Slashdot Mirror
iPhone Shakes Up the Video Game Industry
Hugh Pickens writes "Troy Wolverton writes in the Mercury News that in less than a year, the iPhone has become a significant game platform, but its bigger impact could be to help change the way the game industry does business. 'It's got everything you need to be a game changer,' said Neil Young, co-founder and CEO of ngmoco, which develops games solely for the iPhone. With a year under its belt and an installed base of iPhone and iPod Touch owners at around forty million, the iPhone/iPod Touch platform has eclipsed next-gen console penetration numbers and started to catch up to the worldwide penetration of both Sony's (50 million) and Nintendo's (100 million) devices. Wolverton writes that not only is the iPhone one of the first widely successful gaming platforms in which games are completely digitally distributed, but on the iPhone, consumers can find more games updated more often, and at a cheaper cost per game than what they'd find on a typical dedicated game console. While an ordinary top-of-the-line game for Microsoft's Xbox 360 sells for about $60, and one for Nintendo's DS about $30, a top-of-the-line iPhone game typically sells for no more than $10. With traditional games, developers might wait a year or two between major releases; ngmoco is planning on releasing new versions of its games for the iPhone every four to five months. 'You have to think differently,' says Young. 'It's redefining what it means to be a publisher in this world.'"
'It's got everything you need to be a game changer,' said Neil Young
Young went on to say that the iPhone "keeps him searching for a game of gold" and went on to speak of the coming mobile console war:
There's fanboi lines bein' drawn
A-nobody's right if everybody's wrong
Young people spendin' their dimes
A-iPhone sales leavin' others far behind
My work here is dung.
Thanks to the Zero Attention Span Theater Generation we get vapid video games (as opposed to substantive ones of old) and 15 second "music videos". Now get off my lawn.
The only place where you can measure the rate of iPhone stories in hertz and get an integer.
As a mobile developer, I cannot deny the strength in numbers of iphone users. That said, I really don't see how any company is making enough money to keep afloat (unless the company is just a handful of people). Also, I'm sure a significant number of people are only using the free apps and using their phone as a phone, rather than as a game console.
Likewise, I very much doubt that a gamer is getting an iphone just so that they can play all of the latest iphone games.
If the company can succeed doing this, great. If people want to buy their games every 5-6 months, wonderful. But it's not shaking up the industry at all.
"a top-of-the-line iPhone game typically sells for no more than $10" That's because the top of the line game on iPhone is no where near comparable to the new games and new ports of those systems
The new games-class iPhone has sold zero units, many existing iPhone users can't afford to or won't upgrade for novelty reasons (the same reasons PSP owners won't ALL race off and buy a PSPGo). Those buying an iPhone will probably look at the older, cheaper units, since the majority wish to buy a phone first and a gadget second.
This will limit its appeal to core developers, but many may dabble in the new control system the iPhone brings, which is good, but not a revolution.
In around two to three years time you can talk about it having helped to evolve "the game", PSP having an App store, a DSi store and so on, but it won't change it. Perhaps the fourth-gen iPhone may be a real contender if it comes out to coincide with the PSP2 and Nintendo's Wii-portable (or whatever).
If he's the Walrus then can I be a penguin please?
To quote: "While an ordinary top-of-the-line game for Microsoft's Xbox 360 sells for about $60, and one for Nintendo's DS about $30, a top-of-the-line iPhone game typically sells for no more than $10."
I don't own any of these devices, but how do these games compare? Is a top-of-the-line iPhone game as cool or complex as a top-of-the-line DS game? Isn't it a different kind of game -- certainly a different game experience?
Liberal? Conservative? Compare perspectives at Left-Right
considered games on a cell phone before. While some of my phones have supported games I wasn't interested. That is until I saw the iPhone commercials. Now an iPhone 3GS is on this years' xmas list. :)
One thing (Sony especially) that other companies need to take note of is the price for these digital only games on the iPod.
Ten dollars or less is a good price range for a game you can't lend or sell. Paying current full retail price for a umd psp game for a digital only download that you can't move off of your system is an idea that isn't going to play out in Sony's favor. The DSi still has a card slot so there's still the illusion that you still will be able to own your games.
Seems odd to me that they have sold 40 million of these. I would imaging that they suck as a phone, and are damned expensive on a monthly basis. Then again.. I'm a cheap bastard. Now get off my lawn!
"He's lost in a 'floyd hole"
I can honestly see how the iphone and the related gizmos may change the landscape but I can't help but think that is is just a passing fad. Right now the iphone is still new and exciting and people are discovering its potential and trying to make fast money off it. What happens 5 years down the line? (Besides apple bringing out some new cool gadget everyone wants but no one needs.)
I predict that the iphone may change some gaming but it will not significantly change those who want an in depth experience which can only really be provided by a console or computer. I'm sure there are still a few of them left.
Then again my opinion and $5 will get you a cup of coffee.
I swear it's like the damn thing is going to save the world. Even for nerds there must be other topics of conversation, right?
I think I've reached the point of hype backlash. I might have been somewhat interested in the iPhone at the beginning, but now I'm just tired of seeing it everywhere.
I bow to the Apple marketing team though. They are doing a truly excellent job. Honestly.
comparing iPhone games to PS3 or XBox360 games is like comparing a gnat to a pterodactyl. Yes they both fly, but one is a beast while the other is a nuisance. This article holds no merit.
As an avid iPod touch user (and iPhone if Apple ever gets one onto Verizon . . .), I must say that the vast majority of the games I've seen for the platform is just too gimmicky. The system has plenty horsepower for simple stuff that might be a good diversion (think Pacman, Asteroids, Space Invaders - or even some more powerful stuff - I recently downloaded Myst for my iPod), but the touch screen interface is just terrible for gaming purposes.
I just don't see it cutting into Gameboy sales that much. On the other hand as an APPLICATION platform the little bugger is amazing. Sure it's an "iPod" suggesting music player (which is does indeed do, and do well), but my iPod touch is about the best damned PDA I've ever used. There are apps for everything I need, and much unlike most cell phone browsers of old (including the one on the Blackberry Curve that I have for work), the included version of Safari actually works for almost any site I want to visit. I might have to zoom in/out to see some things, but I can use the page at least.
To tell the truth mine has replaced 95% of what I would use a laptop for. My laptop now has become truly a "portable computer" like the old ones that you just lugged around. I'll take it on a trip to use in the hotel room, but for when I'm actually out and about, in a coffee shop, etc, the iPod is smaller, lighter, and is always with me. Battery life is great too.
All in all I truly do see them as revolutionary devices, just not so much on the gaming front.
"People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
What the iPhone needs are FULL SIZE games, not these cheap, quick, and shallow things currently available. There's a lot of arcade style stuff, puzzle style stuff, and very flat approximations of every other genre of game.
In fact, the only games on the iPhone outside of the puzzle/arcade variety that I'd term full-size are Myst and Wolfenstien. That's not to say that the only possible good games on the iPhone are ports of old games, but that if you want to fit a full size game on an iPhone, you need to give up on the super-detailed graphics.
That goes for xBox 360 and PS3 games too, actually. I like to play games, not watch loading screens!
People keep spouting off hype about Apple getting into games.
They will fail.
No one can take on Nintendo in the handheld department and win.
They compare the iPhone sales to the DS sales, yet fail to account for the fact that the iPhone is a PHONE and the DS is a dedicated gaming device.
They mention the price difference as if it's a good thing? If you're looking to attract developers, you need to provide them with a market. Which would you want? A market that sells a few tens of thousands at $10? Or a market that sells a few million at $40?
Do you have a simple, small game that you want to sell for cheap? Both the PSP and the DSi have their own online stores. You can pimp that shit out to the PS3/360/Wii's online stores as well.
The bottom line is when Apple has something that is the equivalent of Pokemon, we can talk. Until then, Nintendo dominates the handheld arena.
As a gamer and a software developer, you just have to wonder how "top of the line" the game could be if it can be developed and released in 4-5 months... And even though the install base of the iPhone may start to catch up with DS and PSP, how many of those are gamers that will purchase games?
Really, I have yet to see an iPhone game that captured my attention for more than an hour or two -- even the recent version of the Sims for the iPhone is a very stripped down version of the real game. A DS or full fledged console or computer game may cost $30 or more but I expect I'll get at least 50 hours of enjoyment out of it....
While I applaud the growing market for games of the complexity and graphic resolution of twenty years ago, I am holding off from buying an iPhone until someone develops an app which monitors the motion sensors and battery level and bills me every time i charge up the phone or take it out of my pocket, and maybe it could bill me every time I change from one cell reception area to the next.
They whose government reduces their essential liberties for temporary security, receive neither liberty nor security.
What people play on the iphone are time-passers. Mere distractions.
While the platform is certainly selling these time passing distraction apps, I don't believe I'll call it a serious games platform.
Business goes where the money is. Sometimes the money is in wasting your time.
They're using their grammar skills there.
This is silly; mobile devices and "full size" gaming systems have to be considered different markets.
I can write documents on my iPhone, but that doesn't mean I won't be buying word processing software for computers any more.
iPhone-only game producer says iPhone is a great games platform (and asks for VC capital???)
Can we please have a separate category in /. for iPhone articles: I'd really like a way to filter out the dross from the iPhone-cultist crowd.
Maybe it's also because the games that are released also contain updates to make the game more fun.
For instance, I downloaded a game called Flight Path. They recently came out with an update containing more maps, and different kinds of planes.
Now in the PC or console industry, they would just re-box this and call it Left 4 Dead 2....
The greatest revenge in life is massive success.
The article seems to be more hype than anything else, but it does hit on a couple of good points.
Yes, the iPhone platform has shaken up the industry, due to the digital distribution of games. This has a lot to do with timing (you need oodles of cheap flash memory for this) but it also builds on the fundamentals of how the iTunes store has built up over the years. It's clearly proven that digital distribution of games can be viable, and you're going to see a lot of this in the future. Both to sell games that would never be viable retail releases due to pricing (micro transactions come to gaming), and because everyone wants to cut Gamestop out of the loop.
And no, the iPhone platform has not shaken up the industry, due to hardware designs. The hardware is fundamentally that of a phone. The processor is overpowered and the GPU is underpowered for gaming, and the whole thing eats too much power when you ramp up the *PUs. The DS gets something ungodly (10+ hours) and even the PSP can do 5+ hours with its better graphics. The controls are also lacking - a touch screen is good for some things (e.g. Solitaire) and bad for others (e.g. Super Mario Brothers). iPhoneOS 3.0 will allow what amounts to button caddies, but since buttons aren't standard they can't be counted on. The hardware means it's an additional avenue for gaming, but it's not necessarily a threat to traditional handhelds like the DS/PSP.
You spelled "Nintendo Wii" wrong in that sentence.
Not every iPhone/Touch user is a gamer, so the penetration measurement here is significantly skewed.
If you wanted to talk about Market REACH (entirely different metric) then you still couldn't compare since the reach of the other systems is still far greater than what Apple can even have a wet dream for.
Every cell phone since hte late 90s has shipped with the ability to play "games".
Why do we persist in pretending the iPhone is something new? Why is it a revolutionary gaming console, when my 5 year old treo (which at least has a dpad and buttons) is a mere phone?
do they pay for this shit, or is it purely an image/cliq thing? If the former, can I get a piece of the action somehow?
Here's a little taste for free:
"The new iPhone revolutionizes both cameras and phones by having a camera in it!"
An iPhone is not (and could never considered) a gaming platform. My 3.5 Ghz, SLI-enabled, liquid cooled machine is a gaming system.
Hand down, a bad article.
While Nintendo might be worried about it getting in on the DS's market, I doubt they are concerned about it getting in on the Wii's market. I'm quite sure that mobile gaming will be a large market, and it doesn't surprise me that a big share will start happening on phones since they are now very capable devices. However, people are not going to abandon their computers/game consoles for their phones.
People keep spouting off hype about Apple getting into games.
They will fail.
No one can take on Nintendo in the handheld department and win.
Because, of course, there is absolutely no middle ground between "win out over Nintendo" and "fail completely."
Dan Aris
Fun. Free. Online. RPG. BattleMaster.
...and I'm not being sarcastic, if my 11 year old son is any indication of what is happening around the country.
He saved all his birthday, christmas and allowance money for months to buy an iPod touch and spends way
too much time playing games on it. Most of the games are free or only cost a couple of bucks, meaning he
can get near-instant gratification without having to save $50 to buy a console game. He uses it almost
exclusively as a game platform, even to the point of using a clunky old mp3 player for music, in order to save the
iPod touch battery for game play.
There is no bigger risk for a game developer, than to have his entire project being blocked, because some company found it "objectionable"
Which could also mean: We have a deal with your competitor. (Usually EA.)
Give me a standardized platform that is not dependent on a single company (=point of failure), and you have a developer studio on your side.
Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
The iphone is so limited as a game platform it's silly to try to compare it. The touch screen does work well for some kinds of games, but it's an absolutely horrid interface for a lot of others.
Shooters do not work well with the touch interface. Racing games do not work well with the touch interface. Sports games do not work well with the touch interface. Platformers do not work well with the touch interface. Right there, you've accounted for (conservative estimate) more than half of the game market. The iphone/touch is great at what it does, but it isn't very good as a portable game system. People are still better off getting a DS or PSP if they want that kind of thing, because let's face it. Having a lot of games doesn't mean you have a lot of good games that have interfaces which are implemented well.
BeauHD. Worst editor since kdawson.
"with a year under its belt and an installed base of iPhone and iPod Touch owners at around forty million"
iPhone OS 2 has only been out for a year. Has everyone already forgotten then the iphone itself has been out for 2 solid years?
The only complain I have about iPhone games is the big guy who sat in the middle seat on the plane and excitedly played one of those tilt-sensitive race car games all flight. I was elbowed a thousand times. Other than that iPhone games are pretty neat.
There is obvious hype around iPhone and iTouch, it's is the sexy thing today, but how long?
Is there any statistics that how many people can make a profit and a living off iPhone game development (not counting the ones who actually lost money, never made enough sales to recover development costs or just manage to break even)?
Where are the profitable developer companies located? Can US, European, etc. developer companies compete with lower wage locations?
How many of the games are truly new titles and not porting or rip-offs of existing properties, originally developed for other platforms?
What is the 3d chip in the iphone capable of doing? More specifically, how does it compare to the power of an older console like the playstation 2? John Carmack has stated that he thinks Quake 3 could be ported to the iphone : is this really possible?
Nintendo DS lite: $99 street price ($129 list). iPhone: $99 - $400 + 2 year contract + give your social security number to AT&T to get a credit check. An iPhone is not attanable by a 12 year old mowing lawns.
Call me when someone ports Nethack to the iPhone. Or figures out a good mobile device type interface for roguelikes in general.
If the geiger counter does not click, the coffee, she is not thick.
Apple and the iPhone have become the Chuck Norris of high-tech fashion accessories. There is literally nothing that the iPhone (or Apple generally) cannot do: No industry that the iPhone can fundamentally transform. I have seen articles saying that the iPhone has "transformed" everything from transportation ("it has GPS!!") to interpersonal relationships ("it has a phone!!!") to gaming ("you can play Sudoku!!!!") to education ("You can read books!") to shopping ("you can buy stuff!") to journalism ("it has a camera!").
You name the industry, profession or realm of human activity, and there is an article somewhere that was born in the mind of an Apple publicist or fanboi that explains how the iPhone is going to completely transform it ("there's an app for that!!"). And thank heavens we have media and "news" outlets that are dedicated to spreading the Word about this transformative product.
And each and every one of these articles will have a quote exactly like the one found in this article: "It's redefining what it means to be a publisher in this world."
You are welcome on my lawn.
Playing games using touch screen? Good luck with that...If they want to make it a gaming platform,put real buttons that can withstand daily abuse.
It's less hype that the title and summary makes it out to be. In reality most people who buy iphone games play it for a week or so and dismiss it. The next time they think about buying an iphone game they will learn from their previous experience and think about the money they wasted. The whole iphone thing is much like the internet boom. The technology is there, it's new, people are curious, but it's going to bust very soon and on a large scale, affecting all those who invested in the hope of a long term popularity. On the other hand, if they revive classic NES, SNES games etc or start making novel portable games that are somehow better than psp and ds games on a limited platform, and release them commercially, that would change things a little. But seeing how Sony and Nintendo have solid relations with the real game developers that make games that a lot of people actually like, the chances of iphone grabbing a large portion of the market is slim.
Based on iTunes Store, digital distribution on the iPhone, and the quality of games released to the iPhone I can only draw a two word conclusion based on the products offered.
DIGITAL FLEAMARKET
-=[ Who Is John Galt? ]=-
That's cool and all, but then you have to talk to southerners.
Sadly even "full fledged console or computer games" with at least 50 hours of playtime have become hard to come by lately.
Together, these substantially reduce the marginal costs of, and the psychological barriers to, porting games to Mac OS X. Apple could do a few things to shake the gaming industry up even more.
Those sort of moves might seem unlikely, but might not be all that far fetched. Licensing OSX to a game console maker is even conceivable, since it doesn't present the threat that licensing to clone makers did to the Mac. One such licensing agreement would vault Cocoa to the top gaming platform.
Apple could absorb a few game content providers without smothering the life out of them, as apparently the Microsoft acquisition of Bungie threatened to do, until Bungie managed to burst out of Microsoft screaming, "liberation!"
If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine.
Hell, they don't even have real buttons.
The "Wee" has no buttons either, preferably, and I hear 'bout %50 of the population has one!
Can you hurry up and get to it already?
With traditional games, developers might wait a year or two between major releases; ngmoco is planning on releasing new versions of its games for the iPhone every four to five months.
I for one welcome Madden 2010 Spring, Summer, Fall, and Winter editions.
If I were Nintendo, I'd be tired of all the "wee" jokes by now. They should name their iPhone-fighter the "Portable Nintendo Entertainment System" to avoid any such innuendo!
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
Iphone games are about as entertaining and long lasting as a fart. I would hazard a guess that after purchase most iphone games are NEVER played again. Leading to gimmick toys that are pushing games nowhere.
No, I don't think this Apple Propoganda. I just think that it's dumb to say that high iPhone and iPod sales indicate competition for Sony and Nintendo. They are still an MP3 player and a cell phone, and some people buy them to play MP3s and make phone calls; this article doesn't take those people into account. I'd wager my own shares in Apple that the majority of people who buy these devices don't buy it with with a "Whelp, I guess I don't need a Gameboy now" mentality.
If you really want to do a sales comparison, compare the amount of money spent on games for the DS, the PSP, and the iPhone/iPod. It'd be interesting to see Apple's "penetration numbers" then.
It expands the market, integrating phones and casual gaming. It has a nice interface, esp given the accelerometer.
It does change things but more from a marketing perspective than anything else.
Look, viewing TV shows on your computer screen instead of your 42" plasma HDTV is a growing trend. Sometimes something less good is good enough and has other advantages. That's what changes things somewhat.
It expands things. It doesn't mean the iPhone games will lessen anything else. But it does change things.
Except for ending slavery, the Nazis, communism, & securing American independence, war has never solved anything.
...will always be it's lack of input. There are more genres better served by a thumbpad and buttons than an accelerometer. I've had an iPhone for over a year and even as an avid gamer I can't find a single game worth playing.
"started to catch up to the worldwide penetration of both Sony's (50 million) and Nintendo's (100 million) devices."
But...most of the people who bought iPods/iPhones didn't buy them primarily as game machines. People who bought Sonys and Nintendos did.
Coder's Stone: The programming language quick ref for iPad
People are making DS games and apps right now, for free. Have been for ages.
There are accusations flying around on various forums that Acekard and other third-party DS flash cards infringe Nintendo's patent on the protocol used by DS Game Cards. Are these without merit?
To be a developer for Nintendo you basically have to prove that you're an actual business that can put out a game.
How does one start "an actual business that can put out a game"?
Shooters do not work well with the touch interface.
There are three genres called "shooter". There are light-gun-style games (e.g. Duck Hunt), space shooters (e.g. Raiden), and first-person shooters (e.g. Doom). What kind of shooters do you mean?
Racing games do not work well with the touch interface.
But apparently they work with the accelerometer.
Sports games do not work well with the touch interface.
Have you ever played the video game Mario Hoops 3-on-3 for Nintendo DS?
Platformers do not work well with the touch interface.
Have you ever played the video game Kirby Canvas Curse for Nintendo DS?
...must be true, because I can play games on it. I'll just conveniently ignore all the other phones that are more popular.
You forgot blackberry: over 50 million.
Not to mention many hundreds of millions for nokia/ericsson/motorola.
Another example of Apple mod-abuse - the above is not flamebait. If anything, the original article is flamebait, and this response points out why it is misleading: if we are comparing one particular phone manufacturer to games consoles, why not compare other phone manufacturers too, since they can all play games? It comes across as a cheap attempt to make the Iphone look popular, by comparing it, and only it, to a smaller market.
Yes, it's interesting that phones are likely to become more popular as handheld gaming devices than dedicated devices, because most people don't want to carry around a dedicated device. But there's nothing special about the Iphone. And the same may end up being true soon of cameras and mp3 players, anyway.
Does the fact that Nokia's sales of hundreds of millions of phones, that contain cameras, mean that "Nokia Shakes Up the Camera Industry"? That in itself would be absurd enough, but this article is worse - it doesn't say Nokia, it instead picks up a niche-player in the market, and just rides on the pro-Apple hype.
Of course, no doubt I'll be modded down too, as happens with any post that advocates a phone other than the precious Iphone.
Objective C is used to build the apps on the iPhone. Sure, some developers might elect to use some C or C++ code, particularly if they have a mountain of it they are porting, but there is a lot of Objective C running on the phone, even in games, and it's... snappy!
The platform and tools are OSX and XCode, and are not available on other platforms, hitherto frequently derided as being either insufficient or insufficiently "open" by developers with an interest in multiple platforms, and certainly not considered to be "pretty standard".
The types of games include FPS and highly graphics oriented games, some of them derived from "regular/bigger" projects.
If there's anything "slow" hereabouts, it's probably not Objective C.
If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine.
We went from playing games on 25" LCD flat panels, down to playing inferior games on touchscreens measuring in at under 5".
What progress!
I look forward to a day when I can imagine games in my head with no hardware at all.
that doesn't mean I won't be buying word processing software for computers any more.
What is this strange concept you speak of?
:wq
Nah, I don't think so. Three reasons it won't happen:
1. Only a subset of the installed base is going to play games on the system. Quoting the 40 million figure is misleading--how much of that base actually wants to play games when the primary reason for the purchase has nothing to do with gaming? Who knows. And that's a problem. The true game-playing installed base could be as little as 1 million for all we know.
2. Only a subset of that subset will want to play the kind of games they have to pay real money for. DS games are $20-$40 while Iphone games have hovered at $5. Most people will be perfectly happy with $2 clones of bejewled, poker and solitaire.
3. Publishers would much rather sell higher priced games to an installed base who bought the system to buy games. When Ubisoft released 'Prince of Persia' for the Ipod recently, they released at a price of $10, no doubt because Apple forced them to. On the DS, they released it for $40. This was okay with them because they're just testing the waters and the game was already made, already profitable purely on the DS. And Ipod owners still complained that the game was so much, showing that they put far less value on gaming than the average DS player. The dirty truth is that if the Ipod were Ubisoft's only platform, the game would never have been made. It's not profitable at $10. You may as well revert to bejeweled clones. It would be a sad day if the Ipod did triumph in the handheld market and rich games with storyline and some depth never again get made.
Everyone keeps thinking there has to be some other hook on top of gaming that will inevitably knock Nintendo out the top spot. The truth is, only taking on Nintendo directly with pure gaming hardware has a chance.
You create the N-Gage and try to mate a gaming system and a phone and you lose. You create something like the PSP and try to mate video, music, media and gaming and you lose (perhaps not as spectacularly, but the PSP has lost). And here it is again, you try to create a phone or a PDA-thing (ipod touch) and then add gaming on top and you're just not focused enough to do it. Let's see Apple get some balls and release an actual gaming device that is primarily sold for gaming first, and only secondarily can do other things. My prediction: they won't do that.
Furthermore, I don't think anything without two screens can beat the DS at this point, and neither Sony nor Apple are offering that. Do you really wanna buy your kid a PSP or IPod Touch that has virtually no screen-protection mechanism, and can easily be dropped and broken? What's more, Nintendo is the king of software--that's no small secret to their success. Is Apple going to create a games division and kidnap Shigeru Miyamoto? Don't think so.
So, I'll believe it when I see it happen. Till then, I remain skeptical. The perennial talk of beating Nintendo at their own game, so far is exactly like all the talk of beating Google at search, and ain't one company come close yet.
"I Don't Have Enough Faith to be an Atheist"
half the post is in the subject line?
Friend: Shit dude, what are you doing?
Me: Chill man, just playing with my "P Nes", you want to hold it?
Hmmm, much cooler than "Wee"
I wonder what sort of penetration the P Nes might get?
Please invite me to your VB clan! /half kidding
User ID: 1802 1331 39
Utilizing the synergization of benchmark e-solutions to pre-workaround action items!
[The DS] isn't a counter argument. It has a full D-Pad and more buttons.
You're thinking of games that combine the Touch Screen with the controls inherited from the GBA. But there are also DS games that can be played with only the Touch Screen, such as Kirby Canvas Curse and WarioWare: Touched! and Meteos.
....no.