Core and Casual: What's the difference?

Saturday, April 30, 2011

What is the difference between 'core' gamers and 'casual' gamers? I consider myself to be a core gamer yet I only play games maybe 5-10 hours a week; does that make me a casual gamer? Other than the fact that I think most people who consider themselves to be core gamers look down on casual gamers and blame them for the dirth of poorly made games flooding store shelves, is there really a difference? I recently did a study on video game platform choice for my honors thesis, and while the difference between these two groups wasn't it's focus, I did learn get some interesting numbers so lets take a look.

The first thing I thought of when I considered the difference was that obviously, the amount of time a person spends playing games is the difference. Casual gamers only play to waste some time on Farmville or Wii sports while core gamers must burn tons of hours hitting the level cap in World of Warcraft or Call of Duty. My study showed that people who reported themselves as casual gamers (N=72) spend 11.25 hours playing games each week on average while core gamers (N=293) spent 19.55, looks good so far. 

I also measured time people spent reading about, listening to audio about, watching video of, and talking to friends about games. As things turn out, self-reported casual gamers spent more time listening to podcasts and music about games and watching video game related videos shows or streams than core gamers did while core gamers spent more time talking to their friends about games, playing games and reading about video games. On average, core gamers spent 45.56 hours a week on video game related activities while casual gamers spent 33.49 hours per week. Looks like video games are a full time job for a lot of people, regardless of whether or not they get paid for it.

Both of those numbers represent a lot of time with games, and I don't think they're enough to separate the two groups definitively; what else is the difference? While I didn't look at some other factors that I think should be part of the classification process like amount of money invested in games, turnover rate of games, profficiency achieved with games, and length of time playing games (have you played for two months or eight years?), I did ask respondents for some other information; their three favorite games and their primary platform. This should be useful since I casuals only playing Animal Crossing or Bejeweled on the Wii... right? 

Data on gamers' prefered platform didn't turn out to be that interesting. Over 50% of both casual and core gamers chose the Xbox 360 as their preferred platform, and 24% of core gamers chose the PS3 while 31% of casuals did. Not surprisingly just 2% of core gamers chose the Wii, while only 7% of casuals did, a much lower number than I had expected. While PC gaming might not be dead, it's definitely lagging, just 13% of core gamers and 6% of casuals named it as their primary platform.

There should be a big difference in the types of games each group plays though, right? As things turned out, there were only a few instances of the 196 favorite games listed where casual gamers named things like Wii Sports or Solitaire as their favorite games, the majority were M rated games like Borderlands, Dragon Age, Red Dead Redemption, or Call of Duty. The core gaming crowd had perhaps more 'casual' games than the casual crowd did, although both tended to identify time consuming or T/M rated games as their favorites. 

Maybe we need more classifications for gamers, or maybe labeling people isn't the right thing to do. Who knows, but I think that research into gamer self-classifications could make for some interesting research and a good addition to the literature as a basis for other researchers. So hop to it all you students out there! I love games and the culture that comes with them (mostly), I think I base my self-classification as a core gamer partly on that love and the history that I have with games, regardless of the amount of time I spend actually playing them. What kind of classifications do you use, and how do you define each group and yourself? Let me know in the comments!

Notes: My sample came overwhelmingly from Bitmobbers and the penny pinchers over at www.cheapassgamer.com which might have skewed my casual gamer group. I'll be posting a few more articles with findings from my research and tips for students who want to work in the video game industry so be on the lookout!

 
Problem? Report this post
BITMOB'S SPONSOR
Adsense-placeholder
Comments (4)
My_face_2
April 30, 2011

I think of myself as a little bit of both. 

I am hardcore- I play over 40 hours of games a week, I write about games, I host a podcast about games, I listen to over 10 hours of gaming related podcasts every week, and I read lots of gaming blogs and sites. 

I am also casual- I play EVE while watching TV, I like to kick back on the bed and play games on my iPod, and I enjoy simple games like Bejeweled and Tetris.

Dscn0568_-_copy
May 01, 2011

I always thought that the casual-hardcore gamer profile is a false dichotomy. There's no hourly rate or amount of titles you have to buy to consider yourself hardcore. I figured a casual gamer would be someone who didn't keep up with news sites or forums except for E3 or when a game they want has just been released, which would be hard to get a sample of with an Internet-based sample.

Picture_002
May 14, 2011

I've honeslty always felt the the hardcore-casual issue an incredibly overblown one mosty by gamers and journalists with a bit of panicky and insecure streak and delusion sense that somehow they "own" the craft. As I've pretty much grown up in both cultures together and  I often see things with games in the same light as stuff I've already gone through with hip-hop. And the uber-defensive "hardcore" sensationalizing the "other" and complaining about the threat to "real" games has the same annoying air of the "real hip-hop-heads" back when I was a kid. (I'm tabling some social issues that are mostly immaterial this idea of an audience dichotomy for the purposes of the comment) Those music fans started haboring the same ridiculous resentment of the new mainstream audience for latching onto a style that "real" or "hardcore" enough for their tastes. Likewise, the same lame "they won't support it and buy the way we do" argument for artists and record labels were made and a load of other grating complaints about the popularity the same group spent years lamenting the genre never having. All this, essentially because the cultural penetration it got wasn't exactly to how they wanted to tailor it. 

From my perspective, the hardcore-casual non-issue is pretty much the same 3-year-old 's resentful reaction to the newborn splitting the attention it used to solely get reaction happens with essentially any subculture. As the article sort of points to, in many of these forced "us vs them" distinguishments, a lot of words that really mean nothing or have very vague definitions are used. "Hardcore"  and "casual" are such shaky words in the same vein as "real" is such the same light. Hence very amusing statements such as Halo, Madden, and Call of Duty players as "casual" when convenient to an argument. Really at this point, I find this entire thing so off-putting that (if I ever get back to being healthy enough to focus on writing) I've thought out a take on (read: lifting/stealing) the Page 2 Podcast's "Quines Mas Macho?" premise -a take on an SNL skit of the same name, for the purposes satirically classifying things as "hardcore" in expression of how ridiculous I fd the construct to be in the first place. 

Ultimately, to answer Jordan's closing question, I don't classify myself as anything other than a gamer anymore than I would waste time putting myself in some imaginary camp of "hardcore" or "casual" sports fan. It's purposeless for me.

May 16, 2011

Thanks for the comments! I have to say that, in general, I agree with the idea that hardcore and casual is a false dichotomy at least insofar as the two segments aren't concretely definable. That was definitely shown quantitatively through my research and the overlap in people's self perceptions as casual or hardcore and the small differences in the games they played or the time they spent on video games. I think the difference in money spent and number of games consumed between self proclaimed hardcore and casual gamers would show a slightly higher number for 'hardcore' gamers in both cases but definitely not enough to define the group by those numbers. Like I mentioned, I would consider myself a 'core' gamer but I don't actually play games too often, I also don't buy too many games anymore but I spend a lot of time thinking about games and the culture around them. Perhaps a definition based on a person's emotional and societal investment into games would be more useful?

My research was about uses and gratifications for using games, and I think that those could be a way to concretely define groups of gamers and perhaps explain Gerren's example of Halo, Madden, and CoD players being described as casual. Those gamers might be considered casual because they play the games for competition and distraction more than fantasy or escapism. They don't actually put it in their mind that they are the character, they just use games to pass time and say they're better than somebody eles. Maybe coming up with a whole new way to categorize gamers for the sake of building research about gaming culture and video games would be a good investment of somebody's time.

You must log in to post a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.