The Rise of Casual and Mobile Gaming

HardcoreGamer writes "The New York Times has a lengthy article about the simple pleasures and growth of casual mobile gaming. Trends show that 'more and more people are playing simpler, quieter types of electronic games on the Web, cellphones and hand-helds.' The growth in lighter, less time- and resource-intensive games (like those by GameLoft, Jamdat, and WildTangent) is spurred by the ability to play anytime, anywhere, as much as the rising development costs and production times for a traditional game. A wireless game can cost $40,000 and take a few months to develop, while full-fledged PC and console games can cost $5 million to $10 million and take years to deliver."

Casual Gaming

[sbszine]

I totally understand the move towards casual gaming. After working a long day I can't devote the hours to a time-intensive game (e.g. Resident Evil). Now I find myself playing retro shooters and suchlike, games that can be crammed in between work and endless bloody domestic chores.

Re:Simple Games are Fun

[fatalist23]

Absolutely. I find "classic" games some of the best out there, for a variety of reasons.

They often have really addictive gameplay, as after even a few moment playing you can easily grasp the games premise and controls, and be happily playing along. That doesn't mean that they don't have strategy; I'm still getting better at puzzle games like Tetris to this day even.

Some old classics: Frogger, Breakout, Space Invaders, Tetris, Pac Man...

It's too bad that new games are often forced to have good graphics. From what I understand, console manufacturers are reluctant to carry 2-dimensional sort of games as they see each game as a way of presenting the console; thus, when they sell a 2-d game they think that every person who sees that game will think that 2-d graphics are all that console is capable of. It's really sad; we're probably missing out on some really quality games that way.

Isn't for everybody

[Jad LaFields]

I just finished playing an excellent game of Day of Defeat, and I can say that hardcore, intensive games aren't going away any time soon, and certainly not for me (I need my daily Nazi-killing fix =).

But for many other people, I can see how these casual games would be so appealing. Many are simple, easy to grasp concepts*, like Tetris or card games the users already know. I knew a girl who was incredibly hooked on Snake. Or Nibbles, whatever its called. Anyway, I'm rambling, so umm... err... GRENADE! Run! =)

* not that Nazi-killing is all that confusing of concept either

No More Toilet Reading

[bfree]

Just play games on your phone instead!

Talk about product placement

[Anonymous Coward]

I saw N-Gage mentioned so many times, it made me want to puke. Damn, what is happening to the New York Times?

Pretty obvious story: People want mobile timekiller = turn to simple games on mobile devices.

I still don't see gaming becoming really big on cellphones, mostly because there aren't too many people who can afford to pay $299 for a cellphone that has pretty games. Give me Tetris and Snake and I'm good to go on my $40 cellphone.

Interactive Vs. Non-Interactive

[Zenex13]

I think you can compare this to non-interactive media, like TV and movies. Movies are expensive and time consuming to produce, but are long, in depth, and have generally have a polished look, while TV shows cost less time and money to produce, lack the polish of movies, and aren't as in depth.

Compare this to video games. Half-Life 2 or Doom 3 (will) have considerable polish, cost millions (i think), and are longer and in depth. Tetris is cheap to produce, lacks polish, but is short and fun anyway.

The point is, if TV and movies are any indication, complex and simple games will both become popular, just filling different niches.

The direct-to-video of computer gaming...

[Kris_J]

Not that portable gaming is of a lower quality, but the lower expectations can allow for some low-budget, innovative titles. Apart from the Activision Anthology for the PS2, my last dozen mainstream retail video games purchases were all for the GBA. (Additionally I've purchased three "new" -- previously unreleased prototypes of -- Atari 2600 games) This is mostly because the limited development environment (more or less) forces the designers to include decent gameplay, or they have nothing.

Re:Cheap Production

[dr.robotnik]

Gameboy was designed for mobile entertainment.

Cell phones aren't.

And this is one of the great strengths of mobile phone gaming... the fact that it's a device which you carry round all the time to serve another purpose. Don't get me wrong, I carry round my GBA most of the time as well, but my boss might look suspicious if i put it on the table in a meeting, whereas with a mobile phone you've got all your options covered for that quick tetris break ;)

Re:Talk about product placement

[chess]

No it is not product placement.
It is about the power of being close.

Just think about what the mainstream inhabitant of the developed world - be it female or male - carries in the pocket leaving home:
- Keys
- Money and ID card
- mobile (cell phone)

So mobiles are closer to the average population than PCs or Handhelds (that's why MSFT _has_ to enter the market of mobile phones).

Plus: People grown up on Gameboy are likely to appreciate a gameboy rolled into a mobile and use it.

N'Gage is definetely worth a try today for Nokia.

Next things to eliminate from the mobile toting humans pocket are: Credit and other Cards and finally keys.

chess

Simple because they are constrained

[awol]

I agree that this phenomenon of simple gaming is increasing but I think it is only because of the constraints of the technology. The only games available on the bus are the ones in my phone (or previously in my Pilot PDA) and both are just timewasters because there is nothing better. I don't want to carry a book around with me all the time and I do not yet have a suitable "book" presence in my phone and so I can't read (which would probably be my preference) so I play a few minutes of tetris or the qix clone on my T68 (and is not that just a sucky phone) for the 15 minutes that my night bus home takes.

If I had a non intrusive way of playing quake I would certainly rather be doing that, but the technology is not yet there. When it is then the story will be "People miss more and more bus stops as immersive games go on the commute" or the like.

Retro Games

[stapedium]

This is where all those classics will show up in the next two or three years. This is good and bad news. Good news: you may actually be able to find your old favorites and play them for a quarter on your cell phone. Bad news: these games are ecnimically viable again so there is no way you can make an argument that those ROMS you downloaded are for "historical preservation purposes". Worse yet, if comanies start making real money on these cell phone arcades with retro games, you can expect a crackdown on all those ROM sites.

Love the trend...but not the games

[Junks Jerzey]

I much prefer smaller games that I can sit down and play, as opposed to extravagant time wasters in which most of the "play" time is spent wandering around a huge level and trying to figure what to do next (good examples are just about anything recent from Nintendo: Metroid, Star Fox Adventures, Mario Sunshine, Zelda). But just because large, modern games have failed in a number of ways isn't an excuse to rewind to the stale games of yesteryear.

Go to shockwave.com or popcap.com or any of these kind of sites and what do you see: worm eats things and gets longer games, click on the colored objects and have the items above them fall down games, retro scrolling shooters with the same batch of power-ups. Are we doomed to forever play endless rehashes of these same concepts?

In short, there's a big gap between these uninspired retreads and the hardcore gamers' games, and that gap is largely empty and unexplored.

Re:Casual Gaming

[Jagasian]

Tetris lacks depth to its gameplay? Have you ever played the game? Have you ever seen good players play the game?