¡Prepárate a morir!
- May 8, 2015
- Reaction score
First off, I am going to say that making a game easier is a way to kill the time spent for many people. Next, they don't care whether you keep playing it. All they care is that you buy their game. Considering the massive sales of the series even after smartphones came into play, so there's no real need to compete with them. No other franchise, Nintendo or otherwise, is doing that as far as I'm aware. Third, as I said before, forty bucks is a lot of money for a mobile game (or a game intended to be used as one). If you're going to spend forty bucks on a game, then you want it to be a game with actual depth. If you try to sell a mobile-esque game for forty bucks, few will be willing to buy it. And considering console gamers and mobile gamers are far different crowds (sure, many console gamers have smartphones, but that doesn't mean that they use it to play games). Many console gamers don't want games that are needlessly easy and nothing but positive feedback. They want games with depth and difficulty to justify a purchase of a 200-500 dollar console and 40-60 dollar games. Try to make console games reminiscent of console games, you lose that crowd, which is the majority of the consumers. GAMEFREAK/Nintendo/whoever is making some idiotic business decisions that could lead to the Pokémon series either being killed or moving to smartphones, neither possibility of which excites me.There is no "we" and "they". It's not a case of people who own a smartphone vs. people who own a portable gaming device; almost all people who own a gaming device, handheld or otherwise, also own a smartphone with a couple of games on it. (I know most "hardcore" gamers like to think in an "us and them" mentality, but bare with me for a sec)Why the hell do they want to cater to the mobile crowd anyway? The mobile crowd does not want to pay 40 bucks for a game, they will spend 5 bucks on the game at most (not counting the "freemium" bullshit). The guys like me who buy a console like a 3DS want to play games with lots of depth and aren't scams (like Candy Crush) nor the same thing over and over again (like Flappy Bird). And we don't want a ridiculously easy game, either. When we spend forty bucks on a game, we want it to have challenge so we get time out of the game. Easy games feel like a waste. If they continue on this path, they will end up losing their current audience while failing to gain a new one.
I'd hazard a guess that most people over 14 on this forum also have a smartphone.
Once you have actually sold somebody the game or console, the challenge then is to make sure that they are actually seen playing it. A huge part of electronics marketing is actually having your product be visible by people, ideally on an almost daily basis. I'll admit that this kind of "social" marketing is what convinced me to buy an iPhone; so many people seemed to have phones that could do more than my small flip phone. I was constantly being exposed to the product(s) wherever I went.
The same problem applies to portable gaming devices; they have to "compete" with phones, not necessarily for market share (they are not marketing like "Buy our product instead of a phone!"), but rather for your time and attention (as in, "Pass your time with me instead of with your smartphone!"). The time you spend on a device also helps justify new purchases for it.
The 10-tag-limit for StreetPass isn't actually because of any software or memory limit, I would assume. It's an arbitrary limit that ensures you have to check your 3DS every so often lest you miss out on one of those sweet sweet puzzle pieces.
So now if you're out and about, they need to motivate you to get your 3DS out and be seen with it. Say you're waiting for a friend outside of a store or missed your bus and need to fill in 20 minutes; do you check Twitter and play a few rounds of Peggle on your phone? Or do you check your StreetPass tags and get a few Pokémon battles in?
The more "grind-y" a game feels, the less likely you are to pick it over a game or app that can give you positive feedback, flashing graphics, and power-ups near constantly. In comparison to Candy Crush or Qiktionary (which is a really cool game btw, I recommend it) and all the other phone apps we "real gamers" consider low brow, training Pokémon can often feel like a chore, and getting your team knocked out and being sent back to the last Pokémon Centre can be a huge drag (emphasis on "in comparison").
Hence the apparent "need" for a quicker levelling system and faster game pace.
The problem with Pokémon being "too easy" is not that they are trying to steal part of the smartphone user demographic, but rather they need to make it easier than ever to convince people to begin playing a game and keep playing it, and the easiest way to do that is by speeding up the amount of progress the player can make in a shorter time.