an old article i found that i think is still pretty relevant.

[Alisha]

http://www.gamespy.com/articles/701/701787p1.html

one of the interviews kinda illustrates why the hardcore crowd feels threatend by the casual gamer space.

[Ryos]

Eh, considering casual games have the best sales, I think the article is not particularly valid.  Though the hardcore crowd pretty much ruined World of Warcraft.  Then again, it's that same hardcore gaming group that's responsible for series like Ar Tonelico doing well enough.  In the long run hardcore gamers are like a symbiotic parasite - developers can't live with them, and they can't live without them.  I'm not sure the same analogy would work for hardcore and casual gamers.  The Wii's reviled for the numerous poorly crafted games, not the casual gamers who eat them up in droves.  

[Dincrest]

When I see articles like that, I think of Supersize Me, where they say that among the fast food eating population are the "hard core" eaters and more casual eaters.  While McDonalds went in a more health conscious direction for wider appeal, Burger King went in the opposite direction to attract the more "hard core" fast food eaters with offerings even more gut-busting and artery clogging than ever. 

[MeshGearFox]

Hardcore fast food eaters are to actually foodies like what hardcore Guitar Hero and Halo players are to actual hardcore gamers, or something.

Anyway.

I am concerned that it's the hardcore gamers driving development times up. If there's anything that'll cause another gaming crash, it'll be universally long development cycles.

[Prime Mover]

I really liked the article, very well constructed with 4 different perspectives and all that.

But I think it's A LOT more complicated than they're making it out to be. One person's "hardcore game" (Zelda) is another person's casual game. I look at the bros playing Halo and think, "what a bunch of casual non-gamers", yet the developer may consider them the root of the hardcore market. I don't think there is one hardcore market. Just like any entertainment, there are enthusiasts of different genres and artistic philosophies. The same way the next Wayne Shorter album (renound jazz saxophonist) isn't likely going to appeal to the underground alt-rock junkie. No matter how great you make a horror movie, it's not going to appeal to historical drama cinema buffs.

The fact is, once a pastime becomes important to you, you become more specialized in that area. It's a guaranteed side-effect of getting familiar with a particular thing. Unfortunately, many times, gaming enthusiasts will often step outside of their box just long enough to voice their opinion on how some other genre of gaming is inherently flawed. This has plagued the RPG genre for years, with supposedly, "hard core" PC-gaming and FPS fans trying to tell the industry that turned based gameplay is a design flaw (for an example). I'm guilty, I'll step out of my prog-rock enthusiast box sometimes to bitch about the Ramones or the Red Hot Chilli Peppers.

So in the end, I think we need to STOP talking about "hardcore" and "casual", because those definitions, especially the fragmentation of "hardcore" is just not relevant to public discussion. When was the last time you heard Ebert talk about how a movie would appeal to "cinema buffs" (as a whole). No, he talks about how a movie might appeal to Quinton Terintino fans or whatnot. Yet the gaming press constantly hammers on the "hardcore" buzzword, as if it really means something specific.