7 ms·
> Ignoring bad control schemes That's the whole point. Mobile devices aren't the perfect platforms for gaming. They have the worst control scheme, which makes
by Fej 10y ago
> Ignoring bad control schemes
That's the whole point. Mobile devices aren't the perfect platforms for gaming. They have the worst control scheme, which makes it all but impossible to pull off great games in "traditional" genres (platformers, shooters; in fact, now that I think about it, anything with a movable camera). So we get new things that don't require a decent controller, but have the gameplay dumbed down to compensate.
This is why the 3DS still sells. It's incredibly difficult to put out a good AAA game on a phone (and forget about selling it for a reasonable price).
- noxToken 10y agoHence why I said near. Touch will never replace traditional controls in some genres. Others, as you've said, require game play modifications to account for lack of physical buttons. My point was not that mobile > mobile console. My point was that companies want to capitalize on mobile since is always available by most people. Even though you can make a lot of decent ports for mobile (e.g. swipe input instead of a joystick for Pac-Man or turn-based menu combat like Pokemon entries), a $30 price point is too high for nearly all games specifically for reasons that we have both cited: am I getting a full game or a watered down POS, are the controls sane, do I have to put up with ads after every event, etc.