On The Go: Mobile Gaming

Right now, I'm waiting for my chest to unlock in a game called "Clash Royale," which involves you creating a "deck" to battle opponents and protect your castles from invasion in a span of 2-4 minutes. It's a mobile game (for smart phones/devices only) that goes with the "Free to Play" platform; meaning, you can completely and totally play this game for free, but they offer in game purchases to help speed up progress.  These purchases can range from $1 to $100, depending on how fast you want to progress.

So, for the chest I'm currently waiting on, which takes a total of 3 hours to unlock by the way, I could instead spend the in game currency of gems to unlock it instantly, which starts at 18 gems.  A bundle of 80 gems is only a buck, but you'll find that you can blow through gems rapidly since chests drop after each of your wins against other players.

Now, I'm not a fan of the "Free to Play" platform based on the words used to describe it.  "Free to Play" should mean exactly that; no costs, no fees, no penalties for not spending money, etc.  I would much rather a game be forthcoming on how much it'd like for me to spend and ask outright.  I understand that this is a tactic used to gain more money over the course of time, but still, I feel that a company should either put a price tag on their game up front or relabel it as "Free to Start."

Unfortunately, there are a slew of games for Android and iOS devices that follow this format.  Some are incredibly frustrating and unwelcoming to newcomers, in my opinion, such as the big brother the Clash Royale, Clash of Clans.  If you're just starting out, you can easily find yourself getting ransacked by bigger and tougher players...the in game ranking works in such a way that a player that has made a lot of upgrades to his characters/weapons can drop down to lower levels, making his potential attackers & defenders more easy to handle.  That's just one I'm very familiar with; looking through the main page and top pics sections on either market you'll find that every other game is that way.

I'm sure that this is not a big issue for most casual gamers, which is the intended market for these games.  They're made with little more in mind that to occupy a few minutes of your time and to try and grab a couple bucks here and there.  Sadly, there are few games that cater to someone like me; I want to play games on the go and take up an hour or more (especially when I'm waiting in a line somewhere...double especially at the DMV.) There are several that fit the bill, such as Five Nights at Freddy's, Final Fantasy (pick a number,), and Shadowrun Returns, but options are, for the most part, limited.

What I would like to see is an app market on both Android and iOS that embrace gamers such as myself.  I currently own a Nintendo 3DS and play a horde of games that require more than 5 minutes of your time (Pokemon is an obsession of mine, as well as Monster Hunter, Zelda, and Super Mario Bros 3.)  These types of games are challenging, offer tons of replay-ability, and, in some cases, are very enjoyable to play with a group of friends.

I propose that the mobile gaming market take some time and learn the successes of mobile game systems such as the 3DS and PS Vita.  There's obviously a market for it, otherwise people like me wouldn't be sold on buying a $200 console to carry around in addition to the cellular device I can't function without.  To continue to grow, and to stay competitive, the mobile game market needs to cater to core gamers and offer up new and in depth experiences.  Now, I know that's dependent on the developers and not Google (Android) or Apple (iOS,) but I think they could nudge things in the right direction (maybe drop a few subtle hints at the next conference, Apple?)

I'd personally would like to see not just games that appeal to core gamers, but some hardware and accessories to go with it.  Right now, I have an off brand controller that works via Bluetooth to play mobile shooters (Shadow Gun is pretty sweet...if you have the time, I suggest you give it a try!)  but it doesn't quite feel right...it's not as comfortable as, say, a PS4 or Xbox One controller, and I can definitely tell that the device is made from cheap parts; at times, I think that I'm going to break a button from normal operation.   My dream would be for Google to make a Nexus 7 that comes with a great controller...imagine if Asus or Motorola were to handle that!  From my experience, they have the chops to make that a reality.

I would ditch my 3DS altogether if I could have a rich experience on my Android device as I do on my 3DS.  With the current treads in gaming, though, it seems that my 3DS is getting games that are similar in appeal as mobile games, which I don't want to see at all.  If anything, Nintendo should stick to its old strategy and just make solid, quality games that are exclusive to their platforms and continue to drive their sales.  If, however, Nintendo wants to get away from making mobile hardware and go straight to mobile gaming for Android and iOS, I know a guy that has a few good ideas that could set them apart from the competition!

Nostalgia Investment

The other day I spent some time going through and organizing my video game collection in alphabetical order just so I could get an idea as to what I have and what I'm wanting to get.  While looking through my catalog of games, I noticed that, for a "Next Gen" console, I own an awful lot of remakes/re-releases...at least 7 by my count.  I didn't dwell on it too much until I did the same for my 3DS and GameCube: I have several games that have released on a previous console that I know I paid for once before.  I sat and thought, "Damn, that's an awful lot of exposure to the same game!"  But it had me thinking; is it really worth the money to invest in nostalgia, or am I wasting my money?

Let me further elaborate: I hate purchasing games over and over again.  I feel that I'm being asked to buy the same product twice, normally with small improvements over the original release, and that I'm giving game companies money just because I enjoyed a game once (I'm looking at you, Nintendo...Ocarina of Time was a good game, but not, "Lets release it on 3 different consoles at $40" good.)  I'm very much against buying a game you already own on another console, UNLESS it's a complete and total remake (for example, the original PS One Resident Evil and the GameCube Resident Evil.)  I argue that, if you really enjoy a game, you should keep your console and a copy of the game(s) to avoid additional costs.  My concern is that I'm paying big money for little or no reward.

I also want to mention that I included any game that was a release, regardless of if I had purchased it before, just so I didn't have to argue with myself if it "truly" counted while figuring out if my money was worth the purchase.  I assumed that it would be a good chance to get an idea if the games I'm buying were worth the investment as well without having to go through the entire collection as well.  

I decided that I needed to review each title and find out if I got my money's worth out of the game.  To find out, I normally put a dollar amount to each hour of game play spent.  If the total turns out to be either at or above the cost of the game, then I have come out ahead...and if the opposite is true, then I'm at a loss.  So, I approach it with the mindset that 1 hour of game play is equal to $6...which means that a new release game that's $60 should give me a minimum of 10 hours  (that includes if I beat it once and decide to replay it.)  

Surprisingly, I found that I'm not purely investing in nostalgia.  Out of the initial 7 games, I concluded that 5 of them were worth my investment.  Mind you, I picked them up at various prices, which range from $20-$60, but I was getting at least that much out of those 5, and, in some cases, a little bit more.  The other 2 were, unfortunately, not so worth it; they have been sitting in a binder since they were bought, which means they're basically space occupiers at this point.

What I did find that was surprising was that a game's cost affected this.  The 2 games that I haven't started (yet) were at cheap costs: one was $7, and the other was part of a "Buy 2 Get 1" promotion, so it was free since it was the cheapest of the 3.  I thought I'd move on to analyze my 3DS and GameCube collections, but that posed a bit of a problem.  The 3DS games I own are mostly digital and from the Virtual Store section, so most of my games cost between $3-$8.  The GameCube games weren't all store bought or paid for with cash; I have been trying to catch up on titles I missed the first time around, so I trade some of my other games for the games I'm missing via online bartering.

That's when it hit me: I have a Steam account!  I decided to do the same comparison with my games on there.  

After going through the same process with my Steam collection, I went through a total of 12 games that I previously owned on another console and found that the same was true as before; if I paid more for a classic, I would tend to invest more time than if I paid less.  Of the 12, only 3 were played enough to be worth the initial investment.  The other 9 were either played a total of 10-20 minutes or not at all.  

So, what did this mean for me?  Am I splurging too much on the same game(s)?  

I decided that, while I had games that haven't been played, overall I was getting more than what I paid for.  For my PS4 games, I invested enough time in the 5 games that it took care of the cost (and then some!) of the other 2.  The Steam games were barely noticeable from a financial standpoint...I bought most of them in collections for a $1-$7, so, if I put 1-2 hours in 1 game from the bundle, I got my money's worth.  

Most of the games I purchased were for consoles I either never owned or no longer have...in the case of the latter, I am guilty of being part of the "trade and save" cycle that most game stores pull you into.  I'll post another time how I feel about that, but I will say that I'm no longer sucked into that.  But I am glad that I have been making purchases that aren't going to waste.  

I'm happy that the games I either enjoyed or may have missed out on the first time are available to this day to enjoy.  There are some games, like Super Mario World, that I'll always enjoy spending time going through over and over again.  I lament that there is focus on only a few franchises, however, and would like to see some other previously released games get a remake or re-release.  Can we get another Eternal Darkness or Jet Force Gemini perhaps?

I'm glad that my concern has been diminished...though, I should complete my back log of games before the next holiday season hits!