Culture Clash

(August 2006)

Business Casual

My father got an Xbox last Christmas.

Dad, who would prefer that his age remain undisclosed, has always been a gamer. He introduced my brother and I to the hobby before we could read or write, and we attribute both our literacy and shared chosen profession to Mystery House. But while Marcus and I grew to think of games as the sixth item on Maslow's hierarchy, Dad remained much more casual about it. He is, you might say, a casual gamer… but not according to the common definition.

Casual gamers have become a cornerstone of the industry. We tend to think of them as people who play fewer and spend less on games in comparison to “core” gamers, who in turn are less otaku than “hardcore” gamers. Research is now showing that that's maybe not the case. The real difference between gamer types is how they view pastime. Serious gamers see it as their chief source of entertainment; casual gamers do not. But a lot of (hard)core or “incumbent” gamers – that is, gamers who were here first – conjure up a very specific scene upon hearing the term “casual gamer.” However wrong or right to do so, on an emotional level we equate casual gamers with people who play Bejeweled a lot.

Which is not entirely inaccurate. The Casual Games White Paper (pdf) describes the breed as mostly playing web/downloadable games, less likely to buy games at retail, and largely interested in word, puzzle or card games. But the presence of all those adverbs indicates that it's not limited exclusively to those criteria. This is a huge market, growing huger. Casual gamers in general may be more interested in Bejeweled than in GalCiv or Oblivion, but not always. Besides, Bejeweled and its compatriots have broader appeal. They're simpler to learn and play, require less investment of time or knowledge, and tend to be presented in an inclusive and friendly manner. Bejeweled would never announce its intention to make anyone its bitch; core games have been known to do that. We may want to reconsider the somewhat limiting Bejeweled -centric view of the casual demographic.

Simply put, there is a difference between casual games (Bejeweled) and casual gamers (my father). He would have no interest in Bejeweled, but that doesn't edge him out of the casual gamer demographic. He's casual because he doesn't perceive games as his primary source of entertainment. Corralling casual gamers too strictly is a failing of the core audience, which tends to draw no distinction between the games and the gamers.

Part of this behavior is borne out of fear. When incumbent gamers note the industry's increased focus on the casual market, they get an unpleasant creepy-crawly feeling that tells them they're about to be marginalized, that fewer games will come out “for them.” It's the equivalent of an older child feeling resentful when a younger one appears and gobbles up all the attention. The elder's parents don't love him any less, though he may suspect they do.

If you feel fear while being eaten by a shark, that's fine. If you're afraid to swim because a shark might eat you, that's irrational. Casual games have been around for a lot of years now, and the industry hasn't yet turned its back on core players. Developers are conscientiously attending the desires of the casual gamer in an expansive and intelligent way: plenty of Bejeweled -ish games for casuals who just want to play something simple, but also plenty of innovative moves to bring the casual gamer into the fold. Nintendo is leading the charge in this, but they're not the only ones.

What we are seeing, thanks to the inspired approach that developers and publishers have taken so far, is an attempt to draw value from gamers, no matter their prefix. Ignoring the casual market simply because they're not “hardcore” is both snobbish and fiscally irresponsible. Ignoring the incumbents simply because they collectively represent fewer potential dollars is disloyal and equally irresponsible. Therefore, the industry has admirably chosen to ignore neither group, preferring instead to cater to all. And that deserves a round of applause.

The thing core gamers tend to forget, when they worry that a move in the direction of the casual gamer equates with a move away from them, is that adding a new block of customers means more revenue for the business. More revenue means more jobs, more jobs means more games – games both casual and core, as the industry expands to meet the demands of its entire customer base.

Of course, the most beneficial facet of the approach (aside from the barrels of cash) is that games will enjoy greater and greater levels of acceptance. That's more important now than ever before. Like two teenagers making out for the first time, the American Congress bumblingly and slobberingly pawed its way through a recent hearing on game violence, moronically attempting to demonstrate their hipness, their wisdom about the medium, even as they sought to legislate something they clearly knew nothing about. But times may be changing. The punctuational wasteland that was Jack Thompson's amicus curiae request (doc) for the pending Louisiana challenge was coldly (pdf) denied. In Minnesota, a Federal judge actually thought it might be a good idea to try some games out before ruling. It's depressing that everything comes back to the fight against censorship these days, but we have to work with what we've got. The industry's efforts to welcome casual gamers may change the battlefield by literally poaching from the opposition.

I prefer Dynomite to Bejeweled, but I've passed time with both. My brain is currently undergoing training, as is my Nintendog. Armadillo Run keeps me occupied for hours. These are all casual games, but my membership in the Hardcore faction hasn't been rescinded. The industry has recognized that the key to understanding, and capitalizing on, the gaming market is the ability to separate why people play from what they play.