don't mean it in the same way as when I say casual game, like wii fit. When I use casual within those parameters, I mean a simplified game made to pick up and play. When I say casual hardcore I mean a hardcore game with hardcore aspects that is massively appealing. Our definitions don't differ that much.
