Game Balance & The Endgame

[Lockpick]

2 hours ago, oedipus_tex said:

I took a snapshot of the state of various characters I have run recently. Far from a full picture but it provides an idea.

 

Top left is my main-main. Only character who has a full build with Range defense, S/L defense, and everything. (I have one other character, a Stalker, who has a similar end game build).

 

The Oedipus Tex character himself is less complete. He uses the "Trust Fund Perma Dom build" I posted about here: 

 

 

 

Top-right is a semi complete build. I like this character but he's being retired in favor of the Earth/Savage Tex build.

 

 

Bottom row is what would be joining your radio teams or other content. These usually get a mercy IO or 2 where the character is lagging. 

 

 

This seems to align with my experience as well.  I have a bunch of characters and by 40 I will usually have a full IO set build.  At 50, I will pull out set IOs that are not part of my final build as I buy the sets for my end build.

 

Between 22 and 40 I will have a mix of basic IOs and set IOs depending on what I can afford or what drops.

 

I guess the point I am trying to make is that the character with end game min/max builds are usually going to have set IO bonuses and have several vet levels.  They will have several incarnate powers.  They will be powerful.  They are supposed to be powerful.  The end game content needs to align to these end game builds.  We don't need to change the 1 to 50 experience to make it harder when the concern is high end content for end game builds.

 

I am also curious about the amount of time played at 50 compared to 1 to 50.  I guess I can understand a bit better the issue some are having if they are focusing on one character at 50 and finding the current content easy.  I focus on leveling for the majority of my play time, so for me the amount of time I am godlike is more limited.  Again, I would suggest that the answer is to create harder content for the end game builds as opposed to balancing the 1 to 50 game to make it harder.

 

I would also suggest that people that think the game is easy should try to create AE content they find challenging as Lines did.  If 5 to 10 people created the high end AE content, we might be able to convince the dev team to add appropriate rewards for that content and could have a rotation of high end AE content added to the WST.

 

That would be a win for everyone.

[Lockpick]

8 hours ago, Haijinx said:

Also I think inferring someone who has a level 50 as a "power gamer" is ludacris.  It takes almost no effort to get to 50 in this game. 

 

No camping is required.  No gear searching.  Nothing.  You can just plug in the SOs you get and keep teaming.  

 

If you just played 3 hours a week, you could pug to 50 in a couple of months.  

 

 

 

I think the term power gamer is not defined well or people have different definitions of it.  I tried to define it earlier based on my thoughts, but the definition from Wikipedia is below where player focus on maximizing potential.  In that context, there are probably a lot of power gamers here.  I think there are negative connotations around power gaming, so people may not be comfortable being called a power gamer. 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Powergaming

Powergaming in roleplaying games can take several forms. One form is the deliberate creation of optimal player characters (PCs), with the aim of maximising the power the player wields in the game world. This is known as min-maxing, due to the practice of maximising desirable or "powerful" traits while minimising underpowered or unuseful traits.

 

[Mezmera]

18 minutes ago, Lockpick said:

 

I think the term power gamer is not defined well or people have different definitions of it.  I tried to define it earlier based on my thoughts, but the definition from Wikipedia is below where player focus on maximizing potential.  In that context, there are probably a lot of power gamers here.  I think there are negative connotations around power gaming, so people may not be comfortable being called a power gamer. 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Powergaming

Powergaming in roleplaying games can take several forms. One form is the deliberate creation of optimal player characters (PCs), with the aim of maximising the power the player wields in the game world. This is known as min-maxing, due to the practice of maximising desirable or "powerful" traits while minimising underpowered or unuseful traits.

 

Yeah like where doesn't one try to maximize their results in most anything they are doing.  Do they call football players powerplayers because they train to be as effective as they can be?  How about dancers, they train to be as good at dancing as they can be, you won't call someone that dances a powerdancer.   

 

The negative connotation with "powergamer" assumes all that person does is sits in a basement playing videogames wearing diapers so they don't have to get up from playing while being some slob.  The Southpark Warcraft episode did a fairly decent job depicting the stigma of "powergaming".  

 

You don't have to play this game days on end to be good at it.  All one needs to know are what are the better powers available to them and how best to incorporate those into a fun experience for yourself.  Trying to be effective and efficient is completely normal at anything you're doing be it dancing or gaming.  I consider myself then a power monopoly gamer.  

[Lockpick]

16 minutes ago, Mezmera said:

Yeah like where doesn't one try to maximize their results in most anything they are doing.  Do they call football players powerplayers because they train to be as effective as they can be?  How about dancers, they train to be as good at dancing as they can be, you won't call someone that dances a powerdancer.   

 

The negative connotation with "powergamer" assumes all that person does is sits in a basement playing videogames wearing diapers so they don't have to get up from playing while being some slob.  The Southpark Warcraft episode did a fairly decent job depicting the stigma of "powergaming".  

 

You don't have to play this game days on end to be good at it.  All one needs to know are what are the better powers available to them and how best to incorporate those into a fun experience for yourself.  Trying to be effective and efficient is completely normal at anything you're doing be it dancing or gaming.  I consider myself then a power monopoly gamer.  

 

In this game, especially on Everlasting, there are players that are more focused on story and role play as opposed to maximizing their results.  The definition of power gaming is what it is.  I didn't make it up.  It is just terminology.  I usually hear the terms casual or power gamer for MMOs.

 

I'm not sure why correlating to dancing or football helps make your point.  Someone playing football to progress has different terminology that they use and a player might go from high school player, to elite recruit, to college player, pro, etc. 

 

I don't get the negative connotation myself since I pretty much agree with the definition. I consider myself a power gamer because I do, in general, what the definition states a power gamer does.  I generally try to maximize my character's potential and I tend to focus on content that allows me to progress efficiently enough to suit my needs.

 

[Mezmera]

39 minutes ago, Lockpick said:

 

In this game, especially on Everlasting, there are players that are more focused on story and role play as opposed to maximizing their results.  The definition of power gaming is what it is.  I didn't make it up.  It is just terminology.  I usually hear the terms casual or power gamer for MMOs.

 

I'm not sure why correlating to dancing or football helps make your point.  Someone playing football to progress has different terminology that they use and a player might go from high school player, to elite recruit, to college player, pro, etc. 

 

I don't get the negative connotation myself since I pretty much agree with the definition. I consider myself a power gamer because I do, in general, what the definition states a power gamer does.  I generally try to maximize my character's potential and I tend to focus on content that allows me to progress efficiently enough to suit my needs.

 

Well I've played with some very good basketball players who aren't "professional" being paid to play.  Being paid doesn't make one any less good or bad and I've seen "elite" recruits get outplayed by a bunch of nobody's.  Some people just fall through the cracks but to not say they're all just basketball players at the end of it would be fundamentally in-factual.  I get there's a difference where you're playing pickup games there's sometimes the kid that never practiced and just shows up not knowing the fundamentals and expects to contribute in a game, and on that same token you can tell in a pickup game where someone has played all of their life.  

 

Mostly it's the time and effort someone has given to that chosen activity that determines whether or not if they are an actual "basketball player" or "casually playing basketball", nothing power about it.  

 

If someone shows up to CoH for 5 mins once a week and learns nothing then yes they are more "casual" but for the most part everyone is just gamers, how they choose to develop their gaming habit is up to them.  So for me the only negative connotation would be the casual person showing up not knowing a thing expecting to contribute which I don't think this game really has any actual casual players, by now everyone at least has the fundamentals down, especially if they even found this game to play on again to begin with.  

Edited October 14, 2020 by Mezmera

[Lockpick]

23 minutes ago, Mezmera said:

Well I've played with some very good basketball players who aren't "professional" being paid to play.  Being paid doesn't make one any less good or bad and I've seen "elite" recruits get outplayed by a bunch of nobody's.  Some people just fall through the cracks but to not say they're all just basketball players at the end of it would be fundamentally in-factual.  I get there's a difference where you're playing pickup games there's sometimes the kid that never practiced and just shows up not knowing the fundamentals and expects to contribute in a game, and on that same token you can tell in a pickup game where someone has played all of their life.  

 

Mostly it's the time and effort someone has given to that chosen activity that determines whether or not if they are an actual "basketball player" or "casually playing basketball", nothing power about it.  

 

If someone shows up to CoH for 5 mins once a week and learns nothing then yes they are more "casual" but for the most part everyone is just gamers, how they choose to develop their gaming habit is up to them.  So for me the only negative connotation would be the casual person showing up not knowing a thing expecting to contribute which I don't think this game really has any actual casual players, by now everyone at least has the fundamentals down, especially if they even found this game to play on again to begin with.  

 

I didn't say anything about pay, I mentioned terminology.  It seems to me like you just don't agree with the definition of power gamer.  If you don't like the definition of power gamer on Wikipedia, please feel free to edit it.  I'm not sure why you are arguing with me about a definition on Wikipedia or terms like "power gamer" and "casual player" that have generally been used to describe players in MMOs for years.

[Ralathar44]

Power gaming vs casual isn't a binary and it isn't a 1 trait definition.  Time invested, min/maxing, how serious you take it, etc are all factors and raises or lowers you in the power gaming spectrum.  I hate when people treat concepts as a binary, that's not how anything works.

If you don't min/max your builds but you play seriously, build the builds you're making seriously, and invest alot of time in the game you're still pretty power gamer.  Switch the time investment and min/maxing and you're similarly pretty power gamer.  Time IS a factor, but just one of many factors.

I'm relatively power gamer despite intentionally not min/maxing.  I try to build well ofc, but I don't take cookie cutter builds or try to numerically min/max to the exception of everything else.  I build what I feel like building to the best of my ability.  So that stone/regen brute focusing on regen bonuses is definitely not optimized, but he had full frankesets, some sets, and a good deal of uniques by 50.  So he was still pretty power gamey despite not being min/maxed in either powersets or build.

[Mezmera]

37 minutes ago, Lockpick said:

 

I didn't say anything about pay, I mentioned terminology.  It seems to me like you just don't agree with the definition of power gamer.  If you don't like the definition of power gamer on Wikipedia, please feel free to edit it.  I'm not sure why you are arguing with me about a definition on Wikipedia or terms like "power gamer" and "casual player" that have generally been used to describe players in MMOs for years.

There's no argument here with you, you can call gaming whatever terminology you'd like.  To me a gamer is a gamer, someone who has the fundamental mindset required for the task of gaming.   To what degree they take the time to hone their skills after that is just creatures being creatures.  Wikipedia can call things whatever but life has been around a lot longer than Wiki, same with Webster's.  

[oedipus_tex]

I think there's also a kind of "Inverse Power Gamer" dynamic for some players too.

 

I need to play a character who is "good enough" to contribute. But it's also weirdly important to me that the character not be "flavor of the month." I like to be one or two steps from perfect. Good but not cookie cutter.

 

That's how I ended up maining an Elec/Psi Dom. It's definitely not the best Dom. Electric frankly gets a bad deal from the Domination rules. But it does have its synergy and is functional enough. 

 

I also have enough characters that it doesnt bother me much to skip "critical" powers anymore either. I have a Dom or 2 now without the AoE immobilize for example. 

Edited October 14, 2020 by oedipus_tex

[Haijinx]

3 hours ago, Ralathar44 said:

Power gaming vs casual isn't a binary and it isn't a 1 trait definition.  Time invested, min/maxing, how serious you take it, etc are all factors and raises or lowers you in the power gaming spectrum.  I hate when people treat concepts as a binary, that's not how anything works.

If you don't min/max your builds but you play seriously, build the builds you're making seriously, and invest alot of time in the game you're still pretty power gamer.  Switch the time investment and min/maxing and you're similarly pretty power gamer.  Time IS a factor, but just one of many factors.

I'm relatively power gamer despite intentionally not min/maxing.  I try to build well ofc, but I don't take cookie cutter builds or try to numerically min/max to the exception of everything else.  I build what I feel like building to the best of my ability.  So that stone/regen brute focusing on regen bonuses is definitely not optimized, but he had full frankesets, some sets, and a good deal of uniques by 50.  So he was still pretty power gamey despite not being min/maxed in either powersets or build.

For an MMO - 

 

Id define it more like this: 

 

Spends at least 20 hours a week playing the game 

At least some weeks spends at least half their time only doing things to get better gear (Farming Money, Raids, Camping Rare Drops, etc) 

Within a reasonable/short amount of time will reach max level and be approaching a top tier gear set (feet on the path sort of thing) 

 

Have I ever been in that category?  Sure in Anarchy Online. 

In COH Live?  Not really

On Homecoming? Nah 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Wavicle]

15 minutes ago, Haijinx said:

For an MMO - 

 

Id define it more like this: 

 

Spends at least 20 hours a week playing the game 

At least some weeks spends at least half their time only doing things to get better gear (Farming Money, Raids, Camping Rare Drops, etc) 

Within a reasonable/short amount of time will reach max level and be approaching a top tier gear set (feet on the path sort of thing) 

 

Have I ever been in that category?  Sure in Anarchy Online. 

In COH Live?  Not really

On Homecoming? Nah 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

That might be power gamer plus.

[Gobbledigook]

I must be a part time power gamer i think.....or a really dedicated casual 😛

Edited October 14, 2020 by Gobbledegook

[Coyotedancer]

11 minutes ago, Gobbledegook said:

I must be a part time power gamer i think.....or a really dedicated casual 😛

Dedicated Casual... I like it. 👍

[Haijinx]

1 hour ago, Wavicle said:

That might be power gamer plus.

In many MMOs people play 40+ hours a week.  Including working hours per day on gear. 

 

Those that have jobs are recognizable by their zombie like appearance since they are seriously sleep deprived. 

 

I was being a bit conservative probably.

[Ralathar44]

15 minutes ago, Haijinx said:

In many MMOs people play 40+ hours a week.  Including working hours per day on gear. 

 

Those that have jobs are recognizable by their zombie like appearance since they are seriously sleep deprived. 

 

I was being a bit conservative probably.

That's a really unfair definition because there are power gamers who just don't have that kind of spare time.  This ain't 20 years ago, alot of gamers have families and jobs of higher level positions.  Responsibilities.  It doesn't mean you're any less serious of a gamer, it just means that you have things in life you can't just walk away from.  I'm not about to draw a line saying someone who takes care of their job and family can't be a power gamer.  That just feels like a toxic combo of elitism and the old stereotype of the basement dwelling loser that does nothing but game. 

My own brother got fired for playing WOW from one of his jobs but TBH he feels more like an addicted casual.  He didn't understand guild politics, he didn't understand the mechanics, he wasn't a terribly great player, he was just an addict who caused problems for his guild with social drama.  And because his boss was also part of his guild the combo of social drama in game and showing up to work tired or (on the last day) not showing up by lunch at all got him fired.

And WOW was the only game he ever even played that much lol.

[Haijinx]

19 minutes ago, Ralathar44 said:

That's a really unfair definition because there are power gamers who just don't have that kind of spare time.  This ain't 20 years ago, alot of gamers have families and jobs of higher level positions.  Responsibilities.  It doesn't mean you're any less serious of a gamer, it just means that you have things in life you can't just walk away from.  I'm not about to draw a line saying someone who takes care of their job and family can't be a power gamer.  That just feels like a toxic combo of elitism and the old stereotype of the basement dwelling loser that does nothing but game. 

My own brother got fired for playing WOW from one of his jobs but TBH he feels more like an addicted casual.  He didn't understand guild politics, he didn't understand the mechanics, he wasn't a terribly great player, he was just an addict who caused problems for his guild with social drama.  And because his boss was also part of his guild the combo of social drama in game and showing up to work tired or (on the last day) not showing up by lunch at all got him fired.

And WOW was the only game he ever even played that much lol.

I wasn't being dismissive of the addiction problems in MMOs.  Just mentioning that a lot of working power gamers are in those straits.  

 

Its definitely easier to be a power gamer if you don't have a job.  Whether during a stretch of unemployment or whatever. 

 

I don't know if casual can describe someone spending all (and more) of their free time in a game.  Even if they aren't particularly good at said game. 

 

And I actually went with the 20 hour definition because of some of those things you described.  Just added there are a lot of people (still) who would call that 20 hour weekly player a casual. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[golstat2003]

1 hour ago, Haijinx said:

In many MMOs people play 40+ hours a week.  Including working hours per day on gear. 

 

Those that have jobs are recognizable by their zombie like appearance since they are seriously sleep deprived. 

 

I was being a bit conservative probably.

I have a few heavy FFXIOnline grinders at my job. When they come on for video meetings you can tell they haven't been getting enough sleep. So much so that my manager commented on it. They blame it on their dogs, kids and heavy noise out their windows. 😛 Only I and a few of their colleagues know the truth.

[Haijinx]

20 hours would be something like

 

2 hours a night + 5 hours sat and sun.

 

Easy enough to pull off if that was what you wanted to do.  Many people watch more TV than that for example.

[Ralathar44]

25 minutes ago, Haijinx said:

20 hours would be something like

 

2 hours a night + 5 hours sat and sun.

 

Easy enough to pull off if that was what you wanted to do.  Many people watch more TV than that for example.

Yeah 20 hours is much more reasonable and more than enough to be a better player with more min/maxing than 95% of people.  You could, for example, easily make high tier leagues in a MOBA playing 20 hours a week and maybe not even dedicating all 20 hours to that MOBA.  You could be a skilled min/maxing repository of skill and knowledge who takes the game seriously.
 

35 minutes ago, Haijinx said:

I don't know if casual can describe someone spending all (and more) of their free time in a game.  Even if they aren't particularly good at said game. 

Casual vs Power Gamer is more dealing with approach/mentality than it is time spent.  Time spent is correlation not causation.
 

35 minutes ago, Haijinx said:

Just added there are a lot of people (still) who would call that 20 hour weekly player a casual. 

I know someone who used to play MOBAs for 40 hours a week and never made it out of bronze/silver tier :D.  Sheer hour count means nothing on it's own.  Again it's correlation not causation.  People who spend more hours tend to be more knowledgeable, skilled, and serious, etc, but it's far from a guarantee.  And I'd argue someone spending 40 hours a week while never learning from their mistakes is the definition of casual gamer.

They're like the Naruto of gaming, only without the magic fox/bloodline powers to bail them out.  Constantly saying they are tying their hardest but never actually admitting their mistakes or doing the work.  Instead they just slam into the same wall the same way over and over again.

When someone says "filthy casual" (usually jokingly these days) it was rarely a knock at the hours someone put in but more of what they played and how they played it.  Hence the origin of that meme.  Power Gamer itself is just a rebranding of the old casual vs hardcore gamer debate and casual games was such a strong concept in game culture that it literally became an official genre.

In modern times people with lesser (but not invalid) gaming interests or commitments have waged a PC war where everyone is now called a gamer and so the new term "core gamer" had to be created so that people doing studies could differentiate between a "gamer" that plays animal crossing a few times a week vs a "core gamer" who prolly plays 15+ hours a week of "less simple" and "more committed" game types.  There is nothing wrong with people liking Animal Crossing and Angry Birds, those are great games, but the watering down of the term gamer literally forced science to invent a new term devoid of the old baggage to refer to the same thing "gamer" used to be the term for.

So all this casual vs hardcore power gamer is just a spinoff of all that mess.  Gamer used to be the mid point in between the two before the term got watered down and now "gamer" is represented by "core gamer".




None of this is new concepts btw, this was pretty much codified even like 2 decades ago. And that continues today with current scientific research. 

Edited October 15, 2020 by Ralathar44

[Lockpick]

11 hours ago, Ralathar44 said:

Yeah 20 hours is much more reasonable and more than enough to be a better player with more min/maxing than 95% of people.  You could, for example, easily make high tier leagues in a MOBA playing 20 hours a week and maybe not even dedicating all 20 hours to that MOBA.  You could be a skilled min/maxing repository of skill and knowledge who takes the game seriously.
 

Casual vs Power Gamer is more dealing with approach/mentality than it is time spent.  Time spent is correlation not causation.
 

I know someone who used to play MOBAs for 40 hours a week and never made it out of bronze/silver tier :D.  Sheer hour count means nothing on it's own.  Again it's correlation not causation.  People who spend more hours tend to be more knowledgeable, skilled, and serious, etc, but it's far from a guarantee.  And I'd argue someone spending 40 hours a week while never learning from their mistakes is the definition of casual gamer.

They're like the Naruto of gaming, only without the magic fox/bloodline powers to bail them out.  Constantly saying they are tying their hardest but never actually admitting their mistakes or doing the work.  Instead they just slam into the same wall the same way over and over again.

When someone says "filthy casual" (usually jokingly these days) it was rarely a knock at the hours someone put in but more of what they played and how they played it.  Hence the origin of that meme.  Power Gamer itself is just a rebranding of the old casual vs hardcore gamer debate and casual games was such a strong concept in game culture that it literally became an official genre.

In modern times people with lesser (but not invalid) gaming interests or commitments have waged a PC war where everyone is now called a gamer and so the new term "core gamer" had to be created so that people doing studies could differentiate between a "gamer" that plays animal crossing a few times a week vs a "core gamer" who prolly plays 15+ hours a week of "less simple" and "more committed" game types.  There is nothing wrong with people liking Animal Crossing and Angry Birds, those are great games, but the watering down of the term gamer literally forced science to invent a new term devoid of the old baggage to refer to the same thing "gamer" used to be the term for.

So all this casual vs hardcore power gamer is just a spinoff of all that mess.  Gamer used to be the mid point in between the two before the term got watered down and now "gamer" is represented by "core gamer".




None of this is new concepts btw, this was pretty much codified even like 2 decades ago. And that continues today with current scientific research. 

Thanks for the explanation and the link.  I had never heard the term "core" gamer before, so it is interesting the term came out in 2000 or earlier.  My experience with gaming started in 2004 when CoH launched.  I was addicted.  Couldn't wait to get home and play.  I was probably playing from 6 PM to midnight every day and probably 20 hours per day on weekends.  Now I treat it more like a hobby as the article indicated.  I would much rather play CoH than watch TV.  I probably play a couple of hours each night as I usually logon with one character to do the 7PM Hami raid and then run an Ephram Shah mission for threads.  I then do the same thing with another character for the 10 PM raid.

 

[Ralathar44]

2 hours ago, Lockpick said:

Thanks for the explanation and the link.  I had never heard the term "core" gamer before, so it is interesting the term came out in 2000 or earlier.  My experience with gaming started in 2004 when CoH launched.  I was addicted.  Couldn't wait to get home and play.  I was probably playing from 6 PM to midnight every day and probably 20 hours per day on weekends.  Now I treat it more like a hobby as the article indicated.  I would much rather play CoH than watch TV.  I probably play a couple of hours each night as I usually logon with one character to do the 7PM Hami raid and then run an Ephram Shah mission for threads.  I then do the same thing with another character for the 10 PM raid.

 

NP :).  Alot of folks on the fringes just wanted to be "part of the group" and so their insecurity has muddled the language over the years.  There is nothing wrong with liking something casually or playing it casually.  The solution to some folks being elitist butts (because they are also insecure) isn't to lower the bar across the board though. 

Every pastime definition has an understood threshold, in spirit if not in technicality.  Perfect example:  that person who is only a "fan" of their sports team when they are doing really well.  Realistically we know they are not really a "fan" and even calling them a "casual fan" feels like a bit of a stretch, they are really more of a "fake fan".  If you only follow the team when successful then you're being a fan of success, not a fan of the team.  A "casual fan" would be better represented by someone who doesn't catch every game but still watches and keeps track of the team even when they suck, who's watching/following habits increase as their team is more successful, but they never actually stopped like the previously mentioned "fake fan".

I think it's pretty telling that simply drawing a 5 hours a week cutoff for being considered a gamer radically changes the statistics on what the average gamer plays and how much they play a week.  That's how watered down the base term has gotten and that's why they've come up with some simple definition like "core gamer" that to differentiate between people who play casual games or play games rarely vs those who use it as their primary past time and tend to get much more involved.


The language shenanigans is a pretty noticeable problem in the dating world.  Less so than it used to be, but still a noticeable and relatively common problem.  Girl gamers are not rare these days, there are tons of them and I love it, but there is still a not insignificant section of ladies who want to be part of the group but who don't really game.  So when they call themselves a gamer they mean, in their own head, I play games therefore I must be a gamer.  Whereas most of us from the gaming mentality think of it more like "I want someone who understands my hobby and shares it, who also doesn't treat it as a threat for their attention".  So when those different definitions collide in the dating world bad things happen to otherwise well meaning people, be they male or female.  Ironically both sides will feel slighted in those situations.  Guys feels lied to and betrayed and women feel discriminated against (kept out of a "boys club") and betrayed.  Because one side is approaching it as a serious hobby and the other is approaching it as a "I wanna be considered part of the group so as not to feel lesser".

Now ofc that's a broad generalization, that can happen with the genders reversed/mixed/penguins, but since ladies have some significant emotional baggage in that area men tend not to AND statistically women are much more likely to play casual games it does tend to unfold across gendered lines like that when the disconnect in expectations occurs.  Realistically women who don't treat it as a real hobby or mainly play casual games should not be so insecure and should understand that they are talking about a different thing.  It's not a discrimination thing, it's a real difference in how they approach and engage in things.  And for their part men should be more aware of that difference and help explain the disconnect in what they want out of a "gamer" in a relationship rather than taking the bait of getting into fights over the definition.  It is absolutely not "mansplaining" to explain you own feelings about your pasttime and what you are looking for when you say you want someone that shares that pastime and anyone getting offended at you being clear, without being rude, about what you are looking for is a toxic person caught up in their own personal baggage.

Edited October 15, 2020 by Ralathar44

[Safehouse]

2 hours ago, Lockpick said:

Thanks for the explanation and the link.  I had never heard the term "core" gamer before, so it is interesting the term came out in 2000 or earlier.  My experience with gaming started in 2004 when CoH launched.  I was addicted.  Couldn't wait to get home and play.  I was probably playing from 6 PM to midnight every day and probably 20 hours per day on weekends.  Now I treat it more like a hobby as the article indicated.  I would much rather play CoH than watch TV.  I probably play a couple of hours each night as I usually logon with one character to do the 7PM Hami raid and then run an Ephram Shah mission for threads.  I then do the same thing with another character for the 10 PM raid.

 

Before I discovered COH (in 2010, I was late to the party), the only games I'd played were on SNES or SEGA, like Mario and Sonic the Hedgehog. Never really touched anything beyond that. But boy, COH got my number and sucked me right in. As with you, I got so hooked on COH that it was something of an addiction. Played a ton during summer and winter breaks when home from college. Now, with it back, I definitely choose COH over TV (well nowadays, my laptop is strong enough that I can easily play with TV on in the background)

[Grouchybeast]

1 hour ago, Ralathar44 said:

Now ofc that's a broad generalization, that can happen with the genders reversed/mixed/penguins, but since ladies have some significant emotional baggage in that area men tend not to AND statistically women are much more likely to play casual games it does tend to unfold across gendered lines like that when the disconnect in expectations occurs.  Realistically women who don't treat it as a real hobby or mainly play casual games should not be so insecure and should understand that they are talking about a different thing.  It's not a discrimination thing, it's a real difference in how they approach and engage in things.  And for their part men should be more aware of that difference and help explain the disconnect in what they want out of a "gamer" in a relationship rather than taking the bait of getting into fights over the definition.  It is absolutely not "mansplaining" to explain you own feelings about your pasttime and what you are looking for when you say you want someone that shares that pastime and anyone getting offended at you being clear, without being rude, about what you are looking for is a toxic person caught up in their own personal baggage.

Well, sure, when you preemptively decide that all games like Animal Crossing, Candy Crush, The Sims etc that entirely coincidentally happen to have a large female playerbase are Not Real Games, then suddenly it turns out that a lot of women are Not Real Gamers.

 

Good Lord.

Edited October 15, 2020 by Grouchybeast

[Ralathar44]

41 minutes ago, Grouchybeast said:

Well, sure, when you preemptively decide that all games like Animal Crossing, Candy Crush, The Sims etc that entirely coincidentally happen to have a large female playerbase are Not Real Games, then suddenly it turns out that a lot of women are Not Real Gamers.

 

Good Lord.

You have to draw a line somewhere or every mom who played Farmville is now a "real gamer".  Like it or not those games have a large tendency to grab people who don't otherwise game.  That is reality.  The amount of people who played alot of Animal Crossing or Candy Crush or Bejeweled but never really got into gaming beyond that is much larger than say, Halo or Call of Duty.  And This is true of games like Mario Party and Jackbox and Madden and Smash Brothers and stuff too.  There are plenty of people who have only gamed via a few specific titles like those but don't really game as a hobby and those folks fall under the same umbrella.  They've played games, maybe they even play regularly for awhile, but they really are not "gamers" because that's about as far as they go.  Women are also represented in much higher amounts than their statistical normal in MMORPGs and those women DO tend to be "gamers" :D.

If a definition is to mean anything then you have to draw a line somewhere.  Sometimes that line is going to exclude you.  I've played alot of musical instruments in my past but I'm not a musician.  I've done my share of drawing but I'm not an artist.  I've watched a ridiculous amount of sports in my life but I'm not a sports fan.  I have a crapton of comic book knowledge but I'm not a comic book nerd.  I've enjoyed the heck out of watching it on TV and played some poker here and there but I'm not a poker player.  I like medieval weapons and historical warfare but I'm not a history buff.  This is not hard when you can set aside your own ego.  There is a different level of commitment between people who choose something as a primary hobby vs those who engage in an area sporadically or in very focused subcategories.  There are many things I'm on the fringe of that I like, but I would never identify as part of the "in group" of because it'd be disingenuous. 

My worth is not defined by me being part of X/Y groups, me being part of X/Y groups as a label is useful only insomuch as it accurate describes my level of interest in an area to other people.  My worth is determined by my actions and my achievements, not my insecurities regarding the judgements of others and whether or not I belong to any specific group.

Edited October 15, 2020 by Ralathar44

[Bill Z Bubba]

Am I allowed to just stick with "gamer" because I like playing games?