4 ms·

I have bought some games on my iPhone and some are good, but most aren't. They usually are at the level of a nice proof of concept, but lack depth and have very

I have bought some games on my iPhone and some are good, but most aren't. They usually are at the level of a nice proof of concept, but lack depth and have very little replay value. The games that I avoid like the plague are the in-app purchase games, especially the ones that are just about buying in-game currency. These games are never good. The sad thing is that the mobile platform should, in theory, be ideal for strategic games and builder games like Anno, Settlers, etc. All implementations of this genre however rely on, after a few hours of playing, increasing build-times of buildings to multiple hours, or days, but allowing you to finish the building instantly with in-game currency. Which is, of course, a crap gaming experience and I am sure the creators know this. It does seem to be a good way to make lots of money, seeing as all games do this now.

tty2300 7y ago
What amazes me is how mobile games are almost all just the same game with different art and slightly different features but they almost always fall in to the category of loading bars that get longer as the game goes on and a second currency to skip the loading bars. They don't seem to have changed much at all since I had the original iPad.
- bostik 7y ago
  > how mobile games are almost all just the same game That is because they ARE. Once upon a time (2011) there was a long article called "Who killed video games? (a ghost story)". It has now been blown away by mists of time, with only stale links referencing the detailed, cruel and flat-out cynical - but oh so true - treatise into how mobile games are essentially built on top of mathematically optimised engagement wheels making use of the anticipation/disappointment cycle. I wish I could find a working link... In only slightly unrelated tangent: a university mate was an aspiring game designer. I remember how he once, off-handedly, mentioned how he experiments with mechanics and rules until he finds a set that works. We actually got to playtest some of his work-in-progress experiments, and while I never got to try anything really good, others in the group did. But right, back to the topic: once the abstract rules of the game itself were ready and sufficiently balanced, he picked a theme and genre most likely to expose the game to the biggest possible (welcoming) segment. It's easy to extrapolate that once a working game design has been found, the creators would fit the same engine with various other skins and themes to target as many lucrative markets as possible. One can find the same approach everywhere, really. Cookie-cutter reality TV show formats; talent shows; sequels of upon sequels, be that films or TV show seasons; ... A really cynical view of all this could be that mobile gaming is now a properly mature market. Innovation is unreliable and expensive, so why bother?
  - chasote 7y ago
    https://web.archive.org/web/20110926012139/http://insertcredit.com/2011/09/22/who-killed-videogames-a-ghost-story/ https://web.archive.org/web/20110926012139/http://insertcred... Haven't read it yet and not too sure how to use the Internet Archive but this seems to be it's first capture of the story.
oneeyedpigeon 7y ago
> The sad thing is that the mobile platform should, in theory, be ideal for strategic games and builder games like Anno, Settlers, etc. All implementations of this genre however rely on, after a few hours of playing, increasing build-times of buildings to multiple hours, or days, but allowing you to finish the building instantly with in-game currency. The version of Settlers I played on the iPad a few years ago is absolutely nothing like that. It was almost a straight port, and the touch screen actually made for a great experience.
- hef19898 7y ago
  Angry birds was kind of the Worms of the 2010s for me!
- k__ 7y ago
  Interesting, I'd expected games like Settlers to be bad to play on a tablet because RTS with your hand constantly in the way of the screen would seem bad for me. X4 games, on the other hand, are pre-destined for tablet.
  - oneeyedpigeon 7y ago
    There’s an element of that, of course - and, bear in mind, I am talking about several years ago - but I found the easy scrolling and pinch-to-zoom counteracted any problems caused by obstruction.
NeedMoreTea 7y ago
> ideal for strategic games and builder games like Anno, Settlers You'd think so, wouldn't you? The final nail in the coffin, so I am not even willing to look any more came with Dungeon Keeper. Dungeon Keeper turned out to be astonishingly cynical crap from an incredibly strong heritage. Micro-transaction and freemium abuse destroying everything they touch isn't solely on mobile of course, yet it seems far harder to avoid there. My games money now goes to independents on PC only - the mistakes and dull failures are more than compensated for by the occasional Factorio or Pillars of Eternity. On mobile? I won't even look or try any more - they thoroughly poisoned the well treating everyone as there to be milked.
fendy3002 7y ago
Problems with games on smartphones are hardware specs. Up until the latest years (maybe around 2015) there can only do simple apps, such as angry birds. Now there are some popular pc game ports, such as stardew valley and terraria (and battle royale fps games). Hopefully in several years there will be mobile first game. However gaming in mobile doesn't feel good. The control feels inferior compared to keyboard + mouse, or joysticks.
- frosted-flakes 7y ago
  I don't agree. Something like Pokémon from the GameBoy era would run great on a phone, even if it was upgraded with modern graphics[0]. But nobody wants to pay $50 for a mobile game, and I expect Nintendo won't allow it because it would sabotage hardware sales. [0] Pokémon Go doesn't count.
  - fendy3002 7y ago
    Have you tried using emulator for that? I've tried and don't like the touch control (physical joystick has better feel). And playing on phone can easily be interrupted, notif or calls for example. Then imo people don't want to spend 50$ because switch > mobile for gaming.
  - zarify 7y ago
    The Siralim games are some that capture some of what Pokemon is for mobile (although the controls aren't really optimised for touch with on-screen D-pad and virtual A/B buttons), although I suppose it's more like some of the old Monster Hunter games (capture, breeding as well as a bunch of other mechanics too).

tty2300 7y ago

What amazes me is how mobile games are almost all just the same game with different art and slightly different features but they almost always fall in to the category of loading bars that get longer as the game goes on and a second currency to skip the loading bars. They don't seem to have changed much at all since I had the original iPad.

bostik 7y ago
> how mobile games are almost all just the same game That is because they ARE. Once upon a time (2011) there was a long article called "Who killed video games? (a ghost story)". It has now been blown away by mists of time, with only stale links referencing the detailed, cruel and flat-out cynical - but oh so true - treatise into how mobile games are essentially built on top of mathematically optimised engagement wheels making use of the anticipation/disappointment cycle. I wish I could find a working link... In only slightly unrelated tangent: a university mate was an aspiring game designer. I remember how he once, off-handedly, mentioned how he experiments with mechanics and rules until he finds a set that works. We actually got to playtest some of his work-in-progress experiments, and while I never got to try anything really good, others in the group did. But right, back to the topic: once the abstract rules of the game itself were ready and sufficiently balanced, he picked a theme and genre most likely to expose the game to the biggest possible (welcoming) segment. It's easy to extrapolate that once a working game design has been found, the creators would fit the same engine with various other skins and themes to target as many lucrative markets as possible. One can find the same approach everywhere, really. Cookie-cutter reality TV show formats; talent shows; sequels of upon sequels, be that films or TV show seasons; ... A really cynical view of all this could be that mobile gaming is now a properly mature market. Innovation is unreliable and expensive, so why bother?
- chasote 7y ago
  https://web.archive.org/web/20110926012139/http://insertcredit.com/2011/09/22/who-killed-videogames-a-ghost-story/ https://web.archive.org/web/20110926012139/http://insertcred... Haven't read it yet and not too sure how to use the Internet Archive but this seems to be it's first capture of the story.

oneeyedpigeon 7y ago

> The sad thing is that the mobile platform should, in theory, be ideal for strategic games and builder games like Anno, Settlers, etc. All implementations of this genre however rely on, after a few hours of playing, increasing build-times of buildings to multiple hours, or days, but allowing you to finish the building instantly with in-game currency. The version of Settlers I played on the iPad a few years ago is absolutely nothing like that. It was almost a straight port, and the touch screen actually made for a great experience.

hef19898 7y ago
Angry birds was kind of the Worms of the 2010s for me!
k__ 7y ago
Interesting, I'd expected games like Settlers to be bad to play on a tablet because RTS with your hand constantly in the way of the screen would seem bad for me. X4 games, on the other hand, are pre-destined for tablet.
- oneeyedpigeon 7y ago
  There’s an element of that, of course - and, bear in mind, I am talking about several years ago - but I found the easy scrolling and pinch-to-zoom counteracted any problems caused by obstruction.

NeedMoreTea 7y ago

> ideal for strategic games and builder games like Anno, Settlers You'd think so, wouldn't you? The final nail in the coffin, so I am not even willing to look any more came with Dungeon Keeper. Dungeon Keeper turned out to be astonishingly cynical crap from an incredibly strong heritage. Micro-transaction and freemium abuse destroying everything they touch isn't solely on mobile of course, yet it seems far harder to avoid there. My games money now goes to independents on PC only - the mistakes and dull failures are more than compensated for by the occasional Factorio or Pillars of Eternity. On mobile? I won't even look or try any more - they thoroughly poisoned the well treating everyone as there to be milked.

fendy3002 7y ago

Problems with games on smartphones are hardware specs. Up until the latest years (maybe around 2015) there can only do simple apps, such as angry birds. Now there are some popular pc game ports, such as stardew valley and terraria (and battle royale fps games). Hopefully in several years there will be mobile first game. However gaming in mobile doesn't feel good. The control feels inferior compared to keyboard + mouse, or joysticks.

frosted-flakes 7y ago
I don't agree. Something like Pokémon from the GameBoy era would run great on a phone, even if it was upgraded with modern graphics[0]. But nobody wants to pay $50 for a mobile game, and I expect Nintendo won't allow it because it would sabotage hardware sales. [0] Pokémon Go doesn't count.
- fendy3002 7y ago
  Have you tried using emulator for that? I've tried and don't like the touch control (physical joystick has better feel). And playing on phone can easily be interrupted, notif or calls for example. Then imo people don't want to spend 50$ because switch > mobile for gaming.
- zarify 7y ago
  The Siralim games are some that capture some of what Pokemon is for mobile (although the controls aren't really optimised for touch with on-screen D-pad and virtual A/B buttons), although I suppose it's more like some of the old Monster Hunter games (capture, breeding as well as a bunch of other mechanics too).