IMO, an easy game isn't casual.
An "casual" game is more something like the Earthworm Jim remake, when they ADDED arrow to tell you "hey you, yes you the retard! It's here! go left!".
It kills the challenge and the joy of finding yourself the solution (nowadays you don't turn in circle wondering what to do, I remember some game who took me 2 days to understand how to pass some points in a game), that's what I call a casual game.
Some game like Dead Or Alive are pure casual game, because you don't have to get any skill to play it and win, you can play it for 5month and having your ass handled by a friend who'd play it for 4minutes.
Some game like Mortal Kombat, Soul Calibur, Tekken, Street Fighter, etc... have a "easy playing" style, but aren't casual, because you have to play them to earn "skills" which will make the difference between you and a "noob".
The same as the difference between Call Of' and Battlefield, to win in Call of Duty, you just need a good connection and playing a few time in a map.
Or look at the difference between Skyrim and Fallout, Skyrim is way too much "friendly" to the player than Fallout IMO.
Cyberpunk 2077 will need to have a decent difficulty, letting the player scratch his head to find the solution to their problem, no "arrows" or crap like this, no casual stuff, it's way more interesting when the player has to learn for themselves.
DoA I think wasn't casual. I played doa 2 fairly extemsively with friends.
There were great back and forths, and finding new strategies but the tactics I used on day 1 were certainly not the tactics I used on day 180. Honestly, the problem with a lot of games is that their definition of hard means grind
Harder should equal to == more cleverness
not more grind
A lot of the fighting games amounted to memorizing long combos. DoA just boiled down the gameplay to distance,bluffing and timing which I think is much better. In general, the sports fighting games e.g. Fight night are better then their fantasy counterparts for the same reasons.