Would You Buy Mobile Nintendo Games?

[Sheikah]

Still wouldn't work. It would still devalue the public perception of value for their titles. It would not drive sales.

 

So the free game promotion, essentially devaluing a host of games, bundled with Mario Kart 8 didn't drive sales?

[Serebii]

Can you please READ THE ORIGINAL post instead of just making up a discussion. We are not discussing them releasing full games on mobile platforms. You are the ONLY one suggesting that. You're having a conversation with yourself instead of actually reading what the thread is about.

I'm arguing about the smartphone industry as a whole.

 

Why would they waste resources for minimal returns when they can shove it into stuff that'll actually sell and make decent money.

[Glen-i]

Urgh... No. Not even Nintendo could get me into liking mobile gaming.

 

 

Pokemon Dash? You had to bring Pokemon Dash into this?

 

I... hate... POKEMON DASH!

 

 

ARGH!

[Dcubed]

Actually it wouldn't. The fact you're constantly running makes the game challenging, so you don't need a control stick for it. With that out the way, the smaller, higher res device that everyone already owns makes it the champ for playing this kind of game.

 

 

 

Rayman Jungle Run. :p

 

And who said that the player would have to have control over the character's movement? There's nothing stopping them from keeping the auto running aspect intact. Just having a physical tactile button to jump would make it a better experience on 3DS or Vita (not to mention that the game's control scheme starts to crumble when you get to the later stages when Rayman is given the ability to punch as well as glide... Seperate buttons would make it control more smoothly there too).

 

Even the games that are designed around the lack of buttons are better served by tactile buttons. Even though a game like Super Hexagon works well on the iPhone, a 3DS version would still be far better because you can feel the button press! (Speaking of which, I'd kill for a 3DS version of Super Hexagon...)

 

There is nothing good that mobiles bring to gaming, nothing!

 

The sooner that these F2P/Skinner Box games get reigned in and regulated like gambling, the better!

Edited August 5, 2014 by Dcubed

[Sheikah]

I'm arguing about the smartphone industry as a whole.

 

Why would they waste resources for minimal returns when they can shove it into stuff that'll actually sell and make decent money.

 

Flappy Bird made a reported $50K a day, for what probably took barely any time to make.

 

That would be 18.25 million per year, from one simple app. Just putting that out there.

[Serebii]

Flappy Bird made a reported $50K a day, for what probably took barely any time to make.

 

That would be 18.25 million per year, from one simple app. Just putting that out there.

Which is exactly my point. They have to strike it lucky in order to succeed. It's very hard to.

[Sheikah]

Just having a physical tactile button to jump would make it a better experience on 3DS or Vita (not to mention that the game's control scheme starts to crumble when you get to the later stages when Rayman is given the ability to punch as well as glide... Seperate buttons would make it control more smoothly there too).

 

Not so - think about it, it's just one tap to do a jump (and holding a tap to propellor). There's no precision required, a tap anywhere produces a jump. A button has no advantage here, unlike in a game where you need a D-pad or analogue stick. I say this from having both completed the levels on the Android version as well as having completed the Vita version of Origins and Legends. There is no advantage!

 

As well as the lower res and battery, the 3DS and Vita are also much bulkier and contain many unnecessary buttons/features that aren't needed to play this kind of game. The mobile or tablet is essentially a device streamlined to play this type of thing.

 

Which is exactly my point. They have to strike it lucky in order to succeed. It's very hard to.

 

What do you mean, they have to strike it lucky? They already know how to make great games, they've made plenty of them before.

 

Essentially what you're saying is that you don't have enough confidence in them to make games people want to play?

[Dcubed]

Not so - think about it, it's just one tap to do a jump (and holding a tap to propellor). There's no precision required, a tap anywhere produces a jump. A button has no advantage here, unlike in a game where you need a D-pad or analogue stick. I say this from having both completed the levels on the Android version as well as having completed the Vita version of Origins and Legends. There is no advantage!

 

As well as the lower res and battery, the 3DS and Vita are also much bulkier and contain many unnecessary buttons/features that aren't needed to play this kind of game. The mobile or tablet is essentially a device streamlined to play this type of thing.

 

 

 

What do you mean, they have to strike it lucky? They already know how to make great games, they've made plenty of them before.

 

Essentially what you're saying is that you don't have enough confidence in them to make games people want to play?

 

It's not just one button in the later levels... and even the one button levels would feel better with an actual physical tactile button...

[Serebii]

Not so - think about it, it's just one tap to do a jump (and holding a tap to propellor). There's no precision required, a tap anywhere produces a jump. A button has no advantage here, unlike in a game where you need a D-pad or analogue stick. I say this from having both completed the levels on the Android version as well as having completed the Vita version of Origins and Legends. There is no advantage!

 

As well as the lower res and battery, the 3DS and Vita are also much bulkier and contain many unnecessary buttons/features that aren't needed to play this kind of game. The mobile or tablet is essentially a device streamlined to play this type of thing.

 

 

 

What do you mean, they have to strike it lucky? They already know how to make great games, they've made plenty of them before.

 

Essentially what you're saying is that you don't have enough confidence in them to make games people want to play?

Flappy Bird is not a great game. Great games don't necessarily do well on iOS.

 

You're falling into the same trap as analysts and investors. You're looking at the handful of successes and assuming that it's easy to do that

[Sheikah]

It's not just one button in the later levels... and even the one button levels would feel better with an actual physical tactile button...

 

They don't though. Tapping a screen is just fine, so long as nothing precise is happening (as in, if there were multiple buttons that you needed to differentiate between, or if you needed to feel like you'd pressed certain buttons, then you would benefit from feedback). Because it's just one button, there is no need for feedback, because in simply making contact with the screen you get your feedback that you have pressed 'the' button.

 

There's also no reason why a Mario type runner would be punching or doing anything else crazy (Mario punching?), not that it felt particularly difficult to pull anything off.

 

Flappy Bird is not a great game. Great games don't necessarily do well on iOS.

 

You're falling into the same trap as analysts and investors. You're looking at the handful of successes and assuming that it's easy to do that

Great games that are addictive and tailored well to a mobile device do well though. Nintendo should have the confidence to make those.

Edited August 5, 2014 by Sheikah
Automerged Doublepost

[RedShell]

Would I buy mobile Nintendo games? No, because you can't buy something that doesn't exist/probably never will.

But IF they did (and that's a big if) then sure, I'd check 'em out.

 

I know a lot of gamers really dislike the mobile game scene, and I can totally see why as it's created this situation where people now expect titles to be free or incredibly cheap, and in the process pretty much destroyed the traditional handheld gaming market.

But not all mobile games are "free" throwaway pieces of crap, I've come across some fine examples of mobile games done right, stuff like the aforementioned Temple Run (well I've only played the sequel but I imagine they're more or less the same ), Jetpack Joyride, Smash Hit, dEXTRIS, Fruit Ninja, 8 Ball Pool, School Idol Festival, jukebeat, Bike Baron, Parashoot Stan... They're all good fun and all control perfectly using touch or tilt controls.

 

At the end of the day, if a game is well designed around the hardware that's all that counts. There are a shitload of mobile games out there that are absolutely terrible and try to mimic traditional controls using touch, but there are also those like the ones I mentioned above, which have been properly designed to work with simple controls.

 

I have no doubt that Nintendo could create excellent mobile titles (after all they're the best videogame developer in the world) but it just doesn't fit in with their ethos. Chances of Nintendo abandoning hardware development and doing a SEGA are simply microscopic.

So yeah, anyone that enjoys Nintendo's games and wants to continue playing them is just going to have to purchase their systems or go without.

[Goron_3]

I'm arguing about the smartphone industry as a whole.

 

Why would they waste resources for minimal returns when they can shove it into stuff that'll actually sell and make decent money.

 

It would take 3-4 staff members to make a mobile Mario runner title. It would make a absolute fortune because of the brand power.

 

'Hey, did you know there's a Mario game on the app store'

'Really? I didn't know'

*gets phone out and downloads*

 

Which is exactly my point. They have to strike it lucky in order to succeed. It's very hard to.

 

They don't have to strike it lucky. You do realise how big some of Nintendo's franchises are, right? You of all people should be aware of that.

 

And who said that the player would have to have control over the character's movement? There's nothing stopping them from keeping the auto running aspect intact. Just having a physical tactile button to jump would make it a better experience on 3DS or Vita (not to mention that the game's control scheme starts to crumble when you get to the later stages when Rayman is given the ability to punch as well as glide... Seperate buttons would make it control more smoothly there too).

 

Even the games that are designed around the lack of buttons are better served by tactile buttons. Even though a game like Super Hexagon works well on the iPhone, a 3DS version would still be far better because you can feel the button press! (Speaking of which, I'd kill for a 3DS version of Super Hexagon...)

 

There is nothing good that mobiles bring to gaming, nothing!

 

But why would a VITA/3DS owner want to play a mobile game when they could just play like, an actual game? I wouldn't want to play Jungle run on my VITA, I'd rather play Origins. And I've never known anyone to say the games controls start to crumble..I've completed the game (close to a 100%) and I've never known this to be an issue.

 

'There is nothing good that mobiles bring to gaming'. That's like saying the Wii didn't bring anything. They both bring accessibility, which is ridiculously important. In the lab I worked in whilst I did my dissertation, there were 10-12 other students who would turn on their phones and have a quick game of Temple Run or Angry Birds. There is nothing wrong in that. In fact, I actually think it's great that we're getting rid of the stereotype that gaming is about really long gameplay experiences in front of a TV. Most people simply want to play a game for 2-3 minutes, what's wrong in that? Do you really think they need to buy a console to fulfill that need?

 

I'm not saying the market is fantastic but to say there is nothing good about mobile games is very childish and quite dismissive of how most people play games. My mum purchased a DS with Brain Training years ago for £120. She now gets a better experience from her Samsung Galaxy S3 and it stops her having to 1)Buy a piece of hardware and 2)Carry that piece of hardware with her when she's at work 3)Spend £20 or so on a game.

 

Edit. Just to add..To those of you complaining that the delay 'ruins' games like Jungle Run, did you complain about the waggle delay in Wii Sports and Twilight Princess (Wii)? What about in Donkey Kong on the Wii? And if you answer is 'but the game design around Wii Sports is built around that lag' then bravo, you've dismissed your initial point.

Edited August 5, 2014 by Goron_3

[Daft]

It would be smart for Nintendo to leverage mobile games as a marketing tool. Kids nowadays aren't growing up with Mario, they're growing up with smartphones and whatever they can get on them.

 

I've said it before and I'll say it again, every year Nintendo remains out of touch damages them long term term, too.

[Serebii]

It would be smart for Nintendo to leverage mobile games as a marketing tool. Kids nowadays aren't growing up with Mario, they're growing up with smartphones and whatever they can get on them.

 

I've said it before and I'll say it again, every year Nintendo remains out of touch damages them long term term, too.

Yeah. Sony and Microsoft need to put their main games on mobile too. God, they're so behind.

 

LittleBigPlanet should be on iOS!

[Daft]

Sony have used mobile to promote their games.

 

I wouldn't mind seeing LBP Sackboy customiser on iOS. That'd be great. Kind of like how I can manage my Destiny character from the Destiny app.

[Cube]

Yeah. Sony and Microsoft need to put their main games on mobile too. God, they're so behind

 

Uncharted, Gravity Rush, Ratchet & Clank, inFamous and LittleBigPlanet are on Android and iOS. Halo is on Windows phone.

 

The Gravity Rush one is actually quite fun.

[Goron_3]

Yeah. Sony and Microsoft need to put their main games on mobile too. God, they're so behind.

 

LittleBigPlanet should be on iOS!

 

They already have games on mobile platforms.

[Serebii]

Uncharted, Gravity Rush, Ratchet & Clank, inFamous and LittleBigPlanet are on Android and iOS. Halo is on Windows phone.

 

The Gravity Rush one is actually quite fun.

And how well did they do?

[Daft]

Probably about as well as the Wii U.

[Sheikah]

And how well did they do?

 

I imagine they did pretty well. Square Enix have also decided to port Dragon Quest games to mobile. As bad as that sounds, why would they do it if money wasn't there? They can just outsource this shit to someone and watch the money come in.

 

You're also overlooking that Mario is potentially much more lucrative, much more well known and far more adaptable to phones.

[Cube]

And how well did they do?

 

It's impossible to tell. The All-Stars island has at least 500,000 installs on Android, but it's a free game with no in-app purchases. The Ratchet & Clank game has at least 1,000,000 installs on Android.

[Daft]

Totally forgot, Knack had an iOS game...that was better than the actual game, too.

 

Shit, there's even a Doki-Doki mail app. Why did I not know this?

 

And here's R&C, which I never knew existed either.

 

They should really advertise some of these more. I knew about Knack, Beyond and a few others but not about some of the above and Starhawk and GT6.

[Goron_3]

And how well did they do?

 

The fact that the Kim Kardashian game made $200m shows that a strong brand can do well on a mobile platform. Give the Nintendo developers some credit dude.

[Fierce_LiNk]

And how well did they do?

 

Are you an investor or a gamer? You're so stuck behind the numbers that you're just as blinded by it as these analysts and investors that you lament.

 

Do I play mobile phone games? On the whole, no. I usually play on a console. However, I have played mobile games and have had a good time at it. When I was stuck in the car for hours at Tower Park in Poole waiting for Nandos/the park to re-open due to a chemical leak, we played games on our phones to pass the time, including a charades-type game that I can't remember off the top of my head. My friend's game, not mine. It's easy. Whip out your phone and the games are there.

 

That led to my friend recommending 2048 to me, just before it become this huge deal. It's a simple game. Would I pay £30 for it on the WiiU eShop? No, because it's too pricey and not the type of game you need to play on a home console with a huge tv. Would I pay £7 for it on the 3DS eShop? No, because I don't have my 3DS with me all the time. In fact, I don't own one, Ine does. Would I get it for pittance on Android. Yes. Which I did.

 

Nintendo are "supposed" to make diverse games for all audiences, or so we're told. In fact, there's probably no better time for them to enter into this market because they are at their peak of making simplistic games. A MiiMaker App which you could then use to upload to your WiiU home console would be great. What about being able to import your MarioMaker levels to an app for your friends to try on their smart phones AND 3DS? How about simple NintendoLand style games (touch screen based) that they can sell individually on Android or iOS, as well as the 3DS? What about some sort of cross-buy, where if you purchase it once, you have it on multiple formats.

 

There is potential there. Nintendo could make it work, but I don't honestly think that they'll do this. This is 21st Century gaming and Nintendo are not in the 21st Century.

[Gizmo]

Wasn't it confirmed that like 0.5% of the games on the App Store make like 80% of the money.

 

The mobile market is horrific. It is very hard for games to succeed in it. People just look at the handful of successes and think "oh look, there's money there", but unless you either abuse in app purchases (which EU legislation is working to stop) or strike it unbelievably lucky, you'll fail.

 

Look at games like Gunman Clive. That did better on the 3DS than on iOS and Android combined.

 

Also, let's do a wee bit of calculation, shall we.

 

Pokémon X & Y. Sold 12 million units in its first 8 months on sale (on a supposedly unpopular console). Assume $40 per game (yeah exchange rates mean different, but for the sake of argument, let's go with this. In just 8 months on sale, it earned $508 million in revenue.

Now, let's say Nintendo release a Pokémon game on iOS (lol, so many things wrong with that but I'm hypothesising to make a point). Masuda and Nintendo in general are against IAP, especially Masuda, so they won't exist. To compete with other games, it'd have to be at a low price. $5 is a bit too high for games to be a success, so $1 would be the price. In order to achieve the same revenue, they'd have to sell 508 million copies. That's twice the amount of Pokémon games, including spin-offs, have sold since the release of Pokémon in 1996.

 

Nintendo can make money on iOS/Android in the short term. Nobody is disputing that. However, the damage it would make to their entire business would be catastrophic. It would stop people wanting to get their hardware. It would devalue the brands "Why would I spent £20-£50 on a new <InsertFranchise>. I have an iOS game of them here for £0.69". It wouldn't lure people to their hardware, it would damage it.

 

The mobile industry is a cancer at the moment. It is fundamentally destroying perceived value in games. When I revealed Pokémon Battle Trozei and Pokémon Art Academy to people on my site's Facebook, there were posts saying "It should be free". FREE for crying out loud. The sooner this smartphone gaming bubble bursts, like all others before it, the better else the industry IS going to crash and very few will survive it.

 

 

Apart from the many other things wrong with what you're saying, I just wanted to highlight this one to point out that the top selling android game right now (and for a while) is Minecraft Pocket Edition, which is essentially a stripped down Minecraft, selling at £4.99. That's a fairly big game selling at a relatively high price because of brand. Als oin the top selling list is Football Manager at £6.99, The Sims at £4.99 and several GTA games at £3-5 each. You really don't think Pokemon would do the same, if they were to release something on mobile? Imagine they released Fire Red/Leaf Green on mobile or something and sold it at £5. They'd make a shit tonne of money, and controls wouldn't be too much of an issue because theres no twitch gaming in Pokemon. If Minecraft can sort out reasonable controls then I'm sure Pokemon can...

 

You seem to be comparing a Nintendo mobile game to an indie (by which I mean, dude in his bedroom coding on the weekend) mobile game, which is simply an incorrect comparison. I think Minecraft and Pokemon are a much better one, do you disagree?

 

The market is so diluted. Do you know how hard it is to stand out in the app store? It's nigh on impossible. It relies solely on human word of mouth or throwing tonnes of money at Apple

 

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/business-english/brand-power

Edited August 5, 2014 by Gizmo