Are these video games?

[sierralem]

Do hardcore gamers consider iPhone/Facebook/Android/etc. games to be video games?

 

If so, what is your favorite? I'm currently addicted to candy crush. If not, why?

Edited May 15, 2013 by sierralem

[iSimba]

As a hardcore gamer myself, I would say no, even though they are "technically" video games.

 

At best I would consider them to be on the same level as flash games (i.e. notdoppler, armorgames, etc) which I also do not consider video games. My terminology for them is simply a "game".

 

I suppose I do not consider them video games because they are not on the same level as games developed for consoles or the PC (dedicated PC games such as MMOs, etc.)

 

My favorite is Cut the Rope 

[JMH]

I don't know... a lot of the Square-Enix games that have been coming out lately either come from old consoles (DS  Final Fantasy IV, updated Cronotrigger, PS Final Fantasy Tactics and SN the other final fantasies,)  and Baldur's Gate for PC Or are completely original but have console like qualities like Chaos Rings. They're even going to come up with a ipad version of the latest X-COM.  While you won't find them among the $0.99 priced games unless they are on sale like Deep-Space for iPhone you'll have to pay a lot more for them 7-30 there are some hard core games out there.  They will only become more so as the iPhone and iPad and Andriod phones get better processors  and displays which pretty much happens with each generation.

[Stellar]

No, I don't.

 

Games on mobile devices like that, similar to social networking browser entertainment, do not fit into the same category. They are, IMO, apps; entertainment-lite in comparison to the much larger and more complex full-throated standalone software that comprise a major PC or console title. They serve a purpose and are fun, but aren't in the same league. That's why when I see people who claim to be a 'gamer' and list those kinds of things as their preferred interest, it tends to make me do an internal eye-roll (if not a literal one but I usually refrain, out of politeness.) My PC disk space is probably taken up by roughly 80% games, outweighing music, video and other software applications combined by quite a rather ridiculous margin. These are works that dwarf what you can find on a mobile platform by an order of magnitude or two, both in terms of the design complexity and the overall quality of the experience.

 

I will admit though, that one of my guilty pleasures when I'm wasting time on Facebook is Dungeon Rampage. Huge fun.

[Cyhort]

Nope, I don't consider them games even though they technically are. To me a game needs to be more than just a quick way to waste fifteen minutes while you're waiting for a bus. They're casual distractions, nothing more than that.

[Traveller_23]

I would say yes, purely because there isn't another label for them right now. IMO app and game can refer to many other things too so while they apply, they're not specific enough. 

 

Don't really have a favourite one...never really got into the casual gaming thing because my commute is too broken up/short. However, on Android and soon to be on Windows Phone 8 as well. Any recommendations folks?  

[Persinette]

I absolutely consider them to be video games! A lot of innovation is coming from them, along with a lot of indie development.

 

The whole 'real' games vs. 'casual' games is mostly a way for insecure gamers to pet their egos, in my opinion. I don't distinguish all that much between an app game and, say, Terraria or Towns or DEFCON.

[thephoenixhost]

technically speaking they are after all we can also consider phone as handheld devices. My guilty pleasure right now is candy crush as well. It's draining my phone battery so i block all incoming calls also to make sure that i aint interrupted. When i still have my PS/PS2 i normally like to play RPG genre games such the FF series.

[clumber]

I would certainly say that 'casual games' count as games.

 

To be honest, if it is any area of gaming that needs to be attacked, it is the mainstream triple-A titles and the indie market. I mean, there are a small number of exceptions, but the vast majority of both big studio games and the indie market are utterly devoid of any sort of creativity, innovation or artistic integrity. They have plummeted into an utterly meaningless and completely worthless cycle of churning out the same game again and again.

 

The mobile and 'casual' game markets, on the other hand, are actually creating interesting and innovative content.

[iSimba]

I disagree. I have yet to play one mobile game I have actually "enjoyed" and actually wanted to play instead of playing it to eat up time.

 

Mobile games aren't in-depth enough to actually be interesting. They're cash machines. Low production cost, quick production speed, a massive market to sell to, and a low price point ensures your game sells and offers no incentive to make an amazing, immersive game instead of a cheap temple run knockoff. 

 

The lack of good controls, actual content, interesting graphics (that don't kill your phone in 2 hours) and no immersion are all powerful strikes against mobile games.

 

Of course, by mobile i am referring to phone games. You might be referring to handheld gaming devices which is a completely different story.

 

All imo of course.

[clumber]

I disagree. I have yet to play one mobile game I have actually "enjoyed" and actually wanted to play instead of playing it to eat up time.

 

Mobile games aren't in-depth enough to actually be interesting. They're cash machines. Low production cost, quick production speed, a massive market to sell to, and a low price point ensures your game sells and offers no incentive to make an amazing, immersive game instead of a cheap temple run knockoff. 

 

The lack of good controls, actual content, interesting graphics (that don't kill your phone in 2 hours) and no immersion are all powerful strikes against mobile games.

 

Of course, by mobile i am referring to phone games. You might be referring to handheld gaming devices which is a completely different story.

 

All imo of course.

 

 

How is this different from a massive amount of triple-A development?

 

Yes, the playing time is longer and the budget is bigger - they're no less of a soulless cash-grab.

 

It's possible we define "interesting graphics" in very different ways, because I find most triple-A games to be near-identical and utterly devoid of any creative merit; more often than not they're just chasing the latest visual trends. If you judge the value of a game by the expense of its development, then "real" games are obviously superior. But when it comes to creative design and skill, the two fields are pretty much neck and neck.

[Meticulously]

I think the genre of gaming is wide enough that it could safely take browser games under its wing. I also think most browser games are Flash-based and thus different in their own right from video games.

 

I usually make my decision about app games by how long I get to play before someone asks me for money. Games and apps that demand payment every 10 minutes before I can continue should, at the very least, not share a category with games that offer good gameplay with the option of enhancement. I think it’s ridiculous to throw money at rushed and underdeveloped games as well as ones that have issues with being "withholding".

 

Not to mention, there’s very little more frustrating than playing a game for weeks only to get an update and suddenly you can’t make a move without coins/jewels/hearts/balloons/diamonds that cost 99 cents each but you can get a value pack of 10 for $15.99 (limited time only).