(1) Even if we accept your assertion that loyalty is correlated to enthusiasm, that doesn't suddenly make them mean the same thing.  Happiness and peace of mind are usually directly related, but does that make them the same?  Hardly.  The fact of the matter is, happiness is possible without peace of mind and vice versa.  No matter how much you want it to be loyalty != enthusiasm.  The two words even talk about different things.  Loyalty is related to staying faithful or committed even under adversity.  Without some form of trial, it's hard to prove loyalty.  Enthusiasm, on the other hand, simply means that you devote a large amount of time and energy going after something.  There's no difficulty involved.  Ironic that you should mention high school comprehension, I just got my scores back from AP tests in May.  My AP English score was, ironically, a 5.

(2)I agree that language changes over time.  However, what is happening here isn't a shift from one definition to another or even the word taking on a new meaning.  It's all of these individuals trying to come up with this group (different for each individual) and then saying that hardcore defines it.  Each person's definition is different, and for communication purposes, that doesn't work.  Let's look at this existentially, and hopefully you can see the issue with this situation.  If everyone in the world had different meanings for the same words, would communication be possible?  Quite simply, no.

(3)Finally, I have no need to use disception in my argument.  There certainly is a hardcore group of people devoted to gaming who fulfill that first definition.  They defend games when they come under fire from media, argue against their peers, teachers, or whoever about why video games are good.  No matter what happens, they stay committed to gaming because they are hardcore (first definition).

I just tried to read the article and remembered why I don't like this guy.

He talks too damn much.

For some reason, he feels the need to go on and on and on, abut this whole "Hardcore vs. Casual" thing in definite terms when that doesn't exist. What about "hardcore" gamers that own a Wii? Where does that put me? Apparently I'm hardcore cause I like nice graphics, and shooting things, but I also love me some Mario kart Wii?

The problem with him, aside from him not understanding how to make a point without writing five or ten pages (I'll get to that later) is that he talks about people in absolute terms, and not applied to the real world. For some reason, a gamer must be hardcore if he thought that MS or Sony won E3, or he must be hardcore if he likes sci-fi books rather than cooking (another anomaly, I love cooking and cooking books). Things like that show what a close-minded individual he is, and why no one should ever take him seriously. There's nothing wrong with the amount of Nintendo love he has, but the amount of disdain he has for people who aren't into the Wii and what he relegates them to (Sci-fi lovers, PS360 owners, and "hardcore" gamers) and how he makes them seem is wholly incorrect, and flat-out wrong.

And to touch on the length of the article, he really needs to shorten it up. The length of that article would be fine if it was a chapter in a book or something, but as a blog entry or whatever, the length is daunting. He needs to be able to summarize what he needs to say in much shorter fashion. It shows how bad of a writer he is that he can't be succinct and to the point. As a writer you should be able to engage the audience quickly, and keep their attention, not drag out conversations and dialog, and ideas for paragraphs and pages on end.

^ How about a critique of the CONTENT and specific points within the writings as opposed to the length of the articles.

DMeisterJ: "There's nothing wrong with the amount of Nintendo love he has, but the amount of disdain he has for people who aren't into the Wii and what he relegates them to (Sci-fi lovers, PS360 owners, and "hardcore" gamers) and how he makes them seem is wholly incorrect, and flat-out wrong."

What's quoted just goes to show that you haven't read any of his articles.  Skimming them and taking what you want out of them, as opposed to taking the time to understand the points being made are two totally different things.

I see the gaming industry from a "big picture" point of view. I respect the opinion and different preferences of other gamers. I condemn the hatred and blindness of competing console haters. I attempt to give positive gaming advice to owners of any console.  I see gaming as a legit form of entertainment such as reading a book or watching a movie. I want to see gaming reach the masses while also retaining a variety of viable options to cater to all types. What does this make me???

The only paragraph relegated to his length was the last one.  The first two were content on what he said.

The reason I didn't focus on his points is because the article is old, and I'm not discussing old news, but I just wanted to discuss his writing style since that hasn't changed over the past year.

[edit2:  removed stupidity] 
(Definition for enthusiasm repost:)

enthusiast -

1. One who is filled with enthusiasm; one who is ardently absorbed in an interest or pursuit: a baseball enthusiast.
2. A zealot; a fanatic.

(1)  Granting that both pairs of words are not equivalent, there is certainly a good deal of overlap.  For instance, enthusiasts frequently devote much time and energy to their chosen hobby (or whatever the target of their enthusiasm is).  In many cases, large amounts of money are also tied up in these pursuits -- gaming is certainly one of these.  So it would be foolish to me to think that enthusiasts are not mostly if not universally describable as dedicated as well, at least in the senses of the words that we are all clearly talking about. 

As for "unfailingly loyal", I think this is where many splinter between "loyal to gaming" and "loyal to MS/Sony/Nintendo".  But even the second group is still within the first definition so long as it does not blinker them into opposing advances in gaming just because they fear it might be insufficiently beneficial to their chosen horses.  And it only makes sense that the ones who can't get past that fear would be the ones screaming the loudest on the forums, and that is who Malstrom is right to deride.  [edit:  And spending thousands of dollars and hours over years and years shows "loyalty" to gaming even if I didn't have to defend my Super Nintendo from attackers or whatever you were thinking of as "adversity".]

(3)  Again, I would expect huge overlap in this, to the point that nearly everyone in the "second definition" hardcore group would follow evey one of your examples of what supposedly identifies the "first definition" group.

P.S.  "deception"

Malstrom's editorial is quite humorous in picking at the stereotypes of today's so called "hardcore" gamer. Even funnier is how Squillam unknowingly puts himself at the blunt of the joke with his "take" on the piece. I can see why people like Malstrom so much... he is quite the writer.

Corrected a serious error (correction is manifested in edit2 of above post).

This.  Including the last line, though I've been trying to change my ways. ;)