Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Robosaur]

Hardcore anything: More choices. Some will screw you up in the long term, some will screw you up immediately, some will screw you up in the short term but make you kickass later, and some are just fine throughout.

Casual anything: Less choices, but none will screw you over at any point in time.

[itisnotlogical]

Casual Starcraft: Warcraft III (before those damn Night Elf missions, anyway)

Casual Quake: Doom

Hardcore Xbox 360: Original Xbox

How can a console be hardcore?

It's part of that whole nostalgia filter. Although the games for original Xbox weren't, on average, any more or less difficult. As for using the console itself, well, the original Xbox didn't melt it's circuits and RROD , preferring instead to occasionally fill up with grime.

My Xbox is full of dust in all those little grooves that it has on the side. I think I'd need compressed air to blow it all out.

[EnigmaticHat]

Hardcore anything: More choices. Some will screw you up in the long term, some will screw you up immediately, some will screw you up in the short term but make you kickass later, and some are just fine throughout.

Casual anything: Less choices, but none will screw you over at any point in time.

Hardcore games tend to be either enormous sandboxes where the concept of distinct choices doesn't make sense (aka DF, where you aren't presented with choices, you just do whatever) or have LESS choices.

Hardcore often means stripping away choice and either making it about pure skill, or about managing luck/risk.  When there are choices, there tend to be less of them but they are more restrictive; a common tactic is to give the player a lot of cool stuff and then say they have to choose only a small amount of it (looking at you new Xcom).  For example, in Fable and Skyrim you can make characters who do everything, while in the Witcher 2 (its the most hardcore RPG I've actually played, yes I know Dark Souls is more hardcore) you're encouraged to specialize into one of three paths, meaning your character will either be weak in two disciplines or mediocre at all of them.

[MaximumZero]

Casual Fighting Game: Play as Bay12Meme MaximumZero, the one who can punch out the moon.
Hardcore Fighting Game: Play as Actual MZ, the one with a bad back and two bad knees.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Alternative Hardcore Fighting Game: MZ vs. MSH, must beat each other up, cannot make any physical contact without destroying the universe, past, present, and future.

[Glloyd]

Hardcore Farmville: Farming IRL

More Hardcore Farmville: Farming IRL in the "Third World"

[Graknorke]

Hardcore anything: More choices. Some will screw you up in the long term, some will screw you up immediately, some will screw you up in the short term but make you kickass later, and some are just fine throughout.

Casual anything: Less choices, but none will screw you over at any point in time.

Hardcore games tend to be either enormous sandboxes where the concept of distinct choices doesn't make sense (aka DF, where you aren't presented with choices, you just do whatever) or have LESS choices.

Hardcore often means stripping away choice and either making it about pure skill, or about managing luck/risk.  When there are choices, there tend to be less of them but they are more restrictive; a common tactic is to give the player a lot of cool stuff and then say they have to choose only a small amount of it (looking at you new Xcom).  For example, in Fable and Skyrim you can make characters who do everything, while in the Witcher 2 (its the most hardcore RPG I've actually played, yes I know Dark Souls is more hardcore) you're encouraged to specialize into one of three paths, meaning your character will either be weak in two disciplines or mediocre at all of them.

So the Skyrim one has less choices made then, if you can do anything. You don't have to choose what you do because you can do everything. As opposed to having to carefully choose what you do.

[Lightningfalcon]

Casual Fighting Game: Play as Bay12Meme MaximumZero, the one who can punch out the moon.
Hardcore Fighting Game: Play as Actual MZ, the one with a bad back and two bad knees.

Final boss in casual is Glorious North Korean leader.  Final boss in hardcore is potato.   Who morphs into Mike Tyson. 

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Hardcore Farmville: Farming IRL

More Hardcore Farmville: Farming IRL in the "Third World"

Actual Hardcore Farmville

[Glloyd]

Hardcore Farmville: Farming IRL

More Hardcore Farmville: Farming IRL in the "Third World"

Actual Hardcore Farmville

Heh, that's what I was thinking of when I made that post, then I was like "Nah, not hardcore enough"

[SealyStar]

in the Witcher 2 (its the most hardcore RPG I've actually played, yes I know Dark Souls is more hardcore) you're encouraged to specialize into one of three paths, meaning your character will either be weak in two disciplines or mediocre at all of them.

I don't see anything "hardcore" about being railroaded down certain trait/skill paths. I think the most hardcore option is one where you are limited in the scope of your "tree" (so you can't be a master at everything), but you can choose what the exact path is.

Fallout is one of my favorite RPGs for this reason - if you try to spread your skill points and perks too widely, you wind up being mediocre, or worse, in everything, so you are implicitly encouraged to choose a few skills (and you can tag only three), but what those skills are is up to you. You can even not choose any weapons skills - though it's not too smart. And most of the skills are useful (with some big exceptions), so it's "tyranny of choice".

[Alkhemia]

That one thing I dislike about fallout 3 and NV the tagging did nothing but raise it 15 points So no matter what char you made it was best to just tag Lockpicking/Computers/Repair they just lvl up what weapon you wanted to use.

[SealyStar]

That one thing I dislike about fallout 3 and NV the tagging did nothing but raise it 15 points So no matter what char you made it was best to just tag Lockpicking/Computers/Repair they just lvl up what weapon you wanted to use.

Huh. I didn't notice that.

That's kind of stupid. The whole point of tag skills in 1/2 was that they could be leveled up faster...

[Alkhemia]

That one thing I dislike about fallout 3 and NV the tagging did nothing but raise it 15 points So no matter what char you made it was best to just tag Lockpicking/Computers/Repair they just lvl up what weapon you wanted to use.

Huh. I didn't notice that.

That's kind of stupid. The whole point of tag skills in 1/2 was that they could be leveled up faster...

Yeah

In Fallout, Fallout 2 and Fallout Tactics, tagged skills increase at double the rate of an untagged skill (i.e. One skill point translates to a 2% increase in the skill). In Fallout 3 and Fallout: New Vegas however, a tagged skill only gives a 15 point boost.

so pretty useless on the flipside I bet there is a mod to change it.

[EnigmaticHat]

in the Witcher 2 (its the most hardcore RPG I've actually played, yes I know Dark Souls is more hardcore) you're encouraged to specialize into one of three paths, meaning your character will either be weak in two disciplines or mediocre at all of them.

I don't see anything "hardcore" about being railroaded down certain trait/skill paths. I think the most hardcore option is one where you are limited in the scope of your "tree" (so you can't be a master at everything), but you can choose what the exact path is.

Fallout is one of my favorite RPGs for this reason - if you try to spread your skill points and perks too widely, you wind up being mediocre, or worse, in everything, so you are implicitly encouraged to choose a few skills (and you can tag only three), but what those skills are is up to you. You can even not choose any weapons skills - though it's not too smart. And most of the skills are useful (with some big exceptions), so it's "tyranny of choice".

The point is that I was trying to make was about "Tyranny of choice" as you put it.  The part with the 3 trees was just specific to Witcher 2; what you described with Fallout is fundamentally the same thing, but more granular.  In Witcher 2, you pick one of 3 paths or generalize, and pick perks within that.  In Fallout, you pick 3 (or whatever) out of a however many skills it has, and pick perks as applicable.  Same concept, different numbers.  It has nothing to do with being hardcore, and everything to do with Witcher 2 being about playing Geralt of Rivia, and Fallout about inventing your own character.