Have you embraced mobile gaming?

[crackdude]

Games have been shit since the dawn of time, that's beyond the point.

As I look at it, mobile games are the logical evolution of arcade games. Were you angry in the 90s that 50cents gave you literally 3 minutes of gameplay?

If the game is good enough, you'll pay. Otherwise, find another game.

Why does Sega have such freaking excellent mobile games? Because they still are an arcade gaming company, 30 years on. Sonic Runners, Crazy Taxi CityRush, SMB Bounce...all great arcade games. You pick them up and play for 10min for free, or pay a buck or two and play them for 2 hours.

I really don't see what the fuss is about.

[Team Andromeda]

As I look at it, mobile games are the logical evolution of arcade games.

 Really , Name me one Arcade game that uses just a 5 inch screen and the list of Arcade games that use 'just' touch control for their interface is tiny too . Only the playtime is the same as Arcade games, the experince and controls are for the most part totally different.


So I don't buy this Mobile and Arcades are just the same at all

[George]

Its comparable in that their both their own type of micropayment. In something like Crazy Taxi: City Rush, instead of paying per a turn and doing bad, You can play Crazy Taxi for 45 min bursts (if wanted) before you wait 20 minutes to fill up. If you wand diamonds to get more time or items, you can. Everything is unlockable through playing the actual game.

While on arcades you would put quarters in per turn or number of lives, it was a micropayment of quarters. You never owned anything, you just payed for a turn on a machine.

[crackdude]

 Really , Name me one Arcade game that uses just a 5 inch screen and the list of Arcade games that use 'just' touch control for their interface is tiny too . Only the playtime is the same as Arcade games, the experince and controls are for the most part totally different.


So I don't buy this Mobile and Arcades are just the same at all

I can safely assume that any iPhone 6 compatible game has dozens of times the resolution of a Model 2 machine. Screen size is irrelevant, I can easily play my mobile games on my TV if I want by AirPlay or android equivalents.

Also, the majority of arcade games have really simple controlls. Touch screen controlls are a non issue if the game is designed around them, like Crazy Taxi CityRush for example. It uses simple pick up and play touch screen controlls that make sense within it's mechanics to provide an experience relatable with the old games

[Team Andromeda]

I can safely assume that any iPhone 6 compatible game has dozens of times the resolution of a Model 2 machine.

 VF II on the Saturn had better screen res than any Model 2 or 3 game and that's on a system that 20 years old now .

Screen size is irrelevant, I can easily play my mobile games on my TV if I want by AirPlay or android equivalents.

Yes, we all carry a 40 ince LCD TV with us on the train and around with us .




Next to no Arcades come with a 5 inch  screen  and the list of Arcade games (even ones from SEGA) that only use touch controls is tiny . So Mobile and Arcade games are not the same

[crackdude]

 VF II on the Saturn had better screen res than any Model 2 or 3 game and that's on a system that 20 years old now .



Yes, we all carry a 40 ince LCD TV with us on the train and around with us .




Next to no Arcades come with a 5 inch  screen  and the list of Arcade games (even ones from SEGA) that only use touch controls is tiny . So Mobile and Arcade games are not the same

Because arcades are portable...? I don't know how taking the ganes with you and still having the option to play on a big screen is a bad thing.

So what controlls define arcade gaming? Hang On, Virtua Fighter, Virtua Cop are all arcade games with different controll schemes. Touch screen is a modern controll type.

[Team Andromeda]

Because arcades are portable...?

Im not the one saying Arcades and Mobiles are the same

So what controlls define arcade gaming? Hang On, Virtua Fighter, Virtua Cop are all arcade games with different controll schemes.

Yep they all share one thing in comon , they don't use touch controls  . So again Arcades and mobiles are not the same and may explain why even SEGA Japan doesn't use touch controls in its games as the main control (bar the odd light, fish  or music game).

[Sharky]

Anyway, I think it's a ridiculous opinion because the logical conclusion would be that there are people as wise as your fictitious young 80s self who realize that mobile games, indeed all games, aren't good enough yet and in 30 years will be much better. So logically you should still be doing something else other than playing current video games.

No, because  there came a point when games began to rival books, film and other media and eventually surpassed it in my mind. Home console games changed a lot between the Atari days and the SEGA Master System and NES and by the time things like Phantasy Star 2, Sonic and Monster World 6 and Streets of Rage came out on Megadrive gaming was a far cry from those green dots on black background. It could have its own art style, beautifully drawn sprites, it could convey narrative through video and have awesome music. (Sure you can probably find rare instances of this in older games, but it just wasn't enough to really draw me in, films and books and tv series were just more thrilling.)

I actually was young in the 80's, my first games were Sonic and Altered Beast with both came with my first games console, The original Megadrive model, my brother who is a few years older had an Atari and ZX Spectrum but I never once felt compelled to play it growing up... Those simplistic games are not captivating to me.

I believe that in a decade from now mobile games will have also gone through a huge change, in fact there are already some incredibly captivating games on mobile.

[crackdude]

Yep they all share one thing in comon , they don't use touch controls  . So again Arcades and mobiles are not the same and may explain why even SEGA Japan doesn't use touch controls in its games as the main control (bar the odd light, fish  or music game).

You're completely missing (on purpose?) my point.
Arcade games have NOTHING to do with controller types. I could name hundreds of arcade games and not two of them sharing the same controllers. It has to do with game design and concept: quick bursts of great fun and skill based gameplay.
Sega dominates this kind of games, and that's why Sega's mobile output is excellent. Because mobile and arcade games share this philosophy.

You don't like touch controlls, I get it. But try thinking beyond that.

I also agree with Sharky, the average mobile game is superior to 99% of those old ass games (even still enjoying some of those green dots and whatnot)

[MadeManG74]

I think casuals are tired of wasting money and think 'f2p' title is enough for them, since most people already have a smart phone regardless. Unlike PS4 that has a 400 dollar entry fee, Playstation Plus payment, $60 dollar for new games and now the rise of season passes. Its a bit much.

That's exactly it, it's so much more convenient to just boot up a game on your phone on the bus or while watching Big Bang Theory rather than buy a console and play games on that.

Most people have only a very casual interest in gaming, and the lower you can set the bar, the better for them. It's the same as any other medium. How many people would sit down and watch an arthouse or independant film, or even a classic like Lawrence of Arabia or Fistful of Dollars rather than watch the latest  Adam Sandler shit? How many people would enjoy reading literature instead of '50 shades of Grey'?

It's low hanging fruit, and I can't get angry at people who enjoy it. I'm sure I enjoy music/movies/food etc that a hobbyist or an enthusiast would baulk at me for even considering.

I understand perfectly well that games now couldn't exist without them, in fact that was the foundation of the point I was making; gaming has come a long way both in terms of graphics and gameplay... And mobile gaming will too. And what's with this 'fermium garbage' shit talking? Is it wilful ignorance that you still think all mobile games must be garbage? A quick google search will set you straight...

Also it's not an ignorant attitude, it's my opinion... I love 2D sprite based gaming but frankly there is not a single game from the Atari/Spectrum era that hasn't been done better. If I was born at that time, I would much rather read a book, watch a movie or play a table top game than watch some green dots flicker on a black screen. Don't like my opinion?

I agree that mobile games might (might) develop into something better, but we're asked if we have embraced it. I think most of us are just arguing that right now, most mobile games don't appeal to us.

Although, I find it strange you're so adopting on Mobile Phone games, but at the same time said you wouldn't have played 80's video games? Why wouldn't you rather read a book, watch a movie or play a table top game than play mobile phone games for example?

So what controlls define arcade gaming? Hang On, Virtua Fighter, Virtua Cop are all arcade games with different controll schemes. Touch screen is a modern controll type.

You don't like touch controlls, I get it. But try thinking beyond that.

Issue is that touch-screens are inherently bad for most game types. Not being bias, it's a fact. You need to literally cover the display with your finger to play. That's an inherent flaw that games can work around,  yes, but it's still an inferior control scheme for most games.

Games have been shit since the dawn of time, that's beyond the point.

As I look at it, mobile games are the logical evolution of arcade games. Were you angry in the 90s that 50cents gave you literally 3 minutes of gameplay?

If the game is good enough, you'll pay. Otherwise, find another game.

Why does Sega have such freaking excellent mobile games? Because they still are an arcade gaming company, 30 years on. Sonic Runners, Crazy Taxi CityRush, SMB Bounce...all great arcade games. You pick them up and play for 10min for free, or pay a buck or two and play them for 2 hours.

I really don't see what the fuss is about.

It's not really the same. Arcade games made you pay more by being hard, you were rewarded for skill.

Most of the freemium app shit on the market make you pay more by making the game tedious as fuck without paying. Not to mention, they don't have an option to buy the 'full experience' like a home port (which I always preferred to arcade releases anyway), AND even if you could, all you get is a lacklustre game that has no challenge (since the incentive to buy is just removing waiting times or near impossible roadblocks instead of actual difficulty).

You can get good at Crazy Taxi and play for 10 minutes to get a high score. You can't 'Get good' at Total War Battles: Kingdom and skip that 8 hour waiting time. You can only pay for it.

No, because  there came a point when games began to rival books, film and other media and eventually surpassed it in my mind.

I don't think you can really compared wildly different mediums like that. Each is always going to have their own flaws and strengths over the others.

Film will always, always have strengths over games and vica versa, ditto books.

I also agree with Sharky, the average mobile game is superior to 99% of those old ass games (even still enjoying some of those green dots and whatnot)

Being better than examples from the same medium that came out nearly 4 decades prior isn't much of an achievement though.

[Aki-at]

Issue is that touch-screens are inherently bad for most game types. Not being bias, it's a fact. You need to literally cover the display with your finger to play. That's an inherent flaw that games can work around,  yes, but it's still an inferior control scheme for most games.

Playing the Sonic the Hedgehog ports on my mobile has given me an appreciation for it but I definitely think for 3D input you need more than touch screen. We might get there but for the most part the mobile games I play are either RPGs or 2D games.

Being better than examples from the same medium that came out nearly 4 decades prior isn't much of an achievement though.

I'd rather get a Chain Chronicle 2 than a Bayonetta 3 >: 3

[MadeManG74]

Playing the Sonic the Hedgehog ports on my mobile has given me an appreciation for it but I definitely think for 3D input you need more than touch screen. We might get there but for the most part the mobile games I play are either RPGs or 2D games.

As I said, the main issue is that touch screen requires you to cover the display to control the game, there's no getting around it, unless you minimise the display. On mobile, that means making the small screen even smaller. And you still run into the smaller issues of not having any physical feedback on the controls for accuracy.

It can work for some games, like turn based RPGs or strategy etc, but it's still just 'good enough' compared to superior inputs.

I'd rather get a Chain Chronicle 2 than a Bayonetta 3 >: 3

I know you've said this before, but I'd really like to know why (unless you're trying to wrangle my jangles).

Also, I'm not holding out any hope for Bayonetta 3 anyway, or anything even remotely similar from Sega ever again, so you'll get your wish. We'll see "Bayonetta: Touch Me Freemium App" for Mobile Phones before we see Bayonetta 3 anyway.

[Centrale]

No, because  there came a point when games began to rival books, film and other media and eventually surpassed it in my mind. Home console games changed a lot between the Atari days and the SEGA Master System and NES and by the time things like Phantasy Star 2, Sonic and Monster World 6 and Streets of Rage came out on Megadrive gaming was a far cry from those green dots on black background. It could have its own art style, beautifully drawn sprites, it could convey narrative through video and have awesome music. (Sure you can probably find rare instances of this in older games, but it just wasn't enough to really draw me in, films and books and tv series were just more thrilling.)

Well, certainly your own opinion is valid, but as I've thought more about it, what ruffles my feathers about being completely dismissive toward earlier games is the difference between technological prowess and artistic merit. Technology is always endeavored in advancement and progress. Mediums develop, evolve and go through massive changes. (We're on the cusp of another as we'll see in the next few years how VR and AR do in the general consumer marketplace.)

But games have always been more than technology - they are art as well. Not just visual art and audio art, but that other intangible quality - fun. And these artistic, intangible qualities are not about achieving technical progress, but achieving the status of timeless classics. To dismiss early games based on appearances and sound, you've missed the fun as well. If some of those old games weren't classic with deep gameplay, the industry would not have continued to develop. And because they are classics, some of them are still worth playing.

Of course, in this day and age, older games are an acquired taste, but one well worth cultivating, much like contemporary musicians can still enjoy and learn from older music. So ultimately, it's no big deal if you miss that fun experience, but it is disrespectful to the designers, programmers, artists and engineers who made those games to dismiss them in a flippant way, like they were worthless, when they are the foundation of everything. Everything! And let's not forget those hard working men and women on the assembly line, working that double shift to get the Pac Man cabinets out before the shipping deadline!! KEEP REACHING FOR THAT RAINBOW!!! *gathers composure*

I also agree with MadeMan's assessment that there's a serious difference in the prevailing design of mobile games versus classic arcade games. Mobile game design is often sinister... borderline evil. Frankly, a classic arcade game appeals to the best in people - striving to improve your skill. Mobile games appeal to the worst in people - addiction, and impatience. Oh, you're getting better at the game? Screw you, wait a few hours anyway. It's awful, and I'll tell you one thing for sure - that kind of "hook" was not designed by a game designer, it was designed by a cynical psychologist.

[crackdude]

Issue is that touch-screens are inherently bad for most game types. Not being bias, it's a fact. You need to literally cover the display with your finger to play. That's an inherent flaw that games can work around,  yes, but it's still an inferior control scheme for most games.

It's not really the same. Arcade games made you pay more by being hard, you were rewarded for skill.
Most of the freemium app shit on the market make you pay more by making the game tedious as fuck without paying. Not to mention, they don't have an option to buy the 'full experience' like a home port (which I always preferred to arcade releases anyway), AND even if you could, all you get is a lacklustre game that has no challenge (since the incentive to buy is just removing waiting times or near impossible roadblocks instead of actual difficulty).
You can get good at Crazy Taxi and play for 10 minutes to get a high score. You can't 'Get good' at Total War Battles: Kingdom and skip that 8 hour waiting time. You can only pay for it.

Being better than examples from the same medium that came out nearly 4 decades prior isn't much of an achievement though.

I agree with you on touch controlls if we are talking about merely having virtual buttons or some shit. It doesn't work, and companies (Sega included with their early iOS ports) were wrong to go down that road.
But as I said, games can be VERY enjoyable if they are designed with touch in mind. Again, my fav example, Crazy Taxi CR has excellent gameplay with simple touch controlls and mechanics that fully incorporate them.

As with everything platform there are good and bad games. Good mobile games fully incorporate touch mechanics and balance gameplay time/microtransactions. Bad ones don't. Let's not throw every mobile game in the same bag.
Take Sonic Runners for example. You can play endlessly if you're good enough. This is a good mechanic.
Your Total War example, very bad mechanics. There is good and bad, we should not ignore the good because there is bad.

"But 99% of games are bad"
Tell me something new

You're right, it is expected that 40 years later games are better. Point is, if I can enjoy Star Wars Empire Strikes Back on the Atari, why wouldn't I enjoy Temple Run or whatever mobile game people enjoy these days.

[crackdude]

Centrale, now you sound like the collective mobile games murdered your nan.