162 réponses à ce sujet

[Wulfram]

Maria Caliban wrote...

I haven't played the game more than once.

Well then you're a hardcore talker about the game, but not a hardcore player of the game.

[LinksOcarina]

i want a casual fan to play Dragon Age II, and I want to see what they liked/dislike.

There is little, if anything, casual about BioWare games frankly.

[Fast Jimmy]

Lightning Cloud wrote...

What everyone else said. There's more of them.

A casual gamer is someone who doesn't play games very often, essentially. That's the definition I've always gone by. Hardcore gamers eat, breathe, and sleep gaming.

One isn't necessarily better than the other. I'm casual when it comes to shooters, but I'm naturally good at them, so I can often wipe the floor with someone who plays them 24/7.

I eat, sleep, and breathe RPGs, but I'm not very good at them. Can't even beat Dragon Age on anything other than Casual.

I know people who play Angry Birds more often than the most fanatical FPS plays multiplayer. Mostly because you can play Angry Birds anywhere, anytime. So if you are clocking hours spent, I think you'll find the casual gamer who plays "Words With Friends" pwns most of the people on this forum.

Now... if you want to compare prefered gameplay elements and their complexity level, then I think that is a more valid comparisson. A hardcore gamer has years, if not decades, worth of manhours into learning various game design assumptions, laws and mechanics. A casual gamer does not have that backlog of pre-rendered data, so complex systems, large amounts of data and nuanced aspects of gameplay are practically a foreign language to them.

I would not expect anyone to pick up DA as their very first video game and be able to handle it any more than I would expect a first-time gamer to be able to handle WoW, Civilizations, Tekken or CoD. Its possible, sure. But its still a huge battle of gaming conventions and leaps in logic to understand interfaces that are second nature to us who have been gaming for years.

Make no mistake - if you have played and enjoyed a game or series of games so much that you know who the developer is, signed up for their website and engage in forum conversations enough to have noticed and/or replied to this topic, you are a hardcore gamer. You are invested in the games, the companies and the industry on an emotional level. I'd wager that a majority of Angry Birds fans could not tell you the developer of that game, or of Words With Friends (despite seeing that information every time they pull up their game). Simply because they may not even understand the concept of a developer - games are just made, a casual gamer doesn't concern themselves with where they come from. Do you know who made your kitchen plates? Your silverware? Your floors? Likely not - because its not something you are emotionally invested in.

Most of us didn't acknowledge the concept/importance of a developer until we A) found a game we really enjoyed and said "I want more of this type of game, where can I find the people who did this" or found out that no more of a series/type of game is being made anymore, because the developer went bottom up.

So to say Bioware is appealing to the "casual" gamer is not entirely accurate. Towards the more action-oriented gamer? Arguably. Towards the gamer with less PnP, D&D experience and instead more of a "video game as my first and only RPG experience" background? Again, the trend could be argued. But to say that they are looking for a player who's gaming experience is limited to their iPhone? I'd say no. Not even close.

Modifié par Fast Jimmy, 10 décembre 2012 - 01:28 .

[Allan Schumacher]

Fan: Does visit the BSN regularly. The BSN is his primary source of information about Bioware games. The fan did finish the game multiple times. Will most likely buy DLC.

This is an interesting perspective. I have closely followed BioWare since 1998, but was never really a regular poster on the boards. I avoided the Interplay boards (interface was largely junk), though I did spend a fair bit of time on the KOTOR boards (less so the NWN boards).

I stopped going to the BioWare boards because I largely found myself not enjoying spending much time there, though I still was the type of person that completed Mass Effect 1 in a single, 30 hour sitting.

[Neon Rising Winter]

scyphozoa wrote...

This thread makes me want to come up with Jeff Foxworthy style "you know you're a hardcore gamer if" references.

'You know you're a hardcore gamer if you have an opinion what a hardcore gamer is.' springs to mind.

[addiction21]

Narrow Margin wrote...

'You know you're a hardcore gamer if you have an opinion what a hardcore gamer is.' springs to mind.

Keeping it

[Iakus]

 I don't know about the "hardcore" or casual" labels.  But I have noticed lately a trend that the proverbial bird in the hand < two in the bush.

[spirosz]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Lightning Cloud wrote...

What everyone else said. There's more of them.

A casual gamer is someone who doesn't play games very often, essentially. That's the definition I've always gone by. Hardcore gamers eat, breathe, and sleep gaming.

One isn't necessarily better than the other. I'm casual when it comes to shooters, but I'm naturally good at them, so I can often wipe the floor with someone who plays them 24/7.

I eat, sleep, and breathe RPGs, but I'm not very good at them. Can't even beat Dragon Age on anything other than Casual.

I know people who play Angry Birds more often than the most fanatical FPS plays multiplayer. Mostly because you can play Angry Birds anywhere, anytime. So if you are clocking hours spent, I think you'll find the casual gamer who plays "Words With Friends" pwns most of the people on this forum.

Now... if you want to compare prefered gameplay elements and their complexity level, then I think that is a more valid comparisson. A hardcore gamer has years, if not decades, worth of manhours into learning various game design assumptions, laws and mechanics. A casual gamer does not have that backlog of pre-rendered data, so complex systems, large amounts of data and nuanced aspects of gameplay are practically a foreign language to them.

I would not expect anyone to pick up DA as their very first video game and be able to handle it any more than I would expect a first-time gamer to be able to handle WoW, Civilizations, Tekken or CoD. Its possible, sure. But its still a huge battle of gaming conventions and leaps in logic to understand interfaces that are second nature to us who have been gaming for years.

Make no mistake - if you have played and enjoyed a game or series of games so much that you know who the developer is, signed up for their website and engage in forum conversations enough to have noticed and/or replied to this topic, you are a hardcore gamer. You are invested in the games, the companies and the industry on an emotional level. I'd wager that a majority of Angry Birds fans could not tell you the developer of that game, or of Words With Friends (despite seeing that information every time they pull up their game). Simply because they may not even understand the concept of a developer - games are just made, a casual gamer doesn't concern themselves with where they come from. Do you know who made your kitchen plates? Your silverware? Your floors? Likely not - because its not something you are emotionally invested in.

Most of us didn't acknowledge the concept/importance of a developer until we A) found a game we really enjoyed and said "I want more of this type of game, where can I find the people who did this" or found out that no more of a series/type of game is being made anymore, because the developer went bottom up.

So to say Bioware is appealing to the "casual" gamer is not entirely accurate. Towards the more action-oriented gamer? Arguably. Towards the gamer with less PnP, D&D experience and instead more of a "video game as my first and only RPG experience" background? Again, the trend could be argued. But to say that they are looking for a player who's gaming experience is limited to their iPhone? I'd say no. Not even close.

This, this and this. 

[Realmzmaster]

Some of us tend to forget that at one time we were causal gamers. We were at one time first timers when it came to video games. We are also casual gamers when it comes to certain genres. My primary focus is crpgs, world creating games and wargames where I would be considered hardcore.

When it comes to fPS I am casual at best. Not big of action-oriented games but I am now heavily invested in Fallout 3 and Fallout New Vegas thanks to V.A.T.S.

The labels mean very little to me. I know someone who is a hardcore Angry Birds player and grew up with a Pac Man fanatic who went to competitions to compete. He was very hardcore when it came to Pac Man. He could make that quarter stretch further than I ever could. Pac Man is considered a causal game as is Angry Birds.

I know gamers who are hardcore Kirby fans. They can lay waste to most gamers who try to play the game.

You can be a hardcore player depending on the time one invests in learning and mastering the game.

Everyone can play a game, a select try to master them. Most play games to have fun. Also hardcore gamers may drop off because RL knocks on the door. My wife could tell you that I was a hardcore gamer and not just crpgs. The kids came along and that changed everything.

Now my kids are grown. I have more free time to devote to gaming, but I have other pursuits I now pursue. The labels have no meaning to me anymore.

Fast Jimmy, StM, myself and others could be considered hardcore crpg gamers. I started with Akalabeth. I realized long time ago that developers will not survive just catering to a select group without attracting new blood.

Yes, I know all about Project Eternity, BG1 EE and others. Basically those are small projects that appeal to a certain type of gamer whose numbers are shrinking and will continue to shrink. I am one of those gamers, but I also have the ability to embrace change if I like it.

I do not envy Bioware or any developer. Bioware/EA is a business. A business must attract new customers while trying to please or at least keep content the old. The newcomers do not have the same experiences that I had. I started before the age of the microchip. The ones now are the children of the microchip.
There will always be change for better or worse.

[spirosz]

^yep.

I used to be in competition for Counterstrike 1.6 and Source, but that was when I was younger and all I played.  Now I've stretched out my "main" gaming interests, mostly RPG's or whatever else tickles my fancy. 

Modifié par spirosz, 10 décembre 2012 - 03:59 .

[Allan Schumacher]

I started with Akalabeth.

NICE!

In general I agree with your post. As much as I like to think it was never the case, once upon a time I was bad at games.

It's just that I started playing them when I was like 3 years old (Lode Runner) so I got an early start. It's actually funny because games I once thought were super hard are now actually quite easy when I go back to them.

[Dabrikishaw]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Because the divide between them isn't where you think it is, nor for the reasons you imagine it does.

Granted, I don't think "hardcore" and "casual" are really descriptive terms so much as slurs and tribal outgrouping.

[Solmanian]

I'm a hardcore fan, but a casual gamer. I'm in my thirties with a family and a job, like the majority of modern gamers, Which means I get to spend maybe 1-2 hours a day at gaming at best (more on weekends). The hardcore gamers, who can spend the entire day playing video games, aside from being mostly teenagers who rely on their parents for money (and thus are more likely to pirate games), is also a vey small precentage (I believe the last study said in the single digit precentage-wise. Not sure, so don't crucify me...). Thats why mobile games are around 50% of the market. The Wii was a gaming platform specifically targeted at the casual croud.

[Fredward]

Is this a serious question? It's really, really simple.

Hardcore ANYTHING is be definition a MUCH smaller and more select group than the "casuals." Yes the hardcore's will probably stick through more (evidenced by the fact that every second day I see someone proclaiming that they wash their hands of Bioware and then they're back here in a week xp) but there will ALWAYS be a ton more casuals who only by the game like once and maybe never even finish it. And it doesn't matter because they've already paid for it.

And Bioware is still a business much as some people seem to detest the very idea.

[Necrotron]

My guess is he is referring to how many fans felt DAII was console-ized and dumbed down in general to make it feel more action-y.

Not saying I agree, but that is what I've seen people say a lot of times.

I have faith that you are taking into account much of the feedback for DAIII like you did for MEII and MEIII, so I expect to see a much more strategic battle system similar to DA:O, with a more mature visual style like DA:O had. It always ebbs and flows with regards to gameplay, and of course, you can't please everyone, but I think it's obvious DA:O's gameplay style was much more popular, even with the 'casual' market.

[Solmanian]

I think a more importent question is what do we consider defines a game as being aimed at "casual" players. It's more importent than trying to label your fellow gamers.

For me a "casual" game, is a game where you can play for an hour and still have a sense of accomplishment, or at the very least FUN. "Saints row the third" is a great example. I remember putting 20-30 minutes of play before work every day, and still feeling like an advancing in the end of the session. Same for the AC franchise. Games like skyrim and DA:O were much heavier, and missions were significantly lenghty, with the main missions taking me several days to finish. ME games were more casual, with more intensive gameplay leading to most mission being 10-20 minutes long. DA2 is in the middle; it did an excellent job at organizing your missions (even better than the ME games) and the majority of the side missions were organized in "bite sized" portions (similar process to the change betwwen ME1 and ME2, where they focused less on exploration and more on bringing you to the action).

[Bfler]

The real problem is not the casual market, but rather that games become much more simpler and simpler and action-packed, because the current young target generation is more "spoiled" than the older one. A while ago you had to use use brain to solve quests or to skill your char. Today the games hand everything to the player on a silver platter. We have f.e. quest markers, only a few talents or in many cases no skill points, so that you can't screw up your char. Games like DA2 or ME3 you can basically play without brain and with the finger on the attack button.
Same development like in TV or cinema. A while ago we also had demanding content, todays program is full of sh.. like f.e. all the casting shows, where people act like idiots.

Modifié par Bfler, 10 décembre 2012 - 06:52 .

[Solmanian]

Bfler wrote...

The real problem is not the casual market, but rather that games become much more simpler and simpler and action-packed, because the current young target generation is more "spoiled" than the older one. A while ago you had to use use brain to solve quests or to skill your char. Today the games hand everything to the player on a silver platter. We have f.e. quest markers, only a few talents or in many cases no skill points, so that you can't screw up your char. Games like DA2 or ME3 you can basically play without brain and with the finger on the attack button.
Same development like in TV or cinema. A while ago we also had demanding content, todays program is full of sh.. like f.e. all the casting shows, where people act like idiots.

I'm not sure I agree with you. If I play an RPG, and while doing a quest I have to go online to understand what the hell am I supppose to do, than I would consider that quest as badly designed. If such quests are abbundant, than I would consider that game a s badly designed.

Lets take DA:O. There were some quests that you simply stumbled on. That didn't show up in your quest log until you "cracked" them (done everything except turning them in). Things like the black vials, a player might just skip without notcing them. Add to that the fact the codex was extremely disorganized... I did liked that some of those were quests that required investigation and referencing the codex, like the quest to get Yusaris, the bag of ashes in the wilds, or even the summoning rituals.

[Biotic Sage]

What EA and other big companies fail to understand is that the hardcore players are the outspoken ones, so they are the ones (loudly) giving the game a good or bad review online and promoting it through word of mouth to their friends and acquaintances. The other thing that decides whether or not a casual gamer will buy a game is marketing. So to sum up, EA, there are two factors that decide whether or not you will get a casual gamer's money: 1) If the marketing appeals to them and 2) If hardcore gamers/critics give the game good reviews.

Mass Effect 1 was a hardcore game. It generated a following which gave rise to the massive (no pun intended) hype preceding the release of ME2. Three of my friends (casual gamers) bought ME2 because of me telling them how great ME1 was, and then they even went back and bought ME1 after playing the great game that was ME2. EA, you quadrupled your profit for ME2 because ME1 was a solid game that appealed to a hardcore gamer. Think about it.

Get your priorities straight, because in this case making an excellent product and making a profit go hand in hand.  Yes, a game can have casual friendly elements and accommodations, but those should be secondary (but still important!) to pleasing the highly invested gamer.

Modifié par Biotic Sage, 10 décembre 2012 - 07:23 .

[Mr.BlazenGlazen]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

How does one define a casual and hardcore fan?

A casual fan in my opinion are just people that pick up a game, play it for a bit, and they either say "cool" or "meh." And then they proceed to sell their copy to gamestop or sell it on amazon. It kind of reminds me of when blockbuster used to be big just a decade ago. I would just walk to the nearest store, pick up a random game or movie, and just shrug and return it. Basically, they aren't really attached to you as a company or the in-game universe itself. 

"Hardcore" fans. Well, that's pretty much me when it comes to games such as Mass Effect or Halo. You get so attached to the universe, plot, and characters that you start to get obsessed.

In my opinion, I believe that its ideal to try to appeal to both. But you should ultimately try to keep your "hardcore" fans happy, because those are the people that try to spread the word about you and promote you as a company and the awesome games that you create. That way, you have a large devoted fanbase, rather than just a large fanbase that occasionally comes and goes.

[Steppenwolf]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

How does one define a casual and hardcore fan?

This.
No one can say "he's a hardcore gamer and he's casual" like it's a fact. I have a friend who calls me casual because I only play RPGs and fighting games while he plays shooters and action games. I have another friend who plays exclusively iPhone/iPad games that I would consider a hardcore gamer because she puts more time into those "casual" games than most people put into Elder Scrolls or Fallout.
The best way to handle the matter is to appeal to both in a way that doesn't compromise complexity or ingenuity in favor of simplicity. And a big part of that is presentation. As much as I abhor ME3 it did a great job of presenting complex gameplay systems to "casual" gamers.

[NUM13ER]

I've always disliked the term "casual" and "hardcore" gamers, they seem to be labels contrived in some marketing meeting. A person can have a passing interest in one title and be utterly engrossed with another. You either play games or you don't quite simply.

For me it's more accurate say long-term fans (especially in regards to an established series or even genre) and newcomers. The key difference being expectations and standards. I'm strongly of the opinion that if you aim to please veterans of a series you will most certainly please new fans. They don't have preconceptions after all.