Also on AOL
- Autos
- Technology
- Lifestyle
- Gaming
- Finance
- Entertainment on AOL
- Lifestyle on AOL
- Sports on AOL
- Travel on AOL
- More on AOL
Featured Galleries
Joystiq
© 2013 AOL Inc. All rights Reserved. Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Trademarks | AOL A-Z HELP | About Our Ads

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
6-09-2009 @ 11:25AM
Nollind Whachell said...
Robin, you nailed it when you said the word "casual" changes based on context and the same applies to the word "hardcore". These descriptive words could be applied to anything in life.
Within gaming though, they are usually applied to two areas.
1) The amount of time a person can play the game (i.e. little or a lot).
2) How the person plays the game (i.e. laid back vs serious).
For example, I'm a casual player player when it comes to the amount of time I play the game because I only raid twice a week. I'm very hardcore when it comes to how I play the game though because since my time is valuable to me, I don't want to waste it. Thus I expect people to be fully prepared for a raid and focused on the run at hand.
Reply
6-09-2009 @ 11:55AM
Percinho said...
Now in my eyes 'only' raiding twice a week does not make you casual. From my perspective that makes you hardcore. I log in to wow on four, sometimes five days a week, sometimes for as little as ten minutes to do the fishing daily. I'm lvl 80 but only just opened the Wrathgate last night as I've largely levelled through an hour of dailies here and there. I can easily go for three or four days without logging in at all if other things come up.
This just underlines the point that 'casual' is a relative term. To me you're not casual, but but to someone who raids 5 nights a week then you probably are. It also underlines the good sense behind Robin giving a description of what qualifies for casual in the context of this column.
6-09-2009 @ 12:16PM
clevins said...
And. Percinho illustrates why we'll never settle this. Everyone wants their own definition. It's just one word.. it can't support the weight of so many definitions. And that's the real issue - instead of using several words for several meanings, it's all 'casual' and 'hardcore'.
Casual can break down into time or attitude. Someone who raids for 6 hours a week (2days, 3 hours per) and dosn't play aside from that- are they more casual than someone who plays alts for 6 hours? How about someone who plays alts 12 hours? is it time? Or attitude? Or activity (raiders can't be casual even if it's a few hours a week)?
And Robin... lose the damn 'real life' crap, ok? WoW is part of my real life, in the same way that any hobby is. Fanstasy sports, knitting, scrapbooking, bike riding, poker, whatever... they're all hobbies that we do for entertainment. Stop perpetuating the idea that video games are the proving of no life losers if taken seriously but that non-game hobbies are just fine. The millions of people who sit in front of the TV the last few weeks watching the NBA playoffs don't have to hear that... neither should we.
6-09-2009 @ 12:53PM
Remen said...
Nollind,
The reason for the "real life crap", as you so elquantly put it, is a legitimate statement. Video games are an escape from reality. WoW can be said to be slightly less so because it does have you interact with other people so you are still dealing with reality. However in my opinion (that's all it is) WoW does not qualify as "real life" because you spend your time pretending you are someone else. I'm not going to say that it's unhealthy to play WoW, however when you start to lose balance it becomes an issue. It is no long part of your "real life" but rather it takes over the life you once had.
6-09-2009 @ 1:16PM
fauxbo said...
It's easy to settle.
A causal player plays less than you.
A Hardcore player plays more than you.
See it's not so hard.
6-09-2009 @ 3:27PM
Percinho said...
Clevins: "Percinho illustrates why we'll never settle this. Everyone wants their own definition."
I entirely agree; as I said it's all about one's own perspective. From my prespective Nollind is not casual, from that of someone in Ensidia he/she probably is. Which is neatly summed up by fauxbo.