[casual_games] surprising stats about casual gaming

[David Wessman]

For me the most interesting finding was when people play and for how long.
The idea that casual games need to be designed around the idea of quick
10-15 minute play sessions seems to me over-emphasized, if not plain wrong.
Clearly, a lot of casual gamers aren't playing these games simply because
they can be played within some narrow window of opportunity.

Another consideration that perhaps explains some of the appeal of short
duration games is the fact that when casual gamers do sit down to play, they
know they're going to be able to play several games to conclusion.  But
then, is that so different from any level or mission-based game where it
takes 10-20 minutes to complete a mission?

I think casual gamers would be receptive to games that are designed to take
hours to play.  Particularly, if they can save their progress at any time
(or at least every 5-10 minutes.)

To me the main criteria for considering a game "casual" are that it have a
very shallow learning curve and a very simple interface.  Actual gameplay
can be quite deep and play time can be much longer than previously assumed.

I'm very curious how much of a leap it would be for a lot of these so-called
"casual" gamers to get into something like Diabo.

Thanks for reading,
David Wessman
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://seven.pairlist.net/pipermail/casual_games/attachments/20060724/94ff56e2/attachment.htm