Baconrath Posted July 12, 2014 Report Share Posted July 12, 2014 Yeah I did go off on a tangent didn't I...but seriously World of Tanks with Legs is bad mmkay Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toxicitizen Posted July 12, 2014 Report Share Posted July 12, 2014 Which is entirely valid Hot Heart. Such casual gamers have every right to enjoy the medium without needing to be enthusiasts. Of cause people get upset when you suggest they're 'casual' gamers, because they think of people on Candy Crush or FarmVille. I don't count them as gamers at all. If you play games maybe twice a week, enjoy the mainstream titles. Bioshock Infinate, GTA V, The Last Of Us, Titanfall, Mario Kart 8 etc. but rarely delve into the deeper elements or obscure games; you're a casual gamer. Just as someone who buys 5 DVDs a year and occasionally goes to the cinema isn't a film buff, they're a casual film fan. Gaming needs that divide... Hahahahahaha, no. No, it doesn't. Besides, Bioshock might be a big deal to us but it's hardly as mainstream outside of gaming circles as you might think. If someone knows about and played Bioshock, they're hardly "casual" gamers. Thinking harder about games doesn't make you more of a gamer and neither does seeking out obscure titles. Cut that pretentious crap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TornadoCreator Posted July 12, 2014 Author Report Share Posted July 12, 2014 Yeah I did go off on a tangent didn't I...but seriously World of Tanks with Legs is bad mmkay  You posted while I was responding, I didn't mean your post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TornadoCreator Posted July 12, 2014 Author Report Share Posted July 12, 2014 Â Which is entirely valid Hot Heart. Such casual gamers have every right to enjoy the medium without needing to be enthusiasts. Of cause people get upset when you suggest they're 'casual' gamers, because they think of people on Candy Crush or FarmVille. I don't count them as gamers at all. If you play games maybe twice a week, enjoy the mainstream titles. Bioshock Infinate, GTA V, The Last Of Us, Titanfall, Mario Kart 8 etc. but rarely delve into the deeper elements or obscure games; you're a casual gamer. Just as someone who buys 5 DVDs a year and occasionally goes to the cinema isn't a film buff, they're a casual film fan. Gaming needs that divide... Hahahahahaha, no. No, it doesn't. Besides, Bioshock might be a big deal to us but it's hardly as mainstream outside of gaming circles as you might think. If someone knows about and played Bioshock, they're hardly "casual" gamers. Thinking harder about games doesn't make you more of a gamer and neither does seeking out obscure titles. Cut that pretentious crap. Â Â Casual simply means that, casual... it's not a lesser position it's merely an indication of how enthusiastic and involved you are in the hobby. I'm a casual anime fan. Yes Bioshock is casual, so is Call Of Duty, GTA, Mario, and a shit load more. In fact, almost any game can be casual and a best-selling GOTY game like Bioshock Infinite certainly counts. Cut that indignant offended crap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toxicitizen Posted July 12, 2014 Report Share Posted July 12, 2014 (edited) Don't assume people are offended just because they disagree with you. It's possible they just think you're being ridiculous. Â Please explain to me how Bioshock (or Call of Duty, for that matter) is casual. You can't say random shit like that without explaining yourself because clearly we're working on different definitions of casual here... Edited July 12, 2014 by FLD Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TornadoCreator Posted July 12, 2014 Author Report Share Posted July 12, 2014 Don't assume people are offended just because they disagree with you. It's possible they just think you're being ridiculous. Â Please explain to me how Bioshock (or Call of Duty, for that matter) is casual. You can't say random shit like that without explaining yourself because clearly we're working on different definitions of casual here... Â Sorry, I'm having a bad pain day today; I may be fueling my posts with frustration so if I'm short with anyone please know it's not personal... Â Ok, I'll explain. I have friends who I consider gamers. These people have a good understanding of the history and principles involved in video games. I can discuss gaming with them. Then I have friends who play casually, they own a PS3 or 360, they play what's mainstream now. They play Call Of Duty, GTA, Bioshock, Assassin's Creed, and more but they don't have a history with games, they don't follow gaming news, they don't know of developers, they don't play extensively... they play casually. I can always tell the casual players because when I'm talking to an actual gamer the casuals are lost within 5 minutes. If I can't discuss the history of BioWare, lament the butchering of the Ultima games, compare the art styles in Team ICO and Ubisoft games, discuss gender-equality in video games, or contrast the 1983 gaming crash with todays industry paterns... if I can't do that with you you're not a gamer. If "gamer" as a term is intended to mean anything, sure it means "video game enthusiast", after all everyone at least plays some games now. I don't expect everyone to know everything, I've never played the Metal Gear or Tales Of games, and they're massive. But you should be informed and eloquent in the culture of video games if you're claiming to be a 'hardcore gamer', being ranked in Call Of Duty isn't good enough. That would be like claiming to be a sports fan but only watching football. What about tennis, boxing, skateboarding, snooker... sure you don't have to like everything, but if you only watch football you're a football fan, not a sports fan. Same goes for Call Of Duty. Â Now obviously everyone starts somewhere, so what about todays 12 year olds, or even someone in their 30s but who only recently got into gaming. Well it's nuanced. Sure they won't know everything about the NES and why would they; they're newbies to the hobby and that's expected. When someone starts exploring though, playing less publicised games like Pandora's Tower, Remember Me, or Vanquish... they try new genres or explore older systems, they are gamers; because they're going beyond the mainstream. Â That's why I claim Call Of Duty and Bioshock are casual, because they're mainstream but without a difficult barrier to entry. Dark Souls is also mainstream, it's not casual because it's barrier to entry is far higher, Hell the first Dragon Age or Mass Effect games... not casual, which is why the sequels where "streamlined". Resident Evil; not casual, which is why they changed the genre completely to appeal to the casual market. Â As gaming grows and becomes more mainstream, what constitutes casual gaming expands. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toxicitizen Posted July 12, 2014 Report Share Posted July 12, 2014 The thing is, casual is already used to describe people that play nothing but stuff like Bejeweled, hidden object games or facebook games. Nothing against Bejeweled, mind you. Fun game, but a casual one. I'm willing to label those people casual gamers. Not because they play those games but because they play nothing but those games. They'd never own an actual gaming console. Maybe they bought a Wii once but they haven't touched it since they got sick of Wii Bowling. Â Something being "mainstream" doesn't make it casual and neither does sticking to those bigger titles. And you're seriously overestimating the mainstream here, by the way. Few big game franchises are truly mainstream. GTA would be one, you can't throw a rock without hitting someone who's at least heard about it on the news. The Last of Us and BioShock definitely aren't, though. Â I know tons of people who play COD but have never even heard of Bioshock. You really think those people know about Dark Souls or an exclusive like TLoU? Gaming is becoming more mainstream, yes, but a lot of it is still very niche outside of enthusiast communities like this one. Shit, even here there's people who have never played a Platinum game. So fucking what? You're a gamer if you play video games enough to own a gaming system. Simple as that. Some people are more passionate about certain hobbies than others, who cares. There's no need for arbitrary distinctions of who's a real gamer and who isn't. That's just being elitist. And we most definitely don't need that. Â This is the Hate out of Ten thread all over again. You're using your own personal views to needlessly draw arbitrary lines that either aren't or shouldn't be there. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex Heat Posted July 12, 2014 Report Share Posted July 12, 2014 In a sense, I do believe the divide between casual and hardcore is necessary, but only in the same way I think it exists in every other entertainment medium. Â It's a symbiotic relationship. Â The stuff for the casual and lowest denomination crowd funds the innovative, higher quality stuff. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toxicitizen Posted July 12, 2014 Report Share Posted July 12, 2014 That's... a different conversation altogether? I mean, if I'm understanding you right, you're correct that the money raked in by stuff like Assassin's Creed allows to fund the smaller, artsier stuff like Child of Light and Valiant Hearts. But that's not what we're talking about here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted July 12, 2014 Report Share Posted July 12, 2014 I can see what TC is saying, and even agree the arguments make sense, but ultimately I've got to agree with FLD that the term "casual gamer" is already taken, and you can't just redefine it because you think your meaning is better, that's not how language works. I think the best thing is just to use the term "gaming enthusiast" like you are, as a distinct subset of gamers who are "into" games on a level that other people aren't, and not worry about assigning a label to non-enthusiast gamers. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TornadoCreator Posted July 12, 2014 Author Report Share Posted July 12, 2014 This is the Hate out of Ten thread all over again. You're using your own personal views to needlessly draw arbitrary lines that either aren't or shouldn't be there.  Well I disagree, much like I did in that thread... and this isn't somthing that's a matter of opinion either. The lines aren't arbitrary, nor are they needless. It's a simple extrapolation of the terms. A casual gamer is someone who plays games casually. My sister is a casual gamer. She owns a Wii, 3DS, and PS3. She plays World Of Warcraft, Pokémon, Animal Crossing, Dynasty Warriors and Wii Fit and pretty much nothing else. She is not a gamer, I couldn't hold down a conversation about video games with her because anything I have to say relies on knowledge she doesn't have, and anything she has to say is something I'm already so familiar with I'd be bored to tears...  It's not elitist to recognise the truth. Being a gamer isn't an achievement, it's a hobby. Claiming someone isn't a gamer isn't exclusionary nor is it an insult, it's just recognising that a lable doesn't fit. I am not an otaku, I'm not a petrolhead, and I'm not an audiophile... I'm not offended by these statements. I enjoy animé, cars, and music... they're just not the things I'm especially enthusiastic about. Video games, film, politics, and science; these are my passions. Why FLD, are you seemingly offended by this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TornadoCreator Posted July 12, 2014 Author Report Share Posted July 12, 2014 I can see what TC is saying, and even agree the arguments make sense, but ultimately I've got to agree with FLD that the term "casual gamer" is already taken, and you can't just redefine it because you think your meaning is better, that's not how language works. I think the best thing is just to use the term "gaming enthusiast" like you are, as a distinct subset of gamers who are "into" games on a level that other people aren't, and not worry about assigning a label to non-enthusiast gamers. Â Perhaps you're right, though I wonder why we'd need a term like 'gamer' in that case, we don't lable people 'TV watcher' or 'music listener' because they own a DVD player or an iPod. It just seems redundant... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toxicitizen Posted July 12, 2014 Report Share Posted July 12, 2014 (edited) You can't just decide that something isn't a matter of opinion simply because you think yours is the correct one. That's asinine. You claim to be a smart guy, maybe try arguing like one? And, again, don't assume someone's offended simply because they disagree with you. I think you're being ridiculous, not offensive. Â Gamer is a very broad term, it applies to anyone that plays video games as a hobby. Casual or not. Like Ethan said, you don't get to redefine words simply because you think they apply to you more or less than to others. It's not meant to describe only the most dedicated enthusiasts like cinephile would. Pretty much everyone will regularly watch movies or listen to music. The same is not true for video games. Edited July 12, 2014 by FLD 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted July 12, 2014 Report Share Posted July 12, 2014 I'm sure the terms will continue to evolve, and would guess that as games reach the level of acceptance of movies or TV, where everyone partakes at least occasionally, then the word "gamer" as a catch-all for anyone who plays games will fall out of use because you're right, at that point it would be a meaningless term. Â But we're not there yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TornadoCreator Posted July 12, 2014 Author Report Share Posted July 12, 2014 Really, because in my experience we are there now. I don't know anyone who doesn't own at least one games system. And ironically all the casual gamers I know own Xbox 360s... which is pretty much the opposite of what the internet would claim I'd guess. Most of my friends are in their late 20's or 30's with the odd one over 40. My parents each own games systems and they're in their 50s. My dad plays on his iPad daily as does my mum on her 3DS XL, and she's an old school PC gamer. Either UK is far more gaming mad than the rest of the world or we're close to, if not already at, that level Ethan mentions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted July 12, 2014 Report Share Posted July 12, 2014 Huh, in my experience the only people I know who have consoles are people in my own generation or younger. Â I don't even know any older people with Wiis, and that's the stereotype for the non-gamer gamer. Â The 360s thing doesn't surprise me though, that's the default console for stuff like CoD. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toxicitizen Posted July 12, 2014 Report Share Posted July 12, 2014 What Ethan said. Most of my friends own a console but if their parents game at all it's casual stuff on phone or PC. I know very few older adults who are dedicated gamers. Â My mother plays hidden object games and Popcap-type stuff and recently got into facebook games but that's about the extent of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TornadoCreator Posted July 13, 2014 Author Report Share Posted July 13, 2014 My mum is 53 and she has an extensive 3DS/DS library, though she heavily favours puzzle games there are some platformers and RPGs. She also plays the smaller niche MMOs, and horror games on PC like Slender, Amnesia etc. and naturally she loves Minecraft. Recently she discovered Surgeon Simulator and finds it hilarious... she's a theatre nurse. Â I know four married couples in their mid 30s who play Xbox 360 casually, largely because they have full time jobs and kids under 5. Red Dead Redemption, Bioshock Infinite, GTA V, Gears Of War, Halo, Skyrim, Mass Effect, Fallout 3 and Batman: Arkham City are games they pretty much all regularly play. The women all seem to enjoy Fable 2 for some reason... now they don't all play every game listed; but they're the ones I've seen/heard them talk about. Â I know two men in their 40s both of whom are hardcore PC gamers, and one of which also owns a PS3 that he uses only for exclusives and blu ray. Â I know one couple in their early 30s who are both avid retro gamers but don't play modern games. It's all Mega Drive, N64, and SNES at their place... though they both make an exception for handhelds and each have 3DS's. Â Everyone else I know is pretty much a hardcore gamer except for my sister, who's more casual... but all her friend that I've met so far are hardcore gamers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted July 13, 2014 Report Share Posted July 13, 2014 Well according to the Entertainment Software Association as of 2013 58% of Americans played video games at all, and 51% of US households owned a game console.  Compare that to the percentage of homes that own at least one TV (99%).  I can't find data on how many people actually watch TV or movies, but I would guess all of those 99% that own TVs are using them for something, and so we can assume the percentage of people who watch TV or movies on a fairly regular basis is approximately 99% as well.  Sure 58% is high enough to be called mainstream, but it's not ubiquitous yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TornadoCreator Posted July 13, 2014 Author Report Share Posted July 13, 2014 Fair enough, I wonder if the statistics are much different here in UK... I'm not sure where I'd find such statistics but I'll have a look. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex Heat Posted July 13, 2014 Report Share Posted July 13, 2014 I can't find data on how many people actually watch TV or movies, but I would guess all of those 99% that own TVs are using them for something,  I imagine it involves pizza, plumbing work and being unable to pay for either of these things. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanb Posted July 13, 2014 Report Share Posted July 13, 2014 It's a Sunday and I've had a long day out so I can't be arsed to go digging, but if looking for stats on UK games industry the places to hit up are likely TIGA and PEGI (probably more so TIGA). Â edit: I'll be honest I'm only half reading these threads too. I can't be arsed to wade in on the casual front stuff either Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vecha Posted July 13, 2014 Report Share Posted July 13, 2014 (edited) Hell the first Dragon Age or Mass Effect games... not casual, which is why the sequels where "streamlined". Resident Evil; not casual, which is why they changed the genre completely to appeal to the casual market.    I know some who'd argue you  on the point that DA:O and ME are casual(oh, by your definition. Not mine)  ::looks around:: Oh...me. Damnit!  DA;O as much as a I loved it...was pretty "streamlined" when compared to previous Bioware titles(And I don't mean KOTOR and Jade Empire). It was supposedly the BG spiritual successor. Well...it was pretty "dumbed down" in comparison(I'm using that worse jokingly)  One could argue, "Well! Times had changed since the late 90s/early 2000s!"  Still streamlined.  I've been gaming since I was just a babe. Used to drool on the controller as I leveled up my...anyway. I get what you're saying. Just wanted to nitpick on that comment. I'd argue the "fall"(opening the doors for a wider audience. Streamlining things) of Bioware was showing it's head before the merge with EA. I believe it started to show with Kotor and Jade Empire.  Dragon Age also was pretty advertised. With all the blood and such. Silly....so, I feel it's just as casual as Bioshock. I'm willing to be many, many who jumped into DA:O would get lost with Baldur's Gate. Just like many would get lost in Ultima Online who played Final Fantasy XI/Everquest.  And hell...Bioshock is the most ironic game to compare Dragon Age with. They BOTH are "Spirtualized successories"(haha I thought that was funny! Oh...it wasn't? ok...).  Just felt like arguing. Bring up the past. Nostalgia.  God, I miss Baldur's Gate. I need to play it some time. Edited July 13, 2014 by Vecha Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TornadoCreator Posted July 14, 2014 Author Report Share Posted July 14, 2014 I can't say I disagree there Vecha; but I'm allowing for reasonable progression and streamlining... if only for my own sanity. Sure DA:O is laughably restricted when compared to the likes of 'Baldur's Gate' or 'Planescape: Torment', but we'll only be massively dissapointed if we compare modern games to those titles. For all the mechanics advancement, (and there is loads), storytelling in video games is going backwards. There are few games that can be as chilling as 'I Have No Mouth And I Must Scream' and I've yet to see a game more nuanced and deep than 'Ultima IV' and 'Ultima V', and they're Commodore 64 games for fuck sake. Hopefully games can be daring, thought provoking, and truly encapsulate the art of storytelling once more... but sadly those things don't sell. Â Maybe my line is seemingly arbitrary but Dragon Age: Origins felt like reasonable compromising to make an epic and engaging game; Bioshock felt like oversimplification incarnate. System Shock 2 deserved a better follow up than that; and to think some people have the nerve to call Bioshock an FPS-RPG... RPG?! How exactly is Bioshock an RPG? Â So yeah Vecha, I guess we can lament the direction of gaming together. We had no idea how good we had it in the late 90s did we? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDDQD Posted December 7, 2014 Report Share Posted December 7, 2014 I actually purposely didn't include the Mass Effect sequels because I know people will accuse me of over-reacting because they're "good games". Who cares if they're good Gears Of Mass Effect games, they're shite RPGs; and at a time when every second game is a third person cover based shooter but there's pretty much no RPGs at all. It feels like the damn devs are just trolling us. They're not trolling. They make concious decisions abot the development of a game that will ultimately bring them mountains of cash. Bioware always made a big deal about the fact that tweaking the gameplay of ME series is based around community feedback, so apparently people were more interested in the story and fast paced gameplay, rather than intimidating stat sheets and endless micro-managing. That is also why ME series isn't exactly praised for RPG aspects, you know.  Besides, ME series was kind of an adventure shooter right from the beginning. I don't know where you got the idea that ME1 was any different. Reading this kind of BS is like listening to metalheads yammering about Metallica ending after Kill'em all. What's funny is that I heard people complaining about the same god damned thing in Mass Effect 1, and now it's a paragon of Role-Playing all of a sudden. Hell, back in the day even KOTOR got bashed for having dumbed down D20 system and today no one even brings this up anymore. You know why? Nobody cares. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.