In the good old days, it was easy to tell who the casual gamers were. They didn’t really know much about games, and generally only had one or two titles in their collection. FIFA of some sort, and a racing game. Casual gamers weren’t good enough at games to ever threaten you but had just enough know-how to make you feel good after you beat them supremely.
But that was then. Nowadays, casual gamers are a group who’s boundaries are becoming increasingly blurred. What makes a casual gamer? Literally, it’s just someone who plays video games occasionally, not enough to warrant the term ‘gamer’. With the power of the Wii and DS bringing in more and more of these so-called ‘casual gamers’, I think it’s necessary for us to find out what we mean.
Most people who are buying the Wii purely for its universal playability are being labelled casual gamers, but I say that they just don’t cut it. A casual gamer is still a gamer. They’ll have a bit of background knowledge on a range of games, and the consoles to play them on. Chances are your grandmother probably won’t. A casual gamer could pick up a PS2 pad and instinctively know what to do. Your three year old sister would probably cover it in orange juice and sticky finger marks before moving on. So why are we calling them all casual gamers? Why do people insist on saying that things like the Wii are aimed at the ‘casual-gamer market’ when clearly the people they’re thinking of aren’t casual gamers at all.
A new term is needed to describe these people, be it ‘hardly-gamers’ or ‘barely-gamers’. Maybe even ‘rarely-gamers’, it doesn’t matter much. What does matter is we reinstate the divides between the different groups of gamers, so we know who we are talking about when we use the terms.
That isn’t to say the walls between should be rigid, unmovable things. People are free to interrupt World of Warcraft sessions with a quick round of Golf on Wii Sports. But knowing the differences between a casual, hardcore and rarely-gamer helps us to understand the reasons behind individual games, and their effectiveness. Unless we know who a certain game is aimed at, we may never discover it’s true value.
Seth
June 17th, 2008
Maybe more games would see commercial success if they appeal to all demographics of gamers. Examples of this are the Lego titles- which are deceptively simple but have huge depth for completionists, and Grand Theft Auto games - which obviously have a large number of activities and missions but can be picked up for a crazy rampage by anyone.
Nintendo are often pretty good at creating games that are mechanically simple, but with extended play reveal subtle complexities.
Manuel
June 17th, 2008
I dont known, i think a gamer is a gamer no matter what, if someone star playing as a barely - gamer , in the near future he or she will be playing games more often, and then will become a hardcore gamer, take for example a person who plays only fifa on pc, he eventually will be playing other types of games, and expend a lot of time on it, because the videogames will grow onto him.( i know this because it did happened to me, and i pretty sure did happened to all of us)
Also, the wii should not be labelled as a “casual game device”, the thing that nintendo did with the wii was to simplify the control interface with the game, and of course this would bring people that did find the old gamepad a bit confusing and dont want o memorize a list of buttons in order to play a game, like old people, children, moms etc, but also appeal to gamers that want to be more involve with the games, like hard-core gamers, so if you see the big picture nintendo is broading the industry, and thats good for everybody including sony and microsoft
Alasdair
June 17th, 2008
I totally agree that the Wii isn’t solely a casual game device, theres so much for hardcore gamers like myself to enjoy. But I have to admit that its main audience in the casual/barely gamer market.
And Seth, you’re right. If more games tried to have something for everyone, the industry would become even more powerful. The problem is that a lot of the CoD4, GoW and GTA players will not even bother trying games like Galaxy that have already achieved a great balance because of the percieved ‘kiddy-ness’. It’s a big shame.
Manuel
June 18th, 2008
Yes, i agree that a high percentage of players that play COD4, GOW, GTA, etc will not play super mario galaxy, but i think it has to do more with fanboyisym or “brand love” like i prefer to call it, than for the kiddie image, because real gamers only want to play great games not matter in which console appear, or if they are “kiddie” or not. Im not saying all the people that plays only sony , or only microsoft , or only nintendo , is not a real gamer, is a gamer indeed , but he is more a brand loyal than a gamer, because he diminish other great games that came in other consoles, so the brand loyal aspect outweights the gamer aspect.
Steve
June 18th, 2008
lol ‘kiddie’ I love how anything can be quoted and used in an arguement.
Games like ‘cod4′ ‘Halo’ ‘GOW’ definatly ‘to me’ appear to attract a ‘less dedicated’ gamer than those who would pick up Super Mario Galaxy or Wii Sports. On the other hand the opposite is true it really depends on many things. I mean look at how little affection ‘the Japanese’ have for ‘first person shooter’ games compared to the West. Are these people therefore casual gamers, or just ‘xenophobics dicks’ (I think thats for another blog, get on it Ally)
But I don’t think theres that much of a discussion to be had here, unless you want to walk the fine line between ’stereotyping’ and ‘bigotry’ for now the casual gamer can just stay a marketing gimmik for Nintendo to use while it alienates every other gamer in the ‘night sky’
I personally would clasify any gamer with an intrest of games that isn’t total to just playing games, i.e ‘reading’ up on games ‘writing’ about games and taking part in futile internet warfare on your favorate entities of ‘artificial entertainment’
Sony sucks btw, except my walkman that rules.
Rob
June 18th, 2008
Another thing that is becoming a problem in this type of situation is a curse known as ‘graphics’.
Galaxy again is one that is looked down upon due to the bright colourful graphics. In the same way people that are biased towards consoles look down upon others, people also look down on unrealistic graphics.
Once again this does not mean a game is poor or not as good as another. Simply this ‘graphics’ thing seems to really affect the way people choose their games and consoles
Rob
June 18th, 2008
More importantly this relates to the hardcore and casual gamer issue.
In this day and age people tend to label themselves as hardcore gamers if they play an xbox 360 dont you think? Theres the hardcore PS3 owners too, but hardly ever are Wii owners labelled with the hardcore tag.
Realistic looking games doesnt mean different classing. Imagine Wii Sports with real looking people, hardcore? i dont think so.
Just another barrier for some to cross
Manuel
June 18th, 2008
Yes rob i agree with you that´s another barrier, but the PS2 didnt face that kind of judgement, when the xbox an GC did came out on sell, the ps2 was lacking behind in the graphics deparment, and nobody said that was casual or kiddie, so i do not see why they are doing this with the wii, if you look the graphic diferences between the last gen consoles, the ps2 vs xbox and gc (that were more powerful machines), they are happening again ,the graphics of the wii in EDTV are not to far away from any xbox 360 game or ps3, just look at mario galaxy it doesnt look to far away with the screens for the new banjo game or the new rachet and clank, like the ps2. so i do not see why is the reason for this.
Zack
June 20th, 2008
The hardcore tag is an interesting one to say the least.
I’m not even sure you’d have to specify consoles that people own, that you can even specify it to specific games with large online communitie, such as Halo or GoW, where people label themselves as hardcore as an effort to seem better, or more interesting or cooler whilst talking with their friends online, and they shun games such as Galaxy to make themselves seem more hardcore.
Wii based online games, lacking headphone interface as well as seemingly lacking the types who would stick hardcore on to seem cooler could be a viable reason why Wii owners don’t label themselves as hardcore gamers.
In short, I believe the term ‘hardcore gamer’ is becoming a fad term for online 360 games (for me, Halo and GoW come to mind quickly,) so strict Wii owners don’t use the label as it’s not used on online Wii games.
Vivek
August 18th, 2008
Gaming as a whole has changed. I remeber the days that gaming was looked down apon as the “lower medium” of entertainment, “a waste of time”. These days though its okay for people who once said these things to be be waving thier arms around playing Wii Tennis and call themselves gamers. I totally see where Alasdair is coming from. I would call myself a gamer, I play a wide range of consoles and have a knowledge of gaming, and the industry (after studying in it for 2 years). My mother on the other hand who enjoys the odd spot of Wii Bolwing is not a gamer. She doesnt take the “gaming experience” seriously. Okay maybe “seriously” is not the right word, I should say competitavly. When I play a game I want to have fun but at most I want to succeed at what I am doing in the game.
I think that is what defines a gamer, and also what defines the best games. Look at the Halo 3’s and CoD4′ers out there theres a clean cut between the people that are gamers and the ones that are just there to spare some time.
Vivek
August 18th, 2008
Crudely put your either a nub or a gamer