Hardcore vs casual gamer

[Kia Mae]

Browsing ToG today I found this post in the Vanguard forum, and it got me pondering:

I think it's far too soon to say if this game is "casual" or "hardcore"; infact I think that is the wrong categorical comparison. The game is the game. There's hardcore players and casual players. I'm pretty sure tiddly winks isn't a hard core game, but you might wanna ask the MIT winks club.

I think it`s not only a gamers choice whether they play this or that way. Some games are designed that way, to give player choices to a casual gamer as well. In my foray trough various MMOs I think the best in that respect is the old UO, still going after so many years. I found Wow to be lacking in that respect, as the endgame is centered around a hardcore gamer that can commit to raids 2-3 times a week, and having a 4 hour timeslot as well. Or an old Mac only game called Clanlord, where an old character could not do much without at least having a group of 5 to go some place.

While there might be casual options in all games, I expect these to be at least as interesting as what is offered to the hardcore gamer.

I don`t really mind slowly working the levels up, nor do I mind seeing hardcore gamers race past me. But it is very much in the design of the game the decision is made whether it caters to a casual gamer or not.

[JuJutsu]

I agree. Playstyle is an individual thing but games vary in their 'friendliness' to different playstyles.

[Ijs]

Originally Posted by Kia Mae

I found Wow to be lacking in that respect, as the endgame is centered around a hardcore gamer that can commit to raids 2-3 times a week, and having a 4 hour timeslot as well...

What are the alternatives for WoW end game content that would cater to casual players?

There is a limit to how many new 'casual-type' quests can be introduced on a monthly basis. Players complete quests a lot faster than it takes to write/implement them.

It takes years to build 'content,' and and only a matter or days/weeks (maybe months for real casual players) to play through it.

UO may be still 'going', but for who? How many? If it's so good, why didn't they ever complete a sequel? A lot of people played it, finished it, then moved on to find another game.

That's the natural sequence. Rather than looking for long-lasting 'end-game', if you're a casual player, just find another game.

[Haldorah]

I think it is down to the way the game is designed to begin with, WoW is only very recently starting to cater too the "casual" player. For example with the changes to pvp faction rewards. Whereas some other mmo types lend themselves to the quick in and out style of play.

[Rajil]

Guild Wars probably caters to the casual, as well as the hardcore player.

If I was playing WoW, no way would I let my 15 dollars go to waste by being a casual player.

[Sente]

The whole path level 1-60 is pretty casual friendly in WoW. That all that is after that is less casual friendly (pre-Burning Crusade) is another matter.

Played WoW actively for about a year, got one toon to 60 and and a bunch of others spread out in 20s, 30s, 40s.
Never even tried to start the raiding stuff or faction grinding or PvP rank grinding.

To me, WoW was good value for money for that year. Did not bother me that I never got into all those "end-game" stuff.

Would I start play WoW again, with BC coming out? Not likely, there is no real sparkle or attraction left in that game for me. But it was fun while it lasted.

[Corpeces]

Yup. I played wow for a while. Got 1 toon to lvl 45, another to lvl 38 and another to lvl 34. I did pvp few times but mostly I was enjoying the PVE aspect of the game. Never felt the need to pvp or was in a rush to do it. But after a while it was just a quest grind and I was never crazy about the cartoon graphics. Actually, the one thing I like the most was the Bazaar

But to the point, I thought WoW catered to both type of players very well.

[Melski]

What makes a game casual is the important question. For me its:
- I can do something valuable with-in about 1 hour;
- I can wonder off and put the house fires out without causing distress to my fellow gamers;
- The goals I could have are all with-in a resonable playing time.
- A human with normal coordination and keyboard skills can achieve good play.

WOW lacks in all four catagories. I can achieve very little in 1 hour in WOW, i can grind a bit. I would be lucky to put a team together for SM in less than 1 hour let alone complete it and SM is one of the smallest instances. Getting a decent character together to play PVP is completely beyond any hope for me... anyway wont go on.

It's all about the designers, and if they believe anything else they've lost the plot (or they don't wish to admit the game is for hardcores).

Look at GW for a sample of casual. instant movement, robots for team members, all weapons/armour have at least of chance of being available quickly (yes, except for the elite ones, but the stats are identical to normal ones). PVP is accessable to anyone, instantly. Sure there isnt the same feel of achievement but atleast I have some.

Some people would argue that even GW is hardcore, compared to UT. UT lets you get in instantly, you can play for 10min and have had fun by the end of it. Indeed there was a time when UT was all I had time for, everything else was for the lucky.

[Valdis]

I've played (or at least tried) a lot of MMO's, and my choice would be city of heroes. There is no requirement for you to go on trials (sorta like raids in wow), and if you have a group of friends, you can start the trial, log out, and come back to finish it later. Missions often didn't take that long, you could do one in 15-30 minutes, no problem. Mind you, I played before CoV, so maybe its changed, but when I was active, much of the content was soloable (and it was usually easy to get help when you needed it). Of course, once you got to the highest level, you were done, but it took a while to get there if you didn't play all that much. Plus, the game was fun to play with a couple of classes.

Superheroes aren't for everyone, but if I had to choose an example of a casual-friendly game, that'd be my choice.

[Sente]

Originally Posted by Valdis

I've played (or at least tried) a lot of MMO's, and my choice would be city of heroes.

I second that. I have played City of Villains and Heroes for maybe 7 months now, my gaming sessions ranging from about 30 minutes to a few hours sometimes.

As Valdis said, many missions are in 15-30 minutes range. Some may be a bit longer, but pretty much all of them have been manageable within one hour.

Soloability depends on the archetype. I think pretty much all archetypes on villain side can solo pretty good. It varies more on hero side, IMHO.

While soloability is an important part, I also think "ease of grouping" is an important aspect. I.e. can you find players to group with easily, can one manage group changes easily (e.g. the group will not break down because there are too few players or the healer left), can people play together even though there are some level differences between them.

I think the CoX LFG tool is pretty good. Certainly room for improvement, but better than what has been available in a number of other games.

Since mission encounters in Cox scale with the number of members in the group, it is straightforward to play with any group size.Mission difficulty can also be adjusted (5 different settings).

And pretty much any character can group with any other character regardless of level (as long as they are all villain or all hero) with the sidekick/exemplar/lackey/malefactor system.

Add to that perhaps the best character creation tool in any MMOG - anyone can actually look unique and cool right from start.

And with the latest updates both villains and heroes can enjoy travel powers pretty much from level 5, cutting down on time just being spent getting from A to B. Overall it is a relatively fast-paced MMOG with very little downtime.

CoX certainly has its flaws, but so far it is my favourite for some quick fun in shorter sessions.