PopCap games casually stroll onto PS2 and Xbox 360 retail shelves

oh man. Hardcore gaming is over as we know it.

Nobody's holding a gun to your head, dude.

...Because Feeding Frenzy is the greatest game of all friggin time!

Because these types of game compilations aren't geared toward you. Most people (which includes lots of my family members) don't realize what you have pointed out. It's like *buying* Solitaire. A lot of the casual gaming market consists of people who don't make computers, internet and gaming their life. Hence the word "casual". We're more than casual gamers and know where to find these games offered for free online (Pogo, Shockwave, etc.) So we may balk at the thought of paying for these games, but the publishers know there is a segment of the population who will gladly pay for them.

So do you play games for the story? Might I suggest reading a book? There are MUCH better stories in them.

I do read books. I wasn't aware that stories had to be limited to just literature though. You should probably get on the phone with Hollywood and musicians and let them know to give up storytelling, too, since Hemingway has totally nailed it.
/snark

I don't play games just for story, but my personal preference is for a game that lets me participate in a compelling story, in addition to having pleasing gameplay. I look for a little more than the "challenge/reward" scheme setup by PopCap. model.

Hear ye, Hear ye!

From this day forward, the following games must be Forever Stricken from any and all "Best Games of..." lists, due to distinct Lack of Story.

Pac-Man
Tetris
Counterstrike

Note the "personal preference" part of my 2nd comment. I'm not saying that a great game has to have a great story, I'm just saying that it's one of the things that I look for. I'd also argue that story was left out of the first two games you list as a result of technological constraints and the expectations of the time, and the third because it was designed to fill a gap left by Half Life's lack of multiplayer.

I'm afraid that the "casual games explosion" risks dumbing down the rest of the gaming market, and games with rich story (the games I generally like) or advanced gameplay (also games I like) will get weeded out because they're too expensive to develop. Granted, it's a bit alarmist, but I love this hobby and I want to protect it.

"I'd also argue that story was left out of the first two games you list as a result of technological constraints and the expectations of the time, and the third because it was designed to fill a gap left by Half Life's lack of multiplayer."

Y'know, I'm not even going to touch that one... I just can't... It'd be like knifing an opponent that's AFK, and I like to think I'm better than that.

"You should probably get on the phone with Hollywood and musicians and let them know to give up storytelling, too, since Hemingway has totally nailed it."

I'm pretty sure these people already know that...

Stories to this point have been used in the same way that High Scores were used in old arcade games (and these "casual" games). They are a way to make the player feel that they have accomplished something. Where in books or in movies it is often used to illuminate some aspect of life and pull some meaning out of what has happened, in games they have been used as a means to an end. Much like the movie Transformers.

"Stories to this point have been used in the same way that High Scores were used in old arcade games (and these "casual" games). They are a way to make the player feel that they have accomplished something."

I agree that once was true, but I think that's changed a lot, especially in the last 5 years. I think that while many game developers use story in a shallow way, so do many authors and filmmakers (you make the Transformers example), so it's not a fault of games, but creative laziness. Games are able to "illuminate some aspect of life and pull some meaning out of what has happened." I think the Metal Gear games (especially Snake Eater), are a good example of this, and BioShock is a great example of where storytelling in games is leading.

Games are their own medium, and I think it's counterproductive to compare them directly to other media. Games have the unique ability to make players a participant in the story, instead of a passive observer. There's a lot of potential there, and we're finally getting further than just scratching the surface (Shadow of the Colossus, Half Life 2, etc.). The trick is getting away from the model you described (play->boss->cutscene->repeat), to a model where the player is immersed in the story from start to finish, instead of sporadically. We're getting there, and I think that a lot of developers are making conscious efforts to move forward. What makes me afraid is that the new "CASUAL GAMES FTW!" mentality that seems to be sweeping the industry will make that progress harder.

"Games are their own medium, and I think it's counterproductive to compare them directly to other media. "

Yet one of the rallying cries for more advancements in graphics is to make them more "cinematic." The games industry is trying to become the movie industry. And I think the reverse is happening too.

I agree that many game developers are trying to emulate the movie industry. Everything from God of War to Halo is becoming way too Hollywood. It's all about tits and explosions. What, we're too good for Pac-Man and Tetris now? Yes, storytelling is ONE of many aspects of gaming, but it's not even necessary. I feel the same way about great graphics. They're a nice touch, but they don't enhance gameplay. The one consistent feature of all the world's greatest games is good gameplay. It's not the story or the graphics or anything, but how they all mix together into a blob of gameplay that my fingers can feel. To argue that any other aspect of gaming is very important is moot. Every aspect can help or hurt but nothing is absolutely necessary other than great gameplay.

I'm not defending PopCap. I hate PopCap. But it's definitely still possible for them to make (or steal) a great game. I'd rather have a casual piece of shit game with no story and no graphics that's still fun than a cutscene-fest that's all story and no gameplay.

"...one of the rallying cries for more advancements in graphics is to make them more 'cinematic.'"

It's a double-edged sword. As games become a more and more unique medium, separate from their nearest cousin (film), we need ways to describe them in ways that are familiar to people unfamiliar with the medium. But a lot of times, those comparisons are confining, because they can make people (developers and players) think of games as movies with tacked-on gameplay segments.

This happens a lot in other media, as well. We're still describing film in literary terms (authorial voice, chapters) or in theater terms (acts, set pieces).

I don't think that games should be more like movies, but some people do. I think it makes sense for games to borrow from cinema, just like cinema borrows from theater, or from literature. And again, I think developers are becoming aware of this, as they gain more autonomy, and as technology allows more sophisticated in-game storytelling. I don't know what we'd call a game like BioShock, because it's not "cinematic" in the same way that Heavenly Sword is, but I feel it's storytelling is much closer to where games are going (and, IMO, should go).

"I think it's counterproductive to compare them directly to other media."

The book was better.

They don't want to compete with the other casual games on the Wii.