Slashdot Mirror
Console Makers Worry Over Apple's Growing Competition
The NY Times is running a story about the effect Apple is having on the console gaming market, making Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo worry that consumers will be satisfied playing games on devices that aren't necessarily focused on gaming. Quoting:
"The concerns highlight an accelerating shift away from hard-core games, which have traditionally driven console sales, to more casual ones played on cellphones. Of the 758 new game titles shown at the Tokyo Game Show, 168 were for cellphone platforms — more than twice as many as in the previous year. ... Apple's assault could even eat into sales of home consoles like Nintendo's Wii, Sony's PlayStation 3 or Microsoft's XBox, as game-playing quickly becomes centered on cellphones. Many in the industry say that Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft need to explore more radical changes to their businesses, including an emphasis on software rather than hardware and a better way for users to download games. 'As a platform, the cellphone has the biggest potential, because everybody owns one,' said Kazumi Kitaue, chief executive at another game maker, Konami Digital Entertainment. A family with three children might buy just one Wii or PlayStation to share, but those children will probably have cellphones of their own and download and play games, Mr. Kitaue said."
Or at least the Wii is.
Seriously, have any of these people actually played any games on it? They are uniformly quite terrible. The lack of physical buttons is simply too big of an obstacle. Sure you can do some interesting stuff with the accelerometer, but at some point you want to be able to mash some buttons to kill the baddies and the in this regard the iPhone simply sucks ass.
Apple computers don't even play any of the best video games. You need Windows for that. Why would console makers fear Apple?
I could see why console makers might consider fearing Windows, since Direct X 11 promises better graphics than what is available on any console. Of course the prohibitive cost of a gaming PC means consoles don't really have much to worry about.
Maybe the handheld console makers like Nintendo might fear Apple, if they weren't already laughing all the way to the bank.
Bottom line: This is just more non-sensical Apple loving fluff "news".
First, I'm more of a casual gamer. Frankly, the $60 titles generally don't hold my attention anymore and I've found the Arcade (xbox 360) titles to be much more fun. I think I've kind of gotten sick of the "wow look at the graphics!" "genre".
That being said, when I do want to sit and waste an hour or two playing games, I want to do so in the comfort of my living room with a nice 46" screen. Not a 3 inch screen. I want to play with a controller built at least somewhat ergonomically, not one that feels like my thumbs are going to snap.
I will concede that _any_ new game "system" will pull customers away from some other company to at least some degree, but I seriously doubt the top players need to worry about the iWhatever taking over their industry.
Although, diversifying in your target market(s) isn't a bad idea.
"Microsoft ... worry that consumers will be satisfied playing games on devices that aren't necessarily focused on gaming."
That was their position before the xbox wasn't it? They would make games for devices (PCs) that were not necessarily focused on gaming.
And here I was worried that I could play games without an annual contract to pay a telco every month. I mean, yeah, I could get an ipod touch, but wouldn't that be just like getting a DSi? Who would I pay every month? Gosh!
Everyone agrees that flatulence apps are not only worth paying for, they make having the AT&T contract worthwhile. Look how many people play WoW, clearly games are only fun if you're paying month to month, right?
Not everyone can afford 300+ for the console and then 60 for each and every game they make. My kids want an XBOX can't afford it plus the games they want at the same time.
The Navy Motto "IF it ain't broke Fix It" "A day is wasted if you don't learn something new"
I don't have a cell phone, you insensitive clod!
A $200 iphone + $1200 a year for service plus $50 for games. So much cheaper!
Now, a lot of developers are focusing on smartphones because and they are NOW becoming more and more gaming capable, a few years ago cellphone gaming meant a crappy 2d java game but now... I see this phones as menace to portable gaming consoles, not to consoles in general, that would be exagerating the issue, and even so... I dont want my iphone dead after a couple hours of gaming.
I just hope that console games start becoming ports of mobile phone games. That would be justice for how they've ruined the PC game market.
Iphone and the Ipod touch at best can compete with the portable market (unless apple figures out how to make the devices plug into a 1080p HDTV)
I don't think the I-game is eating away market share because it's Apple, I think it's the entire package tied in with it. It's a gaming device, and it works with Itunes.
All Sony/Nintendo has to do to compete with this is write a DS/PSP Itunes sync program, and the problem's solved. Change the image of the DS/PSP from being mostly gaming devices, to a multifunction device that happens to play games and they'll be OK.
well, they should have a pretty good market as long as they make their games really shiny
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe." - Albert Einstein
Seriously, have any of these people actually played any games on it? They are uniformly quite terrible. The lack of physical buttons is simply too big of an obstacle. Sure you can do some interesting stuff with the accelerometer, but at some point you want to be able to mash some buttons to kill the baddies and the in this regard the iPhone simply sucks ass.
You're obviously not the target demographic. I'm guessing that, in other discussions, you've said similar things regarding perceived shortcomings with the Wii.
The target demographic that's mainly interested in "mash[ing] some buttons to kill the baddies" is the group that's currently buying XBox 360s and Playstation 3s - and, based on sales, it's pretty obvious it's a significantly smaller group than the group buying the Wii and/or interested in playing short games that you can pick up for a short while and set down afterward. And, in the end, overall sales is really pretty much the only thing any of these companies care about.
I am not meaning (or attempting) to demean your opinion. I'm just pointing out that it's unlikely you're a reflection of the audience Apple is after.
#DeleteChrome
Does the iPhone have many (any?) games that aren't of the simple silly cellphone variety? While there's a market for games like that, no doubt, there is also very clearly a market for games with more depth to them. Some of the top selling games are ones that have a good deal of complexity to them (the Sims being a great example), not the sort of thing that competes with a cellphone game.
Also, as you noted, the iPhone really isn't a competitor for a console just based off of the fact that it is a handheld. So while it might be a competitor for the DS and PSP, I don't see it making inroads in to the console market. People do not get handhelds to replace consoles. I have never met someone who has said "I got a DS so that I wouldn't have to get a Wii or 360." No, they get the handheld to play when they aren't at home. They don't get it to replace their console.
However even in the handheld market, it seems at this time that the iPhone doesn't have the games to be any real threat. While it may have some bigger games, a good many of its games are of the same, simple, cellphone variety we've seen in the past. Nothing wrong with that, and indeed probably what you want on a cell since it is the kind of thing to play for 15 minutes while waiting for the doctor. However that isn't the same market as people who want a game they can really get in to and play for longer periods of time.
Part of the problem I think is that there is this misperception in the media that casual games are taking people away from more involved games. They seem to have this idea that there are all these people who played very complicated games because they had to, and now, freed from that tyranny, have moved on to simple games. No, not so much. The people who are gamers and like complex games still play them. They continue to sell in ever increasing numbers. Rather what has happened is people who were not interested in games are now playing games because the casual games appeal to them. They don't want "hardcore" games, but a casual game is some occasional fun.
What that means is that the casual market does not cut in to the hardcore market. They are different groups. If anything, the hardcore market cuts in to the casual market, as some people start on the casual games, discover they are in fact a gamer and just didn't know it, and start buying more games.
"consumers will be satisfied playing games on devices that aren't necessarily focused on gaming."
So you mean like a PC? Back when the home computer market was growing and the Atari was collapsing I'm sure the console industry was wondering the same thing. Once they took back the market in the late 80s (thanks Nintendo) it seemed that as more people got multiple PCs in the home that a shift back to using devices that aren't consoles as our primary gaming systems seems inevitable.
iPhone/Touch app's store is like Steam except for a handheld. Which makes me wonder why Steam's growth has stagnated (relative to Aple apps store, Wiiware, Xbox live, PSN, etc) when ideally I think it should be expanding in a world of social networks and instant downloads.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
I think what apple is targeting is the cash strapped parent who kids want multiple mobile devices. Though $200 for an iphone or iPod touch might seem out of line for a kids first device, if it can serve as the personal computer for browsing, email, and reading, can text, take pictures and movies, and play some games, it might seem a good alternative to phone plus a psp plus a music player, etc.
Like the mac,which made graphic processing affordable, the advantage is likely to be short lived. It should be simple to get something like a PSP and add a phone and some other trinkets. If that can happen,then people will likely migrate to it. One thing that I am surprised to see is that MS is not integrating the Windows Mobile, xbox, and zune technology into single product. The fact that we are talking about MS Windows 7 and a new Zune to me is incompressible. A Zune that has and HDMI port, but cannot play games, is simply silly.
"She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
The iPhone's touchscreen is nice for some applications. But for general purpose gaming, you can't beat a regular controller. DS-style controls are unlikely to make an appearance on standard cellphones and this will keep gaming on cellphones to a minimum.
I have a feeling that demographic doesn't really strike a lasting profit, however. Nintendo is slowly falling and has been for a few months - could the Wii's marketing be wearing off? Could the iPod Touch face the same downward curve?
Besides, while the Wii has had phenomenal sales, the other two consoles have still gathered an audience - numbers that most markets would BEG to have. The positive thing about the button mashers is that they're growing (gaming is very mainstream, even in the Xbox/PS3 variety) and they don't stop spending money. I mean, if the Xbox 360 and its failure rate (which may or may not be fixed; who knows) can lead the charge through the High-Definition consoles in this economic decline, what will get those gamers to stop spending money?
... waiting for a train, in a doctor's reception, under my desk where others can't see me...
Best use these devices were ever put to.
Can't you see that I'm social networking when I'm on a PC and drinking beer otherwise?
This article is just trying to create a false dichotomy, namely, one that assumes that game sales represent a zero sum game. So if Apples sales increase, Microsofts, Sony's and Nintendo's must decrease. This is not the case.
The real important facts are the one's that this article leaves out, like that in 2008, only 462 total games were shown, where as this year, 758 new games where shown. This is an increase of 62%! So in reality, Cellphone games have only increased 40% compared to the rest of new video games. A 40% increase, while large, is nothing to worry too much about, as the cellphone market is very immature; not very many cell phones can actually play games, vendors still lock-in most cell phones.
This is article is just a standard journalistic technique of creating a story where none exists.
Maybe the market they mean is the newly identified lethargic gamer market. The kind of people who might play Tetris or Solitaire on a console.
Quack, quack.
Why do people keep comparing the two? I know cellphones have games sold on them, but thats like comparing cars to boats. Of course more cars are going to be sold than boats!
Where else can a budget-minded enterprise leap a low-rung development hurdle of $100 for the Apple SDK and produce a game that, with the right market strategy can then propel that same company to generate more games that sell for what the developer asks for.
Low overhead and potentially high volume sales for a bargin priced game should usher in a new age of game development for this platform.
including an emphasis on software rather than hardware
They'd better not, because that's where their competitive advantage is. The only reason anyone would play on a console instead of on their phone is because of the hardware (including bigger screen, the controllers, etc). If they focus only on software, then eventually any type of software that can be made for a console can be made for a phone.
Qxe4
I groan whenever I see anyone write "It's not about the graphics... it's not about the graphics." If that was the case, then why aren't we satisfied with the original PlayStation, or the Super NES for that matter. Or even the original NES! Why aren't millions of people playing MUDs instead of World of Warcraft? Let me answer that for you. Because graphics DO matter. People who say "it's not about the graphics, it's about gameplay" are the same kind of people who tell you the first thing they look for in a chick/guy is personality, then do a double-take whenever someone hot walks down the street.
Freedom is drinking a beer in the park when you're supposed to be at work.
I don't have an iPhone. I have an almost-luddite Samsung phone. When I had a Sprint PCS no-frills cell phone, many games had monthly subscriptions. I found that to be annoying. I found it annoying when I switched phones, several games I already paid for(no subs, just a 1-time fee) couldn't be played on my newer phone.
Maybe just 1 cell platform for games isn't such a bad idea.
"Console Makers Worry Over Growing Competition From Apple" leads me to think that Apple has released a competitor to the Wii, xBox, PlayStation. Bad slashdot editor, bad (swats with rolled-up newspaper).
If I want a great multiplayer strategy game with complex rules and takes a lot of time to learn, I'll play that on my PC or Mac, if I want to blow a couple of hours in a racecar or fragging aliens in an FPS, then my console is pretty good at that. If I am on the bus and have 30 minutes, I might play Assasins Creed or bejewled on the iPhone. (or listen to a podcast, or watch a TV episode, or listen to music etc)
Sometimes I even play board games with my kids and soccer outside. All sorts of games have their place and I hope none of them goes away.
The comparison doesn't really make sense, for a number of reasons, such as:
1. cost to enter either market are wildly different.
2. sales prices are wildly different.
3. development time is wildly different.
etc.
Not to mention that cell phones make terrible gaming machines and some games won't transfer well at all onto a cell phone.
The console makers might be sweating the iphone, but not because it's cutting into their console/game sales (except for maybe Nintendo).
Also: this is to Tokyo game show. I thought no one had an iphone in Japan.
Actually, I find that the mashing buttons to kill the baddies falls squarely on the Wii, while beer drinking FPS tournaments are 360's big thing, and heavily priced bizarre gameplay falls in the ps3 arena.
Regardless, the biggest issue seems to me to be basic economics. What is the cost of your entertainment. I've been interested in picking up a next gen console since the wii came out. I've played all three extensively, and at the moment, their price point is nearly identical. But for me to get one game out of a system, I need to drop about $300 for the base system WITHOUT any games, and $50 for a relatively old game (Mario Galaxy is still $50, 3 years in). With high quality games like Braid coming out on steam for $5-$20 the comparable initial drop of $20 to start playing and $350 to start playing is an obvious choice. Needless to say, despite the fact I've typically enjoyed console gaming for years, the higher price point for individual games combined with the cost of the systems (which haven't dropped to levels that I feel the purchase is justified), makes people who share this opinion swing away from them.
I still haven't swung toward cellphone games, because generally, across the board, I haven't found many of them that are on par with games from the super nintendo. Tetris maybe, but I haven't found a good solid push for thought provoking games for a cell. The biggest challenge for me is that the cost of old classics is finally pushing up into the current 'new game' price point that I have no interest in.
I'm mostly hoping this commentary will shed some light on the mindset of a, possibly atypical, non-hard-core gamer.
I wouldn't consider the mad hatter mad. Just reality impaired. He sure can make a mean cup of tea.
Halo, or SecondLife on a 3x4 NEVER. As in the console wars the graphics prevailed, and in the computer world the processor prevails. I mean think about playing Halo on a 3x4 screen.. LOL the story is laughable.. I believe that most people have both a phone and a console, the phone is great on the go. But when it comes to "real" gaming, the consoles and PC's RULE...
how about better mac hardware for gameing at better prices>
a imac at $1500 with 9400m (on board video) and 2.66GHz Intel Core 2 Duo (laptop) is not cutting it. not only that the video chip will have a hard time with having a good fps at 24-inch.
the mini at $599.00 with 9400m and a 2.0GHz Intel Core 2 Duo (laptop) # 2.26GHz Intel Core 2 Duo [Add $150.00] and only 1gb of ram.
$1,799.00 to get 2.93GHz Intel Core 2 Duo (laptop) and only a GT 120 with 256MB memory? a ATI Radeon HD 4850 512MB is only $200.00 more.
of the mac pro at $2,499.00 with only 3gb or ram and a NVIDIA GeForce GT 120 512MB # ATI Radeon HD 4870 512MB [Add $200.00] makeing it 200+150 (base gt 120 price) = $350 for a 4870 512
you can build a core i7 system with 6gb + 1tb HD + dual dvdrw + 4870 1gb for $1000 less with vista / 7.
People are starting to rely more on portability than functionality. For a lot of people, playing a game on an iPhone and playing a game on a Wii holds no distinctive difference. It's all just a matter of portable entertainment. A logical answer to the cellphone gaming craze would be that if you get bored of a game, you can simply download a new one, and based on your coverage, it's fairly simple. The portability of cellphone games is always going to be at the price of function and graphics (not to make all CPG's out to be poorly designed.) However, replayability when your sitting in the waiting room at the doctor's office is always going to be paramount. There's only so long you can carry around a PSP or DSi before you either start forgetting your games or charger, or it simply becomes too much of a hassle. Cellphones are going to be around for a long time, as are the games for them. There's nothing we can do about it.
"Chance favors only the prepared mind." -Archimedes
So... the pc industry is dying, but the exact same type of hardware model will utterly destroy consoles? Or maybe analysts look better when they make wild predictions, and cellphone gaming is just another platform, and it might slow sales of systems like the DS and PSP.
Apple likes their hardware the way it is. There is clearly a large market for a consumer level tower system, as Dell, Gateway et al sell MANY of them and Mac users have asked for one for years, but Apple won't deliver one. For whatever reason, they are convinced their lineup is as it should be. They aren't going to be introducing something that is more game oriented.
Also as a practical matter, Apple doesn't seem to understand the computer games market very well. Gabe Newell (Valve) said that every few years Apple comes to the game makers and says "We need more games, what do we have to do to get games on the Mac?" The developers then tell Apple the kind of things they'd like to see, and that is the end of it. Apple goes off and doesn't do anything. As such the game tools on Mac remain inferior to those on the PC and that combined with the smaller market share means most game studios just aren't interested.
There has been nothing to show that any of that is going to change. Apple has their own idea of how things should be done, and aren't really interested in listening to feedback. However, I guess I can't really give them shit, they are making money, and really what more do you want?
The execs are right to worry about this kind of thing. All technology adaptation follows the same general life pattern. Right now consoles are now a developed industry... They make changes and improvements however they are incremental changes not revolutionary.... The problem is the stage after this is obsolescence. They are right to worry. Maybe not this year or next but sometime within ~30 years (my guess) there will be no need for consoles and their market will die... The execs know this, however to maximize proffit they need to know when this is happening. The problem is not that people will stop wanting games but right now people are willing to pay a premium to pay games. Once technology develops a little further this will not be the case. If moore's law holds up within 20 years your toaster will have enough computational power to power the most intensive game imaginable witout breaking a sweat (over exaggeration but you get my point) once this happens the market for "gaming machines" will be like the market for calculators (basic kind not graphing/integrating)
It is terrible for us but some people loves it, especially casual type games rock with touchscreen.
Anyway, I think Sony and others are missing the point. It is how easy it is to buy a game, almost globally! You feel like gaming, you just enter your password and the game is there. No serials, no credit card numbers, no physical media, no J2ME warnings (don't ask), no IMEI entering while purchasing... IMEI is the most evil DRM system ever BTW... Buy a game tied to your device IMEI, device dies, game is gone too. Happened to me couple of times.
It is amazing that they don't see the real deal, take lesson from Apple's success with that "gaming creature". I remember almost buying a PSP game for 20 dollars and gave up just when I saw post and packaging cost $25!
lol, mod parent up!
Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
I may buy scrabble to play on the bus on my way to work. However when it comes down to playing a real game, I'd rather do it in front of a computer or a TV. However GameBoy type consoles may give way to cell phones.
Furthermore when it comes to cell phones, Qualcomm's BREW has far more market share and reach than Apple ever had. It won't ever be the Iphone that causes the DS or PSP to tremble in it's boots, it's going to be a simple BREW or Java Mobile capable device.
No you're just an idiot who makes circular arguments.
Where are the mod points when you need them?
You are right on spot. The truth is that Nintendo through the Wii, decided to base their entire market on the kind of people that don't really love games, and now they are worried because the non gamer market prefers non gaming devices, well I'm shocked, not
Seriously why did they expecting different? Are their marketing teams so retarded?
But... the future refused to change.
A whiny pointless dismissal of an Apple product by someone who doesn't understand the appeal! Stop the presses!
Fiat Homos et Pereat Theos
Cell phone games won't replace consoles. They're two different genres. Cell phones don't have the necessary hardware to replace a lot of the popular console games. It will be a long time before you see Halo or Call of Duty on a cell phone.
I admit, some of the iPhone games are addicting. I've been playing Kingdoms Live a lot recently. But that is only because my cell phone is always with me. It's just something to do during any down time while I'm away from the consoles.
Console gaming will never go away. Sure they would benefit from a more robust online system (which is continuously happening). I will never want to sit on my phone to play a game for a few hours. The couch and a big screen with surround sound will always be more appealing. I recall reading an article that console gaming is destroying the PC gaming market. Then this article comes out saying that an almighty cell phone is worry console makers? Please.
Absolutely agree! And so do these guys!
Ahh!...bitter, are we? ;)
Well, truth be told, I agree - although many console ports(like TF2) still play better on PC.
VoIP on the DSi, including video chat. Problem solved.
I have a Japanese phone and pay (very little) for older games directly from the companies. For example, I play the NES and SNES Mega Man games on my phone, bought from Capcom. I also play the original Dragon Quest (Dragon Warrior US) games on my phone and have the first Final Fantasy. If these third-party companies are making money off of their old, unused libraries, then I don't see why all of the first-party console makers should shut themselves out of the business.
http://www.tenjou.net/
It isn't about the graphics. Consoles have gotten to the point where everything is good enough. In the past, there was such a noticeable difference between console generations -- Atari vs NES, NES vs Super NES, N64 vs PS2. This generation has reached a point where graphics are good enough that there is not a huge need to upgrade in the mind of the consumers. Hell, the fact the people are still buying PS2 show that last generation is good enough for many people. Don't get me started on the Wii.
Game play counts. It has always counted and will always count. If graphics were all that anyone cared about, would anyone have ever played an Atari 2600? There are so many gorgeous games that just plain suck (Crysis, anyone?). There are plenty of games that have terrible graphics but are loved for the wonderful game play. How many people still pick up and play Super Mario? Starfox 64? Any Zelda Game?
If that was the case, then why aren't we satisfied with the original PlayStation, or the Super NES for that matter. Or even the original NES! Why aren't millions of people playing MUDs instead of World of Warcraft?
Try playing a FPS on an NES. How about a game like Mass Effect on a PS1. People upgrade consoles not just because of the graphics. Yes, graphics are apart of it, but so is things like RAM, Processor, and storage medium. People aren't satisfied with just a SNES for the same reason they don't still use 486's with Windows 3.1. By upgrading the hardware, it allows the developers to do more. More RAM means more and bigger levels. Faster Processor means more and better AI baddies. Also, Try fitting a 700+ Mb game on an Atari 2600 ROM Cartridge. It also helps that every five years, console makers tell people that they need to upgrade.
As for MUDs, they are very user-unfriendly that require arcane protocols that most people never use. Try telling Joe Sixpack how to use Telnet or how to dial into a BBS. I don't think that WoW is the best example of a graphically complex game. Last time I seen it, it still looked like a First generation PS2 game which proves the point that graphics aren't everything.
Slow Down Cowboy! It's been 1 hour, 47 minutes since you last successfully posted a comment
I seriously doubt that all of these mega companies are "worried" that apple is going to assault their business and take them all out. This NYtimes article is just trying to make iPhones seem all that much cooler.
Next week's story, TV's are losing market share to Iphone and Ipod's. People have realized that they can stream live tv and watch movies on their Iphone's and Ipod. "Its the smart way to go" says some dumb blond. "Its much cheaper buying an Iphone then an expensive 46 inch tv."
"Cowardice in a race, as in an individual, is the unpardonable sin." --Teddy Roosevelt
Anything that brings new people to video games will ultimately be good for everyone who makes games.
The quality of the entertainment is what matters. Quality will continue to win. Always. That's why games are taking over from movies and (to a lesser extent) TV. Great games and bad movies.
Phone games can only "win" if they are a better entertainment experience than console games. And that's not normally going to be true.
Newspapers and crossword puzzles and card games better watch out for the iPhone though.
It looks like you entirely missed the point. Whether or not you believe the games on the iPhone terrible, it's a sizable market, and it's not even a gaming device.
This author takes full ownership and responsibility for the unpopular opinions outlined above.
Anybody else here grow up during the 70s? 80s? 90s? Anybody else find the idea of Apple being any kind of force in gaming utterly bizarre?
Not saying it won't happen, or that Apple can't be a force in whatever field... but this is like "Ferrari, Lamborghini Worry Over Growing Competition From Oldsmobile" or something.
Village idiot in some extremely smart villages.
Not true AC. As a long time PC gamer I have been very impressed with the quality and workability of iPhone games. All my gaming is now on the iPhone. The PC gathers dust. And yes I mostly play shooters.
iphone doesn't compete with living room game market. It expands the bathroom game market.
Another thing I wonder about the Wii as compared to the other consoles is the attach rate, meaning how many games the average owner has. That is actually where the console makers really make money. They make little to no money (and even lose money often) on the hardware itself. They make money because each title sold pays a license fee. It also indicates how well the owners like their gaming experience over all. After all if you buy a system and only get two games for it, good chance you aren't enjoying it that much. That you bought it means you thought you'd like it, not that you do like it.
I can't find any numbers on this, but I'd be interested because my observational evidence suggests that the Wii has a fairly low attach rate. People seem to get it, buy a couple games, and then the novelty wears off and they don't get more. Now perhaps I haven't seen a representative sample (which is why I'd like some hard numbers) but I could certainly see it based on my own experience. My roommate got a Wii and I tried it out. It was kinda cool, but the novelty of the controller wore off in a hurry and I really wasn't interested in it.
'As a platform, the cellphone has the biggest potential, because everybody owns one,'
Say, does it smell like oblivious privilege in here?
DRM: Terminator crops for your mind!
The target demographic that's mainly interested in "mash[ing] some buttons to kill the baddies" is the group that's currently buying XBox 360s and Playstation 3s - and, based on sales, it's pretty obvious it's a significantly smaller group than the group buying the Wii
The 360 and PS3 combined have outsold the Wii. When you look at game attach rates, even more so.
I wish I still had mod points. That's great!
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
I think a huge part of why cell phone games are rapidly becoming popular is because of how fast they load. On an iPhone, you just tap, a couple seconds later, you are in the game. Compare that with consoles where you'll probably have to switch video inputs; load the disc; wait for it to spin up; then the software developer's logo forcibly shows for x time; then the publishers; maybe even the distributors. Then you get to the opening screen and can play, if there isn't a forced-wait where you have to watch some kind of sequence introducing the games title. Then you might have to go through some bullshit for opening up a game and choosing a character or something. Or computer games, where you just spend a shitload of time loading all the various parts of the game.
That seems to be a relatively short-sighted opinion, and clearly you're playing the wrong games (hint: ports of games from consoles that try to capture the same style of gameplay rarely work).
As someone who has been a gamer for a few decades now, as well as a happy iPhone owner, I can attest to the fact that the iPhone does indeed do video games well. That said, it obviously can't handle the same sorts of gameplay that consoles can handle, and, conversely, it can handle some gameplay that consoles are poorly-built to handle.
Consider Zen Bound. It's certainly a casual game, but the premise (using your fingers to rotate a 3D block of wood or metal in order to wrap a rope around as much of the shape as possible...just look at the video at the link) simply doesn't work well on any of the consoles at the moment. I was skeptical at first, but once I saw a few gameplay videos and then got my hands on it, I was sold; the game demonstrates a new form of play and is remarkably entertaining for such a simple concept
Or consider a game like Eliss. Again, remarkably entertaining and yet incredibly simple in concept and execution. Both of these rely heavily on a multitouch interface (Eliss in particular) that none of the other consoles or handheld game devices could possibly hope to match (neither of these have a chance of working on the DS or Wii). When iPhone developers play to the iPhone's strengths, it really shines. When they try to shoehorn gameplay that was made for an entirely different medium, such as a console, into the device, it shows (and it usually sucks).
Really, it all comes back to what it has always been about: making games fun. Quite a few of the developers and console makers have gotten caught up in the shinier graphics, yearly releases on spent franchises, and other such nonsense that they've forgotten what real gamers (read: not "frat bros") want, which is to have a fun time. 8-bit games weren't fun in spite of the graphics. Rather, the only thing that the developers could feasibly work on to differentiate themselves was the gameplay of their product, so they were forced to innovate if they wanted to produce sales, and we saw quite a few brilliant and entertaining examples of new gameplay from that generation. The introduction of 3D with the 64-bit era really changed the game as well, since it allowed for new forms of gameplay, but since then, the industry has stagnated and very little has really changed in terms of the types of gameplay that we can expect.
The iPhone, for all of its foibles and drawbacks, is offering developers a chance to get in on the ground floor with something that's fresh, different, and entirely game-changing. And I'm not talking about the iPhone itself, but rather about multitouch. I honestly believe that multitouch has the potential to provide a more entertaining interface than that of any current console, so while the iPhone may be relegated to "casual" games for now (and it is), it certainly has the potential to explode in the "hardcore" market if a few hardcore titles showcasing multitouch come out. What those titles would be, I have no idea, otherwise I'd be building it now to make my millions.
I own a DSi just for a few months. I bought 3 games for it (Knights in a Nightmare, Trauma Center: Under the Knife 2, and some popular Brain Game with sodoku). What struck me was that none of them used buttons for any of the main action so far even though the DSi has four face buttons, it's all about the touch screen and the stylus.
Since the iPhone will be closest competition to handhelds, something worth noting. I played some good games on the iPhone, but they aren't on the caliber of serious DS games yet, but more like quick entertainment when you're bored for 5 minutes (something like paper toss), however, as the market grows, I'm sure it will catch up.
Also, the lousiest games tend to be.... free. (Some damn good ones too though). I think the DS will be king for a while.... but the iPhone/iPod Touch platform makes a way better gaming machine than the DS will ever make it as a browsing machine (Wii's Opera browser.... I shudder thinking about even having tried it on the normal web.)
I do. I probably just don't play the same types of games as you do. Plenty of games where a touchscreen and no buttons works fine.
I have a feeling that demographic doesn't really strike a lasting profit, however. Nintendo is slowly falling and has been for a few months - could the Wii's marketing be wearing off?
That's the problem with good games: if the player won't get bored with them, they won't buy a new one. Perhaps we should start paying attention to Open Source games, like Freespace 2 and Warzone 2100.
Your observations are off. Here's the numbers from vgchartz.com. First column is units of sw worldwide lifetime, second is attach rate.
PS3 153,204,847 6.24
Wii 334,499,258 6.26
360 254,496,331 7.93
So Wii's attach rate is basically tied with PS3.
I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
'satisfied playing games on devices that aren't necessarily focused on gaming.' ...It's called a pc. Duh
If I want a great multiplayer strategy game with complex rules and takes a lot of time to learn, I'll play that on my PC or Mac
Such games are much bettter played tabletop with a bunch of friends, with cardboard tiles and wooden, plastic or metal placeholders.
"I'm never quite so stupid as when I'm being smart" (Linus van Pelt)
I think this just continues the trend that started with the PS2, which doubled as a DVD player way back when they were fairly new. I own a 360, and use it for DVDs and Netflix streaming video in addition to a gaming machine. Right now I'm considering replacing my Samsung BluRay player with a PS3 Slim.
I've taken to calling my iPhone a "DAD": Do Anything Device. I don't use it for gaming, but the number of things you can use it for grows daily.
Xbox: 32.3 million sold
ps3: 24.9 milllion sold
Wii: 53.4 million sold
Yep. Idiotic marketing department seems to be the answer.
Apple doesn't even make a device which competes in these markets. Some people may like their games on the iphone/cell phone - but at the end of the day, it's an inferior device to game on. Some gamers might use these devices to get a quick fix when they're away form home, but serious gamers will always go back to their PC or console.
BeauHD. Worst editor since kdawson.
. . . Outside???
The point of phone games is that they are portable. I can see how they may threaten handheld consoles, especially with the increasing number of qwerty keypads (standardisation) coming into existence.
An SQL query goes to a bar, walks up to a table and asks, "Mind if I join you?"
Seriously, have *you* played any games on it?!! The missing buttons only present problems with a handful of games. You should try Blades of Fury and Modern Combat.
Just add calling capability to WiiMote so that Wii can compete with iPhone.
I beg to differ. I had stopped playing games altogether for some time, and the iPhone has rekindled my love for a good game. Madden NFL 2010 is great on an iPhone, it even got the Broncos two games from the Superbowl. With Wild West Pinball, Shredder Chess, Spore Origins, and more I've spent many an idle hour there. Fast & Furious race games are good, as are The problems don't lie so much with the platform, but the games themselves. Gameloft is doing well with the interface, but still needs a bit of work with dpads and whatnot. Spore for example only gets you to land and then stops there. So depth is the #1 concern for me at the moment. But for cell phone games, I am not sure how deep it needs to be for success...probably not much. Dice games where you roll the dice by shaking the iPhone are cool, as are space invader types where you tilt the phone back forth forward backward. Then there are the silly ones that hardly cost anything: Sheep Launch, Putt-Putt, Gomi, Flight Control, Star Trigon, etc. that keep the kids entertained for hours. As far as killing games go, it's true, it's not a war simulator. Wolf3d is kinda lame, as is Sandstorm. But there are new areas of killing to explore such as Silent Hill, Trapped, and Zombie, albeit their mentioned lameness at simulating destruction and carnage. The lack of buttons is freeing, multi-tapping, shaking, tilting, and other innovations are making hard buttons obsolete. In this regard, the NYT article is right on: console makers should be worried.
I think therefore I can't be ~TTNH
Based on every other product Apple has ever produced, a game console from them would be sleek, stylish, cost in excess of $900.00 (us), have only 3 titles available(each of which would require you to repurchase the title when a patch came out), and a controller with only button. Of course it would have an alternate means to use the button, but it would require you to press the option button on the console itself while trying to press the controller button.
I'm usually on the Apple bashing side, but there isn't even a room for it this time. Its not Apple's fault that these "amazing" PS3's and Xbox 360's keep having crap after crap game come out. If the game is decent, you pay for it a second time with map "packs" that usually contain two or three maps of which one is a remake. No map packs in your game? Look forward to your $80 plastic guitar shaped controller not being compatible for some reason down the road. Do I need to keep actually giving more reasons?
"They confiscated everything, even the stuff we didn't steal!"
They make little to no money (and even lose money often) on the hardware itself. They make money because each title sold pays a license fee. It also indicates how well the owners like their gaming experience over all.
The wii was making profit on the hardware from day one, they only just now lowered the retail price three years after it's initial release.. they have been making lots off hardware alone
Seriously. Do they really think chincy little games on a phone is going to make people not want to play high end games on a console or PC. lol. THey have nothing to worry about...nothing.
Nokia were too early with the Ngage. Plus they produced a gaming phone that nobody really wanted to own, it wasn't a nice looking device.
Apple have made a desirable device, many games can be downloaded on the device or wifi and it has a large screen. The control mechanism isn't exactly ideal, but it doesn't seem to put off people.
It wasn't long ago that so called industry experts were saying the games on the iPhone were gimmicy and accelerometer/touch screen games would never catch on.
It's already happening to the DS, especially the DSi.
Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
Except that the PSP is a TERRIBLE game machine.
Seriously, have any of these people actually played any games on it? They are uniformly quite terrible. The lack of a touch screen is simply too big of an obstacle. Sure you can do some interesting stuff with an analog stick, but at some point you want to be able to draw a line across the screen to show it where you want you character to go and in this regard the PSP simply sucks ass.
I agree, that in baddy mashing games, the touch screen sucks ass, but I've actually played several very very very good games on iPhone that simply wouldn't be possible on "traditional" consoles. No it's not the exact same experience as a button bashing baddy shooting console, but it's bloody good fun. Incidentally, squishing baddies under your remorseless finger is actually pretty fun too :P.
Yeah, open sourced games. Both of those were commercial at first and only opened later, those games have paid professionals working on their creation. Most unpaid open source games are horribly derivative and usually ugly and unintuitive.
Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
have you played any of the top end games lately? FIFA? Madden 2010? Civ? Spore? The options are getting better every day as developers start further embracing the touch method as a platform. There's some damn cool games now. MYST I loved when it came out, the touch version is a wonderful adaptation. And that's just the tip of the touch platform. Go play your original NES some more and tell us that's good enough. New tech is here now, it may not be good enough for YOU, but it's good enough for the other 40+% of the tactile gaming market on portable devices. And it's not going to stop there.
I've only tried a few (on an iPod Touch, but the idea is the same). One was a driving game. You held the device a little bit like a steering wheel, turning it to make the car move. One was a variety of the Same Game. No buttons required; you touched items to make the disappear. I also played a port of Worms 2, which worked very well. The moving and aiming was a lot easier with the touchscreen than with a mouse and keyboard (I figured out the controls without reading the instructions, while last time I played on a PC I - and several other players - kept getting jump and fire mixed up).
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Vega Strike could be classed as derivative of Elite (in the same way that Command and Conquer is derivative of checkers), but it definitely isn't ugly or unintuitive (and is fun, if you like space trading / combat games). Battle for Wesnoth, apart from some horrible grammatical errors in the narration, is very polished. It is a turn-based strategy game, so you could call it derivative in the sense that it isn't defining a new genre. Globulation 2 is unfinished, but is quite original and intuitive.
Most of the games I've played recently have been open source. There is a lot of crap out there, but the nice thing about it is that you can download it quickly, try it, then discard it. The games that really stand out have the same advantage and, unlike good commercial games, you can typically go back to them a few years later and find that they've added new features and expanded the storyline.
The biggest difference between proprietary and open source games, as my little list above shows, is that you get to see and play the unfinished product, rather than just videos. Nexuiz may not be up to the same standard as Quake 4, but how does it compare to Duke Nukem Forever?
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Nintendo is the winner this gen no matter how much "hardcore" gamers hate the Wii!
Maybe you haven't noticed, but lots of people play NES and SNES games in emulators. Lots of NES-era games have recently been re-released for handhelds and for downloads on current-generation consoles for a few dollars and lots of people are buying them.
When people say graphics aren't important, they aren't saying that they don't want good graphics, they're saying that they would rather have good gameplay than good graphics if it's a choice. To fix your analogy, they want the girl with the great personality, but they're certainly not going to complain if she's hot too.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Wow, the DSi has 3G now? Or are you being fecal in your wording by implying a $90 handheld that's normally used with wifi and mains power nearby is supposed to compete directly with a $600 phone on features?
The Wii comes at least with Wii Sports, the other consoles can be found with free games if you shop around. I wouldn't really use Braid as a comparison since it's a cheap indie game and there aren't many games like it on the consoles so for the most part the console gives you access to a library of games you can't get that cheaply on the PC.
Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
People always keep claiming that the Wii audience is fickle but there is no evidence to support it (the dropping sales? I wouldn't call dropping sales due to no major games for over a year fickle).
Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
So Wii's attach rate is basically tied with PS3.
No it isn't. The Wii attach rate also includes that awful 10 "game" Wii Play pack everyone buys to get a 2nd controller.
iphone 700 euro.
Nintentdo dsi 150 euro.
sure, the iphone will ahve it's niche, but my wallet has a voice in this as well.
Actually, from my POV, I got the same with consoles: how to play FPS without mouse and keyboard?
The target demographic that's mainly interested in "mash[ing] some buttons to kill the baddies" is the group that's currently buying XBox 360s and Playstation 3s - and, based on sales, it's pretty obvious it's a significantly smaller group
Well, except that is just plain wrong. There are currently 56mil "button mashers" (aka PS3 or Xbox360 owners) and 53.5mil Wii owners. Just because the button mashers are split between two consoles instead of focused on a single one doesn't mean that they are somehow the smaller group.
CELL PHONES DO NOT COMPETE WITH CONSOLES!!!!!!!!! Just look at the iPhone game section and it's easy to see why. Noone puts any damn effort into these games, because noone takes it seriously as a platform. Sure, you get casual games (Tetris, bejeweled, whatever), but look at how people play those games. 5 Minutes while they are waiting to do something else. I don't really know of anyone who puts any real dedication into playing a cell phone game because there's not really anything to put any dedication into. And besides, if a gamer want's to play a game with dedication, he or she can just go to the console he or she already owns and play a REAL video game. Not the latest touch knockoff of Tetris. People owns cell phones for calling people. Not video games. Stop saying that they are the gaming market of the future, cause all you accomplish is making the gaming market laugh at you.
I still don't see the gaming advantage of the iPhone. The games should be considerably different and simpler than other consoles for one single reason: your remote and your screen is the same. So if you want to use accelerometers to control the game, you'll be shaking your own screen. If you don't then you need to improvise some "on-screen buttons". Since they are not responsive, I wouldn't expect for the iPhone to get too many actions game in the near future.
Other games, like brain teasers and the like, may be more appropriate to the device.
The delta between a voice plan and a voice plan with iPhone data is $360 a year.
O rly? I don't use a lot of minutes because I use the land line for everything that isn't a 2-minute call to, say, arrange a ride. So I have a $6 per month prepaid voice plan from Virgin Mobile USA. Unless AT&T wants to offer me an iPhone plan for $36 per month, I'm closer to the iPod touch demographic.
All Sony/Nintendo has to do to compete with this is write a DS/PSP Itunes sync program, and the problem's solved. Change the image of the DS/PSP from being mostly gaming devices, to a multifunction device that happens to play games and they'll be OK.
Fat chance of that happening. Apple and Microsoft are fine with an environment where any developer working from home can buy a complete devkit for $1000 (either Mac mini + iPod Touch + 1 year developer certificate, or a Windows PC + Xbox 360 + 1 year XNA certificate), upload an app, and charge 500 bells for it. But Sony and especially Nintendo prefer developers who have "relevant industry experience" (that is, done an internship at a major video game studio in another state) and a "secure facility" (that is, a leased office). Developers with a day job in another industry need not apply.
The only reason anyone would play on a console instead of on their phone is because of the hardware (including bigger screen, the controllers, etc).
Then why would anyone play on a console instead of plugging USB controls and an HDTV monitor into a PC, which can also surf the web and play indie games? One might say Apple's "console", after the Pippin failure, is the 2009 Mac mini.
I find a lot of commercial games have extremely buggy network play these days... I never got to finish a multiplayer game of rise of nations over the internet, because one player would always drop out for some reason and bring the whole game to an end.
http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
First off, I'm an Apple fanboi (as people like to call it). I own a several iPods, iPhone, a Mac Pro and a Macbook Pro.
Sony, MS and Nintendo have nothing to be worried about because they target completely different audiences. The people that are buying Apple's products are not buying them soley for the catalogs of games available.
Most Apple (computer) owners are painfully aware Apple's attitude toward games, and Apple has no interest in promoting their products as game platform (unlike Windows) unless it is the developers taking the initiative. We generally get 3rd rate games on OS X 2 years after the Windows release (when we get them period). Infact Blizzard is the only company I can think of off the top of my head that releases Mac versions of their games at the same times as the Windows counterparts.
The gaming status of Apple's non-iPods/iPhone products is abysmal at best, a reason I have a PS3 (and bootcamp).
The iPhone on the otherhand, if it wasn't for the developers making games for it, you sure as hell wouldn't be seeing the gaming popularity on that we do now. Apple is more of the mind, 'err, and it makes a great gaming platform' after looking at the store sales figures.
Apple is broadly targeting their core market, everyone.
This whole article is conjecture.
Depends, if you're stuck at the whim of a company approving or rejecting your software after developing it, hardware lockins preventing you from selling the game...
Doesn't really help developers and can in turn fragment the market from existing developers.
Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
I tried playing soccer inside a few times. It's just not a good idea.
Additive identity, multiplicative cancellation, distributive multiplication over addition: pick any two (unless 1 = 0)
The target demographic that's mainly interested in "mash[ing] some buttons to kill the baddies" is the group that's currently buying XBox 360s and Playstation 3s - and, based on sales, it's pretty obvious it's a significantly smaller group than the group buying the Wii and/or interested in playing short games that you can pick up for a short while and set down afterward. And, in the end, overall sales is really pretty much the only thing any of these companies care about.
Well if you want to look at sales numbers, Wii has sold about 53M consoles and PS3 + 360 about 55M. So the most you can say is that the two demographic groups have the same size.
Mada mada dane.
We'll be releasing this in October:
http://www.ravensword.com/
This is quite a ways beyond "iFart".
A family with three children might buy just one Wii or PlayStation to share, but those children will probably have cellphones of their own and download and play games, Mr. Kitaue said."
ERROR: SIG NOT FOUND (A)bort, (R)etry, (F)ail?:
Nokia has some cool "Apple enemies" coming soon. Have a look at their plans: http://www.swedishwire.com/business/899--nokia-strikes-back-against-smart-enemies
You can press the Shift,Option, and Control buttons in different combinations to create different kinds of button presses on Macs. That would probably be like ~12 combinations.
Once you start despising the jerks, you become one.
It'd be nice to see people move away from playing consoles in general, just so that the quality of games can go back up. If you take notice, the quality of video games has been quick declining ever since it became a more popular pastime with the original Playstation. The less stupid people playing these games, the less justification there is to push out bad ones catering to them.
"He who can destroy a thing, controls a thing." --Paul Atreides, Dune
I think the other thing that needs to change, beyond the price to the consumer, is the price and accessibility to the developer. The iPhone makes developing games affordable without knowledge sapping NDAs (yes the iPhone did have it a the start) and without high access costs. Yes there probably is a lot of 'crap' on the iPhone, but at least that crap is affordable and the ratings give you a good idea of the quality. This would help bring more developers into the fold, even if it does break the current business model of focusing on a small number of games developers.
I use a Wii at home, and after using the iPhone I feel the following needs to happen:
- Do away with those stupid friend codes
- Improve the Wii Store experience, even providing a web based UI for purchasing the software
- Improve the UI of the Wii Store, to make it easier to browse the large catalogue
Jumpstart the tartan drive.
"Sony and Nintendo worry that consumers will be satisfied playing games on devices that aren't necessarily focused on gaming."
What, you mean like your own console systems which are now just over-glorified computers with internet, movie playing capability, and photo viewing/media streaming? Your devices sure as fuck aren't focused on gaming with all the directions you're going.
Give me a fucking break you pussy companies. It's called competition, man up and step up to the challenge or shut the fuck up and sit in the corner quietly while the real competitors play.
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
I agree, I'm in the same boat. However, what I will add is this. A game that's 3 years old should NEVER be $50. I remember PS2 used to put things on the "Greatest Hits" list (and Mario Galaxy easily would fit in this category), sometimes quickly based on sales. Usually these games were automatically $20. Now, Personally I think after spending that much for the system, even $20 is sort of stretching it, but it would make me buy a new one for $20 over a used one for $10-15... which is the end goal of the console makers/game makers anyway (for me to buy it new). I'm perfectly happy buying a used game now-days because of places like local used game stores that offer 7 day money back guarantees. The Disc doesn't store data, as long as it works, it's good for me, and someone else was able to buy a new/different game because of trading it in!
I know, I'm probably not the Target Demographic either, but I am a semi-hardcore gamer, I regularly play plenty of PC games, and used to big into console games until the latest generation. I know the hardware costs more to build now, but the cost of entry went up too quick for me. I have an equivalent or better, fairly high end PC already, and it seems to run even Crysis, just fine.
As for cellphone games, they're great for random time wasting moments, but I have yet to actually spend any money on them. There are tons of great ones for free on the App store, and frankly I just don't have enough time where I'm stuck somewhere not in front of a PC, or Console, where I have real buttons, a large screen and surround sound.
-=JML=-
IMO, what they're most worried about are price points. The consumer mindset for cell phone games seems to top out at about $5, and a lot of games that, were they released on Xbox Live Arcade or the PlayStation Network might be $10, are $1-2 on the App Store.
The Nintendo DS version of Civilization Revolution was $30 at release. The Xbox 360 version was similarly priced.
The iPhone version is currently $5. It's essentially the same game. The controls aren't as good - and no one is saying that the other two don't have their place, because you don't always want to stare at a tiny screen. Developers have tried to put games for $10 on the App Store. While there's the occasional success, most of the time the reviews are filled with 1-star "$10 for a phone game?" reviews, and the game quickly shoots down the charts and out of the rankings and "Featured" lists.
Peggle for PC is still available for $10. It's the same price on the Xbox 360 (Live Arcade).
The iPhone version is $5.
The iPhone is causing people to shift their view as to an appropriate price point at the same time that many companies are trying to rip out a third of an otherwise complete Xbox or PS3 game so they can sell the rest as "Downloadable content" to squeeze that extra $5-10 out of each buyer. That, I believe, is terrifying to the marketing droids and finance people that actually run these companies.
The positive thing about the button mashers is that they're growing ... and they don't stop spending money... what will get those gamers to stop spending money?
As a gamer who has spent a ton of money on console games over the years, I think growing up is going to get them to stop spending money. I've been putting more and more money into games for my iPhone than I have for games on my PS3, XBox or Wii, since I don't have as much time at home to play games anymore. On top of that, the AAA titles don't even interest me as much. I've been keeping up with all the titles coming out, but I just can't justify spending $60 anymore on something like Arkham Asylum, which has been getting great reviews but I know I'll only be able to put a few hours into. This is the same story I hear from many of my co-workers. The big 3 console companies aren't making games for their aging audience. Games are getting more expensive and take longer to finish and require more of an investment. I want the exact opposite - shorter games that are less expensive. Every time I read a review that boasts how a game takes 60 - 120 hours to complete, that's a game that's immediately not getting my money. In order to get what I want, I have to go to the iPhone or the PSN Home or XBL Marketplace.
Don't trust a bull's horn, a doberman's tooth, a runaway horse or me.
The iPhone could be a real threat to the DS and PSP, but even within the casual gaming space, handheld and console gaming are two different experiences. There's a reason movie tickets and big HDTVs are selling great, people love huge screens. Also, the all-in-one device concept works for the iPhone because for handhelds compactness and convenience is everything, but there's enough space in the house under the TV for multiple devices. People have been predicting the death of game consoles since the early 90s when home PC sales took off, but now most PC game customers and developers have migrated to consoles. Playing both movies and games helped PS2 but it didn't help PS3. If the two-in-one concept works again, it'll probably come from a combined OnLive and Netflix device or service which won't come from Apple. Finally, Apple TV bombed.
In summary, Apple may very well conquer a big swath of handheld gaming, but there's no sign that they're about to enter, much less conquer, console gaming.
Success doesn't mean having the greatest games, it means having the most sales. Something the bitter losers who dropped a whopping $600 for a PS3 are denying (The PS3s are still way too expensive.). The problem with the PS3 is it's STILL NOT SELLING WELL. At least, not even half as well as Sony expected. I guess after two generations of sony overhyping the Playstations people started to catch on that maybe the console isn't all its cracked up to be. I doubt it. I think it's the fact that there's no way the PS3 is worth what Sony is charging people for them. Couple with the problem that compared to the two previous generations of Playstation it just doesn't have the games! Another problem i thinkit has it that they put blu-ray in there, which is probably one of the biggest reasons the price of the PS3 is so jacked up. Blu-Ray may have won the "future format war," but it's not the primary format yet, which makes it damned expensive. I could pick up a DVD player cheapest for $20-$40. The cheapest of Blu-Ray players aren't even under $100 yet. Finally, was a marketting mistake of trying to pass the PS3 off as a PC alternative. The problem is that PowerPC (Which is what the majorly overhyped Cell's architecture is.) has a pathetically meager PC software library. Sony failed on so many fronts to actually capture the so-called "magic" of the previous two Playstations.
...Wii! I won't lie to you, I like this console a lot. It's fun. And people underestimate its game library. It's just slow to get new games that aren't basically a mini-game-on-a-disc. But there are some games I'd be hard put to call "small" or "simple" on the Wii. Most of them are done by Nintendo themselves like Super Smash Brothers Brawl. That game has so may modes and features (Including a new story mode that could almost be considered it's own full game.) I gave to wonder how they crammed that all onto on disc. There's also the entire Metroid Prime Trilogy that was very recently released. It's no minigame, I can assure you. None of the Zelda games to this day have ever been simple, and the latest installment is a Wii title. And yeah, I like Animal Crossing: City Folk as a good time killer. I like a good sandbox (That's why I play GMod.). The problem the Wii has is that it is aimed at the casual gamer market. Makes for great sales of the console, can lead to too many third party development houses not taking the console seriously. So, amongst a few gems of games, you get a lot of third-party garbage: This sideline Sonic series (Sonic and the Secret Rings and one other I forget the title of.), while fun, really sucks with story, and I can't say I consider it a full game. And I've heard mixed reviews about Sonic Unleashed, some love it, some hate it. Wii has potential, just as the Gamecube has potential. Nintendo might squander it, library-wise. But, as far as actual commercial success goes, Wii has beaten the crap out of the 360 and PS3 so far.
The 360 wins in the game department, but as pointed out before: The "shoot them dead hardcore" demographic is a much much smaller group than those who might just pick up a controller if it means a social experience with people in the same physical room with them. The other problem I hear is that even these days there's still a good chane a 360 will brick itself for no apparent reason other than Microsoft sucks at hardware. Its price is right, and it's got a lot of good games, but it seems that the games releasing for the 360 are slow, and I don't see any actually first party games in either of the XBox consoles (Halo was done by Bungie which was owned by Microsoft at the time, technically its a second party.) It's probably sellign well for its demographic. But again, the "shoot them dead" demographic is smaller then the deomographic of the...
Now, I'm thinking that the fears of Apple entering the gaming market unfounded. The iPhone isn't that great a peice of hardware, there's no buttons, and the iPhone would only be fitting for the sort of casual games that have been aroun
I find those numbers extremely interesting. There is still no way to play pirate copied games on a PS3, and still the XBox 360 on which pirate copying is rather common has a higher attach rate. VGchartz says that there's been sold 24.55 million PS3, compared to 32.1 million 360, so market size-wise, there really isn't that much of a difference.
Of course, the 360 has been out for a bit longer time, which might play into this, but even so, the fact that so many more games are released for the 360 implies that the industry still isn't moving to the PS3 where there ought to be more revenue to be made per game today. Also, it stands to reason that people who can afford a PS3 probably have more money since the PS3 has been the more expensive alternative for a long time now, which ought to factor in even more in favor for the PS3.
I guess one conclusion would be that piracy really isn't that of a problem. (At least for game consoles, I'll leave the PC market out of this).
There is nothing stopping any of the console makers from embracing the iPhone, and turning it into an extension of the console experience rather than a competitor to it. (Well, okay, something might stop Microsoft, but Sony and Nintendo have nothing to lose.)
With a single app the iPhone becomes a full color smart controller, with mutli-touch, motion sensing, and a built-in camera.
Allow developers to incorporate that functionality into the iPhone versions of their console games, and you enable a seamless gaming experience from home (where the epic action happens) to the larger world (where you mini-game, grind, or play in smaller-scale settings).
I guess someone retarded enough to mod this down, is probably dumb enough to mod it offtopic.
I would like to moderate the moderator as "Pathetic, shit for brains".
Lick my balls, peasant.
You are aware that TF2 was written for PC, right? XBox was almost an afterthought.
I have developed a truly marvelous proof of this comment, which this signature is too narrow to contain.
All I know is that I'm going to keep buying the awesome $60 games for my 360 until Apple or whoever can put the same quality of a game on a phone. And even then, I couldn't imagine the death of the controller anytime soon.
1 console game = 10 cell phone games in profit. So it really does not matter that there are more people playing iphone games. Also most iphone games are impulse purchases that never get played again, so I think that market will relax once the novelty has worn off (much like the ring tone market)
I can't use it, basically not available in my country which iPod/iPhone store exists. It is in fact, basic as that.
Most of the buyers for under $10 cellphone games are not the same people who buy $60 PS3 games.
They also get more coverage because there's just more games coming out, as development is quicker and easier.
console makers has to upgrade their consoles with subscriber identity module (SIM). SIM card securely stores user licenses for purchased games and makes obsolete a distribution on discs - user always can download encrypted personally for him images of software from central server and use them with personally assigned Smart Card key. As I know it is impossible to use two identical mobile numbers - so consoles must to have built in GSM transmitter that allows to subscribe into the network and avoid piracy use of software new model of software distribution is emerging - users software licenses would be prescribed on SIM cards - obviously backed up by software vendors - maybe it is some kind of DRM - but user has to have a physical proof of him software
Even now, it's ten times easier for a group to join a random server than it is to join a specific one.
GLaDOS for President 2016! "Well here we are again. It's always such a pleasure." -- GLaDOS, 2011
More notably, Nintendo themselves did this with their Player's Choice program on their earlier consoles, including the Gamecube. Yet, there is no Player's Choice for the Wii...
GLaDOS for President 2016! "Well here we are again. It's always such a pleasure." -- GLaDOS, 2011
And check this out; with Windows Mobile 7 coming out with phones with a 1 Ghz processor (and snapdragon or tegra whatever it's called) I'm sure gaming on phones will get even better. I think Apple will definitely start focusing "hardcore" on an Apple Game Store.
Even with the emergence of all types of games on cell phones, true gamers and gaming companies will stick to what has been successful thus far. They will continue to focus the majority of their time and money in console and PC gaming because of the fan base and income it generates. Cell phone games are meant to be played when you are in an area where you need something to do for a short while to pass the time. People are not going to sit on their couch and play a game on their phone when they could be playing it on their TV. Phones just don't have the capacity or technology to rival games on a console or PC. I just don't see high quality games getting outsold on the phone compared to a major system.
Just like the DS. And then they released the DS Lite. And then the DSi. And add some price drops. All of these made the sales pick up again. And Wii just dropped to $199, which will boost sales.
All this "Wii is failing" nonsense is getting annoying. It has been proclaimed "dead" since before it was even release, and is still selling like crazy.
Clever signature text goes here.
You are aware that TF2 was written for PC, right? XBox was almost an afterthought.
Kind of. I'm sure they were considering a console port when they first designed it. No company just out of the blue says "lets port our game to a totally foreign architecture!"
I chose TF2 rather than L4D, because TF2 has less hackers. L4D's experience is pretty bad on every platform unless you have lots of friends and go pub-stomp. :P
And yes, L4D still plays better on PC.
Nintendo's games are the exception to the rule. Every other game's price goes down over time, especially six months after release. Then there are those good games that tanked that go for even less.
I regularly go to stores and visit online shops to check on prices. In May and July I came back with tons of Wii and DS games priced from 5 euro to 20 euro. I also got bargains last December and January (one of them being Legend of Zelda: Phantom Hourglass for 20 euro!). You, too, can get tons of cheap games by keeping an eye on your stores.
The iPhone just can't compete with a full fledged console, yes it may steal some game boy and PSP users but that isn't what keeps the industry rolling. It's full fledged hardcore gaming, plain and simple. The only people that will care will be Sony and Nintendo, and Nintendo is really focused on a younger audience and most likely kids will want to stick with their game boy. The iPhone/iPod Touch not not really effect the gaming industry.
I understand what you're saying, but you might be surprised how high mobile phone penetration is in the developing world. In middle income countries they're ubiquitous, and even in the poorest countries they're far more common than computers.
Space game using normal deck of cards: http://BattleCards.org
I for one am never going to buy a game console; it's not worth the investment because I don't have the time or inclination to play elaborate games, and when I do have time to play I'm not necessarily at home. But I have downloaded a few games for my iPod Touch (only free ones so far, but I'm open to putting down a few bucks here or there). If there are a lot of people like me, then we are driving the surge in iPhone games, but we were never going to be game console customers in the first place, so it's not eating into the console's market at all. So big deal if cellphone/iPod games are on the rise; the problem for the console makers will be if people are playing games on the iPhone INSTEAD of on their consoles.
My only worry is that if gaming industry does shift their focus toward the iPhone or any other cellphone for that matter, it will kill off some off the game genre like fighting for example.
I can't see how they could make it work on iPhone and still be fun to play.
True Gamer won't change their way, unless they can make the game that as good as the console on iPhone.
Bull all I see now is a short, puzzle game which aren't bad, it just isn't the type of game the so-called hard core gamer would be interest in.
Let me completely abandon my PS3 and my HD TV and start gaming on a phone. Gaming on a phone platform is nothing more then a market for very casual gamers
SO who ever wrote the NY Times article is obviously not fully understanding the gaming world
Cell phone gaming and console gaming are obviously very different. Console companies shouldn't worry about cell games taking over until the cell gaming experience is changed from a 15 minute bathroom break at work to 40 hours of extended gameplay.
Is it a surprise that there are more games made for cell phones since they tend to be smaller, easier to make, and a lower barrier of entry for developers? I really don't feel like playing games on a cell phone when I am at home. The great thing is that they are portable and I can play them to kill time waiting at in line or something like that.
I think the companies should watch what is going on. But do they need to radically change how they are now to compete with cell phones? Heck no. I hope the people who control these companies think the same as me.
Support a great indie game: http://www.abaddon360.com
I guess I don't understand why people have that opinion on the 360. To me it seems to have the most diverse lineup. It has the most of what I care about (RPGs). The Wii falls short on pretty much any game category other than their well done first party games. But really, I still feel the wiimote is a gimmick...one that worked, mind you, but still a gimmick. I'd rather just have another button than have to waggle.
Support a great indie game: http://www.abaddon360.com
I wonder if a first person giant brick Lego came would work. One where the 2x4 bricks are around 6' long and you can pick up and jump around with them. Could build castles and vehicles and then import in to a shared world and have fun.
I drank what? -- Socrates
Come on, doesn't everyone know the impressive history of Apple brand systems as gaming units? Think about Oregon Trail, Where in [wherever] is Carmen Sandiago, and lets not forget all of the educational games like Math Blaster and Reader Rabbit. This might have changed since I haven't used a Mac as a gaming system since I left elementary school in the early 90's, but I'm just not seeing too many Apple compatible games at the store. The consoles and computers have nothing to fear from the iPhone or any other hand held mobile as a gaming device. I've had several different smart phones and the only thing that their games are good for are time fillers when I'm waiting for a flight, auto repair, meeting someone, etc... They are great for that, if you are suddenly done waiting, you can quick turn it off, and depending on the game pick it back up where you left off.
Who says we aren't? SNES and Playstation emulators are both mature technology, so I've been playing a great many games for both systems recently (and wishing 3D graphics hadn't killed off sprite graphics).
"They redundantly repeated themselves over and over again incessantly without end ad infinitum" -- ibid.
"Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo worry that consumers will be satisfied playing games on devices that aren't necessarily focused on gaming"
That's so true. These guys are screwed if anyone ever figures out how to put a game on something like a computer.
I would tend to agree, but in slightly a different fashion. The games that are not designed for use with the iPhone's control scheme are universally bad. A virtual D-Pad is the worst control ever devised, IMO. There are many many games for the iPhone/iTouch that use the accelerometer or touch interface itself, and those games rule. They're the only ones I play. After investigating, I refuse to play any game with a virtual D-Pad. Sucktackular hack. I'll wait til someon comes up with a hardware controller add on.
by Mike Buddha -- Someday the mountain might get him, but the law never will.
The only thing that Apple is missing is an avatar system. Oh the possibilities.
A cellphone is a convenient gaming tool, but the quality of the game is usually poor. The re-play value of a cellphone game is limited, and in my opinion cellphone games cannot hold my attention for longer than a few minutes. The biggest problem within cellphone gaming is that its easier to pirate and distribute among your friends than a game you must purchase from the store. Since the economy is down, people are upgrading their home theater systems. More and more families are getting higher definition televisions, quality sound systems, and want to be entertained at home rather than spending their money out on a short-lived benefit. A quality game built for consoles offers many more hours of enjoyment for the price you pay, not to mention the existence of multiplayer and online gameplay makes it easier to enjoy with more people. Instead of fretting about the new kid in town taking the lemonade sales, console companies should concentrate on making a better product or a new innovative product. We have already witnessed Nintendo's response to innovative gaming with the WII. It's healthy pressure and something to think about, but saying that Apple's iPhone is going to eat into the console sales is ridiculous because of 160 new titles. Cellphone games are more compact, lower budget and quick to product so it's no wonder people are trying to make a quick buck with a new video game. People like their cellphones naturally, but the quality of the gaming product is nowhere near the quality of a Playstation, Wii or Xbox game.
While I agree that casual gaming is becoming a larger market, I don't believe that it will start to eat into the hardcore profits. They're two completely different markets. I play cell phone games when I'm bored and not at home, but when I'm home I'd rather play a console. I don't see Apple eating into the home console market at all, cell phone/ipod games lack the quality effort put into it that go into console games.
Correction: You suck at iPhone games. Just because you are too lazy to learn a new control scheme and therefore fail at every attempt to play one of these games doesn't mean that they suck - it means that you suck at playing them.
For lack of a better signature...
You're kind of a funny person to be posting that, considering your work on Spring.
I mean, it's true, but you're a funny person to hear that from.
Peggle for PC is still available for $10. It's the same price on the Xbox 360 (Live Arcade).
The iPhone version is $5.
Are you telling me that you would rather sit in your living room playing Peggle on your iPhone to save $5? Seriously?? Well, that is your prerogative, but don't come complaining back here when you've gone blind and cross-eyed from starring at a 2" screen and have carpal tunnel syndrome.
It's worth the $5 extra dollars, to me, to be able to play it on an HD big screen and hear it on 5.1 surround sound while sitting comfortably in my living room using a much more comfortable ergonomically designed controller. Not to mention XBLive with friends and game achievements.
I'd pay the $10 for a console arcade game. I would not purchase any phone games at ANY price, except the ones that I've had for free, and those I've only played once or twice. But that's me. Playing a game that I can barely see, hardly hear, and cramps my hand in the process does not interest me in the least.
My leisure time comfort is worth much more to me than $5, but please, feel free to go knock yourself out. 8^b
"What [the hell] is a Jiggawatt???" -- Marty McFly