Gothic - hardcore or softcore? (split)

What's wrong with my definition again?

I think it's perfect!

Wizardry 4 was hard to finish, but it didn't drive me insane and at that time I had no internet and walkthroughs at hand.
Games have to make fun and should be interesting, if they become stressful like work or boring like a prison sentence, I cancel them.

What is boring, what is stressful in games ? - that's a matter of taste.

You're a stronger man than I then. That game took great pleasure in beating the holy hell out of you and laughing in your face while it did it.

There's an old D&D P&P adventure that is infamous because in essence it is one giant deathtrap. I never played it and don't know the name of it, but even I heard about how downright evil it was. That is the only thing that can compare to Wizardry IV.

If you think Wiz IV was just hard then, dude, you are king of the CRPGs. At least in my opinion .

If you're going to talk about how hard something is, you have to compare it to the average person - not someone dedicated to playing precisely that kind of game.

Originally Posted by DArtagnan
What's wrong with my definition again?

You mean this one?
"Personally, I think the definition that makes most sense is that a hardcore game requires a larger investment on the part of the player - and ideally offers a corresponding reward for that investment."
Nothing´s wrong with it imo, as that´s pretty much how I´d define it as well. Of course, how large the required investment needs to be to guarantee the game hardcore label is on everyone´s individual consideration.

Originally Posted by skavenhorde
There's an old D&D P&P adventure that is infamous because in essence it is one giant deathtrap. I never played it and don't know the name of it, but even I heard about how downright evil it was. That is the only thing that can compare to Wizardry IV.

Originally Posted by DArtagnan
If you're going to talk about how hard something is, you have to compare it to the average person - not someone dedicated to playing precisely that kind of game.

Why limit yourself? I think it´s perfectly legitimate to compare it to someone more dedicated as well, just mention the context.

Originally Posted by DeepO
Nothing´s wrong with it imo, as that´s pretty much how I´d define it as well. Of course, how large the required investment needs to be to guarantee the game hardcore label is on everyone´s individual consideration.

Obviously, but as I mention below - it doesn't really make sense when trying to determine whether a game is "hardcore" or not. In that way, no game would ever be casual or hardcore - and as such, the concept loses its meaning.

Why limit yourself? I think it´s perfectly legitimate to compare it to someone more dedicated as well, just mention the context.

You can do whatever you want. But if you're, say, the best and most "hardcore" CRPG gamer in the world, it wouldn't make much sense to call a game casual, because you didn't have to invest much to play and succeed in the game.

At least, not as far as I'm concerned.

I call Gothic a hardcore game, because most gamers would need to invest SIGNIFICANTLY before succeeding in the game.

—-

As for World of Warcraft - and indeed many MMOs, the level of investment directly corresponds to the perceived reward. Not in a linear or measurable sense, because I don't really see much reward in the endless grind - but you have to invest a lot to overcome the greatest challenges. So, it's not really ONE game, but several games rolled into one.

That said, I would DEFINITELY consider WoW to be a hardcore game, because I look at "the big picture" in terms of what you can experience - be it the actual levelling process, the raids, the PvP, and so forth. I'd say you need to invest A LOT of your time and your focus to succeed in all those areas. Not to be the best, but just to succeed at most of the activities. So, in my view, a player who invests himself in WoW for hours each day - is a hardcore player. WoW CAN be played as a casual experience, and as a casual gamer - but truth be told, I think people who pretend they're "casual gamers" after years of WoW, have a very different opinion than I, about the concept of being hardcore.

With all that said, I DESPISE the term "hardcore", which is why I personally prefer to use the term "enthusiast". Too many people misunderstand each other when they use hardcore, because there's too much stigma attached to make it into a sound discussion.

Maylander said…> I'd say the requirement to enjoy the game should describe it, not the requirement to do everything that is possible. <

That is a respectful and central ground view, if fact if all definitions could be more centric without spreading into grey area fuzzy-ness there would be less confusion but the grey areas will always be there.
If part of a game was hidden and players were not aware of this, they would indeed be content in finishing to their liking - yet if the hidden part was the main core concept i would take a slightly more critical viewpoint in weather the game was "correctly" completed as per developer intended game design (and as described within the books within the game!)

Fanatics of the game surely must want and strive to play the full extent of the total game otherwise they could indeed be seen as "casual gamers" - this is most likely yet another one of the reasons of modern day streamlining, eg: why put in hardcore content if players are incapable of going for the max'.

With all that said, I DESPISE the term "hardcore", which is why I personally prefer to use the term "enthusiast". Too many people misunderstand each other when they use hardcore, because there's too much stigma attached to make it into a sound discussion.

I agree.

The term "hardcore gamer" is tainted with many prejudices:
Urban Dictionary: hardcore gamer

I can live with the first part:

Someone who plays video games as a primary hobby. They tend to spend large amounts of time playing games, often in excess of two or three hours a day. Hardcore gamers tend to care less about graphics then casual gamers. While some specialize in a single genre, they typically have fairly diverse taste in games, frequently playing a wide variety of games from different genres. They'll often seek out obscure and older games, based on word of mouth or positive critical reception. Hardcore gamers put good gameplay above all else, and don't mind if a good game has poor (or even nonexistent) graphics, sound, characters and plot.

but it gets worse:

The stereotypical hardcore gamer is out of shape, and has poor hygene. They spend a lot of their disposable income on video games, consoles, or PC upgrades, and a large percentage of their free time either playing video games or discussing them, online and off. They wear either black clothing, or T-shirts with geeky pop-culture references, often to video games. Their social skills may be sub-par, and they may be less likely than others their age to have many friends, a jobs and a girlfriend/boyfriend. Some of these stereotypes are negative, and they certainly don't apply to all hardcore gamers, but there's a fair amount of truth to them.

Originally Posted by DArtagnan
With all that said, I DESPISE the term "hardcore", which is why I personally prefer to use the term "enthusiast". Too many people misunderstand each other when they use hardcore, because there's too much stigma attached to make it into a sound discussion.

Yea, "Enthusiast" is what I would call myself, as well. I suppose I can't really be hardcore because I actually play a very limited amount of time. But I am very interested in games, so I don't just play them for fun. I also scrutinize them, think what I like about them, and why, etc. I have opinions on what I think is good or bad, and what I'd like to see done in games in the future. And generally I hold the opinion that games are a medium that can express moods, ideas, and allows artistic expression, in addition to merely being entertaining. Just like books and cinema and all other forms of art/entertainment…

Originally Posted by GhanBuriGhan
Yea, "Enthusiast" is what I would call myself, as well. I suppose I can't really be hardcore because I actually play a very limited amount of time. But I am very interested in games, so I don't just play them for fun. I also scrutinize them, think what I like about them, and why, etc. I have opinions on what I think is good or bad, and what I'd like to see done in games in the future. And generally I hold the opinion that games are a medium that can express moods, ideas, and allows artistic expression, in addition to merely being entertaining. Just like books and cinema and all other forms of art/entertainment…

Yeah, I find myself in a very similar situation. I can make the time when a truly great game comes out, but I very rarely do so. I generally just read about games, and dream about the "perfect" version of my favorite games.

So, I'm definitely an enthusiast - but I really don't bother investing in many games anymore. I just don't have the time - and I'm too jaded.

That said, I'm actually REALLY enjoying Arcania at the moment. I've already played for ~10 hours - and I think it's a very good game so far (ignoring its legacy, mind you). I think it has to do with my very low expectations, mostly based on the demo and the previews - but I think it's much better than what most of the Watch people seem to think.

Maybe it'll get worse from this point on, but I'm trying to enjoy it for what it is.

Originally Posted by Kostaz
Why do I always end up skipping posts in threads where both DA and Alrik post?

Uh. I take this as a sign I should withdraw. And write much, much, much less.

Originally Posted by toltec7
But as a developer myself and being often in a situation where i can do an easy boring work and hardcore programming work for the same money i'll go with the easy boring shit.

I have no problems understanding this. At least people need to make money for a living.

But we also need some sort of diversity, imho. There is a reason why there are Millions of food recipes on this world, and not everything isn't = Buger King or/and McDonalds.


Besides, I realized the oother day (I think it was yesterday or the day before that) that my postings too often end up as if they were speeches.

Originally Posted by DArtagnan
Obviously, but as I mention below - it doesn't really make sense when trying to determine whether a game is "hardcore" or not. In that way, no game would ever be casual or hardcore - and as such, the concept loses its meaning.

The concept has its meaning only when we´re comparing games to each other and we´re not using these silly "casual"/"hardcore" terms in a binary way imo.
For example, if this was said in a review:

Originally Posted by DArtagnan
I call Gothic a hardcore game, because most gamers would need to invest SIGNIFICANTLY before succeeding in the game.

I´d call it quite meaningless because even though now I know you consider Gothic to be a game which requires SIGNIFICANT amount of investment from "most gamers", I can´t really deduce what amount will I, a reader and potential player of the game, need to invest. The information would be only useful to me if you´d mentioned some other games for comparison. Do I need to invest more than in the case of Wizardry 8? Oblivion? ArcaniA?
Then, even though I could still end up in disagreement with your assessment that Gothic is a "hardcore" game, I´d probably have much better picture about how demanding the game will be for me.
Creating "casual"/"hardcore" as some kind of absolute categories where all games can be shoveled in is for naught, as far as I´m concerned.
And for the record, I rather despise the "hardcore" term as well.

Originally Posted by HiddenX
I agree.

The term "hardcore gamer" is tainted with many prejudices:
Urban Dictionary: hardcore gamer

Yeah, enthusiast FTW indeed.
However,
Urban Dictionary: gaming enthusiast
"Loser who spends way too much time in front of a tv screen playing video games."

Originally Posted by DeepO

Thank you. I had forgotten that Gary Gygax had written it. The man had an axe to grind with someone when he made that. Surprisingly the info I just read on wiki lists it as one of THE greatest adventures ever.


I think my friend who told me about it would disagree. He had many colorful words to say about it Man that was long ago. Thanks again for refreshing my memory on this one. I'm going to have to wallpaper that sucker for awhile.

Alright then you guys go right back on discussing the essence of hardcoreness.

Originally Posted by DeepO
The concept has its meaning only when we´re comparing games to each other and we´re not using these silly "casual"/"hardcore" terms in a binary way imo.

The idea is that you compare it to the "average gamer" which I think we can all estimate without having to strictly define who that is.

As in, we allow for the imprecision to communicate smoothly. So, in those inevitable cases where someone would contest that Gothic is actually hardcore to the average gamer, I sort of require "leeway" and an acceptance that there will be exceptions to the rule, as there is to every rule.

For example, if this was said in a review:

I´d call it quite meaningless because even though now I know you consider Gothic to be a game which requires SIGNIFICANT amount of investment from "most gamers", I can´t really deduce what amount will I, a reader and potential player of the game, need to invest. The information would be only useful to me if you´d mentioned some other games for comparison. Do I need to invest more than in the case of Wizardry 8? Oblivion? ArcaniA?
Then, even though I could still end up in disagreement with your assessment that Gothic is a "hardcore" game, I´d probably have much better picture about how demanding the game will be for me.
Creating "casual"/"hardcore" as some kind of absolute categories where all games can be shoveled in is for naught, as far as I´m concerned.
And for the record, I rather despise the "hardcore" term as well.

I think we largely agree, though you seem to want to know "in-depth" about me before you know what I mean.

Personally, I think it suffices to have an estimate - which is exactly why I'm talking about the "average gamer" - which to me is somewhere between casual and hardcore. Not an absolute, as that can never be - but simply as a starting point, from which further discussion can evolve.

If I say Gothic is hardcore - and you understand that it's in terms of what the average gamer would consider hardcore, then you already have a reasonably informed idea of where I stand - with absolutely no further detail needed.

That's why I think it's a good starting point, and if detail is needed - one can ask for it.

But that's just me, and how I think the optimal usage of terms should work when communicating.

Since I don't believe in absolutes - there will ALWAYS be further discussion if something is to be defined with precision.

I do agree hardcore players are rather a loud, vocal minority but unfortunately while everyone everywhere knows they are upset with the state of gaming, most companies dont pay mind to it because the suits only listen to numbers. They see the sales figures for Oblivion or Fable and thats what they listen to.

They are obsess with numbers most publishers and developers actually admit to go excessively by Metacritic. I dont know why the industry pays so much attention to metacritic numbers but I feel thats a bad way to run a business, metacritic isnt exactly reliable in my opinion but, metacritic rules all. Thats where the suits get their 'facts' from.

Originally Posted by GothicLena
They are obsess with numbers most publishers and developers actually admit to go excessively by Metacritic. I dont know why the industry pays so much attention to metacritic numbers but I feel thats a bad way to run a business, metacritic isnt exactly reliable in my opinion but, metacritic rules all. Thats where the suits get their 'facts' from.

The average score of sites like gamecritic and gamerankings are actually more reliable than from a single site. You get a average cut right through the public, covering many different gamers and if a game can impress a diversive bunch you have a hit.

Unfortunate, this streamlining into one single fictional archetype tend to have the same result as planned economy in communism. When someone "up there" watch the data and try to grasp what will be good enough for everyone, you end up with very little diversity.

There was once a great research done on tomato sauce. The marketeers asked "what is the best tomato sauce", and poured a huge amount of cash into it. Their conclusion was "you have asked the wrong question". The best way to make tomato sauce is not to find the one-best-sauce, but instead to provide a range of tastes. That way you can cover much much more of the market than you would if you try to find the streamlined tomato sauce lover.

Unfortunately, gaming have gone into the direction of finding the streamlined tomato sauce lover, and end up with mashed tomatoes in water once all the spice is removed.

Do the average, casual or enthusiastic players do anything like :
Download hardwar because someone posted a thread in a forum
Download Transantarctica because it is post apocalyptic and steampunk
Post in gaming forums long after midnight
Typing long replies on the lore of a game , or reading tones of lore from a game
Spend time reading reviews and previews when he knows that he is going to buy the game anyway
Making guides for new players without anyone asking him

?

I guess no , you have to be hardcore .
Being hardcore gamer is somewhat like doing drugs , you can not deal with it and live in denial.




*I shower twice / day, thrice at summer so f*ck the "poor hygiene" part

You made me smile Tragos. I believe I fit your diagnosis.

So I was playing Fallout New Vegas today and I think Bethesda actually came up with a good idea I hope will see become standard in games. In addition to your Very Easy up to Very Hard Difficulty modes, they actually have a "Hardcore" Mode. Seems someone figured out Hardcores exist. What it does is make it require you to take care of basic needs like eating, sleeping and hydrating or else you die, and it gives ammo weight and a host of other 'hardcore' gameplay features.

The funny thing is they dont recommend you turn it on! But on topic, I think such a feature is something more developers should put into games so everyone enjoys it. On Easy its really casual but up it up to Very Hard and enable Hardcore mode and it becomes even worse then Gothic and Risen.