Are AAA Video Games “Too Big” For The Casual Gamer?

ThisGenGaming says "Recent statistics have shown that a large majority of gamers don’t finish the games they buy. They just play up to a certain point and put it down, maybe to pick it back up later, maybe never to be finished at all. Seeing these statistics, along with the fact that gaming is now somewhat of a mainstream hobby, made me wonder whether or not some triple A titles are just too big for their demographics with too much for the player to do."

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
-Foxtrot1136d ago

Who gives a shit about the casual gamer

You either like Fallout for what it is or you don't

DarkOcelet1136d ago

Oh well, since 90% of games nowadays are extremely easy and very few are challenging, i think anybody can play it whether he is a casual or not.

CorndogBurglar1136d ago

I dont really consider casual gamers to be bad players. Casuals can be very good.

I'm 33 years old and i've been playing video games since i was 4. Now i have a wife and kid and dont have as much time to play. I get in a couple hours every night.

Point is, just because i dont have a lot of time to play doesn't mean i'm bad. You don't do a particular acrivity your whole life without picking up some real skill.

All i'm saying is people have this ridiculous notion that casual gamers are terrible. In reality, if you aren't taking part in tournaments or playing in the MLG, then you too are a casual when it gets down to it. You're playing for fun. In your free time. Thats just as casual as the next guy.....

brish1136d ago


Most people I know consider fallout to be a casual rpg series.

Nothing wrong with that just saying.

jb2271135d ago (Edited 1135d ago )

I think this headline is missing the's not only "casual gamers" that some games are "too big for". Its when games are long just for the sake of a soundbite or bullet point but there's no real substance to 75% of the runtime, and it's all so repetitive it's literally pointless to even begin. That's obviously not the case w/ a game like Fallout, but now that there are so many open worlds & rpg's, there is bound to be a whole mess of wasted time on gamers hands. Has nothing to do w/ being "casual" & "core" and everything to do w/ the value of the gameplay on offer.

There needs to be more pointed experiences for those of us who'd rather have a more focused experience vs. solely sandbox playgrounds. Too much of anything and market saturation always ends bad. Eventually people will be sick of open worlds and even the best of them will have a hard time finding a platform for their game. All of the lesser sandbox rpg's will eventually harm the potential for future quality titles like Fallout imo. Game devs & publishers need to be more willing to take risks, instead of just giving us a dozen games in the same genre, they need to split it up so every crowd is catered to.

Eonjay1136d ago (Edited 1136d ago )

Well, No Man's Sky is billions (upon billions) of times bigger than Fall Out 4 in size and I don't consider it to be a hardcore game. I think the question is malformed. After all, you don't have to do everything in Fallout 4 and you simply can't do everything in No Man's Sky (all of us combined can't).

I think its better to say that both games offer varying degrees of involvement. In both games you can just follow the story. In both games you can do your own thing. This way, both the casual gamer and the hardcore completionist (good luck with that in NMS lol) are both served.

jb2271135d ago

That's a really valid point. I think what really needs to be worked on in regards to these open worlds are actually making the stories compelling and giving us some form of gameplay variety. At this point something like Mad Max is supposed to be very fun but apparently the story is more of a distraction while the distractions are more of the main draw. That's fine for some people but why not offer both? Last gen there were a fair few open worlds but they seemed to put more work into the campaign missions for them whereas this gen only the cream of the crop like Fallout & MGS seem to even care about the stories in the slightest.

Activemessiah1136d ago

I think the clue is "Casual"... There's your answer to that question.

Cy1136d ago

They're too big for me, and I'm nowhere near casual. But I've always seen "casual" gamers as people who are totally okay with sinking hours upon hours into mindless, pointless experiences (Candy Crush, Angry Birds, FarmVille, etc) so I think some of them would actually love really big games, if they were easy to play/portable/not too hard.

My issue comes from trying to stay interested in a game if it takes me more than 5 days to beat it. I just have so many other things to do that I can't devote weeks of my life to a game, and once I lose interest I move on to one of those other things that I'd put on hold to focus on the game. Kind of reaching that point with MGS5 right now. I'm a huge MGS fan, but I've been playing it for a week and I'm only 51% done. That's just way too much game for me. Give me a 40 hour RPG and I'm as happy as I can be.

Genova841136d ago (Edited 1136d ago )

51% done, have you finished the main story yet? If so, absolutely no shame in hanging it up. I never 100% games. I 95%'d assassin's creed 4 and tomb raider. But that last 5% was going to be way too much of a pain in the ass for me to want to do it. I think I got 70-80% into far cry 4. That's good enough for me.

Cy1136d ago

I'm done with the "main" story, but not the second part of it that's locked behind "post"game stuff. Most open world games I get around 65-80% done with just doing the side stuff minus collectables/super hard missions/exploration and the main story, so I'm probably barely gonna hit 60 in this game, if that.

rainslacker1135d ago

Most are too big for me as well, and I'm not casual by any stretch of the imagination.

However, to answer the question, no I don't believe so. Even though some games have a lot of content in their open world presentations, it doesn't mean that the base game takes an excessively long time to complete. You can get through the whole story of most sand-box/open world games in the amount of time I'd imagine most casuals will delegate to a single game.

The content is there for those that want to continue playing it, and the needed content is there for those who just want to go through a game faster. It caters to several groups, which is why they tend to be successful.

Genova841136d ago (Edited 1136d ago )

Let's see:

1. Super Mario Maker
2. Mortal Kombat X
3. Gears of War Ultimate Edition

There are 3 AAA titles releasing or released recently that casual players can get into. So, without reading the article, my answer is "No. They are not." Now I'll read the article.

Edit: After reading the article, I can say that two of my "casual" friends both loved Destiny. They liked that they could do a couple small things in one sitting rather than having to one one big quest. These games are only as big as you make them. Take Far Cry 4 for instance: I only do the side quests I enjoy. So no races, no bomb defusing, no assassination contracts. You can have a casual approach to these games or you can try to do EVERYTHING! Most don't do everything ...

Show all comments (17)