I have to admit that my 10 year old nephew play facebook games more than his PS3, Xbox 360 combined. Why? It's not that facebook game is better than PS3 or Xbox 360, heck I play my PS3 all the time. It's because that facebook games are easier to understand, less learning curve, and quite enjoyable. My 10 year old nephew isn't exactly a casual gamer at all, in fact he was playing games since age six with DS, PSP and so forth. PS3 and Xbox 360 games sometimes felt a bit too intimidating for him. It's hard to jump into the game and enjoy it. You'll need some skill learning in order to perform better, until then it easily become frustrating than fun.
My generation, which I consider golden generation of gaming, we starts from simple game like dig dug, pac man. We then learn to tackle more complicated game like Mario Bros, Contra, Mega Man. Until today, we play Modern Warfare 2, Resident Evil 5, etc which we can jump into without any problem. But for the rest, especially people who just start gaming, they rather find another alternative.
Facebook games provides exactly the kind of alternative they need. Free, easy access game from internet browser. They don't need to buy a gaming device and most of the household nowadays already has a PC and internet connection. They don't even have to go to the shop and get the hard copy. With digital distribution everything is easier.
Taking from above point of view, that is why digital distribution plays a big part in changing the face of gaming industry. It didn't really boom until Apple introduced its Apple App store and Valve also introduced Steam where casual gamers and small developers can go to without significant cost of entry barrier. After that, it seems that digital distribution is the new era. Music, movie, games began rolling through internet. Microsoft and Sony didn't want to miss the boat and start doing digital distribution via their Xbox marketplace and Playstation Store.
With the rise of digital distribution, it doesn't just helping casual gamers, but small/ indie developers that have almost no chance against big ones have alternatives to promote their game. They couldn't do retail copy because their team and budget is so small that almost make no sense to distribute it via disc. When people buy 40 - 60 bucks of games, they expect more content and experience. Small games like Joe Danger and Flower are not so feasible to do it via retail.
The best thing being indie developers is that they can use any kind of creativity and imagination without the need to be controlled by other people. They can start slow and small, and take a risk with new things which triple A title could not afford. There will be more and more indie developer in the future no doubt, and it definitely helps the growth of our game industry.
Wednesday, July 28, 2010
Casual gamers, digital distribution and the rise of indie developers
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
"Casual Games" like all other things has its ups and downs. Ups, as you mentioned above is that less skilled players can easily play them, and it opens a way for independent developers to sell their games.
ReplyDeleteHowever the downs of it, is what scares me. You see, in these times, when casual game's sales are high, they become an illusion.
why? because people start to think: "casual games are cheaper to develop, and sell more. so why even bother a developing a hardcore game?"
That's obviously bad, because casual gamers can learn to play more satisfying, more complex games in time. However, hardcore gamers, who have tasted the joy of hardcore games, can't go back and play casual games. At least not as their main games. To me, casual games are just a relaxing break after a tense hardcore gaming experience.
So right now, casual games are a designer's best bet. We hardcore gamers take one or two of the best games out there (World of Warcraft, Call of Duty, Halo, Battlefield, etc.) and practice on those, therefore we won't care about less valuable games. These games are bought by people who have less experience and skills, and therefore won't care about the game's different aspects that much. These people won't really care about the amount of time and money spent when the game is being developed, as long as the game can entertain them for some time.
These people are called casual gamers, and games designed specifically for these people are called casual games. So casual games, are games that are easy and cheap to develop, yet they can entertain people for quite a time.
So what's bad about these "casual games"? Since they're cheap to develop, yet sell a lot, they become a designer's first priority. NDS becomes full of simple games, Wii is built specifically for casual gamers, apple believes that iphone is the best handheld console, since it has so many casual games, simple facebook games are played more than million dollar budget games, PSP creates a section dedicated to casual games called "Minis", and most recently we have Natal and Move, both aimed at casual gamers. (Move is less casual oriented though)
Now let's fast forward some years later, your 10 year old niece have been playing facebook games for a couple of years, now he has become a "skilled player" at these games, he knows everything about them, and he's itching to play a game that's a little more complex. He has now become a "hardcore gamer". However all developer's care about is simple casual games, because in these times, they have proven to be more profitable. What is happening is that these casual gamers are becoming less and less, because no hardcore gamer will ever become a casual gamer. suddenly people will get tired of these "casual games". they want something more complex to do, suddenly casual games stop to sell, so will the casual hardware, and all that money and attention that is put into the casual games will go to waste, and guess what? the video game industry will crash.
ReplyDeleteWhy am I so sure that this will happen? because it has happened before, in the only other generation besides this generation that lasted more that five year, the second generation of video games. Just replace "Atari 2600 cartridges" with "casual games", and you'll find out that this situation has been happened before. And what do they say? History repeats itself.
More Info here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_video_game_crash_of_1983
So what is the answer here? I believe it's simple, yet for some reason forgotten.
The answer is: quality level design, plus balanced difficulty levels.
In a game like "Half-Life", player can choose the difficulty in the beginning, so casual gamers can easily choose "beginner skill levels", while skilled players can choose harder difficulties.
Now if the level design is done well, even a player with no previous experience can learn to play the game, and in time, become skilled at it.
As an example, in Half-Life 2, when you first receive your first handgun, the very first opponent you'll see is at an obvious disadvantage, he won't shoot you a lot, and won't move a lot. so the player gets to learn "how to aim". that's an easy task. next opponents are much farther and they move a lot. so the player now needs to learn to "aim better". In time, the non-experienced player will become experienced, just like how you become more skilled the more you play a specific sport.
If a game excels at these, it can be played by both the "hardcore gamers", AND the "casual gamers". These games sell really well (Half-Life and Half-Life 2 are 5th and 6th top selling games on PC), and push the video game industry farther (instead of holding it, like casual games do).
Developers should focus on creating quality games that are easily played by everyone, instead of focusing on a specific group of gamers.
THAT IS ALL! :-)
ok nice point of view, gonna publish it on to one post!! :)
ReplyDeleteoh, Thanks!
ReplyDelete