Why is "Casual" bad?

[Quaidis]

Absolutely nothing bad with casual games. I play them all the time and I haven't developed cancer or anything from the experience.

 

[GiantRaven]

CD Projeckt Red.

They run GoodOldGames.com [http://www.gog.com/en/frontpage/], a website that offers old games with no DRM for $10 and under, and optimizes them for current operating systems.

And they're releasing The Witcher 2, a PC exclusive thats a stat-based RPG aimed at the old-school RPG crowd. Complete with a branching story that evolves based on your choices. And they're releasing it with a shit-ton of extra stuff [http://www.amazon.com/Witcher-2-Assassins-Kings-Pc/dp/B003VJNPPE/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1296594937&sr=8-1] and releasing it with little-to-no DRM.

They also treat their customers like actual people instead of potential pirates with lots of money.

So yeah, they're practically saints of the gaming world.

Thats my example for "loving developer that deserves millions".

Somehow I don't think that there is going to be much overlap between consumers of CD Projeckt Red and Zynga. So, are they really denying them money in any way?

 

[LightspeedJack]

So I hear alot about how Casual gamers are the scum of the earth or that Casual Gamers are all evil. Why?
Why this Antagonism to people who just play games for fun and never really get into it much more than that.

Because casual games are usually built on a flimsy gimmick, have no depth or lastability.

 

[AngryMongoose]

Casual games aren't necessarily bad, though the problem is that they generally lack depth.

 

[CopperBoom]

Casual as opposed to what?

I think I'm pretty casual in my gaming.

Ditto.
On Xbox Live it means nothing though which is silly. The people I play online are still all crazy about winning... who cares?

 

[Erana]

Casual isn't bad, its the people like Zygna that make it a heinous, heartless money grab.
Casual gamers feed these people, earning the loathing of people who want the loving developers to be the ones to make millions.

Why is Zynga bad? Why are they any worse than any other company that makes a game and sells it to make a profit? Did Zynga kill your favorite pet because you wouldn't pay the ransom? Thing is about Zynga games is, now hold onto your hat here, you can play them for free. You don't have to invest a single penny if you don't want to. Sure you might have to pay for the cooler looking outfit if you want it. Or if you want to buy your way through a mission instead of earning it. And I guess a little known fact is you can earn the Zynga bucks ingame. Meaning eventually you can earn enough in game to buy an item that would cost you real money otherwise. Just because gamers want to pay them money for a game they enjoy playing they must be evil huh.

Zynga has a fanbase of how many millions? A fanbase they make happy by providing games to them. Isn't that the whole purpose of gaming no matter if it Farmville or COD? Aren't games supposed to make the people playing them happy? Or is that logic only applicable when it comes to AAA hardcore mainstream games?

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/7.231405-Zynga-Seems-More-Sinister-Than-You-Might-Expect?page=1
Well, that, for example.

Zygna has bad business practices, cares about nothing but money, and sets a despicable standard that other developers are clamoring to follow.

Microtransactions aren't bad at all! Nor are casual games. Just look at, say, LoTRO or Popcap.

 

[captain underpants]

Seems to me, the games that are branded 'casual' today are the same sorts of games that I grew up playing in the 80's. Space Invaders is a 'casual' game. People are just overthinking the whole thing. Perhaps the real problem is the phenomenon of 'shovelware' - lazy, cash-in games with no redeeming qualities being released in their hundreds, but hey, we had those in the 80's as well, and I solve that problem by simply not buying them.

Personally, I like a broad spectrum of gameplay, and sometimes a few hands of Freecell is all I want.

 

[Dreiko_v1legacy]

OK so since there's like 4 nearly identical replies to my post I'll quote just one bit and piece which is stated more than once and reply to it directed at all those who made similar points.

You must have enjoyed them mustn't you? THAT is the reason why people play games, because they enjoy them. There should be no other reason.

That is the reason a 5-year-old would give. You're sorta taking the entire argument that the question is based on out of it and are just responding to the title anyways.

People like to waste time. You would be lying if you said you never did that. There is something everyone does that they are not devoted to that they enjoy every now and then. I don't want to spend ALL of my free time on gaming/music, maybe I could be better off, but I know for sure that tending to something you're in to will cause you to burn out if you do it too much when you're not enjoying it.

Wasting time is something I hate. I have something I love thus wasting time is time I could be partaking in that but am not, which is a huge shame. If you know how to handle yourself you never burn out. If you truly love your item of fascination you'll never get tired of it cause there will always be new sides of it to discover and improved ways of you to experience it.

Passions never get dull or monotonous, they're always more compelling with each new day, the more you know the more you want to know and it's always a growing model. That's how it is to have an actual passion, that's what people lack and that's what I'm getting from anyone who makes points about being bored by or needing a break from one's passion.

You never get bored, you never need a break, you're always in tune with it and are always deriving comparatively unsurpassed meaning from it.

Where are you getting this from? Nobody is casual about everything. This thread is about casual gaming, so this is unrelated, unless you think 'casual gamers' are casual about everything, which is untrue.

It's the way of the times, too many people do lots of things without passion or deep love for them, just to blend in and pass the time, gaming is one of them. I think it's an undisciplined way of being that leads to meaninglessness when set next to having a driven and focused life.

Yes, they should do it so that they enjoy it. I don't spend all my spare time on my favourite things.

And the best way to enjoy something is to be intricately familiar and highly interested in everything about it. It is impossible to achieve that for multiple fields due to life constraints though (unless you're a millionaire hobbyist) thus my view on the subject.

Who the hell are you to tell people what to do. If they enjoy something but are not obsessed with it why shouldnt they still do it. I enjoy playing games but I dont take the seriously and I sure as hell dont play them for 30 hours a week. Does that mean that im not allowed to do something I enjoy just because I do it for fun?

Huh? I'm not telling people what to do, I'm just trying to make sense of what they do. Obsession is negative, I never talked about anything negative here, you should try and discern negative and positive traits of words before making such charged posts. Nobody "prohibited" you from doing anything, we're just having a philosophical discussion. Calm down.

By taking a hobby and attempting to limit who gets to use it (which by your aost shows you hope for that) you are saying these people aren't good enough for you and your medium of entertainment. But how do you know if you truly like something if you don't dabble? Also, what is wrong with being half-assed in two or three different hobbies? My dad loves video games. He is obsessed with Starcraft and Warcraft, but he will not play ladder matches because he isn't good enough, he is not allowed to play games anymore cause he isn't core enough?

Now, hyperbole time:
Do you like beer? I really enjoy beer, I enjoy it so much that I am a part of a brewing club and design my own recipes. But you only enjoy Bud Light (assumption), you don't know what true beer tastes like so you shouldn't enjoy that crap beer or any beer along with it.

Do you like music? But do you know about Trent Reznor's side project with his wife (How to Destroy Angels) or ever seen Girl Talk live? NO?(assumption) So you shouldn't listen to music anymore because you truly aren't that big of a fan of it.

Do you like Star Wars? Of course you do, everyone likes Star Wars (exaggeration). But you didn't know that in the original film Alderon explodes a few frames before the laser from the Death Star hits it so it isn't just a super powered laser but a tachyon beam (assumption, but I know a guy who actually did this to prove it and doubt anyone else knows or cares), so you can no longer watch Star Wars or any other sci-fi movie.

I would rather be a casual who enjoys Chime, LittleBigPlanet, and attempting to complete a perfect Yes Man run on New Vegas and enjoy a past time than someone who looks down on other people because they are not enjoying the games the right way.

Furthermore, a lot of casual games are stepping stones to more advanced games. I gave someone who played Farmville religiously a go at Civ V and she loved it. It scratched her resource managing itch better than that Facebook app. I had a party in my dorm room and had 8 people (2 core, 3 casual, and 3 self proclaimed non-gamers) where all we did was drink and play Wario Ware, and those 3 that said they didn't like games came back later and joined in multiplayer Halo after we explained rules and how to work the controls. Think of it as a gateway drug, you just need competent pushers.

I agree with the gateway nature of games, which is why I would never brand kids or absolute non-gamers as casuals. They just need someone to show them and let them decide for themselves.

What you're missing here is the fact that minutia or experience is NOT what I'm going for here. I'm not being an elitist, branding people who don't have enough information or knowledge casuals. I'm just examining attitudes about it.

If you're genuinely passionate about something it doesn't MATTER how much actual knowledge you have about it, if you just have the drive and love for the medium that's enough to make you superior to people who just pass by, even if they happen to know more stuff about the item than you.

Being passionate is about deriving meaning in the highest form possible from something, not about being the best trivia pursuit winner on it or having every lunchbox and phone card of it out there.

 

[RanD00M]

It's not "bad" but it does somewhat hurt the more mainstream audience by having developers making more of these casual games to flood the market. An influx of games no one was buying almost killed the gaming industry once.

I don't think that that is entirely true. Casual and Regular gamers are two different demographics that don't often clash together. So I'm damn sure that no Casual release has ever almost sunk a company that makes your more average/mainstream games.

 

[CatmanStu]

Mostly because casuals are a scapegoat. There an easy identifiable group that isn't here in great enough numbers to defend itself so we can blame our problems on them rather then addressing them. We're like the Nazis and their the Jews. (Yeah I just called people who hate casual gamers Nazis, suck it).

I am going to second that analogy. It may be an extreme one, but 'Hardcore Gamers' are elitists, elitists are zealots, and the Nazi's were the second most notorious group of zealots the world has ever known.

 

[Hunter6475]

I think it might be related to why there's a rip on the wave of so-called 'anti-intellectualism' lately. Let me break it down for you.

You don't see fine art being celebrated on the television. You don't see weird, Lynchian-inspired auteur films hitting mainstream cinema and scoring big at the box office. You don't see people recite Shakespeare and poetry by Miur on the nine o' clock news.

You see 'backwards' shows like Two and a Half Men and My Name is Earl. You see another sensationalist news story about something that probably didn't deserve to be reported on in the first place. You see films like The Expendables and The A-Team. One dimensional comedy shows appealing to stereotypes (the promiscuous male, the lovable rednecks, the trailer-trash ex-wife) and brainless action flicks. You see a story about an autistic kid who got labeled a cheater by microsoft(i read somewhere it had been reported on Fox news, i think that's the American news network), rather than the next great poem by our generation's young Tennyson or Keats.

Casual games versus 'core' games is, essentially, the same. We're losing our Wuthering Heights and our Charge of the Light Brigade for, dare i say, the video game equivalent of the Twilight franchise. As games become less about story, characterisation, artistic design and 'auteur-ism' they end up becoming noving more than mainstream drivel, degenrating into such games as Farmville. I think a lot of core gamers fear this, and so they defend their core games to the death in the hopes our Bioshocks will never be dumbed down into the likes of Kinect Adventures. Casual gaming, is, in essence, the 'anti-intellecutalism of the gaming industry'. Simple, derivative games aimed at no particular audience except for the ones that can pick up and play within the space of five minutes, as opposed to a 40-hour epic where you learn about characters and their struggles through careful interaction and dialogue.

'Casual is bad' is simply so because of the fear that it may change the industry - indefinitely. As companies see the far more lucrative markets of housewives, children and the elderly as opposed to the niche core market, they may shift their business model to cater primarily, and eventually, solely to that demographic, the core audience will feel betrayed, hurt and confused that they have lost something that primarily belonged to 'them' as a culture that only they identified with.

You sir, have stated one of the most intellectual answers I have ever seen so far on the internet, thank you.

anc[is]Because when I'm talking to a girl and she says she plays video games I get excited, then she starts talking about farmville and a tiny piece of my soul dies.

I can empathize with that.
If I can add my two cents:
I believe the "fear" and/or resentment towards games is present in cases such as an article I read a few days ago where it was reported that Atlus, Konami, and a few other companies were diverting their resources from their core series' like Atlus' SMTersona series and a few others for games suited for a "broader audience" such as mobile gaming (cellphones, iphones, etc) . Mind you this is happening in Japan, not sure of its affect anywhere else.

 

[Guitarmasterx7]

Many people have said it better than i could on this thread.

Basically I don't care unless the developers that used to make games I liked decide there's more money in making shovelware for my grandma (IE Nintendo.)

 

[squid5580]

Casual isn't bad, its the people like Zygna that make it a heinous, heartless money grab.
Casual gamers feed these people, earning the loathing of people who want the loving developers to be the ones to make millions.

Why is Zynga bad? Why are they any worse than any other company that makes a game and sells it to make a profit? Did Zynga kill your favorite pet because you wouldn't pay the ransom? Thing is about Zynga games is, now hold onto your hat here, you can play them for free. You don't have to invest a single penny if you don't want to. Sure you might have to pay for the cooler looking outfit if you want it. Or if you want to buy your way through a mission instead of earning it. And I guess a little known fact is you can earn the Zynga bucks ingame. Meaning eventually you can earn enough in game to buy an item that would cost you real money otherwise. Just because gamers want to pay them money for a game they enjoy playing they must be evil huh.

Zynga has a fanbase of how many millions? A fanbase they make happy by providing games to them. Isn't that the whole purpose of gaming no matter if it Farmville or COD? Aren't games supposed to make the people playing them happy? Or is that logic only applicable when it comes to AAA hardcore mainstream games?

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/7.231405-Zynga-Seems-More-Sinister-Than-You-Might-Expect?page=1
Well, that, for example.

Zygna has bad business practices, cares about nothing but money, and sets a despicable standard that other developers are clamoring to follow.

Microtransactions aren't bad at all! Nor are casual games. Just look at, say, LoTRO or Popcap.

I dunno being on facebook and seeing games that are clear rip offs of Zynga games springing up almost daily it seems that Zynga is getting bashed soley because they are the big dog in the fight. Any new game that does innovate becomes cloned within days and put up there. Zynga releases Cityville. The Burbs pops up. Same game different graphics. And if there is no reason to innovate why should they? They are a company there to make money. If they have found a way without much innovation (just like any mainstream company) there is no incentive to do so.

 

[Sparcrypt]

Casual gaming is fine - most of us 'play casually' really, especially as we get older.

However, as some have pointed out already, games are changing as more and more people are playing them. It's great for the industry, sure, however when you look at what used to be the average gamer (basically, nerds) and what is currently the average gamer (pretty much everybody) there is a huge difference. The gaming industry IS a business after all, and as such they are catering to the market that brings them the biggest profits. This means a completely different style of game is becoming the standard.

For example, take a look at one of the most popular games on the planet, World of Warcraft. On launch this game was a traditional MMO - brutally unforgiving, making you work hard for every level and piece of gear. Noone cared about things 'being fair' - like all MMOs, achievements such as fast mounts or epic loot needed to be earned with serious playtimes. There were no character name, race or faction changes - I remember submitting a ticket to a GM waaaaaaay back because I had two characters with the same name and it was causing issues with my addons. One was level 60, the other level 45 (remember.. even level 45 was quite a large time investment at the begining). Their response? Oh.. sorry, I guess you'll need to delete one of them and start again. End of discussion.

Now? Everyone gets free mounts, gold is thrown at players, only the very top tier of gear is a challenge to get, and each patch they hand out what used to be the best gear to anyone who wants it.

Whether all this has made the game better or worse is not my point - some want the old WoW back, some like the way it's changed. However the reasons for the changes are easy to see - at the end of the day, there are more people who want to play a nice casual game then there are who want a brutally challenging MMO. So the game changes to meet those needs and thus gain more and more subscriptions.

Another example is the recent trend of smartphone games. This style of game has been around for a long time - in the form of flash games made for your browser. Simple little point and click games that can be very addictive that lived around the internet for free. Now however they exist on smartphones for a dollar each and can make an absolute fortune.

From a business point of view, is it better to spend YEARS working on some epic and truely awesome game that might not even break even, or instead churn out 20 little smartphone games you can sell for dollar each? Then factor in the cost of piracy - people are much less likely to pirate a $1 smartphone game then a $100 PC game.

Anyway I got a little off track there but really.. gamers don't care about people who play casually. However 'casual gamer'and 'gamer who plays casually' are not the same thing.

 

[Gralian]

You see films like The Expendables and The A-Team.

What?s wrong with The Expendables and The A-Team? Yes, they were mindless action flicks but they were fun.

I didn't say anything was wrong with them, or that they weren't fun.

I was using them as examples of promoting anti-intellectualism within the mainstream culture as opposed to something avant garde like Mulholland Drive.

You shouldn't take things out of context, particularly so if it's not related to the actual topic.

 

[guntotingtomcat]

Casual gaming is what's preventing the bottom falling out the industry.
It's why nintendo is STILL doing better than Sony and Microsoft. It is also the ONLY way that new people are going to get introduced to games
WHICH is the only way games will ever be accepted as popular media worthy of artistic critique.

 

[Fishyash]

You must have enjoyed them mustn't you? THAT is the reason why people play games, because they enjoy them. There should be no other reason.

That is the reason a 5-year-old would give. You're sorta taking the entire argument that the question is based on out of it and are just responding to the title anyways.

I take this back tbh. I apologize since it definately wasn't your point. But what gets most people passionate about things is the fact that they enjoy them, and want to know more about them, or they find it absolutely necessary to their well being to learn about them. Most people who are passionate about games are people of the former, who play games primarily for enjoyment.

People like to waste time. You would be lying if you said you never did that. There is something everyone does that they are not devoted to that they enjoy every now and then. I don't want to spend ALL of my free time on gaming/music, maybe I could be better off, but I know for sure that tending to something you're in to will cause you to burn out if you do it too much when you're not enjoying it.

Wasting time is something I hate. I have something I love thus wasting time is time I could be partaking in that but am not, which is a huge shame. If you know how to handle yourself you never burn out. If you truly love your item of fascination you'll never get tired of it cause there will always be new sides of it to discover and improved ways of you to experience it.

Passions never get dull or monotonous, they're always more compelling with each new day, the more you know the more you want to know and it's always a growing model. That's how it is to have an actual passion, that's what people lack and that's what I'm getting from anyone who makes points about being bored by or needing a break from one's passion.

You never get bored, you never need a break, you're always in tune with it and are always deriving comparatively unsurpassed meaning from it.

Your general passion may never get tiring, but for some of them (depending on the context), it there is going to be some tediousness involved. For example (might be a bit pointless to read), I love playing piano. I had an interest since I was 3, and even though i'm still young (17), I have plans on taking my passion up as a career(potential pointless text over). However, I hate practicing scales (I have yet to see a single musician who enjoys this, but there may be some people), and learning music theory. I know both of these are very important for me to improve as a musician, so I do these anyway. If at times I did not take a break from practicing scales, or learning music theory, I would have probably discouraged myself. Obviously that doesn't make me casual, but it does mean that I cannot devote 100% of my free time to music because I would be put off by practicing scales and learning music theory. I don't like it, but I take it seriously enough to do it anyway (this is mainly due to the rewarding feel of being able to perfect your playing for the former, and to get it over with in the latter).

To clarify about not seeing anyone enjoying practicing scales, there are probably people who DO enjoy it, and there is also likely a way to make it more interesting to learn them in certain contexts.

I might be missing the point, but some elements of some passions can be dull and monotonus, and has the potential to discourage something from being taken too seriously and become 'casual'. In my opinion showing a small interest in something shouldn't really be a problem at all, you don't really lose anything from it, except a small amount of time that was probably not going to be spent usefully on your passion if you would have rather done that.

Where are you getting this from? Nobody is casual about everything. This thread is about casual gaming, so this is unrelated, unless you think 'casual gamers' are casual about everything, which is untrue.

It's the way of the times, too many people do lots of things without passion or deep love for them, just to blend in and pass the time, gaming is one of them. I think it's an undisciplined way of being that leads to meaninglessness when set next to having a driven and focused life.

I guess i'll agree to disagree on this, it just seems like a bit of an assumption more than anything else. While you may be right on this, I haven't seen this happening.

This is a very interesting discussion for me. I enjoy discussing things like this to be honest.

Also to finish this particular post (this is not directed at Dreiko), I really wonder...

What defines 'casual' in the context of gaming? Is it similar for everyone? Maybe there is a distinguishable difference between different people's definitions on casual?

 

[KEM10]

What you're missing here is the fact that minutia or experience is NOT what I'm going for here. I'm not being an elitist, branding people who don't have enough information or knowledge casuals. I'm just examining attitudes about it.

If you're genuinely passionate about something it doesn't MATTER how much actual knowledge you have about it, if you just have the drive and love for the medium that's enough to make you superior to people who just pass by, even if they happen to know more stuff about the item than you.

Being passionate is about deriving meaning in the highest form possible from something, not about being the best trivia pursuit winner on it or having every lunchbox and phone card of it out there.

It is a game, it says so in the name of the medium. So why can't it just be a game to some people? Casual happens in everything and you should cherish it because you could slowly work them up to a "stronger" attitude and have a gaming partner, or if they eventually give in you have a cheap system you can buy from them.

I guess it is like watching TV. I can enjoy my programing no mater what my neighbors watch, if they even watch. Your original post made it sound like if you didn't enjoy a program enough to make sure you were always at home to see it, then you shouldn't watch it on a whim as well. You mistook my trivial pursuit tactic for user knowledge instead of devotion, probably because of my lack of explanation and redundant examples (even though the more devoted you are the more you end up knowing it (but now I am just trying to defend my thought process).

I hope this makes more sense.

 

[joshuaayt]

Mostly casual games bother me only in that they tend to trivialise the media- demoting public perceptions of video games to "thing you waste time on until you are bored", a gameplay model which obviously does not encourage a compelling narrative or complexity of game mechanics.

But this is really the fault of marketing- over here, at least, we almost exclusively get the casual, kid-friendly games advertised. This has led to many frustrating conversations with my family, they convinced that my hobby is "childish". (And I should do something constructive, like play a sport, which apparently is more productive than gaming)

I personally don't hate casual gamers in and of themselves. They just wanna have fun, and I have no quarrel with them.

 

[MASTACHIEFPWN]

Casual gaming can be good, but most of the notable titles for it suck... IE FARMVILLE!