Support NeoGAF

[RoadHazard]

99.9% of all smartphone games are terribly shallow pieces of trash with awful controls. There are some outstanding exceptions, of course, but even then we're mostly talking about stuff you play for a few minutes at a time. They are fun distractions, not the deep, engaging experiences you can get with console and PC games.

 

[Beermeister]

What's holding mobile gaming back from being widely accepted by "gamers"?

Most smartphone games are terribly shallow and have awful controls.

 

[EightBitNate]

I think it's because gamers are scared of the idea of playing casually in short bursts. Many don't want to live in a console -less future.

 

[Mr.Monitor]

Decent controls, good games that are something more than a quick diversion.

 

[RoadHazard]

I think it's because gamers are scared of the idea of playing casually in short bursts. Many don't want to live in a console -less future.

I don't mind doing that from time to time, but yes, I will fully admit that a future where that's the only kind of gaming experience that exists scares the shit out of me. Don't know why that would happen though - I believe there will still be a market for both 10 years from now - but if it did that would be a tragedy.

 

[Foffy]

I think it's because gamers are scared of the idea of playing casually in short bursts. Many don't want to live in a console -less future.

But there are tons of games that allow short bursts of play as is. I'm only scared if we degrade from having deep experiences and buttons to everything being nothing but short bursts with touch screen controls, even if touch screen controls are awful for certain games. For example, anyone who says any GTA game controls well on a phone must have their hand in the sand. Maybe Chinatown Wars, but certainly not III or VC.

 

[Shai-Tan]

It's difficult to find good mobile games not only because of the sheer number of games and the average low quality, it's also low standards in the supporting media. I only tend to try games when the interest bleeds into a more general games media. Because of the lack of curation it's important to have something that can take it's place.


Part of it is just the nature of those games and budgets but I feel like I'm missing out on good games because there doesn't seem to be anyone out there that I can go to who draws a line in the sand. Indy on pc also suffers from this but I feel there's a better chance for the good ones to bubble up (not just the flavor of the month).

 

[BeerSquad]

The thread title contains an self defeating assumption, IMO, since it defines "gamers" as "hard core" gamers.

Mobile gaming is very different than the current definition of hard core gaming, thus its no surprise there's almost no intersection there:

Some examples:
a) It kills me to hold something I have to keep looking at. That makes me choose where the pain will be: my neck or my arms (usually both).

b) I can't always have sound on mobile since that will bother people around (awful speaker) or make me totally isolated (earbuds). When my GF is not playing with me, she is usually participating in my gaming session by way of couching or laughter. All in all, no sound means less immersion.

c) Game designers can't really make a immersive game since they have to design around any distraction I may face while playing. And when you're looking at a phone, that could include a being hit by a car.

 

[CaptainSlow]

Buttons. The End.

I bought Shining Force for my old iPhone and the virtual d-pad is complete garbage. If you can't make 20 year old, turn based, starategy RPG work nothing will. Mobile gaming will never get past that short, arcade style Angry Birds, Temple Run type game. Not that those games are bad, but they don't hold your attention for more than 20 mins. You'll never see in-depth action/adventure/platform/RPG games on a iOS/Android/WP8 without a better input method.

 

[tzare]

no buttons

First post nails it

 

[Justzisguyukno]

Buttons, and I'm not a fan of micro-transactions being tossed in my face in a lot of these games now.

 

[Flynn]

Board games are excellent on iOS and can be insanely deep. Turn-based tactical games and RPGs work great on the platform.

The trick is finding games that suit the platform. And you can bet on more and more games being made just for touch rather than trying to shoehorn hack and slash and racing or shooting over to iPhone.

 

[scytherage]

Needs buttons.

 

[flatearthpandas]

Wilful ignorance.

Honestly, I have no idea. Mobile games should occupy a place in every healthy gaming diet. Sure, there's an awful lot of shit out there, but sift through it carefully and you'll find nuggets of gold.

This conjured an image in my mind of someone literally panning for gold in a river of shit.

While I'm sure some people find that okay, I can think of more palatable ways to make money and to find entertainment.

 

[KenOD]

What I find most interesting about this thread isn't about mobiles, but rather the idea that apparently all video and audio games need buttons to so many.

This conjured an image in my mind of someone literally panning for gold in a river of shit.

While I'm sure some people find that okay, I can think of more palatable ways to make money and to find entertainment.

Many of us who enjoy playing games on mobile have wonderful resources in which to ignore the many bad games and find the good ones. This board's iOS and Android threads for example. I've still played some bad games to be sure, but not that many and roughly the same amount as any of my handheld or home consoles or PC.

There are good games on smartphones, but they are hampered by their controls.

However, most games are Facebook/social-inspired shitfests that are just looking to gouge you. Mobile gaming kind of represents that cheap, micro-transaction infested shallow gameplay that us who grew up with traditional games tend to despise.

I've never played any of those. Must be why it's not such a determinant to me on mobile or browser based platforms.

 

[Evolution_1ne]

Most smartphone games are terribly shallow and have awful controls.

that was easy

 

[Deleted member 17706]

There are good games on smartphones, but they are hampered by their controls.

However, most games are Facebook/social-inspired shitfests that are just looking to gouge you. Mobile gaming kind of represents that cheap, micro-transaction infested shallow gameplay that us who grew up with traditional games tend to despise.

 

[old manatee]

shitty controls.

 

[railGUN]

"gamers", with emphasis on the " "

 

[pantsmith]

Its like the difference between "casual" and "hardcore"- gamers just want to feel like their style of gaming is somehow more authentic than everyone else's.

A game is a game, regardless of where you play it, but somehow the idea that "normal" people are gamers because they can play games on their phones is just flat out unacceptable.

 

[Fox Mulder]

There's nothing wrong with the way mobile gaming is doing its thing. It's only an issue to "gamers" that think stuff like the wii, kinect, and mobile games will ruin their hobby. People also feel like their gaming is superior to the enjoyment others receive from stuff like Angry Birds.

I have fun with mobile games, they fill a need, and I embrace them for what they are.

 

[Xenon]

1. Controls. Touch controls suck for tradition games. There are a few games where it is manageable, but that's only because they try to copy tradition controls by putting a joystick on the screen. But the lack of feedback leads to frustration.

2. The heavy FTP saturation, which I hate with a passion.

3. Every gaming medium has its own feel and style like PC vs console games. The lines have been blurred a bit this gen. But they each have a strong identity. Mobile gaming was built around 10 minutes of fun. While there are some deep titles, it remains the predominate model for mobile games.

 

[Reallink]

It really is all down to the controls. If Google/Apple sold an official Xbox/Dualshock knock off and integrated support into the OS, publishers would almost assuredly flood the app stores with full blown console/PC ports, and gamers would accept them en masse.

 

[legacyzero]

no buttons

First post wins. It's really the only barrier for me.

 

[Duxxy3]

Button, button, who's got the button?

 

[Ushae]

Wilful ignorance.

Honestly, I have no idea. Mobile games should occupy a place in every healthy gaming diet. Sure, there's an awful lot of shit out there, but sift through it carefully and you'll find nuggets of gold.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

Personally I only play the odd rare gem of a mobile game. But they cn never quite hold my attention like core games can.

 

[Noirulus]

It's a god damn phone. I don't want to play games on my phone.

Pretty much this. I'm content with browsing the internet on my smartphone if I'm bored, and I vastly prefer to game on handhelds if I want to indulge myself in gaming on the go.

 

[RM8]

It's plain and simple terrible for a ton of genres. I enjoy stuff like Game Dev Story and Dragon & Puzzle, but pretty much my entire 3DS, DS, GBA, GB, PSP and WS libraries would blow on touch devices. You're not EVER going to get perfect ports of fighters like 3DS and Vita do, for example. You don't get Super Street Fighter IV, you get "Street Fighter IV Volt".

And really, its exhausting finding a good game among immense seas of pure crap. Most games get great reviews because they're reviewed using different standards, which doesn't help. Touch gaming can be fun and has its place, but it's extremely limited and mostly abysmal at the moment.

 

[Astral/H3X]

I find it hilarious that, as a concept, a Turn based strategy would work VERY WELL on a tablet, or even a phone.
And no one does it. It's so stupid. Instead of making terrible FPSs with even worse controls, make something that would actually work for the system it's on! AGH.

 

[muu]

I'm really looking forward to when haptic touch becomes standard, but until then my phone gaming's pretty much limited to stuff that are recommended by gamer friends that bother to wade through the crap.

 

[rohlfinator]

I find it hilarious that, as a concept, a Turn based strategy would work VERY WELL on a tablet, or even a phone.
And no one does it. It's so stupid. Instead of making terrible FPSs with even worse controls, make something that would actually work for the system it's on! AGH.

That's the funny thing. I think mobile devices are perfectly capable of delivering great gaming experiences, but so many developers just crap out poorly-controlling ports/clones of console games or nightmarish F2P whale-hunting garbage. The whole ecosystem is poisoned by the gold rush mentality, it just destroys my interest in trying to hunt down the few gems.

As much as I dislike the "walled garden" model, I'd really like to see some kind of curated service for mobile that would filter out the crap.

 

[I NEED SCISSORS]

No buttons seems to be the obvious sticking point. It may be true, but the substitute is a touch screen which is fairly robust in its own right. It's not like they've just given us a lonely knob to twiddle. On top of all of the touching stuff, like taps and swipes, touch screens can be adapted to more traditional controls to do more. They are fairly suitable for mouse emulation. Virtual analog sticks and on-screen buttons add in more traditional controller functionality. The accelerometer can also be used for some gameplay mechanics. The only big thing that it's undeniably missing is shoulder buttons. Now I won't bother touching on the quality of each game's implementation of all of this, as it differs wildly, but the fact remains that controls on a phone are very capable of being done well with some intuition.

Yet, despite this capability, somehow people seem to have no problem considering the Atari 2600 or the NES as devices more worthy of "gamer" status, even when these consoles can do considerably less from a control, interface or technological point of view. Or how about all of the classic DOS games which are controlled with only a mouse? We could go further still, all the way up to the PS1 days since that was the time just before shoulder buttons, the phone's obvious weak point, started to feel really necessary. If someone was to just spend all day every day playing classic games on these consoles, for some reason they would be considered a more hardcore gamer than people today (evidenced by all the retro wankery that pervades the internet and praise for any game that feels like a throwback to older times). The double standard is staggering.

 

[ZAMtendo]

The touchscreen is holding it back.

 

[RM8]

Yet, despite this capability, somehow people seem to have no problem considering the Atari 2600 or the NES as devices more worthy of "gamer" status, even when these consoles can do considerably less from a control, interface or technological point of view.

You can't be serious. NES Ninja Gaiden would be a nightmare on phones, for example. Heck, Tetris plays better on NES, that's just how limited and imprecise touch controls are. Capacitive screens are not even perfect for typing, let alone games that require precision and responsiveness.

 

[twobear]

The "no buttons" thing continues to be mind blowingly stupid. The screen can be covered in buttons if it needs to be. Virtual control pads are crappy, yes, but the solution is just don't play games with virtual control pads. There are plenty of deep engaging gameplay experiences that can control as well if not better than console games because of the touch screen. Like I've said, if XCOM has proper care and attention paid to it, the interface should be leaps and bounds better than the 360 and PS3 versions. iPad could comfortably run, say, Civ 4 with an excellent interface if there were any developer impetus to create it. If it's not, it's because of the developer, not the device.

 

[Mitama]

A lack of good games, that's all. Hardware buttons aren't necessary for all genres. There's games I've really enjoyed like Plants vs Zombies, Fieldrunners, Game Dev Story and board games for family occasions but that's about it.

 

[Jokes and Riddles]

Fun games.

 

[Cipherr]

I don't pay it much mind, but even the casual gamers playing those games are still gamers.

Mobile gaming will get my true attention when they have more than a few handful of worthwhile titles released a year that aren't just ports of games from consoles. Until then Ill treat it just as I did the flash games and Wii games of old, Im sure theres a good one here and there, but don't expect me to bother.

Wilful ignorance.

Honestly, I have no idea. Mobile games should occupy a place in every healthy gaming diet. Sure, there's an awful lot of shit out there, but sift through it carefully and you'll find nuggets of gold.

People said the same about the Wii. Most still didn't bother. If noone blamed those guys, noone should blame the lot of us for being genuinely uninterested in mobile gaming as it stands today.

 

[RM8]

The "no buttons" thing continues to be mind blowingly stupid. The screen can be covered in buttons if it needs to be. Virtual control pads are crappy, yes, but the solution is just don't play games with virtual control pads. There are plenty of deep engaging gameplay experiences that can control as well if not better than console games because of the touch screen. Like I've said, if XCOM has proper care and attention paid to it, the interface should be leaps and bounds better than the 360 and PS3 versions. iPad could comfortably run, say, Civ 4 with an excellent interface if there were any developer impetus to create it. If it's not, it's because of the developer, not the device.

You're basically accepting that it's good only for some genres, that's one of the biggest issues.

 

[Brinbe]

The lack of buttons hurts for sure, and there's definitely a hell of a lot of terrible/shallow/exploitative games out there.

But there's still good, quality engaging gaming to be had on phones/similar media devices (even if those games are in the minority), and anyone willfully ignoring that because of some prideful vendetta is missing out.

 

[sibarraz]

gamers remembering that just because a game has no buttons, doesn't mean that is bad

 

[twobear]

You're basically accepting that it's good only for some genres, that's one of the biggest issues.

So are consoles though. Sims and RTSes almost universally blow with a gamepad. FPSes are okay though many prefer keyboard and mouse. That doesn't make console games universally crap, though, it just means that there's some things they don't do as well. Touch devices have the capability for games as complex if not more so than consoles. Dismissing them because they don't have buttons remains incredibly dumb.

 

[I NEED SCISSORS]

You can't be serious. NES Ninja Gaiden would be a nightmare on phones, for example. Heck, Tetris plays better on NES, that's just how limited and imprecise touch controls are. Capacitive screens are not even perfect for typing, let alone games that require precision and responsiveness.

Not all games require precision and responsiveness though in order to be enjoyable or considered as games. You don't need razor sharp 60fps d-pad controls in Catan, which i'll add is an incredibly deep multiplayer strategy game, for it to work as intended.

The quality of specific aspects of the controls can also be weighed equally with the quantity that a touch screen possesses. A NES has a d-pad to move and two (sometimes 3 excluding "start") buttons that all operate flawlessly. A phone can have a rudimentary version of that, as well as a virtually unlimited number of on-screen buttons, analog sticks, additional swipe moves, accelerometer, mouse emulation etc. Not to mention the benefits that more power and internet bring to the table for gameplay. The whole point of my comparison between retro consoles and phones came down to quality vs quantity. I view phone gaming as more than comparable to retro gaming from quantitative point of view, and so if the latter is considered a "gamer" device, then surely so must the former.

This whole argument is also highly dependent on the individual game's design, and as I said earlier the implementation of the touch screen controls by the developers. Pointing to some very specific examples of "omg so inferior" is mind-numbingly short sighted because you can do the exact same with some phone games too - the much lauded Super Hexagon for example controls infinitely more accurately with a touch screen compared to a mouse. Fruit Ninja controls better with a touch screen than Kinect or any controller. And so on.

Moving the goal posts also seems to be working both ways in this argument - proponents of phone gaming will admit that it isn't good for some genres. Opponents are equally guilty by using that as proof that it's therefore no good for gaming. "You're basically accepting that it's good only for some genres, that's one of the biggest issues." - does not entail that it's now a bad gaming device and its users are not "gamers". Not suitable for some =/= universally inferior.

 

[Boco_Jones]

For $1 you won't exactly be getting a Uncharted. No one is gonna develop a game like that even if mobiles could produce a game as good looking as Uncharted or Battlefield. They would lose millions on making it because of how much it would have to cost for the buyer in the end. $4.99 max or something.

Games on mobiles should remain a different breed. Bite-sized 5 minute things like Plants vs Zombies or Angry Birds. It's the only way they can succeed. Hardcore forums like this aren't really the best place to talk about mobile stuff because most people here are into deeper complicated games like Dark Souls, MW or Far Cry that usually ask a lot more from the player, rather than swiping or pointing.

Mobile games remain for the casual crowd who don't have time to game on consoles and PC or can't afford more expensive hardware/TV/space/convenience/family etc. It's obvious but still true.

 

[RM8]

So are consoles though. Sims and RTSes almost universally blow with a gamepad. FPSes are okay though many prefer keyboard and mouse. That doesn't make console games universally crap, though, it just means that there's some things they don't do as well. Touch devices have the capability for games as complex if not more so than consoles. Dismissing them because they don't have buttons remains incredibly dumb.

The ratio is overwhelmingly in favor of dedicated systems / consoles, though. Sims and RTS might be better on PC, but most genres are perfect on consoles. In the case of phones, you better like endless runners, tower defense games and strategy games that would be better on PC (because really, capacitive is not amazing at precision).

@I NEED SCISSORS: Not all games require precision? I'd argue every single game ever made is better with having precise controls. And really, the "you can have a ton of virtual buttons on screen!" doesn't fix the fact that they're virtual buttons and automatically not optimal. You can argue they're "okay", you can't argue they're just as good - no one will ever use a touch screen for competitive fighters, shooters, puzzles, etc. Capacitive screens are okay for swiping and tapping here at there, but if they're not even perfect for typing and option like autocorrect are widely used then it's pretty telling. Plus really, covering the screen with virtual buttons is ugly, and that's not even counting your big fat fingers covering part of the screen :/ It's definitely detrimental to the experience. Plus ads, IAPs, ugly amateur art, flash game look, blatant cloning of franchises on other platforms... nope.

Also, I don't claim that there are no good games for phones or that no kind of game is a good fit. I love Game Dev Story, Puzzle & Dragons, Sonic Jump, Canabalt, Ski Safari, Jetpack Joyride - it's just that those games work because they are dumbed down for a touch device. Even hardcore iOS defenders like SmokeyDave say the best iOS games are those built around the device's input methods, emulating traditional controls is not good at all. If your only argument is that I should consider phones as gaming devices - I do! Just entirely non-traditional and downright incompatible with a ton of gaming experiences.

 

[rohlfinator]

@I NEED SCISSORS: Not all games require precision? I'd argue every single game ever made is better with having precise controls.

I played 10000000 on the PC, it was not great. Sometimes (though rarely) the accuracy of a touchscreen is better than the precision of a mouse.

 

[DocSeuss]

It's because "gamers" tend to be people who value playing a game for a length of time, but mobile gaming tends to be oriented more towards short-term, bit-sized play. The two schools of thought are pretty incompatible. Most people don't really want to stare at a phone for two hours, which is why attempts to release hardcore games on mobile devices often run into problems (see: Vita kinda not doing so hot).

It's a format issue.

It's not about controls (plenty of interface options out there), it's about "gamers" who go put twenty hours and a hundred hours into Skyrim or Call of Duty or Final Fantasy XII not being the same people who put five and ten minutes a pop into Angry Birds.

They're different markets.

They'll overlap, but they'll never converge.

It's about how much time you want people to play your game. The reason that, say, Dead Space Mobile doesn't take off like Angry Birds is because you can play Angry Birds for five or ten minutes, and Dead Space Mobile, which is super fun as a Dead Space game, kinda sucks at the whole "being mobile" thing. I'd rather download it as an XBLA/Steam/PSN game, because it's just better suited to couch play. Rage was the same way. I enjoyed it, but I'd rather have just played it as a straight-up series of arcade shooter levels on my PC downloadable for $5.

 

[Tenrius]

Jank.

 

[ZombiePlatypus]

• Hardware not built from ground-up as a gaming device. Of course this isn't an automatic deal breaker, but "gaming tacked on as an after-thought" is an automatic concern for the hardware to overcome.
• Lack of buttons.
• Software. Yes, there are some fantastic mobile games. But the platform is saturated by either shallow time-wasters designed for short bursts fo gameplay, or crap freemium. The shovelware to quality ratio is just not there yet.

If mobile gaming was the only option around, it wouldn't seem so bad. But I'd never consider it as a contender when 3DS/Vita and home consoles are available.

 

[SMT]

Some people are addicted to tetris, and other puzzle games, but when you ask them if they're gamers, they get offended.

I think both sides have hard times accepting one another.