What is a hardcore gamer?

[HappySqurriel]

staticneuron said: Great post. Hardcore and casual....... I actually like these terms. I have always viewed hardcore as people who either spent alot of money and/or time revolving video games. Actually purchasing or researching them. While a casual gamer would be more apt to purchase a game because it has a pretty cover or has the same title as their favorite movie. I would like to say thhat hardcore gamers are important. Casual gamers view games as just one thing only. And that is fun. An enjoyable waste of time. I love simple fun games and I think there are always a place for them but I am a bigger fan of the games with strong graphics and mature themes. There are people who are quick to say that video games don't offer a level of emotional or intellectual connection as movies or books. I disagree. Some games I view as artforms as well. Shadows of the collosus and Flow are examples of that. I think it is a huge step backwards the more people ignore story and say that graphics do not matter. What is being hyped is gameplay and online connectivity in alot of these arguements. I feel that they are fun but too singular to define gaming as a whole. I will put it on the table here a hardcore gamer is those that love to play a large variety of games not just one genre or from one company. To those people I want to ask whether or not they agree about the future of games and the effect that it will have on more those that are newly introduced to games.

I don't think that "Hard-Core" and "Casual" really has too much of a distinction on the content of the game; in fact most of the "Hard-Core" gamers I know would be willing to play Animal Crossing/My Sims if they're interested in that type of game, while many "Casual" gamers I know end up buying games like BMXXX because that's a "Mature" extreme-sports game ... Now, I know someone is going to ask why people say games like Animal Crossing, Nintendogs, My Sims and Brain Training are so often mentioned as being important to the "Casual" gaming market then ... The fact is that these games are designed to expand the market and New gamers are (almost) always going to be casual gamers. ... Now, for graphics not being important ... In my opinion what most people mean by that is that with the Playstation 2, XBox and Gamecube we hit an age where a game (both in gameplay and story) was no longer being primarily limited by what a system could produce on screen. Its a time where you can play a game like Resident Evil (0,remake,4) or Starwars Rogue Squadren: Rogue Leader and everyone can tell what is going on; you don't have to point and say "That red-blob is a Zombie" or "That triangle is an X-Wing" ... Essentially, the previous generation represents a point where we can visually communicate at a high level of effectiveness; it may not be "Photo-Realistic" but (Much like Comics and Cartoons) it doesn't have to be "Photo-Realistic" to communicate what it needs to. Now, the Wii represents the strategy to eliminate another limiting factor now that graphics has hit a point where they're no longer the largest limiting factor. You may not agree with this but it is as valid of a strategy as pushing to get "Photo-Realistic" graphics.