By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - What should be the definition of a (hard)core game

Personally I don't buy the definition of Nitendo, I think a (hard)core game need a certain difficulty setup to be called as such, I mean by that, you can play the game on different difficulty settings to get the real essence of the game. That would make Mario kart hardcore and grand theft auto more casual, but that definition got a lot of flaws, because it doesn't support some genre such as rpg's and simulations games, that requires more patience then anything else. So what's your definition of (hard)core

Discuss



Bet reminder: I bet with Tboned51 that Splatoon won't reach the 1 million shipped mark by the end of 2015. I win if he loses and I lose if I lost.

Around the Network

In my opinion, there is no such thing as a hardcore game(or they are few and far between) only hardcore gamers. "Hardcore" to me means playing a game for long periods in each setting or many hours out of a week and/or playing games to achieve "completion." By this I mean finishing on the highest difficulty if an option exists, clearing/defeating all side-quests/missions/bosses/etc., collecting all items/weapons/costumes/etc., and so on. For games where there is no true ending, hardcore would be shooting for the highest possible level/score or setting up challenges(such as 4-line clears only in Tetris) for oneself.

By this definition any player can play any game in a hardcore fashion. But also any game can be played casually. Either by playing for a little while every so often, finishing on an easier difficulty, and/or rushing through to see the ending.

A hardcore game to me wouldn't have a difficulty selection, but it would be very hard throughout. There wouldn't be any optional side-quests or bosses because they would be forced upon the player. That's not to say the game couldn't have options, but it'd be more like branches the player could take where either branch offers similar challenges. Save points, if any, would likely be fairly separated(though checkpoints could prevent too much repeating in the case of game overs) to force longer sittings. A game like this would probably be pretty niche, because most of the gaming population simply doesn't want to play every game this way. It makes far more financial sense to make the hardcore aspects optional and grab a larger audience by opening the game to gamers that would play it casually.

 

EDIT: My second post in this thread reminded me that another way to play a game in a hardcore manner is to finish it while doing a minimal amount of certain things. For example: low-level games, no use of magic or abilities, skipping key items that make the game easier, and so on.



'hardcore' is about obsession really. It is a personal thing however you define it.

'core' is a marketing term. It means your central, loyal market for something.

They are completely different things and not to be confused. Nintendo always talks about 'core' and never (except occasionally by mistake) about 'hardcore'.

So, really it doesn't make sense to say you don't buy Nintendo's definition, because what they're defining isn't what you are looking for a definition of.



Seems this division in gaming only became more pronounced since Wii's domination of the market. I don't believe in any of those words to describe a game. You either play games or you don't.



Bet between Slimbeast and Arius Dion about Wii sales 2009:


If the Wii sells less than 20 million in 2009 (as defined by VGC sales between week ending 3d Jan 2009 to week ending 4th Jan 2010) Slimebeast wins and get to control Arius Dion's sig for 1 month.

If the Wii sells more than 20 million in 2009 (as defined above) Arius Dion wins and gets to control Slimebeast's sig for 1 month.

Metriod Is a Core Game....Zelda Is a core game ...
Smash Brothers Brawl is a Core game



 



Around the Network

Linkzmax has a good answer. Zizzla_Rachet has it right.

Hardcore and causal are stupid terms and need to be abolished. They have an elitist undertone (casual=bad, hardcore=good).

Core is a good way to describe games. "This is a game core Nintendo users will love" means just what it says. The game will be loved by Nintendo fans.

Hardcore and casuals are new terms and were only made up in the last year to describe a split between older gamers (the core) and the new ones coming in due to Nintendo and more excessable PC games (expanded audience). It is just a wall built by the self proclaimed "hardcore." Casual, to me, was a term I used to describe people who were "gamers" (those who played games, but it was more of an identity) , but did not obsess over them. They may bust out an XBox for Halo or play Kingdom Hearts when they get a spare chance, but they did not have long outrageous gaming sessions. But now, I can't use this term because it means "retard gamer." It's just a nice way to call people stupid.



Hmm.. A game which has a lot of good players and a chance to compete in LAN-tournaments. That is hardcore. :)



Zizzla_Rachet said:
Metriod Is a Core Game....Zelda Is a core game ...
Smash Brothers Brawl is a Core game

 

 I am not sure about Metriod, but Zelds and SB are most definitely casual games.



ramses01 said:
Zizzla_Rachet said:
Metriod Is a Core Game....Zelda Is a core game ...
Smash Brothers Brawl is a Core game

 

 I am not sure about Metriod, but Zelds and SB are most definitely casual games.

 

You have no idea what your talking about...There is nothing Casual about Zelda games....And Brawl....Well...I will let the Brawl heads in this site deal with you



 



Zizzla_Rachet said:
ramses01 said:
Zizzla_Rachet said:
Metriod Is a Core Game....Zelda Is a core game ...
Smash Brothers Brawl is a Core game

 

 I am not sure about Metriod, but Zelds and SB are most definitely casual games.

 

You have no idea what your talking about...There is nothing Casual about Zelda games....And Brawl....Well...I will let the Brawl heads in this site deal with you

 

Zelda&brawl are as casual as it gets.