Let every man, woman, and child know of the threat of casual games. They're infecting our schools and our consoles! Children sit in between classes and play Cooking Mama and Phoenix Wright. Pretty soon, our children will be betraying us by spending time playing those despicable casual games and leave the purity that encompasses games like Gears of War and Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas.
Or at least, this is how some gamers react to the mere mention of casual games. After the Planet Puzzle League review, my brief foray into the world of the American Podtoid (not to be confused with the highly-efficient and robotic Podtoid-san), as well as the Pac-Man World Championship, I figured it was high time to tackle this whole issue.
Recently, casual games have been getting more and more popular. I mean, that's been the key to the Wii's success, and a big part of the DS' as well. Games like Wario Ware, Hotel Dusk, and Big Brain Academy have all been huge successes recently for consoles (not to mention stuff like Bejeweled on PCs). Also, there are the classic games like Pac-Man and Tetris that are casual.
So, what's so bad about them? Over on Podtoid, I got to report on the Pac-Man World Championship, and I refused to leave, so I stayed on for reader questions. On it, one was fielded to us about the rising waves of casual games, and would it take over the market, since it requires less effort to make these games and thus a greater profit margin. Simply put: no. The video game industry is very much like Hollywood: sure, there will be tons of titles put out that are meant to make money, as the Madden franchise and countless movie to video game titles have proven. Yet for all the Disturbia and The Last Holiday that gets put out, there are films like Grindhouse and The Departed to show us what the magic of Hollywood really is.
Now that my film analogy is over, my point is this: casual games may become a significant force in the market, but they will never take over. Sports games won't appeal to soccer moms -- they'll only target those who have a vested interest in professional sports, but they'll still remain the highest selling games every year. Casual games aren't successful solely because soccer moms and grandpas are buying the games and systems. No, it's because these games appeal to most every time of hardcore gamer.
I love Phoenix Wright to death. It's clearly a casual game (games that require no real knowledge or familiarity with video games to enjoy), and I'm a hardcore gamer. At the same time, some of the people at the Pac-Man World Championship who only play Pac-Man, and don't play any other video games. Now, while it's a casual game, they are playing it in a hardcore manner. You'll also find players who play games like Gears of War once in a while -- in other words, casually. So, since we've got all these different ways of playing games, is there really that much of an "us" or "them" division? I'd like to think not. Sure, there are groups, but they clearly intermingle with each other.
So, why is it that hardcore gamers are reacting like this? One possibility is it's the fear that gaming will become totally misunderstood, and they'll have to fight off yet another stereotype. Another is that they'll then have to deal with annoying casual gamers bugging them and demeaning what it is to be a "gamer." Y'know, like when your little sister tries to get into gaming and only bugs the hell out of you with it?
The players at the Pac-Man World Championship were all really interesting people -- only a few of them were hardcore gamers, but for the most part, they just enjoyed competing in games of Pac-Man. They're not self-conscious about what their status is as a gamer, nor what sort of damage their playing casual games does to the market. They are just there to play video games and enjoy them -- something that I've seen some gamers forget how to do.
All in all, I think it's pretty ridiculous. The fear that casual games will replace the market of good hardcore games is entirely unfounded. The same amount of great games will be made every year, it's just that the overall pool will increase. Ubisoft isn't going to give up making Splinter Cell games just to make more Dolphinz games (which, by the way, Chad Concelmo will be reviewing when it comes out) -- they'll make both, and increase their profits even more.
So gamers, please, don't fret -- your blood-splattering, zombie-chansawing, hardcore games will still be around as long as consoles are being made. Stop making such a fuss over a category of games that's different from yours. There are probably several casual games that you'd like if you only gave them a chance. There really doesn't need to be any hostility towards those who only game casually (and trust me, I've seen it happen before), since in the end, they're helping to give more money to the companies we love, and thus keeping them around.
[Thanks to SuperDickery and Golbeza for the imagery]
Contest:
11:18 PM on 06.10.2007
| 
The populartiy of casual games is only going to help the video game industry in the long run. It'll make money for publishers who'll be able to put that into other projects, and it will get more players interested in gaming, who will eventually graduate to bigger challenges.
BTW, Grindhouse[/] was a commercial flop, but it was [i]supposed to make money. Just because it didn't cost as much as, say, War of the Worlds to film, doesn't mean that it wasn't intended to turn a profit. Every single movie released in Hollywood is released to make money. Money is where the business goes, so if a big company can make more money on Tetris than it could Madden; then that's they way things will head.
Also if a casual game a company makes helps fund a new 'hardcore' game then go for it. The industry needs serious funding to make epic games. Remember all the problems with companies and the PS3 budget!
Casual games and hardcore games are here to stay.
I think its to do with elitism as well. Which I guess is really covered by fear in a way. I think it's funny that people have wanted more and more people to start gaming and understand the scene better, but when they do a lot of people get mad and try to ostracize the very people they complained about not gaming in the first place.
Meanwhile, though everyone plays Pac-Man and Tetris, I'd really argue that those games are grandfathered into the hardcore games category based on age and importance; the only reason they are casual is simple game design (though advanced back in the day) and the social climate of the 80s that made it more acceptable to play video games.
Finally, I would severely hesitate to put WarioWare into the casual gaming category. 1) Soccer moms and wanna-be gamers are not going to go pick up suck a bizarre-looking title with horrible graphics (that I dearly love). 2) The gameplay itself, while simple in concept, is overwhelming to casual gamers. (That is, that's my experience showing it off to people.) 3) The WarioWare series is really more of an homage to hardcore gamers throughout the years. When simply told to "Jump!" how many casual gamers will automatically reach for the A button? How many will see a Zelda screen and know to automatically run into that weird-looking block that barely looks like a staircase? How many casual gamers will have the reflexes to advance past the introductory stage? It's a series steeped in gaming tradition, and, to me, it seems very inaccessible to casual gamers.
Feel free to argue any of these points, I just love playing devil's advocate so much I don't know whether or not I support everything I'm saying, except for the WarioWare stuff.
P.S. No love for Nintendogs, one of the great successes of casual gaming?
Either you have a chainsaw or a Wiimote. Nothing in between.
If you don't know of Grindhouse style movies, then it was a waste on your fragile mind. That's why "Are We Done Yet" was in theaters around the same time. You had options, you just thought you were going to appear "cool".
If you need more edification on why Grindhouse was one of the best cinema experiences of the year, go find any of the following:
The Candy Snatchers
Gator Bait
Big Bad Mama
Black Christmas (and not the shitty remake)
Street Trash (<---- entry level grindhouse cinema)
Cannibal Holocaust
Any of the Mondo Cane series
Two Thousand Maniacs (again, not the less stellar remake)
Black Belt Jones
Ilsa
And a shitload of others. I've grown to appreciate the "art" behind these films, and there's a definite love or hate about these kinds of movies. And if you "hated" Grindhouse, it pays to be able to back up why you disliked it if you compare it to the source material that it was lovingly stolen from rather than write it off as a shitty pair of movies.
Oh wait, that was an Ubisoft adventure game, wasn't it. . . .
Damnit, I should've known Tarrantino would sooner rip from a videogame than include someone else's philosophy.
{Warning: The above post may contain more sarcasm than originally detected.]
Casual games make money. That's good for all gaming.
While Phoenix Wright or Hotel Dusk wouldn't immediately come to my mind as examples of casual games, they still are for exactly the reasons Dick mentioned. Classic arcade games are also casual, simply by design. They're intended for anyone to be able to drop a quarter into the machine and be able to play. Sure people like Billy Mitchell will play Pac-Man for hours on end, but my grandma still can grasp the basic concept in seconds and she's been dead for like four years now. Hence, it's still a casual game.
I miss my grandma.
They're not using it in a racist way though. You could also argue that the metaphor of the pure American spite shown for the Japanese is similar to the blind patriotism of the hardcore gamer against the "casual" gamer. I think it's a great metaphor.
So how about you stfu.jpg.
Menstruating much?
I don't give a shit one way or another whats going on in the world of casual gaming. Wii and a good majority of DS games don't interest me. I refuse to play a system designed around mini-games. I have no use for any of it. So I ignore it and carry on with my own business.
Easy.
Grindhouse was shit. Most of the movies it emulated were shit.
If you love shit, that's fine by me. Some people do.
Alot of us who saw the potential of those sploitation flicks and wondered what would happen if a talented director and a real budget came together some day to make one were disappointed because instead of finding out what might have been, we were treated to an homage to the style rather than an effort to see what they could really be in todays world. It was sad. The worst part is that because the movie bombed so bad, it's not likely that any major studio will be doing the same thing, something a lot of us hoped would happen, should grindhouse prove financially viable. So yeah, grindhouse was a huge disappointment, particularly for those of us who enjoyed the shitty movies you mention, if only a little.