This is changing. It has already changed. You assume touch-based gaming will not evolve.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
iOS and Android Grab 58% of U.S. Portable Gaming Revenue
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
This is changing. It has already changed. You assume touch-based gaming will not evolve.
Yes, best game I played in 2010! Can't wait for the PS3 HD version next year (in the UK
).
16GB isn't a bunch, but it's more than enough for current tech in the iPad. You could make a really nice, full featured game, and keep it at or under 2GB quite easily. You don't need huge high quality prerendered cutscenes or tons and tons of 2048x textures to make a game look good on the iPad.
Holy crap. Someone ported Out of this World to iOS? I couldn't imagine that being anything but a huge ass exercise in frustration. It was already unforgiving with a proper controller. But using touchpad controls? GAWWWW!
Straight up like World of Warcraft? Yeah, you're right. The draw distance and crowds of characters would choke the iPad out quicker than some dumb kid experimenting with autoerotic asphyxiation. You could get that same amount of detail on a smaller scale, though. Like if I were to make a 3D iOS game using UDK or Unity, I'd make it an isometric overhead perspective. It'd be more focused, so you wouldn't have to worry about drawing out detail all the way to the horizon, but you'd still have enough power at your disposal to add in tons of detail to your surroundings.
Eh. Initial load might take a bit. But it's something most people wouldn't worry about, unless it's taking a full minute to boot the game. If you've got a game people want to play, they probably won't mind waiting 15-20 seconds to play it.
Wuh? You've never played Alpha Centauri? Well now you ain't no excuse. Play it. Love it. See you in a month.
Yup. But the tragic thing is not many people are making games like that. I kinda wish they would, because right now it's feels like a huge waste of potential.
DERPA CHIEF said:
It'll evolve, but it'll never be the preferred choice of interface for certain genres. Touch controls are basically a lateral upgrade from the mouse, better suited for portable computers because it's integrated directly into the screen. And much like the mouse, it's designed for pointing, not steering. It'll work great for some things, but not so well for others. In short, it's not a catch all replacement for everything under the sun.
For example. You wouldn't want to play a racing sim with a mouse, would you? I sure as hell wouldn't.
Last edited:
P.S.
I've "grown up" with touch controls as I am a) young & b) have had ios since the very first iPhone and Havn't abandoned it since.
& I'll tell you this. Despite "growing up" with touch controls - its still rubbish for gaming. Great for reading, browsing the web, and other software! Worthless for gaming.
----------
I don't assume. I've watched them not evolve. Since the launch of the app store they have not evolved. Even so-called "high end" iOS games are ultimately disposable. How do I know? I've played them.
Edit:
* One & only one exception - I did enjoy the FFIII remake on my iPad, but turn-based RPGs aren't controller intensive games. Though If I had to play it on my iPhone I'd scream. *
I've "grown up" with touch controls as I am a) young & b) have had ios since the very first iPhone and Havn't abandoned it since.
& I'll tell you this. Despite "growing up" with touch controls - its still rubbish for gaming. Great for reading, browsing the web, and other software! Worthless for gaming.
----------
I don't assume. I've watched them not evolve. Since the launch of the app store they have not evolved. Even so-called "high end" iOS games are ultimately disposable. How do I know? I've played them.
Edit:
* One & only one exception - I did enjoy the FFIII remake on my iPad, but turn-based RPGs aren't controller intensive games. Though If I had to play it on my iPhone I'd scream. *
Last edited:
I've grown up with touchscreen controls. In Feb 2001 I was playing games (mostly emulators) with a Pocket PC. In 2004 I preordered a DS - the first mainstream touchscreen gaming device. In 2007 I worked with a firm that sold touchscreen EPOS systems.
How long should it take to want touchscreen controls over physical controls for games?
According to some we only want touch screen controls, apparently? I prefer my PSP to my iPhone 4, I have quite a collection of iPhone games but just am not interested in them, apart from the tower defence games and Real Racing 2. Infinity Blade was alright. But give me Syphon Filter and my PSP anyday, the VITA has the best of both worlds, it will be a great device that is going to offer a far better experience then an iOS device ever can with limited touch controls.
The only ones on here championing touch controls are the Apple can NEVER do wrong purists.
Last edited:
Yeah I'm not a businessman, but that has nothing to do with anything.
Bottomline is you don't understand gaming. Last few years have seen a market expansion into casual games and then social games. The expansion is enabled by a huge new submarket, middle-aged women, who wouldn't be playing games otherwise. Meanwhile Facebook, the original platform for these games, instituted a fee for microtransactions, so these social game developers have had to go mobile to recover lost profits. Finally, Sony's handheld is at the end of its life cycle and Nintendo's next-gen handheld doesn't have a proper library to justify purchase yet.
So you got pie graphs that imply the market never expanded and an analysis that doesn't bother to mention the finer realities of what happens with cyclical product lines. You guys are coming to the wrong conclusion
Let me break down the iTunes rating system for you
>4 stars = better than the typical crap on the app store (but not necessarily better than the typical crap on other platforms)
3 stars = typical crap on the app store
<3 stars = game is broken and won't run
Yeah I like how touch based gaming is supposed to be the future, yet 99% of developers still put a virtual analog stick and virtual buttons on the screen.
Changes
At the same time people are playing simpler quicker games on mobile phones, Call of Duty is selling a bajillion copies this week. The mobile scene is certainly disruptive, but the closed platforms still do pretty well. Open platforms like iOS, Android, and Windows allow so much more competition. With OnLive (I cannot believe this even works - its amazing) and Steam and others it now seems ridiculous to buy high priced games. But on consoles they maintain the high prices. Games on the PS3 store are absurdly expensive and I don't think they are helping themselves. Maybe they think they are protecting the brand, maybe they are but why are there never any sales whereas I routinely get amazing games off steam.
At one time I had to plan for 1 PSP game every other month and sweat about my decisions. If it sucked I was screwed. Well, if I spend 99 cents on a game for my iPhone and it only lasts 1 day, or even a week - that was amazing entertainment. WAIT- I can also play it on 3 other devices in the home. I cannot even finish the games I buy there are so many great ones so cheap. I probably buy more now because experimentation is so cheap.
That was random and meandering, but we live in a great world.
----------
You make good points. But...the number of people willing to buy a dedicated system vs the people who will already own a smartphone is going to mean going forward dedicated portables will be the minority of game sales. That issue is done. It does not mean that dedicated portables will go away. As you point for many games they remain flat out better. Some people like me who used to buy them no longer will, but lots of people will. Both can survive, but dedicated consoles will probably never be the dominant players again. The price of the games also makes the value proposition very competative for smart phones - but some people will still not find them satisfying. I have played RPGs on iOS that rivel anything I ever played on my PSP. Action games not so much. But, I never played a cool word based games on my PSP either. But my PSP did have Patapon and Lumines, which were both awesome. Why doesn't someone rip off patapon - maybe touch is not good enough for beat games but tap tap should pull it off.
At the same time people are playing simpler quicker games on mobile phones, Call of Duty is selling a bajillion copies this week. The mobile scene is certainly disruptive, but the closed platforms still do pretty well. Open platforms like iOS, Android, and Windows allow so much more competition. With OnLive (I cannot believe this even works - its amazing) and Steam and others it now seems ridiculous to buy high priced games. But on consoles they maintain the high prices. Games on the PS3 store are absurdly expensive and I don't think they are helping themselves. Maybe they think they are protecting the brand, maybe they are but why are there never any sales whereas I routinely get amazing games off steam.
At one time I had to plan for 1 PSP game every other month and sweat about my decisions. If it sucked I was screwed. Well, if I spend 99 cents on a game for my iPhone and it only lasts 1 day, or even a week - that was amazing entertainment. WAIT- I can also play it on 3 other devices in the home. I cannot even finish the games I buy there are so many great ones so cheap. I probably buy more now because experimentation is so cheap.
That was random and meandering, but we live in a great world.
----------
You make good points. But...the number of people willing to buy a dedicated system vs the people who will already own a smartphone is going to mean going forward dedicated portables will be the minority of game sales. That issue is done. It does not mean that dedicated portables will go away. As you point for many games they remain flat out better. Some people like me who used to buy them no longer will, but lots of people will. Both can survive, but dedicated consoles will probably never be the dominant players again. The price of the games also makes the value proposition very competative for smart phones - but some people will still not find them satisfying. I have played RPGs on iOS that rivel anything I ever played on my PSP. Action games not so much. But, I never played a cool word based games on my PSP either. But my PSP did have Patapon and Lumines, which were both awesome. Why doesn't someone rip off patapon - maybe touch is not good enough for beat games but tap tap should pull it off.
Do you always pick on Dead Space because it's the only AAA console/ PC game port that iOS has? I'm guessing so because you have used the same old argument several times before with that particular game. And the iPad version in no way half as playable or anywhere near comparable to the console or PC version, period, end off!
As for Ballamer laughing at the iPhone, so what, I laughed at it too when it first came out because it's specs were an utter joke, FACT, compared to the competition. So what you gonna do?
You REALLY are stupid if your going to claim that the 'newcomers' platforms OWNS the games industry
Why do you persist to flog a dead horse? Why? Your utterly deluded to proclaim COD Modern Warfare 3 or Battlefield 3 pails in comparison to iOS but that is what you are claiming, because iOS OWNS the games industry
I think my only point is I don't think touch controls alone are going to save dedicated handhelds (i'm not talking about stuff like kinect but like buttons).
And that there are plenty of games where touch is better if done right than buttons (or at least buttons you'd get on a console. Try any realistic flight sim on a console.. oh wait, they don't have that because it's just not possible. Those are on computers mainly cause computers have enough keys they can dedicate each to a control. Where as I think if the specs catch up on the ipad or android tablet (cause I do think you'd also need a decent size screen if you were going to try a touch based flight sim), touch based controls would allow them to have enough dedicated controls to do a realistic flight sim (though not sure if they could do as realistic as on the computer).
There is a set of games that I will fully admit buttons and physical controls are far better.
But what I'm arguing is that for those games, for many people who aren't the diehards, touch screen (if done right, Gameloft is very good at this actually) is good enough. When they already have their smartphone and they don't have to pay for another device or carry another one around (an advantage to using a smartphone as a portable device cause after all, being portable is an important part of a portable game machine) I think many will just settle for the touch controls.
If you think about it, all portable devices are already a compromise in decent controls. Cause they have to have an integrated screen into your controller. Give me a Playstation type controller any day over a portable machine if we are just talking for pure playing purposes. So you already are sacrificing controls for portability. And I think the extra portability of a smartphone (being only having one device to carry around), will make up for many people the loss of as good controls.
My last point is that I'm sure there are people who the controls are not good enough. I just don't think they are large enough to uphold dedicated gaming devices on their own (now where I do think dedicated gaming devices can excel is to make sure they have the good games first or even better (for them, not for people like me who just have our iphone), have the good games on their devices only. In the end, people will go where the games are).
----------
The idea is that most of the good games that come to iOS that aren't stuff like Angry birds (For the "casual" gamers) are ports from other game machines. The prices the market will bear on smartphone games is no where near enough to encourage them to make games solely for iOS or Android. Even with iOS that has a reputation of people more willing to pay for stuff (where as Android has the reputation that you can't really make money unless you use the advertising method) people don't tend to buy games that cost much at all.
Which is why you are seeing game makers get creative about pricing ("Free" games where you pay for in game money or worse, experience. Where you end up with packages for 100 dollars!!!).
My point isn't that they should subsidize, it's just that realistically you aren't going to get FInal Fantasy for the iPhone, they'll make it for PSP (or Nintendo I guess) first. And then if they think there's money to be made they'll spend some effort porting it to the smartphones to make extra money.
Therefore, I don't think it is a good thing for people who like to game on their iphone to want Nintendo or Sony to go away from the handheld market (for me especially Sony cause in general I dont' find Nintendo gets many games I could care about).
Anyways, I could be wrong.
In the end I will say I don't know. That's just my feelings looking at how things are going these days (with more games going to freemium models and the games I like best on iPhone being either ports from previous games like most of Squaresoft's offerings or games mimicking games from other systems like Gameloft's).
imo, i think true hand held gaming devices are going to be extinct, yes its good for the hardcore gamer, but how many are there? i used to be a hardcore gamer, back when i went to school. i had to try out every game i liked, every fps, rpg, fighting etc etc. i grew up with the original game boy, pocket game boy, game boy color, and had the psp when it first came out. etc etc, and even had that one hand held (that japanese one i forget)
of course the games on the psp and ds are much better generally, have better graphics, controls, and just has more features. but the iPhone basically cancels it out, u have the same thing, but its a phone, mini touch computer, and an mp3 player, plus an organizer, and a money maker u can use it to develop apps if your a programmer.
if u have an iPhone, it basically defeats the purpose of having a psp or ds, y do u have a hand held? i mean of course u like games, but u have it to kill time, to play games on the go. and by no means does it step up to the real consoles.
so why buy a watered down version of the real game that costs 40 bucks per game, on a device that can basically only play games, where as iPhone has just as addictive games and does much more.
especially with the bad economy, If I'm buying a game, I'm spending it on the real thing either rfor ps3 or 360.
if there wasn't a device like the iPhone i most defenitly would of gotten the psp or ds and I'm sure many many many people fall into that category.
and the thing i know its going to fail, because it doesn't appeal to the average consumer, i hardly see anybody with a psp, and obviously I'm talking bout the young adults and kids. everyone just wants an iPhone. where as when i was a kid, everybody wanted a gameboy. and gameboy appealed to the average consumer thus being a success.
u can argue all you want how the psp or ds is a much better gaming system, but the thing is its getting phased out, its not going to last because nobody wants it but a select group of people.
360 and ps3 is hurting the PC game, although there is specific popular PC games like blizzard games, certain fps like half life etc etc, and other mmo's, strategy and such and of course fps and strategy games are much better and easier on the PC, the fact is nobody can afford a top notch computer, i mean would rather play COD, BF3 on my computer but i can afford a computer like that, and if i do, in 5 years i would have to replace it again, and again. and its expensive. and at the end of that 5 year run, i won't be able to play any of the new games on high settings.
i do really want a high end gaming desktop, so i can play wow, up coming d3, sc2, half life 2 series, and play BF3 with 64 player games, and COD using a mouse and keyboard, but I'm stuck with a ps3 because its just unreasonable.
i mean whose gonna spend 2-3 gs (I'm talking about supin it up to the max) on a custom built computer when u can get the ps3 for 250 (if u go to the right place) with just as good graphics. without having to build it your self or have someone else build it for you.
the thing is, the average desktop from the retail stores should be able to run PC games on at least medium- to high (assuming theres very high) settings.
because thats the thing really killing the PC game industry imo.
of course the games on the psp and ds are much better generally, have better graphics, controls, and just has more features. but the iPhone basically cancels it out, u have the same thing, but its a phone, mini touch computer, and an mp3 player, plus an organizer, and a money maker u can use it to develop apps if your a programmer.
if u have an iPhone, it basically defeats the purpose of having a psp or ds, y do u have a hand held? i mean of course u like games, but u have it to kill time, to play games on the go. and by no means does it step up to the real consoles.
so why buy a watered down version of the real game that costs 40 bucks per game, on a device that can basically only play games, where as iPhone has just as addictive games and does much more.
especially with the bad economy, If I'm buying a game, I'm spending it on the real thing either rfor ps3 or 360.
if there wasn't a device like the iPhone i most defenitly would of gotten the psp or ds and I'm sure many many many people fall into that category.
and the thing i know its going to fail, because it doesn't appeal to the average consumer, i hardly see anybody with a psp, and obviously I'm talking bout the young adults and kids. everyone just wants an iPhone. where as when i was a kid, everybody wanted a gameboy. and gameboy appealed to the average consumer thus being a success.
u can argue all you want how the psp or ds is a much better gaming system, but the thing is its getting phased out, its not going to last because nobody wants it but a select group of people.
360 and ps3 is hurting the PC game, although there is specific popular PC games like blizzard games, certain fps like half life etc etc, and other mmo's, strategy and such and of course fps and strategy games are much better and easier on the PC, the fact is nobody can afford a top notch computer, i mean would rather play COD, BF3 on my computer but i can afford a computer like that, and if i do, in 5 years i would have to replace it again, and again. and its expensive. and at the end of that 5 year run, i won't be able to play any of the new games on high settings.
i do really want a high end gaming desktop, so i can play wow, up coming d3, sc2, half life 2 series, and play BF3 with 64 player games, and COD using a mouse and keyboard, but I'm stuck with a ps3 because its just unreasonable.
i mean whose gonna spend 2-3 gs (I'm talking about supin it up to the max) on a custom built computer when u can get the ps3 for 250 (if u go to the right place) with just as good graphics. without having to build it your self or have someone else build it for you.
the thing is, the average desktop from the retail stores should be able to run PC games on at least medium- to high (assuming theres very high) settings.
because thats the thing really killing the PC game industry imo.
Modern Warfare 3 recently sold 9 million copies on their launch night.
Mario, Zelda, God of War, Metal Gear Solid, Half Life... even new indie games like World of Goo and Limbo sell in their multi-millions. So there's a rough figure for "how many".
Heh, I'm not sure why this mentality exists but you are allowed more than one device.
No, no, no, no, no. (remember you're allowed more than one device to fulfil a single purpose)
Gamers don't game to pass the time. They do it because they're really good games that offer experiences and worlds to explore, to exhilarate and impress. It's not something you just chew up and spit out, moving onto the next thing before its even processed.
I'm also not sure what handheld or console games you've been playing - they're not watered down. New Mario DS was the only place to get a retro 2D Mario game, the consoles got the 3D versions. Mario Kart DS was better than the previous Gamecube version and on par with the Wii version. MGS Peacewalker was so good they're porting it to home consoles. Handhelds are the only place you can get a full Pokemon RPG. Go look up Dissidia and Monster Hunter whilst you're at it.
I've never met anyone (other than myself) who bought an iPhone wanting a portable game console. I don't see people with handhelds in public either, but all my friends and most my family have DS and PSP systems. Don't be quick to forget there are 150 million DS systems and they still sell millions of games.
The 3DS is already outperforming the DS.
PSP sales started dropping once they announced the Vita.
Doesn't really sound like phasing out to me.
Then buy a better computer? COD games are quite well optimised. Because this generation of gaming has survived for a while - multiconsole (and PC) games are built to run on 6 year old hardware. So a good PC from a few years back will still be running modern releases at high settings.
Not at all. As you said earlier - that PC can make you money, the PS3 wont. And it won't be "just as good", it'll be leaps and bounds better- 30fps 720p console game against a 60fps 1440p PC. I don't think you've looked much into PC gaming and hardware. A PS3 and Xbox perform as well as a high end PC from 2007.
Then it's a good thing this worry for you is completely fabricated. Every single PC in my house, from a mid-range PC from 2008 to a the lowest end new iMac... so long as the machine has a dedicated GPU it'll run almost all modern games at very high settings flawlessly.
I do NOT want to be spending the rest of my life playing Angry Birds on my daily commute. There are sure to be more people than just me (Millions) who want a tangible and immersive gaming system that Mobile Platforms at times cannot fully deliver. On the note of PC Gaming. This will never die. There have been naysayers across the ages constantly touting it's death. The PC platform is too accessible to way too many people and demographics (not to mention how easy it is to subtly integrate into many people's current digital lives - no real investment needed) that it will always be there along with your "Dedicated" gaming platforms which will continue to diversify into media consumption hubs. - This goes for Handheld Platform's too. I wouldn't be surprised if a better social experience will be introduced to the 3DS and Vita. Deals with Facebook, Twitter, You Tube could easily be signed (and maybe even slightly subsided) with these companies to bring their services into a really nice package onto the device.
The VITA has a built in Twitter client as standard and I think it will offer some form of Facebook integration. It will also most likely have an app to allow YouTube videos to be played.
Not sure about Nintendo but they really push their own systems social networking anyway.
Nice. But you never know, Nintendo pushing Netflix is a good sign.
Maybe not a Facebook APP, but maybe a social connector. So say you play a game or beat it or achieve an achievement, you set up your networks previously and it updates your network with the achievement. Could be cool.
The 3DS has Street Pass, where they communicate with each other if in range. They haven't really fleshed out this feature yet but the new Mario uses it and I'd bet my bottom pound that the next Pokemon will too.
Vita has GPS/location based networking stuff. The PS3 already has Facebook integration, wouldn't surprise me if the Vita does too.
It's all quite exciting!
"There is no way that a touch screen phone without keyboard is gonna wipe out the traditional numpad / keyboard phones" circa 2006
Sounds familiar?
In my view the problem only lies in the software part. Exclusive titles are a very very strong reason for returning customers... just like many people love the iPhone because of the high quality of content available on the App Store / iTunes etc.
So this is why iOS is not going to kill Nintendo.
If Nintendo ever dies (again), it's their own fault. Don't blame Apple.
But they do urgently need to sort out their next product line-up. The current plan is awful.
Sounds familiar?
In my view the problem only lies in the software part. Exclusive titles are a very very strong reason for returning customers... just like many people love the iPhone because of the high quality of content available on the App Store / iTunes etc.
So this is why iOS is not going to kill Nintendo.
If Nintendo ever dies (again), it's their own fault. Don't blame Apple.
But they do urgently need to sort out their next product line-up. The current plan is awful.
There are serious flaws with this comparison:
- Reaction time isn't critical when typing. It is for serious gaming.
- A smartphone keyboard only needs your thumbs. The controls on a modern gaming handheld take advantage of your index fingers as well.
- On-screen keyboards have autocorrect when you miss a key or hit the wrong one.
- There are still many smartphones on the market with keyboards.
Last edited:
\\
Many? Like what? Other than casual games, which game genres control better with touch controls?
Of course its possible. If there actually was demand for realistic console flight simulators publishers would just bundle a special controller with it.