I paid full price for it both on iOS and on Steam. I was going by what the other poster said, I don't follow the prices for games I already own. I could be totally wrong on the ability for sales to drive iOS games because the prices are already so low so the relative value of a game dropping from $5 to $3 isn't the same as what happens on the Steam store. I freely admit that. I wasn't trolling I was just surprised that it didn't blow up when it went on sale.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
How Much Money Do We Think iOS Games Actually Make?!
- Thread starter RedSwirl
- Start date
I paid full price for it both on iOS and on Steam. I was going by what the other poster said, I don't follow the prices for games I already own. I could be totally wrong on the ability for sales to drive iOS games because the prices are already so low so the relative value of a game dropping from $5 to $3 isn't the same as what happens on the Steam store. I freely admit that. I wasn't trolling I was just surprised that it didn't blow up when it went on sale.
Forsaken82
Member
I don't think the question is necessarily how well ios games do in comparison to AAA PC/Conosle titles, but rather how often they are profitable, in which case, I think mobile wins.
You can argue that games like CoD bank significantly, but for every CoD, there are at least 5 other games that bomb hard in the console/PC market. I really don't think any iphone titles "bomb hard" since their budgets are usually low enough that they don't lose a heck of a lot.
You can argue that games like CoD bank significantly, but for every CoD, there are at least 5 other games that bomb hard in the console/PC market. I really don't think any iphone titles "bomb hard" since their budgets are usually low enough that they don't lose a heck of a lot.
Actually no. Thats EXACTLY what I was looking for. Exactly. And I will hold you to that. I mean, I suppose I find it a little odd that profitability finds itself no place in your definition of healthy but thats really irrelevant. You chose a metric, a measurable and reasonable metric. Thats plenty good enough.
And this is that much better. I think we are done here. I still feel a little like you are putting up a backdoor to move the goalposts with the whole 2 mario titles thing, when we already have 2 other Mario titles planned for the system likely to drop in the next fiscal, but that last part of expecting it to slow sort of wipes that out, so Im good with it.
I never called for you to ignore it. I even myself stated that it may very well brick in ways only the virtual boy could compete with. I took objection to using the lowest common denominator to blanket and entire market/industries outlook. Its a 1:1 comparison with iOS and Android. Vitas troubles dont erase the 3DS's success. Neither does Androids troubles erase the successes of the iOS gaming mobile ecosystem.
Wiktor
Member
I get your point, but the problem is that this doesn't have anything in common with smartphones doing anything to mobile. Non-Nintendo handhelds always sold weak, so it's not like we can pin Vita low sales on smartphones.
I think it is way too early to claim anything about the traditional handheld market in relation to how well the DS did. I think that there is a very strong possibility that the 3DS sells fewer units than the DS which could end up with the market this generation being smaller than the prior generation. I think that is the most likely outcome. But, I don't think that means the traditional handheld space isn't healthy it just means that it is different. I think that the consumers that bought a DS for a game like Brain Training, Nintendogs, Tetris and those sorts of games have moved onto mobile (and really just iOS) platforms. But, I still think there are a whole lot of people who want the traditional portable gaming experience and are willing to pay for it. I think that we'll see more of the games I care about on the 3DS and Vita and fewer of the games I didn't care about from the DS and PSP released and those titles will move to iOS.
So, I think you're right that the handheld market isn't the same that Nintendo expected it to be but I think it could still be very healthy.
Interfectum
Member
You are wrong and you were trolling. Hope that helps.
D
Deleted member 53899
Unconfirmed Member
Deleting
Serious question, why are you so hostile against iOS?
Interfectum
Member
Well we have one example in this very thread. We have some guys who made S&S, had great success, have ported it to Steam, had great success again and now the sky is the limit.
There are also a thousand examples of indie devs failing on iOS to due to the fact there is literally no barrier of entry to get on the iOS store. Do you have $100 and a game you created in your spare time? If yes, put it on the AppStore and see what happens.
I'm not hostile and against iOS. Have I ever started a troll thread about anything on iOS? Do you troll around the iOS game threads? No. I don't. What I am hostile to are when threads pop up and we hear that traditional handhelds are dead, Nintendo should drop their hardware and go with iOS and all of that. I didn't go into the Republique thread and troll iOS. I said that I'd like to see it on other platforms (like Windows Phone because that's the phone I just got) but I think it's great that someone is trying to create a great experience the ground up for mobile platforms.
I really like the traditional handheld gaming experience. I absolutely loved the DS and the games that released on it. I don't want that experience to go away and I don't think the games that I personally really enjoy would be as good on an iOS device. I think that traditional interface is vital to the experience and I don't want to lose it. So, when there is a thread and we get some of the usual suspects coming in and downplaying traditional portable games or outright trolling, then I come in as one of the usual "skeptical of iOS suspects. I get a little tired of people who get so excited to start a new thread quoting some know nothing analyst saying that Nintendo needs to drop traditional handhelds and games to jump to iOS.
Theres a lot of hostility on both sides here. Plenty of this to go around.
Most indie developers aren't quitting their day jobs to release iOS games. They do it more as a hobby and something that they enjoy doing. I'm sure they would all love to have enough success so they could quit their day jobs and make games for a living.
So analysts are suggesting:
- Nintendo makes games on iOS, sells them for cheap
- People runs and buys Nintendo games on their iPhone iPad and iPod, loses interest in 3DS/Wii
- Nintendo's games on their own hardware starts selling less and less because customers can get games on iOS cheaper
- Nintendo hardware sells less, this 3rd party stops making games on Nintendo hardware, which leads to loss in 3rd party royalty for Nintendo
- Nintendo hardware becomes inviable business for them. Nintendo goes 3rd party!
Makes a lot of business sense to me.
Nintendo should just troll anaylsts by making a full blown Mario game on iOS and start selling it for $29.99 and see it flop.
- Nintendo makes games on iOS, sells them for cheap
- People runs and buys Nintendo games on their iPhone iPad and iPod, loses interest in 3DS/Wii
- Nintendo's games on their own hardware starts selling less and less because customers can get games on iOS cheaper
- Nintendo hardware sells less, this 3rd party stops making games on Nintendo hardware, which leads to loss in 3rd party royalty for Nintendo
- Nintendo hardware becomes inviable business for them. Nintendo goes 3rd party!
Makes a lot of business sense to me.
Nintendo should just troll anaylsts by making a full blown Mario game on iOS and start selling it for $29.99 and see it flop.
tinfoilhatman
all of my posts are my avatar
People are insecure, hostility against any type of gaming platform or product is insanely childish and immature.
The 3DS is losing money, and missing forecasted sales even though it got a massive price cut. It is a success in a single, smallish market. The Vita has been a complete global failure thus far. The DS is dead.
I don't think the dedicated gaming handheld market is healthy, and I don't see any reason to think the future of that market is terribly rosy. Do you think the dedicated handheld gaming market's total sales and/or profit over the next five years will be larger than the last five years?
Version 3.0
Member
Sounds like you're ready to be an analyst, or write for Reuters.
...of course, data has been provided, just not by your side of the argument. It just wasn't "useful" - according to you.
My first job in the banking industry as a precious metals analyst. Did I know anything about precious metals to get the job? No. Do I know a lot about precious metals now? No. I know a lot about some of the firms in that space but I do not fundamentally understand that business. The problem with analyst and people putting a lot of faith in what they say is that these financial types often have never created anything or had to sell anything and without having that understand we have to be skeptical of what they say
Alexios
Cores, shaders and BIOS oh my!
DS, really? The platform they just replaced is dead? Omg!
Don't forget, the GBA, GBC, GB, Game Gear, Wonder Swan, Neo Geo Pocket and NGP Color are also dead, handhelds am doomed.
Handheld market has always been primarily Nintendo dominated. That they're the only ones afloat atm is hardly a surprise.
I like how you ignore big reasons for their first losses too (exchange rates, failing home business due to transitionary periods, and so on), or that the missed expectations were among the highest ever for this post launch period.
tinfoilhatman
all of my posts are my avatar
I think the realistic people are talking about putting VERY old versions of popular IP's on iOS , like Mario 1,2,3 and so on.
Some indies are making money.
The traditional bigs seem to be making money off cashgrab ports, with some dedicated games like Mass Effect, Dead Space, Mirror's Edge.
Chair and Epic are basically making exclusives for Apple in return for free marketing.
Gameloft, Zynga, PikPok, Halfbrick, Chillingo, Backflip, etc. seem to be making a lot of money churning out multiple games per year.
The traditional bigs seem to be making money off cashgrab ports, with some dedicated games like Mass Effect, Dead Space, Mirror's Edge.
Chair and Epic are basically making exclusives for Apple in return for free marketing.
Gameloft, Zynga, PikPok, Halfbrick, Chillingo, Backflip, etc. seem to be making a lot of money churning out multiple games per year.
I've always believed that it would do no damage at all to Nintendos hardware sales if they released some of their classic games to iOS. Like anything made at least 10 years ago and older. I'd love to play some classic Super Mario Bros. on my phone or iPad.
No reason to not have those legacy games on several mobile platforms. Nobody is buying your new hardware to play those 10+ year old games anyway. Its a huge opportunity lost and the only logical reason is because of pride.
No reason to not have those legacy games on several mobile platforms. Nobody is buying your new hardware to play those 10+ year old games anyway. Its a huge opportunity lost and the only logical reason is because of pride.
Do you think that this sole metric is the end all be all of healthy? If it doesn't equal the previous gen in the next 5 versus the last five, but there is plenty of profits made regardless of not topping the industries previous highs, does that mean that the market as a whole is a failure and isnt healthy?
Is the only way to be healthy to obliterate or equal the best the industry has ever seen? And if not, where exactly is the bar for healthy? If they begin to meet both their estimates, and make profit simultaneously, does that mean that its healthy? By all means if you want to go on the record here, please do. Draw us that line.
But, people buying the new hardware are buying those old games. Would you really want to play Mario Brothers 3 on a system without buttons? The digital buttons are so bad that I wouldn't want to play even old games without having physical buttons.
Pureauthor
Member
Hint. Google '25th Anniversary Mario' in GIS and see what that gets you.
Pokemon would be fine without physical buttons.
And people are still buying MvC2 and Max Payne in droves, and they are even more reliant on buttons than Nintendo games.
Forsaken82
Member
War in the North would be a game I consider bombed hard.
And yeah if you are losing money, no matter what, your project bombed, but if you only spent £2000 dollars its hard to believe that only making a 50% return on that would cripple you. (unless £1000 is a lot of money and I just don't know EU funds
) I guess my main point is that a AAA Console/PC developer is going to put everything they have behind their game (more often than not), do you think the majority of iOS developers pour everything into their projects? For example, the iOS team at NRS was pretty light when compared to the MK team. Lockdown could have sold next to nothing, and im pretty sure NRS would still be around despite it (as it is, it turned a heavy profit), but if MK9 sold next to nothing, than there would have been a problem.
I guess you can look at it the same way if its a developer like Zynga who's first and only focus is Mobile development, but i really think in the long run, most iOS projects don't break the bank. A single failure is less of an issue given the budgets in most cases. in my opinion atleast.
This isnt a valid argument. Some people would like to play those games with onscreen touch buttons no matter how you feel about it. Not trying to pile on you here, but your personal feelings and preferences dont extend across everyone else. Nintendo has reasons for not putting any of their titles on mobiles, but the lack of people willing to use touch screen controls, no matter how inferior they may be, is not one of those reasons.
tinfoilhatman
all of my posts are my avatar
Doesn't' Healthy=Profitable?
That's the one. Doesn't really matter what architecture the kernel is running on, as I'm talking about the userspace, which should be pretty portable.
I don't see how it's crazy. It's actually something they are considering (and probably working on behind closed doors). I'm not the only one who thinks it would make sense and could probably work if they get it right. They could theoretically base it on 3DS, which would mean they'd have a pretty damn strong software lineup right out of the gate. You really think a smartphone that plays all DS, DSi, 3DS, DSiWare, VC and eShop games wouldn't sell?
Pleaseeeeeeeeee don't go to the buttons argument.
And they are never going to do that. To put their IPs on another platform holder's system is to set a precedent that they are willing to do that; it weakens the very tangible connection between those IPs and Nintendo's hardware. They will never separate their IPs from their systems. If you want to play Nintendo games, you have to buy their stuff. Period.
Thats what Im looking to find out from him. He started to insinuate that, but later in his post swapped to this gen versus last gen. Im looking to get a definitive line drawn from him on what exactly he means by healthy.
I would consider healthy profitable, but half a page up, Smoky instead defined it by not profitability, but instead merely meeting quarterly forecasted expectations. Just saying "healthy" clearly seems to cover a wide range of ideas. Why not clear it up
Pureauthor
Member
Why, in Nintendo's studied history, makes you think they have the knowhow to make a smartphone that wouldn't be pants-crappingly awful?
Did I say everyone agrees with me? I asked him, would you want to, then I said I wouldn't want to. I'm not willing to sacrifice control to have it on a platform.
So you are suggesting they just close shop on Virtual Console. The thing is we don't have figures on VC. For all we know it could be making quite a bit of money for Nintendo. And they don't have to give 30% to Apple.
Why is that argument any less valid than the "I don't want to carry an extra device" argument? It all comes down to personal tastes. Some people don't want to haul an extra device with them and others like buttons. None are more valid than the other.
Eh, I guess it depends on your definition on indie devs and your definition of most.There are probably thousand of hobbyists out there releasing tiny games just for fun, but anyone hoping to make a somewhat substantial game and have a chance to make money other than through a freak lottery effect is most likely working fulltime on it and often in a team, and a lot of those games are bombing hard.
Nintendo isn't going to make a smartphone. Jesus, people. The appeal of the firm's hardware is its games. That doesn't change whether the thing is a phone or a handheld/console. Given their lack of experience with phones, there's no reason to venture into that space given the core appeal of their products.
Thats what Im looking to find out from him. He started to insinuate that, but later in his post swapped to this gen versus last gen. Im looking to get a definitive line drawn from him on what exactly he means by healthy.
I would consider healthy profitable, but half a page up, Smoky instead defined it by not profitability, but instead merely meeting quarterly forecasted expectations. Just saying "healthy" clearly seems to cover a wide range of ideas. Why not clear it up
I still can't decide. On reflection, manufacturers could set their expectations really low and then it would be 'healthy', even if it wasn't healthy. Same thing with profitability. If you make an average of £20k a year for 19 years and then in year 20 you make £1, are you healthy? You're certainly 'profitable', but could you call year 20 'healthy'?
I'm sticking with 'If they are happy, I'm happy' for now, but it's certainly not an infallible metric.
(Apologies for not replying to your prior post, I've been busy at work)
The problem with that logic is that the Super Mario All-Stars release on Wii did *ridiculously* well at a high price. Would they make more on iOS than doing that? What sort of an effect would a later iOS release of that ROM dump have on purchasers of a similar future ROM dump?
Those are all questions Nintendo would have to deal with before making a decision - in part because it's very hard to re-cork the bottle; once people have it in their head that waiting will save them money, how do you convince people not to wait?
I'm not ignoring shit. I'm saying the market isn't healthy. I didn't realize I was expected to make excuses for Nintendo when I say that.
Yes, in general, I think shrinking markets are unhealthy. I think you'll find this view is not especially controversial.
Dear God. Remind me to never, ever hire you for anything.
tinfoilhatman
all of my posts are my avatar
Joke post?
Because they have about 25 years of experience in developing highly successful mobile "smart" (= programmable) devices?
Pureauthor
Member
I'm postulating that the handheld market will shrink this generation. It's justa hypothetical, though. Last gen was fantastic for Nintendo, in all phases.
Alexios
Cores, shaders and BIOS oh my!
Oh, you're one of those.
So if Sony or MS were losing money overall, but their gaming divisions alone were profitable, it wouldn't matter, we would say the gaming market is unealthy, because who cares if there are other reasons for the losses, all that maters is they're there.
Unless you have the numbers indicating exactly what part of the losses is the "unhealthy dedicated gaming handheld market"'s fault, I'm sorry but I don't agree with that way of thinking, considering all the different fields Nintendo is in.
Because from where I'm standing a big part of it is that they sit on big piles of cash that lose a ton of value with every exchange rate flunctuation, and if the reports didn't have to convert everything to yen the picture would look quite different.
But I guess asking for real information instead of sensational bullshit is just making excuses, so I'm sorry about that, nevermind.
Troll post?