Turning mobile phones into handheld consoles is genius

[Khaza-R]

I am curious to know the age of people playing mobile games. I tend to see younger folks, <21 years old, using their mobile phones regularly as gaming devices but I hear of older folks using pc/consoles.

*21 years of age is rough guestimate.

I think the assumption is that is younger gamers. But the reality is that the mobile market is so massive because it also readily encompasses individuals who would otherwise never purchase a gaming device and yet now have one readily available. The games you typically associate with younger gamers are actually just a fraction of total market.

[Katchii]

Ah, I see. Well, as I said above. It's a matter of being used to it. For people used to gaming in that way, they have no issue playing Apex Legends or Genshin Impact on their phone.

Being used to it/ have no issues doesn't mean it's "good" though.

Controllers and Mouse+Keyboard are more ergonomic allowing for longer, more comfortable, play sessions while also allowing for what I would consider "better" control at the same time.

If you (general you, not specific) like mobile games, great enjoy them! But I'm not sure I'll ever be able to. I find the platform inferior in most every way for many game types and it almost entirely comes down to the controls and the comfort of playing them. If I had a controller to play them I doubt I'd have the same issue, but at that point I might as well just play it on another platform where I already have a controller....If it ever becomes an issue where there' a game I REALLY want to play is only on mobile maybe I'll look into it, but at this point, it's just not worth it to me when I already have consoles and a PC to sate my gaming needs.

[rhorle]

Controllers and Mouse+Keyboard are more ergonomic allowing for longer, more comfortable, play sessions while also allowing for what I would consider "better" control at the same time.

You can connect a controller to your phone. That makes it so it is just a small screen with console controls. You say that if you own a controller you might as well play on a PC or console but that ignores the portability of a phone. The only thing holding back phone gaming is the quality of most games and it not being a dedicated release platform despite it being able to handle a lot of the non-AAA games out there.

What if Nintendo released an apple and android emulator that could play all of their console games? There are some "third party" emulators for at least android that work with varying quality where it makes you wonder what could officially be done.

[Fencers]

Being used to it/ have no issues doesn't mean it's "good" though.

Well, that is irrelevant to the conversation topic and entirely subjective.

But I'm not sure I'll ever be able to.

That's perfectly fine. I can't play phone games comfortably either.

What if Nintendo released an apple and android emulator that could play all of their console games? There are some "third party" emulators for at least android that work with varying quality where it makes you wonder what could officially be done.

I used a DS emulator on Android to play custom Pokemon ROMs on my phone. It is terrific.

[Ealyssa]

The problem of mobile gaming isn't hardware for quite a few years now. With high end model being stupidly more powerful than a nintendo Switch.

The problem lies in software and the current market trend. You can't make AAA games on mobiles because somehow nobody is willing to spend even 10$ on their 1000$ phones... So you end up with only garbage P2W mobile games.

That's truely the only difference between phones and mobiles consoles : a market where people are ok to spend for full priced good games.

[rhorle]

The problem lies in software and the current market trend. You can't make AAA games on mobiles because somehow nobody is willing to spend even 10$ on their 1000$ phones... So you end up with only garbage P2W mobile games.

Is that true? Minecraft is listed a #1 paid game on Google Play. It is $7.49 below your limit but it does show that people will pay for games. Stardew Valley is 6th and Terraria is 9th but both are $4.99. I can't check the prices for Apple but they have Minecraft as 1st, Football Manager 2022 as 4th, Stardew Valley as 6th, and Monopoly as 7th from a website that claims to have updated it 6 days ago.

Maybe you are right and people won't pay over $10 but there is still a place for more traditional style of games to make money on phones. However it does seem like the players would buy up a game by a proper developer. Like I said earlier if Nintendo released a port for phones it would sell really well though that would tank their hardware sales so likely won't happen any time soon.

[Edge-]

Like I said earlier if Nintendo released a port for phones it would sell really well though that would tank their hardware sales so likely won't happen any time soon.

Extremely unlikely. People like their Switches, and the gameplay experience on a phone won't be the same as it would with a Switch. Phones come with their own problems and limitations, and Nintendo isn't gonna be selling $60 copies of Mario on mobile devices anytime soon. People won't pay that.

[rhorle]

Extremely unlikely. People like their Switches, and the gameplay experience on a phone won't be the same as it would with a Switch. Phones come with their own problems and limitations, and Nintendo isn't gonna be selling $60 copies of Mario on mobile devices anytime soon. People won't pay that.

Didn't people say the Switch wouldn't do well because it was a "mobile" console when it released? Now we have the Steam Deck as capitalizing on that trend. If people pay $60 for a switch game now why wouldn't they do the same on a different "console"? Pokemon would certainly still sell but less popular titles likely would have more trouble.

Nintendo could even still sell physical cartridges if they have a dock/controller the phone slides into for play. Lets be real the Switch is essentially controllers and a "tablet" so controllers and a "phone" you already own isn't that big of a paradigm shift.

[Edge-]

Didn't people say the Switch wouldn't do well because it was a "mobile" console when it released?

People said a lot of things. And if they said that, they were wrong. But a comparison between a phone as a gaming device and a Switch is lightyears in difference, as we can see in the purchasing habits of mobile gamers vs. folks when they game on Switch.

Now we have the Steam Deck as capitalizing on that trend.

Handheld market =|= mobile market.

If people pay $60 for a switch game now why wouldn't they do the same on a different "console"?

They will on other handheld consoles. They will not though, on phones. As has been shown historically.

Nintendo could even still sell physical cartridges if they have a dock/controller the phone slides into for play.

Meaning they give up control of the ecosystem, especially on iPhone. Plus make a compatible dock. Plus deal with the problems people have when their older phones can't run newer games, or run them poorly.

Lets be real the Switch is essentially controllers and a "tablet" so controllers and a "phone" you already own isn't that big of a paradigm shift.

Sure, it is. But it's a purpose-built tablet for one thing: Gaming.

Much like home consoles like the PlayStation/Xbox are basically PC's, but similarly are purpose-built for primarily one thing: Gaming.

Your phone? That's for everything, and also Angry Birds while dealing with some mild constipation.

[rhorle]

Your phone? That's for everything, and also Angry Birds while dealing with some mild constipation.

Right. But just because it isn't built for gaming doesn't mean it can't be used for gaming. All you are doing is saying it can't be like that because it has never been like that. Again the Switch is already almost there because it is a tablet that runs only on the Nintendo ecosystem. It is a phone with out the phone. It isn't a big shift to suddenly have it able to make calls. Even back in the 90's Sega sold a TV antenna device for the Game Gear to enable it to be multi-purpose.

[Edge-]

But just because it isn't built for gaming doesn't mean it can't be used for gaming.

This is true! But practically in reality, it's not. It's used to game, but as a casual device for the most part. It's why most attempts from peripheral makers to make hardware to help "gamify" your phone and turn it into more of a "handheld console" has remained very niche and never really taken off.

All you are doing is saying it can't be like that because it has never been like that.

I'm saying historically that's not how it works and that it's unlikely to change meaningfully given the nature of smartphones as "everything" devices and how different segments of gamers treat their hardware.

Again the Switch is already almost there because it is a tablet that runs only on the Nintendo ecosystem.

It's not "a tablet that runes on the Nintendo ecosystem", it's barely even a tablet in terms of non-gaming functionality and isn't remotely practical for use as a tablet as one would use a Apple/Android tablet.

It's a console that happens to look like a tablet, not a tablet that's also a console.

It is a phone with out the phone.

It is in no way, shape, or form a "phone with out the phone" and it does a fraction of what peoples normal smartphones do even if you ignore the whole "calling" feature.

Even back in the 90's Sega sold a TV antenna device for the Game Gear to enable it to be multi-purpose.

How'd that work out for Sega? Just because a small niche market exists, or has existed, doesn't mean it has the potential to become a mainstream product.

[Zenfoldor]

Phone screen is too small

Touch controls suck for non turn based non adventure games

Mobile device loses its broad appeal when you have to carry around an additional controller

Phones aren’t switches. They are too little, and the controllers are addons not integral nor mandatory. It’s limiting. That’s why they won’t take over. Most people have not gamed for their whole lives to downgrade to a 4 inch non-oled screen now.

If you are willing to sacrifice your experience, then you can play games on a toaster too.

Problem with phones, is the same as the advantage. They run only on hardware that everyone has. The good news is, everyone has a phone, The bad news is, they will likely never be redesigned, en masse, as a gaming device first. Individual SKUs will but they cannot make games based off of those low selling SKUs, they must make games for everybody’s phone. That is a strength, but it is also easy to overlook that that is a very big weakness which consoles do not have.

Streaming is worst than mobile, because at least mobile is ran off the local hardware. Adding latency to my single player game is unacceptable.

[rhorle]

How'd that work out for Sega? Just because a small niche market exists, or has existed, doesn't mean it has the potential to become a mainstream product.

Good? It is referenced on the game gear wikipedia page as "adding to its popularity". The game gear was a main stream product and I'd call an accessory for it being widely available as mainstream.

And yes the switch is a tablet with out full features that allows controllers to attach to the side of it. Most places call the screen/console part a tablet. It doesn't matter if it is highly restricted and not a full functioning tablet. There isn't even a universal standard for what a tablet is as even remotes can be called tablets. They sell a Granpad tablet that is restricted to a "Old-person" friendly interface that can receive and make calls. Which just shows how close to being a phone a tablet is.

This is really you being contrary just for the sake of it or out of some phobia for "phone" gaming.

[Katchii]

You can connect a controller to your phone. That makes it so it is just a small screen with console controls. You say that if you own a controller you might as well play on a PC or console but that ignores the portability of a phone. The only thing holding back phone gaming is the quality of most games and it not being a dedicated release platform despite it being able to handle a lot of the non-AAA games out there.

What if Nintendo released an apple and android emulator that could play all of their console games? There are some "third party" emulators for at least android that work with varying quality where it makes you wonder what could officially be done.

Not sure if you read the rest of my post, but I did allude to the fact that emulators and peripherals already exist that fix my specific pain point, however there are no games I care enough about on mobile to go through the trouble.

As you, part of the issue is that mobile as a platform is so prolific because of it's portability. emulators and some peripherals kind of work counter to that part of it's desirability. You have to have a set-up to play a mobile game comfortably...which makes it not so mobile, in which case why wouldn't I just play on a console, or PC? Which brings me back to there just not being any games on mobile I care about being worth the trouble of doing that.

[QUOTE=Fencers;53906945]Well, that is irrelevant to the conversation topic and entirely subjective. [QUOTE]

Fair enough

[rhorle]

You have to have a set-up to play a mobile game comfortably...which makes it not so mobile, in which case why wouldn't I just play on a console, or PC?

I feel like set-up is being exaggerated a little. Taking a controller out of a bag and turning it on isn't a lot of work. Steelseries sells a grip that holds a phone and attaches to your controller. Razer has a joycon like device that expands to hold the phone in the center. If you were at home would playing on a console or PC be better? Sure probably but look at how the Switch can be played in docked and handheld form. Do people always play docked?

It also ignores how people wouldn't have to buy a console if their phone can function the same, right? Your phone would be the console. This seems like something similar to when smart phones first came out and people said they didn't need a computer mixed with their phone and stuck to the "dumb" ones. Yet now it is crazy advantageous to have that power at our finger tips.

[Edge-]

Good? It is referenced on the game gear wikipedia page as "adding to its popularity". The game gear was a main stream product and I'd call an accessory for it being widely available as mainstream.

The Game Gear was a moderately successful handheld console with around 10M sales, a fraction of what we're seeing for consoles nowadays. Does the wiki have sales numbers for the tuner? Because I'm not finding any evidence to indicate it performed well in terms of sales.

And yes the switch is a tablet with out full features that allows controllers to attach to the side of it.

So...a console that happens to be shaped like a tablet, not an actual tablet which is very different in its functionality.

This is really you being contrary just for the sake of it or out of some phobia for "phone" gaming.

Not at all, that's you projecting though.

I game periodically on my phone, don't stick with many games for long but there are a few like Crush Crush I log into periodically over the years.

I'm trying to point out that your argument that the Switch is basically a phone/tablet, and that if Nintendo released ports on mobile devices that they would sell well.

[Val the Moofia Boss]

The problem with mobile gaming is that they don't have buttons like proper handhelds, so precious screen space has to be alotted for touchscreen controls, which is simply inferior to a handheld setup. You just can't play handheld games on mobile. It doesn't work and it doesn't feel right.

What's great about consoles is that for developers, they only have to develop for one set of hardware. There is only one model of DS. With Mobile, developers have to account for the hundreds of different iPhone and Android models, different hardware, different resolutions, different firmwares, and so on.

- - - Updated - - -

Also, playing on a tiny screen sucks. Sure, you can play Kotor on your phone, but your shortchanging yourself.

[rhorle]

I'm trying to point out that your argument that the Switch is basically a phone/tablet, and that if Nintendo released ports on mobile devices that they would sell well.

Most media outlets refer to the screen/console part as a tablet. If you have an aversion to calling it what it basically is then that is on you. You also have to be blind if you think Pokemon Scarlet Violet wouldn't sell at $60 if it was a phone exclusive. If it was some random switch game? Sure. But the Nintendo heavy weights would sell on whatever platform they get released for.

It isn't projection to point out you being contrary for what seems like to just be contrary. You have an aversion to calling something a tablet. You've said tablets aren't close to phones. You think all tablets have to be as useful as apple/android to be a tablet. You've called the game gear not main stream and are trying to compare it to modern day numbers. You are just taking a contrary position when it isn't backed up by anything at all.

[USTANAK22]

no matter what the game is on a mobile phone , the phone itself will always need to be the size of like a tablet or ipad for me to have the most fun playing any mobile game.
maybe the future is larger phones , no smaller ones !

[Edge-]

You also have to be blind if you think Pokemon Scarlet Violet wouldn't sell at $60 if it was a phone exclusive.

It wouldn't. Squeenix has tried to do this with multiple titles at lower price points, even fairly premium titles. It's never worked out because the market, despite your claims, doesn't exist.

Sure. But the Nintendo heavy weights would sell on whatever platform they get released for.

Sure, but why would Nintendo ever release their games on a platform they don't own and lose a cut of sales? Easy answer: They wouldn't. If they wanted to simply move software alone they'd have abandoned hardware generations ago. But every first party console maker would kill for the kind of first party software sales Nintendo sees on their platform because it makes them money hand over fist.