Leaderboard

The mobile market is a pool of dead fish. You either create a one hit wonder or you get no-where special. What else has King made that is noteworthy? Nothing. What has Rovio come out with better than Angry Birds? Nothing. What was special about Flappy Bird? Nothing. Do DotGears have any other popular games? No. Has HalfBrick created a more popular game than Fruit Ninja? No You can hire a bunch of low-cost overseas developers to make anything you want for cheap... have a gaze at freelancer sites and you'll heaps of "make me a copy of x game". Countless games (& crud) for mobiles come out everyday, further diluting the market to the point that the value of games is also diluted. General consumers look at the price of a console game and compare them to the price of mobile game (I worked in a store for 7 years selling games, consoles & phones, the change of view over time was apparent.) and most of the time, they will choose the cheap option ESPECIALLY if it is for their children. There is almost no game loyalty on mobile markets, people will play(consume) then replace it with another game, this is also a side affect of valueless games... people don't care because it cost them next to nothing. 10 years ago before the mobile markets were anything, people bought games costing $80 - $120, people played fewer games, however played them longer and there was no pressure to complete it quickly because you have a game backlog or you wanted to get the "achievements". This doesn't just effect games, we only notice it because that's the industry we're paying attention to. The same effects can be found in most industries, we live in a "throw-away society" now. Prepare to see over-night game companies popup and burn in the years to come.

I just had to point that out.

From a "don't care" consumer view, they'd choose the 50 games.... But those 50 games are like buying those handheld $2 arcade game things that are all 100-in-1. They're crap. Like James said, would you rather watch a 30 second vine video repeated to fill up an hour or a full length movie. The difference in quality should burn out your eyes, but they have their places.

How the hell is a mobile game like, say, Angry Birds, even remotely comparable to a console game like, say, Dark Souls? It's not a matter of one being "better", they're totally different types of things. It's like comparing a Vine video to a cinematic blockbuster. They serve completely different purposes, they give entirely different experiences.

No it's not. People getting feed up with cheap games would be the equivalent people realizing McDonalds is making them fat, and stopping. The equivalent of this situation would be "McDonalds sells not very tasty 'mighty wings' for nearly a dollar a wing. Then McWallaces comes along and undercuts McDonalds by selling 'Fighting Wings' that taste a little worse for ten cents a wing. They don't look as nice, but they pretty much taste the same, and people realize that it's not worth it buying 'mighty wings' for ten times the price of McWallace's wings." People aren't going to switch over to phones because they are feed up of console games. They will switch because they see that it is not worth $50 for a console game when you can get a game on your phone for $1. I'm sure the console game is in many ways better than the phone game, but is it worth paying fifty times the amount for, when you could be getting fifty phone game instead? I think that you are still assuming too much. This is all hypothetical. You have yet to give compelling evidence that phone-games can supplement console games, let alone that most console games are as uninspired as you claim.

True, they are in business, and if they choose to make uninnovative games, then I can't stop them. As you say, the eyecandy gets good marketing results and hype-trains get them people to pay lots of money. I understand why their doing it, but its not making good games. Yes there is a lack of creativity. If the number one sellers are first person shooters with little to distinguish them from the next fps then there is a lack of creativity. I'm not saying there aren't creative game makers, but the industry as a whole is nowhere near as creative as it should be. Gaming is an incredible medium and for most game makers simply to shell out fps all the time is sad. I was not disrespect Indie developers. The have nothing but respect that they go against the trend. Tell me, Seaborgium, are you an authority on modern games? You talk as if you are one, but you give no citation, and talk in rather vague language. You criticize the article, justly I think, for amounting to an argument to authority. But aren't you doing even worse, given that you don't play many modern games?

thisthisthisthisthisthis