Smartphone Platforms Continue to Grab Share of Portable Gaming Market

[Popeye206]

are the games getting better, though?

Yeah... I think they are and I think we'll see a huge evolution here as more and more companies see the opportunity.

Personally, I think companies like Nitendo should embrace this change as an opportunity and start porting popular titles to the smart phone platforms. Again, maybe not right now, but they should see that as a path they will have to take.

Along with this, baring any major changes in technologies like AppleTV or new products, I think the advanced game systems like Xbox, and Wii still have a market for the serious gamer.

 

[NAG]

It is a bit funny they lumped iOS and Android. That would be like lumping Sony and Nintendo together (regardless of one being bigger than the other). Analysts always find a way to make completely arbitrary groupings (e.g. the iPad is never included in iOS numbers yet is always lumped in with a "tablets" category which doesn't distinguish between OS let alone who makes them).

I would love to have more games with depth for the iOS but the only ones available are ports of really old computer games like Riven. It would be nice if we got some original content designed for touch that had depth (the two seem to be mutually exclusive at the moment).

As far as Nintendo porting, that would be a horrible decision for them. They might as well sell themselves to Sega. Nintendo's situation is worsened by the 3DS kind of missing the point and they don't need to make it even worse by losing their exclusives. (Personally, the 3DS completely lost me. I bought the original DS and DS lite but I see no reason to get a 3DS because they just tacked optional 3D on). Sony's NGP might interest me if they ever get their store/update junk sorted out. They seem to have ADHD.

 

[tigress666]

The iPad is a direct competitor to consoles.

I plug it into my TV, grab my iPhone, and play games till I die

What?

You're kidding me.

I'm sorry, I can see making the compromise of having only a touch screen for the iphone as it is more portable than the handheld games so you get advantages too with the iphone (you already are carrying it cause it's your phone as well, it's smaller and therefore more portable, the games are already loaded so no trying to either carry all the cartridges or pick what games you bring. Makes up for the lack of physical buttons).

But no way would I pick an iPad over a console for at home play.

1. The compromise of not as good controller for what advantage does the ipod have over a console? I'm not worried about portability with a console so that doesn't make up for it. So what advantage does an ipad have over a console that would get people to pick it for playing games over the console? The only advantage I could see is if you already owned the ipad. Even then I think I'd rather just buy the console extra. For me if I had to choose between the two, I'd pick the console. I already have a laptop that if I had to carry something ipad around I'd rather have the laptop, I have my iphone for being with me everywhere, and a console will have better games and a better gaming experience (real controllers anyone? Games made for it are specifically aimed at people who bought the thing to play games). And even if I had an ipad, I'd still want either the Sony Playstation or the Microsoft Xbox for actual playing of more serious type games.

2. The compromise of the games just aren't as good. Sorry, but no game on the iphone/ipad compares to the stuff they make on consoles. You're still getting the compromise of making the game more for a handheld market so it's not as complex/in depth. I'd bet the games on the new Sony handheld coming out are much closer to console quality (cause that is what htey seem to be specifically aiming the device at). Plus it has buttons!!!! I'd pick that over an ipad for trying to replace my console.

Sorry, but until they make dedicated controllers for game playing for the ipad (and not touch based only ones, gotta have buttons too and a joystick) and attract more serious type games comparable to what you see on the consoles, I don't see the ipad being a big rival to consoles.

 

[sinsin07]

Nintendo is not going anywhere just yet:

Nintendo 3DS clocks up 400,000 US sales in opening week....

 

[tigress666]

As far as Nintendo porting, that would be a horrible decision for them. They might as well sell themselves to Sega. Nintendo's situation is worsened by the 3DS kind of missing the point and they don't need to make it even worse by losing their exclusives. (Personally, the 3DS completely lost me. I bought the original DS and DS lite but I see no reason to get a 3DS because they just tacked optional 3D on). Sony's NGP might interest me if they ever get their store/update junk sorted out. They seem to have ADHD.

I have to agree here.

Until they find games that the 3D is actually part of game play (it is essential to the actual game and not just add on prettyness), it's just a nice extra but it's a gimmick and not enough to actually sell it over other devices. ANd I really don't see how 3d, at least how it is implemented in the Nintendo, can really be implemented to be part of game play and not just something to pretty up the screen. Sure, it adds to the experience, but it's not essential to the experience. You could play a similar game on another game player easily enough, just not as "pretty".

Any console/hand held in the end, if it is going to sell itself for playing games, has to get the games that make people want it to play them.

 

[Shasterball]

This means little to nothing without absolute numbers.

 

[sinsin07]

The iPad is a direct competitor to consoles.

I plug it into my TV, grab my iPhone, and play games till I die

Gee, will I be able to pickup a copy of SOCOM when it comes out next Tuesday for the iPad? Or Rockstars new game in May? This is just personal preference, but that's the stuff I want to play on my TV.

 

[ten-oak-druid]

Gee, will I be able to pickup a copy of SOCOM when it comes out next Tuesday for the iPad? Or Rockstars new game in May? This is just personal preference, but that's the stuff I want to play on my TV.

When Apple buys nintendo in 5 years.

 

[Consultant]

LOL at iOS and Android.

By recent measures iOS has most of the mobile app revenue, even Nokia and RIM earns more revenue than Android.

 

[furi0usbee]

Let's not go too far. The iPad/iPhone/iOS will NEVER replace the home console, at least as we know it now. The iPhone/iPad are really made for playing simple and fun games. Anyone who wants to play serious games, such as Call of Duty or "real" console games, will always play them on a console. COD might be fun for a few minutes on an iPad, but it doesn't come close to the immersion you get from a console. PvZ is a perfect example of the type of games the iPad does well. But even the iPad version isn't as good as the Mac version. It's missing MANY things the Mac version has. But I've purchased all versions. Maybe that's the way to make money. Have us buy the game on EVERY platform.

 

[inlovewithi]

What?

You're kidding me.

I'm sorry, I can see making the compromise of having only a touch screen for the iphone as it is more portable than the handheld games so you get advantages too with the iphone (you already are carrying it cause it's your phone as well, it's smaller and therefore more portable, the games are already loaded so no trying to either carry all the cartridges or pick what games you bring. Makes up for the lack of physical buttons).

But no way would I pick an iPad over a console for at home play.

1. The compromise of not as good controller for what advantage does the ipod have over a console? I'm not worried about portability with a console so that doesn't make up for it. So what advantage does an ipad have over a console that would get people to pick it for playing games over the console? The only advantage I could see is if you already owned the ipad. Even then I think I'd rather just buy the console extra. For me if I had to choose between the two, I'd pick the console. I already have a laptop that if I had to carry something ipad around I'd rather have the laptop, I have my iphone for being with me everywhere, and a console will have better games and a better gaming experience (real controllers anyone? Games made for it are specifically aimed at people who bought the thing to play games). And even if I had an ipad, I'd still want either the Sony Playstation or the Microsoft Xbox for actual playing of more serious type games.

2. The compromise of the games just aren't as good. Sorry, but no game on the iphone/ipad compares to the stuff they make on consoles. You're still getting the compromise of making the game more for a handheld market so it's not as complex/in depth. I'd bet the games on the new Sony handheld coming out are much closer to console quality (cause that is what htey seem to be specifically aiming the device at). Plus it has buttons!!!! I'd pick that over an ipad for trying to replace my console.

Sorry, but until they make dedicated controllers for game playing for the ipad (and not touch based only ones, gotta have buttons too and a joystick) and attract more serious type games comparable to what you see on the consoles, I don't see the ipad being a big rival to consoles.

The advantage it that it's the closes thing to an Apple console out there. It might not have the same games as the X Box and PS3, but it's like an Apple console. How cool is that. It's like the spending the whole day playing an Apple console. The thought should get your bacon sizzling.

 

[UCPonch]

I keep seeing percentages but never the raw numbers. iOS and Android may be increasing their market share but is the market just increasing as far as the number of users? I would guess that iOS and Android aren't leeching customers from traditional handhelds so much as expanding the user base overall and their market share is increasing because that increased user base is only coming from those devices and not from the traditional handhelds (ie DS, PSP, etc.)

 

[tigress666]

The advantage it that it's the closes thing to an Apple console out there. It might not have the same games as the X Box and PS3, but it's like an Apple console. How cool is that. It's like the spending the whole day playing an Apple console. The thought should get your bacon sizzling.

Are you being facetious?

Honestly, just the fact that Apple made it does not make it any better of an experience. Yes, I do prefer Macs to PCs. But that's cause how the OS works and even some of the implementation of hardware. It being made by Apple just happens to be made by Apple. And the reason I like a lot of Apple things isn't cause they made it, but because they did a good job making it.

But no, it being an apple product does not let it coast on not being just as good or better as something else. It actually has to be just as good or better.

I keep seeing percentages but never the raw numbers. iOS and Android may be increasing their market share but is the market just increasing as far as the number of users? I would guess that iOS and Android aren't leeching customers from traditional handhelds so much as expanding the user base overall and their market share is increasing because that increased user base is only coming from those devices and not from the traditional handhelds (ie DS, PSP, etc.)

Interesting question. But, I think for your argument to work we'd also have to see if the market for handhelds is increasing. For iOS and android not to be taking some sales from other handhelds and still increase in amount of people playing the market itself would have to get bigger (basically they'd be adding to the market people who weren't in the market before).

Plus I'll add the idea that they are increasing in market*share* means that they are an increasing percentage of the overall market for hand helds. Even if that is because they are bringing in new people to the market, most likely that also means Nintendo and Sony are not and just getting the same customers for iOS and Android to be getting more percentage of the marketshare.

 

[a.gomez]

This means little to nothing without absolute numbers.

exactly

Love how you can just come up with a chart and say anything these days and not have to back it up with numbers (done all the time for both iOS and Android)

"For this year’s report, Flurry once again leverages publicly available market data in the news, released by companies such as the NPD Group (e.g., Gamasutra’s Behind the Numbers series). We combine this data with our own estimates of game category revenues from iOS and Android devices"

so they do not even have actual sales numbers for iOS/Android - I use a report like this at work to justify anything and I think I would get fired on the spot

 

[0098386]

This is so weird. I mean I have an iPod touch 4th gen, DS, PSP and I've got all my handheld consoles stored away. But I just can't get into iPod gaming. Your fingers get in the way most of the time and it just doesn't feel like a fully polished experience for 99% of games on the App store.

Ho hum! Once I'm done in work I'll go back to Dissidia 012 and Pokemon White, bought World of Goo last night but you need fingers the width of pencils to play that game.

 

[inkswamp]

This is so weird. I mean I have an iPod touch 4th gen, DS, PSP and I've got all my handheld consoles stored away. But I just can't get into iPod gaming. Your fingers get in the way most of the time and it just doesn't feel like a fully polished experience for 99% of games on the App store.

That's because touchscreen interfaces are still a new thing and it's going to take time and trial-and-error to figure out how to best use it for gaming. We're already seeing little moments of brilliance here and there. Have you tried Super MonkeyBall or Myst on iPad? They're right at home--better than in their original platforms.

But most game companies aren't looking at that yet. Right now, we're dealing with a lot of game companies wanting to impose virtual buttons or joysticks on the screen, which IMO, is a kludge. But then a game like Angry Birds comes along and it's a huge hit because they work with the hardware instead of trying to tie it down to the old way of doing things. Imagine playing Angry Birds on a console. What a painful experience that would be. And yet on a touchscreen, it's a pure joy.

Give it time. This touchscreen gaming thing has just started, and it will continue getting better as game companies figure out how to work with the hardware instead of fighting it.

 

[mrsir2009]

Cellphone games are great when you need to kill a ton of time, but I rarely use them otherwise. Maybe when I get an iPhone 5 though there'll be some games that'll make me want to play them all the time

 

[NAG]

I have to agree here.

Until they find games that the 3D is actually part of game play (it is essential to the actual game and not just add on prettyness), it's just a nice extra but it's a gimmick and not enough to actually sell it over other devices. ANd I really don't see how 3d, at least how it is implemented in the Nintendo, can really be implemented to be part of game play and not just something to pretty up the screen. Sure, it adds to the experience, but it's not essential to the experience. You could play a similar game on another game player easily enough, just not as "pretty".

Any console/hand held in the end, if it is going to sell itself for playing games, has to get the games that make people want it to play them.

Not to rain on your parade but there will never be a game that requires 3D for the 3DS. It will always be optional because not everyone can use it/see it or at the very least can play it for as long before they are fatigued. Game designers probably won't be too keen to limit their market like that for something that would work just as well as a 2D game.

As far as iOS gaming and the virtual joystick kludge, I agree. It is like how in some very early console games/programs you had a full on mouse cursor that you controlled with the D-pad. How long did it take them to figure out that was a horrible idea? You have to design for the device, and not many developers are doing it (great examples of how not to do it are the various RPGs with maybe the exception of Battleheart but even that is a bit clunky). Personally, I hope someone ports a game like Aquaria or Ocarina of Time because I think touch based gaming is much better at music than console or keyboard & mouse because it can just give you a keyboard or some other simulation.

 

[AndroidfoLife]

There is some really big factor why people will still want there Portable games.

1. They are much more child friendly. A DS no matter how you slice it is better for a Child to play then a Ipod Touch.

2. Dedicated medium for games. Its so that you can barrow a friends game you can buy them physically at a store.

3. the most important a dedicated control system. With hard buttons a joystick is much easier to get more easier types of control in the games. A touch screen is good when you are on the ******* buy when you on long trip you want a game just as long as that plane ride or train ride.

 

[tigress666]

Not to rain on your parade but there will never be a game that requires 3D for the 3DS. It will always be optional because not everyone can use it/see it or at the very least can play it for as long before they are fatigued. Game designers probably won't be too keen to limit their market like that for something that would work just as well as a 2D game.

That was kinda my point... I don't know how well the 3Ds will do and if it is successful it isn't going to be because of the 3D. For the 3D to really have much affect I think on making a game player successful, it would have to be part of the experience, not just an add on to make the game prettier. And I think I mentioned I don't think they can do that with 3D (and not cause not everyone can see it, but because I'm not sure what you would really *need* 3D in order to play a game. Unless it was stuff like look behind boxes but I am pretty sure the 3D implemented in the 3Ds isn't capable of doing stuff like that).

As far as iOS gaming and the virtual joystick kludge, I agree. It is like how in some very early console games/programs you had a full on mouse cursor that you controlled with the D-pad. How long did it take them to figure out that was a horrible idea? You have to design for the device, and not many developers are doing it (great examples of how not to do it are the various RPGs with maybe the exception of Battleheart but even that is a bit clunky). Personally, I hope someone ports a game like Aquaria or Ocarina of Time because I think touch based gaming is much better at music than console or keyboard & mouse because it can just give you a keyboard or some other simulation.

I don't know if I said *that* more than I don't think the ipad will make up for lack of buttons to have some advantage over consoles.

I have played joystick games on the iphone and I still enjoy them. Sure, they would be better on another console, but just my own selfish reasons i don't really want to be stuck with just angry bird type games on my iphone. But, so far, I haven't had to. I've found plenty of good rpgs (though honestly for turn based ones I don't think you need buttons to play them, in some ways touch screen is nicer. Instead of having to scroll through a list to pick who you want to fight or what action you want to take, you just tap it) and racing games. And even enjoy the Prince of Persia and Assassin's creed port (both use virtual sticks). The virtual controls are more clunky than a dpad (or even better, a joystick) but they don't make the game unfun to me . So I personally would vote to still get games that use joysticks as well, even if they have to use a virtual joystick.

Though I suppose if you were to make a game kinda like the for the iphone, you could probably implement some way that you use the iphone's strengths instead as controls.

 

[*LTD*]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8H7)

This is impossible. The iPhone has no physical control buttons. Users must have physical buttons available for legitimate gaming.

 

[tigress666]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8H7)

This is impossible. The iPhone has no physical control buttons. Users must have physical buttons available for legitimate gaming.

This is a really short sighted and black and white viewpoint.

1. Even games that are better with physical controls can be implemented to still be fun on the iphone. Sure, they probably are just going to be ports over from other devices (hey, let's see if we can pick up a few more sales), but they still are fun to play (I've played Assassin's Creed and Prince of Persia on my phone. Both are fun and easy to get over the only having a virtual joystick).

2. Shortsighted because this completely ignores the fact there are many games that you really don't need physical buttons or the gameplay is actually better using something else:

• Games like Monkey Ball or ones where you guide a ball around by tilting.
  
• Racing games. They are much better served by tilting the device (cause it feels more like using a steering wheel) than using even a joystick. SHoot, I alway bought a wheel for my console for racing games on it. The controller actually hampers play on these.
  
• Yes, Angry Bird games and games like that.
  
• Turn action rpgs like Final Fantasy you really don't need physical buttons. You are mostly picking out your actions. Done right, having a touch screen would actually make the experience *better*. Certainly at least not something you need buttons to control.

 

[lilcosco08]

When Apple buys nintendo in 5 years.

HAHAHA

keep dreaming

 

[NAG]

Yadda yadda

About the 3D, yeah we're definitely agreeing here. No real gain, more work. Cost/benefit doesn't pan out.

As far as the second thing, I wasn't referencing you. Whoops. Sorry. Should have quoted them. Anyway, I agree that virtual sticks aren't the devil (unlike cursors controlled by dpads). Still, I think there has to be a better way for some of the interactions and that they're mostly being used as kludges (again, basically agreeing).

 

[diamond.g]

I don't understand how they are able to accurately compare game revenue for iOS to game revenue from Nintendo, when Apple doesn't separate games from other genres. (or do they?)

It would be nice if metacritic scores were posted on games like the tomato score is for movies.