So are casual gamers responsible for bad games? There's a bit of a case to answer on the question of stifling innovation and so on, but bad games? Let's be serious. There have always been bad games. Yes, always. Much is said about retro gaming, but a quick delve through the archives shows games that have not only aged badly, but were truly awful in their day. Many of them sold in bucket loads. However, all we had to protect us in those days was an ability to be canny when reading the flannel panel on the back of the box.

These days we have an army of devoted reviewers working for outstanding publications, such as the one you're now reading. Many people still don't read reviews before buying games and regret it. Rise of the Robots anyone? (See FG40's Hall of Shame if you don't know what I mean.) I'm afraid not reading or believing reviews is what's responsible for bad games, not casual gaming, and we've all been responsible for that from time to time.

I think hardcore gamers have to take a good look in the mirror and wonder if they're not in danger of becoming the equivalent of a grumbling old man in the pub who's complained about the décor for years, only to be rebuffed by the landlord due to lack of funds. One day he finds the pub redecorated but full of young, loud people. He complains to the landlord, only to find that the only way he can have a shiny, clean pub is to put up with the objectionable newbies. So, do we stop going to the pub, insist it be converted to the dive it once was, sit there grumbling and being laughed at, or do we carry on as we were and accept progress?

The choice, as always, is yours.