Yes I want Pokemanz and Zelda and Mario Kart on iOS because I'm sick of reading all the memes and jokes online and not knowing what they are all about!
More than old Nintendo titles that might be difficult to adapt to touch input, a niche of iPad game I see as still untapped is the conversion/port of some old turn-based early RPGs written for Win/Mac desktops.
Titles that come to mind are the Baulder's Gate series, and Fallout 1 & 2. Heck, even all the old map-based games like Warcraft I, II, and III, Age of Empires, StarCraft I, etc.
Those games would easily be adapted to touch input and have huge followings of nostalgic gamers that now have iPads, are chomping at the bit for "real" substantial games on the iOS platform, and would be willing to pony up ~$10/title.
From what I've seen, new titles developed for the iPad that try to fill this space, longer plot-based games, are severely lacking. I know I would love to play Fallout II all over again on the iPad.
iPad and iPod Touch are annihilating Nintendo's traditional audience. They are largely the same price but provide way more functionality and cheaper games.
On one hand I think it would make a lot of sense for nintendo to go in the app store, on the other hand I like the new developers like rovio and gameloft and don't want to see them stomped out in favor of some giant big name console publishers.
Rovio just got valued at $1 billion. They'll be fine. Nintendo and PlayStation titles coming to iPad will only fuel more iPad consumption and hence, more sales for all game developers. Throw in an A6 AppleTV as gaming console and iOS will become a must-develop-for platform. (Of course, needs a bit more improvement in control mechanisms, better graphics will be useful, etc. etc.)
Want to point me to the massive number of parents who are going to sign up little Timmy for a 2 year phone contract in order to let him play crappy games?
iPod touch. ipad. both of which could play the games, no required contracts for phone service
I don't believe Nintendo should be considering porting their current games to any outside device. They would need to sell 10 or 20 times as many games at the prices iOS users expect to pay to equal their current revenue. iOS users are certainly not going to pay $50 for a game.
I agree with this. The other thing to keep in mind is gaming development cycles.
Apple releases a new phone pretty much every year - but worse, almost discontinues hardware that's over 2 years old, which makes sense in some cases as the jump in performance is so high.
Nintendo's own hardware stays the same over 5-6 years so the gaming performance is guaranteed over that time.
Then we get to the App Store. With their own limited selection of titles, the titles can stand out. In a store with over 300,000 apps, people have to actively search for Nintendo's games to see them. The price issue would make it unworkable.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Applecation
However, Nintendo has a large number of titles from its previous platforms that would sell well on iOS. That would seem to be a very lucrative move for them. I would be interested in a Mario 1,2, or 3 game on my iOS device.
There's only so many times you can play old games without getting bored with them. There will be new generations that haven't experienced the old games so some may take off again and I'm sure there are people who would love a multiplayer Mario Kart game but you can already play these old titles on iOS devices as well as PSone titles. Better controls per game would improve them but I would only see it as one of those moves that other developers make on the iOS platform, which is to have a presence but not really take it seriously.
This is also indicative of a bigger problem. The iOS platform should have its own franchises to help it stand alone as a gaming platform and not rely on Nintendo. Publishers tried to make titles like Rolando, Angry Birds, Doodle Jump and all manner of quirky apps out to be the defining apps for the platform but it just hasn't really taken hold - the good titles don't keep coming and any decent ones have no depth to the experience. To put it concisely:
This opinion will vary depending on what games you like but I don't think I've come across a single iOS title that I regard more enjoyable than even the weaker titles on 20-year-old gaming systems and it's not just the controls.
I would argue quite the opposite. Nintendo is primarily a software company. Their hardware is just a means of selling their software, not the other way around.
For example, look at the top 10 selling games on the Wii. 9 of them are from Nintendo and just one (the 10th!) is from another company.
It's clear that people buy Nintendo hardware primarily to play Nintendo games.
That is all true - and it works in the console market where games are $40 or so. You can sell the system itself at low margin, break-even, or even a loss if you sell enough games and accessories to make up for it. Essentially, if you sell 5 $40 games per console at 70% margin, that's $140 margin which you can add to your console margin to figure out the value of that customer.
It doesn't work so well when the games are $0.99. You have to sell a LOT of games to make it worthwhile to sell a $200 console at break-even or a loss.
The best scenario for Nintendo is probably to sell the games on iOS if they can find a way to use them to make their console more attractive. For example, if it can be demonstrated that game play is far more enjoyable on the large screen, then it's possible that the $0.99 (or even $4.99 or $9.99) sale might get people interested in the game and encourage them to buy a console later. That would be the biggest potential win for Nintendo. Whether they could pull it off, is another matter.
My daughter would by SuperMario for her iPod Touch. But she almost never plays on the Wii any more, so I'm not sure the strategy would ever work.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Firefly7475
I think Nintendo would be a fantastic purchase for someone like Apple. If they started pumping out games targeted toward iOS and an Apple console it would be a very very big deal.
Why would Apple do that?
First, the games are already being targeted at iOS and driving customers to iOS.
Second, if Apple buys them, they instantly become a competitor to their game developers - and could cause some of them to lose interest.
Second, if Apple buys them, they instantly become a competitor to their game developers - and could cause some of them to lose interest.
Normally I'd say that's a good argument but in the case of games it doesn't seem to apply. Pretty much every major games platform is owned or was owned by a firm that either develops games or at the very least publishes them.
Game developers are used to competing with the platform owner.
I don't believe Nintendo should be considering porting their current games to any outside device. They would need to sell 10 or 20 times as many games at the prices iOS users expect to pay to equal their current revenue. iOS users are certainly not going to pay $50 for a game.
However, Nintendo has a large number of titles from its previous platforms that would sell well on iOS. That would seem to be a very lucrative move for them. I would be interested in a Mario 1,2, or 3 game on my iOS device.
This is what I'm thinking. releasing only the classics (arcade too) on other devices it adds value to their nintendo only new releases and could make them some big money on old titles. A priprority controller for iOS would also be a great move.
the way I see it, this is terrible advice. Nintendo is at heart a hardware company -- they make game consoles. If they started porting their most valuable property to other consoles, it would be the end of their own,
Perhaps not. These days their games are mostly about 3d, first person stuff. THey could keep that on their own machines due to the lack of power in the iPad etc and just port over the very early games like SM 1 and 2 without devaluing their current hardware.
This is what I'm thinking. releasing only the classics (arcade too) on other devices it adds value to their nintendo only new releases and could make them some big money on old titles. A priprority controller for iOS would also be a great move.
I think the main flaw when it comes to the controls is just that you can't do two gestures at once. If you look at a standard controller, your two thumbs control 10 buttons and two analog sticks. The advantage they have is the shoulder buttons as you can have 4 fingers on those all the time.
All the iPhone really needs is shoulder buttons.
Trouble is, how to implement them on a device with no fixed orientation. If the back of the phone was touch-sensitive, it might work but I think they could just make the edge touch-sensitive like this:
I don't think it matters if it only works in one direction - although they have to take account of the earphone location.
This kind of basic development gives you way more control over games. It can be a capacitive metal band. In a first person shooter, it gets mapped to fire so you can move with the left thumb, aim with the right thumb and fire with the first finger. Platformers can use it to jump and fire so you get the timing right.
Nintendo has some options, they could partner with Apple to add exclusive interactivity between iOS devices and their hardware (ie iPhone/iTouch controller, viewer, interconnectivity for messaging, camera, accelerometer, etc...), make an agreement to provide iTunes content on their console (again exclusive), piggy back off of Apple's new data center for online gaming and work with Apple to improve it, perhaps add Ping/Game Center social networking, add/license iChat/FaceTime or work on a Nintendo Game Store powered by Apple.
There are plenty of other ways they can collaborate.
It would be amazing if Apple were to buy Nintendo or make them a subsidiary (to keep the brand name, ie FileMaker)
Great idea below. Or, they could simply sell a Nintendo gaming case accessory rather than have to re-engineer the iPhone a lot for gaming control.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin
I think the main flaw when it comes to the controls is just that you can't do two gestures at once. If you look at a standard controller, your two thumbs control 10 buttons and two analog sticks. The advantage they have is the shoulder buttons as you can have 4 fingers on those all the time.
All the iPhone really needs is shoulder buttons.
Trouble is, how to implement them on a device with no fixed orientation. If the back of the phone was touch-sensitive, it might work but I think they could just make the edge touch-sensitive like this:
I don't think it matters if it only works in one direction - although they have to take account of the earphone location.
This kind of basic development gives you way more control over games. It can be a capacitive metal band. In a first person shooter, it gets mapped to fire so you can move with the left thumb, aim with the right thumb and fire with the first finger. Platformers can use it to jump and fire so you get the timing right.
Comments
good shot dude
lol
apple should get mario and etc
CALL OF DUTY SELLS GREAT ON Apple plat forms
9
Yes I want Pokemanz and Zelda and Mario Kart on iOS because I'm sick of reading all the memes and jokes online and not knowing what they are all about!
MARIO KAAAAAAAARRRRTTTTT
Game exclusivity sucks
More than old Nintendo titles that might be difficult to adapt to touch input, a niche of iPad game I see as still untapped is the conversion/port of some old turn-based early RPGs written for Win/Mac desktops.
Titles that come to mind are the Baulder's Gate series, and Fallout 1 & 2. Heck, even all the old map-based games like Warcraft I, II, and III, Age of Empires, StarCraft I, etc.
Those games would easily be adapted to touch input and have huge followings of nostalgic gamers that now have iPads, are chomping at the bit for "real" substantial games on the iOS platform, and would be willing to pony up ~$10/title.
From what I've seen, new titles developed for the iPad that try to fill this space, longer plot-based games, are severely lacking. I know I would love to play Fallout II all over again on the iPad.
iPad and iPod Touch are annihilating Nintendo's traditional audience. They are largely the same price but provide way more functionality and cheaper games.
On one hand I think it would make a lot of sense for nintendo to go in the app store, on the other hand I like the new developers like rovio and gameloft and don't want to see them stomped out in favor of some giant big name console publishers.
Rovio just got valued at $1 billion. They'll be fine. Nintendo and PlayStation titles coming to iPad will only fuel more iPad consumption and hence, more sales for all game developers. Throw in an A6 AppleTV as gaming console and iOS will become a must-develop-for platform. (Of course, needs a bit more improvement in control mechanisms, better graphics will be useful, etc. etc.)
Want to point me to the massive number of parents who are going to sign up little Timmy for a 2 year phone contract in order to let him play crappy games?
iPod touch. ipad. both of which could play the games, no required contracts for phone service
I don't believe Nintendo should be considering porting their current games to any outside device. They would need to sell 10 or 20 times as many games at the prices iOS users expect to pay to equal their current revenue. iOS users are certainly not going to pay $50 for a game.
I agree with this. The other thing to keep in mind is gaming development cycles.
Apple releases a new phone pretty much every year - but worse, almost discontinues hardware that's over 2 years old, which makes sense in some cases as the jump in performance is so high.
Nintendo's own hardware stays the same over 5-6 years so the gaming performance is guaranteed over that time.
Then we get to the App Store. With their own limited selection of titles, the titles can stand out. In a store with over 300,000 apps, people have to actively search for Nintendo's games to see them. The price issue would make it unworkable.
However, Nintendo has a large number of titles from its previous platforms that would sell well on iOS. That would seem to be a very lucrative move for them. I would be interested in a Mario 1,2, or 3 game on my iOS device.
There's only so many times you can play old games without getting bored with them. There will be new generations that haven't experienced the old games so some may take off again and I'm sure there are people who would love a multiplayer Mario Kart game but you can already play these old titles on iOS devices as well as PSone titles. Better controls per game would improve them but I would only see it as one of those moves that other developers make on the iOS platform, which is to have a presence but not really take it seriously.
This is also indicative of a bigger problem. The iOS platform should have its own franchises to help it stand alone as a gaming platform and not rely on Nintendo. Publishers tried to make titles like Rolando, Angry Birds, Doodle Jump and all manner of quirky apps out to be the defining apps for the platform but it just hasn't really taken hold - the good titles don't keep coming and any decent ones have no depth to the experience. To put it concisely:
iPhone games just aren't any fun.
This opinion will vary depending on what games you like but I don't think I've come across a single iOS title that I regard more enjoyable than even the weaker titles on 20-year-old gaming systems and it's not just the controls.
I would argue quite the opposite. Nintendo is primarily a software company. Their hardware is just a means of selling their software, not the other way around.
For example, look at the top 10 selling games on the Wii. 9 of them are from Nintendo and just one (the 10th!) is from another company.
It's clear that people buy Nintendo hardware primarily to play Nintendo games.
That is all true - and it works in the console market where games are $40 or so. You can sell the system itself at low margin, break-even, or even a loss if you sell enough games and accessories to make up for it. Essentially, if you sell 5 $40 games per console at 70% margin, that's $140 margin which you can add to your console margin to figure out the value of that customer.
It doesn't work so well when the games are $0.99. You have to sell a LOT of games to make it worthwhile to sell a $200 console at break-even or a loss.
The best scenario for Nintendo is probably to sell the games on iOS if they can find a way to use them to make their console more attractive. For example, if it can be demonstrated that game play is far more enjoyable on the large screen, then it's possible that the $0.99 (or even $4.99 or $9.99) sale might get people interested in the game and encourage them to buy a console later. That would be the biggest potential win for Nintendo. Whether they could pull it off, is another matter.
My daughter would by SuperMario for her iPod Touch. But she almost never plays on the Wii any more, so I'm not sure the strategy would ever work.
I think Nintendo would be a fantastic purchase for someone like Apple. If they started pumping out games targeted toward iOS and an Apple console it would be a very very big deal.
Why would Apple do that?
First, the games are already being targeted at iOS and driving customers to iOS.
Second, if Apple buys them, they instantly become a competitor to their game developers - and could cause some of them to lose interest.
Second, if Apple buys them, they instantly become a competitor to their game developers - and could cause some of them to lose interest.
Normally I'd say that's a good argument but in the case of games it doesn't seem to apply. Pretty much every major games platform is owned or was owned by a firm that either develops games or at the very least publishes them.
Game developers are used to competing with the platform owner.
I don't believe Nintendo should be considering porting their current games to any outside device. They would need to sell 10 or 20 times as many games at the prices iOS users expect to pay to equal their current revenue. iOS users are certainly not going to pay $50 for a game.
However, Nintendo has a large number of titles from its previous platforms that would sell well on iOS. That would seem to be a very lucrative move for them. I would be interested in a Mario 1,2, or 3 game on my iOS device.
This is what I'm thinking. releasing only the classics (arcade too) on other devices it adds value to their nintendo only new releases and could make them some big money on old titles. A priprority controller for iOS would also be a great move.
the way I see it, this is terrible advice. Nintendo is at heart a hardware company -- they make game consoles. If they started porting their most valuable property to other consoles, it would be the end of their own,
Perhaps not. These days their games are mostly about 3d, first person stuff. THey could keep that on their own machines due to the lack of power in the iPad etc and just port over the very early games like SM 1 and 2 without devaluing their current hardware.
This is what I'm thinking. releasing only the classics (arcade too) on other devices it adds value to their nintendo only new releases and could make them some big money on old titles. A priprority controller for iOS would also be a great move.
I think the main flaw when it comes to the controls is just that you can't do two gestures at once. If you look at a standard controller, your two thumbs control 10 buttons and two analog sticks. The advantage they have is the shoulder buttons as you can have 4 fingers on those all the time.
All the iPhone really needs is shoulder buttons.
Trouble is, how to implement them on a device with no fixed orientation. If the back of the phone was touch-sensitive, it might work but I think they could just make the edge touch-sensitive like this:
I don't think it matters if it only works in one direction - although they have to take account of the earphone location.
This kind of basic development gives you way more control over games. It can be a capacitive metal band. In a first person shooter, it gets mapped to fire so you can move with the left thumb, aim with the right thumb and fire with the first finger. Platformers can use it to jump and fire so you get the timing right.
There are plenty of other ways they can collaborate.
It would be amazing if Apple were to buy Nintendo or make them a subsidiary (to keep the brand name, ie FileMaker)
I think the main flaw when it comes to the controls is just that you can't do two gestures at once. If you look at a standard controller, your two thumbs control 10 buttons and two analog sticks. The advantage they have is the shoulder buttons as you can have 4 fingers on those all the time.
All the iPhone really needs is shoulder buttons.
Trouble is, how to implement them on a device with no fixed orientation. If the back of the phone was touch-sensitive, it might work but I think they could just make the edge touch-sensitive like this:
I don't think it matters if it only works in one direction - although they have to take account of the earphone location.
This kind of basic development gives you way more control over games. It can be a capacitive metal band. In a first person shooter, it gets mapped to fire so you can move with the left thumb, aim with the right thumb and fire with the first finger. Platformers can use it to jump and fire so you get the timing right.