4 ms·

I'm not sure this a fair analysis. Yes, Pokémon certainly added a nice built in fanbase, but I don't think that alone would have made it the social phenomenon i

I'm not sure this a fair analysis. Yes, Pokémon certainly added a nice built in fanbase, but I don't think that alone would have made it the social phenomenon it currently is. As the article mentions, the gameplay is significantly easier than Ingress. Also, the theme is much more family friendly and less paranoid. It's got cute pocket monsters you can collect throughout the day. Additionally, the camera aspect makes it built-in social sharing material, especially since it's a palatable theme. I'm not going to share Ingress photos with anyone else, but a humorous picture of Magickarp flopped on the beach is fun to share. I'm seeing a lot of people who are completely ignorant of Pokémon playing this game. I see parents downloading it to go on walks with their kids. It's fun, easy, and fits in nicely with people's aspirations (more exercise). None of that was really in place with any of the previous iterations. They were all too "serious", dark, and/or niche audience. I suspected Niantic expected this to be a moderate hit with Ingress players and Pokémon fans - both were a niche audience. It's the gameplay and family-friendly theme that has made this as popular as it is.

erroneousfunk 10y ago
Agreed. Ingress had gameplay that was not only niche, but it was abstract and difficult to explain -- and THEN explain why it was fun. Pokemon is, not only a completely different game with different rules and objectives, but the gameplay is super accessible. I enjoyed Ingress, but I completely disagree that it's a "tragedy" that it (or other, often similarly convoluted games) didn't take off with a broader community like Pokemon has. While I appreciate that the article exists, and think that its message (the apparent necessity of corporate branding to drive VR) is a good one to consider, their logic may have some holes. Pokemon is not just re-skinned Ingress.

erroneousfunk 10y ago

Agreed. Ingress had gameplay that was not only niche, but it was abstract and difficult to explain -- and THEN explain why it was fun. Pokemon is, not only a completely different game with different rules and objectives, but the gameplay is super accessible. I enjoyed Ingress, but I completely disagree that it's a "tragedy" that it (or other, often similarly convoluted games) didn't take off with a broader community like Pokemon has. While I appreciate that the article exists, and think that its message (the apparent necessity of corporate branding to drive VR) is a good one to consider, their logic may have some holes. Pokemon is not just re-skinned Ingress.