Support NeoGAF

[Fudgepuppy]

- Oversaturation with games that are made for the bite-sized people who don't really care about games.
- Shitty controls
- No "real value" to them as they are cheap and only exist as an icon on your smartphone.

Overall to me, they feel as much as "real games" as flash-games do.

 

[Bgamer90]

This might come as a shock to some people but not all of us want to play games on our phone.

???

Then... don't. No one is forcing you to do so.

My phone is for sending messages and making phone calls, I don't want to play games and drain my battery every single time.

You have a "dumbphone" then right?

Smartphones are no where near the battery life of "dumbphones"; they are good for making phone calls and sending messages.

I don't understand the obsession with device convergence, what is wrong with having separate machines to serve difference functions?

Is the fact that some people don't want to carry around multiple devices that hard to understand?

I want to play games, so I buy a device made specifically for playing games.
You don't see people tossing their SLR cameras away because the iPhone has teh megapixels. I'd rather have several devices that do their specific function extremely well.

If so then that's you and that's perfectly fine.

However, smartphones do things well enough for a large portion of people to the point in which dedicated devices are pointless for them.

Also, the people using their iPhones as go to cameras are largely people who have never owned DSLRs.

 

[entremet]

Are plp forgetting that you can play these games on tablets as well?

I can understand not wanting to kill your phone battery with gaming, but these experience translate well into the tablet space, especially the Cave games.

 

[Haunted]

We need more games like The Room. And more designers thinking about game mechanics instead of monetisation models. Ambition and effort are the key to make mobile gaming break out of the casual ghetto.

 

[Fireblend]

- Oversaturation with games that are made for the bite-sized people who don't really care about games.

So you're some kind of superior gamer breed because you play on consoles and prefer RPGs rather than arcade titles? What?

- Shitty controls

This is up for debate. There are lots of touch-enabled games that do a great job and are quite inventive. And you don't even have to look very deep; Cut the Rope uses touch controls incredibly well. Plus this is an invalid argument. Are you saying if I hook up a bluetooth controller then suddenly the games become "more real?"

- No "real value" to them as they are cheap and only exist as an icon on your smartphone.

What? What's the difference between that and games bought during a Steam sale? I got Deus Ex: HR for like $10, Borderlands for $5, Just Cause 2 for $5...

Overall to me, they feel as much as "real games" as flash-games do.

This is a very narrow definition of gaming, IMO. SMB and many others started as flash games, does that mean they're not real games?

 

[jmdajr]

Are plp forgetting that you can play these games on tablets as well?

I can understand not wanting to kill your phone battery with gaming, but these experience translate well into the tablet space, especially the Cave games.

Must be a better experience for sure, but I wouldn't buy a tablet just for games. Heck, I wouldn't really buy a tablet period. I feel that my phone surfs the web ok enough, although I could use a faster phone now.

In the end I find the option of being able to play them no problem all. I just have no interest, even with DS and Vita with far superior controls and depth.
If I'm going to play games I'm going to play them on console. If I need time to kill somewhere I rather surf the web on my phone.

 

[Tain]

Shallow games = arcade games we grew up with.

I'm very positive that the acclaimed mobile-exclusive action games that I find shallow are less complex than the arcade games (old or not) that I am playing today, and that's saying nothing of aesthetics. A lot of people draw pretty weak parallels between modern small-scale games and arcade classics, but it's not surprising when you consider the modern forumite's general lack of familiarity with arcade games.

FWIW Espgaluda2 (a Cave shmup) controls beautifully on iPhone.

It does, but that's due to the iOS game having fundamentally different movement mechanics and, to a lesser degree, simpler stages than the original Espgaluda 2. The Cave iOS ports are different games at their core. They're also easier due to the removed rules, which tends to help them find an audience among those that aren't traditionally into the genre.

 

[BlazingDarkness]

???

Then... don't. No one is forcing you to do so.

When did I claim that?
I'm answering the question posed by the OP. Stop being so defensive.

'Gamers' are enthusiasts, they don't purchase things solely based on convenience, which mobile devices offer - they buy based on other things, like depth of experience. Which is why the majority (including myself) will always prefer to invest in a platform which main function is to play games.

 

[Coolwhip]

Mobile gaming: aimed at casuals, for short play sessions
Console/PC gaming: aimed at enthusiasts, for long play sessions

Also no buttons. Pretty simple really.

 

[SonicMegaDrive]

Mobile gaming lacks "game feel".

Yep, I stole it from Egoraptor. Sue me.

 

[Alexios]

I also find the "shallow games" complaint to be funny considering how many people here reminisce about games in the past-- games that fit a similar pick up and play nature of many good iOS games.

Eh, I've not played any, for example, iOS racing game that I'd say is on par with something like Daytona. And even a Daytona port I wouldn't play with what, on-screen virtual pedals and gearbox? Auto-gas? Meh.

The wheel function is hardly going to be ideal either, tilt steering has worked great for some games (Real Racing 2 most notably, I don't think many others got the feel even close to right) but the rest bring it down.

Even a simple function like a d-pad + a modifier button + another button (think Super Mario running & jumping) is very inconvenient if not impossible to use with virtual controls and any new games have to take that hit in design flexibility.

Things that could be considered, possibly, maybe, for some, on par with other arcades games like Pac Man, like for example Forget Me Not, I find are best played with something like iCade, not the vanilla setup and not something you conveniently pull out at any moment. Without my own iCade I play them on PC/console, it's the controller that makes me interested enough and not the tablet in this case. Similarly for all the shmups etc.

I mean, I did mention that I've not really gamed on iOS in months with Gridlee being the most exciting release in ages for me and how I look forward to very few games like Warhammer Quest, no flavors of the week.

I spend most of my gaming time on PC so as per the thread title I wouldn't say I'm as accepting of mobile gaming as other forms for reasons like these despite the odd game here and there I've enjoyed or even loved.

I've also pushed it as an amazing and affordable solution for a good approximation of old school arcade thanks to iCade but that's more about iCade itself than mobile gaming and it's not getting nearly enough support.

Maybe if I get my own iCade I'll talk about that more. When I first bought it for my brother in law while I was waiting for it to arrive, and after it did and I tested it out, etc, I was raving about it in that time's iOS threads.

Hence the iCade section in every iOS thread mentioning me since I dug up all the videos. But eh, some people here wanna label me as some hater or whatever at various times just because I'm not into the same things.

 

[Fudgepuppy]

So you're some kind of superior gamer breed because you play on consoles and prefer RPGs rather than arcade titles? What?


This is up for debate. There are lots of touch-enabled games that do a great job and are quite inventive. And you don't even have to look very deep; Cut the Rope uses touch controls incredibly well. Plus this is an invalid argument. Are you saying if I hook up a bluetooth controller then suddenly the games become "more real?"


What? What's the difference between that and games bought during a Steam sale? I got Deus Ex: HR for like $10, Borderlands for $5, Just Cause 2 for $5...


This is a very narrow definition of gaming, IMO. SMB and many others started as flash games, does that mean they're not real games?

1. Many games, much like Facebook games, caters a certain type of audience that wants something small to pass the time when they're on the train or such. I have absolutely no content for these kinds of gamers and I don't think I'm superior in anyway, but I do feel that those types of games don't suit me, or feel like they exhibit the best parts about gaming.

2. Sure games can be made to function with a touch-screen, but not the types of Games I truly feel push the medium forward. You can definitely say that a touch-based games works in spite of its controls, but it's very rarely you can say that a game with a traditional way of input works in spite of it having buttons, sticks and mouses.

3. I'm sorry but Just Cause and Deus EX feel like more bang for your buck when you get them on insane Steam sales. A game that was made to be sold for 0.99 is not the same as a game that gets sold for 5$ for a limited time a couple of years after it's been released.

4. Flash is very limited, and flash-games are either made to experiment with some simple concept or to just kill time (with heavy generalization mind you). I don't doubt that there are great flash-games, or that many good games started out as flash-concepts, that I'll give you.

 

[ToxicAdam]

I think you can draw a through-line in gaming history from the early days on the PC when you could get 100 public domain games on a floppy, to shareware games of the BBS era, to early web games, to flash games of the broadband era and now mobile.

They all share the same kind of aesethetic and similarities relative to whatever era they came from.

 

[Dyno]

First post nailed it. Lack of sophisticated controls results in simple games.

 

[rrs]

The only thing holding it back is you. Even though the market is flooded with games for a casual audience, there are still games that can give this "real" gaming experience on phones.

 

[Bgamer90]

When did I claim that?
I'm answering the question posed by the OP. Stop being so defensive.

I'm not being defensive. It's just, what do you expect someone to say to that?

Also, at the same time, there's a difference between not wanting to play something and not accepting something.

'Gamers' are enthusiasts, they don't purchase things solely based on convenience, which mobile devices offer - they buy based on other things, like depth of experience. Which is why the majority (including myself) will always prefer to invest in a platform which main function is to play games.

Haha, now we are getting into the "what's a real gamer" BS?

Oh please.

Gamers of all forms can't possibly buy and play things for different reasons! That's silly!

I personally play games that I find to be fun. No matter the platform. No matter if they are convenient to pick up and play or not.

 

[BlazingDarkness]

I'm not being defensive. It's just, what do you expect someone to say to that?

Also, at the same time, there's a difference between not wanting to play something and not accepting something.




Haha, now we are getting into the "what's a real gamer" BS?

Oh please.

Gamers of all forms can't possibly buy and play things for different reasons! That's silly!

I personally play games that I find to be fun. No matter the platform. No matter if they are convenient to pick up and play or not.

You're dissecting every post trying to argue a counterpoint which is entirely redundant when we're simply offering our opinions in regards to the questions posed by the OP.

No, that's not what I said. If you believe that 'gamer' is a term that is applied in the same manner across a wide spectrum of different demographics then you're incredibly naive. The sort of 'gamer' which owns only an iPhone is not the sort of 'gamer' which invests hundreds of pounds into consoles and games each year. They seek different types of experiences and have different spending habits.
If a person who is a gaming enthusiast has the choice of spending X amount of pounds on a piece of hardware designed first and foremost to offer games and the option of buying another piece of hardware (many phones/tablets of which don't come cheap these days!) which is designed for a multitude of functions, not with gaming at the forefront - then they're going to go with the former every time.

 

[Alexios]

Haha, now we are getting into the "what's a real gamer" BS?

He didn't say real gamers so take it up with the thread OP.

If you don't want to make the distinction in any way then the thread shouldn't exist since gamers accept it since people game on mobile so are gamers.

People want to discuss the premise of the thread, why they don't personally accept it as much despite being gamers themselves, and do so, sadly for you.

The only thing holding it back is you. Even though the market is flooded with games for a casual audience, there are still games that can give this "real" gaming experience on phones.

The point is those games don't appeal enough to many to jump on them vs the competition on their preferred systems. Sure, they appeal to others, I get that. I'm talking about myself as asked.

Maybe some 4x has the theoretical bullet points of depth, factions, tech trees, resource management, whatever, but if I don't like it or don't like it over Alpha Centauri on PC or whatever it's 100% meaningless to me.

Again, I look forward to Warhammer Quest. It seems to have enough balance of depth and quick session friendliness with little in the way of competition regardless of platform. Such games seem to be exceptions for me.

I've mentioned how for board and card games you also can't go wrong with mobile since the controls and format are very friendly to such things as well but again, I'm not among those gamers. so it doesn't work for myself.

Yes, I realize Warhammer Quest is a board game but it's certainly of a different mold than card games, monopoly, ticket to ride, and so on and it has PC strategy/RPG style elements that I feel will work out for my own taste.

There also seems to be a misconception that people like me only call out these kinds of games now that they're on mobile, selling more than handhelds, etc as if we were all preferring them over what we usually buy when such games were available (and still are) within browsers from PopCap, MumboJumbo, random developers on newgrounds, most recently on things like armor games and kongregate, and so on, where they at times were soaring successes much more than conventional games. No, we always considered them simple diversions and only raved about the odd gem that appealed to us enough to single it out here and there, just as we do now. Similarly for f2p, it didn't originate on mobile and made millions for companies on the web format, so obviously people like and pay for it, but not some of us who don't see the value in how it's usually handled.

 

[DESTROYA]

Shitty controls for shitty games.
The decent games drown out all the crap, now there are some good games but it's just not the same as gaming on a dedicated device.
Only games I play are online poker and cave games.
Unless iOS or Android comes out with a universal gaming controller that support all games It won't change anything.

 

[Tain]

What are considered the best mobile action games (mobile-exclusive) lately? It's been a year or two since I last asked, I think, and I'm probably behind. I've played Super Hexagon, which I found pretty mediocre, but what else is there in the past year or so?

 

[.GqueB.]

I personally didn't even know gamers weren't accepting mobile gaming. I accept it fine. The games that are built for that touch experience can be really great. Just to name a few:

Cut the Rope
Jelly Defense
180 (created by a gafferI think)
Ninjump
Fruit Ninja

These are all great games. Who wants "deeper experience"s? Thats what handhelds and consoles are for. I want quick experiences that I can just pull out and play on the train real quick. Anything "deeper" than that seems unnecessary to me.

 

[Bgamer90]

You're dissecting every post trying to argue a counterpoint which is entirely redundant when we're simply offering our opinions in regards to the questions posed by the OP.

How is what I'm saying redundant?

There are many people here making wide generalizations; hence the reason for the statements in my posts.

If you believe that 'gamer' is a term that is applied in the same manner across a wide spectrum of different demographics then you're incredibly naive.

Why?

It's somehow wrong to realize that there are different types of gamers but yet still call all of them gamers?

If a person who is a gaming enthusiast has the choice of spending X amount of pounds on a piece of hardware designed first and foremost to offer games and the option of buying another piece of hardware (many phones/tablets of which don't come cheap these days!) which is designed for a multitude of functions, not with gaming at the forefront - then they're going to go with the former every time.

Then why are so many (core) gamers using their iPhones instead of buying a 3DS or Vita?

That's basically what I'm getting at --- different gamers have different reasons for playing what they like to play. Putting one group above the other as being "more true" just because they fit along the same lines of the way that you feel is just silly in my opinion.

 

[redcrayon]

No one is forcing developers to make phone games.

I didn't say they did, I'm saying that a wide choice of genres are options for a system with multiple inputs.

However, what I was saying is that the whole "virtual buttons" complaint becomes moot when a huge portion of the best iOS games don't even use buttons.

No it absolutely doesn't become moot. Yes, lots of the best iOS games don't even use buttons, I agree entirely, but my point is that as a system it rules out genres due to the lack of accuracy and thumbs over the screen. Playing Contra or Metal Slug on IOS would be painful, and I wouldn't want to think about things like 3D platformers. Virtually all mobile phone games work fine on a handheld with a bit of adaptation, but it just doesn't work the other way around as you can't adapt an analogue stick, d-pad and 6+buttons for comfortable small touch screen use.

However, what I was saying is that the whole "virtual Devs could make games with virtual buttons too if they want and unlike what some may say, all games that use virtual buttons aren't bad. Super Hexagon requires the player to press down on the left and right sides of the screen and yet the game was one of my
favorite games of 2012.

I'm sure some of them are fine but 'they aren't all terrible' isn't exactly a reasonable argument when compared to systems where the buttons work all the time, and games that aren't playable usually don't make it past 'quality control', which also seems to be very inconsistent on iOS.

Battery life is a good point since people use their phones for multiple functions but I haven't played a game to the point in which I don't have enough battery life to use my phone for the rest of the day.

I remember playing Puzzlejuice for a little bit more than 2 hours straight and still having more than 70% of battery life left.

Yeah, I've noticed battery consumption vary from game to game, also depends on what apps you have running in the background, brightness, wireless etc etc.

Then go online and read sites/blogs that cover mobile games. Heck, even the iOS threads here are good for finding new games to play.

I could do, but frankly my previous experiences with buying iOS games have left me disinclined to explore it any further on a smartphone beyond the odd bit of fruit ninja. As I said, different story for tablets,
as
a) thumbs not being in the way
b) it not draining my phone battery
c) better battery capacity
d) bigger screen

solve quite a few of the issues. That is the thing- it's not any one of those issues that bother me, it's all of them added up together with the crap iOS store, lack of being able to filter out microtransaction rubbish and lack of decent controls for stuff like run'n'gun gameplay that have just made it feel like a poor experience compared to the handheld in my bag.

All of this is just my opinion based on 2 years of having a smartphone and a portable on me most of the time. I spent the first six months looking up decent games, bought two dozen or so but play maybe four of them for five minutes every now and then, here and there. I really couldn't care less how many people are happy to play games on their mobile phone instead of buying a portable, portables have always been niche and not for everyone, but I just prefer them for the reasons given above. This doesn't mean I think iOS gamers aren't 'real gamers' or whatever bizarre tribalism is being referred to. They are all just games, people just like different hardware for their own reasons. It was ever thus, and this thread seems to frame every response as if it's a sweeping statement for or against one or the other as an absolute judgement. I don't think that's the case, and I'm quite likely to pick up a tablet for gaming before I pick up a Vita.

iOS games are primarily aimed at an ultra casual audience that wants games that are easy to pick up, easy to play, easy to spend a quid on with the touch of a button on a device they have on them all the time. Nothing wrong with that, it's a great idea. But personally I don't see the need to convince people like me that playing games on a mobile phone is any way comparable to a device specifically designed only with games in mind. I just don't agree, but to each their own.

In our conclusions we seem to agree that people should be left alone to choose the hardware they prefer and suits them best, I suspect the OP framing the discussion in such combative terms is the problem.

 

[RM8]

I really don't agree with the notion that shallow phone games = classic arcade gaming. I think you can find way more "substance" in early platformers, shmups, maze games, puzzles etc. - than in stuff like Angry Birds. Not to mention arcade games never suffered from imprecise controls (unless your local arcade had really old and busted cabinets ). Plus arcade gaming is mostly about action, while I find that phone gaming is a better fit for strategy, simulation and other games that are not very action-heavy. I mean, for starters, arcade platformers were never one-input games like endless runners.

BTW I recently bought Relic Rush. It's not very good A shame because I think it's an interesting variation of the endless runner and it looks very cool. Oh well.

 

[RedSwirl]

Budgets. Until mobile games start hitting those 8 figure development costs, we're not going to see anything complex or deep. They'll continue to be through away titles and treated as such.

I don't even think it needs to be that much. It would be enough of there were enough mobile games with the same budget and amount of polish as 3DS, PSP, and Vita games.

But again, I think the main problem is the price ceiling. If it weren't for that, I think the big publishers would be trying to release iOS or Android versions of a lot of their games.

 

[rohlfinator]

These are all great games. Who wants "deeper experience"s? Thats what handhelds and consoles are for. I want quick experiences that I can just pull out and play on the train real quick. Anything "deeper" than that seems unnecessary to me.

This kind of touches on why mobile games don't really work for me -- I don't have a need for that kind of quick gaming experience on a daily basis. I could see the appeal if I had a regular commute, where I had predictable downtime away from home. But most of my "screw around with my phone" time is too short and inconsistent to really get into a game, so I tend to just use my phone for Twitter/internet, and stick to gaming on dedicated platforms.

 

[vag 2.0]

aspergers disease

 

[djshauny]

Well I like dedicated gaming devices for my games and a phone to make calls and texts.

 

[flak57]

Another helping of Dat Mobile Non-game.

Like before, all pictures link to a youtube vid. I can't guarantee that all of these are great, but I excluded the ones that seemed to have an overall negative sentiment from those that played them, however it's worth noting that I think many tend to me more lenient for a lot of games because of the price and indie nature of the releases. Oh, and I tried to weed out Gameloft's most egregious ripoffs, even though they may be liked.

The point? Aside from an enjoyable way to waste my evening, there are plenty of "gamer" games to play on mobile if you are fine with/able to use the touch screen. There are deep games, complex games, and games from a wide variety of genres. Games that are not just minigame pick up and throw away stuff, but full fledged shit. Although I'll say a good number of those "mini games" on mobile have a ton of depth (Jet Car Stunts!), but that's another discussion.

They are usually rough around the edges and don't have that professional polish, however depth of gameplay isn't necessarily determined by the budget, but the person making the game (of course control limitations can be a factor).

A lot of these are not mobile exclusive (such as Lostwinds, Wii fans!), and some are old classics as well, however almost none of them can be played on any other handheld game console.

Flight Combat



SHMUP:



Stat progression games of various types:



Adventure



Strategy



Driving/Racing



Shooter



Sidescrollers (No runners)



And again, there are many, many more.

 

[Alexios]

Christ you're obsessed.

Screens/vids don't mean the games you pimp are worthwhile. Especially when you don't have personal experience of all.

For example, Sky Gamblers AS at first seemed nice but in the end it's a very limited, repetitive and shallow experience. More of a tech demo for fanboys like you to pimp than a real worthwhile game.

I bought the sequel SR hoping they've improved since the base/engine was solid but nope, more of the same.

ARC Squadron was the most disappointing rail shooter I've played in ages thanks to its hype.

The shumps are good, if you have iCade, so hardly mobile gaming at that point.

Similarly for some platformers.

Random Heroes isn't good.

Samurai 2 is bad, Bladeslinger is bad.

Haven't played a good FPS/TPS either. I've tried several from Shadowgun to MC3 and Star Warfare in particular was laughable but there it is, in your list, adding credibility.

You probably haven't played most of these either if you really pimp Star Warfare's dodgyness. Might as well play Onslaught on Wii, lol.

Yes, Lost Winds 1 & 2 are good. ~3 years prior to their iOS release and with physical inputs at least. Couldn't go through the 1st on touch. Same for NyxQuest.

The random action JRPGs or whatever you'd call those IAP grindfests aren't.

Star Command has hardly great impressions so far, sadly for me who kickstarted it.

Real Racing 3 is disappointing after quite enjoying RR2 for a while (though it suffered from some of the same issues as Sky Gamblers).

Gemini Rue is good but already played on PC.

Didn't enjoy Time of Heroes.

But oh no, I didn't comment on every single game specifically, must mean I don't have a point. Do some quality control of your lists and they'll be much smaller and people will be able to comment on all.

Either way, yes, we know of that stuff, no, they generally haven't made some of us spend more time on mobile as at the very least they appear like lackluster copycats of better things we have elsewhere.

After wasting money on all those reportedly great games we're less inclined to try more based on such recommendations either, especially if they're recommended in the same post as games that suck as equals.

Just a gem here and there doesn't make me spend as much time on mobile as on other systems. Then consider how not everyone's going to be in shmups, 4x, board, card, puzzle games and it's worse for most people.

And the controls some wanna claim are based on the individual are always something every game's design deals with, whether some are happy enough with the compromise or not. Even a simple function like a d-pad + a modifier button + another button (think Super Mario running & jumping) is very inconvenient if not impossible to use with virtual controls and any new games have to take that hit in design flexibility and/or playability.

 

[flak57]

Christ you're obsessed.

Screens/vids don't mean the games are good.

For example, Sky Gamblers AS at first seemed nice but in the end it's a very limited, repetitive and shallow experience.

I bought the sequel SR hoping they've improved since the base was solid enough but nope, more of the same.

ARC Squadron was the most disappointing rail shooter I've played in ages thanks to its hype.

The shumps are good, if you have iCade, so hardly mobile gaming at that point.

Similarly for some platformers (cos most suck, but there are a few nice ones).

Random Heroes isn't good. Already played though, so doesn't make me play more mobile.

Samurai 2 is bad, Bladeslinger is bad.

Haven't played a good FPS/TPS either.

You probably haven't played most of these either if you really pimp Star Warfare's dodgyness. Might as well play Onslaught on Wii, lol.

Yes, Lost Winds 1 & 2 are good. ~3 years prior to their iOS release and with physical inputs at least. Couldn't go through the 1st on touch. Same for NyxQuest.

The random action JRPGs or whatever you'd call those IAP grindfests aren't.

Star Command has hardly great impressions so far, sadly for me who kickstarted it.

Real Racing 3 is disappointing after quite enjoying RR2 for a while.

Gemini Rue and other adventure games are decent but already played on PC.

But oh no, I didn't comment on every single game specifically, must mean I don't have a point. Do some quality control of your lists and they'll be much smaller and people will be able to comment on all.

Either way, yes, we know of that stuff, no, they generally haven't made some of us spend more time on mobile.

People play them and like them, regardless of you as an individual. Again however, the point of the post was clearly stated and you went off on another unrelated tangent.

Those are gamer games. They are not mini-games. They are not, by design, pick up and put down in 5 minute type games. The SHMUPs I suppose could be, but then again who doesn't consider SHMUPs a hardcore genre, at least when they appear on other systems?

And mobile gaming libraries should be compared to other handhelds, not console/PC. If you are not a handheld gamer, then you would obviously play any game on your TV/Monitor if given the choice. And Rayman Origins would no longer count as a good Vita game, for example. How stupid is that?

 

[Alexios]

People play them and like them, regardless of you as an individual.

I'm obviously posting for myself and like minded, yes.

You're happy to post based on others but whatever, that's your deal. What point does that make? That some people like mobile games? As if that's not known. They do make lots of of money for Apple and others.

And nowhere did I say it's the mobile factor that makes me not play some of the good games in that form, just where the better experience is, hence how I also mentioned an arcade game on iCade is better than with a standard controller so given the choice I'll play that on iCade and not on my PC with a controller but as I don't have my own iCade I of course don't choose the touch controls for them and go for the controller. I also said what kind of games make me consider spending more money and a lot of time on handhelds (like Monster Hunter). So yeah, talk about unrelated tangents.

Rayman is ok on mobile, but it's nothing like on other platforms since it's an auto runner but at least it doesn't shoehorn things that don't fit on the controls so I'd say it's more successful than many in your list.

In fact it's of the last iOS games I spent any real time with though its auto nature makes it far more repetitive so I didn't finish it, yet at least. But yes, post games like that, which don't rely on the platform weaknesses.

 

[OmegaTreeFish]

 

[flak57]

I'm obviously posting for myself, yes.

You're happy to post based on others but whatever, that's your deal.

Either way, yes, we know of that stuff, no, they generally haven't made some of us spend more time on mobile as at the very least they appear like lackluster copycats of better things we have elsewhere.

After wasting money on all those reportedly great games we're less inclined to try more based on such recommendations either, especially if they're recommended in the same post as games we hated as equals.

And nowhere did I say it's the mobile factor that makes me not play some of the good games in that form, just the better controls, talk about unrelated tangents.

Then why did you bring up that games were on console/PC? Those are not handhelds. And regardless of the control factor, you cannot play those games on other handhelds. If you aren't into touch controls, well, I've addressed that about 10 times now. But people do use the touch controls just fine in a lot of cases, so much of the time it comes down to preference.

 

[MarkusRJR]

The controls just aren't there for a lot of the more "in depth" games. For example, I just bought Nova 3 on my tablet for 99c, and I can't even begin to understand how to aim and fire at the same time. It must be witchcraft to play this game competently.

 

[Alexios]

Then why did you bring up that games were on console/PC? Those are not handhelds.

Can you not read? It's in the quote. Where the better experience is regardless of mobility.

And yes, I did say things like "we" and "some of us" at times because it's clear other posters in the thread feel the same way.

I didn't say that for the particular game opinions however, which I left for myself alone. Just the if some spend or don't spend time on mobile.

Ie, yes, everyone knows people do play on mobile, I'm not speaking for anyone by stating the obvious, neither is the OP asking those like you, he's asking those who don't get into it.

 

[SuperAngelo64]

Spent the last two months playing final fantasy dimensions and chaos rings. The touch screen is perfect for JRPGs so no complaints from me! Keep em coming!

 

[flak57]

Can you not read? It's in the quote. Where the better experience is regardless of mobility.

And yes, I did say things like "we" and "some of us" at times because it's clear other posters in the thread feel the same way.

I didn't say that for the particular game opinions however, which I left for myself alone. Just the if some spend or don't spend time on mobile.

Yes, everyone knows people do, I'm not speaking for anyone it's just a known fact.

What would make for a game you would rather play on mobile (including 3DS Vita etc) than on a home console/PC, if given both options?

 

[mrklaw]

nothing is holding mobile/tablet gaming from being accepted.

Buttons holds mobile back from being a valid 'only' platform option for gamers. If they added buttons, you could almost manage without a console. Without, there are just too many game types that are compromised

but as a complement to a console or PC, nothing is missing

 

[Hero]

Flak in two pages you managed to become one of the most annoying GAFers I have ever seen in my 10 plus years on the forum. Nobody cares about your dumb post which is a glorified list war that is worsened by the fact that you're spamming the thread. The fact that you managed to make another one when NOBODY cared about the first one means it's probably time to stop posting.

 

[hirokazu]

Shitty controls.

Most of the big games are casual stuff that are fun for anywhere between 5 minutes and 1 hour.

Most of the "console-level" stuff that last substantially longer are ports of old games from other systems.

Also, at least on iOS, there's no real way to back up and restore your progress. If you need to delete the app, you can't restore your progress without doing a full system restore (unless that particular app has cloud saves).

 

[flak57]

Flak in two pages you managed to become one of the most annoying GAFers I have ever seen in my 10 plus years on the forum. Nobody cares about your dumb post which is a glorified list war that is worsened by the fact that you're spamming the thread. The fact that you managed to make another one when NOBODY cared about the first one means it's probably time to stop posting.

I'd imagine it would feel pretty abrasive for some to have their points systematically destroyed, in a fashion that they can't really launch a rebuttal argument against.

 

[OmegaTreeFish]

The controls just aren't there for a lot of the more "in depth" games. For example, I just bought Nova 3 on my tablet for 99c, and I can't even begin to understand how to aim and fire at the same time. It must be witchcraft to play this game competently.

the controls arn't what makes Nova 3 not a deep experience lol. Game its pretty bad all round.

Aiming and shooting at the same time is easy. press the shoot button then move your thumb / finger to aim. The problem is that its impossible to aim and burst fire while aiming. Thats the real restriction here. The solution is guns have bigger clips so you can keep shooting while aiming but its still pretty bad and one of the biggest things making FPS's not that great using touch controls. You may be able to have as many vitual buttons on the screen as you need but pressing more than move and one other button at the same time is not easy at all. A controller / mouse and keyboard doesn't have this issue.

I think a big issue is that people seem to think deeper experiences = FPS though. This is pretty crazy considering most fps's out there arn't exactly deep. Some game types work great on touch controls and others don't. A deep experience is perfectly possible. However when the market has made its price point rock bottom or freemium it becomes very hard to find the budget to make these types of games.

I actually use touch controls just fine for the most part. I got used to them pretty fast and dont see them as an issue apart from in some game types. Hell I actually played modern combat 3 and 4 all the way through. Both games pretty dumb and while the controls are annoying at times I never found them unplayable. The best example of how to do an action game on touch screen is still dead space which actually controlled really well. I also cant believe people havn't copied the movement controls from mage gauntlet yet. Those were damn amazing. Floating D-Pads are better than static ones but MG's idea was way better.

 

[massoluk]

To me, most mobile games either

a) Are too shallow - Just severely lacking in content or just plain boring repetitive.
b) Have shitty controls - mostly due to simply using touchscreen to emulate buttons.
c) Are poor imitation of either console or portable games, usually comes with again... button emulations on touchscreen.

There are exceptional games once in a while that don't have the three issues. Puzzles and Dragons are my most played game right now in the past year. But really, a lot of great ones were buried under pile and pile of running/tower defense/match-3 games.

 

[rohlfinator]

I'd imagine it would feel pretty abrasive for some to have their points systematically destroyed, in a fashion that they can't really launch a rebuttal argument against.

lol at "systematically destroyed"

Screenshots say precisely nothing about depth or quality or controls, which are the main criticisms against mobile games in this thread.

 

[commish]

The biggest problem facing mobile gaming today is just plain old ignorance from many/most gamers. I mean, just look at the comments in this thread. It's as if people don't know, or are willfully ignorant, about what mobile gaming has to offer. "Too shallow"... "shitty controls"... these comments are just silly, tbh. There are many games that offer a deeper experience, and the control issues, while absolutely true for some games, is vastly overstated. Not every game is so uber fast paced action game.

I say all this as a proud Vita and 3DS owner who has put an ungodly number of hours into Soul Sacrifice and Fire Emblem, to name the 2 most recent games I've been playing.

 

[zerokoolpsx]

No buttons, short battery life, and selection of games are usually a bad or shallow game.

I'm not saying Puzzle and Dragons is a bad game, but after 15 minutes. My battery is low. I would have to plug in to play longer than 15 minutes. Yeah, who wants to be plugged in on a mobile game. =/
Puzzle and Dragons is the most fun I had on a mobile game in a really long time. Another thing is that I don't mind ports. Its for the nostalgia, but it wouldn't hurt to have something original or new on a mobile phone.

Publishers are just going for the safe $$$.

Are there good shmups on mobile games?

 

[Alexios]

The biggest problem facing mobile gaming today is just plain old ignorance from many/most gamers. I mean, just look at the comments in this thread. It's as if people don't know, or are willfully ignorant, about what mobile gaming has to offer. "Too shallow"... "shitty controls"... these comments are just silly, tbh. There are many games that offer a deeper experience, and the control issues, while absolutely true for some games, is vastly overstated. Not every game is so uber fast paced action game.

I say all this as a proud Vita and 3DS owner who has put an ungodly number of hours into Soul Sacrifice and Fire Emblem, to name the 2 most recent games I've been playing.

I'm not ignorant and still rarely game on iOS as little catches my attention. I'm looking forward to Warhammer Quest and that's about it since Gridlee. That some games can be called deep and others have decent for the platform controls doesn't mean much to me, I don't buy games based on bullet points (or cos they're cheap) but on overall appeal and the competition there is to potentially better suit my tastes.

 

[Winterfang]

Mobile gaming is legit.

 

[jrDev]

You won't find the same deep experiences you'd get with console gaming.

Wrong! This gets more Wrong as each day passes and mobile platforms rapidly get better technology (Also, deep experiences don't need better technology).

EDIT: Could someone clarify what 'deeper experience' means? Sounds like one of those lame excuse that 'hardcore' gamers use lol? Fire Emblem is a 'deep experience' and that can be done (there are probably a ton of well done SRPGs on mobile).