Is ipads, smartphones hurting the big 3

richymcdermott

I see alot of articles saying 99 cent games are killing console gaming and it could doom the way we play games in the future. For me at least i think when it comes down to the handheld market it seems more appealing to me playing games on my ipad cause theres a huge variety of games that are great fun and are priced very resonable or free. I would like to own a 3ds or vita aswell but for the adverge person whos not really a gamer i can see them on the go playing games on their phones than buying sonys and nintendo handheld.
It leaves me to this , we see tablets and phones getting pretty powerful and what if it comes to a day where well see like apple tv where you can hook up your ipad to the tv and browse the internet or play games , is their much market to gain to the people their trying to convert to buying their products When the adverge person doesnt need the best gaming experience possible and just looking for a 99c game to play to kill time.

We know developers go to the place where markets boom
And angry birds selling 350 million could more companies make way

http://www.videogamesblogger.com/2011/09/21/angry-birds-sales-exceed-350-million.htm

I dont think it be the doom for consoles as it seems cause sony fans will buy sony console, ms fans will buy ms console and the same with nintendo fans Theyll buy nintendo products.

What do ye guys think.. Is it a concern or is it just people trying to create buzz and making noise over nothing.

http://www.computerandvideogames.com/327886/consoles-are-doomed-richard-garriott/

chin_grin

Hmm. See that xbox nearly sold a million consoles last week alone? So, no. I don't think it's affecting the "big three". Also the games on these systems tend to be a very scaled down version of the "full spec" game on the likes of a pc\ps3\360. And I can't stand flash games. Not sure, they just annoy the feck out of me. Maybe I'm not playing the right ones.

http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2128958/microsoft-sells-nearly-million-xbox-360s

Microsoft sells nearly a million Xbox 360s in a week

Seven years old and still going strong
By Dave Neal
Wed Nov 30 2011, 12:49
GAMING CONSOLE VENDOR Microsoft has just sold its largest number of Xbox consoles in a week.
In a seven day period that included Black Friday and Cyber Monday, both traditionally big days for retailers, the company managed to shift 960,000 consoles in the US alone, the most ever in a week.
800,000 of the devices were sold in one 24 hour period, it added, meaning that the rest of the week was perhaps a little more lacklustre.
Jeff Meisner, editor at the Official Microsoft Blog welcomed the high sales figures, which also saw more Kinect units leave stores and enter homes. Meisner said that combined standalone and bundled movement sensing gewgaw sales numbered 750,000.
"Xbox 360 should deliver its eleventh straight month as the number one console in the US. Given the robust holiday portfolio and the new Xbox LIVE dashboard going live on Dec. 6th," he said. "Microsoft expects holiday momentum to continue, driving Xbox 360 to finish the year as the number one console in the U.S."
The firm has not released worldwide sales, but it is possible that these were also high. Microsoft is making a big push with its Kinect hardware and is rapidly releasing more titles that make use of its software for voice control.
These include the recent Halo CE Anniversary release, and the Black Eyed Peas Experience. µ
Source: The Inquirer (http://s.tt/14p4S)

ShadowHearth

It is effecting handhelds.

I bought 3ds, but feck me I don't touch any new releases. 45eu for new game on handheld? Nope...

chin_grin

ShadowHearth wrote: »

It is effecting handhelds.

I bought 3ds, but feck me I don't touch any new releases. 45eu for new game on handheld? Nope...

Call me a pessimist, but I don't see the Vita doing well either.

Temptamperu

There will always be a place for the big consoles, I read on destructoid Xbox has sold the most units in a week ever recently.
But there is a place for handhelds too.

chin_grin

Temptamperu wrote: »

There will always be a place for the big consoles, I read on destructoid Xbox has sold the most units in a week ever recently.
But there is a place for handhelds too.

Psssst, read my post. It's the second one. :P

There will always be a place for handhelds. But they will always be marketed towards the younger gamer. Well, in Nintendos case. Although I played Street Fighter on the 3DS there and was amazed. Couldn't stick it for long though as I was getting a strain on the eyes (OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOLD!).

I think PSP tried to get the more mature gamer in to the fray and failed. It's been dying since the slim. I still own my phat one though. It still has a place in my heart..............for playing psx games. ^_^

Retr0gamer

I see a crash coming in the smartphone market before it stabilises. There's a bit of a goldrush in the market at the moment but I can see the low price points being unsustainable when consumers start demanding more of their smartphone games. You'll see the small indies being weeded out and a stabilisation of the market around big developers and publishers. I really don't see the iphone or android devices being able to offer me the depth of game that I get on the DS and PSP for the price they are selling for, the handheld market will definitely take a bit of a hit but I don't see it going away. Smartphones have priced themselves out of the childrens and teen market which despite what skewed reports show, is the biggest market for these devices. As a gamer, most of the smartphone games are throw away or unexplanably popular, the god awful angry birds being the big one. While they are interesting I'm never going to get a game as polished or as enthralling as etrian odyssey or Pokemon.

jaykhunter

ShadowHearth wrote: »

It is effecting handhelds.

Ya, I'm paraphrasing but I think Ipod devices and the like have taken about 20% of their sales; the only consumers at risk are the casuals who need something/anything to play to waste time (eg commuting) and don't particularly care what it is.

Like there'll always be a place for a dedicated gaming handheld that can deliver games that phones can't, it'll just get it's casual market stripped away. But as long as games like pokemon, mario, zelda, uncharted etc have exclusivity, then handhelds will have a place.

That said, they gotta slash the price of handheld games - they're almost equal to console-game prices but take half the development/staff. Ridiculous. So, this competition will only be great for us the consumer. Game prices will HAVE TO come down to compete

meoklmrk91

I don't think it will. I just consider it a different medium. I play games on my iPhone when I am bored and don't have access to any other form of entertainment. However I would choose an actual console over it every time.

It's casual gaming, you could argue that all handhelds are casual but it all depends on what way you use them. In my personal opinion if people only like 99c games on smartphones or tablets then I would consider that to be casual.

richymcdermott

I see it as ya cant put a price on how fun games will be , millions and millions went to bf3 and i hated every second of it . I seen final fantasy on the app store and looks gorgeous and plays like a dream. If developers can create similar experience using a turned based system with jrpg , japan will boom cause already they are a handheld country..
Handheld and tablets arent going to be graphically behind or using less powerful machinary forever..
As jakhunter said its good for us consumers.:D

marco_polo

richymcdermott wrote: »

I see it as ya cant put a price on how fun games will be , millions and millions went to bf3 and i hated every second of it . I seen final fantasy on the app store and looks gorgeous and plays like a dream. If developers can create similar experience using a turned based system with jrpg , japan will boom cause already they are a handheld country..
Handheld and tablets arent going to be graphically behind or using less powerful machinary forever..
As jakhunter said its good for us consumers.:D

For the forseeable future at least, the heat generated by the most powerful computer components will require far more ventilation than can possibly be provided by any handheld device.

For sure such tiny home gaming devices will arrive someday, but it is not an imminent threat to this or the next generation of consoles.

hooradiation

jaykhunter wrote: »

Game prices will HAVE TO come down to compete

This will never happen.

Ciaran500

hooradiation wrote: »

This will never happen.

Yes it will



Check and mate.

nitromaster

ShadowHearth wrote: »

It is effecting handhelds.

I bought 3ds, but feck me I don't touch any new releases. 45eu for new game on handheld? Nope...

More like 30-35 online :P

For the one title available on it.

Retr0gamer

I think the handheld market will still be there for gamers and for children. However the smartphones have now taken the casual market that nintendo worked so hard to entice with games like brain training. They're pretty much gone now.

Potential-Monke

I think it also has the reverse effect. I know of 3 (yes, 3!!!) people who had no interest in gaming and through the powers of App games have upgraded to DS's and one even got a PS3.

Varik

As long as i buy the games i want to play publishers will see a market for it and developers will try to make games like it so they can get more of my money.

At no point was i deciding between 40-50 apps and skyrim.

RobertFoster

Retr0gamer wrote: »

While they are interesting I'm never going to get a game as polished or as enthralling as etrian odyssey or Pokemon.

I agree with you. Any game I've played on a phone hasn't been very deep, with simple mechanics, and short play sessions. They're easy to pick up and play for 5 minutes while you're waiting for something. That said, with the more advanced/involving games on the DS I sometimes wonder if it'd be more fun to be playing on a bigger console instead of crouched over a handheld.

I do find DS games pricey. I was looking at some older DS games earlier this week, and the fact that they were still over £20 on Amazon made me reconsider getting them. I don't so much look at it and think of how many cheap phone games I could get, I think of the 360 or PS3 game I could get and play on the TV instead.

I think Penny-Arcade showed both sides of the argument when the 3DS price dropped:

Dont be at yourself

chin_grin wrote: »

Hmm. See that xbox nearly sold a million consoles last week alone?

Lifetime sales:

PS3: 56 million
360: 57 million
Wii: 90 million
iPad: 40 million
iPhone: 100 million
iPod Touch: 60 million
iOS5 users: 66 million

Not bad, considering the iPhone and iPad are both much younger than the other consoles.

Virtually every one of those iDevices has a user's credit card information, with one-click purchasing enabled. And the most popular task performed on these devices is gaming. It's a massive, massive market; and one that's increasingly being taken seriously by the big publishers.

Infinity Blade, an iOS game, made Epic Games $10 million dollars within 6 months of launch. The game itself took only 6 months to make, and only a handful of people to do so. The sequel, launched this week, will undoubtedly make even more. They've abandoned a successful and well-received Xbox Live title in Shadow Complex to focus on iPhone/iPad, because it's much more lucrative.

Not that these devices reliant on big publishers like Epic. The incredibly low barrier of entry (a $99 developer account is all you need to submit titles to the App Store) means that the bedroom coder can sell titles on the same digital shelves as the likes of Epic, Ubisoft, Square-Enix, EA and Capcom. And outsell them. Look at Angry Birds, Flight Control and Sword & Sworcery (probably my GotY so far) for amazing successes from small developers.

It's clearly got the big 3 rattled. Just today, a Sony suit went on record to say that Vita software prices would be impacted by the 99c smartphone game phenomenon. XBox are pushing their XBox Live brand into the mobile space to retain mindshare. Nintendo, well...are as slow to react to industry trends as ever, but it's hard not see a little iPhone/iPad influence in their upcoming Wii U.

What's really going to shake the market up is when Apple enters the living room. They already have their 'hobby' Apple TV box which plugs into your telly. But there are building rumors of an Apple television set coming in the middle of next year.

The moment that the Apple television set enters the living room, along with the App Store, is the minute the console gaming landscape changes forever. It means that triple-AAA developers don't need to sign away their IP and their profits to a publisher just for market access. It means publishers don't need to bow to platform holder's licensing fees. It means the next mass-market console smash hit could be created by some guy coding in his sitting room wearing a dressing gown.

richymcdermott

EA Believes its killing the console market and ready to support it

http://www.hiphopgamershow.com/2011/07/ea-apple%E2%80%99s-ipad-killing-the-console-market-were-investing-heavily-in-it/

Gabe Newell thoughts on apple wanting to destroy the console business

http://www.gamefront.com/newell-thinks-apple-might-be-looking-to-kill-consoles-and-hes-probably-right/

Epic Game Boss Believes ipad is the future of consoles

http://www.gamesradar.com/epic-games-boss-reckons-the-ipad-is-the-future-of-consoles-agree/

while i made this , my time owning an ipad it be foolish to believe that 99c cent games are nothing and should be ignored.
i have made comments in the past before on how 50 quid for a game is expensive but thats an entirely different story, well see down the line if mobile gaming succeeds in the future.

jc84

as much as i love playing games on my ipad, it doesn't come close to console games and i doubt it ever will, ipad/smartphones are definitely hurting handheld console's though i'd imagine

Mr Trade In

If the big American RPG publishers started releasing JRPG games on the Ipad and Android markets I would ditch my PSP and 3DS in an instant, €45 for Tales of the Abyss is a pain I am not looking forward to tomorrow.

Retr0gamer

Mr Trade In wrote: »

If the big American RPG publishers started releasing JRPG games on the Ipad and Android markets I would ditch my PSP and 3DS in an instant, €45 for Tales of the Abyss is a pain I am not looking forward to tomorrow.

The thing is you can't make a massive WRPG or JRPG, sell it for 99c and expect to make a profit. Big budget games just can't work in that environment.

richymcdermott

Shining force is 99c in the app store
Secret Of Mana 8.99
Final Fantasy 3 is 15.99

http://www.gamepro.com/article/features/222212/the-6-best-jrpgs-on-iphone-ipad/

theres some great jrpg on the store

richymcdermott

Retr0gamer wrote: »

The thing is you can't make a massive WRPG or JRPG, sell it for 99c and expect to make a profit. Big budget games just can't work in that environment.

for 99c no probably not but you can get some gems on the store for 5 -10 euros

Dont be at yourself

Retr0gamer wrote: »

The thing is you can't make a massive WRPG or JRPG, sell it for 99c and expect to make a profit. Big budget games just can't work in that environment.

A developer could potentially release a big budget game, sell it at $9.99, reach a massive audience and keep 70% of all revenue, though.

Triple-A is untested on iOS at the moment, but all signs point to it being a success. There is a perception that smartphone users are married to the 99c price point, but in actual fact developers have noticed sales have increased when they raised their price from 99c upwards. There are also plenty of (relatively) high price titles, like Infinity Blade, Football Manager and the Gameloft games, which consistently reach the very upper reaches of the charts, despite a higher price point.

Big publishers are being very conservative when it comes to bringing their triple-A IP to the App Store, but it would be fascinating to see them release a 'proper' entry in a big series, backed by the usual hype machine and marketing campaign.

Mr Trade In

richymcdermott wrote: »

Shining force is 99c in the app store
Secret Of Mana 8.99
Final Fantasy 3 is 15.99

http://www.gamepro.com/article/features/222212/the-6-best-jrpgs-on-iphone-ipad/

theres some great jrpg on the store

I have all three on Ipad and also paid €30 for Shining Force on GBA and €40 for Final Fantasy 3 on DS when they were released.

richymcdermott

you are doing a better job than myself , just google searched their to try to help ya out , my most hardcore game i own on ipad at the moment is scrabblee hd and plants vs zombies :pac:

Mr Trade In

Retr0gamer wrote: »

The thing is you can't make a massive WRPG or JRPG, sell it for 99c and expect to make a profit. Big budget games just can't work in that environment.

Off topic.

Game Boy Advance era games would sell very well on Itunes. If the price as set at €15 for many of the games I would pay that, I played two great GBA games a few years ago that never made it over here, Summon Night and Riviera The Promise Land, cost me a bomb to import, if games like these were released on Itunes for €15 or less they would sell very well.

gizmo

With regard Angry Birds paving the way for more developers to sell millions of copies of their games, it really should be pointed out that Rovio are not really a small developer, at least not in the manner people are describing them. Angry Birds was their 52nd game in 6 years, had a team of at least 10 people working on it and cost over €100,000 to develop. That figure also ignores the fact that they already had their tech in place. Now, sure their success is monumental but this is only one in a sea of unknown, underwhelming and poor selling titles from not just themselves but other developers too.

The moment that the Apple television set enters the living room, along with the App Store, is the minute the console gaming landscape changes forever. It means that triple-AAA developers don't need to sign away their IP and their profits to a publisher just for market access. It means publishers don't need to bow to platform holder's licensing fees. It means the next mass-market console smash hit could be created by some guy coding in his sitting room wearing a dressing gown.

While Apple entering the home console market would result in some change, I think you're highly overestimating the effect it would have on the market the big three exist in.

• Publishers will still be needed for marketing and funding - even Rovio used Chillingo to publish the initial release of Angry Birds.
• Publishers (or developers) will still need to hand over 30% of their revenue to Apple, not to mention a further 25% of their profits if they were to use UDK or a similar third-party engine.
• Games such as Infinity Blade could not be made by some guy coding in his sitting room.

It's clearly got the big 3 rattled. Just today, a Sony suit went on record to say that Vita software prices would be impacted by the 99c smartphone game phenomenon. XBox are pushing their XBox Live brand into the mobile space to retain mindshare. Nintendo, well...are as slow to react to industry trends as ever, but it's hard not see a little iPhone/iPad influence in their upcoming Wii U.

Sony said they'd have various pricing tiers on the platform which is an extremely clever move. You'll have the likes of Uncharted: Golden Abyss for those people who don't mind forking out £30 for the latest big release but you'll probably have Vita ports of mobile games at more sane prices. Microsoft are pushing their Xbox Live brand onto Windows Phone 7 as part of a drive to improve the feature set of the OS, I don't think it has much to do with this topic. Nintendo are probably like me, they keep hearing how great mobile devices are for gaming and then get confused when they can't find the d-pad and buttons on the device.

Dont be at yourself wrote: »

Triple-A is untested on iOS at the moment, but all signs point to it being a success. There is a perception that smartphone users are married to the 99c price point, but in actual fact developers have noticed sales have increased when they raised their price from 99c upwards. There are also plenty of (relatively) high price titles, like Infinity Blade, Football Manager and the Gameloft games, which consistently reach the very upper reaches of the charts, despite a higher price point.

Actually I'd argue publishers are far more interested in free to play games on mobile devices rather than AAA titles at the moment. Over the last year or so it's proven to be extremely profitable for a large number of titles and most of the big acquisitions by publishers have been in this area.

As for the games you've mentioned, Infinity Blade is an exception due to the visuals it boasts. It's not really a great example when you take into consideration the work that would have gone into it, the people who were involved and the costs involved for developers who would need to licence Unreal and the tools required to utilise it properly. With regard to Football Manager and Gameloft, they have the advantage of leveraging big licences to sell their games and as such, are able to command higher prices.

richymcdermott

another interesting article

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/113986-Apple-Voted-Largest-Influence-On-Gaming-Industry

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/g/a/2011/11/30/prweb9001622.DTL

Overheal

The consoles could start by updating their 2005/6 specs with something meatier. Just saying.

Retr0gamer

richymcdermott wrote: »

Shining force is 99c in the app store
Secret Of Mana 8.99
Final Fantasy 3 is 15.99

http://www.gamepro.com/article/features/222212/the-6-best-jrpgs-on-iphone-ipad/

theres some great jrpg on the store

They're all emulated roms, not games created from the ground up and none of them have great production values anyway, nothing close to the likes of Fallout 3 or Final Fantasy XIII or even a DS or PSP RPG.

Also there was an outcry from Apple users over the price of FFTactics on the iphone store. It's only 13 euros and is far better and will last longer than the vast majority of games on the store. People aren't willing to pay the prices that could sustain big budget development.

Dont be at yourself wrote: »

A developer could potentially release a big budget game, sell it at $9.99, reach a massive audience and keep 70% of all revenue, though.

Triple-A is untested on iOS at the moment, but all signs point to it being a success. There is a perception that smartphone users are married to the 99c price point, but in actual fact developers have noticed sales have increased when they raised their price from 99c upwards. There are also plenty of (relatively) high price titles, like Infinity Blade, Football Manager and the Gameloft games, which consistently reach the very upper reaches of the charts, despite a higher price point.

Big publishers are being very conservative when it comes to bringing their triple-A IP to the App Store, but it would be fascinating to see them release a 'proper' entry in a big series, backed by the usual hype machine and marketing campaign.

It remains to be proven. However I think that consumers will demand more as the specs of the iphones will increase and demand it at unsustainable prices. The apple and android stores are so crowded that it's hard to get noticed and I feel something has got to give. It all feels too much like the dot com boom days and I think there'll be a crash and stabilisation of the market. Perhaps it won't be that drastic and it might be a slower process like the way there's no small developers on consoles anymore but I believe no matter how it happens, it will happen.

richymcdermott

No retr0 no.. Dont mention ff13 please...have mercy

gizmo

richymcdermott wrote: »

another interesting article

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/113986-Apple-Voted-Largest-Influence-On-Gaming-Industry

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/g/a/2011/11/30/prweb9001622.DTL

I saw the first article earlier in the month alright and, to put it bluntly, it's full of ****. There is no way those replies came from "industry professionals" unless they're using the term for 1000 hobbyist iOS developers.

Overheal wrote: »

The consoles could start by updating their 2005/6 specs with something meatier. Just saying.

No, that would be an utterly terrible idea. We don't need a new console generation yet.

Look on the bright-side though Overheal, the longer the current generation exists, the longer you can boast about how superior the PC is while simultaneously ignoring the litany of amazing games this console generation has produced.

Overheal

oh not ignoring, just balking at their limitations and exclusivity deals. All but a handful of releases are DX9 for instance. Including Skyrim, which is impressive enough, but could have been that much nicer with access to DX10 and 11 libraries.

Azure_sky

I never play games on my phone. I have a 3DS/PSP for that. Good luck trying to play street fighter on a mobile.

hooradiation

gizmo wrote: »

Look on the bright-side though Overheal, the longer the current generation exists, the longer you can boast about how superior the PC is while simultaneously ignoring the litany of amazing games this console generation has produced.

thus proving that there isn't a single conversation topic that can't be turned into PC owners crying about how nobody loves them any more.

Retr0gamer

hooradiation wrote: »

thus proving that there isn't a single conversation topic that can't be turned into PC owners crying about how nobody loves them any more.

Did you have a traumatic experience with a PC gamer in your youth or something?

hooradiation

Retr0gamer wrote: »

Did you have a traumatic experience with a PC gamer in your youth or something?

Did you ever have a question to ask me that wasn't 48 shades of fucking stupid?

Alt Answer: I feel the constantly complaining, over entitled man children that typify PC owners deserve as much fucking scorn as I can heap upon them.

johnny_ultimate

Overheal wrote: »

oh not ignoring, just balking at their limitations and exclusivity deals. All but a handful of releases are DX9 for instance. Including Skyrim, which is impressive enough, but could have been that much nicer with access to DX10 and 11 libraries.

That's the thing though: I often find that PC gamers get more passionate about tech and DX10 than actually playing the game! Some games will always be better on PC for a myriad of technical and input reasons, and that's grand. But ignoring all the wonderful games out there just because they don't have keyboard / mouse or DX11 support just seems bizarre to me when so many unique, engaging titles are console only.

It's not like owning a 360 - going for, what, 200 dollars or so these days? - will detract from your ability to play Skyrim or Starcraft 2 on a PC if you so wish. But it will also give you the option to play Vanquish or Dark Souls or Disgaea or whatever - games that are every bit as 'hardcore' as anything on PC.

As for iOS? Excuse me while I grow further addicted to Jetpack Joyride.

Retr0gamer

It's nothing to do with ignoring games. You're playing PC games so you can have the best possible experience, of course you're going to have to be passionate about tech to do that. One of the best things about PC gaming is how open the system is and tinkering with it and building a machine that can run games as gorgeously as possible. For some that's as much fun as playing the games. Your not given much oppurtunity to do this when a PC from 5 years ago can run the latest directx 9 console port. And then there's when you get shafted by a half assed port with a myriad of technical problems. Sure there's some PC owners that will moan about silly things but a lot of it isn't baseless.

TBH if you are really into games and have the money you'd have a PC and console, it's how I've always had it.

I think the console gamers that look down on PC gamers are just as obnoxious as the worst PC gaming fanboy.

richymcdermott

I find pc gamers alot smarter than console gamers , they are under no influence by company demands or strict rules.
I did see pc gamers fixing games faster than companies release patches for either texture problems or crashes.
Im not a pc gamer but i dont need the best gaming experience possible to play games. Frames per second or ultra quality graphics doesnt bother me in the slightest.

johnny_ultimate

It's not looking down - its more like having a balanced diet. There are some games I'd rather play on PC, and some games that will for whatever reason only be worth playing on PC. I'd imagine a majority of gamers will switch between both PC and console.

But to write off all console gaming (and vice versa) just seems somewhat misguided to me. I personally don't really see how not having DX10 or 11 could anyway negatively impact your enjoyment of the game. Sure, the best tech possible is always nice, but its more an icing on the cake rather than a gamebreaker. The fundamental game is still there (albeit with every so slightly less pretty graphics), and always moddable if you're on PC.

Nothing wrong with having a preference - if you're only into RTS and FPS then by all means stick with PC. But to say 'that games looks great but its only on consoles so I can't play it' just seems bizarre to me, given the extremely low cost of entry to console gaming. If you can build a fancy gaming rig, surely you can afford a 360!

Retr0gamer

Well some people just have a preference for PC or consoles. However anyone that looks down on console or PC gaming is not worth getting into an argument with. I think some PC gamers are just sick of the lack of effort in and restrictive DRM some publishers have on the platform.

Dont be at yourself

With regard Angry Birds paving the way for more developers to sell millions of copies of their games, it really should be pointed out that Rovio are not really a small developer, at least not in the manner people are describing them. Angry Birds was their 52nd game in 6 years, had a team of at least 10 people working on it and cost over €100,000 to develop. That figure also ignores the fact that they already had their tech in place. Now, sure their success is monumental but this is only one in a sea of unknown, underwhelming and poor selling titles from not just themselves but other developers too.

The point is that they achieved success ahead of even Triple-A developers for an absolute fraction of the cost. Angry Birds is apparently the most knocked-off brand in China. It's massive. It has spawned a litany of top-selling games across any number of platforms, and they're expanding the brand into a movie and TV show. Fair enough, it's not the work of a 'bedroom coder', but Rovio were a tiny Java developer before the App Store catapulted them into being one of the most influential and biggest-selling dev teams in the world. Without it, they'd still be making Java games and nobody would know who they were.

Of course, success in the App Store is something of a crapshoot, but when the rewards are so spectacularly high and the barrier to entry so low, that dev teams small and large will continue to take it seriously.

Publishers will still be needed for marketing and funding - even Rovio used Chillingo to publish the initial release of Angry Birds.
Publishers (or developers) will still need to hand over 30% of their revenue to Apple, not to mention a further 25% of their profits if they were to use UDK or a similar third-party engine.
Games such as Infinity Blade could not be made by some guy coding in his sitting room.

Yes, there are universal costs that apply to game development, regardless of if it's for iOS or PS3/XB360. However, Apple's flat 30% margain and $99/year fee is chump change compared to fees of the current platform holders. The platform holders hold all the cards: they charge astronomically for their SDK and development tools, they charge for their test and debug kits, they charge for the media used to press the ROMs, they charge for the software to be submitted for compliance testing (and again for resubmission in case it fails), and they often load agreements so the developer takes the hit if the software doesn't shift units.

Sony said they'd have various pricing tiers on the platform which is an extremely clever move. You'll have the likes of Uncharted: Golden Abyss for those people who don't mind forking out £30 for the latest big release but you'll probably have Vita ports of mobile games at more sane prices. Microsoft are pushing their Xbox Live brand onto Windows Phone 7 as part of a drive to improve the feature set of the OS, I don't think it has much to do with this topic. Nintendo are probably like me, they keep hearing how great mobile devices are for gaming and then get confused when they can't find the d-pad and buttons on the device.

I agree about Vita pricing: it is a very clever move. It's also a move directly in response to the rise of smartphone gaming.

Nintendo are like you: looking for d-pads and buttons on the device. Just as how they've clung to traditional multi-player gaming and traditional ways of reaching the customer while the likes of Xbox Live, PSN and Steam galloped away into the distance. They are notoriously slow to respond to indutry trends - often willfully ignoring them - but it's surely only a matter of time before next Edge 10/10 isn't Mario or Zelda, but a touch- or voice-controlled App Store game.

As fun as Mario Kart 9 undoubtedly is, it's not a reflection of where the industry will be in 10 years.

As for the games you've mentioned, Infinity Blade is an exception due to the visuals it boasts. It's not really a great example when you take into consideration the work that would have gone into it, the people who were involved and the costs involved for developers who would need to licence Unreal and the tools required to utilise it properly.

Is it an exception, or a trailblazer? An abberation, or the vanguard of a new wave? There's a good interview with Chair on Gamasutra at the moment, and it underlines how large the return was compared to the initial outlay. It took 10 people six month, together with a UDK licence to deliver $10 million in profit after Apple's cut 6 months later. They may not be a shining light to the 'bedroom coder', but they certainly point the way for a lot of small independent developers trying their luck on XBLA.

With regard to Football Manager and Gameloft, they have the advantage of leveraging big licences to sell their games and as such, are able to command higher prices.

I accept your point about Football Manager, but many of the Gameloft titles are unlicensed knock-offs. But there are plenty of other examples. FireMint's Real Racing franchises and Capybara & Superbrothers with Sword & Sworcery have both found success at a premium pricepoint with new IP.

Overheal

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

That's the thing though: I often find that PC gamers get more passionate about tech and DX10 than actually playing the game! Some games will always be better on PC for a myriad of technical and input reasons, and that's grand. But ignoring all the wonderful games out there just because they don't have keyboard / mouse or DX11 support just seems bizarre to me when so many unique, engaging titles are console only.

It's not like owning a 360 - going for, what, 200 dollars or so these days? - will detract from your ability to play Skyrim or Starcraft 2 on a PC if you so wish. But it will also give you the option to play Vanquish or Dark Souls or Disgaea or whatever - games that are every bit as 'hardcore' as anything on PC.

As for iOS? Excuse me while I grow further addicted to Jetpack Joyride.

And see, that's my major hangup: You can buy a new PC off the shelf and anything that has a SandyBridge i3 or better has about as much Gaming power as an XBOX 360. If not more. Nevermind when you actually buy a GPU, then you are looking at severalfold more power. And Windows supports the controller. Basically: There's no reason for the exclusivity. Nevermind the actual tech specs except to say that there is much of no reason for console games to be exclusives except for the pure sake of twisting someone's arm to plop money on an obsolete piece of hardware.

It's not a PC vs. Console thing except that I'm getting real tired of the artificial segregation. Hell I'm not even saying the thing is priced unfairly (you can grab the guts for $150), just that if I already have hardware that will do the same thing or better I fail to justify re-buying it.

K.O.Kiki

One day, I hope a smartphone can give me the tactile feedback of a REAL D-PAD.

VinLieger

No, simply because they are targeting 2 completely different markets, I and im guessing others on here would happily sit down to play Skyrim for several hours at a time and not get bored, i cant say the same for a single mobile game. This is to do with graphics gameplay and immersiveness, and skyrim doesnt even have online play which very few mobile games have been able to get right as of yet.
Possibly in the future if the big 2 and their used to be cool small and annoying cousin completely stuff up the next consoles then yeah mobile gaming could take over but its gonna be a while yet

Overheal

K.O.Kiki wrote: »

One day, I hope a smartphone can give me the tactile feedback of a REAL D-PAD.

actually working on that.

plus, some covers already overlay the screen with a transparent pad-shaped gel insert.

gizmo

Dont be at yourself wrote: »

The point is that they achieved success ahead of even Triple-A developers for an absolute fraction of the cost. Angry Birds is apparently the most knocked-off brand in China. It's massive. It has spawned a litany of top-selling games across any number of platforms, and they're expanding the brand into a movie and TV show. Fair enough, it's not the work of a 'bedroom coder', but Rovio were a tiny Java developer before the App Store catapulted them into being one of the most influential and biggest-selling dev teams in the world. Without it, they'd still be making Java games and nobody would know who they were.

Of course, success in the App Store is something of a crapshoot, but when the rewards are so spectacularly high and the barrier to entry so low, that dev teams small and large will continue to take it seriously.

As I said, I'm not knocking their success, merely outlining why they're a poor example to use as the little guys in the mobile space when they had the experience, expertise and funding all ready in place before Angry Birds became a hit.

Dont be at yourself wrote: »

Yes, there are universal costs that apply to game development, regardless of if it's for iOS or PS3/XB360. However, Apple's flat 30% margain and $99/year fee is chump change compared to fees of the current platform holders. The platform holders hold all the cards: they charge astronomically for their SDK and development tools, they charge for their test and debug kits, they charge for the media used to press the ROMs, they charge for the software to be submitted for compliance testing (and again for resubmission in case it fails), and they often load agreements so the developer takes the hit if the software doesn't shift units.

I think we're talking about different things here. If Apple were to enter the home console market, in order to take on the big three they would need to aim for AAA standard games. If you want AAA standards then you're talking a considerably higher investment than the annual $99 development licence. If you were to only consider mobile standard apps on their hypothetical home platform then they of course wouldn't apply however they'd be aiming for an entirely different demographic in this case.

Dont be at yourself wrote: »

Nintendo are like you: looking for d-pads and buttons on the device. Just as how they've clung to traditional multi-player gaming and traditional ways of reaching the customer while the likes of Xbox Live, PSN and Steam galloped away into the distance. They are notoriously slow to respond to indutry trends - often willfully ignoring them - but it's surely only a matter of time before next Edge 10/10 isn't Mario or Zelda, but a touch- or voice-controlled App Store game.

You talk about those control schemes like they're a bad thing. While there are games that most certainly do work well with touch screens, I don't really see them transitioning into the realm of AAA, especially while on mobile devices. This may change as tablets become more prevalent but again I think you're still limited in the types of genres you can work with on such a platform.

Dont be at yourself wrote: »

Is it an exception, or a trailblazer? An abberation, or the vanguard of a new wave? There's a good interview with Chair on Gamasutra at the moment, and it underlines how large the return was compared to the initial outlay. It took 10 people six month, together with a UDK licence to deliver $10 million in profit after Apple's cut 6 months later. They may not be a shining light to the 'bedroom coder', but they certainly point the way for a lot of small independent developers trying their luck on XBLA.

It took 10 industry professionals with prior experience in UE3, the appropriate resources and the direct help of Epic, 6 months to make the game. There's a couple of very important caveats there, ones which are shown to be even more relevant when you consider that UDK with iOS support has been out a year this month and we have still yet to see any other major successes being powered by it. It is because of this that I regard them as an exception.

Overheal wrote: »

And see, that's my major hangup: You can buy a new PC off the shelf and anything that has a SandyBridge i3 or better has about as much Gaming power as an XBOX 360. If not more. Nevermind when you actually buy a GPU, then you are looking at severalfold more power. And Windows supports the controller. Basically: There's no reason for the exclusivity. Nevermind the actual tech specs except to say that there is much of no reason for console games to be exclusives except for the pure sake of twisting someone's arm to plop money on an obsolete piece of hardware.

I don't really want to get into this as I made the original comment totally in jest and we've discussed it before but I'll just say one thing. There is one primary reason why there aren't as many PC ports these days. Money. Simple as. The sales of multiplatform games on the PC in most cases simply don't justify the costs that go into making a PC version. If it did then they'd do it. I mean, why wouldn't they?