MOBILE FEATURE
The Wright Stuff: Sh.t games on sh.t devices
The mobile games veteran tells it how he s... .t |
This time, let's start the column with some audience participation...
[Holds up 'Clap wildly' board]
The first question is, What's the worst mobile game you've played (and please supply the device you played it on)?
[All answers - please just add to Join the discussion section below]
You see I have a theory; within the list of atrocious mobile games you've played, I'm willing to bet there are some good games that were just bad because you were playing them on low end devices.
The problem is network operators are forcing publishers to support a device list (it's officially known as the 'drop list') that exceeds 700 different phones. The equivalent situation would see GTA IV being released on PlayStation 2, PSone, Mega Drive, SNES, NES and even the Spectrum and the C64, purely because 'there are millions of them out there'.
This means mobile game publishers end up spending more time/money on porting their games than on the actual game development itself. The sad thing is publishers will only make money on 20 per cent of those 700 devices. The sales on the remaining 560-odd devices won't even cover the cost of porting and hence represent a huge lost for publishers.
Of course, forcing publishers to support these handsets means we end up with games that are of such poor quality they'd be lucky to get a 1 out of 10 in a Pocket Gamer review. For example, take a look at any Nokia 7210 version of a currently released game to see how unplayable it is. Anyone who buys that version of a current mobile game will almost certainly never buy another mobile game.
In this way, the drop list negatively affects the public's overall view of mobile games, as well as some of the better games out there.
Game publishers have realised such behaviour is a false economy. The simple solution would be to cut the drop list by 75 percent, allowing developers to double their development budgets and massively increasing the overall quality of mobile games.
Operators, on the other hand, don't appear to understand this extremely simple concept. They need to stop forcing ridiculous lists on publishers, making them spend a huge amount of money by porting games onto devices that can't support the game and don't sell anyhow. That way publishers can spend their money making good games and increasing the overall market.
So why are they doing this? To be honest, I have no idea but I do know network operators read Pocket Gamer, so here's a second opportunity for some audience participation. Please, can someone tell us why?
[Cue massive applause. Exit stage left]
After 12 years in the games industry, the last eight as head of production at I-play, Chris Wright finally has escaped. He now runs his own consultancy focusing on casual games.
He thinks his greatest achievement is having worked on the mobile version of Space Invaders, while his greatest regret is not having invented Space Invaders. He can be contacted at chris[at] gamesconsultancy.com
All opinions expressed are the author's own.
Joined:
Oct 2007
Post count:
100
From personal experience I developed a game which contained over 20 minigames for the top end handsets and when we got down to the worst of the phones we had to reduce the number of games to 4 or 5 just to squeeze the game into 128K.
My problem with this sort of practise is not the scope of the handset range (as an employee I get paid whether I'm porting or developing) but that someone who has a N95 gets about 500% more of a game than someone who has a 3220 but they end up paying the same price.
I'm sure there would be a outcry if GTA4 was ported back to the PS2 and was touted as being the same game and cost the same but only contained 1/5 of the content.
Somehow it's ok for the mobile industry to do this?
Joined:
Mar 2007
Post count:
6
My worse game ever played would be Elder Scrolls Oblivion on a Virgin Mobile Switchback. Literally five, ten second levels all the same. I have a Verizon enV now and here the game is great on that handset though.
Joined:
May 2008
Post count:
5
Hellelujah! Finally someone has written an article saying exactly what I have been saying to the carriers here in Australia for years. This handset-support list paradigm (oh god, i used the word 'paradigm') from the carriers is utterly ridiculous.
For any carrier reps reading this - please imagine this scenario as a parable: Console Games Publisher creates a great new game for PS3 / XBOX 360. However when they try to distribute it through retail stores such as EBGames, the stores tell them that first they must make an edition for NES, SNES and Sega Master System. Only then will the game get sold in the stores. So Publisher spends a huge budget to do so and finally the game gets into the stores and the sales on the NES, SNES and Sega end up being 4% of total sales. End result --> 4% greater sales but 40% greater development cost.
Carriers, you need to start treating mobile games like the console games industry. When a console becomes obsolete the publishers simply stop making new titles for it. If the consumers want the latest games then they must upgrade their console. So it should be for mobile!
Add to del.icio.us
Digg this 
Post to Furl
Add to reddit
Add to myYahoo!
Add to GameGrep
