Mobile gaming - is it damaging the gaming industry?

Soldato
Joined
15 Aug 2005
Posts
23,501
Location
Glasgow
So with all the fuss around the next gen clearly taking up everyone's time on here, I thought this might serve as a nice little distraction and perhaps something we can discuss amicably. I read this article on Eurogamer earlier and found myself agreeing with it almost entirely:

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2...pers-need-to-look-at-dungeon-keeper-and-learn

I'll say it now: I don't like mobile gaming. I played Snake (as did everyone) back in the day, but from the time that Java games became a thing on phones to the present day where we've got full-3D stuff running in smartphones and tablets, I can't really think of anything that's held my interest for more than a short amount of time. Words With Friends was one, but they slowly eroded the quality of both the Android app and the game in general (with in-app purchases and ads, surprise surprise) to the point that I no longer wanted it on my device or attached to my Facebook account. Draw Something passed me by (I can't draw), Temple Run didn't appeal to me, and I'd usually end up helping everyone else with the logo guessing game because I seem to have a knack for it. There have been a few other games I've enjoyed but considering the sheer volume of mobile games out there, the very fact they're so few and far between is rather indicative of the quality of what's out there.

Does anyone else feel this way, or are people just so enamoured with mobile games that there's now no way back? The entire mobile gaming industry, as the article says, seems to just be a way of small businesses scamming a burst of money out of people with fairly minimal effort. There's no quality game design there, no sense of art, style, or even pride from the creators. Or if there was, it's soon lost under the sea of microtransactions, ads and other money-making methods.

Mobile gaming is obviously catering for a market that doesn't tend to play normal games. The people playing Angry Birds, Draw Something, Temple Run, Flappy Bird or whatever the hell else is out there aren't the same people playing BF4, The Last Of Us and Gran Turismo. They have relatively little appreciation for games as games, they're a distraction or a fun thing to play on the train or in a lunch break, and they're 'free' (to download, at least) so there's no commitment. The problem is that the companies involved in 'normal games' all want a piece of this mobile gaming pie, but don't seem to know how to do it. They're not catering to the strengths of mobile gaming as a platform, they're just using it as a way to make some money quickly on impulse. The detriment to the gaming industry as a whole comes with the fact that they're using their existing franchises (because that's all they have) to get into that market. That in turn attracts the people familiar with those franchises to these mobile games which aren't really designed to appeal to them. Or perhaps, they're designed to appeal solely so that they'll spend money before realising the game is crap.

Similarly, we're finding a lot of these trends seep back out of mobile gaming into console and PC titles. Dead Space 3 was the first to get attention for it, and then more recently Forza 5, although Forza Horizon had in-game purchases before both of them. When a game is free-to-play it's one thing to find ways of getting money from your players, but when the game costs £40 or more, it's just offensive.

Companies like Zynga and King aren't game developers, they're in it solely to make money with the attraction of bright colours and shiny graphics. They might as well be manufacturing fruit machines.
 
Last edited:
If mobile games are to blame for in game purchases then yes, its ruining console gaming.

Fifa should be free to play, god knows how much money they make with UT.
 
Fifa is free to play or do you mean you shouldn't need to pay £40+ to buy the game in the first place?

I have actually made money on fifa, i've made about £80 so far minus the cost of fifa and i'm up £40, i have another 800k or so of coins to sell, so i should be roughly £100 up by the end of selling them.

so i made money by playing fifa. i will be selling the game soon too, to recoup some more costs, probably leaving me well over £130 up
 
Fifa is free to play or do you mean you shouldn't need to pay £40+ to buy the game in the first place?

I have actually made money on fifa, i've made about £80 so far minus the cost of fifa and i'm up £40, i have another 800k or so of coins to sell, so i should be roughly £100 up by the end of selling them.

so i made money by playing fifa. i will be selling the game soon too, to recoup some more costs, probably leaving me well over £130 up

Um, "making" money on a game is another discussion.
 
Yes it is damaging gaming, it's allowing a greedy concept to proliferate mainstream console gaming.

DLC was the originator, micro payments normalised it and gave it a wide ranging business model, and companies like EA are just bleeding it dry.

Great to see some negative coverage of the practice in the news today too:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-26033685

Shame they didn't cover Simpsons Tapped Out, Candy Crush, Plants V Zombies 2 etc. as well.
 
Plus there's Apple's recent payout of something like $34m to customers for microtransactions. I wonder if/how they'll recoup that cost from the developers responsible.

Hopefully this does mean that the general public are at least slightly more aware of what mobile gaming/apps are like, but I don't really see it changing behaviour very much. People still want to play games on their phone and they'll continue to download whatever is popular. They're generally not going to be clued-up enough to know what to look out for or which developers to avoid.

Unfortunately it seems it's largely down to the gaming press to draw attention to these practices and call them out on it, but the gaming press simply isn't very relevant to most people who are playing these games in the first place.
 
I think the best example of a company abusing DLC is COD. You pay £40 a year to play the exact same game on different maps. Then you pay an additional £40 per year on top to get more maps.

It's £80 a year for the same game on different maps essentially.

IMO all DLC for COD should be rightfully free they are already making £40 per year on it.
 
DLC came long before mobile gaming took off to the extent it has though, we only have ourselves to blame for that one. The scenario with mobile gaming is different because the trends of a market fuelled largely by casual users are seeping over into the 'traditional gamer' market, and I'm curious to see what the opinions are of that.

Paying £40 for a game and then £40 for additional content (whether you feel that content is worth the price or not) isn't the same as paying nothing for the game but then various amounts just to make the game playable/enjoyable.
 
Last edited:
DLC is a good thing, as long as it is done right.

The right way:
Sell a complete game, and additional create DLC for those who want to keep the story going.

The wrong way:
Create a complete game, and strip out content for DLC.
 
Agreed, I think the worst offender of that in my experience is Mass Effect 3. Day one DLC that claimed to be a key part of the storyline; if it's so vital, it should be part of the game. I reluctantly bought it because I didn't want to miss out, and it ended up being fairly disappointing anyway. I haven't bought any further DLC for ME3 as a result.

I don't even necessarily see anything wrong with selling small extras in games (although I still think they could and should be rewarded via other means instead), but the pricing for those sorts of add-ons should be minimal rather than £2-3 for a weapons pack or whatever. Similarly, paying for 'shortcuts' in games (e.g. unlock things early) or for tokens, credits or whatever needs to go. Paying for something that someone has had to create (a map, a character, a skin) is one thing, but paying for credits or resources is just silly. You're giving them money just so a counter in the game will increase, no effort required.
 
No problem with add ons, I've been buying them since C&C Red Alert, that's when Add ons came after the game had been out a while.

DLC and micro transactions when done right are OK with me too, I mean weapon camos are something you either want or don't and don't ruin the game, DLC like GTA IV DLC should be what devs aim to produce. Pay to win has no place on any gaming platform.

I think mobile (casual games/gamers) have caused this pay to win rubbish to appear everywhere.
 
Last edited:
Mobile gaming hasn't damaged the gaming industry, its the companies who release the games.

To us, gaming is a hobby and always has been. To companies, its a business and unless we have another crash then that's the way it will remain.
 
I think the best example of a company abusing DLC is COD. You pay £40 a year to play the exact same game on different maps. Then you pay an additional £40 per year on top to get more maps.

It's £80 a year for the same game on different maps essentially.

IMO all DLC for COD should be rightfully free they are already making £40 per year on it.

Couldn't agree more. It just encourages devs to release games with less content and charge extra for what should be included to begin with.
At least COD isn't subscription only yet, else you would be charged allot more per year.
 
Mobile gaming hasn't damaged the gaming industry, its the companies who release the games.

To us, gaming is a hobby and always has been. To companies, its a business and unless we have another crash then that's the way it will remain.

Difference being it's a lot more clearer now than it used to be on the 80's and 90's
 
DLC is fine as long as it isn't a half arsed cash in that was ripped from the completed game purely to make a quick $ and is reasonably priced. Micro-transactions on the other hand that impede on the core functionality of the game are a ****ing disgrace. While it doesn't bother me as much in F2P games (I usually avoid them anyway as they're often pay to win) when it starts happen in full priced games like Gran Turismo and Forza, that's when it becomes a major issue.
 
think the answer to the title is No. I think the majority of the kind of people who play mobile games aren't the type of people who generally play console Games. For example, my sister, my aunt, etc play mobile games, they would never consider buying a ps4 though. What's more, we see modern Games becoming much more detailed and immersive. Given the recent sales figures that ps4 and Xbox can boast it is clear that gaming is growing more and more. Mobile gaming isn't damaging, it just means even more people are gamers now. Even my gran plays bejeweled on her phone. Would she enjoy bf4 on pc though....? Er
 
This thread is more about the infestation of F2P and micro transactions into console gaming.
 
Last edited:
Mobile gaming 'might' be hurting handhelds, but looking at 3DS figures, maybe not. I find mobile gaming a quick fix when sitting bored at places like wacky warehouse when your kids are running around and you're sat there waiting for them to eventfully get bored themselves with ball pits..!!

Or when sat on the train, I've never really played mobile games in the house. This is what my PC and games console is for.

As for in app purchases. I avoid these type of games, or find a way around it or not bother in the first place.. Candy crush had me for a little while, never spent a penny on it. Completed something like 180 levels before I got bored and deleted it.

Same for Real Racing 3, just played the free stuff, never spent a penny on in game credits with real money..
 
I dont think mobile gaming is hurting traditional video gaming.

Mobile games are pants, I don't play them at all. Likewise Micro transactions are pants, I never buy anything daft like in game currency.

If I did a LOT of travelling, I would invest in a handheld but as it stands I'd just end up sat at home playing them.... Which is pointless when I have a proper games console & gaming PC.

I try to make informed purchases regarding DLC, I'm more than aware that the vast majority of DLC nowadays was planned/complete during the game's original development. If the DLC offers good value & is for a game I love I will consider it.

If people would just stop buying into these rip off schemes, they'd soon stop. Similar to COD syndrome, new one releases every year, same game with new maps, everyone universally complains but they still keep buying!
 
Back
Top Bottom