[Hillseeker]

This is a spin off from a different tread since I feel the subject can get very big so I'm going to ask you all what's your definition on a casual game is?

So far I have heard that a casual game is a bit shorter and maybe a bit easier but I feel that it should be more in the definition since I cant tell a casual and a adventure game apart.

[kadji-kun]

Any game that is classified as "Casual" must be simplistic and is capable of being picked up and played with a very low learning curve. This includes somewhat simplistic gameplay, controls, and start to quit execution. Usually it relies on how much effort it takes from the End user to play the game.

[smulan]

A computergame condemned by the AG community.

[terhardp]

The way I see this, casual games are the games aimed towards the people who usually don't play games: who either don't have the time, will and patience to dwelve into full-blooded games. While traditional game often requires mental devotion from the player - handling the game mechanic and move coordination, putting him(her)self into the role of his character, high concentration and logical skills, the casual titles are primary aimed to the "fun" and "passing time" factor. They usualy have very simple commands, puzzles that most people are allready familiar with, often a story that isn't very difficult to follow, and generally not very steep learning curve. I myself am considering all so called "hidden object games" as casual games, as well as those which are based on some well-known board and or social games.

To conclude; the difference between casual and "real" games can be illustrated with the album vs compilation comparison. While the full album of some artist will primarily drew connoisseurs and fans, compilation albums are aimed to the much broader audience. This is also the case with casual games.

[Luna Sevithiainen]

An interesting question, as I often find myself wondering about the thin (?) line between adventure games and casual games. I don't like casual games (or rather, the idea I have of casual games does not incite me to play them), but on the other hand, they do seem to include all elements of adventure games... a story (maybe not as deep as adventure games), puzzles (though easy, lot of the same etc.) and some sort of exploration.

I think I'll have to second terhardp in this. I think casual games are the 'light' version of adventure games, for those who do not want to put too much time and effort in it. The mainstream, who wants to keep it simple. In a way reflecting a society in which there is no more room for long and thorough explanation, patience in trying to solve puzzles. Everything has to be done quick, the answer should be immediately there, the story should immediately digress. But I digress.

I think in casual gaming what is missing is the thoroughness of adventure games. The immersion into a story, not only because of a clever story, but also because solving puzzles takes time, and therefore forces the player deeper into the story, the surrounding, the characters. With casual games I think it is easier to skip over the story, surrounding, everything because you are by no means forced into the story. You just skip over it, and you are done...

[booB]

"Casual games" refers to any type of game with a low learning curve that doesn't require a massive time requirement to play. Not all of them are related to adventure games or HOGs; Tetris, Bejewled, Peggle, and the like are also considered casual games.

[kadji-kun]

Also, Mobile Platforms are usually except from having Casual games since it is common place to make any product support the Mobile case.

Casual games aren't just HOG's or puzzle games. Most of the Xbox Live games are considered casual, including old school platformers such as Castle Crashers.

[Fien]

I'll just add my two cents.

First cent. I agree that casual games with adventure-lite features are one hundred percent aimed at instant gratification. IMO that involves more than a low learning curve: very pretty graphics because eye candy in itself is gratifying, cliches, stereotypical story so people can easily pick up where they left, exploration (if any) kept to a bare minimum or the player might get lost. Four screens from the boat to the house and the same four screens in reverse order from the house to the boat. Like walking backwards. But of course instant gratification also includes a lot of hints, handholding and the option to skip puzzles.

Second cent. As far as I know, there are no real "adventure-lite" casuals. I can't think of a single one that is not based on some variation of the Hidden Object concept. The most recent game in the Ravenhearst series, Dire Groves (reviewed at AG), has about 40 Hidden Object screens and only 10 rather simple puzzles.

[Hillseeker]

I think I've got it now. A casual adventure game is more or less a toned down adventure game but I was hoping that there should be some clear distinction between them so that I could point out that this (random game) is a casual game and that (another random game) is a full adventure game but I guess that you cant have it all
Thanks for the help my friends.

[Fien]

Originally Posted by Hillseeker

A casual adventure game is more or less a toned down adventure game but I was hoping that there should be some clear distinction between them so that I could point out that this (random game) is a casual game and that (another random game) is a full adventure game but I guess that you cant have it all

Well, like I said, there IS the distinction that casual games are actually based on non-adventure features. They may have puzzles, they may be dolled up, but essentially they are HOGs in disguise. I honestly don't remember an adventure game where I had to collect dozens and dozens of butterflies to buy myself a subway ticket or something.

And everybody who has played both casuals and adventures, knows the distinction intuitively as well. Yes, gray area and hybrids and all that. Even so.

PS: Look at the genre description of for instance Big Fish games. A game may be categorized as an "adventure", but a closer look often reveals the words "hidden objects" in the game details. They do have real adventures available for download, though. The "large file" ones.

[terhardp]

Adventure games can be an art form, while casual games don't even try to be that.

[dekaneas297]

Originally Posted by Fien

they are HOGs in disguise

Totally agree. Nothing more to add.

[Hillseeker]

Originally Posted by Fien

Lots of text...

The game that started this tread was one I recently played named Dawn The Painted Tower that I found very entertaining, and I hate HOG, but the game is looked down on from a lot of people since it describes as a casual game but another game that I have recently played named Dracula Orgin is not described as a casuel game and is recommended by lots of people but I cant see the difference between them besides that Dracula is a bit longer and has more annoying puzzles.
If you compare lets say A longest Journey or Still Life with The Painted Tower there is a clear difference but not so much with Dracula and The Painted Tower.
Well I was hoping that there should be a clear border between the genres but it feels there is a lot of games that belong in the grey area.

[Shany]

I think the biggest difference is that casual games are usually static.
You only look at one screen at once and it doesn't move, nor does your character.
'Cutscenes' are composed of pictures of people talking to each other, or something that looks like a comic book.
They have very little animation.

[Fien]

That is definitely not true for all casuals. Ravenhearst had real people playing "ghosts" and the recent Dire Grove has very good FMV cut scenes with surprisingly good acting.

[kadji-kun]

Again, it is best to stick to the bare minimum when describing Casual Games. Despite what we all say, the Casual gaming market is quite diverse with a wide range of gameplay mechanics.

This is stretching it, but the Telltale games can be considered Casual gaming. They are built from the bottom up to have a low learning curve, and easy to pick up and play. Plus, the package size is quite small and can still pack a punch.

[Fien]

Originally Posted by kadji-kun

This is stretching it, but the Telltale games can be considered Casual gaming.

That's stretching it too far... SNAP!

[crabapple]

Originally Posted by kadji-kun

Again, it is best to stick to the bare minimum when describing Casual Games. Despite what we all say, the Casual gaming market is quite diverse with a wide range of gameplay mechanics.

Agreed. When people in this forum talk about "Casual games" they are usually thinking about some version of hidden object games. But actually "Casual games" range from computer solitaire to simulations of board games to time management games (strategy lite?) to Match 3 to arcade types to pinball variations, etc. There's nothing that they really have in common other than most being relatively easy to pick up and start playing without learning a lot of rules or having to remember much from one session to the next.

[rtrooney]

Originally Posted by smulan

A computergame condemned by the AG community.

Then maybe you should look for another forum. None other than our fearless leader, Jackal, has been positively reviewing casual games on the opening screen. I've applauded him for doing same.

[Lee in Limbo]

Originally Posted by booB

"Casual games" refers to any type of game with a low learning curve that doesn't require a massive time requirement to play. Not all of them are related to adventure games or HOGs; Tetris, Bejewled, Peggle, and the like are also considered casual games.

Agreed.

The recent spate of 'adventure-lite' Hidden Object Games has become a hotbed of debate for adventure gamers, some of whom see it as a threat to the adventure game market. Personally, I think it's the smartest thing to happen to AGs since Episodic gaming. We need more casual players to discover the wonderful world of adventure gaming, and HOGs are perfect for this. The fact is, some folks really don't have the time or incentive to pick up a Longest Journey or Syberia-type game. They need shorter challenges that don't require an eidetic memory to keep all of the information straight before they shut off their PDA and get back to work.

However, I think we're struggling with this one because we're failing to appreciate the importance of Casual Gaming as a whole. There have always been games that could be played in a half hour, not requiring a great investment of time, and only enough consideration to obey the rules.

The fact that the most recent incarnation bears more than a passing resemblance to our own genre while largely failing to be anything more than a meaningless pixel hunt (which is something many AGers disdain even in the most rigourous of AGs) is really the only reason we're even discussing the matter. Very few of us have any interest in drawing comparisons between Bejewelled and Machinarium. But HOGs are infringing on our turf. Or so it seems.

We typically use words like 'easy' or 'dumbed down' because we are, for better or for worst, experienced gamers who have a certain vested interest in seeing games produced with more advanced forms of gameplay scenario. We don't need a gateway drug; we're already hooked. We might not be what we tend to think of as 'hardcore gamers', but we demonstrate some of the same characteristics, though more passively than do the FPS and MMO crowds.

What we need to understand about HOGs is that they exist for people who either have never played an AG and aren't sure if it's their thing, but who like a good mystery, or are people who used to play AGs but played a few too many of the ones that give AGs a bad name, and then just 'grew out of them'. HOGs are a way for them to discover (or rediscover) their love of the genre. It enables people, who want something other than the crossword puzzle in the newspaper to bide their time during lunch, to experience some of the same atmosphere and challenge that AGers do, without diving head first into the deep end and coming up choking and disillusioned with the experience.

Personally, the last few games I've finished were such short adventures that they could very easily be classed as 'casual'. To my mind, we need more of this sort of thing, not less. We won't see growth in the genre we love until we see a few more people drift into AGs via their love of shorter, less intensive HOGs. I really think AGs need HOGs to thrive.

As for a definition of Casual Games: Video games marked by short playing sessions and challenges which can be overcome with little or no specialized knowledge beyond the ability to learn the rules relevant to the immediate task at hand. Most casual games have limited narrative content and scenery change, and usually have very clearly-defined goals, often tracked by some form of visual score or meter.

How's that?