When it comes to gaming as a hobby, “casual” (ie mobile, easily accessible….) games are often either pushed to the side or totally excluded from the discussion. Many self-proclaimed Hardcore gamers don’t see them as true gaming experiences and therefore write them off as less-than, something just for kids or something to be ignored period. In “Social networks, casual games and mobile devices: The shifting contexts of gamers and gaming,” Tama Leaver and Michele Willson write, “Debate and disagreement about what constitutes a game abound through the historical game literature. As new technologies have been introduced or new game genres have been developed, debates have opened up as to whether these should be considered games and whether those who play them can be considered to belong to the category of gamer.” (Leaver & Willson, 2) This dismissive treatment often extends past games that can be played through different devices like phones to indie titles like Shovel Knight, as well. Though these games do require knowledge of their mechanics to progress, the basic argument against them tends to be that they lack difficulty or don’t involve skill and they’re, therefore, not worth investing in. To many people, they are simply a waste of time. A lot of the time, these games are dismissed as not intense enough or too basic. 

To me, the basis of these arguments is deeply rooted in a lack of understanding different perspectives along with an unwillingness to accept that it’s okay for people to be into different kinds of things. It might be true that these games tend to require a lower skill set or are not as difficult as a lot of AAA titles, but that doesn’t mean that they deserve to be dismissed as “fake” games. There’s nothing wrong will being into the intensity/danger of games like DOOM or Call of Duty, but there’s also nothing wrong with being more into games that are based on organization or tranquility. I’m into a ton of different kinds of games. I’ve played third-person, puzzle games, platformers and too many hours of Tetris when I don’t have the time. They’re definitely different experiences, but I don’t see that as a problem. If anything, I think these games should be distinct so that they have their own place and unique impact on the people playing them. The impact of beating the final boss in a big game everybody’s talking about is not going to be equivalent to the impact of building your first town in a lesser-known indie title. It definitely won’t be the same if you’re playing one on your phone while waiting for the bus amidst tons of distractions and the other in the privacy of your own home on a much bigger display. This is all playing games, though—despite how different the experiences tend to be. To imply that one isn’t valid because it presents itself differently or holds a different kind of place is to wrongly underestimate it. At the end of the day, I think people would be better off if they played the games they wanted to and didn’t dismiss the ones they didn’t care about but instead understood their importance to others.

Works Cited

Leaver, T., & Willson, M. (2016). Social networks, casual games and mobile devices: The shifting contexts of gamers and gaming. In T. Leaver & M. Willson (Eds.), Social, Casual and Mobile Games: The Changing Gaming Landscape (pp. 1–11). London and New York: Bloomsbury Academic.