Maybe we shouldn't try and label things at all. The truth is, labels can be incredibly dishonest and irrelevant. The choice isn't whether something is casual or hardcore, nor should it be whether it's "mass market". The choice should be whether it's fun and appeals to you. We don't feel the need to do that with music and movies. People aren't saying "only the hardcore are going to like The Dark Knight." Yes, they talk about niches (family films, women's comedies, etc.), but Hollywood doesn't seem as ready to separate their films into casual or hardcore. Why label?

The other problem is that all three of these labels (even the new one) is a little condescending. What makes a casual title? Is it that you have to spend on a few minutes a day playing it? Or is it that it is for a broad (read: non-game playing) public? If that's the case then where does Puzzle Quest or Crush fit? Both are deep enough to not be considered casual, neither are particularly hardcore, and only one might be considered mass market. And the same is true with Hardcore. Is there a reason that Grand Theft Auto IV can't be enjoyed by passing gamers? Is there something keeping people away from enjoying Burnout Paradise if they generally only play puzzle games? Neither of these labels work, and I don't think it's a good idea to simply have a third label as a stopgap for when the other two fail.

The truth is, we should stop trying to label things. We have enough to worry about when it comes to actually playing good games. Heck, half the time people don't even give the best games a chance, so maybe we should try and rectify that before we start looking for new labels.