What is a hardcore gamer?

[staticneuron]

HappySqurriel said: 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.

Good jobs with the quotes but I think you missed this one. "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." or "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." Certainly there are going to be those who like genre's more than others but I consider hardcore to tryout as many to actually give strength to thier preferance. Take for instance I do not like sports game but I like RPG's. But I have played sports games continuosly to know that I do not like them. Nothing was really introduced to change my mind. ( last sports game played 2 months ago. As far as the content speech I am going on a general basis. Most people who are likely to be swayed by the wii or the DS. Family or friends who normally don't play games, will view video games as an insignificant medium. Its not a question. Go out on the road find non gamers and ask. Better yet throw up comparisons between great games and great films/novels and see how many scoffs you get. As far as graphics is concerned I still think that the wii is an excuse for limitation. I find it funny how gamers are saying it is a great thing for devs to be limited and devs are not saying that. The advantage the PS3 provides is that it places the choice in the hands of the devs. The level of detail (graphics) in a game like rainbow six affects its gameplay and definatley does more to engross you into the game. While you can tell the enemies apart in red steel the game is nowhere as visually appealing. Now for a game with weaker graphics or where graphics is not a main issue the PS3 can handle those as well. Just like the PS2 which had tiles like god of war and MGS, they also had okami and games like disgaea. On the PS3 there are games like resistance and moterstorm and yet there is flow. I see the wii as aa step back. There is no way that you slice it that explains it. I don't mean to have the Wii as powerful as the PS3 or 360 but a little more power would not hurt.