the problem with the mobile game market is that it is aggressively opposed to any kind of premium experience. Time and again, the market has proven that they are not willing to pay very much upfront for a premium gaming experience. Games that try to charge a “premium” price like $10 or $20 tend to suffer for the choice to charge that much. You’ve seen attempts to address this problem (like Apple Arcade), and they’ve seen moderate success, but it doesn’t seem to be changing the overall shape of the market. App stores are still full of free-to-play slop because that is what gets the most downloads and plays and positive reviews.
I find a big impetus to mobile games (on phones) is the interface. Touch screens absolutely SUCK for most games. Holding a rectangle is uncomfortable.
Its interesting to me that playstation isn’t new to the mobile market.
They’ve had the accessories for the psOne to add a battery and monitor, the psp, and the psvita. They are one of the companies I’d be interested in another mobile platform.
How much of it is that no one is willing to pay 20 or 30 dollars for a mobile game, and how much is it that anyone willing to pay is unable to find them, or has just given up on the segment entirely.
Of course the mobile store fronts have no incentive to increase the visibility, because a free to play game is liable to make them significantly more money in the long term due to their cut of each micro transaction.
PC game and console storefronts are full of free to play slop, but they’re not the first thing people are shown, even when they are popular. They make an active effort to highlight quality games, and thus users willing to pay for them can actually find them.
There is a lot to be said of the atrocious design of mobile application storefronts.
But, they do for mobiles, because mobile app storefronts force micro transactions to go the through them and they take a significant cut on each one. The 30% apple tax for example.
So they have a huge incentive to put F2P slop front and center which other storefronts on other devices don’t. In the context of steam, they do make money on the micro transitions of games that valve owns, but they make more money selling everyone else’s games over all, so they still have a reasons to show those.
It’s not so much saying that other storefronts are angles who love their customer, but more that their incentive structures are aligned differently.
If there were significant shake up in the mobile storefront market, or in terms of how they can make money, there might be a shift in they type of content they push.
There really aren’t that many premium experiences on mobile that are worth a damn imo. They’re usually just ports of games from other platforms that control terribly on a touch screen. For me to be willing to pay for a mobile game it has to be a good game and a good fit for the platform. Apart from Balatro not much comes to mind.
the problem with the mobile game market is that it is aggressively opposed to any kind of premium experience. Time and again, the market has proven that they are not willing to pay very much upfront for a premium gaming experience. Games that try to charge a “premium” price like $10 or $20 tend to suffer for the choice to charge that much. You’ve seen attempts to address this problem (like Apple Arcade), and they’ve seen moderate success, but it doesn’t seem to be changing the overall shape of the market. App stores are still full of free-to-play slop because that is what gets the most downloads and plays and positive reviews.
I find a big impetus to mobile games (on phones) is the interface. Touch screens absolutely SUCK for most games. Holding a rectangle is uncomfortable.
Its interesting to me that playstation isn’t new to the mobile market.
They’ve had the accessories for the psOne to add a battery and monitor, the psp, and the psvita. They are one of the companies I’d be interested in another mobile platform.
How much of it is that no one is willing to pay 20 or 30 dollars for a mobile game, and how much is it that anyone willing to pay is unable to find them, or has just given up on the segment entirely.
Of course the mobile store fronts have no incentive to increase the visibility, because a free to play game is liable to make them significantly more money in the long term due to their cut of each micro transaction.
PC game and console storefronts are full of free to play slop, but they’re not the first thing people are shown, even when they are popular. They make an active effort to highlight quality games, and thus users willing to pay for them can actually find them.
There is a lot to be said of the atrocious design of mobile application storefronts.
Steam mostly prioritizes what makes them money, and free to play games don’t on PC
But, they do for mobiles, because mobile app storefronts force micro transactions to go the through them and they take a significant cut on each one. The 30% apple tax for example.
So they have a huge incentive to put F2P slop front and center which other storefronts on other devices don’t. In the context of steam, they do make money on the micro transitions of games that valve owns, but they make more money selling everyone else’s games over all, so they still have a reasons to show those.
It’s not so much saying that other storefronts are angles who love their customer, but more that their incentive structures are aligned differently.
If there were significant shake up in the mobile storefront market, or in terms of how they can make money, there might be a shift in they type of content they push.
There really aren’t that many premium experiences on mobile that are worth a damn imo. They’re usually just ports of games from other platforms that control terribly on a touch screen. For me to be willing to pay for a mobile game it has to be a good game and a good fit for the platform. Apart from Balatro not much comes to mind.