As it is with most segments of society, the gaming community is not want for labels. We have the Casual crowd, the Hardcore crowd, Fanboys, Noobs, and probably few I haven't even heard of yet. Despite all of these classifications however, most of us have one thing in common: we like to game. We spend some or most of our free time defending the universe, ambling through poorly lit dungeons, and generally saving the day. And we are far from alone in our endeavors.

Young or old, rich or poor, gamers are everywhere. One of the main reasons for the sudden strength of the gaming community is all of the new members that have been ushered in under the development of casual games. And, regardless of whether our tastes lie in casual or hardcore titles, gaming is something that is here to stay.

When video game sales start to rival and even dethrone numbers set at the box office, I think it's safe to assume that gaming has become a fixture in our culture. Though there are still a few issues and misconceptions leveled at and surrounding gamers, as time marches on we will begin to see a much broader acceptance from those that once criticized us. After all, you'd have an easier time coaxing the ice caps to stop melting than trying to rid the world of games and gamers.

So, the real question is not will they be around 20 years from now, but what will they look like. How will they play? Will casual games take over completely, or will the hardcore reign supreme?

For the sake of this blog, let's start with a pair of definitions. Please note, these definitions are not universal, as many games have bits of both definitions in them, and these are in regards to the games themselves, not the people playing them.

Hardcore: A hardcore title is one which requires a great deal of involvement from the player. In order to finish it or make significant progress, a great deal of personal time and effort must be invested. This may include mastering difficult controls, putting up with inconsiderate save-systems, or spending massive amounts of time in order to unlock multiple endings.

Casual: More along the lines of pick up and play; the player is not required to invest a lot of time in order to gain a sense of accomplishment. Generally speaking, the controls are simple to master, the player can save at will, and the player does not have to be a veteran gamer in order to progress through the game. Most of them can be played in bite sized chunks, and can be put down as easily as they are picked up.

Now, moving onto the question of gaming's future itself, let's look at the current situation.

It's no secret that when the Nintendo Wii was born, it took the world by surprise. No one save for the geniuses at Nintendo had the foresight to understand the true potential of the casual market. A swarm of untapped gamers lay waiting, and Nintendo knew just how to drum them out of hiding. While MS and Sony were at each others throats over market supremacy, convinced that hardcore gamers were the future, the execs over at Nintendo just kept doing what they've been doing for years: introducing people to fun games at reasonable prices. The sales of the Wii, as a result, have been astronomical. And the success has more than a few naysayers rethinking their approach to casual games.

But that's not to say that the hardcore crowd doesn't have a voice as well. When you sell millions of copies of Halo, Mass Effect, etc, it is clear that there is enough of a demand for more involved games that developers who spend time wowing the hardcore crowd with quality products are sure to be rewarded.

Now, given the undeniable success of both types of game, it would be foolishness to simply write one form off as the loser of the two, and then focus completely on one or the other. This is not a battle between types of game, and whichever front a company chooses to embrace, so long as the games are fun and interesting, stands to make a good deal of money. However, in light of certain changes in the community, mainly involving the shifting attitudes of developers towards casual games, I believe that the future of gaming will be found in a single word:

Marriage.

I believe that in the future, we will begin to see a blending of the hardcore with the casual. And here's why. The reason that casual games have such a mass appeal to people in this day and age has to do with time. Though there are a slew of other reasons, one of the main selling points to the casual crowd is the fact that they can pick up a game, play for seven or eight minutes, and then put the game back down and head back to work. Spare time is often hard to come by for many, and so any time entertainment can be offered in meaningful but brief chunks it will be utilized.

This idea, along with easy to learn controls and so on, will begin to work its way into more and more titles that would have been exclusively hardcore had it not been for the success of the Wii. And this transition will be largely one sided. Though a few casual games might stray into hardcore territory, it will be the developers of hardcore games that do most of the "borrowing."

Though strictly hardcore and strictly casual games will still pop up on their own, I believe that many titles will begin to carry elements of both. And there are already a few examples out there.

Bioshock: Though met with a largely negative reaction by the gaming community, Vita Chambers were a whisper of casual influence on hardcore gaming.

Guitar Hero: Easy and Medium difficulties scream casual, while Hard and Expert pander to the hardcore. This is the most successful blend thus far.

Resident Evil 4: Now, this is pure speculation on my part (as I've played the PS2 version but not the Wii), but I would imagine that this title is much easier to play on the Wii mote. For those easily frustrated by difficult controls, the motion sensitive aiming must have been a breath of fresh air.

Crackdown: GTA light. A game that is much less involved and much less serious than its predecessors, you can see the casual influence working its way into this title.

Vita Chambers and GTA with out the Theft were both met with mixed reactions from the community. It seems that certain casual aspects injected into games that expect to be strictly hardcore are difficult to digest. We fear change. But Resident Evil for the Wii and the GH series were both met with praise by gamers everywhere. I think what it boils down to is the player's recognition of casual influence on hardcore games. We grow used to a certain level of difficulty or involvement within a certain genre, and when that level doesn't meet our expectations were not sure what to think of it. That's not to bash gamers, that's just say we'll need to learn to adapt.

So, is the future of gaming to be found in the hardcore or the casual? All I can say is that I think I hear wedding bells.

In keeping with the tradition of crafting quality, state-of-the-art games out of movies and T.V. shows, several developers have just announced a slew of titles based upon that very medium. Here's a look at just a few of the three hundred plus games that EA, Ubisoft, and Adventure International have planned for this year.

Copland:According to sources, you can forget the high-drama of accidental shootings and investigations into the matter. You can forget about shooting anything, as a matter of fact, as EA is convinced that the real game is to be found in the office of Freddy Heflin. Over the course of a sixteen hour day (executed via what EA is calling "to-the-second real time" ), you'll sit behind your desk, mumble something incomprehensible to your lamp from time to time, and periodically scratch your ass.

"We at EA are completely devoted to giving gamers the best experience they can have. We want them to really get their money's worth. And in order to do this, we really needed to explore the character of Freddy. In order to enhance the realism, there is no way to save the game.. You have to sit with Freddy through his sixteen hour day, all of it. One of the most unique features in this title is found in the fact that we discovered a way to keep gamers from turning off their consoles once the game has started. We're calling it "Paralysis Through Fun," and its a feature you can expect to see more of in future titles."

Alfred's Big Day: Apparently, Ubisoft has found a way to breathe new life into the Batman franchise in a way that doesn't involve Legos or Uma Thurman. Choosing to forgo the usual and obvious focus on the caped crusader, developers have decided that it was Alfred's time to shine.

The gameplay, though simple, sounds like a breath of fresh air for this tired series. You'll dust lamps, dust shelves, dust crystal, and occasionally fiddle with a painting until it looks straight. Once every so often, you'll get into a conversation with Alicia Silverstone, which will initiate a mini-game. The whole point of this side quest is to avoid throttling her with a power chord as she prattles on about how she was pretty good in Clueless.

Offering us a bit of a spoiler, a rep from Ubisoft says that the game will come to a head when Alfred discovers Bruce Wayne's Spiderman underoos, and Spidey's web seems to have snared itself a couple of dark brown skidmarks.

"We kinda figured that Alfred isn't real happy with his job, and so we decided that during the entire game, he will have an inner-monologue that is quite nasty. We're expecting an 'M' rating."

Trading Spaces: Though simple in application, this offering by Adventure International shows a great deal of promise. Featuring completely randomized locations, and over 17,000 different items that can be used to decorate, Trading Spaces has much to offer in terms of re-playability.

But rather than have the player go through the game as the designer, A.I. has decided that the best way to immerse the gamer in the experience is to have them play as the couple doing the actual work. The designer will assign tasks to the player, and they will go about sanding tables and watching paint dry for hours on end.

"In terms of dialogue, we wanted to keep it simple. Word for word, this is all the spoken dialogue that can be found in-game:

DESIGNER: Now, put these here.

GUEST: I'm pretty sure they won't like that.

DESIGNER: Then we must teach them to like it, darling. We must teach them to like it, and thereby teach them to live."

Finally. Man, that took forever.