110172-a-conversation-what-is-hardcore-really

Page 1, Page 2
== Content ==
			
Greetings fans of Wildstar and developers alike. I was having a rather interesting conversation with a friend of mine earlier and it dawned on me that it was a perfect example of an extreme design flaw in many MMO's. In the case of Wildstar, this was an extremely relevant conversation and I wanted to share it with the community.Also before I share the conversation I would like to share that I am no stranger to 'Hardcore' raiding. As a matter of fact, I have years of experience as both a Guild Leader and Raid Leader across a variety of games. I have personally shared in countless raid victories, and the other person in this conversation has as well. This conversation only serves to highlight the vast difference between entitlement and hardcore. In today's games, especially in the case of Wildstar, players' desires for self-entitlement is greatly hindering the progress and development of quality games. In the case of Wildstar, one can't even navigate the forums without someone comparing cupcake sizes. So without further ado, please enjoy:PlayerA: Theme parks just blow if you dont have a guild, period.PlayerA: Can be super fun to level but once you do it's game over w/o a guild.PlayerB: Yea, there you go. Again the 'get a big guild or get out' applies. Such a shame. These companies waste millions of dollars sometimes and no one has figured this out yet?PlayerA: It's a catch 22 man. I Mean really it is. I don't like or want a big guild so I'd like to be able to compete. But if you look at it from the other side I can understand why a solid group of 20 people would feel *cupcaked* on if a solid group of 3 people were able to do everything they did.PlayerA: It's why really I hate to say it but I feel theme parks are just flawed by design and principle.PlayerB: Take W* for example. Like omg, I hadn't been so happy with an mmo in literally years. Love the theme, the art style, pretty much everything. But the same guild problems apply, and despite having a profound enjoyment in the game I still won't log in because I don't want to deal with it tbh. Having people probably under 18 with 39 friends act superior to me in every way even though I have probably logged in more time in mmo raids than they have doesn't appeal to me.PlayerB: Personally I don't see where 20 ppl are entitled to anything more than 3. Only thing I'd see is they'd be able to accomplish more faster with more hands, and that's completely fair.PlayerA: I think (and this will never happen b/c big guilds will *cupcake*) every single thing should ONLY require 1 tank and 1 healer. Anything after that should all just scale based on the # of people in raid/instance.PlayerA: That way all groups could do their *cupcake*. Me and you could straight up play any mmo and just do it ourselfPlayerB: Heck even 1 tank, 1 healer, and 1 dps.PlayerB: Then you'd run into the ppl *cupcaking* regardless lol. They'd be like, "What's the incentive to make a 10man run when we can do it with 3?" Then they'd ask for better gear from 10man runs as opposed to 3, and you can 'almost' see where they'd be justified. But...If you line it all up, the source of the problem is entitlement. Imo if you have 3 ppl having fun great. If you have 10 ppl having fun great too. Why is one any more entitled than the other?PlayerA: They aren't really. In fact I think it's easier with more people b/c you can afford to have more people suck cuz ya got more to carry them with. The only reason 10, 20 and 40 mans are harder is getting the people in group to start withPlayerA: With 2 or 3 mans it'd be hard as hell cuz each person would have to really nail their *cupcake*.PlayerB: Yep pretty much. Even the so-called hardcore raiders will tell ya. You have your core group and the rest are warm bodies.PlayerA: I remember doing pug raids in WoW man. 40 mans were always easier then 20.PlayerA: With that many people you bound to have some "elites" who know what they are doingPlayerB: Yea totally. This conversation right here pretty much outlines the truth. People just always want to be 'better' than someone else. And they are going to use any available crutch to get there. Your points about 3 ppl having to be on top of it is 100% valid, and I'd be curious to hear a hardcore raiding guild's rebuttal.PlayerA: One thing wow does have that most mmo's dont for some reason is arena. Like 2v2 or 3v3 or 5v5. That is solid. Because then you can at least do *cupcake* at end game with only 1 other person and progress.PlayerA: Oh they would say the raid leader's job is so hard controlling 40 people. I'd say well I don't need someone screaming in my ear telling me to in fact NOT stand in the fire.PlayerB: bahahaPlayerA: Seriously thats all it is man. And hell WoW and a lot of mmo's have those deadly boss mob mods now. The ones that flash your screen and throw up huge text on your screen telling you exactly what a boss is about to do.PlayerB: Yea it's one thing to help ppl learn. It's another entirely to be an elitist. Most 'hardcore' ppl use the game's limitations on solo players as a means to be 'better' than them, when in all reality they are actually far less genuine.PlayerA: So why do I need a raid leader again?PlayerA: Ya I really feel this way. I wish someone would scale a WOW raid down for 3 people. I guarantee it'd be harder than the 40 man.PlayerA: In 40 you can even have 6 or 7 people die and still win. It happened all the time. With 3 if one drops you probably *cupcaked* up cuz that's 33% of your group lolPlayerA: Then consider 66% of them are not losable at all, heals and tanks.PlayerA: No way anyone can tell me 20 or 40's are harder and deserve better quality loot. Better quantity sure, but not better quality. 
 
I am left with one main question: What is "Hardcore", really?
 
Is it, perhaps, rose-tinted glasses from those days of yore when everything was magical and a big raid was somehow special?
Is it player entitlement, and the want to always be 'better' than someone else?
Is it being able to put up with rude and obnoxious Raid Leaders who jump on each opportunity to disrespect other players?
 
In the case of the above conversation, personally I'd have to agree that 3 players being required to not mess up at all would be more hardcore than 40 who had a large % as 'expendable'. That's hardcore, and those 3 players may be the only 3 on the entire server to pull it off. Where a group of 40 makes it easy. The only thing hard about it is getting the 40 players together in the first place.
 
Questions, comments, concerns? I'd really love to hear the community's take on all of this, if it's presented in a legible and valid way. 
*edited to add in some cupcakes that the filter didn't catch, in an attempt to keep things civil.	
----
			
how do you handle tank swapping with 3 people?
 
how do you handle multiple adds with only 1 tank? Assume some of them need to be tanked away from eachother,
 
How would you handle a fight that require balancing DPS on several target? Crowd control? Kiting?
 
How about curing and healing? what if t here's some focus-restraining mechanism that force healers to rotate in and out?
 
Heck, since we're in wildstar, let's pick example from GA raiding:
 
You got a 3 man raid fighting a scaled-down version of X89... what happen when your tank have to run away... or when the healer run away? if the DPS guy is meant to offtank him for the ~10-12 sec the tank is away, then X89 kinda have to hit like a wet noodle... can't have a real DPS timer either, in case your only DPS get bombed...
 
Kuralak:  pretty much the entire fight revolve around planning who interrupts who, when, and in what area.. since the amount of interrupt raise exponentially in that fight, you'd pretty much have to either be done after 1 egg phase ... or have the infected person not remain infected after an interrupt? at wich point it merely become a rotation of interrupt , clearly easier that the current setups required for Kuralak
 
No puzzle/chain on phagetech prototype, no controlling DPS on phagemaw bomb, no split tanking on convergence... If you played WoW, just look at how the naxx 40 mechanism had to be dumbed down to be doable in a 10 man setting ( most notably the 4 horsemen... or look at the 10 man VS 25 man WoW had during WoTLK-cataclysm... a balance nightmare they still don't manage to get right after 5+ years.
 
I Will agree that you don't necessary need a 40 man raid to have complexity... or hardcore raiding... but you definatly need a minimum number of people, and that minimum is higher than 3... 20 sounds like a good number to me. in PvP, 5v5 arena are alot more complex than 2v2... more target, more spells going on, more strategy, more cooldown... well in PvE 20 mans are more complex than 5 man.
 
Sure, you can have 5 man where every class can pretty do everything ala GW2... but then GW2 isn't exactly famous for it's challenging and engaging PvE.
 
And now add that you have 6 different classes, 2 role each, and any tank-heal-dps combination of those 12 template should be able to have a fair shot at everything you design... ( can't have fight that favor range over melee! can't have interrupt-heavy fight in case you get a medic! DPS classes arn't equal, so can't have those hard DPS check on anything... range-tanking like phagemaw? nah, warrior and stalker must also be able to do it)... g'luck.
 
You remember pugging 40 mans in WoW? and they were easier than 25 mans? well, I definatly believe that pugging molten core was easier than pugging kael'thas however...that's hardly because 25 mans were harder, it's because molten core was Blizzard first raid instance, and it was pretty easy and definatly doable by 20-30 people... now Razorgore, that's another story, wasn't he?	
----
			
In a raid environment, I would define hardcore as being able sink large amounts of time into the content, being able to learn and adapt to the mechanics quickly, as well as execute the strategies to overcome it.
 
Also, I'd challenge that raids at the highest levels of play have 'warm bodies'. I just don't think they'd put up with having Derp 1 and 2 just cupcaking up all the time. Maybe that's different for 40 man raiding, but for 20/25 man raiding, that's just not acceptable when going for world firsts.	
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
PlayerA: That way all groups could do their *cupcake*. Me and you could straight up play any mmo and just do it ourself  [sic]
----
			
A very productive and thoughtful response, Vlorg. Thank you.
 
 
{| class="blockquote"
how do you handle tank swapping with 3 people?
 
how do you handle multiple adds with only 1 tank? Assume some of them need to be tanked away from eachother,
 
How would you handle a fight that require balancing DPS on several target? Crowd control? Kiting?
 
How about curing and healing? what if t here's some focus-restraining mechanism that force healers to rotate in and out?
 
Heck, since we're in wildstar, let's pick example from GA raiding:
 
You got a 3 man raid fighting a scaled-down version of X89... what happen when your tank have to run away... or when the healer run away? if the DPS guy is meant to offtank him for the ~10-12 sec the tank is away, then X89 kinda have to hit like a wet noodle... can't have a real DPS timer either, in case your only DPS get bombed...
 
Kuralak:  pretty much the entire fight revolve around planning who interrupts who, when, and in what area.. since the amount of interrupt raise exponentially in that fight, you'd pretty much have to either be done after 1 egg phase ... or have the infected person not remain infected after an interrupt? at wich point it merely become a rotation of interrupt , clearly easier that the current setups required for Kuralak
 
No puzzle/chain on phagetech prototype, no controlling DPS on phagemaw bomb, no split tanking on convergence... If you played WoW, just look at how the naxx 40 mechanism had to be dumbed down to be doable in a 10 man setting ( most notably the 4 horsemen)...
 
I Will agree that you don't necessary need a 40 man raid to have complexity... or hardcore raiding... but you definatly need a minimum number of people, and that minimum is higher than 3... 20 sounds like a good number to me. in PvP, 5v5 arena are alot more complex than 2v2... more target, more spells going on, more strategy, more cooldown... well in PvE 20 mans are more complex than 5 man.
 
Sure, you can have 5 man where every class can pretty do everything ala GW2... but then GW2 isn't exactly famous for it's challenging and engaging PvE
----
			
So, I think the main problem here is that we equate "hardcore" with time or numbers.  Some players say you can't be hardcore unless you log in for X number of hours a day, or you grind dailies every day, or whatever.  Other players say you can't be hardcore unless you're doing 40-person raids on a regular basis.
 
Here's what I say (and what I've posted in a few other threads now).
 
{| class="blockquote"
 
You know, I've been a raider in dozens of games for 15 years now.  I've had my share of server firsts and even a few world firsts along the way.  I've been in the guild that figures out the fights and posts the strats that everyone else follows.
 
I've also been a "casual".  I've been in work situations where I could only play one day a week at prime time.  I've come into games years behind other players and had to try and catch up when no one cared about grouping for the lower stuff anymore.  I've been that newbie who's just trying to learn and who gets insulted and patronized for not being good enough.
 
Being "hardcore" isn't about beating a timer.  It's not about downing something first.  It's not about keeping score.  If you're focused on that, you're doing it wrong.
 
It's about turning the playing of the game into an art form.  It's about being able to work as a team, even when everyone's not at the top of their game.  It's about being able to think on your feet and adapt so that when that healer is in the wrong place at the wrong time, it doesn't wipe you.  It's about being able to get back up and give it another try even when you've wiped 20 times, and still be laughing about it.  And most importantly, it's about recognizing that YOU influence the game experience of everyone else around you.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
So, I think the main problem here is that we equate "hardcore" with time or numbers.  Some players say you can't be hardcore unless you log in for X number of hours a day, or you grind dailies every day, or whatever.  Other players say you can't be hardcore unless you're doing 40-person raids on a regular basis.
 
Here's what I say (and what I've posted in a few other threads now).
 
 
Hardcore and Casual are stupid words.  I wish we'd quit using them.  They're artificial.  What's really important is outlook and dedication.  The player that only logs 2 nights a week but works hard to get good at the game, has fun, and stays positive is more "hardcore" in my opinion than the player who logs in to raid 4 nights out of 7 and then comes to the forums to complain about every little thing that's not perfect.
 
As far as guilds and guild sizes go, I think players who feel they must be in a huge guild to succeed are deluding themselves, just as surely as those who feel that larger guilds can't have good communities and decent people.  As players, we need to realize that we are responsible for our own enjoyment of the game.  The players that accept that, and do the best they can to enjoy what the game offers to them, are the ones that never regret a moment of having played.
 
/soapbox off.  Time for sleep.
----
			
It's a nebulous concept.  The word "hardcore" has a vague meaning, generally relating to people who put a lot of time into the game.  But does it mean anything?
 
Not really.
 
What's hardcore?  20 hours a week?  40?  Does it make you hardcore if you spend your weekend dropping 20 hours into the game, but only get two hours in some other days?  Does that mean a person isn't hardcore if they're on every day for 4 hours, but spend sunday with their families?
 
People have sliding scales of time, and it's rarely constant.
 
More than that, is Wildstar really hardcore?  Do you need to be hardcore to be in a big guild?  Are you still hardcore if you raid once a week, but clear content well?  Does it matter how fast you go through the content?  Are only the top tier guilds really hardcore?  Plenty of them burned out raiding.
 
Really, it's a fallacy.  A buzzword that sold game boxes.  If you clear the raid content next month or next year, you've cleared the content.  So people who log in a few times a week and raid once a week could clear this content and some people who played every day could wash out.
 
I don't put much stock in it.	
----
			
Wildstar raiding ( and grouping) is definatly faster paced than most game out there. it's also alot more unforgiving... using my last MMO ( Everquest 1) as an example, despite 54 man raiding, most raid can be done by 20 or 25... just take longer. To me that make wildstar more hardcore. it's clearly more challenging that the average MMO out there, it's made for people who actually want to master their caracter and overcome challenge. when it's raid time you'll get a coffee or two and be on your toes... in Everquest you will lay down, grab a beer and enjoy.
 
Astralforge: You cannot downtune all mechanic to 5 man. that's my point. 20 may be too extreme for you.. maybe it's 15 then... but 20 man raiding allow dev to create mechanics alot more complex, strategies alot more involved, than what's possible with a 3 man or a 5 man
 
Using kuralak again ( spoiler... but there's soo much info about early GA out anyway). 1 person ( random) in your raid get infected.. he turns evil and must be interrupted quickly. The interrupter then become infected... few minute later you need 2 people interrupting that ( the initial guy who got infeted + the first interrupter). few minute later you'll need 4, then 8, then it's a wipe... Sounds kinda simple on paper but actually require a good deal of pre-planning , especially since you don't know who is first to get infected... then you need backup in case people die... fun times.
 
How would you downsize that to a 3 man?
 
Tank swapping; Naxxramas 4 horsemen is probably the best example that comes to mind ; each horsemen is tanked in a different corner, each of them stack up an exponential debuff on players around them ( but each horseman have a different one). The idea ( in the 40 man version) was to have a rotation of tank going in an out, let the debuff fade away... sounds simple yet require a good deal of coordination. There was also several different ways of handling that tank-swapping... some used 8 tanks ( 4 teams of 2, pretty simple). some 6 ( and had 2 triangle running around). some 5 and moreorso relied on burning one horsemen down real quick... Now add that the healing teams didn't necessary had the same rotations as the tanking teams, the DPS teams on another rotation, some horsemen required a minimal amount of player to be near them at all time, other required interrupts or people spread out loosely... Now, as a single player you may think it's pretty simple ( you know what you have to do, and merely have to be at the good place at the good time) but as a raid, there's alot more... my guild used 6 tank teams, 5 healers team and 5 DPS team rotating around the place for ~10 min. a well oiled clockwork machine as long as everyone knew what to do and when to switch. You cannot reproduce that with a single group.
 
The list goes on. scale it down to a 5 man is a pretty simple thing to say, yet a pretty hard one to do ... if everything was a tank-and-spank it would be pretty simple to scale stuff down. thanksfully fight are a little more complicated than that.	
----
			
"Hardcore" means different things to different people -- mostly it seems to mean "willing to put a ton of time into the game," but that's not enough, as you have to put that time into a specific activity, namely challenging the game's most difficult content. If you spend a ton of time messing with your house, you're not hardcore, unless you use that time to build something amazing and unique with that time, in which case you might be "hardcore" for just that one aspect of the game.  I tend to put significant hours into MMOs when I have a sub, but I'm never hardcore because I don't take it seriously and I don't care about doing the "hard" stuff, only what's fun to me at the moment.  
 
I was struck by something in the OP's conversation, though, which is all this talk of "deserving" and being "entitled" and so on.  Why is that even a thing in commercial MMOs? They're not a public service or utility, just another for-profit entertainment being offered for a price. Talk of "deserving" things or being "entitled" to things is meaningless in this context and always has been (to me) so why is it so prevalent in the community? I don't think I "deserve" to have the local Chinese food place deliver to me.  I'm not "entitled" to a cozy, friendly bookstore cafe within walking distance of my home.  No one has to offer me these services -- they just decide to do it if they think it's profitable, and if I want what they're selling at the price they are selling it, then we trade my cash for their goods or services.  The only thing I "deserve" is what I perceive to be fair value for my dollar, and if I don't think I'm getting that, I'm "entitled" to walk away.  
 
It's not a question of "deserving" 40 man raids or 20 man raids or 3 man raids at all, or of the 20 man raids being "entitled" to better loot than the hypothetical 3 man raids. It's just a question of what people want to play and will pay to play.  Carbine offers a product, and people decide if they think it's worth the price plus the sub.  If different groups of customers want different things from the product and they can't both be satisfied for one reason or another, then the business has to choose which base to cater to. That choice is usually made on the basis of which group would be more profitable to cater to, although personal tastes of the business owner can sway that a little. (If it sways it too much you'll likely end up with a failed business, however.)  
 
I actually think the concept of MMO content specifically tailored for smaller groups of people -- pairs and trios for example -- is a very strong one and it's why people have been after Carbine to get the Veteran Shiphands rolling as it seem like those would be perfect for this.  I think it's a strong concept because I think there would be a lot of demand for it and I think it would help keep people playing as it gives you stuff to do that's still multiplayer without needing to defeat "rosterboss" -- which is getting enough people on line at the same time to do your 20 man raid, or (shudder) your 40 man raid.  But it's got nothing to do with being "entitled" to something or "deserving" something -- it's an issue of what people will pay to play. In general I think the strongest model for a lasting quality MMO is to offer content for as many different sized player groups as possible, from solo to pair to small group through (shudder) 40 mans if you want them, so people have the option of doing fun stuff whenever they log on, regardless of how many of their friends are also on at that time. But of course there's an expense attached because each group size probably requires a separate batch of content to be designed and programmed and maintained, which is costly.  So choices have to be made.
 
But there's no "deserving" and no "entitled."  It's interesting that people say things like "No way anyone can tell me 20 or 40's are harder and deserve better quality loot. Better quantity sure, but not better quality."  It heavily implies that putting together a large raid is not intrinsically more fun than playing solo or in a small group, or no one would care about the rewards offered -- you offer rewards to get people to do stuff they would not otherwise wish to do.  In an ideal world, a 20 man raid would be twice as much fun to play as a 10 man raid which would be twice as much fun as a 5 man dungeon, which means there'd be no need for better loot for the larger groups as the increased fun would be the motivation for putting together a larger group.  You might enjoy kicking a soccer ball in the backyard with your brother or sister,  but it's more fun (sometimes) to get a whole pack of people together for a pick-up game in the park just because it makes for a better game. No one has to offer any rewards for getting a larger soccer game together -- it just happens if enough people think it would be fun and are available. This kind of implies that the Phat Lewtz in MMOs are a reward for the people who don't actually want to be in a large group but are willing to put up with the crap from other players if it gets them rewards.  The Phat Lewtz subsidize the creation of the large groups because they aren't fun enough by themselves to warrant the hassle of putting them together and getting on-line gamers to organize, which is about as much fun as herding cats.  It's as if a local guy wants to play soccer in the park so much he's willing to pay for an ice cream truck to show up and treat the other players on his dime, just to incentivize them to come to the park so he can have his game when they otherwise wouldn't be willing to bother. 	
----
			
Hardcore to me,
A mini essay by Scott Of Awesome - Or Lord Scott of Scottopia, friend to all Scottians of the great Scott community of prosperous Scotts in a Scott world.
 
Hardcore to me is content that is Hard, content that makes you get better, that makes you improve to get past it, content that may have you swearing at your screen. Hardcore to me is Dark Knight Mode in Arkham Origins, or Nightmare Mode in Ninja Gaiden. It is not endless grinds and RNG on top of RNG, those are time sinks not Hardcore. Hardcore is content you have to bring your A game to or you're wasting your time.
 
So in short is Wildstar Hardcore, Yes it is. Is it also Tedious and full of to much RNG and Gold Sinks that gate you to the Hardcore content? Yes it does. I think Carbine need to sit down and realize endless grinds and RNG do not make great content. Great Content are the challenging raid bosses and dungeon bosses they already have in game. So come on Wildstar step up let everyone try to be Hardcore, stop gating us with RNG and currency caps.	
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Greetings fans of Wildstar and developers alike. I was having a rather interesting conversation with a friend of mine earlier and it dawned on me that it was a perfect example of an extreme design flaw in many MMO's. In the case of Wildstar, this was an extremely relevant conversation and I wanted to share it with the community.
 
Also before I share the conversation I would like to share that I am no stranger to 'Hardcore' raiding. As a matter of fact, I have years of experience as both a Guild Leader and Raid Leader across a variety of games. I have personally shared in countless raid victories, and the other person in this conversation has as well. This conversation only serves to highlight the vast difference between entitlement and hardcore. In today's games, especially in the case of Wildstar, players' desires for self-entitlement is greatly hindering the progress and development of quality games. In the case of Wildstar, one can't even navigate the forums without someone comparing cupcake sizes. So without further ado, please enjoy:
 
PlayerA: Theme parks just blow if you dont have a guild, period.
PlayerA: Can be super fun to level but once you do it's game over w/o a guild.
PlayerB: Yea, there you go. Again the 'get a big guild or get out' applies. Such a shame. These companies waste millions of dollars sometimes and no one has figured this out yet?
PlayerA: It's a catch 22 man. I Mean really it is. I don't like or want a big guild so I'd like to be able to compete. But if you look at it from the other side I can understand why a solid group of 20 people would feel *cupcaked* on if a solid group of 3 people were able to do everything they did.
PlayerA: It's why really I hate to say it but I feel theme parks are just flawed by design and principle.
PlayerB: Take W* for example. Like omg, I hadn't been so happy with an mmo in literally years. Love the theme, the art style, pretty much everything. But the same guild problems apply, and despite having a profound enjoyment in the game I still won't log in because I don't want to deal with it tbh. Having people probably under 18 with 39 friends act superior to me in every way even though I have probably logged in more time in mmo raids than they have doesn't appeal to me.
PlayerB: Personally I don't see where 20 ppl are entitled to anything more than 3. Only thing I'd see is they'd be able to accomplish more faster with more hands, and that's completely fair.
PlayerA: I think (and this will never happen b/c big guilds will *cupcake*) every single thing should ONLY require 1 tank and 1 healer. Anything after that should all just scale based on the # of people in raid/instance.
PlayerA: That way all groups could do their *cupcake*. Me and you could straight up play any mmo and just do it ourself
PlayerB: Heck even 1 tank, 1 healer, and 1 dps.
PlayerB: Then you'd run into the ppl *cupcaking* regardless lol. They'd be like, "What's the incentive to make a 10man run when we can do it with 3?" Then they'd ask for better gear from 10man runs as opposed to 3, and you can 'almost' see where they'd be justified. But...If you line it all up, the source of the problem is entitlement. Imo if you have 3 ppl having fun great. If you have 10 ppl having fun great too. Why is one any more entitled than the other?
PlayerA: They aren't really. In fact I think it's easier with more people b/c you can afford to have more people suck cuz ya got more to carry them with. The only reason 10, 20 and 40 mans are harder is getting the people in group to start with
PlayerA: With 2 or 3 mans it'd be hard as hell cuz each person would have to really nail their *cupcake*.
PlayerB: Yep pretty much. Even the so-called hardcore raiders will tell ya. You have your core group and the rest are warm bodies.
PlayerA: I remember doing pug raids in WoW man. 40 mans were always easier then 20.
PlayerA: With that many people you bound to have some "elites" who know what they are doing
PlayerB: Yea totally. This conversation right here pretty much outlines the truth. People just always want to be 'better' than someone else. And they are going to use any available crutch to get there. Your points about 3 ppl having to be on top of it is 100% valid, and I'd be curious to hear a hardcore raiding guild's rebuttal.
PlayerA: One thing wow does have that most mmo's dont for some reason is arena. Like 2v2 or 3v3 or 5v5. That is solid. Because then you can at least do *cupcake* at end game with only 1 other person and progress.
PlayerA: Oh they would say the raid leader's job is so hard controlling 40 people. I'd say well I don't need someone screaming in my ear telling me to in fact NOT stand in the fire.
PlayerB: bahaha
PlayerA: Seriously thats all it is man. And hell WoW and a lot of mmo's have those deadly boss mob mods now. The ones that flash your screen and throw up huge text on your screen telling you exactly what a boss is about to do.
PlayerB: Yea it's one thing to help ppl learn. It's another entirely to be an elitist. Most 'hardcore' ppl use the game's limitations on solo players as a means to be 'better' than them, when in all reality they are actually far less genuine.
PlayerA: So why do I need a raid leader again?
PlayerA: Ya I really feel this way. I wish someone would scale a WOW raid down for 3 people. I guarantee it'd be harder than the 40 man.
PlayerA: In 40 you can even have 6 or 7 people die and still win. It happened all the time. With 3 if one drops you probably *cupcaked* up cuz that's 33% of your group lol
PlayerA: Then consider 66% of them are not losable at all, heals and tanks.
PlayerA: No way anyone can tell me 20 or 40's are harder and deserve better quality loot. Better quantity sure, but not better quality.
 
 
I am left with one main question: What is "Hardcore", really?
 
Is it, perhaps, rose-tinted glasses from those days of yore when everything was magical and a big raid was somehow special?
Is it player entitlement, and the want to always be 'better' than someone else?
Is it being able to put up with rude and obnoxious Raid Leaders who jump on each opportunity to disrespect other players?
 
In the case of the above conversation, personally I'd have to agree that 3 players being required to not mess up at all would be more hardcore than 40 who had a large % as 'expendable'. That's hardcore, and those 3 players may be the only 3 on the entire server to pull it off. Where a group of 40 makes it easy. The only thing hard about it is getting the 40 players together in the first place.
 
Questions, comments, concerns? I'd really love to hear the community's take on all of this, if it's presented in a legible and valid way.
 
*edited to add in some cupcakes that the filter didn't catch, in an attempt to keep things civil.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
A very productive and thoughtful response, Vlorg. Thank you.
 
 
 
As far as tank swapping goes, personally I feel that if 1 tank drops it should be game over rather than having an 'offtank'. Imo that's an unnecessary mechanic that doesn't offer much to the difficulty. If anything it adds more failsafes.
 
For a great majority of the other issues, the main thing is that in any case the content would need to be scaled for less players. Having the same content scaled (across the board mind you) in most cases should be sufficient, although you do raise exactly the right questions about some other cases. I'll try to cover each topic to further elaborate:
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Wildstar raiding ( and grouping) is definatly faster paced than most game out there. it's also alot more unforgiving... using my last MMO ( Everquest 1) as an example, despite 54 man raiding, most raid can be done by 20 or 25... just take longer. To me that make wildstar more hardcore. it's clearly more challenging that the average MMO out there, it's made for people who actually want to master their caracter and overcome challenge. when it's raid time you'll get a coffee or two and be on your toes... in Everquest you will lay down, grab a beer and enjoy.
 
Astralforge: You cannot downtune all mechanic to 5 man. that's my point. 20 may be too extreme for you.. maybe it's 15 then... but 20 man raiding allow dev to create mechanics alot more complex, strategies alot more involved, than what's possible with a 3 man or a 5 man
 
Using kuralak again ( spoiler... but there's soo much info about early GA out anyway). 1 person ( random) in your raid get infected.. he turns evil and must be interrupted quickly. The interrupter then become infected... few minute later you need 2 people interrupting that ( the initial guy who got infeted + the first interrupter). few minute later you'll need 4, then 8, then it's a wipe... Sounds kinda simple on paper but actually require a good deal of pre-planning , especially since you don't know who is first to get infected... then you need backup in case people die... fun times.
 
How would you downsize that to a 3 man?
 
Tank swapping; Naxxramas 4 horsemen is probably the best example that comes to mind ; each horsemen is tanked in a different corner, each of them stack up an exponential debuff on players around them ( but each horseman have a different one). The idea ( in the 40 man version) was to have a rotation of tank going in an out, let the debuff fade away... sounds simple yet require a good deal of coordination. There was also several different ways of handling that tank-swapping... some used 8 tanks ( 4 teams of 2, pretty simple). some 6 ( and had 2 triangle running around). some 5 and moreorso relied on burning one horsemen down real quick... Now add that the healing teams didn't necessary had the same rotations as the tanking teams, the DPS teams on another rotation, some horsemen required a minimal amount of player to be near them at all time, other required interrupts or people spread out loosely... Now, as a single player you may think it's pretty simple ( you know what you have to do, and merely have to be at the good place at the good time) but as a raid, there's alot more... my guild used 6 tank teams, 5 healers team and 5 DPS team rotating around the place for ~10 min. a well oiled clockwork machine as long as everyone knew what to do and when to switch. You cannot reproduce that with a single group.
 
The list goes on. scale it down to a 5 man is a pretty simple thing to say, yet a pretty hard one to do ... if everything was a tank-and-spank it would be pretty simple to scale stuff down. thanksfully fight are a little more complicated than that.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
In W* specifically, though, if you don't have a huge guild then guess what? You are not going to be able to see all the content that you are paying for. It's that easy and, in my humble opinion, it's evident that this can bring down enjoyment levels for many people. How long should someone do dailies, or roll alts, or do whatever it is that they do without a large guild to see endgame content? The answer seems to come in the form of dwindling numbers on many servers here for W*, and that's something that personally I can't bear to watch happen.
----
			
I always enjoy your postings NepheleVG. You speak truth, and it's the voice of solid experience. I can respect that, and tbh I have to agree with most of what you say.
 
But as you've said here, the 'latter' is what is poisoning our community at large across all games. How do you stand against it? Really, how often do small guilds 'work together'? Where are these guilds where the Guild Leader pays attention to the health of the social fabric of the guild? The only ones I've ever seen I've been the GL of, and it's becoming so difficult to find like-minded individuals it honestly isn't enjoyable to try and manage these days.
 
Also the hardest truth in this entire scenario is the dwindling player-base. Regardless of good intentions across the board, it just can't be denied at this point. Sure it's a hard pill to swallow, but it's there and continues to be a problem. At what point does the fun begin and the poison of modern community end?	
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
I always enjoy your postings NepheleVG. You speak truth, and it's the voice of solid experience. I can respect that, and tbh I have to agree with most of what you say.
 
But as you've said here, the 'latter' is what is poisoning our community at large across all games. How do you stand against it? Really, how often do small guilds 'work together'? Where are these guilds where the Guild Leader pays attention to the health of the social fabric of the guild? The only ones I've ever seen I've been the GL of, and it's becoming so difficult to find like-minded individuals it honestly isn't enjoyable to try and manage these days.
 
Also the hardest truth in this entire scenario is the dwindling player-base. Regardless of good intentions across the board, it just can't be denied at this point. Sure it's a hard pill to swallow, but it's there and continues to be a problem. At what point does the fun begin and the poison of modern community end?
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
They're out there.  But like anything else it usually takes some leadership to get them to appear.
 
For Evindra, getting the community to be more active and work together more has been a project that I and a few others have been sort of independently working on for a while.  The results are promising - on the Exile side, we've got several guilds working together to help each other out and also run server events, and on the Dominion side, Scott and a few others helped revitalize that half of the game for a lot of players by convincing people to give the Dominion a try.
 
None of that could have happened though if we hadn't stuck our necks out there and said "hey guys, let's be a community".  It's too easy for everyone to get focused on themselves and their friends and their own guilds and forget about everyone else.  You need those leaders on each server who have the vision to see beyond that, and who can help motivate others to give it a try as well.  It takes work and effort, just like building a good guild does.  But the results can be amazing.
----
			For some, hardcore is time invested. For others it is a difficult challenge that requires dedication and skill. Tedious =/= hardcore for some, and for me, I tend to think games like wildstar create most of their time sinks to spread and thin out content. Wildstar isn't incredibly difficult and it isn't really hardcore in my eyes. It tends to use a lot of older mechanics and systems that are essentially large time sinks and time gates.	
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
You singlehandedly give me hope in a sea of despair. I am rerolling Evindra immediately and to the Abyss with the pvp servers and community. This means starting over from square one, but that's something I'm ready to embrace if I can indeed find like-minded players. I'm not willing to take up a banner and go flying it around in search of followers anymore, but I am willing to give the community its just due. If there are people out there wanting to be a community, like a real community (classy and all) I'm on board. See you soon, and thanks for the encouragement.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
For some, hardcore is time invested. For others it is a difficult challenge that requires dedication and skill. Tedious =/= hardcore for some, and for me, I tend to think games like wildstar create most of their time sinks to spread and thin out content. Wildstar isn't incredibly difficult and it isn't really hardcore in my eyes. It tends to use a lot of older mechanics and systems that are essentially large time sinks and time gates.
----
			a lousy decision made by someone who had little experience in marketing.	
----
			It means whatever people think it means. Just like in all the other threads people have posted about this topic.  	
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
It means whatever people think it means. Just like in all the other threads people have posted about this topic.  
----
			
We all have a strong heuristic knowledge of what Hardcore means as MMO players.
 
Frankly, and unabashedly, it means this:
 
http://vimeo.com/89858791
 
Hardcore = extensive time investment to potentially overcome a significant challenge
 
But for anyone who thinks Hardcore does NOT include a major and significant time sink of repetitive activities in the context of MMO's, you are simply mistaken / fooling yourself.	
----
			
For me hardcore will be trying to lead any group content with a bunch of random douches since it tests my patience and puts me out of my comfort zone otherwise it is mediumcore or softcore
 
Doing the same instance with the same ppl multiple number of times doesnt make content harder but instead easier	
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
We all have a strong heuristic knowledge of what Hardcore means as MMO players.
 
Frankly, and unabashedly, it means this:
 
http://vimeo.com/89858791
 
Hardcore = extensive time investment to potentially overcome a significant challenge
 
But for anyone who thinks Hardcore does NOT include a major and significant time sink of repetitive activities in the context of MMO's, you are simply mistaken / fooling yourself.
----
			
I would say that hardcore is defined by time investment and is a relative quantity.  Someone who is more hardcore spends more time in game or when out of game, looking at resources that help them in game.  So no one is really "hardcore," they are just more hardcore than others.
 
Now, this game is more based on skill, not hardcoreness.  You can spend hours and hours and hours wiping on dungeons trying to get silver, and in any other game that would be enough.  In this game, you actually have to have some modicum of skill to succeed.  Just wiping endlessly doesn't matter, there is no good effort prize.
 
In fact, I would think its the more hardcore, unskilled players that are the loudest in this game crying for nerfs.  I bet that you could easily be a successful raider in this game on about 8-10 hours of playtime a week.  That is rather casual for a non-WoW MMO.  But you actually have to be good.	
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
I would say that hardcore is defined by time investment and is a relative quantity.  Someone who is more hardcore spends more time in game or when out of game, looking at resources that help them in game.  So no one is really "hardcore," they are just more hardcore than others.
 
Now, this game is more based on skill, not hardcoreness.  You can spend hours and hours and hours wiping on dungeons trying to get silver, and in any other game that would be enough.  In this game, you actually have to have some modicum of skill to succeed.  Just wiping endlessly doesn't matter, there is no good effort prize.
 
In fact, I would think its the more hardcore, unskilled players that are the loudest in this game crying for nerfs.  I bet that you could easily be a successful raider in this game on about 8-10 hours of playtime a week.  That is rather casual for a non-WoW MMO.  But you actually have to be good.
----
			Or it is just a word. Really as simple as that. The meaning being that something is hard at the core.	
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
I would say that hardcore is defined by time investment and is a relative quantity.  Someone who is more hardcore spends more time in game or when out of game, looking at resources that help them in game.  So no one is really "hardcore," they are just more hardcore than others.
 
Now, this game is more based on skill, not hardcoreness.  You can spend hours and hours and hours wiping on dungeons trying to get silver, and in any other game that would be enough.  In this game, you actually have to have some modicum of skill to succeed.  Just wiping endlessly doesn't matter, there is no good effort prize.
 
In fact, I would think its the more hardcore, unskilled players that are the loudest in this game crying for nerfs.  I bet that you could easily be a successful raider in this game on about 8-10 hours of playtime a week.  That is rather casual for a non-WoW MMO.  But you actually have to be good.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
No.
----
			
I don't think those words should be used to define people. More like, good or bad. Do you suck at a certain game or do you not?
 
I think a lot of people misunderstand what a game is. Who likes to lose at a game they're not good at? No one.
 
Does this mean that any game (any game, board games, sports games, computer and console games) where a certain amount of the playing population could possibly lose has the wrong dynamic? Are games meant for only relaxation? Have any of you ever read anything about the historical or evolutionary uses of games? Would we be better off in a society where a baseball game always ends in a tie or a batter only gets up to bat if he's feeling relaxed enough? Maybe we should only play games that don't demand anything other than being physically present.
 
I'm talking across the board, from professional games all the way down to the peewee leagues. Name anyone who goes out to play darts and enjoys being on a team with the person who consistently hits the ceiling and mens room door with the darts. You either enjoy what you're playing and try to get better or you play something else that suits you better.
 
I don't bust into the local chess club and demand they remove rooks because those things have always baffled me.   	
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Excellent response, brimming with reasoned, logical statement and presentation of alternative interpretations of the facts...
 
[/sarcasm]
 
No one is unaware that this is in-fact what Hardcore means in an MMO. Plenty of folks WISH it meant something else; which is why you see a lot of folks trying to represent personal ideas as if they hold any bearing on the reality that in the MMO context; the emergent property known as 'Hardcore' comes from THIS
 
Now it's true that could change down the road, but Hardcore play in an MMO is grinding for months to obtain gear / skill / progression to overcome some difficult content.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Or it is just a word. Really as simple as that. The meaning being that something is hard at the core.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
I remember a GM in wow forums saying that the definition of casual/hardcore was meaningless as it varies from person to person and it is best to address ppl as players and nothing more , 
 
Funny quote" Ppl with more achievement points than me are hardcore ppl with less are casual scrubs"
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Again, no
 
There is no objective definition of hardcore, and asserting your opinion as fact is pretty arrogant (yes, I get the irony). I was an experienced EQ pvper on a red server, I raided molten core among the first on my server, I've down almost every hardcore content in most popular mmo's. I also play FPS games and Fighting games competitively. My opinion of what hardcore comes from experience, granted subjective experience that isn't objective or true for other players. But these are the forums, right? You don't want to hear about some silly facts that anybody could proclaim as true (as far as my raiding/pvp experience).
 
There is no "hardcore", there is merely player dedication and skill. Time =/= hardcore, skill =/= hardcore, because hardcore itself is a non static concept, it never had a static defiition. It is a combination of things, including the time you invest, the abilities you have and the skill you develope, plus how much dedication you have to the experience, and many other factors. There is no perfect balance of these attributes that perfectly define what hardcore is. They vary from person to person, people that are all hardcore MMO'ers.
 
 
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
There is a socially emergent definition of Hardcore in the MMO context (THIS), and yes, the word itself also has a definition.
 
 
Both 'objective' deffinitions include time investment as explicit components.
 
You can spin it all you like, but if you ask a gamer on the street to describe hardcore MMO players, this is what you get
----
			
Almost regretting including "What is Hardcore, really?" in the topic, since it does sort of open the door for unnecessary conflict. That was never the intent; really I was hoping to bring more light to the discussion around raid mechanics, how many people it takes to raid, and the effect it is having on mmo communities. With this being said, however, the question does remain valid as well and it has spurred some productive and informative responses.
 
I do encourage everyone to be sure they take a good read over what is discussed in the OP, although it is a bit lengthy. I share a conversation between 2 players there, which it would appear many may have overlooked yet may have valuable input to share about it.	
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
I am curious, if you could be so kind, what are your opinions on skill as discussed in the conversation in the OP?
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Wrong again, you're trying to determine the attributes of the definitions themselves, meaning, you are trying to put numbers and statistics on something. Skill = such and such, and time = such and such, before a player can be hardcore.
You can be a hardcore player and have almost no skill, you just won't have the skill to progress, but you're hardcore.  You can have the skill to progress, but not the time.
 
MMO's will always have a varied definition of what their hardcore content means and how it should be perceived. Some MMO's base the concept of hardcore around skill, and not entirely on time. WIldstar seems to think it bases it's hardcore content on skill alone, but it is really just time invested. There is no objective or defined version of the ideology that is hardcore, because it is an idea, an arbitrary idea that can change from one player to the next, one game to the next, and you could find each person successful within their respective games and circumstances.
 
 
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Pure sophistry. Anyone and their mother knows that words have set meanings. For 'Hardcore' it's (link)
 
 
hardcore 
  NOUN
1The most active, committed, or doctrinaire members of a group or movement
 
 
 
I bolded the explicit time investment portion of the definition for you. I never put statistcs into the deffinition, However you fail to realize while your (and my) personal opinion is completely uninformative about what Hardcore actually means to MMO gamers, the aggregate opinion (aka emergent) DOES. That's not statistics, that Sociology 101.
 
You really can't be hardcore without skill; if you lack the skill to overcome content, you BUILD your skill until you can (if you are hardcore). If you are unwilling to improve your skill, you aren't hardcore..
 
 
MMO's have never had a varied deffinition of Hardcore. The Hardcore players are always the ones that spend the most time, effort, and skill on the game.
----
			
Hardcore is a designation given to a subset of activities/individuals, in an overall larger/broader/more encompassing group of activities/individuals, that is more in depth and/or encourages application of skill. (Short, mid and long term respectively)
 
A game that is just "hardcore" cannot truly exist alone and by itself following that definition without considering it part of a larger unit, such as of like games that are NOT as in depth and/or encourages application of skill. Thus a quandary on what Wildstar is supposed to be since it attempts to cannibalize itself from the start if it presses for "hardcore."
 
Wildstar, if it is so "hardcore" is aiming at a smaller demographic, though in actuality has many mechanics that do not reward in depth considerations or encouraged application of skill moreso than many other games; I consider it more punishing and gruelling than actually hardcore in many aspects as the travails of the more invested/skilled are the same as those that are less so.
 
 
 
Sorry if that was confusing, but what I was getting at, as a definition, "hardcore" is a subset of a set and cannot exist by itself, at least in a stable and hospitable environment. Encouraging the mentality of hardcore requires a healthy community that is "softer" shall we say?	
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
I may not be undestanding what you are looking for in the OP but hopefully this answers it.
 
Yes, they can make content that takes just as much skill to do with 3 people as it does 10, 20, 40.  The problem with it is that it would be much, much harder to make each and every encounter as exciting.  It is just easier to do more if you have more tools available.
 
As an aside, if internet connections were capable, I guarantee that a 1000 person raid could be made that is way more exciting than anything possible with a 10 man.  Could you just imagine, a giant battlefield and you are trying to take over a castle.  25 groups of 40 man raids where each has their own importance in the overall fight.  Yes, the individuality is lost, but it isn't about you, it is about everyone working together to a common goal to achieve something that no individual could ever hope to accomplish.
----
			It's a BS term kids throw around to justify sitting their asses in front of a computer.	
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Actually I knew plenty of "hard mode" wow raiders who had almost no skill. They were sweet and nice players, but they were getting carried by other players. I've known these types of players in every mmo. I also know that some players progress through hardcore content by simply showing up to the raid times.
 
Let me be more clear to you, "The most active, committed, or doctrinaire members of a group or movement", the circmstances itself for this definition are all subjective depending on the game and playerbase. You made the declaration that hardcore will always have a time sink. That is not true for every player, mmo, or game. You can't  qauntify subjective concepts. There is no X level of commitement in which you need before you can progress through hardcore content of a game, wildstar or any other. You can't measure individual skill alone, when it is a team based process. This is what I mean by you attempting to quantify the attributes.
 
You're attempting to assert a definition that each player should determine on their own, about a video game and what qualifies as dedicated and non dedicated playerbase. In truth, most people qualify as hardcore players. Whether they progress is whether or not they're good at being hardcore.
 
Sick of people asserting the term and ideology of hardcore as if it's a sacred badge of honor. Get over yourself.
 
----
			
 My definition of hardcore is pretty extreme... I don't consider doing content as it was intended hardcore. So a 40 group doing a 40 raid isn't hardcore in my definition of the word but ill use it non the less to describe those players for the sake of arguments. No doing 40 with 20-30 at the appropriate gear level would be pretty hardcore in my eyes...if there was no wipes in the raid than i would have to call it like godmode hardcore or something or rather.
 
So basically hardcore is pretty much a matter or perception i guess.	
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
You're attempting to ignore the established and objective definition of hardcore (as a word) and ignoring it's socially emergent definition in the MMO context.
 
 
Individuals don't get to re-define words; Their level of activity/ commitment, and ability to clear content determines whether they fit the category or no.
 
Absolute skill level is irrelevant to 'Hardcore', only that it is high enough to overcome the content. Time investment (activity) is a much more important qualifier for the category of 'Hardcore'.
 
As for 'Hardcore' as a badge of honor, the only one pretending it's a 'Badge of Honor' is you. It is a category of the player base; nothing more nothing less. 
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
you don't get to define the parameters and you don't get to define anything else. That is up to the playerbase and the game, and it's given features.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
That is literally my point cupcake, now go run along and refute your own arguments elsewhere.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Refer to your original post and stop trying to act like you've had a leg in this argument at any point.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
 
This one right here:
 
 
 
How does your foot taste?
 
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Fine, not all games require "significant" time sinks, to be competitive or have a hardcore playerbase. Are you really this oblivious?
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
You're attempting to ignore the established and objective definition of hardcore (as a word) and ignoring it's socially emergent definition in the MMO context.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Is that a joke? First, you're trying to explain why your addendum to the definition is correct. It's not. You can't add to definitions because you think you're right and expect everyone else to just accept it. The definitions are the definitions. Anything more than that is fallacious garbage. Second, you say "socially emergent definition" and then point to satire. 
----
			
Guys, guys, guys. Please, let's keep the tone civil! The discussion is in the best interest of the game and the community, at no point is it really necessary to flame one another. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, please respectfully contribute to the conversation so that we can all benefit from it. It's not very productive to 'single out' anyone, unless you really have something valuable to share. I realize you guys do have your own valid points you'd like to make, but just because others may or may not agree that doesn't justify singling them out with rude remarks. I'd just like to keep the discussion healthy, so that everyone can benefit mutually from the outcome (valuable feedback for the devs to take note of).
 
If it helps at all, I value everyone's opinion so far and I think Carbine does too. The discussion at hand exposes some of the core problems of the game and what this means for the future of Wildstar. Isn't that a bit more important to all of us than stabs at each other? Hey I'm not a moderator so it's not my call, but the OP and the discussion following has otherwise been fairly productive guys. Help out, and ignore the word "Hardcore" for a moment and re-read the conversation posted in the OP. Get back to me here about the raid mechanics, and how it may or may not be possible to scale content. Thanks guys, I'd love to hear your input on this!	
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
The discussion is in the best interest of the game and the community, at no point is it really necessary to flame one another. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, 
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Satire (south park) presents parodies of our actual society. That episode parodies the Hardcore WoW. Yes it's a joke; but you know as well as we all do, that that is an accurate representation of the Hardcore MMO player in our society (in Asia it's even more extreme; the Hardcore guilds in FFXI  literally raided for over 15 hours straight when Pandemonium Warden was first introduced). The grain of truth in every joke shines though.
 
I didn't ammend any deffinitions; Hardcore describes the group that is most active in any given context. That literally translates to those with the greatest time investment. 
----
			
My feeling on what hardcore is encapsulated by a definition based on my own observations and feelings above^  
 
But I feel that this thread should be focusing on what "IS" hardcore,  or what hardcore is to Wildstar, what should Wildstar being working towards with its focus on more movement and understanding of the environment in its play-style? What should be the core of this game and how to get it going with a community that is a force to be reckoned with instead of the flimsy noodely-ness we have now.
 
Maybe its not hardcore that we should be looking at, but the core itself for this game.	
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Pointing at a South Park episode to support your opinion is insignificant. If the definition referenced the episode you'd have a point. 
 
We are not playing Korean MMO's. We're not playing MMO's from 15 years ago. If we were you might have a point. It's entirely possible right now to be in a top 100 guild in the US in other raiding games and spend less than 10 hours a week online. Your interpretation of "active" in context of western mmo's is flawed.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
My feeling on what hardcore is encapsulated by a definition based on my own observations and feelings above^  
 
But I feel that this thread should be focusing on what "IS" hardcore,  or what hardcore is to Wildstar, what should Wildstar being working towards with its focus on more movement and understanding of the environment in its play-style? What should be the core of this game and how to get it going with a community that is a force to be reckoned with instead of the flimsy noodely-ness we have now.
 
Maybe its not hardcore that we should be looking at, but the core itself for this game.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
What do you expect when you pose a question that has a real answer already? 
 
There is no point in discussion; Hardcore is the group that is most active in a game. 
 
The fact that some people can and cannot invest the time / effort to clear content or think it should be designed differently is irrelevant. There are always players who will do it regardless, and those who will not expend the time.
 
Adding other content for players with lower time investment is cool, but no need to scale current content. 
 
After all, W* has nothing like OG games with hardcore content
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
The raids / raiding are the hard core of W* (and warplots too, but they need tweeks to PvP first to make those viable again).
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
It is of my feeling that content should not be gated form everyone like that, not to mention, I am raiding and I would not consider this truly worthwhile or demanding of skill in a manner that I'd label, subjectively mind you, "hardcore."
 
In practice hardcore play is something everyone can attempt to do, but few can only achieve mastery through time and effort spent, and continuously rewards you for skilled play. (attunement is NOT that)
 
Crap I think I got a little off topic and whindy there... Sorry sorry I think I confused myself here..
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
By your logic, you are always right and there is no point in discussion. 
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
And you suggesting that being in a top 100 guild alone is a good indicator that you are also in the 'Hardcore' category for your MMO of choice is false. You can be  a crafter for a top 100 and not do any raids/ or any content besides making stuff for your guildies. That doesn't make you 'Hardcore'. 
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Not at all, no need for apologies if you ask me. You give your unbiased opinion here of how you would define hardcore. In a pretty logical way at that. +1 for contribution.
 
As for Nazryn, I rest my case man. You are arguing semantics at this point, which is far from productive.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Really? You're going to assert that I'm talking about non-raiders? That's your angle? You're making your position sound untenable.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Not at all, no need for apologies if you ask me. You give your unbiased opinion here of how you would define hardcore. In a pretty logical way at that. +1 for contribution.
 
As for Nazryn, I rest my case man. You are arguing semantics at this point, which is far from productive.
----
			
The big difference here is that I provided a topic, gave an opinion, and asked for productive feedback (several times now, which has fallen on deaf ears) about the meaning of the term Hardcore to the players. There is a big difference between 'arguing' and 'discussing'. I have repeatedly tried to keep the post on topic, with no intention of insulting or attacking anyone. You, on the other hand, have posted here multiple times with this intention obviously first and foremost in mind as is evident by the content of your postings.
 
I have not visited the same thread repeatedly just with the sole purpose in mind to argue semantics. You, on the other hand, continue to do so. I've really got better things to do than go back and forth with you since you are obviously one of those people who will constantly post on a forum in order to 'get the last word' even if you make a complete fool out of yourself in the process.
 
If anyone else would like to contribute to the actual topic in a productive way, I'm all ears and I will respectfully carry on the conversation. Otherwise, I've gained tons of insight that I was after in the first place about the topic at this point so it's easy enough to be happy with that.
 
Cheers!	
----
			Hardcore, I don't think this means what you think it means.  Hardcore refers to generally difficult content that requires practice, patience, and skill to complete.	
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
The big difference here is that I provided a topic, gave an opinion, and asked for productive feedback (several times now, which has fallen on deaf ears) about the meaning of the term Hardcore to the players. There is a big difference between 'arguing' and 'discussing'. I have repeatedly tried to keep the post on topic, with no intention of insulting or attacking anyone. You, on the other hand, have posted here multiple times with this intention obviously first and foremost in mind as is evident by the content of your postings.
 
I have not visited the same thread repeatedly just with the sole purpose in mind to argue semantics. You, on the other hand, continue to do so. I've really got better things to do than go back and forth with you since you are obviously one of those people who will constantly post on a forum in order to 'get the last word' even if you make a complete fool out of yourself in the process.
 
If anyone else would like to contribute to the actual topic in a productive way, I'm all ears and I will respectfully carry on the conversation. Otherwise, I've gained tons of insight that I was after in the first place about the topic at this point so it's easy enough to be happy with that.
 
Cheers!
----
			
Just a few opinions here...
I think many people confuse terms in MMO's, gating vs time sink vs hardcore.
 
With gating there are thresholds that must be fulfilled before being able to do something or obtain something
 
With a time sink...continuing to do something over and over again allows incremental progression towards completion
 
Hardcore describes the challenge of the mechanics to mastered before being able to progress
 
So something like:
 
Defeating X allows you to move onto Y = Gating
 
Every time I do X I earn a token...if I gather enough tokens I can unlock Y... without actually defeating X = Time Sink
 
Y is available to me, but it is incredibly powerful and requires perfect timing or coordination to achieve that typically can only be accomplish by skilled and experienced players = Hardcore
 
Now, I think the real passion people have is concerning rewards and how they are aligned to gating, time sinks and hardcore content. And this is where I think games drop the ball. Games that hide BiS gear behind these walls find their players arguing about solo vs group, pug vs pre-made, elite vs casual...because at least one or more group is barred from BiS gear.
 
My opinion is that in a game you want BiS gear available to each group type of player with suitable challenge that way you have large pools of people available to succeed at end game content. End game content should provide really awesome cosmetics, titles, unique mounts, non combat perks...rather than be the method for obtaining BiS gear.
 
If the game play is fun and compelling the rewards should be nice but secondary.
 
Just my opinions	
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
No, by my logic defined terms have a real definition that stands regardless of what individuals wan't to pretend it is.
 
 
 Atunement can be completed by anyone willing to put in the time (it takes less then a week if you attune full time). Atunement has existed in some form in virtually all MMO's I can recall. Heck even Ragnarok Online had some of it's zones gated behind some really intense time sinks.
 
Hardcore isn't a subjective term. Simple as that. People might like to pretend it means something it doesn't, but a rose by any other name...
 
You might believe raiding doesn't require much skill, and I might remind you that skill isn't a major factor in 'Hardcore'. Activity / time invested is.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Not at all, no need for apologies if you ask me. You give your unbiased opinion here of how you would define hardcore. In a pretty logical way at that. +1 for contribution.
 
As for Nazryn, I rest my case man. You are arguing semantics at this point, which is far from productive.
----