GAMING: I CAN'T STOP PLAYING "JEWEL QUEST II"

Maddeningly addictive games have people hunched over their iPhones and Blackberries everywhere you look. Tom Standage, business editor of The Economist, takes a moment from lining up jewels to consider these casual, unputdownable diversions ...

From INTELLIGENT LIFE magazine, Winter 2008

It is a truth universally acknowledged that the most compelling games of all are the cheesy “casual” games you can play on a mobile phone, call up in a web browser or download free online. They lack the fancy 3-D graphics, elaborate physics models and epic soundtracks of modern console games, and tend to have flimsy plots, clunky graphics and basic controls. I know I should be playing “Fallout 3” or another of the new crop of cutting-edge, blockbuster games. But lately my supercomputer-class games consoles have gathered dust below the widescreen high-definition TV. Instead, I’ve been spending too much time playing “Jewel Quest II” on my iPhone.

This simple but maddeningly addictive game is one of a vast category of casual games that involve lining up jewels of a similar colour on a grid. A line of three or more jewels vanishes in a puff of smoke, causing the other jewels to ripple down the board. This is deeply rewarding: the game’s creators have found a way to stimulate a primitive region of the brain that likes tidying things up. Various bells and whistles are added to this basic formula—there is a plot relating to secret artefacts in Africa, and special kinds of jewels that do different things. But ultimately the game delivers the simple pleasure of matching jewels until the board is cleared.

Another category of casual games involves serving people in a cake shop (the “Cake Mania” series) or a restaurant (“Diner Dash”), juggling customers’ demands and preparing their orders as efficiently as possible. Like “Jewel Quest”, these games give you the pleasurable feeling of getting things done, when you are in fact wasting your time. But the illusion of setting the world to rights can make them unputdownable. A recent development is the rise of “hidden object” games, in which you search for everyday objects hidden in a scene. These games supply small, regular rewards that keep players coming back for more.

Casual games are played by hundreds of millions of people. Compared with console games, they appeal to a broader, older and more female audience. You can squeeze in a few minutes of play when it suits: just call up a game on your desktop during lunch, or play on your phone on the train, or in a queue. Much as I enjoy expansive, complex games such as “Fallout 3”, there is little point in playing them for less than a few hours. Not everyone has that much time—except students, of course, and the retired, hardly a core video-gaming demographic. (I plan to catch up on a lot of video games when I retire—after I’ve got round to watching “The Wire”.)

Lately the distinction between casual and hard-core games has started to blur. More casual games are appearing on games consoles: the success of the Nintendo Wii is largely due to the simplicity of many of its games. Similarly, Microsoft makes casual games available via its Xbox Live Arcade service. And many modern games work as casual games on the surface but offer more depth for players who want it. The industry is tacitly acknowledging that it has become too fixated on making fancy games for enthusiasts, and could learn a thing or two from the wider popularity of much simpler games. Not everyone wants a ten-course banquet—and sometimes even gastronomes just want a snack.

Illustration: Katie Edwards

(Tom Standage is the gaming columnist for Intelligent Life and business editor for The Economist.)