S
Saiyan Lusitano
Guest
Really hope Nintendo's not going forward with the right analogue stick on the top again. It's bad enough they did it on the Wii U GamePad and WUPC but then again, it might be a Japanese-thing as to what they find more comfortable for their hands.
Even in terms of touch-only controls, I think TWEWY proves it's at least possible to make a popular hardcore game with nothing but touch.
Whoa hold your panties there...
1) "Just because my coworker(s)..." they are not alone... I've been playing for free for the last 3 years. I actually started to prove them a point. Well the point that was proven to me is that people get addicted... a dollar here a dollar there. Next thing you know you got a company like SuperCell pulling in $2 billion on 3 products and still keeps on going.
2) "King not doing so hot..." you're right, they dropped 10% 2015 down to only $2 billion dollars in sales. Probably Activision/Blizzard acquisition got people wondering (which they paid almost $6billion for). But yeah crappy $2billion in gross revenues for a software gaming company with a few products. The 2nd of the two biggest free-to-play company u are referring to is SuperCell.
http://www.pocketgamer.biz/list/62773/top-50-mobile-game-developers-of-2016/entry/1/
You have no idea of what you are talking about but thanks for your opinion anyway.
Let's look at the top selling games of every console...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_video_games
A majority of the top selling games sell about 5 million copies. Let's just say all the material (poster, discs, disc case is free) and games sold at $50 a pop. That's about $250 million. Multiply that x 3. That's about $750 mill... nowhere near $2 billion dollars posted by top mobile game companies. Yeah.... and guess what? They don't even have to spend money on making the physical product.
3)"Manufacturers fighting tooth and nail against each other..." that is one of the points about my previous post. Nintendo comes out with earth shattering innovation that is impressive for about an hour of play... then everyone is back to let's play some fun games. As cool as the tech is... it is no more than a gimmick that maybe barely keeps them in the picture (because tech gets copied).
4) "Game developers only make a profit on free-to-play games...games costing more than $5 are dead" yeah if that is the case console gaming would be completely dead...
5) "Complete garbage after 2 years".... hmm... isn't that why all gaming companies continue to develop day in and day out? You expect say a game is designed to be played over and over for 5 years? 10 years? forever? As nostalgic as Hogan's Alley or Duck Hunt is... you plan on playing it for hours on end 20 years later? How about something recent like GTA...
Android/mobile platform gaming has it's place and it's target. Most of the games are lightweight and made for a quick-whip-out-and-play... Whether ur at the mall bored as ef, sitting in the doctors office, on the train... that's the niche. That's where they make their money and IT MAKES money!
6) "It will have obsolete hardware in one year...." let the hardware manufacturers worry about that. Again... top 2 grossing games on android don't require much hardware. Can be played on multiple platforms. The platform manufacturers drive the hardware upgrades themselves anyway... (A Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge isn't designed to play Candy Crush... nor is the latest Apple Ipad Pro... etc etc....)
7) "Online gaming would be a hacking nightmare in six months...." but yet they still exist hack free whether mobile platform or console. Because server side hacking works.... mmmhmmm... Even after the console get's hacked, server side game data are still untouched... that's why just about every single mod out there requires you to be offline. Do you even think about what you write?
8) "Nintendo will lose control of the platform in one month...." as if they haven't lost control of their platform for any of their systems in record time over the past 7 generations. :rolleyes All of their systems to date have been emulated x86.. the same cannot be said for M$/Sony. What prevails for any platform is server side data end of story.
9) "How's OUYA doing? Attaching a name brand to it will not solve the problem..." OUYA is about as name brand as Wintendo... Again it fails because it's model is based on hardware revenues. A $20 chinese android media box with a $20 usb controller is capable of doing the same thing OUYA is doing. Has OUYA developed any exclusive games? Apple makes iphones/ipads.... the bulk of their revenue is iTunes. Are you starting to see the picture yet? If not go back to point 1 up there and start reading again.
Nowhere in my post did I suggest Nintendo abandon hardware or go full android. What I DID suggest is they stay their course making mobile/portable and consoles separate but yet create a viable marketplace that is multi-platform. Many of your android/ios games share the same server data across different platforms. If they want to drive hardware sales they can make exclusive software or ingame digital content. Making stuff like the WiiFit are a hit or miss, 15 mins of revenue fame.
Last edited by kabloomz,
those people are just idiots getting suckered into micro$ they don't realize you can download the cracked APK with everything unlocked
Try downloading a cracked apk of the latest top selling android games and see how far you get.
S
Saiyan Lusitano
Guest
Why does this matter so much to you? Chill out, dude. After all, this is a report by EuroGamer not a confirmation by Nintendo.
I'm chill... and I stand behind things I post especially when people are calling me out who have no valid points. Look at my original post. I'm not calling out EuroGamer nor the report.
True words, honest facts!
At the end of the day people just want simplicity, and it logically makes sense to combine the 2 together, we have the hardware power and software knowledge. The funny thing is that this doesn't just apply to smartphones/handhelds, it also applies to gaming consoles and PCs. When you step back and look at the facts, such as how games are developed and tested on PCs, it really hits you. I mean why buy a gaming console which would usually have a dumbed down version of the game (whether it's graphics or computing power) when you can play the game the way it was originally developed, on a PC? I used to play everything on console, then one day my friend showed a comparison picture of the graphical difference for Skyrim PS3vsPC, and i was dumbfounded and if that wasn't enough he later showed me the MODS for the game, my jaw dropped. I ended up building my PC the next month, it wasn't hard, nor was it expensive, it was a mediocre build at best but still looked better than the PS3. I later saved up for a good graphics card and by the time the PS4 was out, i was like on PS6 in terms of raw power. Take a look at the Xbox S (Scorpio project), they mentioned it having 6 teraflops of processing power, my 4 year old graphics card has 5, so put that in perspective.
When you sit and really think about it, the big companies like Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo make their profit from selling consumers old hardware so you can play their "exclusives" on them. But if we as consumers stopped feeding them our money, those 3 companies would step out of the hardware scene real quick and switch over to the software aspect of the gaming industry. I also cannot believe that they're making people pay monthly/trimonthly JUST TO PLAY MULTIPLAYER ONLINE...and people are falling for it, ll. Not to mention that "cross-platform" wouldn't need to be a thing, or the fact that our money would actually REACH the developers since there isn't a middle man, which would mean more games from the developers.....but hey what do I know, let's continue to feed the giants.
Back to the smartphone gaming.
For those who are doubting iOS/Android as money makers for games, here's a poll of a F2P game called Kingdom Hearts Unchained that I've been playing recently on my phone. The poll shows how much money people have dumped into the game, i took the low average sum and came out with $69k, FROM ONLY the 680 people that voted. This doesn't include the people in the other parts of the world, nor the 1 million people that downloaded this game. The game's objective is super simple with "luck" as a big factor of the game, and graphics consists of a CG crappy drawn backgrounds with 2D figures that have minor/simple animations, oh and there's also a "story". If you take the $69 and divide it by the people that voted (680), you get $101.5, so it's like 680 people paid $101.50 for their copy of the game.....So please check your facts before stating that Android/iOS is not a money maker for games. Does the game make it's money from shitty 'micro-transactions' that most of us hate, YES 100%, am I suggesting/condoning that our future gaming should be mobile with micro-transactions on games like as LoZ or Super Mario, HELL NO, I would puke. But when you look at KHUx there's no way to hack it and play for free, everything is saved on their servers. So maybe we can take that idea and have Nintendo servers check our legitimacy of our copy of the game, and if we check out fine, we'd be able to save our games (like on our Mii or something).
All very true. I will however disagree on the paid multiplayer point. Unfortunately, whether we like it or or not, the servers we play on and their maintenance, aren't free.
I rather pay yearly for a good quality online multiplayer experience, than the crappy free badly maintained counterpart.
When I say "real" games, I refer to any game that has some degree of in-deph content to it and is meant to be played with your full attention in order to get a good experience. A game without that would be Candy Crush for instance.
Fact of the matter is that touch is horrible for precise gaming, for many reasons, from the fact that you don't get any physical feedback on your fingers, to the problem regarding half the screen being covered by your own hands.
For now, gamepads are still the better solution, by far.
Last edited by WhiteMaze,
I have not played Kid Icarus.
However judging from the fact that it is for Nintendo 3DS, not for a tablet without physical controls, my point stands.
I must disagree with you there, because servers and maintenance should be taken care of by the producers of the game, i mean it only makes sense right? "you made it, you take care of it". Take the Dark Souls 3 game, that was released not too long ago for example. The game was released on all 3 consoles (PC, PS4, Xb1) and while the gaming consoles (PS4,Xb1) are making you pay monthly/trimonthly to play multiplayer, the PC version of the game is completely free!! Same with GTA5, Rocket league, OverWatch and many other games. Ever since Xbox Live was invented back in the 2002, Sony's PSN (which used to be free) mimicked and copied Microsoft's idea in 2010, since they saw the Microsoft was profiting off of this idea. It's like those added-on extra fee's that big cellular services make you pay for that, which you just don't need. I'll go back to saying this, but in my opinion, all the expenses of a game whether it's online or not, should be taken out and paid for IN the price of the game itself. And even if i was to pay for my online services i would rather pay the developers of the game and not the middle man.
I see.
Well even so, not only do you use a specific tool for that (stylus), you also must have use for the physical buttons. So again, not entirely touch screen.
--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------
I understand your point, and it is to some extent true. Especially the inequality between PC gamers and console gamers. If PC gamers dont pay for online gaming, neighter should console gamers.
But we need to see things from other perspectives as well, I'll give you an example:
I play Left 4 Dead 2 to this day on Steam. This is a game that was released back in 2009, and the entire focus of the game is online play with other people.
It's been nearly 8 years since then, and as you might imagine, Valve STILL has to keep it's servers running. The money you paid for that game, is for the development of that game. Online play is a service, above anything else, because it must be maintained for long periods of time, and is in some sense, not part of the original content you paid for.
If you look at it, the 30$ I paid for the game, have long been burned by server expenses. The only way to continue paying for those servers is to sell more copies of the game, which in turn brings more players to the game and more servers are required. It's a losing cycle.
So today, many years later, the game barely has any servers on. Official servers are hard to come by, and most servers are community run servers which result in bad ping and an overall bad online gaming quality for you.
So, and quite honestly, I would rather pay a (small) monthly or yearly fee, to maintain high quality servers running and keep the game experience fresh and smooth.
Neither is this this concept drawing of what the NX might be, though
Certainly. I'm basing my opinions on what I am seeing and what information is available. If Nintendo's NX is something entirely different than what currently depicted and described, we will look at it then.
For now this is all we have.
i think Nintendo SONY and MS could make their own gaming phones....MS already has a head start with win10 phone.
Indeed they could. But I would advise against it.
The Smartphone market is already well established and over-flooded. Between Apple, Samsung and other brands, such as Microsoft, HTC, Huawei, etc etc etc.
In all honesty, we do NOT need a new Xperia Play or a Nintendo Phone: Peach Edition.
What we NEED, is for Sony and Nintendo to focus on developing software for iOS / Android, and stop with the 3DS's and Vita's. Handhelds were beat the minute smartphones and tablets came into the picture. It's a simple fact, with simple explanations. And the sooner Ninty and Sonya realize that, the better.
S
Saiyan Lusitano
Guest
Touchscreen controls aren't really that precise compared to a controller or m/k. Couldn't imagine having fun play Mario Kart with touchscreen controls or even drift properly.
fuck Touchscreen controls i don't know how mobile games are so popular with them shitty controls i can't stand using them!
S
Saiyan Lusitano
Guest
People are cheap ass and casuals don't demand much so for them it's OK. I have Angry Birds on my phone but after a minute I'm already bored of it.
I can't really see how smartphones and tablets beat out handhelds. The two gaming experiences are essentially identical except for the mode of control: touch versus button, and from my experience touch is terribly imprecise and unreliable, ruining any gaming experience I've tried.
Besides that, phones and tablets aren't really optimized for gaming, sometimes giving odd or inconsistent performances. Even still, if games development shifted entirely over to the mobile frontier, I think it'd make it more difficult for developers to make games that ran well on all systems and all OSs. Mobile games would need to stay scraping the bottom of the technological barrel to guarantee the widest demographic the way they do now
EXCEPT
if there were a standardized mobile gaming platform with gaming-focused OSs and comparative hardware capacity that developers could focus on, then those problems wouldn't exist. Then at that point, you'd have made a handheld console the same that exist today, only possibly with the inferior touch controls. Otherwise, we're back to where we started, having replicated the handheld market. Seriously, I can't find a single advantage to moving gaming completely, or even partially, over to mobile.
Last edited by Meteor7,
Similar threads
-
- Portal
-
BakerMan
I rather enjoy a life of taking it easy. I haven't reached that life yet though. -
BigOnYa
-
Xdqwerty
what are you looking at?
-
@
Psionic Roshambo:
Ken do you think any of them asked for a different tattoo? Like could I get a star of David instead of these numbers? Lol -
-
-
-
-
-
-
@
The Real Jdbye:
if i was female i would be a lesbian cause the lesbian flag has all my favorite colors in it -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
