Casual gaming is a hardcore pursuit
by Conrad Quilty-Harper 
{ Jun 29th 2006 at 11:25AM }
Lending more credence to the idea that casual gaming deserves a lot more attention from the industry and the gaming press than it does currently, a survey carried out by Macromedia on its casual gaming site, Trygames, has found that just under a third of people that use the site spend over two hours playing games per session. Of those, over a third visit the site nine times per week. Although these findings may surprise many people in the industry that believed casual gamers tended to play games in short bursts, the idea that casual gamers aren't just gamers that play sporadically has been well reported on over the last couple of years. The Guardian and the BBC both ran interesting articles on this issue recently. We've already seen how reviews on large game sites and in magazines have very little influence over what hardcore gamers buy and play, so it's obvious that the effect should be even more pronounced for casual gamers. This is partly due to the "viral" nature of casual games (they often spread through word of mouth offline, or online via social networking sites, IM or email) and the fact that a large proportion of casual gamers are female. Larger commercial games are often very male orientated, which reflects the fact that many game development companies are made up of men and therefore the majority of games that come out of these companies are designed to appeal to men.
There's another possible reason for the lack of a connection between the industry (that is largely tuned towards the needs of hardcore gamers) and real mainstream, casual gamers that don't consider themselves gamers; the simplicity and low access requirements of casual games. Many so called "casual" games are available in bulk on online portals and require not much more than a small download and a double click to play. Everyone knows the rules of popular card and puzzle games and that's why they're amongst the most popular types of games for casual players.
Games like The Sims, Myst and Geometry Wars are examples of games that have attracted casual gamers through simplicity and have gone on to become extremely popular as a result. Keith Stuart on the Guardian GamesBlog called casual gaming the new hardcore just over a year ago; it's "stigmatised, unconventional, comparatively inaccessible", just like hardcore gaming used to be. So why has this not changed in the year since this article was written? Research has long shown that casual gaming is an under appreciated market that is already disproportionately large for the amount of coverage it receives. So why does everyone in the industry continue to be surprised to see that casual gamers are actually quite prolific gamers?
[Image credit: Stuff on my cat]
Get a WordPress.com Blog
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
VaultedCeilings @ Jun 29th 2006 11:33AM
First, I laughed when I read that the Sims was a simple game. That game is a far cry from pick-up-and-play construction. I think you're blurring the different qualities that attract "casual gamers" to play new games and coming out with a single and inaccurate result, simplicity.
That said, isn't it interesting that there is one company that says it recognizes this trend and wants to capitalize on it? We'll see if they can put their money where their mouth is, but I don't think the market is going completely unnoticed by the big three.
Tucker @ Jun 29th 2006 11:39AM
Myst? Simple?
JTS @ Jun 29th 2006 11:46AM
I would agree with #1 that "casual games" or "casual gamers" are difficult to define. Sims is the best example, but where do we squeeze in all of the new DS software like Nintendogs or Animal Crossing? Neither of these are exactly pick-and-play, but they aren't exactly geared to "hardcore gamers" (well, maybe Animal Crossing).
While I haven't clicked through, I'd be interested to know how many of the survey respondents at Trygames A) would self-identify as casual gamers and B) spend time playing games on a console (be it DS, GC, XBox, PS2, etc.). I have a sneaking suspicion that many of these casual gamers may actually be just regular old gamers who tend to play at casual sites either at work, while surfing the web or as a break from more "hardcore" gaming.
All that being said, I think with things like the DS and XBox Live, we're beginning to see a shift into providing more options and greater attention in design toward so called casual games.
Robotic House Plant @ Jun 29th 2006 11:49AM
Tell me you didn't get that pic from stuffonmycat.com
epobirs @ Jun 29th 2006 11:50AM
Who-ho! GBA-meister, getting some...
Oops, it was temporarily possessed by the demonic presence of Rob Schnieder.
#2 Sure, it's simple. The sooner you say to yourself, "Bugger this for a slideshow," and use a walkthrough to see all of the pretty pictures, the sooner you've won. Not so much the game as your life back.
I regard Myst as the finest demo of the early CD-ROM era. So fine that people actually paid for it, rationalizing that it was a game when deep down they knew they just needed something to demonstrate how purty the stuff on their new PC could be.
Gemini @ Jun 29th 2006 11:55AM
Somehow the fact that today's Real Life webcomic is about casual gaming this article is just that much more interesting.
As far as the Sims go, I actually use that for mind numbing casual bouts of gaming when I need a break from all the RPGs I tend to play.
Francois @ Jun 29th 2006 12:06PM
Casual games are the most interesting going on in video games right now. It's there that you'll find the most creative and diverse gameplay scenarios and mechanics. The "big" industry and the media gives casual games the cold shoulder because it shatters their conception that video games should be "interactive movies", that pretty much all fall in the pretentious epic fantasy category. As the "hardcore" grow older, at the same time that they wish to legitimize their passion for games, they seem to be profoundly ashamed of actually playing games. This gave birth to the skewed notion of "interactive entertainment", to something that is really glorified Dungeons and Dragons with cinematic cutscenes.
Yet, the mainstream isn't ashamed of games at all. Board games, card games, puzzles, all those other games out there that no one feels the need to argue whether or not it's art. It's no surprise such type of leisure in video form would also strike a chord with them.
32_Footsteps @ Jun 29th 2006 12:10PM
You know, it's really odd that the video game industry focuses so hard on the hardcore fans. Could you imagine if book publishing was dictated by the whims of bibliophiles, or the movie industry by the cineastes? In that regard, the video gaming industry has been more than a little backwards.
I think the secret to getting games to appeal to casual gamers is that the basic concept needs to be simple. Sure, actually running the lives of your Sims can be an engrossing and complex task. However, the basic conceit of the game (run the lives of these fictional people) is simple to understand. You could say the same about Nintendogs (take care of puppies), Geometry Wars (blow stuff up), or Myst (look at how pretty we can render stuff).
Part of that, admittedly, is pure marketing. But part of it is just coming up with a basic concept that's easy for as many people as possible to grasp.
Scott @ Jun 29th 2006 12:15PM
my girlfriend is a casual gamer, as in she hates the games I play, but holy crap did she ever play sims2. If any of the next gen console makers would release sims 3 as an exclusive title, they would sell a tremendous amount of consoles.
VaultedCeilings @ Jun 29th 2006 12:20PM
@ 8
I agree that the goal of a game should be clear, however I think you're failing to recognize that most "hardcore" games have very clear goals, but they don't capture many types of gamers. I mean nothing seems more clearcut then Doom, kill anything before you... I think anyone can understand that comman, but not everyone is motivated by it. I agree with what # 7 said, casual gaming might be the last place where video games can be about having fun instead of escaping from reality.
Anyone who reads this site or any other game site will find more escapism language that I care for; since when were games about levels of immersion that rival "lucid dreams"? I am not going to say that such games shouldn't exist, but I think the industry has gone too far when each and every game promises to wisk you away from the boring world you live in now. Games should be fun because of some mechanic or goal, not because you are forgetting just how bad things are in the real world.
32_Footsteps @ Jun 29th 2006 12:29PM
Of course, Vaunted, you realize that Doom is, to this day, quite popular with casual gamers. By citing Doom, you're really proving my point.
As for escapism language - well, obviously. This site caters to hardcore gamers, and as you said, hardcore gamers are more likely to think in those terms. There's nothing wrong with that (arguably, we're just being honest with ourselves - all entertainment is some variety of escapism, and we're just owning up to that). Presenting games as simple concepts is just about marketing games to people who don't care to totally own up to what they're doing (or want to ease into it).
Rare Hare @ Jun 29th 2006 12:41PM
Poted by Conrad Quilty-Harper:
"Larger commercial games are often very male orientated, which reflects the fact that many game development companies are made up of men and therefore the majority of games that come out of these companies are designed to appeal to men."
Ahh, but let's not forget that the sex minigame in God of War was thought up and developed by a woman.
Rare Hare @ Jun 29th 2006 12:48PM
I consider myself a casual gamer as well as a hardcore gamer. Is anyone else here with me on that? I enjoy playing small flash games like Pocket Tanks and Stickman Odo and even Windows games like free cell, solitaire, minesweeper, and pinball.
I also own all three major consoles of this generation. I subscribe to two video games magazines and am considering subscribing to a third. Joystiq is my homepage. I'm planning on ivesting in a hi-def TV solely for the purpose of hi-def gaming. I could go on.
The question (for me) is, what defines the difference between "casual" and "hardcore"? I know people who own a PlayStation 2 or an Xbox, but only use it to play Madden or a borrowed copy of GTA. They don't keep up on gaming news, aside from the advertisements they see on TV. They don't set foot in game stores or the like. They really don't even look at gaming as a hobby, but rather as something to do to pass the time.
Now, wouldn't you consider them casual gamers? Or does the fact that they own a console make them hardcore? Should whether or not one is a "gamer" at all be defined by his or her own opinion of the matter? Shouldn't someone defined as a gamer look at gaming as a hobby?
robotplague @ Jun 29th 2006 1:05PM
Hah, I run stuffonmycat.com. Thanks for crediting the image at the bottom. As far as the article goes, it completely reminds me of my girlfriend as well. She plays a lot of GBA games, mainly pinball. By all means, GBA pinball games are not "hardcore" in the slightest. But does that change when she'll play it for 1-3 hours on a daily basis? We'll both start playing games and she'll play long after I turned off my system and am falling asleep. Sometimes I don't even have time to play games for a few days but she'll usually make time to play whatever she's into on the GBA/DS. It's pretty interesting, in the end she probably games more then me...on pinball.
Stick_Man @ Jun 29th 2006 1:59PM
I think a big problem between bridging the divide between casual and hardcore lies in the investment costs of the hardware used to play the games.
If we look at movies as an analogy, your grandma can pick up a DVD player from Wal-mart for 25 bucks and an old Carry Grant movie for 5 bucks. She can then experience that movie for as little as a 30 dollar investment. WE could consider her a casual movie watcher. She doesn't care about all the bells and whistles she just wants to watch Carry Grant with Grandpa. (As a side note DVD's will most likely be in production for the next 15 years.)
On the other hand a cinemaphile might buy a 300$ DVD with a reciever and 7.1 surround sound with a 50 inch HD compatable TV and buy 50+ DVD's. The cinemaphile can still watch Carry Grant but the cost is significantly higher.
And thats the problem with the Video Game industry. Grandma might want to play Geometry Wars. But does your grandma want to shuch out 500+ dollars to play it? No is probably the answer. The Console Video game industry is geared only to Those who wish to spend 500+ dollars to get the software up and running. As well every 5-6 years you will be forced to buy a new increasingly costly system just to keep up with the games you might want to play.
That is why the Console industry doesn't acknowlege casual gamers at this time. (Nintendo Wii is hoping to change that, but only time will tell on that one). Casual PC software on the other hand is still on the Up and Up. you can get a resonable computer these days just about anywhere for around 150-200 bucks. Grandma can pick up a computer that can play just about any simple game from a yardsale, Goodwill, or maybe her friend from her bridge club. That computer will still be able to play Flash content games and simple pick up and play software 15 years from now, as well as surf the web, read email and possibly pick up some Bridge tips.
Consoles just can't deliver to the casual audience. The development costs rise as the hardware advances and as the hardware advances then the games become more advanced and require bigger development budgets. Games like geometry wars try and break the mold, but when all is said and done There still has to be a hardcore gamer around to get that console into the house for Mom, Dad, and Grandma to try it out.
Now if they released Geometry wars as a flash game download how many copies do you think they would sell? I would be willing to bet that it would do 4-5 times as well as it has now.
All Your Lost Socks @ Jun 29th 2006 2:12PM
# 14, I am the same way as she is. In the 12 hours my boyfriend stayed up to play straight through Condemned the first time, I could have been laying there playing Tetris DS for the same length of time.
My boyfriend is one of those cases that defines what 'hardcore gamer' is for me. He has been a gamer his entire life. He has played everything worth playing, through the classics up to some of the ridiculously realistic and complex stuff out today. But he doesn't make a point of owning every new console out. He doesn't subscribe to a ton of gaming magazines and read a bunch of news sites or anything like that. I doubt he even has read this site. Does this mean he's not a hardcore gamer? No. He could tell you which songs did what in Ocarina of Time, and sing them. He can recall secrets and unlockables in games he played and beat years ago. He knows a ton about the games themselves, and what makes them worth playing, enough to look at a new game that comes out, play it for a few minutes and know whether to bother with it any more or not. But he still plays what people consider 'casual games', because well, they are fun, and he understands that fun is what games are supposed to be about.
There are gaming nerds out there that devote a lot of their time to finding out about the game companies, keeping up on the news, knowing what will come out next and planning to invest in it to collect everything that the industry has to offer. But that doesn't make them hardcore gamers. It doesn't mean that their dedication to gaming is part of their life, and that's what being a hardcore gamer is.
When I think about casual games, I think of what I read here in an interview with the head of Nintendo - that they were trying to appeal to the 'non gamer'. And so many people snuffed that right out, saying, how does one expect to sell games to people who don't play them? Simple. Nintendo's arcade-style approach lends hardly any learning curve and allows anyone to just pick up a controller and play along. You aren't required to have any prior knowledge. Games may not be a part of your life that you feel you require, but it is interesting enough that you would pop a few bucks on a console to gain access to the well of content that will be provided. You are just involved enough that you can think of it as something to do when you have friends over. It's the market that tries a game, says 'hey, this is fun' and takes it home. No deeper than that.
Of course, I also think of WoW. So many gamers I know have gotten their significant other involved in a game they wouldn't have otherwise touched and had them end up playing it for hours every day. Does this make them hardcore gamers? Still the answer is no.
The simple difference is: are they interested in the gaming aspects, or each game itself?
All Your Lost Socks @ Jun 29th 2006 2:14PM
A better, shorter analogy - it's same difference in level of understanding, appreciation and dedication as there is between a musician and someone who enjoys music.
Aux @ Jun 29th 2006 3:46PM
I think one other factor in this needs to be mentioned... Price.
Though I've never been to Macromedia's "Trygames" site, I'm willing to bet most if not all the games on that site are either free, or cost less than $5 to play. That's why people spend so much time on these sites. It provides hours of entertainment for little or no money. A lot of casual gamers play games on their cell phones... again, a very low cost platform. Some of the comments mentioned here state how they love to play games on their GBA or DS or whatever handheld it is. Those consoles and most of their games fall below the threshold that "casual" gamers are willing to pay.
I think it's going to be hard for gaming companies to break into the "casual" market when they're charging $300-$600 on a console, and then anywhere from $60-?? for a game. The casual gamers they're trying to capture are already playing the games they deem fun and don't have to put that much of an investment into it.
All Your Lost Socks @ Jun 29th 2006 4:01PM
And that's what I was saying about Nintendo - their console is relatively inexpensive, and they plan to offer those cheap arcade style games online along with it, so that one is not limited to paying standard new-game prices. That's the way to enter into this market with a console.
I doubt Nintnedo was surprised at all by this survey. And I'm not saying this as a fangirl, lol. Logically, it's what they are going for, and they have a better shot at it than Sony or Microsoft.
cringer8 @ Jun 29th 2006 4:02PM
What Makes a Gamer? In My Opinion...
A gamer has patience. She/he can replay an objective over and over for hours, if needed.
A gamer has dedication. She/he WILL replay that objective until it is finished in perfect form.
A gamer has pride. If scores are awarded, only the top rank will do. A gamer doesn't care if his/her performance is "good enough" to progress, it must be the best.
A gamer is multi-faceted. Given an hour with ANY genre, on ANY system, a gamer should easily become the best in the room (unless there are other gamers present, in which case, you will only match their skill).
A gamer is wise. The TRUE gamer doesn't use strategy guides or cheat codes. Gamers know that games have structure and boundaries. No game can defeat the true gamer (due to the qualities listed above).
A gamer is friendly. She/he wants others to join in on the fun. She/he fosters and tutors. Alienating future gamers will only serve to destroy the momentum video games have gained in the last 15 years.
Anyone who doesn't satisfy ALL of the criteria, is merely a video game enthusiast (or casual gamer). The title "Gamer" should be reserved for the true champions of the art. *In My Opinion*
All Your Lost Socks @ Jun 29th 2006 5:24PM
That sounds dead on, esPECIALly the bit about not alienating future gamers. I have met so many people who go on about how uber they are and then, to try and play up their skill, rag on me for any kind of poor form or small mistake.
Also, a true gamer knows what makes a good game. He or she will never discount a game just because it looks like a 'kiddie game' -- they will judge it by it's gameplay elements and whether it's actually fun to play.
Serious Kriss @ Jun 29th 2006 8:11PM
@5 epobirs : Are you serious? Just because you sucked at Myst doesn't make it any less of a great game. It basically started the whole first person adventure genre.
Merus @ Jun 30th 2006 1:45AM
Gives me games with hidden depths over games with no shallowness any day. I don't always have half an hour to devote to a game, but it'd be nice to be able to play.
Handheld gaming has served me well in that regard, so it's no surprise that it gets the majority of my playtime. Well, that, and I have Brain Training.