First lesson. When you want to check the definition of "hardcore" quickly, don't just type hardcore into Google. :blush:
Hahahaha 8D
Best explanation for my point of view is a paraphrasing on the subject from a convo I had with someone.
Him: Theoretical question. Say I'm a hardcore gamer. Name me five games I should be playing right now.
Me: Are we talking "HARDCORE GAMER PWNING NOOBZ ERRY DAY" or comprehensive dedicated-type gamer?
Him: That's not an answer, and that's up to you.
Me: Well fine. Play five games. I don't actually give a shit what. But at least three have to be games you weren't playing this time last month, and no more than two should be best defined as the same genre. Preferrably, at least one must be at least four years old and one must not presently have accumulated a huge fanbase. There.
I know it's an odd and arbitrary requirement, but yeah. To me, people who actually call themselves "Hardcore Gamers" are usually too busy restricting themselves by some arbitrary limit (Online competition only! FPS only! Difficulty only! etc), but insist far too much on being called like that. ...But an actual dedicated gamer isn't afraid to vary up their games list and look into things that are outside those random labels just as much as be inside them. It's about experiencing and enjoying, but with the same kind of interest and drive that puts them far out of "casual" territory (And they'd never label themselves that). Not to say they can't have preferences, of course - but anyone who'd back away from a game because "Eww it's not rated M" is just disappointing, to me.
Of course, the Hardcore/Core/etc gamers have already labelled themselves as that and it has stuck, although some of the major outlets seem to view it differently (Microsoft and Sony seem to believe Hardcore counts as GUNS AND BLOOD ERRYWHERE, Nintendo believes it's people who've been playing games so far back they grew up when Nintendo was The [only?] choice, not the Casual choice), so... maybe that kind of dedicated gamer needs a new term.
