Do you agree or disagree that mobile games are not real games?

[zaza]

I mean compared to console and pc games.

Whenever I bring up how iphones are such supreme gaming devices, I get a reply "lol who cares, mobile gaming isn't real gaming"

So let's compare a mobile "casual" game to a PC "hardcore" game. Casual phone game Candy Crush requires actual thought and concentration to beat the higher levels, hardcore PC games like battlefield only require fast reflexes so you can shoot your opponent before he shoots you i.e. a 13 year old will definitely stomp an adult at it cause younger people have faster reflexes.

So Candy Crush is more like chess and battlefield is more like "wack-a-mole". Which is the real game in your opinion?

 

[dawheat]

I mean compared to console and pc games.

Whenever I bring up how iphones are such supreme gaming devices, I get a reply "lol who cares, mobile gaming isn't real gaming"

So let's compare a mobile "casual" game to a PC "hardcore" game. Casual phone game Candy Crush requires actual thought and concentration to beat the higher levels, hardcore PC games like battlefield only require fast reflexes so you can shoot your opponent before he shoots you i.e. a 13 year old will definitely stomp an adult at it cause younger people have faster reflexes.

So Candy Crush is more like chess and battlefield is more like "wack-a-mole". Which is the real game in your opinion?

I don't know if you're a millennial or not, but the seriousness (without realizing the hilarity) in relating Candy Crush to chess screams millennial. Probably closer to say it's like checkers.

I'm guessing "hardcore" gamers tend to feel this way about mobile games b/c the vast majority of what people play are basically the equivalent of arcade games - Candy Crush being an example. And since the vast majority of games play pretty much the same on a phone 3 years old vs. a current flagship, that probably exacerbates the sense of simplicity.

I think they're both right and wrong - gaming is gaming at the end of the day, but there clearly are huge differences in controls, immersion (detail and directional sound), and team play aspects (is there an equivalent of a 4-6 man team in COD or Halo?).

But different and broader audiences doesn't necessarily mean better or worse.

 

[elitejp]

It comes down to if you like to play it then play it. I used to think I needed a high end phone so that I could play some cool games. But for me I havent found any that keep my attention, but thats probably because im cheap and dont pay for any games.

 

[Crono]

A lot of mobile games aren't very different from old console games or independent games for PC. Heck, a lot of good mobile games are ports of older games. I consider all mobile games to be "real" games, but it doesn't mean I have to like them all or get into all of them. I rarely play casual puzzle games anymore, though.

OP: Trying to elevate mobile gaming at the expense of PC an console gaming is a bad argument. I'm not a huge Battlefield fan or anything (I do have Battlefield 4, though), but it and other shooters take plenty of strategy if you are a good player and use team tactics. It may not always be as cerebral as an RTS - and frankly few types of games are as complex and mentally engaging and even frenetic as RTS' and simulation games for PC, due to how much screen real estate and units you can use - but I don't think it's productive to make an apples and oranges comparison of mobile puzzle games to PC shooters.

 

[sweenish]

Candy Crush requires money.

I'll play quality games where I can find them, including on mobile.

As for the actual original post, that's just a bunch of garbage. It's just so garbage. I mean, Candy Crush is like chess? How? But then again, given OP's post history...

but I don't think it's productive to make an apples and oranges comparison of mobile puzzle games to PC shooters.

You've got it backwards. It is an apples to oranges comparison, OP tried to make it apples to apples.

 

[podspi]

All games are real games.

Personally, I'd rather play a computer or console game instead of staring at a small screen, but they're still games.

 

[mnewsham]

Best smartphone game I have played is Star wars KOTOR. It's literally just a direct PC port with some touchscreen menus and controls. Works even better if you have a Galaxy note 4 or 5 and the digitizer.

 

[ControlD]

There are good games on mobile platforms, but most mobile games suck. Baldur's Gate, KOTOR, Terraria, etc. are all available on mobile and are great. Candy Crush? Clash of Clans? That stuff just sucks.

 

[poofyhairguy]

In some cases mobile games are the same games that are on consoles (like my Final Fantasy collection for example).

So the answer has to be yes. Freemium doesn't completely define the market.

 

[mmntech]

The problem with F2P mobile games is they're often deliberately designed to extract as much money out of players as possible. Particularly "whales", the rather indignant industry term for the biggest spenders. As such, they're working on similar mechanics to games of chance like slots and video poker. Problem now is that mechanic is starting to worm its way into $60+ games, where it doesn't belong period.

There are plenty of good smartphone games out there though. If you have an iPhone, check out the "Pay Once and Play" section of the App Store. That's where Apple hides the good stuff.

Even Yeezus himself hates microtransactions.

 

[ImpulsE69]

I dont mind mobile games, because I just like games..of all sorts, regardless of platform. My problem with mobile games is simply the use of touchscreen for everything. It works fine for some things and is pretty awful/unreliable for others.

This also annoys 'hardcore' gamers simply because there is nothing competitive about touchscreen gaming since there is very little precision for the types of games they like.

 

[Fardringle]

They are games, and they are not imaginary. So, yes, they are "real" games. That doesn't mean you have to enjoy them if you prefer other types of games, but they are still games.

Personally I can't stand watching bowling or golf, but they are still real games...

 

[Commodus]

Mobile games are real games; casual games are real games. You can pour a ton of passion and skill into Candy Crush and be an absolute lightweight in Halo.

I don't like the attempts to segregate gamers based on where they play, because that's been used for far more sinister things than bragging rights. The boy's club types use it to justify excluding women, for example. Since mobile and web games (conveniently, where a lot of women play) "don't count," it's okay to build nothing but male-dominated games where women are rarely more than eye candy. A more inclusive approach to the definition of gaming leads to including more people.

 

[JeffMD]

Games come in many shapes and sizes. Some very simple, some complex. Look at gameboy, it's games weren't very complex either.

 

[Chocu1a]

If you play it, it is a game.

 

[Exophase]

Sure they're real games. That's just not a very meaningful categorization by itself. What's meaningful really depends on who you are and what you're interested in. If you're trying to make money off of games, for example, you're going to want to know who pays how much and in which ways. And for mobile games this is typically very very different than for other platforms like consoles or Steam.

 

[Zaap]

In the days of running Doom on a Rockbox-hacked iPod Nano... sure, that wasn't *really* playing a game. It was just a "because it's possible" sort of thing.

Any enjoyable game on a modern smartphone: of course that's a real game.

 

[VirtualLarry]

They are games, and they are not imaginary. So, yes, they are "real" games. That doesn't mean you have to enjoy them if you prefer other types of games, but they are still games.

Personally I can't stand watching bowling or golf, but they are still real games...

I remember, I used to have a bowling game on my old Samsung flip-phone. The trajectory of the bowling ball down the lane, seemed to be pre-programmed according to which pixel it was released on. So lame. But I still played it, because it was one of the best games on my phone.

 

[JeffMD]

Virtual larry, most 8 and 16 bit games do that. I had baseball for the gameboy and would always manage to hit some of the same exact trijectories.

 

[lopri]

I've always thought first-person shooters on PCs and consoles are nothing more than an elaborate whack-a-mole. ^^

 

[Red Storm]

The mobile gaming scene is infested with freemium games. I do not consider these to be "real" games, instead I see them as nothing more than poorly designed apps that desperately want your time and money. They aren't about making an actual good game. Unfortunately this seems to be the new trend that has taken over. Obviously any dev makes their game with the intention of making money, but you can tell the difference between the "real" games that have a level of polish, thought, and effort put into them compared to ones that scream cash grab.

Some examples of mobile games I consider to be real games are Bastion, Alto's Adventure, EvoCreo.

A freemium example is Star Wars Uprising. It was actually quite fun to start, but like in every other freemium game the fun disappears as soon as you hit the intentional money/grind wall that limits your ability to play. Any game that does this I don't consider a "real" game.

 

[Anubis]

All games are real games.

.

end of thread

 

[SlitheryDee]

I'm just going to copy/paste a post I wrote in a thread about how the PS4 got a price cut in japan because the Japanese are all switching over to mobile gaming. I think it sums up my feelings on the subject well enough.

I don't get how mobile gaming can replace console gaming for anyone. It's a fundamentally different experience for me. Console games offer a kind of depth and involvement that I have yet to see out of any mobile games that aren't just ports of previous console games. How can you replace something like Destiny or Mortal Kombat X or Metal Gear Solid: Phantom Pain or any number of other high quality, painstakingly crafted games with anything offered on any mobile platform?

I can see mobile gaming as something you do when you are away from your console, but it isn't something I'd ever dream of doing at home when I could be getting an entirely different level of enjoyment from my PC or console.

I've tried to find mobile gaming experience that rival my console. I really have. There's nothing there that doesn't feel kind of threadbare and well...mobile. The stories are less nuanced, the gameplay is hampered by the input method, the graphics are unpolished. It all adds up to feeling like a mere shadow of the gaming experience I really want. It isn't something I could ever accept in place of a modern console or PC.

That said, mobile games most certainly are "real" games. The bar is not very high for something to be called a game, but I don't think there are very many (if any) "gamer's games" on mobile. That is to say, someone who considers themselves a "gamer" would not do so because they played mobile games.

 

[VashHT]

Yeah I consider them real games, I also consider them terrible games. I just can't into a game where I have to either pay or wait hours to do the next thing. The most fun I've had mobile gaming has been with remakes of old RPG's and emulators. Turn based games work great for mobile since the touchscreen doesn't get in the way much. I've tried playing platformers and that's just really frustrating.

 

[Mai72]

Check out Heroes and Castles 2. That game has elements of rts, rpg, and action. The graphics are great for a mobile game and will tax older phones.