From my experience, a lot of industry people started out from hardcore games, there are a few who insist that they cannot work in social games. Social games are just a bubble and "a lot of social games people are just doing it for the money"

Most of the points are debatable. But I'd like to hear from people who have switched from hardcore to social and how's the experience like?

I'm considering a position in a start up that has made it's fortune from a single hit game.

I think games are games, and this idea that "casual games" are somehow lesser than "hardcore games" makes no sense.

First of all, there isn't anything "casual" anymore about "casual games". Some of these games are quite hard, more people play them, and for more average hours. And I think it's pretty obvious why: they don't cost an arm and a leg (how many times have you spent $60USD on a AAA title and it was almost exactly the same game as its previous iteration), and they can actually run them (again, who has the rig to run all of the latest AAA titles? I do, but I spent a ton of money on this machine).

So it depends on what you want to do. If you're making games for your own enjoyment, well then, it doesn't really matter much what you choose to do, as long as *you* choose it for yourself and don't let peer pressure push you into making Battlecraft: Spec Ops 17. If you're trying to make games for money, the market will tell you what to do. Right now, it's telling everyone to make fun games that maximize the number of people capable of playing them. Huh, that's kind of weird. In a totally, not actually weird, way.

Social games nowadays aren't really games. There's no game in there, just graphics and social clicking.

Games must have win/lose conditions, these "social games" have neither.

I never made social games, but if I do, I want to make sure that they are not the same games they are now.