Random Video Game Crap

[Celt Z]

Mobile "gamers" shouldn't be mixed with other type of gamers.

But why? The game still had to be developed, coded and distributed. Is it because of it's simplicity or accessiblity that it shouldn't count? Because if that's the case, are we still allowed to cite Tetris as one of the most popular games of all times?[DOUBLEPOST=1408806966,1408806777][/DOUBLEPOST]

17%? That seems low. I can't think of a single 11-18 year old that isn't obsessed with some game.

It does, but then again, most of the guys I knew growing up didn't have a system past the basic Nintendo. Sometimes they'd pull it out to have Super Mario Bros challenges, but gaming wasn't big with them. The only time I got to play Genesis was at some girls' houses.

 

[Hailey Knight]

But why? The game still had to be developed, coded and distributed. Is it because of it's simplicity or accessiblits that it shouldn't count? Because if that's the case, are we still allowed to cite Tetris as one of the most popular games of all times?

I think it's because they're not playing it because they enjoy games, they're playing it because it fills a crack in their day where 20 years earlier they would've just stared emptily, because it wasn't enough time to start a conversation or read or anything. It's not a hobby, it's a time-filler. To use your example, you can't really do that with Tetris unless you're ready to lose. Otherwise, Tetris keeps going. A "session" for a mobile game is made to be brief--the time waiting for someone outside a public restroom, the time while waiting in line to get movie tickets. I couldn't pull out any of my 3DS games for those kinds of things because it would take just as long to get into them. A Kid Icarus Uprising chapter can be 10 minutes or more. A single Pokemon battle can take a long time. Developers of mobile games work to figure out the perfect amounts of time their game takes for the intended audience, i.e. 15 seconds, 17 seconds, 20 seconds. It's not something you sit down and play, it's something you do while standing in line. Mobile phone games are a thing you do between the things you actually want to do.

When something else comes around to take their place, that audience will shift to it. It was naivete on Nintendo's part to think the newcomers of the Wii were going to stick around and become hobby gamers. The Wii was as temporary as any family board game. In the same sense, once technology moves onto ... I don't know, first thing my imagination says is that your phone putting an electric signal into you that gives you a 10-second high. Something. They'll move onto that and the mobile game apps you see on phones will become a thing of the past.

 

[Celt Z]

I think it's because they're not playing it because they enjoy games, they're playing it because it fills a crack in their day where 20 years earlier they would've just stared emptily, because it wasn't enough time to start a conversation or read or anything. It's not a hobby, it's a time-filler. To use your example, you can't really do that with Tetris unless you're ready to lose. Otherwise, Tetris keeps going. A "session" for a mobile game is made to be brief--the time waiting for someone outside a public restroom, the time while waiting in line to get movie tickets. I couldn't pull out any of my 3DS games for those kinds of things because it would take just as long to get into them. A Kid Icarus Uprising chapter can be 10 minutes or more. A single Pokemon battle can take a long time. Developers of mobile games work to figure out the perfect amounts of time their game takes for the intended audience, i.e. 15 seconds, 17 seconds, 20 seconds. It's not something you sit down and play, it's something you do while standing in line. Mobile phone games are a thing you do between the things you actually want to do.

When something else comes around to take their place, that audience will shift to it. It was naivete on Nintendo's part to think the newcomers of the Wii were going to stick around and become hobby gamers. The Wii was as temporary as any family board game. In the same sense, once technology moves onto ... I don't know, first thing my imagination says is that your phone putting an electric signal into you that gives you a 10-second high. Something. They'll move onto that and the mobile game apps you see on phones will become a thing of the past.

Except that I would argue that games being a "time-filler" instead of a hobby would be a return to video games' original intention. Considering video games were developed to be distraction that gave adults an excuse to spend more time in bars, and purchasing more beer, mobile casual game is a return to that model. Gaming, specifically console gaming, wasn't really considered a hobby until Nintendo decided to rebrand it during the fall-out of the 80's. Just because a good portion of us grew up being told that video games are a children's toy doesn't mean it was always that way, or will remain to be that way.

I know we want to be console/PC snobs because that is the standard for almost 30 years (maybe longer if you count the Atari/Intelevision craze), but we may be looking at the next step in gaming evolution. People who normally wouldn't be gaming are picking it up because they can take it on their phones. Given the leaps phone tech is making, would it really be shocking if Nintendo releases their own phone that allows for wifi Pokemon battles or bringing your current console game with you? They already are doing something similar with the Wii U. For video games to survive, they have to reach the widest audience possible, and by getting people used to the idea that you can "game" anywhere, they may have a new business model.

 

[Hailey Knight]

Except that I would argue that games being a "time-filler" instead of a hobby would be a return to video games' original intention. Considering video games were developed to be distraction that gave adults an excuse to spend more time in bars, and purchasing more beer, mobile casual game is a return to that model. Gaming, specifically console gaming, wasn't really considered a hobby until Nintendo decided to rebrand it during the fall-out of the 80's.

Which is what I'm saying. The idea of it as a time-filler became unsustainable. Nintendo changed what games were for, and so the hobby developed. If that hadn't happened, we wouldn't have what we have today. The people who used them as time-fillers could not sustain an industry. Eventually they would move on.

Just because a good portion of us grew up being told that video games are a children's toy doesn't mean it was always that way, or will remain to be that way.

Your graph already shows we're beyond that since the average age is 31. We adults buying and playing games are supporting the industry, and I'll count in those who are just buying Call of Duty. Yeah, that's only one game a year (probably with Madden), but each of them needed to buy a console to play it on. It's not the same as a peripheral on a phone; it's the purpose of the purchase.

I know we want to be console/PC snobs because that is the standard for almost 30 years (maybe longer if you count the Atari/Intelevision craze), but we may be looking at the next step in gaming evolution. People who normally wouldn't be gaming are picking it up because they can take it on their phones. Given the leaps phone tech is making, would it really be shocking if Nintendo releases their own phone that allows for wifi Pokemon battles or bringing your current console game with you? They already are doing something similar with the Wii U. For video games to survive, they have to reach the widest audience possible, and by getting people used to the idea that you can "game" anywhere, they may have a new business model.

Again, this was the viewpoint Nintendo took with the Wii, and it lost most of that audience. Hell, Square-Enix at one point declared they would only be making mobile games and that plan crashed and burned. When something else comes along, those people will move on, same as your 80s example, same as with the Wii. My 50+ year old relatives who play Candy Crush a couple minutes a day are not going to support this industry. The idea that PC games and console games will disappear has been bandied around for the last 15 years. In fact, I was 15 when I was told that PC gaming was dead. And then I was told everyone would just game on consoles and not PCs.

My point is, the people playing those mobile games aren't playing them to play games, they're playing them because they exist. That isn't going to remove the AAA industry. If anything kills that industry, it'll be their own unsustainable development costs.

I don't mean the act of having a game be mobile is the issue. Anyone with a laptop can play an offline PC game anywhere. I can play my 3DS wherever. iPads and things are getting better at being able to play games. But I don't think lugging a Wii U around so you can play on the gamepad is going to become normal either.

What I'm getting at is just the stuff that's used to fill time. The developers making mobile phone games know their audience. They aren't developing deep RPGs for the people who just want something to flick their fingers at for 20 seconds outside Dairy Queen. They won't get sales that way. These people are very good at making money; they know what they're doing.

 

[Jay]

I didn't realize my wife, who only plays Candy Crush on her phone, was considered a "gamer" these days. Ridiculous.

Honestly, I'd be most interested in seeing the stats excluding mobile games. It sounds really dumb to say but there are a lot of people, particularly women, who will play to waste time on their phones or whatever rather than playing games as a hobby of it's own and I certainly don't really count them as 'gamers'. All my wife's friends play farmville, candy crush but have never owned a console nor playing a 3d PC game. Hey, I sometimes doddle images in paint... does that make me a graphic designer? Nonsense.

Other stats of notice :

96%[1] of EVE Online players are male
96%[2] of Dota 2 players are male
90%[3] of LoL players are male
84%[4] of WoW players are male
80%[5] of CoD players are male

I won't go into this whole debacle because it's ridiculously stupid. Women gamers are increasing year after year and that's great. I have female friends on Steam, played/raided with hardcore female gamers when I was in a TOP 50 US WoW guilds but I certainly don't consider the "mobile gamers" regardless if gender.... "gamers". I tried in vain to find a popular single mobile game that doesn't suck and I failed to find one. All are cash grabs, offer in-app bullshit and women love these type of games as per article

Surveying its own ad platform that is deployed across a wide variety of games of mobile games, Flurry found that on average, women spent 31 percent more money on in-app purchases and 35 percent more time within mobile games as compared to their male counterparts. Moreover, women committed themselves to a particular game and stuck with it. Globally, women came back to the games that they had chosen to play 42 percent more often over a seven-day period.

Long story short, not gamers.

Ze end.

 

[Celt Z]

But my point is, there are more people playing those non-committal games than consoles. And it's a hell of a lot cheaper to develop and distribute them. I'm not saying console gaming is going the way of the dinosaur, but if you're a company who wants to see bigger profits than production costs, what are you going to choose?
But whether you're a hobbyist or a casual gamer, at the end of the day, a game's a game. A console game may have more details and options, but just like the Candy Crushes of the world, you're still limited to the options programmed within the game. Sometimes the simpler models become a "gateway drug" for more serious gaming. Nintendo may not have held onto all it's Wiig audience, but it did gain some. If the survey I originally mentioned is any indication, the demographic that has an interest in gaming is wider than previously thought and there should be an effort to make games at capitalize on this.

 

[Jay]

No.

 

[GasBandit]

I disagree. Counting people who use mobile apps as "gamers" is like, to borrow a simile from another thread, counting people who've tapped kegs at frat parties as "bartenders." How many of those playing those mobile games would continue to do so if it didn't come bundled on their phone/facebook machine, and they had to get a separate device such as a DS to play? A lot less, I'd wager.

Media sources have been crowing for 5 years how there are more female gamers than male, even on PC alone -

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2009/04/09/nielson-study-majority-pc-gamers-female-solitary/

Of course, they ARE taking Solitaire and Freecell into account...

It might be more telling if you look at specific games - for example, according to the same above-linked nielsen poll, 61% of WOW players were male. A 60-40 split still ain't bad as far as diversity goes.

 

[Hailey Knight]

But my point is, there are more people playing those non-committal games than consoles. And it's a hell of a lot cheaper to develop and distribute them. I'm not saying console gaming is going the way of the dinosaur, but if you're a company who wants to see bigger profits than production costs, what are you going to choose?
But whether you're a hobbyist or a casual gamer, at the end of the day, a game's a game. A console game may have more details and options, but just like the Candy Crushes of the world, you're still limited to the options programmed within the game. Sometimes the simpler models become a "gateway drug" for more serious gaming. Nintendo may not have held onto all it's Wiig audience, but it did gain some. If the survey I originally mentioned is any indication, the demographic that has an interest in gaming is wider than previously thought and there should be an effort to make games at capitalize on this.

I do agree that it would be wise for the major developers to hedge their bets. It only takes one or two people to make one of these phone games, and that's in their spare time, so having a couple devote some hours to an off-side game for extra cash isn't a bad idea.

But I still don't agree that this is the future direction of gaming. While it may approach a wider audience and may even be a gateway to some of those people, I maintain that the next portable distraction will draw them away from it. I'm not insulting them either; this isn't a gamer snob thing to me. It's just that they largely aren't interested in games, they're interested in not being bored for those few seconds, and something else will be there for them someday. And that too will eventually be replaced. We're dealing with two entirely different audiences here. I'll get away from the word "gamer" because it's become loaded in these discussions, but the audience of "this is my interest" and the audience of "this is something to do". I don't think most of the "something to do" crowd is the future for the "this is my interest" crowd. I just don't see it.

I didn't realize my wife, who only plays Candy Crush on her phone, was considered a "gamer" these days. Ridiculous.

This is kind of what I mean. My aunt is 54 years old and plays Candy Crush on her phone. She is never going to play anything else. There's no games in her future there.

84%[4] of WoW players are male

That's odd; back when I used to play (granted, that was five years ago) the number was less extreme in different. Males were still the majority, but females were more than 30. I wonder what happened.

Moreover, women committed themselves to a particular game and stuck with it. Globally, women came back to the games that they had chosen to play 42 percent more often over a seven-day period.

This I find really interesting, because if you look at my 3DS activity log, you'd see that the games I've played the most have around 120 hours, but that's only three of them, whereas most of the other games are around the 40 hours mark. My wife's activity log, on the other hand, has fewer games, but they're in the 200-300 hour mark for total time ever played. And then if you look at monthly stuff, I'll have a bunch of games with varying hours, whereas she'll usually just have two or three games, with the number one having many, many more hours.

I've actually wondered if I just had a shitty attention span and was impressed that certain games could keep her coming back so consistently. Maybe it's just a difference in how men and women are wired. It's fascinating.[DOUBLEPOST=1408811589,1408811547][/DOUBLEPOST]

It might be more telling if you look at specific games - for example, according to the same above-linked nielsen poll, 61% of WOW players were male. A 60-40 split still ain't bad as far as diversity goes.

Yeah, that's more what I'd heard.

 

[GasBandit]

That's odd; back when I used to play (granted, that was five years ago) the number was less extreme in different. Males were still the majority, but females were more than 30. I wonder what happened.

It's actually the other way around, chronologically - most of the works cited in that article list sources from 2004-2007. My 2009 poll shows a 60-40 split.

 

[Hailey Knight]

It's actually the other way around, chronologically - most of the works cited in that article list sources from 2004-2007. My 2009 poll shows a 60-40 split.

That was still five years ago though.

But then yeah, Jay's is outdated, so I wonder where we're at now.

 

[GasBandit]

To paraphrase another few folks on the subject, the "gaming gap" can still be experienced simply by noting common reactions when people say "I spend my free time playing video games" in a social setting. It's still female-repellent, as often as not, and yet change the genders and suddenly many guys are intrigued. The advent of the female gamer (or even the gamer-accepting female) comparatively new. There's another humorous image floating around that describes the history of females and video games more or less thusly:

1995 - "lol look at the loser and his video games"
1996 - "lol look at the loser and his video games"
1997 - "lol look at the loser and his video games"
1998 - "lol look at the loser and his video games"
1999 - "lol look at the loser and his video games"
2000 - "lol look at the loser and his video games"
2001 - "lol look at the loser and his video games"
2002 - "lol look at the loser and his video games"
2003 - "lol look at the loser and his video games"
2004 - "lol look at the loser and his video games"
2005 - "lol look at the loser and his video games"
2006 - "This MMO looks like it could be interesting"
2007 - "THE CAKE IS A LIE XD XD XD"
2008 - "Girls can play games too ya know!"
2009 - "I'm a GRRRL Gamer!"
2010 - "There are more girls gaming than boys. What do you mean mobile doesn't count?"
2011 - "Video game developers need to cater more to us."
2012 - "Video games are sexist."
2013 - "The gaming community is completely populated by rapists."

And heeeeere we are.

 

[Hailey Knight]

On another side, maybe I'm becoming a crank geezer at the old age of 29. Let's look at my recent gaming history:

- Mega Man 5, a game from the early 90s.
- Mega Man Zero, same old franchise.
- Bravely Default, a new game, sure, but basing most of its gameplay and tropes on games from 20 years ago.
- Fire Emblem Awakening, another long-running franchise.

In fact, the only really new thing I've played recently is The Wolf Among Us, from a company trying to recapture the spirit of point-and-click adventure games from before my time.

And then how about the games I'm looking forward to?

- Theatrhythm, a rhythm game (I am aware of the hypocrisy) existing solely to harness nostalgia for a series with its best days over a decade behind it.
- Super Smash Bros, throwing a bunch of characters from popular, long-running franchises together.
- Hyrule Warriors, similar situation, though different gameplay, but still pulling its strength from Zelda, a series almost as old as I am.
- Pokemon Omega Ruby, from a franchise I've been playing since I was a kid, and a remake of a game from 11 years ago.

And the only new things I'm looking forward to are any new virtual console Mega Man releases (so more old-timey stuff), Shadow of Mordor, and Bayonetta 2.[DOUBLEPOST=1408812598,1408812377][/DOUBLEPOST]

To paraphrase another few folks on the subject, the "gaming gap" can still be experienced simply by noting common reactions when people say "I spend my free time playing video games" in a social setting. It's still female-repellent, as often as not, and yet change the genders and suddenly many guys are intrigued. The advent of the female gamer (or even the gamer-accepting female) comparatively new. There's another humorous image floating around that describes the history of females and video games more or less thusly:

1995 - "lol look at the loser and his video games"
1996 - "lol look at the loser and his video games"
1997 - "lol look at the loser and his video games"
1998 - "lol look at the loser and his video games"
1999 - "lol look at the loser and his video games"
2000 - "lol look at the loser and his video games"
2001 - "lol look at the loser and his video games"
2002 - "lol look at the loser and his video games"
2003 - "lol look at the loser and his video games"
2004 - "lol look at the loser and his video games"
2005 - "lol look at the loser and his video games"
2006 - "This MMO looks like it could be interesting"
2007 - "THE CAKE IS A LIE XD XD XD"
2008 - "Girls can play games too ya know!"
2009 - "I'm a GRRRL Gamer!"
2010 - "There are more girls gaming than boys. What do you mean mobile doesn't count?"
2011 - "Video games are sexist."
2012 - "Video game developers need to cater more to us."
2013 - "The gaming community is completely populated by rapists."

And heeeeere we are.

Well, we were losers back then, the cake was indeed a lie, and many sectors of the gaming industry are pretty sexist. I love Atlus games, but they said pretty directly earlier this year that they didn't think a female protagonist would make a "good fit" for the SMT games. I couldn't disagree more, but that's their throwback outlook. I want to blame it on Japanese culture, but Nintendo pretty much killed that cliche, so I have no idea what their problem is besides being an insulated, niche-catering company.[DOUBLEPOST=1408812677][/DOUBLEPOST]I just want to say, I didn't mean for discussion of Celt Z's post to be about female gamer prevalence; I thought it'd been pretty obvious the last few years that lots of gamers are girls. I was just curious about the mobile aspect, not to deride the percentages for any particular demographic.

 

[Dei]

Hey, I'll have you know that I've been a video game loser since the Atari you sexist asshole!

(Spoilers: sarcasm)

 

[Hailey Knight]

Hey, I'll have you know that I've been a video game loser since the Atari you sexist asshole!

(Spoilers: sarcasm)

1995 - "lol look at the loser and her video games"

 

[Ravenpoe]

In fact, the only really new thing I've played recently is The Wolf Among Us, from a company trying to recapture the spirit of point-and-click adventure games from before my time.

Actually, I'd argue that the recent success of TellTale is because they finally stopped trying to recreate old point-and-click adventures (which I also enjoyed) and moved on to something new entirely. Modern TellTale games are nothing like the games of old.

 

[Hailey Knight]

Actually, I'd argue that the recent success of TellTale is because they finally stopped trying to recreate old point-and-click adventures (which I also enjoyed) and moved on to something new entirely. Modern TellTale games are nothing like the games of old.

True; the couple times I tried their genuine point-and-clicks, I didn't finish them. Walking Dead and Wolf Among Us though ... keep giving me story options, I love it.

 

[Celt Z]

I do agree that it would be wise for the major developers to hedge their bets. It only takes one or two people to make one of these phone games, and that's in their spare time, so having a couple devote some hours to an off-side game for extra cash isn't a bad idea.

But I still don't agree that this is the future direction of gaming. While it may approach a wider audience and may even be a gateway to some of those people, I maintain that the next portable distraction will draw them away from it. I'm not insulting them either; this isn't a gamer snob thing to me. It's just that they largely aren't interested in games, they're interested in not being bored for those few seconds, and something else will be there for them someday. And that too will eventually be replaced. We're dealing with two entirely different audiences here. I'll get away from the word "gamer" because it's become loaded in these discussions, but the audience of "this is my interest" and the audience of "this is something to do". I don't think most of the "something to do" crowd is the future for the "this is my interest" crowd. I just don't see it.

I'm sorry if I seemed to imply it would replace consoles, I was trying to say that the availability of casual gaming is broadening the definition of "gamer". I do agree with you that it's loaded, and there is a difference between "casual use" and "hobbyist". But I do think that the "this is something so do" crowd is changing the definition, or maybe connotation, of gaming. The more causal gamers, the less gaming is considered an "undesirable" activity. Look at the Internet. I can still remember a time when having a computer in your house meant you were a "nerd" and knowing how to use it was even more socially-acceptable. Now, can you imagine a phone being released without internet access? (Besides the Jitterbug for the elderly. )

To paraphrase another few folks on the subject, the "gaming gap" can still be experienced simply by noting common reactions when people say "I spend my free time playing video games" in a social setting. It's still female-repellent, as often as not, and yet change the genders and suddenly many guys are intrigued. The advent of the female gamer (or even the gamer-accepting female) comparatively new. There's another humorous image floating around that describes the history of females and video games more or less thusly:

1995 - "lol look at the loser and his video games"
1996 - "lol look at the loser and his video games"
1997 - "lol look at the loser and his video games"
1998 - "lol look at the loser and his video games"
1999 - "lol look at the loser and his video games"
2000 - "lol look at the loser and his video games"
2001 - "lol look at the loser and his video games"
2002 - "lol look at the loser and his video games"
2003 - "lol look at the loser and his video games"
2004 - "lol look at the loser and his video games"
2005 - "lol look at the loser and his video games"
2006 - "This MMO looks like it could be interesting"
2007 - "THE CAKE IS A LIE XD XD XD"
2008 - "Girls can play games too ya know!"
2009 - "I'm a GRRRL Gamer!"
2010 - "There are more girls gaming than boys. What do you mean mobile doesn't count?"
2011 - "Video game developers need to cater more to us."
2012 - "Video games are sexist."
2013 - "The gaming community is completely populated by rapists."

And heeeeere we are.

I would say this would be largely inaccurate because there wasn't a large enough platform to dispute it before Internet forums and blogs. No one was giving a voice to the female gaming culture for a very long time, and we were largely ignored, or in some cases, outright treated hostilely. I've been a console gamer for over 31 years, and bit longer if you count arcades. As I mentioned above, I knew more girls that owned and played consoles. For most of my life I've had a pretty even split of male and female friends, so I can't attribute it to only hanging around girls. Maybe it's just the circles I run in, but I've found a pretty sizable audience of women that have been gaming for a long time, we just didn't have a way to communicate until recently.

I would also never say the gaming community is populated by rapists. That's gross hyperbole. However, speaking as someone who has been on both sides of the fence, as an animator and enthusiast, it would say that there is plenty of sexism from an industry that has a majority of males in it. Sometimes it's intentional, sometimes is old, bad habits from people who never thought about it, but it is there. Drawing attention to it has slowly started to improve things, but there is a long way to go.

 

[Hailey Knight]

No one was giving a voice to the female gaming culture for a very long time, and we were largely ignored, or in some cases, outright treated hostilely.

I wish this had changed by now.

 

[ThatNickGuy]

Mobile "gamers" shouldn't be mixed with other type of gamers.

It's just gaming on a different platform. These days, it's a much more viable and successful market than anywhere else.

 

[AshburnerX]

It's just gaming on a different platform. These days, it's a much more viable and successful market than anywhere else.

Except that it's not. Only a select few games pull in any kind of real money... most just get buried under the titans by a capricious public and the company ether tries again or goes out of business. The reason it seems so much more successful right now is because the stakes are much lower, both for entry and to be considered a success. It's not a $100 million game that needs to pull in triple that to satisfy the stockholders, it's a 5k game that is pulling in 10-20k, unless you get REALLY lucky.

Just look at King: Candy Crush is their only game making serious money, but it's quickly declining and they are scrambling to get another hit going. Zynga's in the same boat with all of it's properties. What looked to be successful companies have turned out to be complete duds.

I'm not going to call mobile a fad, but it's going to crash sooner or later and then the big boys will dominate again.

 

[ThatNickGuy]

Except that it's not. Only a select few games pull in any kind of real money... most just get buried under the titans by a capricious public and the company ether tries again or goes out of business. The reason it seems so much more successful right now is because the stakes are much lower, both for entry and to be considered a success. It's not a $100 million game that needs to pull in triple that to satisfy the stockholders, it's a 5k game that is pulling in 10-20k, unless you get REALLY lucky.

Just look at King: Candy Crush is their only game making serious money, but it's quickly declining and they are scrambling to get another hit going. Zynga's in the same boat with all of it's properties. What looked to be successful companies have turned out to be complete duds.

Sure, the bubble is popping quickly. I think most people expected that. But the amount of money needed to make a game (or app) is much less than console or maybe PC. As a result, as you said, the small games make money. But it's still the most viable market, if only because unlike expensive consoles or PCs, almost everyone has a smart phone these days. So it's an easier market to at least get your product out there. But I doubt these companies like Zynga can last much longer.

That said, I kind of hope Rovio stays a success. If only because one of my best friends moved to Finland to work for them.

 

[AshburnerX]

Sure, the bubble is popping quickly. I think most people expected that. But the amount of money needed to make a game (or app) is much less than console or maybe PC. As a result, as you said, the small games make money. But it's still the most viable market, if only because unlike expensive consoles or PCs, almost everyone has a smart phone these days. So it's an easier market to at least get your product out there. But I doubt these companies like Zynga can last much longer.

That said, I kind of hope Rovio stays a success. If only because one of my best friends moved to Finland to work for them.

It IS worth mentioning that virtually every triple A studio trying to make and sell mobile games has fallen flat on it's face. Square Enix keeps losing money because they can't price themselves well ($20+ for Final Fantasy Tactics? I can get cheaper and better elsewhere) or are just putting out stuff no one cares about (the stupid rail shooter) or are just blatant cash grabs (Final Fantasy: All the Bravest). EA has completely failed to get ANYTHING out there. Really, the most successful ones are apps that tie into games (like the cellphone app for Dead Rising 3).

So ironically, the bigger studios simply aren't capable of succeeding there right now. They are still stuck in the AAA mindset and it's killing them.

 

[Jay]

Wife works FOR a mobile game company and even moderate sized games cost a lot of money... even before paying royalties for IPs. Hits are awesome but the fickle "gaming" consumers dictate all.

 

[GasBandit]

Who's in the mood for an easter egg? If you watch carefully, @Charlie Don't Surf makes an appearance in it.

 

[PatrThom]

If this guy's other videos are as good as these, I might need to watch more of them.



--Patrick

 

[GasBandit]

Wanna watch some filthy casuals try BROFORCE?

 

[GasBandit]

Check out this training level in Half Life 2 to acclimate players using Oculus rift and the crazy mo-cap controllers. The guy doing the video is irritating, but the game itself is an excellent demonstration of what is possible. Having to aim down the iron sights yourself, aiming independent from viewing angle, manually swinging the crowbar and throwing grenades. Nice.

 

[PatrThom]

Grr...You can cross your eyes on a smallish monitor (or put on a pair of incredibly nearsighted glasses and view it on your phone) to "play along" with him in 3D...IF it weren't for his little PiP spoiling the immersion.

--Patrick

 

[GasBandit]

Grr...You can cross your eyes on a smallish monitor (or put on a pair of incredibly nearsighted glasses and view it on your phone) to "play along" with him in 3D...IF it weren't for his little PiP spoiling the immersion.

--Patrick

Eh, really the star of this one is the motion controls. The Stereo vision actually breaks down for me a little... especially on text objects which he's not directly looking at, the colors tend to bleed and make it illegible for some reason.

 

[Frank]

Wanna watch some filthy casuals try BROFORCE?

"Yoooo, this a Pewdiepie game."

Get fucked you ignorant shit.

 

[CynicismKills]

Wanna watch some filthy casuals try BROFORCE?

The biggest crime here is making them play BroForce without a controller.

 

[Jay]

Fuck controllers


Plays fine without one

 

[CynicismKills]

Fuck controllers


Plays fine without one

Plays better with one.

 

[GasBandit]