Gamasutra: The Art & Business of Making Gamesspacer
View All     RSS
October 26, 2014
arrowPress Releases
October 26, 2014
PR Newswire
View All
View All     Submit Event

If you enjoy reading this site, you might also want to check out these UBM Tech sites:

Bitter sweet? A brief look at ‘addiction’ to Candy Crush
by Mark Griffiths on 10/29/13 05:07:00 am   Expert Blogs   Featured Blogs

The following blog post, unless otherwise noted, was written by a member of Gamasutra’s community.
The thoughts and opinions expressed are those of the writer and not Gamasutra or its parent company.


On October 17, the ‘addictiveness’ of the game Candy Crush made the national newspapers when the Daily Mail published the story with the headline ‘How women blow £400,000 a day playing Candy Crush, the most addictive online game ever’. The Mail article said:

“Look around any busy train or bus and it seems every other person with a smartphone or tablet is hooked on Candy Crush Saga, the latest online game to have taken the world by storm. With its twinkly lights, hypnotic music and comic sound effects, it has millions of people in its grip – and, like 2010's Angry Birds, which even numbered [British Prime Minister] David Cameron among its fans, it has become an online sensation…An astonishing 700million games of Candy Crush are played every day on mobile devices alone, according to AppData, a leading authority on social media trends. But, unlike so many video games, it appears that instead of teenage boys and men, it's mostly women who are in thrall to Candy Crush. According to the game's creators,, women aged 25-55 are the demographic most loyal to the game…According to ThinkGaming, Candy Crush makes an estimated £400,000 a day for King. That's £146m a year, figures which have prompted the Office of Fair Trading to voice concern that guidelines are needed to stop firms exploiting young users.King claims that 90 per cent of its players are over 21, but maturity doesn't seem to prevent women…from falling under Candy Crush's spell”.

I was interviewed by the journalist that wrote the article [Jill Foster] who wanted to know why it was such an ‘addictive’ game and why so many women played it. I told her that Candy Crush is a gender-neutral games that has a ‘moreish’ quality (a bit like chocolate – although this analogy didn’t end up in the article) and can fit in flexibly around what women do in their day-to-day life. The game takes up all the player’s cognitive ability because anyone playing on it has to totally concentrate on it. By being totally absorbed players can forget about everything else for a few minutes. I speculated that this may be particularly appealing to many women whether they are a stay-at-home mother who has ten minutes to play it in between childcare, or a business executive on her commute. It’s deceptively simple and fun. I also noted that unlike many online games, Candy Crush doesn't involve killing or fighting, and it doesn’t feature strong male characters or highly sexualized female characters. For those of you reading this that have yet to play Candy Crush, the Mail report provided a good description of the game:

“The rules of Candy Crush are indeed simple. Players move a variety of brightly coloured sweets - or candies - around a grid and line up at least three of the same sweet in a row. Every time a row is completed, the line explodes, making way for more sweets to drop in. With more than 400 different stages, each more difficult than the last, and more being added all the time, players never need run out of challenges. As a so-called 'freemium' product, basic access to the game is free, but users must pay for 'premium' services. Players aren't charged to advance through the first 35 levels but after that, it costs 69p for another 20 levels, although it is possible to avoid paying by asking your Facebook friends to send you extra lives. However, the cost can rise as players are encouraged to buy 'boosters' such as virtual 'candy hammers' for around £1”.

In typical tabloid style, the Mail article had interviewed a number of women that were used as examples to demonstrate the existence of Candy Crush ‘addiction’. For instance, Lucy Berkley, a 44-year old company director from Ashford in Kent told of how she came into her office on a Monday morning with severe back pain. All of her work colleagues could clearly see she was in much discomfort. The cause of her back pain was Candy Crush that she had played for ten hours over the weekend hunched over her iPad. She claimed I couldn't help it, it was so addictive. The extraordinary thing was that almost everyone else in the room admitted they too were addicted. Now we're all competing”. Another woman, Steph, a mother-of-one interviewed for the Mail article said:

“I'm thinking about it all the time. I call it "crack candy" because I imagine giving up is like trying to break a crack habit. I hadn’t heard of it until I saw that many friends - all intelligent, creative women - were playing it on Facebook. I've never played any other game on my phone. But I don't like going a day without my ‘fix’. I play it whenever I have a free moment. In the morning I play on my commute and when I look around the train, nearly every other person seems to be doing the same. I'll have a sneaky game or two at lunchtime. When I get home, I’ll leave the ironing or the housework and have half an hour - or more - on the iPad. [At the weekend when] I’ve got up and read the papers, I'll start playing and that’s me sorted for the next three to four hours. In fact, I only usually stop when my iPad runs out of battery. My boyfriend thinks I'm mad. My son Ben, who is at boarding school, can't understand my obsession. I've been known to meet him off a train and rather than give him a hug I've said ‘Just a minute Ben, I’m just getting on to the next level!"

She then went on to say:

“Over the past four months I've probably spent around £150 playing it. But it's worth it…I'm thinking about it all the time. I wake up and the first thing I do is pick up my phone to have a game, then I'll be playing if I get a spare second before work. I play it on my walk from the car to the office. When I come home, I play it while I'm cooking the evening meal or watching TV. [My partner] Martin thinks I'm bonkers. When the lights go out and we're in bed he'll say: ‘I know you’re playing it because I can see the light from your phone’ so I have to play it under the covers. My son asks: "Why are you playing that game again Mum?’ It's as if our roles have been reversed. It's taking over my life. I don't know if I’ll ever be able to stop”.

Although none of the cases covered in the piece appear to be genuinely addicted by the criteria I use to assess addiction, that doesn’t mean the cases are uninteresting psychologically or that games like Candy Crush are totally innocuous. I have noted in a number of my more general writings about games played via social networking sites that ‘freemium’ games are psychological ‘foot-in-the-door techniques that lead a small minority of people to pay for games and/or game accessories that they may never have originally planned to buy before playing the game (akin to ‘impulse buying’ in other commercial environments. I’ve also argued that many of the games played on social network sites share similarities with gambling. As I noted in my interview with the Mail:

'On first look, games like Candy Crush may not seem to have much connection to gambling, but the psychology is very similar. Even when games do not involve money, they introduce players to the principles and excitement of gambling. Small unpredictable rewards lead to highly engaged, repetitive behaviour. In a minority, this may lead to addiction”

Basically, people keep responding in the absence of reinforcement hoping that another reward is just around the corner (a psychological principle rooted in operant conditioning and called the partial reinforcement extinction effect – something that is used to great effect in both slot machines and most video games). Another woman interviewed for the Mail story (Jenni Weaver, a 40-year-old mum of four from Bridlington) is worried that she's addicted to Candy Crush (and based on her interview quotes, she certainly appears to disply some signs of bona fide addictive behaviour) She told the Mail that her Candy Crush addiction was beginning to affect family life:

'I'm playing it for eight hours a day now and it's become a real problem. My daughter told me about it. I was hooked straight away. The longest I've played for is 12 hours with just a few short breaks in between. It's worse than smoking…Housework has gone to pot. I've even been late picking my ten-year-old up from school because I've been stuck on a level. I've burnt countless dinners and let vegetables boil dry because I've been engrossed. I'm trying to limit myself, but I can still spend eight hours a day playing it. It's ridiculous.'

Earlier this year, I was interviewed at length by Mike Rose (for Gamasutra, the online magazine about gaming issues), who wrote a really good set of articles about free-to-play games. In one of Rose’s articles I argued that even in games where no money is changing hands, players are learning the mechanics of gambling and that there are serious questions about whether gambling with virtual money encourages positive attitudes towards gambling. As I have noted in a number of my recent articles, the introduction of in-game virtual goods and accessories (that people pay real money for) was a psychological masterstroke. It becomes more akin to gambling, as social gamers know that they are spending money as they play with little or no financial return. The real difference between pure gambling games and some free-to-play games is the fact that gambling games allow you to win your money back, adding an extra dimension that can potentially drive revenues even further. The lines between social free-to-play games and gambling is beginning to blur, bringing along with them various moral, ethical, legal, and social issues. The psychosocial impact of free-to-play games is only just beginning to be investigated by people in the field of gaming studies. Empirically, we know almost nothing about the psychosocial impact of gambling or gaming via social networking sites, although research suggests the playing of free games among adolescents is one of the risk factors for both the uptake of real gambling and problem gambling.

Dr Mark Griffiths, Professor of Gambling Studies, International Gaming Research Unit, Nottingham Trent University, Nottingham, UK

Further reading

Foster, J. (2013). How women blow £400,000 a day playing Candy Crush, the most addictive online game ever. Daily Mail, October 17. Located at:

Griffiths, M.D. (2010). Online gambling, social responsibility and ‘foot-in-the-door techniques. i-Gaming Business, 62, 100-101.

Griffiths, M.D. (2010). Gaming in social networking sites: A growing concern? World Online Gambling Law Report, 9(5), 12-13.

Griffiths, M.D. (2012). The psychology of social gaming. i-Gaming Business Affiliate, August/September, 26-27.

Griffiths, M.D. (2013). Social gambling via Facebook: Further observations and concerns. Gaming Law Review and Economics, 17, 104-106.

Hall, C. (2013). Just how addictive are mobile games? Yahoo! News, October 18. Located at:

Lagorio-Chaflkin, C. (2013). Candy Crush Saga’s intoxicating secret source., July 25. Located at:

Pressman, A. (2013). Candy Crush: Insanely addictive today, but likely on borrowed time. The Exchange, July 11. Located at:

Rose, M. (2013). Chasing the Whales: Examining the ethics of free-to-play games. Gamasutra, July 9. Located at:


Related Jobs

Digital Extremes
Digital Extremes — London, Ontario, Canada

Character Artist
Digital Extremes
Digital Extremes — London, Ontario, Canada

Sound Designer
Disruptor Beam, Inc.
Disruptor Beam, Inc. — Framingham, Massachusetts, United States

Lead 3D Artist
Red 5 Studios
Red 5 Studios — Orange County, California, United States

Graphics Programmer


Nicholas Lovell
profile image
The call for more research is a good one. I look forward to reading the results.

Alfa Etizado
profile image
I'll say I've binge played a lot when I was young, I don't like to blame games but I'm pretty sure if I had not discovered Final Fantasy VII my grades would have been better. I still go on binges sometimes, though I've learned self control long ago.

Not that this is the most important thing going on here, but I think maybe self control when playing a game is something you learn over time and some players have never had the chance. Once again, I don't think that's the most important thing when it comes to a compulsion like this and I don't mean to blame people or anything. In fact I also don't feel like blaming the game on this one either.

Ramin Shokrizade
profile image
I'm of the opinion that there is a cocktail of hormones released when you play these games, and for those who are having a novel experience the quantity and effects are greater. For women, who have been largely ignored by game developers for years, this is their moment. They have not learned how to control their use yet, just like a teenager falling in love for the first time and being overwhelmed my love related hormones.

Certainly research is warranted. I also have to wonder about how many children are being ensnared here. Children are not being directly surveyed, and in many cases if they use mom's credit card it shows up statistically as mom using the product. I have seen some recent data showing that parent's surveyed in the USA indicated that 22% of their children made transactions in these games without parental permission. Certainly the real number is much higher, this is just the activity that parents are aware of. None of this gets tracked as such by companies such as

Nils Pihl
profile image
"I'm of the opinion that there is a cocktail of hormones released when you play these games, and for those who are having a novel experience the quantity and effects are greater. For women, who have been largely ignored by game developers for years, this is their moment. They have not learned how to control their use yet, just like a teenager falling in love for the first time and being overwhelmed my love related hormones."

If this were the case, we should be able to make a couple of predictions from the comfort of our armchair, from the two assumptions that you offer:

1. People with less prior game experience are more likely to exhibit addiction (more hours spent, more money spent, characterized by a lack of control)
2. Experienced game players less likely to exhibit addiction.

We should then be able to predict that a majority of whales, across the game industry, will have less experience playing games than the general player population of players in the game they are addicted to. Is this the case? Across the industry, data suggests no, and anecdotal cases like Candy Crush doesn't change that. Data suggest that whales on MOBILE actually spend most of their time playing games on CONSOLES (Read: They have plenty of game experience).

And Ramin, you still didn't share this data about 22% of children... Are you sure you're not reading the data wrong, and that what the data is suggesting is that 22% of the children THAT MADE TRANSACTIONS did so without permission? IF what you are saying is true, then over 1/5 of children with mobile devices have, at some point, monetized. I find that notion ludicrous. Do you really think that if you walked into, say, a middle school, and polled every child there with an iPhone, that you'd find that 1/5 of children had spent money on games? WITHOUT permission? Show the data.

Rob Solomon
profile image
Presumably the 22% figure is out of all children who made mobile transactions, but that is still a lot.

Ann Ballien
profile image
"... there is a cocktail of hormones released when you play these games, and for those who are having a novel experience the quantity and effects are greater. For women, who have been largely ignored by game developers for years, this is their moment. They have not learned how to control their use yet..."

Yes, and we all know about those crazy women and their hormones. But maybe they're just all on their periods, amirite?

Katy Smith
profile image
Did you seriously just compare adult women with swooning teenagers?... -_-

Ian Griffiths
profile image
@Katy - It's incredulous!

Ann Ballien
profile image
Alternatively: I find it intriguing how tales of addiction to MMOs, which have a somewhat predominantly male player base, lead to an examination of the mechanics of the games themselves and protests that such cases are atypical, whereas tales of addiction to a game with a predominantly female player base lead someone to spout 19th-century pseudoscience about inherent defects in the infantile female brain, completely unable to regulate itself in the face of its raging hormones, with other posters just harrumph-harrumphing in agreement as if the argument put before them weren't complete lunacy.

Ian Griffiths
profile image
"For women, who have been largely ignored by game developers for years, this is their moment. They have not learned how to control their use yet..."

How outrageously sexist! On what authority can you claim that an entire gender is somehow unable to control the 'cocktail of hormones' while playing a game!? Throughout all of your articles you seem to have a very condescending attitude towards people in general by suggesting that they have little to no agency over their lives and spending behaviour.

Also, you frequently come back to this 'think of the children!' argument. While I'm sure a minority of children make purchases without direct parental permission, it's still fundamentally that parent's responsibility to guard and control their account pass-code which is enabled by default on almost every device.

Brian Peterson
profile image
Ramin is referring to marketing, not biology, in reference to women. His phrasing and the specific comparison he used could definitely be misinterpreted if you read it too quickly, but this is what I believe he's trying to say (correct me if I'm wrong, Ramin):

Anyone, regardless of gender, is more likely to be susceptible to the hormones released by addictive or gambling elements if they are playing games for the first time.

The relatively recent swing in demographic trends is resulting in more women playing games for the first time than men.

Therefore, women are statistically more likely to be new players and more likely to be susceptible to these elements in games. The fact that F2P mobile and casual game developers go out of their way to target women in their marketing supports this claim very strongly. A person of any gender who has experience playing games would be less susceptible to these strategies.

Katy Smith
profile image
But that still doesn't match up with facts. In this report:

the people who are spending the most money (whales) are 30 year old men. In fact, the people who are spending the most money are "traditional gamers" who have the most experience playing games already.

One thing Mark touches on in his article is that CCS is a game that requires focus, but very short play sessions. This fits in better with more people's lifestyles, which is why there is a more diverse audience.

Ann Ballien
profile image
No, he's pretty laser-focused on biology. As mentioned above, the reaction to tales of addiction to MMOs - which, albeit to a lesser extent, also mined a new player base and which at the extreme end spawned marathon sessions much longer than the eight- or nine-hour sessions mentioned in the Daily Mail article - focused on the mechanisms of the games themselves: there had to be something unique about the games to inspire such fanaticism. Shokrizade, meanwhile, when faced with a game with a predominantly female install base which evinces milder signs of addiction than the MMO group, jumps right to the conclusion that the addiction has to be due to the _players_, not the game; because it's women predominantly under the microscope, we can't apply the operant-conditioning analyses that characterized discussion of the actually-more-severe MMO addictions, because, y'know, womenfolk aren't "normal" people - their thought processes don't follow any logical, psychologically-predictable patterns, y'know? He then falls back on the "women can't control their hormones and are at the mercy of their emotions" schtick that's been around since before hysteria diagnoses in the 19th century. It's an extraordinarily old tactic, used to warn of the dangers of women participating in all sorts of supposed vices in the public sphere.

The guy's reasoning, or lack thereof, is toxic. Don't go down with his ship.

Mihai Cozma
profile image
I never understood how one can play what is basically not a game but more a "virtual store" and this article really gave me some insights about it. The idea that there are hidden "gambling" mechanics seems indeed well founded.

Samuel Green
profile image
This is just a ludicrous comment. Candy Crush is a brilliantly designed puzzle game. There's nothing 'not a game' about it.

Mihai Cozma
profile image
I guess everybody is entitled to their own opinion about what it is or it is not a game, just like everybody is entitled to share their opinions publicly.

I don't consider any F2P titles that let you play through them faster by spending money to be games, again, just my personal opinion.

If a game is fun, I would like to play it for longer times, not spend real money to finish it quicker so I can then spend more money to unlock new stuff and so on, only to get meaningless achievements.

I consider a game to be something that greatly rewards its player skill and not its purse.

Katy Smith
profile image
Thanks for the article, Mark! Towards the end of the article you talk about virtual gambling increasing positive feelings towards real gambling. I was wondering what your opinion was on those game-and-watch style digital gambling games. I see so many seniors with those and I'm curious to know if there have been any studies showing a real-world impact of elderly populations playing those games and then having issues with real money gambling.