New research from PlaySpan and Magid points to some interesting data on consoles, mobile and free-to-play
Gtfo both of these companies have something to gain by saying this bullshit. If there is a neutral source who says it i might believe it but even then its a stretch.
Plus, throwing birds at little piggies is NOT gaming. Sorry if I offended anyone.
No IT IS gaming. Please amuse us with an explanation.
a feeling of being threatened. Its mostly from the younger generation too. If people can come to terms that this form of entertainment can no longer be contained to the traditional ways. The sooner the industry moves forward and we get to enjoy new ideas. Gaming was never going to stay confined to a tv. We all knew the moment it went portable, there was a market out there that would take it beyond the living room. That isnt a bad thing but why so many feel threatened by gaming going global is rather strange. The ones who have watched gaming grow from pong understand the need to evolve and generally encourage the younger generation to revisit the roots. It creates a better sense of appreciation in how far the industry has come. I would not classify these platforms (mobile, console, portable) as being equal in the sense of what they display. I would classify them as equals in what they offer in terms of providing entertainment in various forms. Each one has its pros and cons but overall they provide fun in their own way. thats what games were originally about. Fun. edit: I am reminded of the similar mentality of traditionalists when nintendo came out with the gameboy. Many felt that it was the wrong direction that gaming was headed. I for one liked the idea of being able to play games on the go. you would be surprised the backlash nintendo got back in the day. Man i can remember others saying things like portable games would never work or it would hurt development of games for other platforms like snes or genesis. But it hasnt hurt traditional gaming. It helped expand it and it was eventually seen as a companion to traditional gaming. So here we are many many years later and you have companies that make phones and we know how attached to their phones people can be. So it was only natural there would be testing to see if playing games (even simple games) on a phone would be another viable extension in the gaming industry. It has worked out pretty good for itself but again, it isnt replacing traditional gaming. But the amount of backlash it gets from younger gamers...you would think it is. It is history repeating itself just like when the gameboy came out. On the flip side of things, while we are getting gaming on more mobile devices, we are also getting more non-gaming on console units. It shows that there is growth and room to evolve the entertainment industry as a whole because the days of the single purpose device are nearly over. At least in the eyes of modern consumerism. Consumers are wanting more for the $$ and so these companies like sony and samsung and apple are doing what they can to fill those conveniences. We have seen that it is possible to take a portable device and double it as a console. Sony proved that with the psp but maybe the consumers arent yet ready to have everything in one device but its coming. in the mean time, (at least for gaming) its okay to enjoy gaming on the screen (console) and gaming on the go (portable/mobile).
@darth What are you going on about feeling threatened? You think gamers don't want to be able to play games like GTA5, KZ:Shadow Fall and Watch Dogs on the go? You think gamers are afraid of that happening? I don't think so. I think most people just don't like the fact that *surveys* are being used to claim over and over and over and over again that smartphones are either "equal" or "surpass" consoles when they CLEARLY haven't yet. That is the issue people have, not fear of technology getting better lol.
Video game-A game played by electronically manipulating images produced by a computer program on a television screen or display. Gaming(merriam-webster)-the playing of games that simulate actual conditions (as of business or war) especially for training or testing purposes. So actually throwing those birds at little piggies classifies as gaming. Sorry to break it to you. If Angry Birds isn't a video game and playing it doesn't classifies as gaming. Then I guess those games on the PS3,360, WiiU and earlier consoles and all way to the arcade machines are just movies or tv shows, right? I don't care for Angry Birds but its time to throw away that silly ideal that gaming is something that exclusive to consoles,pcs and handheld devices made by big video game corporations.
GTFO No hardcore gamer would prefer gaming on phone/tablet over console. If a thin device like that can fit powerful chips then imagine how many powerful chips a bigger box can fit.
In terms of hardware they are advancing fast, but it will NEVER be equal to a home console.
Obviously. I mean, you know you have a problem when one of the highest end phones becomes incredibly hot after 15 minutes on a game like The Simpsons: Tapped Out. Form factor alone means the Smartphone market will always have a huge barrier between them and the consoles.
How long would companies exist, what kind of companies exist, if they had to be honest I wonder. On subject: at best, iOS devices are on par with 16 bit machines. Only with better textures and graphics. And I only say that because there are now 16 bit era games like Chronotrigger on them.
They're definitely well beyond the 16-bit era. This is Shadowrun on iPhone 4. http://www.goozernation.com...
@Qrphe Love the bullshot...
Smartphones still have lousy controls but graphically they are already superior to current gen consoles. http://www.youtube.com/watc... http://www.youtube.com/watc... http://www.youtube.com/watc... Those are being played with a Tegra 4 APU which has been in both smartphones and tablets for quite a while now, The GPU in the Galaxy S4 is already more powerful. Nvidia themselfs have stated that the Tegra 4 is 3-4x more powerful than RSX (PS3 GPU). http://www.brightsideofnews... I much prefer consoles also but that doesn't mean we have to be ignorant to reality.
lol we will see if phones have "console quality" games once ps4/720 comes.
How many gamers also have a phone to play quick little casual games? How many of those gamers would give up their PS3, xbox, or PC and stick to just crap phone games? NONE.
would they have to give up one for the other? Cant they play both? It isnt like they must choose. Games do get better over time. console gaming came a long way from the 2600 days. Do you really think mobile gaming will never evolve? People said the same thing about PC gaming when it was behind consoles at the time. Things change, people change. That is how this industry has grown from such humble beginnings to rival that of any other major entertainment industry.
Who is evolving it though? Only Sony and some third party peripheral makers, thats it. I don't mind evolution, but I don't want Apple's big head invading our space. Do you want 6 month console releases, with the previous one being out dated due to poor developers? Apple constantly says they are a gaming platform, yet do absolutely nothing to address poor gameplay with a touchscreen..... Sorry, but its also a bit annoying to see some Angry Birds fan call themselves a gamer. I don't draw a stick figure on a paper and call myself an artist.....
I don't think he's saying that you can't play both. He's saying that smartphone games aren't at the level where real gamers would pick smartphones over any single console or PC.
@darthv72 I have no clue of how you have 7 bubbles.
I can see what you and soldier are saying. At this point in time i certainly wouldnt pick one over the other. I do feel that eventually we will hit that converging point where a mobile will double as a console. It may be a while off but we have seen the potential for such an idea actually take place before. Then it wont be about one or the other as you will have a device that does both. All it takes is the right company to lead the charge. I would prefer it NOT be apple but their success in taking digital media from the "underground" and making it easy to understand by everyone else could give them an edge as far as the acceptance of that idea. But obviously they lack the content of a company like sony to really drive it home. @utalkin...maybe its because i contribute to topics of interest. I can respect others instead of question the amount of bubbles they have.
I agree. If I'm standing on line, waiting to order some food or waiting on my wife while she runs in the store to pick up some groceries then I'll play some little bs game on my phone. But I see no way that a 'gamer' would PREFER mobile phone games to console games.
That's stupid, I imagine very few people think of gaming capabilities when buying a phone.
Phone games are good for like a train ride home but they do get boring quickly Most of the iPhone games I play no longer than a month or when I beat it
A month is actually a very long time to play an iPhone game.
I'm really sorry but people can say this until they're blue in the face. I don't care if the graphics are ten times better than a PS4 on my phone, I just won't be playing those games on that tiny screen with touch controls. Stop this nonsense please. Every damn person has a phone now. In order to make this a viable argument you would have to find out the 'percentage' of those phone owners that play games. Are we to take it that ALL people who own phones now play games? NO, of course not. Do ALL console owners play games? I'd say there's a pretty good chance that's true. You would NEVER buy a phone just to play games. If you do then you're a pretty damned stupid person.
smart phones are for cool kids. a minority of ppl like myself use a £10 standard brick.
with some of what you said. but to be fair, there are those who did see fit to buy a game console to watch movies. We dont know percentages but it has been stated that during the launch of both the ps2 and ps3, there were those who bought the respected units due to them being cheaper than a comparable movie only player at the time. Now some of them could have played games on them but again, we dont know what percentage of users who bought a ps2 or ps3 bought them ONLY for movies. The last time we had dedicated gaming ONLY platforms was the generation prior with the saturn, ps1, n64. We could add in the wii as it didnt play movies (unless you count streaming with netflix). So like today, the convenience of these phones that do more than just make calls, we dont know the percentage of people who play games on them. All we have are statistics based around sales or downloads of games available for them. When i upgraded my samsung impression to the galaxy s2 I didnt do it because it played games. i did it because i wanted the s2 (before the s3 came out) and as a convenience that I wasnt privy too on my previous phone....it played games and netflix and youtube and surfed the web. I am not discrediting what you say but we cant ignore the convenience of these things on these devices. There is no reason to downplay the existence of these other forms of entertainment. In no way would i expect them to replace traditional gaming but i do accept them as "in addition to" traditional gaming.
I actually agree with you. That's why I chose to express it in this way: 'Do ALL console owners play games? I'd say there's a 'pretty good chance' that's true.' However, you cannot assume the same with phones. Yes, phones are better for games than they used to be and, yes, the games DO look much better on them now too, but I can't imagine anybody buying a phone JUST to play games. You're primary motive is communication. Resolution on a phone is simply a bullet point to impress tech heads and gullible people (I mean no disrespect there). 720p or 1080p for instance, is rendered pointless on such a small device. in the same way 1080p is rendered pointless on very small TVs (720p would suffice). Then of course you have the problem of control. It often amuses me when articles point out that a lot of games often ignore touch control on the Vita. The reason is simple: When given the option of playing a game with analogue stick, people will opt for that option, and devs know that. You can't 'force' a control scheme on people that have a much better alternative, but you can convince people with no alternative that touch controls are as good because they 'NEED' to be convinced of that.
A lot of people buy iPod touches to play games. I see no issue with that. Smartphone games have evolved quite a bit and have become good gaming experiences. A large majority of smartphone buyers play or have played a game. Games on the market are free, simple and easy to access. Unfortunately these people probably don't own consoles so their default answer will probably be preference to smartphones. That's why Smartphones are taking away from the console market. People are satisfied with their experiences on phones. They no longer see the need to purchase a Console and instead use that money to upgrade their smartphone.
I suppose my problem with these arguments are largely semantic ... perhaps even pedantic to a degree. When I see the word 'preferred' I automatically assume 'choice' and 'evaluation'. So I answer accordingly. Phones are a convenience as a gaming platform whilst consoles are a lifestyle choice. The two are not comparable in my opinion.
Comparing Smartphone games to Console games is like comparing Youtube videos to feature films.
Haha, imagine that: "Youtube videos now seen as "equal" to feature films"
given the number of views some of the more popular vids have received. im sure there are feature films that would love even a fraction of that.
My phone is my favorite platform for playing solitaire. It's so oldschool.
So basically the PS4 and 720 should tank sales wise since most gamers prefer smartphones to consoles? Okay then, we'll see come the end of 2013 lol! This is why surveys are pretty ridiculous to use as the bases of what millions of people think.
Just because they keep saying it, doesn't make it true
I'd rather game on a big screen 3D tv than a little 5 inch screen that takes phone calls. Even when I am waiting at a doctors office I rarely use my cellphone to play games. I won't even game on an tablet I prefer a big screen tv. Even when travelling I'll take my 3DS or my PSP to play videogames. Because I can always download Mario or a decent Playstation title. I can't really do that with a cellphone and Angry Birds gets boring after a while.
the potential for a mobile device to double as a console? Would that change the perception? sony has shown that a portable unit like the psp can double as a console. technology has improved from those PSP days and we have seen tablets and smartphones connect to TV's for other forms of entertainment. The addition of a bluetooth controller to play games from your portable device on a tv is now a viable option. you would tell me that a company with the experience of mobility AND gaming like sony you would still turn your back on the idea? to be fair, i believe that is the direction gaming is eventually heading. As with most electronics, what once was big and powerful will eventually be small and even more powerful. One thing is most certain, it isnt so much about when it happens but who is leading the charge. If it was any other company that tried it, it seems only right that people would scoff at it. But put a big name company behind the idea and watch how opinions change.
Seems like you just enjoy playing Devil's Advocate. Consider this: the more powerful handhelds and phones get, the more powerful consoles will get. If Samsung or Apple or whoever is capable of cramming a whole bunch of power into something so small, just think about what that means for a device many times larger that doesn't have to worry about power consumption limitations. Even if all you did was cram a bunch of Tegra 4 chips or whatever into a box the size of the PS3, the simple fact that you CAN do that means that non-portable device will ALWAYS be more powerful. Even once we get to things like nanomachines being commonplace, one nanomachine won't be able to outperform a hundred. And that's before we get to this article premise: that these devices are as preferred as consoles for gaming. When I see such articles, I immediately begin looking at the source for the information. Neither Magid nor PlaySpan are gaming entities in any way, shape, or fashion. We don't know the makeup of their polling sample, nor do we know how they chose to define "gamer;" indeed, we don't know that they defined it. And that presents a problem, because you and I are not gamers in the same sense that my nephews or my mother is a gamer. If all it takes is playing some sort of electronic game, then almost everybody's a gamer. I imagine that's about how they came to that 80% number, as the number of dedicated consoles and gaming PCs out there just don't bear out that level of saturation. Amazingly, we keep hearing this sort of stuff, but any "evidence" pointing to it is so fractured and incomplete it's hardly worth mentioning. No one takes into consideration how people call themselves gamers for playing Angry Birds(tired example, but still valid), and HOW MANY do just that. Seriously, there isn't proof enough for claims like this to be thought of as truth.
Un like a console I get 5 to 10 years gaming out of it. With a cellphone I get a year before the next model comes out and if I drop the cellphone Im screwed. A console stays staionary to the tv and ages slowly while I get newer technology crammed down my throat. A cellphone changes every year making the last gen old like the Galaxy S 3 and now the Galaxy S 4 then will come the Galaxy S 5. And on top of that to buy a new tv that interfaces with a cellphone costs money and is usually a bit up there in price compared to a $500 plasma that does 1080p remember there are people who do things on a budget. There are some people out there who probably can't afford the Iphone or the Galaxy S4 or the newest smart phone. Some people still use the old flip phone and there are some dummied down smart phone for those on a budget that are at a slower clock speed than the high end smart phones. A Playstation, Xbox or any other console remain the same from the day its launched to the day the new console comes out. You may have a dummied down console like the Xbox 360 arcade for a cheaper price throw an HDD on it and its the same as an Xbox Elite minus the color of the console. I think gaming will change over the years but they will have to make it affordable. And as technology advances I doubt Sony will pump out a Playstation every year like Apple or Samsung pump out a cellphone every year. With a cellphone the games are not there if Microsoft were to put Halo or Gears of War or if Sony added KillZone or God of War to the I phone and Android people will play it. Right now how I see games on a cellphone they are nothing more but to amuse a child while your sitting in a waiting room at a doctors office they are a time killer. Unlike an Xbox where I get to drink a beer and play a game with friends online and pull over nighters on a great game. A guy would look funny drinking beer pulling an overnighter on a cellphone game specially if it gets interupted by a phone call.
They missed the " by idiots and people who don't own consoles " off the end
Hmmm Uncharted or Angry Birds. Gee I can't choose!
Wow the media loves to say phones are equal to consoles. I've read it before the answer is still the same, there not even close, not even in the same league. And everyone but non gamers know this. Sure phones have came along ways since the original snake I used to play on my Brick Nokia. But there no where near console level, and 99.9 percent of phone games aren't even anywhere near handheld level. No matter how many articles are written, no phones do not replace my want for a ps4 or nextbox. So keep on writing about it, and ill keep on taking a dump on your pointless jiberish.
Uh, no. People are stupid.
by who the casuals who game every once in a while? Any real gamer knows a phone can't match a home console. They can't even match the Vita or 3DS so please just go away and stop spreading this misinformation.
Smartphone games are better than console games. - Said no gamer ever
this shit is going too far. casuals.
lol.. The two are certainly not equal. The smart phone games are no different than the little cheep handhelds you buy at Walmart in the toy section. They are fun for maybe a few minutes and are better than nothing when your out and about and have time to kill, or need to keep your kids quiet and occupied, but they certainly do not meet the need of having computer and console games that have actual DEPTH to them. Angry birds is cute and fun and all but I would not have paid for it nor would I have even played it if it werent FREE. Most phone games are dumbed down to the point of needing very little input whether it be just to jump or just to shoot as your character moves thru the level, which is the same from one level to the next. Its like playing Atari or Nintendo games again except those games at least have nostalgic value, the smart phone games have little to no value at all, which is why most of them are free. Now I feel I have insulted Atari and Nintendo games as most phone games dont even have the depth and quality that most old console games have. Oh well, Point is I will NEVER pay for a phone game until the phone games play just like console games.
yes with tegra 4 consoles will die fast and will move to mobles(Andriod) where you can do much more than console but at the end PC ITS THE WINNER.
That's why it's a waste of time and resources for Kinect and Wii U to go after the casual market; most of them have already moved on to their phones/pads where most games are free and certainly never approach 60 dollars. I have no doubt casual gamers are having more fun with their phones/tablet/facebook games than they had with Wii/Kinect. My GF loved Kinect....for about ten minutes then never played it again. Now all she plays are iPhone games, mostly online with friends too (which is something Nintendo still isn't doing). And she can get a new game every day for less than 2 dollars. I understand why casual gamers prefer their phones to consoles - they already have one and it has the added benefit of playing games which are cheap. Why would they ever spend $30-$50 on a games that offers no more enjoyment than a 99 cent one. Out of the 80% of consumers playing games, it seems likely that 35% are core and 35% casual and the rest hardcore or something in between. Nintendo had that casual last gen and MS/Sony/PC shared the rest. Wii U went after the wrong market, they've moved on and MS is trying to get the entire market but might end up getting very little of each.
WTF? NO. Who writes this shit.
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.