I am thinking about making hybrid-casual games. I have been researching the genre extensively for the past few days, and I already have a basic concept for a superhero-themed platformer. I am kind of torn between 2D and 3D, but I am wondering if either type of platformer would be considered “casual”.

Check out this link to learn more: https://gameanalytics.com/blog/six-features-hyper-casual-dud-hybrid-casual-hit/​

Would a platformer with the features described in the article linked above be considered “hybrid-casual”?

BradleyAuerbach said:
Would a platformer with the features described in the article linked above be considered “hybrid-casual”?

The features in the article are independent to genre, and because it's bolt on stuff, i would even say it's tangent to game design at all. So ignore them for my answer.

Which is: If you want a casual platformer (i assume jump'n'run) make it 2D, not 3D.
Older players from the 8/16 bit Nintendo generation often have issues with navigating 3D worlds.
That's for good reasons, because i have not seen a 3D jump'n'run game which properly works yet. 3D lacks oversight, determinism, and a clear distinction of gravity vs. controlled motion.

The best 3D platformers i know are Quake 3 and Portal. But neither is casual and neither uses jumping for primary mechanics. Super Mario 64 is just a fail imo, comparing it with former 2D games which are awesome.

I would argue that “Casual Games” are games that you can pick up any time and start playing. There's no need to save progress etc., because you only want to start a new game when you start one anyway (think Solitaire or Minesweeper). Hybrid-casual, I would argue means games that are sort of casual, but you actually do store some sort of progress (level, points, coins etc), but the gameplay itself is always the same and you don't store which level (i.e. scene, not stats) you were on when you quit.

So, by those definitions a platformer (both 2D and 3D) could be casual and hyper-casual.
Please correct me if I'm way wrong, but I would interpret the genres like this.

AndyPett said:
I would argue that “Casual Games” are games that you can pick up any time and start playing. There's no need to save progress etc., because you only want to start a new game when you start one anyway (think Solitaire or Minesweeper). Hybrid-casual, I would argue means games that are sort of casual, but you actually do store some sort of progress (level, points, coins etc), but the gameplay itself is always the same and you don't store which level (i.e. scene, not stats) you were on when you quit.

That's a nice definition i think. Sounds like the missing piece i never really understood regarding that ‘casual’ term.

Though, some relaxation is probably needed. The best casual game to me is Zuma, but like a jump'n'run this uses manually designed levels. And you won't play them all in row, so saving progress is needed.
So i would remove this, and reduce it to accessible games with simple, ideally self explaining and addictive mechanics.

Bolt on features like customization, collectibles, items, social stuff, leaderboards etc. depends on saved state and progress as well. Likely they can give the player advantages, but should not directly effect the mechanics to remain casual.

JoeJ said:
Though, some relaxation is probably needed.

Yeah, probably. And nonetheless there are “no rules without an exception” (which is actually a paradox, but that's a different subject), so a definition of genre should more indicate what the game is about rather than dictate what it can and can't do. That's my opinion anyway. ?

In my opinion, a true casual game is one that you can stop playing for a while by simply putting down the controller or walking away from the game, and then return later to exactly where you left off. In other words, no “action” takes place in the interim. But I don't see what difference it really makes to the player what arbitrary label you put on the game.

BradleyAuerbach said:
I am thinking about making hybrid-casual games.

Why not just make whatever game you want to make, without worrying about what arbitrary label somebody might put on it?

no

I am thinking about making hybrid-casual games. I have been researching the genre extensively for the past few days

Its beautiful to see in person when scientific terms are growing naturally out of nowhere.

But this is probably not such a moment.

@Geri what do you mean?