A person who logs more hours of Animal crossing compared to Starcraft is a hardcore Animal Crossing player, not casual. Casuals don't spend that time in a game. As I said, a casual is a casual based on outlook and consumer habits. Perception is the way we see things. Nintendo has not lost its toy image and childish image. When we're talking characters I learned in my editorial illustration and specialty illustration classes in school where to do childish illustrations or take the realism approach. For instance for one assignment we were told to remake a school book page, keep the words but change the illustrations in two ways. One for elementary school kids and the other for the highschool kids. On the elementary school side we drew cartoon images, but on the highschool side since things were getting more scientific and needed realism we drew/ painted realistically. This is because they know their audience. The only reason videogames were percieved to be toys is because Nintendo never changed their image. Sony and Microsoft did that for them and even though people don't percieve videogames as toys ask a friend whether they think Nintendo's could be mistakened as one today as well.

Skills are one determining factor in fleshing out the casual from the core. But core settings in a game can turn off a casual. Cores and casuals have different approaches to gaming where its more simplistic and a novelty. Anyone who does anything hardcore is isn't doing it simply for kicks. They are doing it for the fun as well as the challenge and devote time into it. Complex controls can turn off casuals as well.

I think he means maintsream

Ask your average Counter-Strike 1.6 player if they think Halo is casual.

I do look at things from a marketing perspective, because I've been training in the industry perspective as well as gaming from a gamers perspective which is far simpler.

Of course an uneducated person would say a videogame system is a toy. I dare them to say their computer was a toy as well...then they would be looking stupid and contradictory.

Arcades only required 6 buttons and a joystick (for use, omitting start and select) at most The SNES and Genesis had a similar amount of buttons. Todays controller has 13+ to 16 buttons. A casuals learning curve is lower than that in the beginning and yes it would still take time for them to learn how to use an arcade stick. Sony killed off arcade gaming because you could play the same arcade games with similar graphics at home. No one wanted to go out anymore. Sega had their hand in arcade sales as well as consoles and wanted to bring the arcade experience to the house, whilst Nintendo focused on simpler characteristics. Sony basically did Segas job for them without alienating third party companies, which was half the reason Sega died. They also had more money and actually created their own tech in most cases. Sega didn't value them (third parties) and that is exactly what is hurting Nintendo today.

My art school isnt keeping my thought process in check, it's not a fine art school. It's teaching me how to filter my thought process to meet the requirements of my clientel so I can get paid. If I do fine art, I do it as commission work or for myself. It doesn't stifle you...but rather teaches you how to be more professional. When you look at concept art for a videogame or movie do you see a lack of creativity?

The rules are what makes it a game though, not the number of people playing.

According to you, which of these would be games and which would be toys?

Playing golf trying to beat my personal best. Game. You're playing against somebody else. It might be your pb or somelse's, it doesn't matter.

Playing golf trying to beat another person's best. Game. See above.

Playing StarCraft trying to beat the AI. Toy. Clever toy but it's a toy.

Playing StarCraft trying to beat a human opponent. Game.

Two children playing with dolls. Could be a game they've invented with their toys or it could be a story they're telling.

Yes, plenty of times you do see a lack of creativity. And sometimes the concept art and the art in the actual game look nothing alike.

I'm not going to comment on anything else you wrote here, because it is either wrong or ignored the points I was trying to make.

Whats wrong to you is subjective, remember that. If you feel that concept art has lost its creativity, then blame the wrtiers because that is what concept art ist based off of. Take that up with them.