So apparently mobile gaming is the new thing, which is fine, but why are these games not being ported to PC? As far as I can tell they sure aren't using anything proprietory to make games that wouldn't be considered cutting edge 20 years ago. Sure mobile gaming is big money but so is PC. I guess you might have to change some control scheme but seriously is it that hard to use a keyboard and mouse for a touchscreen? Is it because guys on the master race of gaming would laugh at how bad these games are? Sure there are no shortage of ripoffs on the PC, but at least on PC they try to trick you with pretty graphics or at least empty promises. It seems like mobile (and facebook games) are pretty much all "we got nothing, just send us money because you're dumb". But even then, why shy away from at least trying?
Your place for discussion about RPGs, gaming, music, movies, anime, computers, sports, and any other stuff we care to talk about...
Why aren't mobile games ported to PC
- Because playing them is not enough, we have to bitch about them daily, too. We had a Gameplay forum, but it got replaced by GameFAQs.
Because most of them are garbage and already exist on PC in some form?
Sure can't find most of them when I go to Steam. I constantly hear about soandso is the latest game to make a zillion dollars in iPhone, and I sort of want to at least check it out, but they're almost never available on the PC. I mean, there's plenty of garbage PC games too, so if you just hit it big on mobile, why wouldn't you want to take a shot at the PC market? Or is the garbage tier for mobile way below even the garbage tier for PC?Eric wrote:Because most of them are garbage and already exist on PC in some form?
There are a lot that are tied to platforms like Facebook as well.
Most successful mobile games are casual titles intended for 1-3 minute play sessions on at least a daily basis. This genre is not as suitable for the PC market; a PC is only at your desk, a mobile phone is always in your pocket or on your briefcase. Situations ideal for playing casual games are typically those away from the desk.
Another factor is that the top casual games depend on fairly frequent updates to deliver new content and features. If those changes have to be ported to non-mobile platforms, that means an increase in dev, management, and QA staff.
Most successful mobile games are casual titles intended for 1-3 minute play sessions on at least a daily basis. This genre is not as suitable for the PC market; a PC is only at your desk, a mobile phone is always in your pocket or on your briefcase. Situations ideal for playing casual games are typically those away from the desk.
Another factor is that the top casual games depend on fairly frequent updates to deliver new content and features. If those changes have to be ported to non-mobile platforms, that means an increase in dev, management, and QA staff.
-Insert Inspiring Quote-
You're not making a lot of money if people are only playing 3 minutes at a time. The stuff you have to pay money for obviously extends your playing session in some way or it wouldn't make much sense to pay for them in the first place.Julius Seeker wrote:There are a lot that are tied to platforms like Facebook as well.
Most successful mobile games are casual titles intended for 1-3 minute play sessions on at least a daily basis. This genre is not as suitable for the PC market; a PC is only at your desk, a mobile phone is always in your pocket or on your briefcase. Situations ideal for playing casual games are typically those away from the desk.
Another factor is that the top casual games depend on fairly frequent updates to deliver new content and features. If those changes have to be ported to non-mobile platforms, that means an increase in dev, management, and QA staff.
I don't see why an enviornment like Steam would pose significant additional resource requirements for what you're already testing, unless the mobile platforms have some kind of proprietory environment. Even then, the PC market is pretty darn big. You're talking about games that are often barely more complicated than a SNES era game. Yes I know it apparently took 40 guys to make Mega Man 9 even though 5 people could do it 25 years ago, but I literally do not see where this additional effort comes from games that are simply not very massive by any measureable category.
False, free2play mobile games people play 3 minutes at a time make their killing via ad revenue. I don't know the exact numbers, but a stupid amount of the mobile games available existed in some way/shape or form on browser first as flash games(And still do) and use the exact same model. Go to some cheap website that has a bunch of cheap flash games, every time you lose or get to the next level an ad pops up, you go or decline and continue. The others, like Seek said, are attached to facebook and are more complex, the only reason they exist and get that kind of attention is because they're on facebook, and they up the ante with microtransactions.Don wrote:You're not making a lot of money if people are only playing 3 minutes at a time.
The reason you haven't seen a huge push for official releases of mobile games on PC, is because alot of that bullshit that flies on mobile wouldn't fly as a regular product. A perfect example of this is Plants vs Zombies 2, which still isn't on PC, why? They can't milk you with microtransactions on PC, because the market will not only refuse to pay, but they'll outright circumvent the system with hacks/cracks and get all the content free. I'm not saying PC users are more savy then regular customers, because they're not, it's just that PC users in general are wary about installing software that has ads attached or promises something awesome for "free". The internet is also pretty open about when you're getting ripped off, whereas people who buy mobile phones and games don't even need to be computer literate or talk to anyone about how they're getting ripped off before they download and play a game.
Almost mutually-exclusive userbase and demographic. 'Nuff said
I was there on that fateful day, were you?
Clash of Clans made over 800 million on iOS last year, Candy Crush Saga made 608 million between iOS, Facebook, and Android last quarter. These games have massive player bases, and if even a fraction of them buy $10 worth of gems, then the publisher still ends up making large amounts of money. These are also games that encourage short play sessions. Clash encourages one every 12 hours or so; why spend 10 bucks? Because you can buy more workers, which cost premium currency, and they will permanently allow you to perform more tasks at once - building jobs, some of which tie up a single worker for 12 days.Don wrote:You're not making a lot of money if people are only playing 3 minutes at a time. The stuff you have to pay money for obviously extends your playing session in some way or it wouldn't make much sense to pay for them in the first place.Julius Seeker wrote:There are a lot that are tied to platforms like Facebook as well.
Most successful mobile games are casual titles intended for 1-3 minute play sessions on at least a daily basis. This genre is not as suitable for the PC market; a PC is only at your desk, a mobile phone is always in your pocket or on your briefcase. Situations ideal for playing casual games are typically those away from the desk.
Another factor is that the top casual games depend on fairly frequent updates to deliver new content and features. If those changes have to be ported to non-mobile platforms, that means an increase in dev, management, and QA staff.
I don't see why an enviornment like Steam would pose significant additional resource requirements for what you're already testing, unless the mobile platforms have some kind of proprietory environment. Even then, the PC market is pretty darn big. You're talking about games that are often barely more complicated than a SNES era game. Yes I know it apparently took 40 guys to make Mega Man 9 even though 5 people could do it 25 years ago, but I literally do not see where this additional effort comes from games that are simply not very massive by any measureable category.
The thing about mobile is that it is everywhere the user is. Creating Steam versions of games is redundant, and creates more needless work. All it would do is canabalize without really expanding the reach of the application.
-Insert Inspiring Quote-
It seems to me the argument boils down to that there are people who has never seen a decent game so paying $10 for Space Invaders with a save feature is totally legit (and Space Invaders is probably a better game than a lot of what counts for mobile gaming). I'm sure that must be true at some level, but if so why would you assume you don't have these guys on the PC? I figure everyone who liked FF14 must have never actually played World of Warcraft and I guess since FF14 is still doing okay there must be a lot more of these guys than I thought, but overall there are still far less guys who has never played WoW than those who do that could be considered as part of the MMORPG audience. And if the point is that people on mobile platform are dumb, there sure are a lot of dumb people on the PC too.
I guess one thing I can agree is that PC players are more demanding. They might not be any smarter but you'll have a hard time putting 8 bit graphics and expect anyone to jump on your game unless it is actually really awesome. PC games at least have to have fake promises (patch coming soon that will fix everything! DLCs that will revolutionize the game!) and looking at a lot of the mobile games I don't think they even put in the effort to have false promises. Still, I bet you can take a SNES era game and just chop it up into 5 minute fragments and that's going to look a lot better than the vast majority of stuff out there on a phone.
Actually let me put it this way. Suppose you had a deal with Nintendo where they won't sue you for copyright. Are you saying that you could take say, Super Mario Brother 3, and then release like world 1 as a whole game, and give people say 3 lives every 3 hours, and then sell extra lives for $1 or starting with a mushroom for $2, and later on you can sell a warp whistle for $50, and people would continue to pay for this kind of stuff? Because Super Mario Brothers is probably a lot higher quality than most games on mobile. Or move to Super Mario Brothers World if you want something that looks slightly better.
I guess one thing I can agree is that PC players are more demanding. They might not be any smarter but you'll have a hard time putting 8 bit graphics and expect anyone to jump on your game unless it is actually really awesome. PC games at least have to have fake promises (patch coming soon that will fix everything! DLCs that will revolutionize the game!) and looking at a lot of the mobile games I don't think they even put in the effort to have false promises. Still, I bet you can take a SNES era game and just chop it up into 5 minute fragments and that's going to look a lot better than the vast majority of stuff out there on a phone.
Actually let me put it this way. Suppose you had a deal with Nintendo where they won't sue you for copyright. Are you saying that you could take say, Super Mario Brother 3, and then release like world 1 as a whole game, and give people say 3 lives every 3 hours, and then sell extra lives for $1 or starting with a mushroom for $2, and later on you can sell a warp whistle for $50, and people would continue to pay for this kind of stuff? Because Super Mario Brothers is probably a lot higher quality than most games on mobile. Or move to Super Mario Brothers World if you want something that looks slightly better.
Casual games typically don't target people who are looking to sit down and play a videogame. They target people who want something they do when they wake up in the morning, while waiting for people to arrive to a meeting at work, while taking a minute's mini-break a work, while on the bus, while on the can, etc... They are looking for a simple and straightforward experience.
They are not for people who are looking to sit down and be dazzled by graphics or an involving gameplay experience that will take them hours.
These are games for people who have little amounts of time and would prefer to occupy it with a game rather than staring into nothingness. The hope of the vendor is that the casual game hooks the player so that the player is compelled to log back in at least once a day to do their bejeweled blitz puzzle, collect taxes from their houses, fight a quick battle, etc...
Look at it this way, why do so many people spend money on coffee or a bagel in the middle of the day when they could eat a full meal? Now use your imagination, what if that coffee or bagel was free and came out of your phone? What if you could pay a micro transaction to get an small plate for your bagel that appears each time you be it, and disappears when it's gone? What about a mug instead of a paper cup for your coffee? That's sort of the same kind of target as a casual game vs. a traditional video game - coffee and bagels are not intended to replace full meals like a dinner - at the same time, you probably wouldn't want to casually eat a full meal while waiting for a meeting at work, or sitting in your office looking for a few minute's break.
They are not for people who are looking to sit down and be dazzled by graphics or an involving gameplay experience that will take them hours.
These are games for people who have little amounts of time and would prefer to occupy it with a game rather than staring into nothingness. The hope of the vendor is that the casual game hooks the player so that the player is compelled to log back in at least once a day to do their bejeweled blitz puzzle, collect taxes from their houses, fight a quick battle, etc...
Look at it this way, why do so many people spend money on coffee or a bagel in the middle of the day when they could eat a full meal? Now use your imagination, what if that coffee or bagel was free and came out of your phone? What if you could pay a micro transaction to get an small plate for your bagel that appears each time you be it, and disappears when it's gone? What about a mug instead of a paper cup for your coffee? That's sort of the same kind of target as a casual game vs. a traditional video game - coffee and bagels are not intended to replace full meals like a dinner - at the same time, you probably wouldn't want to casually eat a full meal while waiting for a meeting at work, or sitting in your office looking for a few minute's break.
-Insert Inspiring Quote-
But you're basically just saying there are some people who are just very different (or maybe very dumb). Again let's say you cut a deal with Nintendo where they agree not to sue you. Does that mean you can chop up Super Mario World into about 80 stages? It takes no more than 5 minutes to complete one of those stages just due to the time limit. It'd probably look relatively high quality compared to most games, and the gameplay is certainly proven. So does that mean you can charge $1 for 1UP? $2 for starting with Yoshi? $50 to use the Star Road? I'm assuming Super Mario World is available somewhere but it sure isn't generating hundreds of millions of revenue, but if you just package the way the stages are setup, it might be able to? If Tetris charges you $1 for a 4X1 does that mean it'll be the new Candy Crush Saga?
The thing about Mario is that it is not a casual game no matter how you cut it up.
Tetris is a puzzle game, but not a casual game. A casual puzzle game would be something like Bejeweled Blitz - where the player competes for 1 minute a day and has a huge opportunity to make very large scores and compete with their friends.
Clash of Clans is another casual game where players build buildings, and then drop troops around enemy bases, and the game behaves like a tower-defense game. Typically the game encourages 1-2 attacks per day in order to gain resources to build up your base, but you can do more if you want. Clash of Clans, in order to build up your base to max level would take you potentially 2-3 years. Although, spending $10 allows you to purchase some extra workers to increase your efficiency, taking you closer to the 2-year mark.
Simpsons Tapped Out has over 40 levels of content, it's a game about rebuilding Springfield, with LOTS of dialogue and events. There's also premium content that can be purchased to improve your Springfield. The current event going on is Stone Cutters, a secret organization that is attempting to take over Springfield.
A great example of a casual game that was popular here for a while was Utopia.
Tetris is a puzzle game, but not a casual game. A casual puzzle game would be something like Bejeweled Blitz - where the player competes for 1 minute a day and has a huge opportunity to make very large scores and compete with their friends.
Clash of Clans is another casual game where players build buildings, and then drop troops around enemy bases, and the game behaves like a tower-defense game. Typically the game encourages 1-2 attacks per day in order to gain resources to build up your base, but you can do more if you want. Clash of Clans, in order to build up your base to max level would take you potentially 2-3 years. Although, spending $10 allows you to purchase some extra workers to increase your efficiency, taking you closer to the 2-year mark.
Simpsons Tapped Out has over 40 levels of content, it's a game about rebuilding Springfield, with LOTS of dialogue and events. There's also premium content that can be purchased to improve your Springfield. The current event going on is Stone Cutters, a secret organization that is attempting to take over Springfield.
A great example of a casual game that was popular here for a while was Utopia.
-Insert Inspiring Quote-
Utopia was the best, but I was totally addicted to it, 3AM attacks on enemy kingdoms!
I thought Seeker said 'casual' games.Eric wrote:Utopia was the best, but I was totally addicted to it, 3AM attacks on enemy kingdoms!
Your mileage would vary when it came to that game heh. It was free to play, but the social dynamic was really addicting. If you weren't part of the major alliances then it's pretty casual, you're basically fodder in a small kingdom for the big time players, but you could still have fun casually growing your province.Don wrote:I thought Seeker said 'casual' games.Eric wrote:Utopia was the best, but I was totally addicted to it, 3AM attacks on enemy kingdoms!
I know. The 'casual' games like Utopia usually turns out to be surprisingly hardcore.