[casual_games] RE: Jay Ellsworth - 7/15/05 - The Definition of Casual Games

Fri Jul 15 13:15:27 EDT 2005

I agree with you completely that UT2k4 is not a casual game but, don't get
me wrong, MMORPG's are in a sea all their own.  Massively Multiplayer Online
games, on the other hand, can be whatever we make them.  That's why I
mentioned that casual games pretty much rule out the RPG's with quests that
can have you running for 45+ minutes at a time.  And just because a game is
massively multiplayer doesn't mean it has to have a monthly fee (which I
think automatically qualifies a game as decidedly un-casual).

There's that gray area again, the area between a game that people like you &
I would play casually and a game that is casual by design.  I don't see how
the length of gameplay sessions has nothing to do with a casual game though,
is it not one of the factors that adds up to make a casual game?  Casual
play and casual games go hand-in-hand.  I mean, every casual game in
existence gets played casually, that's how they're meant to be played.  And
then, like you said, there are games like UT2k4 that hardcore gamers can
play in a casual manner.

Jay

  _____  

From: machaira at comcast.net [mailto:machaira at comcast.net] 
Sent: Thursday, July 14, 2005 1:06 PM
To: IGDA Casual Games SIG Mailing List
Subject: RE: [casual_games] The Definition of Casual Games

I don't think you could ever consider an MMORPG as a casual game. People may
play them casually but that doesn't make it a casual game (as has been said
I believe - hard to keep track :) )

I don't think "the length of the gameplay sessions that matters and how
easily you can hop in and out of it." have anything to do with the
definition of a casual game. That's more along the lines of casual play. I
can easily jump in play UT2004 for 5-10 minutes, but it's not what I'd call
a casual game.

Jim

-------------- Original message -------------- 

So many good points being made here but, I'm in the same boat as Jeff, I'm
starting to feel like I misunderstood what a casual game is....

There are so many factors to consider, we should come up with some kind of
grid or row echelon style system to add up the yay's and nay's

I am a hardcore gamer myself, I don't want to speak for everyone here but, I
think it's safe to assume that I am not the only hardcore gamer reading
this.  Having said that I can say this; because we can play Doom 3 or HL2 in
five minute spurts if we choose to does not make them casual games.  We have
to be careful not to confuse games like these that can be played casually by
the hardcore gamer (who happens to have a $400 video card) and games that
are casual by design.

I disagree and maybe I'm wrong but I don't think having a low-to-medium
budget has a thing to do with making a casual game.  Who's to say that you
can't have a casual game that's designed and created by a full dev team with
a full budget and rendered in 3D?

And I still think that the time required for any given game session is one
of the factors that adds up to a casual game.  That cuts out games with
large, time-consuming quests that have you running around a huge world
looking for Bad Guy X who's holding the Rune of Repulsion that you need to
bring back to Good Girl Z three towns over so she can complete her Ritual of
Whatever that allows you to blah blah blah etc etc.

On the flip side of that coin, exactly like Jeff said, isn't Bejeweled meant
to suck away as many hours as possible?  How many early games just got
harder and harder as you progressed until you just couldn't make it any
further, I mean, did Pac-Man even have an end?

I think this means the total length of the game has nothing to do with
whether or not a game is casual by design, it's the length of the gameplay
sessions that matters and how easily you can hop in and out of it.  Again,
like Pac-Man, couldn't a casual game theoretically go on indefinitely?  Just
because they can go on forever doesn't rule out regular interval rewards.

>From my perspective, I think an MMO is begging to made as a casual game.
They can be social can't they?  Someone mentioned word games, I played
Acrophobia obsessively for like 2 weeks several years ago, it was social, it
was casual and I laughed hard enough to get more than a couple weird looks
in the computer lab....

Anyway, thanks for listening, I'm diggin' the banter here,

Jay Ellsworth

-----Original Message-----
From: Charles Parcell [mailto:cparcell at toxictoy.com] 
Sent: Thursday, July 14, 2005 9:05 AM
To: IGDA Casual Games SIG Mailing List
Subject: Re: [casual_games] The Definition of Casual Games

I understand your points but I think there is something you need to 

consider when you lay it out like this. while you can play Doom3 for 5 

minutes at a time, you still end up having to log a bunch of hours to 

get your reward from the game. I don't mean that the reward is the joy 

of blowing up baddies, but rather some in game mark that rewards you for 

completing something.

In the case of Doom3 you are rewarded when you get to the end of the 

game. There are no end of level bonuses or score multipliers that get 

calculated to reward you. But in the case of 'casual' games (in my mind) 

the player is rewarded frequently (ex. levels in zuma). The points in 

the game where the player is rewarded are also points where the player 

can 'walk away' from the game. This is a casual game.

so, while Doom3, Bejeweled, and Scrabble could all be played over 40 

each, they have there differences in reward. Doom3 is a huge single 

experience; Bejeweled is leveled experience that could go on forever 

(?); Scrabble is a group of multiple short game experiences.

I hope that was articulated well...

Charles P.

Jeff Murray wrote:

>Ello!

> 

>I'm really not sure you can nail down a genre or type of game as 'casual'.
I play a lot of big titles as though they were casual games, in fact thats
the way I play all games. I switch on, race around a bit, then turn off and
forget it. I don't want to have to learn anything, I just want the burst of
energy/excitement/whatever which makes me a casual gamer. I played Half Life
2 all the way through, but didn't think about it... it was just a week or so
of casual game bursts then the game ended! The only difference between the
way I played that and the way I play a webgame is the play length ...
although thats not concrete either. I've played word games online for hours
at a time ... my wife once even left the computer switched on overnight so
she could continue the next day! I really don't think time is an issue at
all when defining a casual game. 

> 

>Yes, you're trying to apply to a broad audience but thats about the
business model and nothing to do with the game. You're not telling me that
Bejeweled isn't designed to be played and replayed for as long as possible??

> 

>So, if we're talking about advergames ... maybe they're all casual purely
in the depth of gameplay and replayability they provide? As for anything
else, I really don't think anyone will nail a requirement/definition other
than the budget OR the depth of play. If you base it on depth of play, the
casual gamer like me will see Half Life 2, Quake3, Doom3 or even Battlefield
1942 as a casual game.

> 

>Does anyone think I'm way off with this? I feel like I'm missing something
here!

> 

>Jeff.

> 

>http://www.fuelindustries.com

>  

> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://seven.pairlist.net/pipermail/casual_games/attachments/20050715/c15a68aa/attachment.html