Why Cater to Casuals and 'Free' Players?

Nothing upsets a hardcore player more than to hear of his favorite series becoming more 'accessible' or 'casual friendly'. Certain games like the Souls series can be punishingly hard, and yet have a huge following. Yet in general, games are getting easier and easier, so much so that normal mode has become easy and easy is basically faceroll.

What we gamers sometimes fail to realize, is that it might not be the devs that make the call, but it is the publishers' attempt to get more sales. Hard and deep games might attract gamers looking for a challenge but a majority of gamers will not be able to get into it. It is no wonder then, that catering to casual gamers becomes very attractive.

That's not to say that devs don't have a reason to simplify their games too. No matter what, much effort have been put into making these games and it is natural that we want others to see the fruit of our labor. Blizzard's choice to include Raid Finder in World of Warcraft has allowed less hardcore players to experience their raids. Yes, it's more effort to create different difficulties, but the art assets, the encounter designs and the lore are not wasted. It also gives casual gamers something to do in the end game and keep them subscribed.

And when it comes to multiplayer games, having more players make for a vibrant community. Be it hardcore or casual, having a larger number of players is crucial at the very least, for the matchmaking to work. Even if they are non-paying players in a free-to-play game, devs have to keep them playing. Imagine having to queue for hours to get into a game. 'Casuals' do get better too, and with proper matchmaking, hard core players shouldn't run into the not so skilled (provided there are enough players playing; see where this is going?)

Ultimately, it boils down to good game design. A good casual and hard core friendly game should be easy to pick up, hard to master. And even then, the balancing between the hard core and casual will remain a delicate art.

e-Sports and Sports and Genderified Games

If you're in the least bit interested in the e-sports scene, you would have heard of the issue between the International e-Sports Federation and female gamers. In short, the federation, in attempting to bring e-Sports up to the level of conventional sporting events, separated its competitors by gender, and, because they did not have a Hearthstone league for women, banned female gamers from participating.

Needless to say, the Internet exploded in a rage akin to a million nuclear bombs dropped onto the organizers of the tournament. The organizers have since rescinded the ban, but it still leaves a sour taste on the gaming community and female gamers.

What is interesting, and not to mention, amusing, is the statement that in order to be like conventional sports, where male and female athletes are separated, the organizers have opted to take a similar approach. In a bizarre turn of events, the organizers have decided to pick the games that each gender should play. That means that, if you are a girl, you are not allowed to play Street Fighter, but can play Tekken, while guys are not allowed, according to the organizers. So sorry, Tekken Tag players, you are just not 'man' enough.

I'm sure everybody understands why guys and girls do not compete against each other in most sports and it's obvious why that does not apply to gaming. Does separating the sexes work though? There are statistics that show that the percentage of male and female gamers are nearly 50: 50, but how much of that are competitive games vs casual games, I do not know. But currently, it is a fact that fewer female gamers enter competitions. Would it be as exciting with less competitors? Perhaps that might encourage more female gamers to step forward, since fewer competitors means a better chance of winning, but that doesn't apply if you don't even give them a chance to compete. Hafu, a female Hearthstone streamer and competitor mentioned in a podcast her discussion with other female gamers and their idea that an all female league actually makes it less threatening for them so perhaps the idea of separating the leagues might really promote esports.

Games are becoming more mainstream though, and games like Hearthstone are particularly well received by all ages and genders. But at the end of the day, when it comes to gaming, it shouldn't really matter who is at the keyboard, but the level of the play. (Yes I understand when it comes to e-Sports, there's image and manner to take into account, but that's a discussion for another day.)

eSportsmanship and 'clever' fanboys

The top two teams of League of Legends competing in Major League Gaming were disqualified after both teams were found to have colluded and agreed to share the price money (links below). After news of this came out, people started bashing on MLG claiming they banned the teams because they played an unorthodox match by going All Random, All Middle.

Though I'm not into DotA style games, I'd guess that it would be pretty exciting and quite a hype to see teams going random, and then going to play a style that's not generally seen, especially in a genre that can normally take a long time for a match to play out. Even so, it puzzles me that people would actually assume this is why the teams were disqualified after MLG has official statements posted about the decision and some even say that the money belongs to the teams, so they can share it if they want to. (I don't want to use such strong words, but do games really make people stupid?) The hate here for MLG is clear, and it's so strong that gamers would rather be blind to what has happened so that they can find an excuse to hate on them even more.

Is it ok then to agree to share the money? I'm sure it won't be an issue if one team wins, feels sorry for the other team and decides to share part of the winnings with them AFTER the competition is over; the money would be theirs, and the outcome of the match would not be affected. However, knowing that you'll get the same amount of money whether you win or lose, will you put in as much effort as you would have? I understand there's some scoring system going on here that would still make winning an incentive, but what if one team does not need the points? I don't know, but I just feel that if this is allowed, why don't all the teams that join the games just walk away with the same amount of money whether they win or lose? And if that's the case, do you think you'll get to enjoy a competitive game? I think it would be ideal to be the weakest team then, because you would earn money in the shortest time possible. Go in, lose, travel to next competition and repeat...

http://www.majorleaguegaming.com/news/an-important-message-regarding-mlg-summer-championship-league-of-legends/
https://twitter.com/MrMLGAdam/status/239878409382133760
http://asia.gamespot.com/news/top-two-league-of-legends-teams-disqualified-in-mlg-summer-championship-6393270