Slashdot Mirror


Struggling To Bridge the Casual-Hardcore Game Gap

With the advent of the Wii and the upcoming motion control systems from Sony and Microsoft, console makers are expanding the gaming population to include vast numbers of casual players. Their problem now, according to this editorial at Eurogamer, is that there doesn't exist a broad selection of games between the simple, introductory titles and the complex, hardcore ones, which tends to limit how deep new players will venture into the gaming ecosystem. Quoting: "... it needs software that spans the gap between the two camps of offerings which are emerging on Xbox 360 — games that encourage players of Dance Central or Your Shape to move upstream and explore. It's unlikely, perhaps, that they'll ever end up curb-stomping crinkle-faced nasties in Cliff Bleszinski's latest, but we're a long way past the point of the Xbox being all about shooting and driving, even if the public perception hasn't quite moved with the software line-up. The long-term challenge for the games market must, ultimately, be to emulate the success which other mediums have had in creating markets where consumers routinely and happily move between genres, and where franchises which would be pigeonholed as 'hardcore' in the games world nestle comfortably in people's DVD collections alongside those which would be dismissed as 'casual.'"

17 of 185 comments (clear)

  1. Whatever Happened... by mim · · Score: 3, Insightful

    to Tetris?

  2. Has anyone considered... by blahplusplus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ... casual gamers just aren't that interested in gaming to begin with? There doesn't need to be more "intermediate" games where casuals "graduate up" the gaming ladder. The truth is you are either invested in games or you are not, period.

    Quite frankly I see this whole casual craze as a bubble that's going to pop.

    1. Re:Has anyone considered... by WrongSizeGlass · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You're absolutely right. Casual gamers aren't investing in a console or a high-end graphics card just to play a few games when they have a little time to kill. The game companies need to offer enough interesting and leading edge content to get the "intermediate" gamers to "graduate up" their gaming ladder.

      Casual gamers are looking for a low cost of entry, no subscriptions or long term commitments, and games that don't require hours and hour of their time. It's one of the reasons the low cost, easy to play smartphone type games are popular. Each one is only a few dollars and is available for immediate download. They've become a digital impulse item. No going to a store, and you don't have to go to a computer or even leave your couch. Just download, play and kill a few minutes here and there.

    2. Re:Has anyone considered... by __aamnbm3774 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I absolutely disagree with you.

      As someone who used to be hardcore into ID Software FPS titles, now that I am an adult with more responsibilities, it is harder to dedicate that much time towards finding a another freaking Intel Item, hidden obscurely in some level somewhere.

      If I cannot play for 15-20 minutes and abort where I am at, without suffering huge penalties, I am not going to ever finish that game.

      I am much more interested in quick games on my iPad, but wouldn't mind if they had a little more depth. Save the super hardcore games for the high school kids, but give us more than Poppit.

    3. Re:Has anyone considered... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      X is here to stay and you will eventually be using it. The same goes for Y. The Y is truly revolutionary and many otherwise informed people are dismissing it as a Z clone. It surprises me how many people here on Slashdot are poor at predicting what technologies will become commonplace in the future.

      See what I did there? Mega corporations marketing departments market these technologies as "gotta have it" to the general populus and they eat it up as they're intended to.

      Anyway, just because the idiots like it and everyone will "eventually" use it, doesn't mean that it's crappy technology. Technology is an ends to a mean, not a mean in itself.

    4. Re:Has anyone considered... by Zerth · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Kinect is truly revolutionary

      Truly? Let me know when they make a version can detect hand motions.

      Hell, let me know when they stop faking Kinect demos.

    5. Re:Has anyone considered... by kaizokuace · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I dunno man. The fact that there are 85 million Farmville players says something.

      --
      Balderdash!
    6. Re:Has anyone considered... by hedwards · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Are you sure about that? 3D TV may very well come along, but it's hardly an assumption that people should be making. 3D has been available to film makers for a half century and it still hasn't really taken off. From time to time there's a story which works better in 3D, but the reality is that most movies are already 3D in the mind of the viewer, We know what's close and what's far and adding 3D to that doesn't contribute a whole lot.

      Likewise videophones were first demonstrated many decades ago and they still haven't taken off. The main reason being that except in extremely long distance communications like in and out of a war zone, people just don't want to have to put on pants and a shirt to take a telephone call.

      I don't think Kinect will catch on to the extent that you do. It's cool, but I'm not sure that it'll truly overcome the problem of games being about escape. Nintendo had a controller back in the 80s which has been emulated a few times in games like DDR, but even that hasn't particularly caught on. The Wiimote has really come the closest, but I'm not sure if it's truly here to stay or not, it depends solely upon how much it adds to the game.

    7. Re:Has anyone considered... by KDR_11k · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Defining a game as hardcore because of total complexity leaves you without useful data. We know Pokemon is a game that appeals to people who aren't big into gaming. A game's values are defined by the customer and the customers of Pokemon define it as a newbie-friendly game so it is a newbie-friendly game, no matter what the game's code or anything else says. Time to finish is completely irrelevant. If you think casual gamers are only interested in shallow short games with no content you would get torn apart by Nintendo if you tried to enter that market. The common belief that casual gamers are stupid has ruined more than one company.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
  3. The gap is permanent by clang_jangle · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The gap is permanent. As a casual gamer I know this because once in a while when I try to play some "advanced" game I find that just learning the rules and controls takes more time than I meant to spend playing the game, so I give up and go back to a simpler game I already know. We don't all have the time to devote to "advanced gaming", you know... Even when I was a kid I didn't have that kind of time available for such frivolity. Work, work, work!

    --
    Caveat Utilitor
    1. Re:The gap is permanent by LupusUF · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I'm with you on that. I enjoy games, but at 30 I have a very busy life and only have so much time to play games. I work 50 hours a week, have a girlfriend (who will play rock band and guitar hero, but thats about it), and friends that want to go out. I just don't have the same amount of time to play games that I did 10 years ago (or at least I don't prioritize the same amount of time to gaming anymore).

      I find myself playing games that I can pick up for 30 minutes at a time and put down. If it has a save system that I can save anywhere I'm more likely to play it. I really enjoyed the bioshock games, though it took me ages to beat them because I played them in short spurts. If a game has a checkpoint system where I have to get to a certain place before saving, I can guarantee that I won't keep playing it.

  4. Public Perception is off? by PingSpike · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...but we're a long way past the point of the Xbox being all about shooting and driving, even if the public perception hasn't quite moved with the software line-up.

    How long is long past? Maybe I'm just not paying enough attention and part of the unwashed masses, but after I bought an Xbox 360 last year to play rock band 2 I decided to search out some games to retroactively justify purchasing the console for one game. I have purchased no other games since. The only games available seem to consist mainly of FPS/3rd person shooters (which I'm not interested in playing outside of a PC environment) and driving games that I was never interested in. There's a handful of RPGs that I might be interested in I suppose, but those are often available on the PC as well and I kind of lack the time to play them these days.

    Again, maybe some one deeper into console games can enlighten me...but my piece of the public perception is that the Xbox is still all about shooting and driving.

  5. Is the board game industry... by feepness · · Score: 5, Insightful

    About transitioning people from Monopoly to Settlers of Cataan to Dungeons and Dragons to tabletop gaming?

  6. Life Life Life by Unholy_Kingfish · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I am a gamer. I'd fall into the casual category. Problem is simply that I have a life that doesn't permit me to play more than 5-10 hours a week. And that is if I am lucky. I want and can handle complex games. Anything less and I will not be satisfied.

    Now the people that are playing "casual" games would much prefer watching TV over gaming. Those people will never be able to be converted to a more involved type of game.

    Look at all the people that play Farmville. My wife even got into it and she HATES video games. And after a short time she bailed on it. Why? because she doesn't want to invest time into a useless endeavor.

    Give her something more complex that might not be a "waste of time" and she gets frustrated because she wants a zero learning curve. Zero learning curve tends to mean something less then advanced. It's an evil little circle that might be impossible to overcome.

    The untapped market will more likely than not remain untapped.

    --
    Fear Is the Only God
  7. baloney! by oddTodd123 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    From most casual to hardcore:

    Farmville, Mafia Wars
    Plants vs. Zombies, Bejeweled, Tetris
    Wii Sports, Cooking Mama
    Mario games, racing and sports games
    Serious Sam, Diablo
    Assassins Creed, Halo
    GTA, Rainbow Six
    Dragon Age, Total War series

    Where's the gap?

  8. "bridging the gap" by ucblockhead · · Score: 4, Insightful

    That's like bridging the gap between coffee and coke. It's like bridging the gap between whiskey and wine. You are only going to create some crap that no one likes.

    What needs to die is this attitude that what we need to do is make games that appeal to everyone, so that every person in the population buys it. That's stupid. It's chasing an impossible dream. You are far better off just making a good game that a certain set of people like. You can't appeal to everyone, so pick a genre, "casual", "hardcore" or whatever, and make something good in that genre. You aren't going to make a game that appeals to both grandma and Twitchy McFragerton, so stop trying. You're just going to end up with some crap that both grandma and Twitchy agree is worthless.

    --
    The cake is a pie
  9. Am I a casual gamer? by hkmwbz · · Score: 4, Insightful
    I used to play the NES, SNES and all that. I spend hours playing the good old games. I could play through the first few Mega Man games blindfolded. I knew every secret and trick in Mario games, including Super Mario World. Knew the Zeldas on NES and SNES like the back of my hand.

    Then I stopped playing.

    I guess I grew up. Or something.

    I've always felt like a gamer at heart, but I came to realize that even though games are looking prettier and prettier, they are feeling rather empty. Maybe it was just the thrill of being a kid discovering new worlds that hooked me, and now that I'm an adult I don't have the time to be sucked in anymore. I certainly don't have the time to play games all day.

    Until the Wii came, I did keep an eye on the gaming market, but I definitely wasn't interested in getting a new console.

    The Wii was the first console in many years that created a small spark of desire inside of me to go back to playing games.

    I think, as someone said, that Nintendo isn't competing with Sony and Microsoft these days, as much as they are competing with disinterest.

    But... Am I a casual gamer? I suppose I am, now. But I used to be "hardcore". Nintendo managed to drag me back into gaming, at least partially. I think that might be part of their success -- winning over disinterested traditional gamers such as myself.

    For all the bashing of "casual" games for the Wii, didn't any of you notice that, in, fact games of the past were usually quite simplistic? They may have been hard to play all the way through, but they certainly weren't the monsters of bloated cutscenes and story lines we have today.

    Frankly, I'm getting sick of the whining about "casual games destroying the market". Accessible games means that people like me get to pick them up and play, and not have to invest many hours a day to do so. Ok, I admit I played through Super Mario Galaxy and managed to unlock Luigi. But it just doesn't feel like the "good old days".

    --
    Clever signature text goes here.