Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 39

Thread: Definition of 'Casual Player'

  1. #1
    eluadyl's Avatar Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    65

    Question Definition of 'Casual Player'

    Sorry about the length

    I'm somewhat confused as to what a casual player is.

    If it really is someone who likes to play a game every now and then, does not care about much and plays fps games in easy or normal, then we can't call this person a gamer. He is just someone who likes to play games.

    Now this person would not (based on my observation on RL people) go to any length to polish his playing skills, be in a competitive mind set so he basically has no interest in advanced multiplayer. Therefore shouldn't be the major concern when designing a 'multiplayer structure' if you excuse my terminology. On multiplayer he will most probably get his certain body parts handed over to him (unless the game is specifically designed to give him the upper hand).

    If, on the other hand, casual means a player who is competitive, likes to work on his skills, 'takes gam(ing) seriously' but not to the level that he competes in WCG, we can call this guy a casual gam(er). This kind actually should be taken into account during the design process as they will most likely be the major target audience. And I don't see anything wrong with designing a game based on the skill gradient of standard to hardcore gamer as long as this skill level is perceived correctly.

    Now which definition is of the casual player everyone is complaining about?

    It's the first one as far as I understand, and if that's the case, are they really making it so that these people will suddenly get attracted to multiplayer? Isn't it a little far fetched to assume that the only reason they didn't play SC1 was the competition being too intense and/or it required too much skill hence they will now swarm the servers since the game is made easier and Facebook is added?

  2. #2
    cat's Avatar Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    17

    Default Re: Definition of 'Casual Player'

    a casual gamer is probably someone out for the single player experience, in multiplayer they probably play tower defense / dota and dont know any build orders and such.

  3. #3
    eluadyl's Avatar Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    65

    Default Re: Definition of 'Casual Player'

    Quote Originally Posted by cat View Post
    a casual gamer is probably someone out for the single player experience, in multiplayer they probably play tower defense / dota and don't know any build orders and such.
    Exactly my point. Then designers cannot be optimizing multiplayer to appeal to these people especially while they are seemingly trying to put limits on third party content.

  4. #4

    Default Re: Definition of 'Casual Player'

    It's like defining macro and micro.

    Is it about the frequency one plays said game, or does it pertain to one's passion on said game?

    They say hardcore gamers display this knack at finding stuff other players don't. It this due to luck or extensive experimentation and therefore more time spent on said game?

    For me a casual gamer doesn't care about the game and how it works at intense levels, but it doesn't mean he/she knows not what the game is all about nor what it takes to play it at those levels. He/she comes in, plays the game, pays his/her bills, and moves on with his/her life regardless of what perks might be there.

    But when someone says, "&*$# protoss %&*@3 OP" he/she is no casual gamer to me. He/she might not be skilled enough to rank high, but definitely not casual about the game and him/her playing it. But then again, this does not mean the said expression says anything about the person's skill level or comprehension of the game.

  5. #5
    eluadyl's Avatar Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    65

    Default Re: Definition of 'Casual Player'

    Quote Originally Posted by GnaReffotsirk View Post
    It's like defining macro and micro.

    Is it about the frequency one plays said game, or does it pertain to one's passion on said game?

    They say hardcore gamers display this knack at finding stuff other players don't. It this due to luck or extensive experimentation and therefore more time spent on said game?

    For me a casual gamer doesn't care about the game and how it works at intense levels, but it doesn't mean he/she knows not what the game is all about nor what it takes to play it at those levels. He/she comes in, plays the game, pays his/her bills, and moves on with his/her life regardless of what perks might be there.

    But when someone says, "&*$# protoss %&*@3 OP" he/she is no casual gamer to me. He/she might not be skilled enough to rank high, but definitely not casual about the game and him/her playing it. But then again, this does not mean the said expression says anything about the person's skill level or comprehension of the game.
    I think this still creates a conflict as to what a player expects from the game he/she bought or how much he/she (can I just say he, it's a figure of speech) is passionate about the game.

    If he is not passionate/serious, he will not care about what's been done to the game, if it's balanced or not, if this or that. To him the only question is whether he has fun playing it. Imho this person will NOT buy a game because a previously balanced race in the game is now cheesed out or OP so that he can have an easy time online. He will buy the game or not based on his feeling.

    The passionate player will care about balance, fun factor, competitiveness, this and that. He'll be selective of features and he will definitely criticize much more intensely than the former. I, as an example don't have great skill at (nor the time to spend on) any game but I am passionate about several titles. I actually want those games to require skill and have depth even if I won't be able to compete very much.

  6. #6

    Default Re: Definition of 'Casual Player'

    If we're talking about casual players in the sense that they are less experienced (due to playing the game less; otherwise they'd be hardcore) then we have to look at what level of play this cheesing or OP is affected by.

    On a high level of play, we could say that the Protoss are more powerful due to Chronoboost giving a huge advantage if used every cycle. The casual player wouldn't experience this though, since their macro/micro is obviously not high enough to make use of the ability; nor are they playing against other players who will either.

    Cheese strategies will exist no matter what level of play you're at. Someone is bound to use an 'OP' strat if it's easy enough to pull off. I mean to be honest, a protoss photon cannon rushing is a cheese strat, but it doesn't mean Protoss are OP because of it. The casual player will be facing these scenarios regardless, so it doesn't matter which race is more powerful; they simply don't have enough experience to the point where their gameplay is affected greatly.

    Casuals who do any amount of investment into playing the game will become hardcore, and they'll learn to appreciate the game as they grow. Cheese strats can always be countered given you learn from mistakes. You can prevent a photon rush by simply scouting early. There's no reason for Blizzard to have to implement a no-photon rush mechanic just because a casual player is too inexperienced to learn to scout. Catering to casuals is detrimental to learning and playing the game as it should be played.

    The other option would be things like no-rush or money maps that were so popular back in SC1 days.
    Last edited by Triceron; 05-28-2010 at 04:56 AM.

  7. #7
    Alterran's Avatar Junior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    158

    Default Re: Definition of 'Casual Player'

    Quote Originally Posted by GnaReffotsirk View Post
    It's like defining macro and micro.

    Is it about the frequency one plays said game, or does it pertain to one's passion on said game?

    They say hardcore gamers display this knack at finding stuff other players don't. It this due to luck or extensive experimentation and therefore more time spent on said game?

    For me a casual gamer doesn't care about the game and how it works at intense levels, but it doesn't mean he/she knows not what the game is all about nor what it takes to play it at those levels. He/she comes in, plays the game, pays his/her bills, and moves on with his/her life regardless of what perks might be there.

    But when someone says, "&*$# protoss %&*@3 OP" he/she is no casual gamer to me. He/she might not be skilled enough to rank high, but definitely not casual about the game and him/her playing it. But then again, this does not mean the said expression says anything about the person's skill level or comprehension of the game.
    A friend of mine played 1 game, he said protoss is op
    I would argue hes casual or not a gamer at all...
    I mean what someone says has nothing to do with if he is casual or not, i can go ahead and write something i dont rly mean just cuz i feel like it sometimes. And if you just play one game in all emotion, you still are not a gamer if you only played a game, even if you got emotional about it.

    I think a gamer should be measured by how much he plays
    Then if you play just a little, but are still good, i would just say you are a good gamer. If you play much you are a gamer, regardless of skill lvl, if you are one step above the good players you could be called a pro player i guess.
    I think casual player is somewere between little playtime and much playtime.

  8. #8
    eluadyl's Avatar Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    65

    Default Re: Definition of 'Casual Player'

    Quote Originally Posted by Alterran View Post
    I think a gamer should be measured by how much he plays
    Then if you play just a little, but are still good, i would just say you are a good gamer. If you play much you are a gamer, regardless of skill lvl, if you are one step above the good players you could be called a pro player i guess.
    I think casual player is somewere between little playtime and much playtime.
    If this be the case, it'll be a much bigger mistake to optimize a game to please people who are gonna spend 2 hours a week on it.

    The point I'm trying to make is, can Blizz really be trying to make this game and everything surrounding it appealing to these kind of people like everyone complains? If it is, how is that a smart move (financially)?

  9. #9
    FoxSpirit's Avatar Junior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    141

    Default Re: Definition of 'Casual Player'

    Is it a smart move financially? Boy, it sure is.
    And that's why you will have Achievments of all levels (I saw ones for beating the comp in skirmish on easy!), multiplayertutorials and a league system. Even for a casual Bronze will be okay after the better players have all gone to at least silver.

    In terms of balance all they wanted to do is avoid that there was a unit that is so good that it can only be countered at high level play. Which is a smart choice anyway since a unit that consumes a disproportionate amount of your oponents micro attention is unbalanced on the meta side anyway.

    They also tightened up the custom game system so people will now have a easier time getting into one as well as avoiding the list to be flooded with only one game. It's not as descriptive as the old one yet (DotA, ap,n00bs only) but maybe you can later add tags or such things.

    I think that pretty much covers it. Any questions or critique? Gogogo.

  10. #10
    eluadyl's Avatar Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    65

    Default Re: Definition of 'Casual Player'

    Quote Originally Posted by FoxSpirit View Post
    Is it a smart move financially? Boy, it sure is.
    And that's why you will have Achievments of all levels (I saw ones for beating the comp in skirmish on easy!), multiplayertutorials and a league system. Even for a casual Bronze will be okay after the better players have all gone to at least silver.

    In terms of balance all they wanted to do is avoid that there was a unit that is so good that it can only be countered at high level play. Which is a smart choice anyway since a unit that consumes a disproportionate amount of your oponents micro attention is unbalanced on the meta side anyway.

    They also tightened up the custom game system so people will now have a easier time getting into one as well as avoiding the list to be flooded with only one game. It's not as descriptive as the old one yet (DotA, ap,n00bs only) but maybe you can later add tags or such things.

    I think that pretty much covers it. Any questions or critique? Gogogo.
    So I gather you somewhat like the new regulations on SC2 and b.net.

    I also tend to think everything will settle down and become clearer in time after the release. I'm just afraid that 'everything too clean' policies will take the depth out of everything and give the failproof 8 year old appearance to the scene.

Similar Threads

  1. [Replay] New Player
    By Bullet in forum StarCraft Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-24-2010, 01:49 PM
  2. Best Player for his race?
    By InpuBot in forum StarCraft Discussion
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 04-27-2010, 07:18 PM
  3. Can a micro player beat a macro player?
    By sandwich_bird in forum StarCraft Discussion
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 04-11-2010, 08:09 PM
  4. Player limit is still set to 8
    By Blazur in forum StarCraft Discussion
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 12-04-2009, 09:16 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •