This Whole "Casual/Hardcore" Argument...

Are we all forgetting that people aren’t always “Casual” and aren’t always “Hardcore”, and that there’s this all-inclusive thing called a “Halo fan”?

The argument against casuals is that they’ll all bail for Call of Duty once it comes out. Well, there’s obviously going to be some people that just buy Halo for a bit and then move right back to CoD…But you know there are plenty of Halo fans out there, right? People who don’t just jump ship when a new game comes along?

I know plenty of “casual” halo fans who would never play a CoD game if they could avoid it. You don’t have to be “Hardcore” to stick with Halo and have it be your prime game. Furthermore, you don’t even have to be competitive.

Hardcore fans, you gotta realize that there are plenty of non-serious non-competitive gamers who really love Halo just as much as you do. They aren’t all people who just bought Halo to bide their time until the next Call of Duty game comes out. That’s just not true.

The argument against the hardcore is that they want to turn the game into something that can only be played by them, have no variety, and cater entirely to their skills so they can crush you into dust.

That’s only half true.

Competitive players (“hardcore”) simply want the game to be fair for everyone. They want everyone to be on the same level, so that everyone has an equal chance to kill everyone else. They don’t see inherent advantages as being “fun” because it ruins the balance of their game, and can lead to cheap tactics and tricks.

It’s not so much that they want to get rid of variety, they just want to get rid of anything that’s not balanced and fair. Usually this means reducing the weapon and ability sandbox, but also keep in mind that they don’t want to UNIVERSALLY remove these things. They just want them kept out of their ranked and “professional” gametypes.

A common misconception about a hardcore ranking structure is that you will get stomped on if you even enter that kind of environment. The funny thing is, it’s the total opposite. Yes, in the very beginning of the game, you might get your -Yoink- handed to you a few times. This is normal, as the game has to get more than a few games under your belt before it realizes “Hey, you aren’t as good as these guys, let’s match you with these other guys instead.”

If a “bad” Halo player plays Ranked for long enough, they’ll actually start playing against people that are just as terrible as they are. I remember back in Halo 2, I was BAD at the game, yet I was always getting matched up with people I could play against because the ranking system worked, especially at the low levels.

Also, not every hardcore player is a saliva-spitting rageaholic teenager with severe social problems. Can we put that stereotype to rest, please?

What both you casuals and hardcores need to understand is that you both want the same things: To have fun with Halo. You just want to have fun in different ways. The most common misconception is that you two can’t co-exist, and that there MUST be this massive war of CASUAL vs HARDCORE. It doesn’t have to be that way.

If you put “hardcore” settings in ranked, casual players can still enjoy Ranked play at lower levels not because of the settings, but because of the people they’re playing against. Conversely, if you put a lot of fun “perks” and abilities into Social play, the hardcore won’t even have to care because they have their Ranked play that caters to them. Casual players can have a blast and just ignore the rest of it if they really want to.

This is not rocket science, people.

All it takes is for people to approach it with an open mind and stop violently hating each other so much.

This a million times. We could coincide in the same game, all we need is barriers for each community. The competitive players want no perks, no AA’s, traditional styled Halo while the casual gamers are all for the changes and want these perks and AA’s to bring in new elements. That’s fine, there’s nothing wrong with people getting what they want. The solution is so easy that I hope 343 really pays attention and sees it.

We could easily play Halo 4 where playlists were separated well. Give the competitive community a set of 4-5 playlists with ranks that have no armor abilities or perks with increased movespeed. Give the casual gamers a separate set of playlists that also feature a variety of gametypes, even some ranked, and include perks and AA’s for them.

It’s such a simple solution, honestly. The player base could then choose between which set of playlists they like the most and they could play in whatever playlist they like, they aren’t limited to just one community. But at the same time, the competitive players get what they want and the casual players get what they want as well.

Competitive players just want a balanced game without any cheap gimmicks or tricks. Games like Starcraft II is a perfect example of a game built for competitive balance yet is still insanely fun for casual and competitive players. Halo had that in Halo 1 but has lost its way since then unfortunately.

The dichotomy is entirely artificial. There’s no real separation between “casual” players and “hardcore” players. As with so many things in life, a binary conception of Halo players is a gross oversimplification. In reality, players exist at points along a continuum, and no two players are going to occupy the same point.

> The dichotomy is entirely artificial. There’s no real separation between “casual” players and “hardcore” players. As with so many things in life, a binary conception of Halo players is a gross oversimplification. In reality, players exist at points along a continuum, and no two players are going to occupy the same point.

A complete separation of playlists would cover all of those in between as well though. In Halo 2 and 3, there were just one set of playlists. These playlists catered to both casuals and competitive players in the same group and everyone was extremely happy. Who is to say that 2 sets of playlists won’t offer an even better solution for all points in the spectrum of Halo players?

> Competitive players just want a balanced game without any cheap gimmicks or tricks. Games like Starcraft II is a perfect example of a game built for competitive balance yet is still insanely fun for casual and competitive players. Halo had that in Halo 1 but has lost its way since then unfortunately.

While that’s true, can you really say that throwing in perks/whatever else into the Social playlists would really do so much harm?

In my Opinion games were never meant to be taken seriously, they were supposed to be for fun that’s why they where created.

> In my Opinion games were never meant to be taken seriously, they were supposed to be for fun that’s why they where created.

Maybe your definition of “fun” is not the same as the other side’s? I know people people who think it’s “fun” to betray their teammates and make them mad. So please, don’t use the “fun” argument, because what you may find fun, I wouldn’t find fun.

I think the playlist solution is a great idea. I usually play ranked matches because I like to be competitive, but every once in a while I like to play some social with my friends just because it’s fun to play Halo. Also, it seems like everyone is forgetting about all of the custom gametypes people will make. I think the use of “perks” would bring a whole new slew of fun custom games for us to play.

> I think the playlist solution is a great idea. I usually play ranked matches because I like to be competitive, but every once in a while I like to play some social with my friends just because it’s fun to play Halo. Also, it seems like everyone is forgetting about all of the custom gametypes people will make. I think the use of “perks” would bring a whole new slew of fun custom games for us to play.

IF they keep them in the right category. If they’re universally applied no matter what, then we’ll have a problem. If they’re something you can toggle on and off in the gametypes, that’s great too.

I just hope you can pre-determine “perks” in set loadouts!

> > In my Opinion games were never meant to be taken seriously, they were supposed to be for fun that’s why they where created.
>
> Maybe your definition of “fun” is not the same as the other side’s? I know people people who think it’s “fun” to betray their teammates and make them mad. So please, don’t use the “fun” argument, because what you may find fun, I wouldn’t find fun.

I don’t find Betraying fun, but I man up and deal with it Not get mad and go for vengeance because games aren’t meant to be taken <mark>seriously</mark>.

> > I think the playlist solution is a great idea. I usually play ranked matches because I like to be competitive, but every once in a while I like to play some social with my friends just because it’s fun to play Halo. Also, it seems like everyone is forgetting about all of the custom gametypes people will make. I think the use of “perks” would bring a whole new slew of fun custom games for us to play.
>
> IF they keep them in the right category. If they’re universally applied no matter what, then we’ll have a problem. If they’re something you can toggle on and off in the gametypes, that’s great too.

To me, that’s why Reach failed. They gave no-one a choice. It was either “convert or die”. I played, beat many people, but the more I played, the more I grew to hate the AAs. And now, here I am.

> > > In my Opinion games were never meant to be taken seriously, they were supposed to be for fun that’s why they where created.
> >
> > Maybe your definition of “fun” is not the same as the other side’s? I know people people who think it’s “fun” to betray their teammates and make them mad. So please, don’t use the “fun” argument, because what you may find fun, I wouldn’t find fun.
>
> I don’t find Betraying fun, but I man up and deal with it Not get mad and go for vengeance because games aren’t meant to be taken <mark>seriously</mark>.

You just don’t get it, do you? Some people find “fun” in competition, and as such, they take the game seriously because it’s fun to them. It’s fun to me to compete and win against the opponents. Get that through your head this time.

> > The dichotomy is entirely artificial. There’s no real separation between “casual” players and “hardcore” players. As with so many things in life, a binary conception of Halo players is a gross oversimplification. In reality, players exist at points along a continuum, and no two players are going to occupy the same point.
>
> A complete separation of playlists would cover all of those in between as well though. In Halo 2 and 3, there were just one set of playlists. These playlists catered to both casuals and competitive players in the same group and everyone was extremely happy. Who is to say that 2 sets of playlists won’t offer an even better solution for all points in the spectrum of Halo players?

Actually H2 and H3 already had separate playlists. labeled casual and Ranked. its always been there for each until reach took it out. H4 just needs to stick with its traditional playlists of casual and ranked and things will be fine.

casual gamers can play a competitive game and enjoy it

competitive gamers cannot play a social game and enjoy it

any gamer can play halo and enjoy it

as much as i am incredibly competitive in my gaming, i like the challenge of beating people with tricks up their sleeves, learning to overcome new obstacles, and earning the right to say ‘you suck’ at the end of games like this where we loose by 6 points, and im the only person to have a KD more than 0 on my team.

you idea for the separation of play lists is a good one, ranked ‘hardcore’ play lists based on classic halo, ranked core play lists that are actually halo 4, and social play lists for unranked games, also a custom game finder wouldn’t go amiss.

yes i have my bad games im just using an example that makes my point glaringly obvious. to level the playing field against myself, here, you can see im not always exceptional, but on that page (at time of posting) i have 2 games when i had a -KD, but i won only just over half the games.
i refuse to believe im the only person who regularly gets matched up against players my skill but matched with players, who aren’t quite so good, or focused.

in my opinion every time i played a new halo game i had to learn to play, admittedly after H1 i had the basics down, but H2,3 and reach all had things to learn before you could be good at them, in H2 it was leading shots, in halo 3 it was equipment and in reach it was bloom and AAs. if i wanted to play a game that never changes like most of these ‘hardcore’ players, i would play CoD more, i played CoD3 as my first CoD on xbox… i have played all the others since and i can go back and forth between versions without getting stumped by the game-play, its not changed enough to notice, but i went on H3 the other day, i go destroyed… because i forgot how to play that version off halo.

i can understand you not wanting to deal with a new learning curve, but that does not give you the right to come on the internet demanding that no-one else have on either. or raging that the game developers dare even think of adding something new to a game that is already so different from the game you want it to be that changing it again will make no difference without going backwards.

One question, can a casual player not be a competitive player as well?

> > > > In my Opinion games were never meant to be taken seriously, they were supposed to be for fun that’s why they where created.
> > >
> > > Maybe your definition of “fun” is not the same as the other side’s? I know people people who think it’s “fun” to betray their teammates and make them mad. So please, don’t use the “fun” argument, because what you may find fun, I wouldn’t find fun.
> >
> > I don’t find Betraying fun, but I man up and deal with it Not get mad and go for vengeance because games aren’t meant to be taken <mark>seriously</mark>.
>
> You just don’t get it, do you? Some people find “fun” in competition, and as such, they take the game seriously because it’s fun to them. It’s fun to me to compete and win against the opponents. Get that through your head this time.

games are meant to be fun, and not taken seriously? this person obviously has never seen a sports fan, those people get so obsessed and take their sports so seriously its unreal, and they aren’t even the ones playing the game, they just watch it…

> > > The dichotomy is entirely artificial. There’s no real separation between “casual” players and “hardcore” players. As with so many things in life, a binary conception of Halo players is a gross oversimplification. In reality, players exist at points along a continuum, and no two players are going to occupy the same point.
> >
> > A complete separation of playlists would cover all of those in between as well though. In Halo 2 and 3, there were just one set of playlists. These playlists catered to both casuals and competitive players in the same group and everyone was extremely happy. Who is to say that 2 sets of playlists won’t offer an even better solution for all points in the spectrum of Halo players?
>
> Actually H2 and H3 already had separate playlists. labeled casual and Ranked. its always been there for each until reach took it out. H4 just needs to stick with its traditional playlists of casual and ranked and things will be fine.

But there were no such things as perks or loadouts in Halo 2 and Halo 3. The game was completely even through and through, in every single playlist. This is what I mean by making seperate sets of playlists. Many people want the old Halo where no perks, AA’s exist while there are many who would like to have the perks and AA’s. So all 343 has to do is make separate sets of playlists where each group gets multiple different types of playlists including ranked and unranked but one set includes the AA’s and perks while one set does not.

> One question, can a casual player not be a competitive player as well?

yes they can be competitive, when they want to be.
competitive gamers on the other hand, define their gaming experience by competing with other people, they simply don’t understand, ‘taking it easy’.

im a competitive gamer, but i do not agree that it must be so ‘balanced’ by the concept that a ton of bricks is only equal in weight to a ton of bricks… when in reality your ton of armour lock, is very much equal in weight to my ton of AC, and that guys ton of evade or the other person’s ton of bricks.

> > One question, can a casual player not be a competitive player as well?
>
> yes they can be competitive, when they want to be.
> competitive gamers on the other hand, define their gaming experience by competing with other people, they simply don’t understand, ‘taking it easy’.

You’re just as ignorant as the other guy. I am a competitive gamer, and I “take it easy” in customs. But when I go into matchmaking, I play to win the game and have fun playing to win the game. To me, there’s just a time and a place for “taking it easy”. I don’t know anyone who seriously goes into Matchmaking with the intention to lose.

Then again, I am “taking it easy” anytime I play a game, because I’m playing a game, and not stressing over real life.