@gold163 Can (Not) Advance: Try it for free at Big Fish Games (one hour demo) and if you like it, grab it for $6.99. Or you can get it through Steam and have Achievements.
@Crenshaw13: I bet he meant, "couldn't" get it for free. Times are tight, and a lot of people would rather buy other games than Plants vs. Zombies, despite how good it is.
I think it's funny how "casual game developers" don't want their games to be known as "casual games" because they think that the title is demeaning. And then Gamestop makes a section of their store specifically for "casual gamers", who often recognize themselves as such. :/
@gold163 Can (Not) Advance: What are you talking about? I don't know any devs in the space that feel that way. In fact it's the opposite, Casual devs are flourishing while huge studios are closing their doors. Where do you hear such things?
@7ucky: I didn't say anything about the economic state of the companies, but I do remember reading a while back that casual developers hated being labeled as "casual", because they believed that their titles had as much merit and deserved as much attention in the market as AAA titles, which I thought was kind of bullshit, because I'd pick MGS4 over Bejeweled any day. X_X
@gold163 Can (Not) Advance: Casual games can and will be addicting because of thier simple premise, as games like Call of Duty and Halo are replayable only due to multiplayer, while Fallout 3 is because of DLC.
Take singleplayer games like Prototype and Bioshock, and I personally don't see any reason to play it again unless if I get the urge after an extended time.
Take a game like fantastic contraption http://www.fantasticcontraption.com/ and you would spend a lot of time playing it BECAUSE it is simple.
I consider myself to be a hardcore gamer, but you can't forget what makes games entertaining in the first place.
@n00b_pwner: I certainly don't doubt that; I just wanted to point out my belief that "casual games" are deserving of that title, and are a separate entity from the rest of games as far as I'm concerned.
@gold163 Can (Not) Advance: Fair enough! Casual games studios aren't all winners, to be sure. And I'm with you: I definitely don't put a match 3 game on the same level as Half-Life.
I was more wondering if there was a company/person who said they felt that way because judging by all the drunken smiling faces at the casual games conference last week, everyone seems to be enjoying the label of "casual games" people. :D
@gold163 Can (Not) Advance:
Wrong, the only people who find casual gaming demeaning and look down on it are "hardcore" gamers who think they are too cool for school.
only morons classify games like "hardcore" "casual"
@styl3s: Why is this, in your opinion? I'd like to see why you think that all "hardcore" gamers find casual gaming demeaning, or why you think the distinction between "hardcore" and "casual" is unnecessary and stupid. Personally, I don't see anything demeaning about it. I just think that there's a very fine difference between what makes one game a "hardcore" game, and what makes another a "casual" game. Sure, Monopoly and Dungeons and Dragons are both board games, but I don't really see myself thinking that they can be classified as similar.
And like I said, some people actually classify themselves as "casual gamers". I'm sure that they don't all have inferiority complexes or anything. Are they all morons too? There's no need to be so aggressive about this.
@gold163 Can (Not) Advance: If I made something like Plants vs Zombies, I'd honestly be pretty mad if someone lumped me in with a bunch of games that had nothing to do with the tower defense/puzzle genre. The problem is, all of these "casual" games have actual genres, which no one uses anymore and the word "casual" has such a negative meaning around here that whenever someone says that they like Plants vs Zombies or Peggle or something, they have to add on "but it's the only casual game I like!" or else they get stoned to death.
It's dumb. If people just called them as part of the genres that they are, you wouldn't have this ever growing chasm forming up between people.
@Ueziel: I don't typically refer to games themselves as "hardcore" or "casual", but I think it's important to differentiate between the demographics that such games represent when referring to them. That's all. If I want to play a tower defense game, then I'll look it up under, "tower defense", not "casual" or "hardcore". I have no problem referring to any game through its genre, but it's kind of futile to act as if there isn't a difference between what makes a game for "hardcore" audiences, and what makes a game for "casual" audiences, in my opinion. The chasm here only exists because of misuse of the two terms, and misunderstanding. I'd like to make this clear: yes, "hardcore" and "casual" aren't genres, and there's nothing inherently wrong about a game being "casual" or "hardcore", and I know that.
Agreed 100%. The more you clearly define "casual" and "hardcore", you split the user base into stereotypical and (in my opinion) inaccurate representations of what the consumer actually wants. This leads to poor quality games on both ends.
"Let's make this super hardcore game for the super hardcore crowd. Let's not include anything that can be interpreted as a "mini-game"...Sure, the pacing of the game will be terribly monogonous, but fuck it! Hardcore gamers don't want to do puzzles or stop and think for two seconds."
"Let's make this awesome casual game that housewives will buy. We'll make so much money! All we need to do is 'borrow' some already-popular game mechanic and throw "party" in the title. Sure, it may end up being a fantastic, must-play game for anyone--but housewives is where the money is at...So fuck it!"
It seems to me this guy is just a little too sensitive. First of all, not all games are "of equal worth". Some games are just bad, whether they are casual or hardcore. Now, that set aside, it is just natural for these labels to arise, because these games have inherent differences. Labeling a game "casual" is not an insult, is just a way to understand and describe a game... just as calling a game an FPS, or an RPG, it's just a classification. Nothing else should be read into it.
Now, if he thinks there are people that think less of casual games... well, that's another issue, but there's nothing he can do about that. If some people just don't like those games, well that's the way it is, just as there are some people who don't like hardcore games. There's space for all tastes :-)
Guitar Hero: Casual - It was designed for the mass market, not a niche group. Everyone wants to be a rockstar, and this will appeal to everyone because they get to play a roll that many people wish they could be. Just because some people pour their every waking hour into it doesn't make it hardcore, just means it's one of the more addicting casual games.
World of Warcraft: Both - It tries to cater to people who are serious about gaming and the people who don't care or have time to play every night. But, it isn't both at the same time, you are either hardcore or you are casual. Mostly.
The Sims: Casual - It isn't a game where you have to play 24/7 and once again, it was made to market to the general masses. This wasn't made to be marketed to people who prefer games like God of War and Halo.
Plants vs. Zombies: - Haven't played it. it seems like your typical "flash schmup" where you just kill waves. Maybe I'm totally wrong, but I'm pretty sure it's something you would play for a while and then go back to play for the heck of it.
Basically, casual is anything that is relatively simple in is construction, mostly made to get lots of users from people who don't generally play video games on a regular basis and who can't really handle fast-paced, quick-thinking, fast-finger games. But, since some "flash" games can have those characteristics, it also includes games that you don't usually stay up till 3am playing. This also includes shovelware; the casual masses gravitate towards them.
Hardcore is basically the total opposite of all that. I also think it means that it services only a small niche in the sense of hardcore people don't mind playing Peggle or Sim City, but going the opposite direction isn't as popular.
I don't mind the "casual" game tag. but I think it's funny that what are called casual games now, used to be just...games. Looking back at where we came from, how casual arcade and early home games, and it seems silly to suddenly treat games that are similarly "casual" as if they are a whole new genre.
As he said: a game is a game is a game. Doesn't matter if it's "casual" or "hardcore" or whatever lies in between.
Well good, I agree the term needs to go. Case in point, there own game Denki Blocks, which could be considered 'causal' and 'kiddy' by those who are close minded fools. It can be played casually as well as hardcore for a few hours. Very good game that.
@excel_excel: I disagree. The notion that "A game is a game is a game" means that Peggle and your average RPG are the same. They are not meant to be played the same way; they don't have the same elements. Many casual games have no characters, no in-game history, no plot, and, most importantly, no long-term goals. People may not like labels, but they are sometimes used for good reason.
"Make the game you love and people who enjoy the things you enjoy will be the audience".
That's very much the old way of approaching the games industry, and by far the more romantic. Nowadays, it's also a lot more about looking at a target audience, or prefferably a bit of both: selecting to work in a genre you enjoy.
Just catering to people "like me" or that "like what I like" can be very limiting, but I won't deny that it makes the games better, in principle, if you make what you like.
@gametr4x: Right, it's about the money now. People want to feel secure about what they're investing their money in, so they need to see who the target audience will be and whatnot. This is the way creativity has been stifled in this country in all areas. The same thing has happened to movies and music. It's less about the artist, more about the audience. Of course we promote it by buying all this crap.
The credit crisis has exacerbated this problem. Before, credit was so easy if you were a fledgling game maker, movie maker, musician, you could get the money to make your idea. Now the only people that have money are the big guys and they will only invest in a "sure" thing.
I think "casual" is a fitting title for the games you can just pick up and play for a couple of minutes. However once you start deviding in casual and hardcore gamERs it gets off. People tend to base that on the type of games played then not on the amount of games played.
It's like someone saying "man, I'm such a hardcore moviegoer I go to the movies every 3 days" -"Yeah but you mostly watch comedy movies, so you're more of a casual moviegoer."
Casual *actually* describes what the game is, casual.
Games not labelled casual usually require alot of time on the users part to make progress, conversely, a casual game can be picked up and played in short blasts with little to no commitment or time.
Its the perfect term for describing exactly what these games are. "Casual"
07/31/09
07/31/09
07/31/09
07/31/09
07/31/09
07/31/09
07/31/09
07/31/09
07/31/09
And yeah, that's supposed to be "can't".
07/31/09
07/31/09
I'll stick with Steam.
07/31/09
07/31/09
07/31/09
07/31/09
07/31/09
Take singleplayer games like Prototype and Bioshock, and I personally don't see any reason to play it again unless if I get the urge after an extended time.
Take a game like fantastic contraption http://www.fantasticcontraption.com/ and you would spend a lot of time playing it BECAUSE it is simple.
I consider myself to be a hardcore gamer, but you can't forget what makes games entertaining in the first place.
07/31/09
07/31/09
I was more wondering if there was a company/person who said they felt that way because judging by all the drunken smiling faces at the casual games conference last week, everyone seems to be enjoying the label of "casual games" people. :D
07/31/09
Wrong, the only people who find casual gaming demeaning and look down on it are "hardcore" gamers who think they are too cool for school.
only morons classify games like "hardcore" "casual"
07/31/09
And like I said, some people actually classify themselves as "casual gamers". I'm sure that they don't all have inferiority complexes or anything. Are they all morons too? There's no need to be so aggressive about this.
07/31/09
See, styl3s? Even the companies themselves acknowledge the label, "casual games". So game developers are morons too? :P
07/31/09
It's dumb. If people just called them as part of the genres that they are, you wouldn't have this ever growing chasm forming up between people.
07/31/09
07/31/09
07/15/09
"Let's make this super hardcore game for the super hardcore crowd. Let's not include anything that can be interpreted as a "mini-game"...Sure, the pacing of the game will be terribly monogonous, but fuck it! Hardcore gamers don't want to do puzzles or stop and think for two seconds."
"Let's make this awesome casual game that housewives will buy. We'll make so much money! All we need to do is 'borrow' some already-popular game mechanic and throw "party" in the title. Sure, it may end up being a fantastic, must-play game for anyone--but housewives is where the money is at...So fuck it!"
07/15/09
Now, if he thinks there are people that think less of casual games... well, that's another issue, but there's nothing he can do about that. If some people just don't like those games, well that's the way it is, just as there are some people who don't like hardcore games. There's space for all tastes :-)
07/15/09
-Guitar Hero
-World of Warcraft
-The Sims
-Plants vs. Zombies
07/15/09
Guitar Hero: Casual - It was designed for the mass market, not a niche group. Everyone wants to be a rockstar, and this will appeal to everyone because they get to play a roll that many people wish they could be. Just because some people pour their every waking hour into it doesn't make it hardcore, just means it's one of the more addicting casual games.
World of Warcraft: Both - It tries to cater to people who are serious about gaming and the people who don't care or have time to play every night. But, it isn't both at the same time, you are either hardcore or you are casual. Mostly.
The Sims: Casual - It isn't a game where you have to play 24/7 and once again, it was made to market to the general masses. This wasn't made to be marketed to people who prefer games like God of War and Halo.
Plants vs. Zombies: - Haven't played it. it seems like your typical "flash schmup" where you just kill waves. Maybe I'm totally wrong, but I'm pretty sure it's something you would play for a while and then go back to play for the heck of it.
Basically, casual is anything that is relatively simple in is construction, mostly made to get lots of users from people who don't generally play video games on a regular basis and who can't really handle fast-paced, quick-thinking, fast-finger games. But, since some "flash" games can have those characteristics, it also includes games that you don't usually stay up till 3am playing. This also includes shovelware; the casual masses gravitate towards them.
Hardcore is basically the total opposite of all that. I also think it means that it services only a small niche in the sense of hardcore people don't mind playing Peggle or Sim City, but going the opposite direction isn't as popular.
07/15/09
to add to that,
I "casually" played Halo all the time when I was an undergrad. uh oh, better relabel that franchise, huh? =P
07/15/09
As he said: a game is a game is a game. Doesn't matter if it's "casual" or "hardcore" or whatever lies in between.
Only thing that matters is if it's fun to play.
07/15/09
07/15/09
07/15/09
07/15/09
07/15/09
07/15/09
That's very much the old way of approaching the games industry, and by far the more romantic. Nowadays, it's also a lot more about looking at a target audience, or prefferably a bit of both: selecting to work in a genre you enjoy.
Just catering to people "like me" or that "like what I like" can be very limiting, but I won't deny that it makes the games better, in principle, if you make what you like.
07/15/09
The credit crisis has exacerbated this problem. Before, credit was so easy if you were a fledgling game maker, movie maker, musician, you could get the money to make your idea. Now the only people that have money are the big guys and they will only invest in a "sure" thing.
07/15/09
It's like someone saying "man, I'm such a hardcore moviegoer I go to the movies every 3 days" -"Yeah but you mostly watch comedy movies, so you're more of a casual moviegoer."
Makes no sense.
07/15/09
07/15/09
Games not labelled casual usually require alot of time on the users part to make progress, conversely, a casual game can be picked up and played in short blasts with little to no commitment or time.
Its the perfect term for describing exactly what these games are. "Casual"
07/15/09