even Steam has "casual games" and they are amazing games too. Everyday Shooter, AudioSurf, etc.

Casual and hardcore should not be defined by the games you play but by the amount of time invested. Casual gamers last gen were the crowd that bought a console for one or two games and played only those games. Prime examples were your people that played only sports games or only GTA. Last generation, if you were playing Pikmin or Fire Emblem or even Super Mario Sunshine you were considered hardcore. All of a sudden things are reversed in the court of public perception.

Did I miss something?

Not to sound cynical, but the main difference between the core and non-core gamer is spending habits, which are presumably directly linked to playing habits.

Core gamers simply spend more of their disposable income on gaming, as it tends to be one of their favorite, if not their absolute favorite form of entertainment.

There are very few individuals who will buy significantly more games than they are capable of playing, barring those working in the R&D sector of the industry who frequently buy any notable titles on any platform as a measuring guage for their own works in progress. The pile of games to be demo'ed can add up pretty fast.

Note the distinction of the word "buy" as people who collect and hoard warez contribute nothing to the industry and often acquire softs they have little or no intention of actually using.

But of course there are always those who simply don't want to have to pay for their entertainment at all, or feel that soft developers are merely charitable, non-profit organizations who invest millions in products they don't actually expect anyone to pay for. Because that would be crazy.

Slash said: If he doesn't like the word casual then he shouldn't use the term core gamer. Core gamer implies that there is at least another kind of gamer out there. His first sentence that there are gamers and non-gamers should of been he opening and closing sentence.

It does and does not. Core gamer doesn't exclude casual or hardcore for that matter, unless you define the market as casual/core/hardcore, when you are talking about groups that: don't buy a lot of games and don't get catered in the market/buy a lot of games and the market caters for them/don't buy a lot of games and market doesn't cater for them. So actually you should be talking about core and non-core gamer. And as i pointed out, you can jump from a group to another, or jump naturally as the market changes and you don't. For example, the hardcore gamer that plays Nintendogs 6 hours a day, and don't buy a new game, definately isn't a core gamer. Or, the casual gamer who plays CS or CoD4 online 6 hours a day and don't buy a new game, definately isn't a core gamer. But the guy, who plays hour a day and buys a new game every time there's an interesting game release, is a core gamer. Now, when you think of it, there's only gamers and non-gamers, although when you are talking about non-gamers, you are talking also about the people, who don't pay for the games they play (for example the free flash games, Solitaire and Hearts that came along with your OS etc.). Edit: @greenmedic: You were a bit faster on this one.

Casual and hardcore gamers seem to me like an extremely narrow way to look at things. In reality, things are far more complex than that. There are not 2 categories of gamers. There are much more than that. You could define gamers by any of the following: age, sex, genre of interest, console of choice, time spent per week, interest in video game industry and so forth...

But people always prefer the simpler explanation, the dichotomy. It's casual = bad, hardcore = good. Just like God = good, Devil = bad. It's much easier to look at things that way but so wrong.

There's nothing wrong with being a casual gamer. I don't know why that's seen as such a dirty word to the core gamers.

Well, actually it's more or less the same reason why hardcore PC gamers, who spend enough money to buy a decent used car on building the "ultimate" gaming rig deride console gamers, core or not.

There's more of a backlash these days because console gaming has continued to grow, while the PC exclusive market has continued to contract, leading more formerly PC exclusive developers to push console games.

Even though there will never be a console that matches the best PC one could build, the gap between gaming rig and the PS3/360 has diminished to the point where only dedicated PC gamers and tech spec obsessive compulsives care about the differences.

On the console side of the house, we see that the casual market is the hottest growth segment, while the core market appears to be shrinking in Japan, growing slowly in the US, and growing moderately in the EU (gaming in general has more room for growth there).

So the downside for console gamers is that more softs not specifically targeted for the core audience are being developed and published to the point that some high profile games (that are newsworthy to non-gaming press) are now being targeted at a different demographic as well.

Naturally, some core gamers are going to take releases like Wii Fit to be the harbinger of doom for the core gaming market. But that's about as likely to be true as the "GTAIV will kill the Wii market" belief (in effect saying the release of a sure selling core audience game is going to have any effect on the casual market).

The only problem with relying upon this new demographic is that it depends largely upon volume of new consumers, rather than a golden core demographic that buys several times more games per year. Do the new consumers continue to expand into core gamer genres, or are they perfectly content with flash games, solitaire, Wii Sports and possibly Wii Fit? Most new gamers will fall into the latter category.

greenmedic88 said: Not to sound cynical, but the main difference between the core and non-core gamer is spending habits, which are presumably directly linked to playing habits. Core gamers simply spend more of their disposable income on gaming, as it tends to be one of their favorite, if not their absolute favorite form of entertainment. There are very few individuals who will buy significantly more games than they are capable of playing, barring those working in the R&D sector of the industry who frequently buy any notable titles on any platform as a measuring guage for their own works in progress. The pile of games to be demo'ed can add up pretty fast.

I don't know if that you can categorize core and non-gamer with spending habits either.  My brother in law is certainly a casual gamer (if one exists).  And this year he bought 2x guitar hero ($180) to get a second guitar.  He bought dance dance revolution and a second matt ($90).  He plans on buying Rock Band when it comes out ($170) + $60 guitarand Wiifit when it comes out ($90) and purchased smarty pants ($50) and Mario Kart ($50).  He also purchased Big Brain Acedemy ($50) and Wii Play ($50).  The only really core game I would say is Mario Kart, yet I would have trouble spending that much on games ($700).  And I know he bought 0 games last year.  Unless your saying he flipped from a non-gamer to a gamer in the current year.

 LOL, it seems all I do is buy games I'm not capable of playing.  I have a three games that are still sealed, one of the from over a year ago.  Stupid work doesn't quite allow me to game as much as I had.

Almost no non-gamers will buy 8 games a year. That's closer to the buying habits of a core gamer. Price of the games due to peripherals is irrelevant (ie. one purchase of Rock Band plus an extra guitar does not = 4 games sold/bought).

If he continues to buy that many games a year or more, but doesn't play them, he's still a casual gamer, but this is pretty atypical. I would imagine he'll either buy far less games in the future if he doesn't play much, or he'll eventually morph into a core gamer who spends time in proportion to the amount of money he spends on games.

Console makers generally don't expect non-core gamers to buy that many games over the life time of the console. 3-4 is more realistic. 5-6 is not unusual.

Some refer to games like DDR, GH and RB as "casual" games, but they really aren't, any more than they are "hard core" games. They essentially fall into all categories of gamers which is why they are particularly big payoff titles for developers. Brawl and Kart actually fall into this category as well. Despite what anyone says about them being "hard core" the play mechanics are simple enough that anyone at a party can pick them up and have fun within minutes.

While there isn't any single definition for the "casual" demographic, buying habits, presumably linked to playing habits, over the lifetime ownership of the console are generally the best indicator.

The rare exception doesn't really disprove anything. Someone who buys a Wii and a dozen games for Christmas (for those in the upper income tax bracket) and then maybe buys one or two more games over the lifetime of the console is still a casual gamer.

A core gamer might buy as few as 8 games a year, but will likely do so every year until a new console replaces it. Other core gamers may buy at least one game a month, per console, many of which will own three or more consoles.

I've bought about 40 current gen console games over about a 17 month period (plus the older last gen games) and until I started spending more time gaming (due to all the good games on three good consoles) and less time watching TV or movies, I had considered myself more of a casual gamer as someone who used to work in industry and practically played games for a living in addition to playing them regularly during my off time.

Even back during the 6th gen, I only bought a PS2, but by the time the PS3 rolled out, I had bought over 50 PS2 games, most of which weren't played for more than a few hours. Less free time spread over other pursuits at the time made me a seldom gamer, often going weeks or even months between playing a game.

So I was a casual player who still had the buying habits of a core gamer. But very few casual gamers are former developer/hardcore gamers, so they really don't count.

By large, the typical casual gamer is either a first time console buyer, or someone who buys one console per generation (often late into the cycle when they are cheaper and there is a big back catalog of games) and doesn't buy games with any sort of regularity or regularly follow any sort of gaming press/news.

greenmedic88 said: 1. Almost no non-gamers will buy 8 games a year. That's closer to the buying habits of a core gamer. Price of the games due to peripherals is irrelevant (ie. one purchase of Rock Band plus an extra guitar does not = 4 games sold/bought). 2. If he continues to buy that many games a year or more, but doesn't play them, he's still a casual gamer, but this is pretty atypical. I would imagine he'll either buy far less games in the future if he doesn't play much, or he'll eventually morph into a core gamer who spends time in proportion to the amount of money he spends on games. 3. Console makers generally don't expect non-core gamers to buy that many games over the life time of the console. 3-4 is more realistic. 5-6 is not unusual. 4. Some refer to games like DDR, GH and RB as "casual" games, but they really aren't, any more than they are "hard core" games. They essentially fall into all categories of gamers which is why they are particularly big payoff titles for developers. Brawl and Kart actually fall into this category as well. Despite what anyone says about them being "hard core" the play mechanics are simple enough that anyone at a party can pick them up and have fun within minutes. 5. While there isn't any single definition for the "casual" demographic, buying habits, presumably linked to playing habits, over the lifetime ownership of the console are generally the best indicator. The rare exception doesn't really disprove anything. Someone who buys a Wii and a dozen games for Christmas (for those in the upper income tax bracket) and then maybe buys one or two more games over the lifetime of the console is still a casual gamer. 6. A core gamer might buy as few as 8 games a year, but will likely do so every year until a new console replaces it. Other core gamers may buy at least one game a month, per console, many of which will own three or more consoles. I've bought about 40 current gen console games over about a 17 month period (plus the older last gen games) and until I started spending more time gaming (due to all the good games on three good consoles) and less time watching TV or movies, I had considered myself more of a casual gamer as someone who used to work in industry and practically played games for a living in addition to playing them regularly during my off time. Even back during the 6th gen, I only bought a PS2, but by the time the PS3 rolled out, I had bought over 50 PS2 games, most of which weren't played for more than a few hours. Less free time spread over other pursuits at the time made me a seldom gamer, often going weeks or even months between playing a game. So I was a casual player who still had the buying habits of a core gamer. But very few casual gamers are former developer/hardcore gamers, so they really don't count. 7. By large, the typical casual gamer is either a first time console buyer, or someone who buys one console per generation (often late into the cycle when they are cheaper and there is a big back catalog of games) and doesn't buy games with any sort of regularity or regularly follow any sort of gaming press/news.

1. Yes. You're right. If you play games, it's just impossible to be a non-gamer. And as you pointed out, we are talking about a core gamer in that matter. 2. Again, that's correct. Although, he doesn't seem to be a "casual" gamer. 3. This is where things are getting interesting. What may be the cause? 4. This is where you point out that "casual games" do not exist. Count Brain Training and Wii Fit in. Both are easy to pick up and still offer a lot to do even for the most demanding gamer. 5. This is where you're off. Although core gamers defines as the group that buys the most games, meaning that it changes constantly, this group gets bored easilly. They don't have a lot of games beaten, but buy a new one when they find new interesting game that they play, until the next arrives. 6. Buys only if there are interesting games available. You could call the core gamer a "red ocean" gamer, since this system makes itself happen. A game gets popular, developers start making similar games, the genre gets popular, developers make even more games until most of the games in the market fits the genre and the market saturates, when different games start to devour each others sales. And this doesn't relate to any specific genre, since it changes along with the games that are being bought. 7. The typical "casual" gamer is the type of gamer, to who the market doesn't cater. Just look at Singstar, Guitar Hero, DDR, Brain Training, all of them were games for the "casuals" or the non-gamers, but all of them have had extremely successful sequels. And surprise, suddenly they all are core games just because they are the type of games the industry relies in. Which means that the new audience buys games just like the old audience, when there's games that interests them.

Those attach rate numbers come from my own casual observations of various households with video game consoles that are not "gamer oriented" households.

Most gamers know what that entails since they probably qualify to some extent: various consoles from different generations attached to multiple TVs is usually an indicator, as is a rack full of games on display in plain sight by the living room TV. More than one of the same console hooked up to different TVs in the house? Check. Multiple consoles attached to the living room TV? Check. Peripherals in plain sight rather than tucked away. Regular community gaming nights? That's a givaway.

Core gamers are less likely to finish games, simply because they buy more than they can play in their spare time. That's typical unless it's a gamer on a budget who likes to marathon every game they buy and plans every game purchase months in advance.

You'll typically find the opposite in a casual gaming house. Most likely one console hooked up to the main TV and no games on display because you'll probably only find a handful of games tucked away with the DVDs or inside the entertainment console. Old consoles usually end up in the attic, or were traded in, donated, dumped or e-bayed after the household stopped buying games for the old console.

These are the people who will typically only purchase a handful of games over the lifetime of any given console. They generally lack the collector mentality of the core gamer.

People that specifically buy accessible games like Guitar Hero, DDR, etc. generally only play other accessible games (which includes most Nintendo franchises like just about anything with Mario/Galaxy/Kart/Smash Bros. You might find someone who specifically has all those for the Wii, but what you probably won't find is a copy of No More Heroes or Okami.

Wii Fit and Brain Training aren't in the same category as Guitar Hero, DDR or Sing Star. The use of popular music in those games are what creates the built in accessibility (to both casual and core) in addition the self explanatory game play. And yes, DDR features a lot of obscure J-Pop, but I'm not even going to start trying to examine the broad appeal behind it.

Call them (Wii Fit) casual if you will since they are typically of limited interest to the core gamer, barring the truly hardcore gamers that buy just about anything different or new that isn't complete crap (but may buy it anyway just to confirm their opinion that "yep, it's crap!").

Even if games like GH or DDR are all selling in the millions, which would be expected as they also appeal to most core gamers, they do not suddenly represent the new core game demographic. That's like saying casual is the new hardcore.

As I said before, the game industry is not counting on these gamers to keep the industry afloat into the future. They know there is a segment of their console buyers that simply doesn't play much. And unless the overall number of gamers continually grows indefinitely, at some point, some of them are going to have to start increasing their buying habits, which would effectively turn them into a core gamer. But even a relatively static core demographic is essential in selling a broader range of games to include the really difficult ones with sharp game play that virtually all core gamers like. So it's not as though the popularity of casual gaming has suddenly made them irrelevant.

The truth seems to be that many hardcore games (better described as traditional games) mainly sell to the same demographic that they've been selling to over the last few generations of consoles, barring the younger players who still have to get their games through Mom and Dad. Of course now a young Mom and Dad likely grew up with video games themselves and are just as likely to game with their kids.