3 ms·

I could see the gaming market being split fundamentally between the casual and high end experience. You either play HTML 5-like games or you want 3D kinect-driv

I could see the gaming market being split fundamentally between the casual and high end experience. You either play HTML 5-like games or you want 3D kinect-driven large-screen immersive experiences. They're almost fundamentally different experiences, trying to serve both of them with 1 device seems foolish.

bilbo0s 15y ago
Actually I think iPads will do that. They already connect to your big screen tv. Add to that the fact that people are figuring out that you can use an iPhone or iPod Touch as a controller and you really have the potential for something groundbreaking. Imagine if kinect-like software were integrated in iOS 6 or 7. Your apps could use it as input. So you make a game that does, then users put the iPad in a stand next to your big screen tv, connect it, and play 'iPad Dance Jam 7' or whatever. I could easily see that happening.
jokermatt999 15y ago
Thank you. I've seen so much proclamation (especially on Hacker News) about how mobile and casual games are totally going to overtake console and PC gaming, and the current players are totally oblivious to this massive revolution. No, no they aren't. Traditional gaming and the current mobile gaming are completely different experiences. It's like the difference between someone who plays games and a "gamer" (forgive my Scotsman here, it's for an analogy). While both someone who plays games and a "gamer" might put in a decent amount of hours a week on Angry Birds, Tiny Wings, or whatever the mobile fad of the moment is, the "gamer" is not going to be as satisfied with that. They're going to be drooling over the latest videos for Skyrim, the next Battlefield game, or Deus Ex. A simple mobile game does not scratch that itch. They're completely different experiences, and I've gotten so tired of people equating the two. It's like saying YouTube is going to overtake movies, because people totally love watching videos of cats. Sure, they spend hours doing that, but no matter how many cute animal videos, vlogs, or LPs they watch, it's never going to serve the same need as a nice big screen movie. </rant>
- rimantas 15y ago
  Please, everybody talking about winning, overtaking, etc. provide the clear metrics you are talking about. Overtaking ir market share, games available, money earned? If for every ten seriuos gamers who will pay $20 for new console game there are 100 casual gamers paying $2.99 for some little game on iOS — whats would that mean in „overtaking“ terms?
  - ja2ke 15y ago
    In these arguments, its never concrete like that, because what people are fretting over is not actually about a particular metric, about revenue, etc. It's personal, and it's cultural. When someone says "casual games will take over console and pc games!" what they mean is "people's first impression of the word 'gaming' will be rewritten to point to a part of games culture that I don't like or participate in, which is troubling to me personally."

bilbo0s 15y ago

Actually I think iPads will do that. They already connect to your big screen tv. Add to that the fact that people are figuring out that you can use an iPhone or iPod Touch as a controller and you really have the potential for something groundbreaking. Imagine if kinect-like software were integrated in iOS 6 or 7. Your apps could use it as input. So you make a game that does, then users put the iPad in a stand next to your big screen tv, connect it, and play 'iPad Dance Jam 7' or whatever. I could easily see that happening.

jokermatt999 15y ago

Thank you. I've seen so much proclamation (especially on Hacker News) about how mobile and casual games are totally going to overtake console and PC gaming, and the current players are totally oblivious to this massive revolution. No, no they aren't. Traditional gaming and the current mobile gaming are completely different experiences. It's like the difference between someone who plays games and a "gamer" (forgive my Scotsman here, it's for an analogy). While both someone who plays games and a "gamer" might put in a decent amount of hours a week on Angry Birds, Tiny Wings, or whatever the mobile fad of the moment is, the "gamer" is not going to be as satisfied with that. They're going to be drooling over the latest videos for Skyrim, the next Battlefield game, or Deus Ex. A simple mobile game does not scratch that itch. They're completely different experiences, and I've gotten so tired of people equating the two. It's like saying YouTube is going to overtake movies, because people totally love watching videos of cats. Sure, they spend hours doing that, but no matter how many cute animal videos, vlogs, or LPs they watch, it's never going to serve the same need as a nice big screen movie. </rant>

rimantas 15y ago
Please, everybody talking about winning, overtaking, etc. provide the clear metrics you are talking about. Overtaking ir market share, games available, money earned? If for every ten seriuos gamers who will pay $20 for new console game there are 100 casual gamers paying $2.99 for some little game on iOS — whats would that mean in „overtaking“ terms?
- ja2ke 15y ago
  In these arguments, its never concrete like that, because what people are fretting over is not actually about a particular metric, about revenue, etc. It's personal, and it's cultural. When someone says "casual games will take over console and pc games!" what they mean is "people's first impression of the word 'gaming' will be rewritten to point to a part of games culture that I don't like or participate in, which is troubling to me personally."