Liking mindless phone games better than actual video games?

Page 1 of 1 [ 12 posts ] 

KikiKitty678
Pileated woodpecker
Pileated woodpecker

User avatar

Joined: 10 Apr 2019
Age: 22
Posts: 195
Location: United States

12 Apr 2019, 8:13 am

I don’t really like actual video games, but I love Tetris, Angry Birds, etc. I’m not much of a gamer, but I love phone games.

I don’t have time for actual video games. Spending five hours in front of an Xbox is something you don’t have time for when you’re busy with hard classes, and even if I did have time school sucks all the energy out of me. Video games are too much thinking lol!

However, phone games are my version of gaming. They’re so relaxing.



Enigmatic_Oddity
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Nov 2005
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,550

12 Apr 2019, 3:38 pm

Tetris is hardly a mindless phone game. What kind of plebeian would play Tetris on a phone anyway?



Last edited by Enigmatic_Oddity on 12 Apr 2019, 5:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Misery
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Aug 2011
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,217

12 Apr 2019, 4:54 pm

Enigmatic_Oddity wrote:
Tetris is hardly a mindless phone game. What kind of pleibian would play Tetris on a phone anyway?


Right now there arent that many options for recent versions of Tetris.

There's the one on PS4, but it's a VR-oriented game, and obviously many cant afford that (really wish they'd bring it to PC). It's also one of those games that's more focused on the "experience" rather than the gameplay. Which sounds odd when you link the idea to Tetris, but that's still what they did with it.

There's the one on the Switch, but you have to have a Switch, and it's an online-only competitive game.

Er.... that's about it.


As far as I'm concerned though, all of the really good versions of Tetris require emulators of various sorts, unless you're willing to go to some trouble to track down copies of them. Or buy an entire arcade cabinet in one notable case.


That being said, mobile versions of games like that CAN be good if the devs get the controls right. Though it REALLY helps to play on a tablet instead of a phone. Massive difference there. When done properly though, you can have extremely accurate controls. The problem of course is that alot of developers DONT do it well.

And there's the problem of the mobile platform itself, and what the Big Guys have done to it. I've had an iPad for a long time, and it quickly replaced my DS / 3DS as my main portable gaming device. LOTS of great stuff on it, mostly from indie developers, including boatloads of bullet-hell games and roguelikes. But ever since The Greed kicked in, it's nigh-impossible to find good stuff anymore... they've been crowded out of the stores. My iPad has since been demoted from "portable thing I always use" to "glorified noise machine". And my phone is just a flashlight and a magical talking map.

Doesnt help that the bloody things are built to fail, but that's a whole other angry rant.



Enigmatic_Oddity
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Nov 2005
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,550

12 Apr 2019, 5:09 pm

I don't even like using my $200 Xbox One Elite controller customisable DPad for Tetris, I'd rather use my mechanical keyboard. The idea of using a touchscreen for Tetris is about as palatable an idea as using an analog stick for a fighting game.

As for mobile games, they've mostly all terrible and I don't even try to find anything decent among them anymore. The market for games on phones is toxic to any sort of good game design, with everything having to be free with microtransactions to have a chance for success unless it already found success on another platform. The only gaming I do on my phone is via emulators like Drastic for games that use the touchscreen, or the occasional visual novel port. And without physical controls there's no compelling reason to play anything more complex.

It's funny you mention Angry Birds specifically, because it's a game that if released today would never have seen the success it has. If it released nowadays it'd be free to play with an unfair difficulty in later levels, with the option of paying for extra attempts at a level and some sort of stamina and gambling system.

I wouldn't be quick to blame 'big business' either for adopting this style of monetisation either. They're just doing what's now established to be profitable. The race to the bottom is something perpetuated by consumers who turned up their nose at anything that cost more than a dollar and eventually we got to where we are now.



Misery
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Aug 2011
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,217

12 Apr 2019, 9:07 pm

Enigmatic_Oddity wrote:
I don't even like using my $200 Xbox One Elite controller customisable DPad for Tetris, I'd rather use my mechanical keyboard. The idea of using a touchscreen for Tetris is about as palatable an idea as using an analog stick for a fighting game.

As for mobile games, they've mostly all terrible and I don't even try to find anything decent among them anymore. The market for games on phones is toxic to any sort of good game design, with everything having to be free with microtransactions to have a chance for success unless it already found success on another platform. The only gaming I do on my phone is via emulators like Drastic for games that use the touchscreen, or the occasional visual novel port. And without physical controls there's no compelling reason to play anything more complex.

It's funny you mention Angry Birds specifically, because it's a game that if released today would never have seen the success it has. If it released nowadays it'd be free to play with an unfair difficulty in later levels, with the option of paying for extra attempts at a level and some sort of stamina and gambling system.

I wouldn't be quick to blame 'big business' either for adopting this style of monetisation either. They're just doing what's now established to be profitable. The race to the bottom is something perpetuated by consumers who turned up their nose at anything that cost more than a dollar and eventually we got to where we are now.



The problem with some of that is that it's *very* subjective in alot of cases.

The controls, for instance. I tended to mostly play bullet-hell games on my tablet. And there is nothing more difficult, or demanding, in the entire realm of gaming, than some of those. These werent watered down, easier versions of bullet hell games... these were the full, nigh-impossible things. Games so hard that *most*, not some, but MOST players will never clear the very first level, even after boatloads of practice. Even moreso than fighting games, bullet-hell shmups DEMAND utter perfection in terms of control execution. Note that I say this as someone who plays both genres.

And while it may sound odd to you, I'll say this with great confidence: I've never once seen a more accurate control method for this genre than my tablet's touchscreen. This is after THOUSANDS of hours in that genre (and in one notable case, at least 1200 hours in ONE game, because it demanded that much in order to stand a ghost of a chance at it). I've used dpads, I've used analog (bleh) and I've used arcade sticks. Various brands on various consoles. You name it, I've used it. And I tell you this: None of those could compare to the sheer ridiculous accuracy with which I could control my ship/whatever on that tablet. Again, might sound absurd to you, but it remains the truth nonetheless. The technology in those screens is bloody incredible, in terms of how sensitive it is.

HOWEVER, I also have seriously abnormal levels of coordination. So that factors in, and is part of why it's so subjective. All the accuracy and high tech in the world, from the device's standpoint, doesnt matter worth a fart if the user just cant work it to it's full potential. And most people simply cant, even on the large screen of a tablet.

There's also the idea of what the player is used to. Take fighting games for instance. Most of the FGC will swear by arcade sticks. They'll say they are the ONLY way to play. I, however, will stomp the crap out of most of them with a PS4 controller. I grew up with dpads, and arcade sticks make my arms hurt. So dpad use is my thing. Frankly, I could do better in a fighting game on a bloody keyboard than I would on an arcade stick. Which sounds REALLY ridiculous, but it's true. I just dont use sticks. Unless I'm like, at a retro arcade or something, that's the big exception. I mean, that's part of the experience. But for fighting games, and even shmups.... no. Dpad, always, for me.

And then there's genre skill. Like, FPS games. It doesnt matter what control method I use. I'm going to find it frustrating and I'm much more likely to explode myself rather than hit an opponent with anything. I'm just bad at them, always have been. Analog stick, mouse, it really doesnt matter.



Now as for mobile game quality, there's one big problem with that: Finding them. If you just browse the store? You will never find the good stuff. You just wont. That's what I mean by "the big guys crowded it out". The good games are in there, but, well... think of Steam, right? Steam is now infamous for being flooded with cheap cashgrabs. The storefront has gotten so bad that many players outright stopped using it to find games, because they COULDNT find games that way. Damn near all indie games, even incredible ones, never reach the storefront pages. They are, effectively, invisible. You must know IN ADVANCE where and how to look in order to find them. It's a sad fact, and one that's causing many indies to have to close their doors, but it's just how Steam is right now.

Now, take that idea, and ratchet it up to 11, because Steam's problem with that doesnt even come close to comparing to how bad it is on something like the App Store. It's SO bad that it's a wonder any devs even TRY. I've found boatloads of amazing things on iOS... but then, I know exactly how to go about finding them (and it's an annoyingly complicated process that I frankly hate doing). Cant use the store itself for that. That's a futile waste of time. I have to use other methods. Only then can I find the good stuff. And note, by "good stuff" I mean games that are exactly the same sorts of things I play on PC. I dont really do the dumbed down stuff like Clash of Whatever. I need depth and challenge for a game to even hold my attention.

At the same time though, I understand why people like the more "mindless" games sometimes. Nothing wrong with that, I suppose... sort of...



Enigmatic_Oddity
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Nov 2005
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,550

12 Apr 2019, 9:34 pm

It's comparing apples to oranges. Tetris and fighting games use digital inputs. Bullet hell games benefit from analog input. There's nothing absurd about using a touchscreen for a bullet hell game, when the best method on PC has typically been to use a mouse. It's such an old fashioned genre though, and one typically made by extremely old fashioned Japanese developers, so usually they're made for keyboards or gamepads even though they're probably the worst possible input devices for them.



Misery
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Aug 2011
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,217

13 Apr 2019, 3:13 pm

Actually, bullet-hell games dont use analog... unless the player is feeling suicidal. Same with a mouse: If you want to REALLY get far in one of them (or in many cases, to get anywhere whatsoever), a mouse will only get you killed. The accuracy isnt quite there due to the device's physical design (it's hard to be THAT accurate with something as large as a mouse is, requiring movement from your entire hand/wrist to use, via an object that is not locked into position but physically slides around), as the truly hard games (well, most of them really) require way more pixel-perfect precision than most mouse-based games, including FPS games (which dont even come close to needing that level of precision). Again, speaking from some utterly absurd number of hours spent in the genre. You wouldnt catch me ever using a mouse for one of those. No. Anyone really into shmups would tell you that one. There's a number of reasons for this, but the biggest one is the transition between macro & micro movements... that's where a mouse kills you a million times over in this genre (and isnt really applicable to other genres, even FPS games). Unless of course it's a rather easy shmup with loads of room for error... in THAT case, you could use a bloody dance pad. But most of the time... no.

Most shmup players will swear by arcade sticks. While those require hand/wrist movement, the locked-down and purely digital nature of them actually removes the accuracy penalty caused by that concept (I'm not going to go into the explanation of how/why that works, it's quite long). As a rule, bullet hell games (even those on PC) are designed with arcade sticks in mind, and dpads as a 2nd possible choice (since, from a purely technical internal standpoint, they're exactly the same thing). Keyboards are always a possibility (zero internal difference) but as that requires multiple seperate finger inputs, very few like using them in any serious fashion.


Note also that when I'm talking about the bullet hell games, I'm *not* talking about older games only. I mean recent stuff. The shmup genre isnt dead... these games are common and frequent releases. Like with roguelikes, indie devs picked up this genre and have been running with it for quite awhile. There's no shortage of these bullet hell games coming out even now from these indie devs, but it's almost PURELY indies. Actually, MOST (all?) of the older Japanese devs are out of the picture. Companies like Cave or Compile have either collapsed or transformed, and are no longer applicable to this genre (Cave for instance doesnt even touch it anymore, which is sad). So currently, it's just indie devs making this genre, same as with roguelikes/lites/whatever. This would also explain why "roguelike + shmup" is such a common genre combination now.



Enigmatic_Oddity
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Nov 2005
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,550

14 Apr 2019, 12:44 am

I don't see the difference between using a touchscreen and a mouse to move a cursor around on a display. It's just a difference of dpi and sensitivity. I never said that the genre uses analog controls either, but that they should. That you think touchscreen controls are superior would indicate your agreement.

That said, there's definitely a difference between sticks and keyboard controls. You can't simultaneously or queue up inputs with a stick. If you are aiming left and suddenly want to go right, it's impossible to do that with a stick instantaneously, whereas with a keyboard you typically would input right, and the change would be reflected upon releasing the left key.



Misery
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Aug 2011
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,217

14 Apr 2019, 2:45 pm

Enigmatic_Oddity wrote:
I don't see the difference between using a touchscreen and a mouse to move a cursor around on a display. It's just a difference of dpi and sensitivity. I never said that the genre uses analog controls either, but that they should. That you think touchscreen controls are superior would indicate your agreement.

That said, there's definitely a difference between sticks and keyboard controls. You can't simultaneously or queue up inputs with a stick. If you are aiming left and suddenly want to go right, it's impossible to do that with a stick instantaneously, whereas with a keyboard you typically would input right, and the change would be reflected upon releasing the left key.



There's more to it than that. Let's go into the specifics of each one:

Difference between mouse and touchscreen: With a mouse, you're holding a physical object with size and mass, and must move the entire thing in order to produce movement on the screen. Even if you want to make incredibly tiny movements. Macro movement, to produce micro movement. You're using your entire hand/wrist to move the mouse at all times.

On a touchscreen, you need only move the tip of your finger, because that's all the screen cares about. In fact, it's SO accurate that you can produce movement by merely "rolling" your fingertip slightly. This produces very small movements. Micro movement, to produce micro movements. Specifically, while making movements that are more natural to you... you're not manipulating some object that you're holding. You're simply moving your finger or hand.

With mouse use in a bullet hell game, you CAN produce ultra-small movement, but it's harder to do, easier to screw it up, and, well.... frequently in a bullet-hell game you must make a transition from "macro" to "micro". You'll have to move a large distance very quickly (and accurately) and then move an incredibly small distance quickly (and accurately). The mass/weight/size of a mouse, and the fact that you're trying to do micro movements with that entire object and your entire hand slows down the transition between the two, and it becomes a rough jolt instead of a smooth movement, increasing the chance of you getting hit. And even once you're in "micro mode" your movements and reactions will be slower. You can actually watch people doing this if you're observant enough, when someone is using a mouse for anything that requires real precision. They'll have to drastically slow down whatever they're doing to do something that accurate.

In addition, the mass/size/weight/whatever of the mouse impedes with OVERALL movement. You just cant be THAT accurate with a mouse. Ever notice how nobody really uses a mouse to create art on a computer? Everyone uses a touchpad & pen for it. It's much easier to get straight lines out of it (as mice arent even good at that) AND, again, it makes the micro movements possible, when a mouse would have incredible trouble pulling it off.


Dont get me wrong: The mouse is an amazing invention. But it has alot more limitations than people think it does.


Now, as for digital VS analog, you mistake my meaning there.

The superiority of dpad VS analog stick isnt because of "digital VS analog" internals... I simply use those two words for convenience. Obviously, from a design and programming standpoint, analog is always superior. But that's not what I meant. It's actually the physical nature of the device itself.

Both analog sticks and d-pads are very small, and in a way, a little awkward. You're manipulating this blob of plastic/whatever with the pad of your thumb. It WORKS, but it's not a hugely natural movement, and things like material resistance get in the way, and stuff like that. There is an inherant inaccuracy in these control methods.

BUT. Dpads get around this by having only 8 possible directions due to their digital nature. If you want to move directly up, you hit up on the dpad. And BECAUSE it's digital, you have more room for error. If your thumb is slightly off (as it almost always will be) you will still get a direct UP movement (as in, STRAIGHT up, not even the slighest deviation) because of the very large deadzone around that direction. There is a significant distance between what registers as UP, and what registers as DIAGONAL UP.

On an analog stick, there is zero distance. If you want to move UP, as in, straight up with no deviation.... yeah, good luck with that, because it isnt happening. Not only is there zero distance between different applicable directions (what with it working in full 360) but you ALSO have the different shape of the thing. A dpad is flat: Your thumb is much closer to the bit that ACTUALLY creates the input signal. An analog stick is NOT flat. You've got this thing sticking out, meaning that you have to do movements that are a bit larger than you otherwise should have to.

On top of all of that, your movements with analog are actually slower than on a dpad. Again, more size, and your thumb must move more of a distance to produce the exact same input strings. This is why fighting games are nigh-unplayable on an analog stick. It can be very hard to personally spot such a tiny difference in the amount of time something takes.... but you better believe the MACHINE spots it. Fighting games dont like it when you execute commands that slowly. Add that to the inherant inaccuracy, and you have a control method that's nearly unusable.


In a shmup, it works in a very similar way. That "slowness" makes it harder/slower to change direction, which will get you killed. The inherant inaccuracy of a stick means that you cannot pull off the incredibly specific micro moves necessary to not explode. Put those two together.... and you have the reason why nobody uses analog. Analog STICKS, that is. As already explained, a touchscreen is capable of very easy/smooth and uninhibited analog input, bound only by *your* own coordination and physical ability. But analog STICKS are all disadvantages.

Of course, analog sticks arent designed for shmups and fighting games. Obviously.

But anyway, that's some of the differences.



I've been into shmups and fighting games for a long time. Like, *really* into them. Moreso than even most fans of either genre could say. And with literally nothing but free time, all the time, I've taken some major time to analyze all this crap... aint like I have much else to do. So that's where all this is coming from.

But it's not JUST that. I went through a period of about 2 years where my right arm was all screwed up... nerve/tendon issues, which I'm prone to, had appeared for the first time. For that period of time, I couldnt do certain things... and that includes fully using a mouse. This kind of FORCED me to learn even more detail about this stuff in an overall sense, because if I wanted to play mouse-based games, I had to jury-rig some other solution into being, and that took some research to do. Ended up doing exactly that, but it wasnt easy. This was right about when Minecraft had first appeared, which was the main one I wanted to play. I had like, one week with it and then my arm flared up the first time. It was bad. Took me a good month or so to put together a new method of control, but I did eventually do it.


As such, I could actually go into quite more detail than this, but frankly I'd rather not. It starts to get annoying instead of interesting past a certain point. Well, probably annoying already.

I mean I tend to think stuff like this is interesting, but rarely does anyone agree with that. So that's enough out of me for now. I ramble on enough on this bloody forum as it is, dont I. Feh.



mr_bigmouth_502
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Dec 2013
Age: 25
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,940
Location: Alberta, Canada

14 Apr 2019, 10:02 pm

For a while, Tetris was literally one of the only games I'd play. Everything else on mobile either controls awkwardly or has stupid microtransactions.


_________________
Every day is exactly the same...


Egautistic
Tufted Titmouse
Tufted Titmouse

Joined: 18 Apr 2019
Age: 18
Posts: 29

18 Apr 2019, 1:23 pm

I will not be a snob about this, I used to play a lot of phone games too.... but my favorite were the simple online PC flash games like on Newgrounds



JonWood007
Tufted Titmouse
Tufted Titmouse

Joined: 25 Apr 2019
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 40

26 Apr 2019, 1:25 am

Phone games are designed to be addictive and require minimal interaction and investment. This makes them attractive to some. Actual video games often have much higher skill curves, and significant investment to get into. Sometimes people just want something basic to help them chill and relax. They don't wanna play some complex game that requires hours to learn how to play and hone skill to play properly.


_________________
AQ: 35
RAADS-R: 155
EQ: 20
RDOS: NT- 93, ND- 119