I recently played HOTEL and both DRAWN games. They led me to this question. Is there a clear diferentiation between adventure games and casual games? The three games above all have have fairly solid story lines, varied levels of difficulty in puzzles, and more than adequate graphics. I just wonder how the people who run a site like this one decide where the questions go. (Please don't interpret this as a criticism. It's not! It's simply a curiosity caused by too much snow on the golf course.)

There is no clear definition and we discuss it frequently off the board. Hotel was always under adventure and Drawn is a cross between the two mostly because BF created it and marketed it to be a casual adventure. At this point though, especially after playing both, I would almost say it belongs fully in the adventure side and it may likely end up there.

Check out Becky's editorials on casual and adventure games to see some insight.

Ana

I put each game in one eye, cross both eyes, and the games all end up rather blurry there, right on my nose.

Are we moving Drawn into Adventure status before I uncross my eyes???

I won't protest Becky. <Hears Becky giggling like a schoolgirl and typing away at a review before i can finish hitting submit>.

Ana

Casual games can be any genre. There are casual shooters, casual strategy games, casual adventures, even casual MMORPGs.

THat's correct Ray, but the struggle is distinguishing the difference between what we call here an "Adventure Lite" vs. an Adventure.

Ana

Heres a definition from wiki

"They require no long-term time commitment or special skills to play, and there are comparatively low production and distribution costs for the producer."

:-)

I've uncrossed my eyes! Things are becoming more clear! Thanks Ana.

"They require no long-term time commitment or special skills to play." AHA! So that's why I liked them. I fear that my brain has indeed atrophied and I simply can't think the way I used to. (At least I think I used to.)

Even though the "Drawn" games were excellent I wouldn't call them true Adventures. I feel they were still Hidden Object style games, even IF mightily enhanced and extremely enjoyable

If you compare a "Drawn" game to a full length traditional Adventure - as an example you could take "The Longest Journey" - there is a vast difference

And likewise, whilst I think having this whole "modern" variety of games to choose from is absolutely splendid, I do feel purchase price differences should remain

While Drawn is definitely a casual adventure game it never crossed my mind to even doubt it is a full fledged adventure game. It has all the adventure game genre elements and very little of HOG.

What do you mean by "vast difference", Mad? That sounds extremely vague and there are vast differences within games belonging to the same genre as well.

What I said is merely my opinion, Ascovel. But here's why - for me - off the top of my head

The length of the story.
[Not to be confused with the time it might take to play the game because that will always differ from person to person.]

The complexity of the story - which could indirectly be relative to the length, of course.
If I was “escaping from a tower” in a full scale Adventure I would expect to have many more and diverse hoops to jump through before I made it out.

And, in a full scale Adventure, I wouldn't expect to find quite so many hidden object pages. No matter how entertainingly designed they might be they are still hidden object pages.

I hasten to add that none of the above reduces my enjoyment of sophisticated Hidden Object games like "Drawn" at all, of course !!

And now, having explained myself how would you qualify the "vast differences within games belonging to the same genre".
I do agree they are there but would be interested to hear your definition.

The difference as I see it, is the difference between a Dickens novel and a colouring book. They are similar only in the sense that they are both books but other than that there's a chasm between the two.

I think some of the better casual/hidden object adventures are beginning to blur the lines, however. There's some awfully good and satisfying ones out there.

I meant that such different games as Secret of Monkey Island, The Last Express, Alone in The Dark and Myst all belong to the same genre.



I don't think the amount of a story in a game changes the way you play it and so I would say it really shouldn't influence the genre the game is in.

For example, Myst has relatively very little storytelling in comparison to exploration and puzzle solving, but its sequels are much more story-focused. Would you say that Myst is not an adventure game, but Myst III already is because after a few sequels the stories in the series developed so much?

How many casual games do you think gamers will be talking about and replaying years from now, Ascovel? There is a difference even if many of us can only haltingly express it. To me, mj2c has come the closest to finding an analogy that works. Although I might upgrade that coloring book to a comic. (I remember loving Classic Comics - and going on to read the actual books they were based on.)

But turn the coin. If, as was mentioned in another thread, casual gamers misled into thinking Carol Reed games are what they are used to are disappointed at what they actually find, you see another whole group agreeing that casual games and adventure games are different.

Funny, having said that, I wonder what those who play casual games by choice and have seldom dipped into adventures would say if they were asked if they considered them adventure games and if not, why not. Maybe someone should ask them.

Gil.

So you have these debates over here as well, do you? I can set my calendar by how often one will start at AG.

I don't actually think I've ever seen a proper definition of "casual". I've seen lots of generalized descriptions, but none that really capture the defining characteristics. Most people have two eyes, two ears, and a nose, but it's not actually a requirement to be a human being. When I hear people say a casual game can't be an adventure because it's too easy, too streamlined, too lightweight, Randy Newman's satirical "Short People" tends to pop into my head.

Of course there are differences between casual games and full-length adventures, but that doesn't mean they're unrelated. There's a big difference between a Big Mac and a sit-down steak dinner, but both are perfectly legit meals. They just suit different needs and particular tastes at any given time. And really, casual adventures are just the genre's version of fast food.

Ultimately, I think comparing "casual" and "adventure" is misleading, as they aren't inherently conflicting terms. To use another analogy, it's like comparing television and movies. Certainly those seem like very different things on the surface, but you can WATCH movies on television, and there are even made-for-TV movies. So yes, sometimes they are very different, sometimes fully compatible. Context matters.

I'm always quite puzzled has to why some casual players appear to be so eager to be associated with Adventure games. If they enjoy searching for objects in a list (and there is no reason for them not to be) why not just enjoy them for what they are?

Picking certain aspects from a casual (story for ex.)and saying look it's "just like an Adventure" doesnt elevate it from what it is. Is it because casual fans are aware of, and want to change a credability gap? I'd be interested to know.

I remember when Doom and Lara Croft type games started appearing - some people attached the term "Adventure" to those as well. Clearly, in computer games terms they are not, but people would refer to the fact that you move from room to room and you had to solve some puzzle to move to the next room - but does anyone associate the two genres today? Enjoy what you enjoy:-)

Mj2c -- definitions become important when, for instance, deciding which GameBoomers forum to discuss the game in. If Drawn: Dark Flight (for instance) is more an adventure game than a casual adventure game, then all discussion takes place in the Adventure Discussion forum, rather than in the Casual Games forum.

That affects other stuff too -- that means that Drawn and its sequels will be listed on the GameBoomers Recent & Upcoming Games page. It means that we will officially review the Drawn games (GameBoomers tries to review all commercial adventure games, but we don't review casual games -- we just don't have the resources to do that).

There's also the issue of helping gamers find what they like. The more you can get across to gamers what a game is like, the easier it is for them to decide to purchase it (or not). That's especially important if the game doesn't receive a lot of reviews (generalist sites, for instance, don't review many casual games). So if a game has elements in it that are similar to an adventure game, stating that helps gamers who enjoy adventure games and are looking to try something that's more "streamlined." (A good word, applicable to many things -- wish it applied to more of my life.)

Neither of the two games in question (Drawn or Hotel) include a single instance of "searching for objects in a list". Hidden object games do not = casual games. They are a type of casual game, but only one type.

Easy to paint all casual games with the same brush. Easy, but wrong. As I said, context matters.

But as the thread is in the context of casual (the adventure lite) type and full adventure I took it as read people would understand what I was talking about (as I'm certain they do). Sometime context is implicit and doesnt need to be signposted at every turn and I like to believe people are smart enough to work it out for themselves without me holding them by the hand:-)

@Becky

I undrstand why GB needs to seperate the two what I'm not quite sure why people want to blur the line between the two. They seem very distinct to me. There may be one or two exceptions to this but exceptions are by their very nature, exceptional. I'm with you on the streamlined, unfortunately;-)

"Fiction" and "literature" are often placed into two different categories in bookstores. One could argue wherein the distinctions lie and which book goes where (more substantive, easier to read, less intellectual rigor required, withstood the test of time, considered very good by a large body of critics, etc., etc.). Whatever criteria you choose to apply, no one would argue that both categories are books. I see no difference between this and the discussion concerning adventures games and casual adventure/adventure-lite games in terms of differentiation.

"And really, casual adventures are just the genre's version of fast food. "

That description entirely suits how I think of casual games.

I will always, without question, prefer to go to a nice restaurant for a Chef prepared meal but I will occasionally dive into a fast food place - for no other reason than I just feel like it at the time

Mad, I so agree with you regarding casual games. The fast food analogy is very good. And I do like to stop in for a short, relaxing taste sometimes.

Here is a simply definition that no one can disagree with. If I like the game, I play it. If I don't, I don't play it. Period.

The only real need for defining casual and adventure games is as Becky said and for retail. A store has to know which shelf a game is on.

I don't go to a site, or store, looking for either casual or adventure games but for games I might like to play. I don't have to know if one is defined as casual or adventure to know if I'll like the game. The definition has no meaning to me at that time; and really, no other time.