[cletus]

Does anyone else see "(techcrunch.com)" at the end of the submission title and think of the boy who cried wolf?

This may be true but, for me, TechCrunch has gotten to the point where anytime I see one of their headlines I think it's sensationalist linkbait and I'm better off assuming what they're writing is exaggerated or simply not true.

As for the claim, it may be true but I really don't think it matters and this is something that's important for anyone assessing FB as an investment.

Facebook used to own social gaming. Arguably it still does. But it faces a huge threat, one which it hasn't remotely tackled: social gaming--and non-social gaming for that matter--is going mobile in a huge way.

Facebook gaming is built on Flash. As we all well know, Flash is incompatible with iOS and doesn't really suit touch-based interfaces for those platforms that do support Flash (eg use of rollovers and so on). That's not to say that you can't write a mobile-friendly game with Flash but, to date, most people haven't (in my albeit limited experience).

Facebook is, for most people, three things (IMHO): games, photo sharing and chat/messaging. FB's revenue seems built on ads and games. They're acting like they've got the market cornered on games but the don't. As Facebook usage goes mobile (as I believe it increasingly is), the draw of those games goes down and consequently so does the potential revenue.

Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo should already be scared to death of Apple as far as portable gaming goes. I think Facebook should add itself to that list.

[scrame]

MS doesn't have portable gaming. Sony's PSP is pretty much dead from a lot of their stupid choices. The NDS has a huge foothold and is an overall _better_ gaming option, and the 3DS looks promising.

Apple will get the market of $3 casual games, but that market does not have a huge overlap with the DS demographic, and where it does, there is less barrier for an iPhone owner to get a DS than there is for a DS owner to get an iPhone -- you can get a used DS for less than a monthly AT&T iphone bill.

Not to mention that the DS is much cheaper than an iPhone, and has multiplayer/networking built in.

Apple is doing fine, and will continue to do so, but they are absolutely not going to unseat the DS any time soon.

[ As a comparison, there have been ~60 million iphones sold, and about 135 million NDS, while iPhone adoption is strong, it has a way to go to just bowl over nintendos foothold. ]

[cletus]

Why are you comparing the DS to the iPhone when the elephant in the room is the iPod Touch?

An 8GB iPod Touch is cheaper than the pricing of the 3DS. For completeness we're looking at $249 for a 3DS and $170 for a DSi [1].

What's more a typical new release 3DS game will sell for $30+. Compare that to the typically <$5 for an iOS game. Now you describe those iOS games as "casual" but I see games like Angry Birds that can hold the attention for a long period of time. What's more, you can afford 10-20 of those games per DS game!

Honestly I've never played a DS so I really don't know but are the games really that much better to not feel the heat from Apple? We're talking an order of magnitude difference in game costs and not too dissimilar hardware costs.

[1]: http://www.bestbuy.com/site/Nintendo-DS/Nintendo-DS-Hardware...

[scrame]

Good point on the iPod touch being cheaper (and not needing a contract). However the 3DS isn't out and will not stay at that price long (thats the japanese launch price which is usually different from US releases).

> Honestly I've never played a DS so I really don't know but are the games really that much better to not feel the heat from Apple? We're talking an order of magnitude difference in game costs and not too dissimilar hardware costs.

Yes, they are.

I think what gets me about these conversations is that it is typically people with smart phones who might play games casually, I have never heard the "Apple will beat Nintendo" argument from someone who uses both.

Here, look at a list of the top iOS games from last year: http://wireless.ign.com/articles/106/1063222p27.html

With the exception of GTA: Chinatown wars (which is a DS port), those games are all nostalgic remakes (space invaders, oregon trail), puzzle ports (peggle) or generally pretty simple/shallow games.

These are great diversions for 5 minutes waiting for a train, but most of them are not "great" or even "good" games. I admit that the iOS is versatile, but it has a lot of its own limitations, many of which coming from the fact that its _not_ a games machine.

The DS has its own share of shovelware, certainly, as do all platforms, but it is a dedicated gaming platform, and the games on there are leagues better.

Also, individual games cost $30 new at release time, but that cost goes down significantly quickly.

Nintendo said a few years ago they consider the iphone to be a competitor, but they are not stupid and have the same focus on high product quality (hardware and first party software) as apple, with a better attitude towards their customers, and have innovated and outmaneuvered and outsold sony and microsoft (and helped run sega out of the console market) at practically every generation.

The two markets actually _are_ different, even though superficially similar, and Nintendo isn't going to just disappear because iPhones/iPods support games any more than twitter disappeared after facebook implemented status updates.

[cletus]

> Here, look at a list of the top iOS games from last year:

Do you play iOS games? I ask this because I do and that's not a great list. It's the kind of list I'd expect from a content farm that picked 25 games seemingly at random.

For one thing it doesn't include Angry Birds (either version), Plants vs Zombies, Bejeweled 2 and many, many others.

Perhaps you likewise have misperception when it comes to mobile gaming?

> These are great diversions for 5 minutes waiting for a train, but most of them are not "great" or even "good" games.

I think you're coloured by your own predilections. I now I've sat there and played Angry Birds for an hour. As for games being "good" or "great", well that's largely subjective.

As an anecdote, my 10 year old nephew has an iPod Touch and plays games on it all the time (when he's allowed to have it that is). Thing is, all his friends have one too.

> Also, individual games cost $30 new at release time, but that cost goes down significantly quickly.

Yes but iPhone games start at (rarely more than) $5 and go down. Angry Birds is one dollar.

A lot of games are free too, some totally so, others ad-supported (eg Angry Birds on Android). Not that Android has an iPod Touch equivalent (yet anyway).

> ... with a better attitude towards their customers

I think your bias is showing here.

> Nintendo isn't going to just disappear

True but, in the phone market as one example, I'd rather be Apple than, say, Nokia or RIM.

[jokermatt999]

> Angry Birds (either version), Plants vs Zombies, Bejeweled 2

All of these are examples of "shallow" or puzzle games. That's not to say that they're bad games, but it's simply not in the same market as DS games.

> I now I've sat there and played Angry Birds for an hour.

And that's an outlier. I was a kid of the Pokemon generation. I'd sit and play those games (and similar) all night, only stopping to do homework.

For a good example of what the DS market is, I'll look at the top games under "DS" on Gamefaqs. This isn't a perfect representation (represents activity on the site vs sales), but it'll do. 1 to 3 are all Pokemon. 4 is a Kingdom Hearts game, a series known for it's story more than anything. 5th is Golden Sun: Dark Dawn, a traditional RPG. 6th is more Pokemon. 7th is Dragon Quest IX, another installment in the classic RPG series. I can't speak for the rest of the list because I don't know the games mentioned, but by now you should have noticed a trend: RPGs and story. These are games that (as a kid) I'd play for an hour at a minimum. You can easily get 20 or 30 hours out of these and that's before replay value (which absolutely ridiculous when you're talking about Pokemon).

That $30 isn't just something to keep you distracted on the bus; it's something you'll put some time into playing. I don't mean to sound rude, but it seems like something you just aren't getting as a "non-gamer". I don't mean that in a bad way, but to me there's a massive difference between Angry Birds: February Edition! and the next installment in an RPG series I know and love. One will give me quick diversion while I wait in line, but the other one will offer me hours upon hours of entertainment and story.

Edit: Apologies for the tone of this post. I love Angry Birds and similar for what they are, but I have a pet peeve about people conflating casual/social games with video games as a whole.

[slantyyz]

Ok, I'll bite.

I bought Street Fighter 4, and I expected the game play to suck on iOS without a D-pad. The graphics exceed any fighting game I've seen on the DS, and the game play is true to the original.

As for the market for DS games, a lot of the big winners for the DS were casual games (the DS legitimized "Brain Games"). Much of the Brain Game genre is easily/faithfully reproduced on iOS.

The driving games I've played on iOS seem better than the DS, and even the hockey game that I got on iOS (I believe it's 2K sports) plays surprisingly well.

Beast Boxing is a pretty good rendition of Punch Out too.

Yeah, all the casual games on iOS get the glory, but there are deep console level games for iOS that can rival games on the DS.

[scrame]

I recognize it is not a great list. Disclaimer: I do not have an iOS device. I actually have an old blackberry, and will likely get an android whenever that gives up the ghost. I have a handful of games that I play on it (none of them very good) when waiting for a train, or similar smaller diversions.

I have used them, and I work around people who use them and play games. I am aware that the list was not great, a similarly thrown together list of the "best" NDS games would be better.

I would love to see a current top 25 with the actual best iOS games. I would like to see how many of those are exclusives (which nixes plants vs zombies and angry birds). And yeah, "good" and "great" are subjective, but the crowd of people buying "the oregon trail" are most likely buying it because they played it in 3rd grade and its a nostalgia trip, not because of its "gameplay", and I would wager most of those install just get a few runs until people realize how dull and tedious it is.

Now, all that being said, I do have a DS, Wii, PS3 and 360, a haphazard steam collection. On top of that I am at level 21 on kongregate, so I have played a _lot_ of casual and flash based games, and I still play them. The wii gets the least amount of play of any of those (basically just a dedicated netflix streamer at this point). My points are not to come across as a nintendo fanboy (though thats not an unfair thing to say), but as a gaming platform, the DS offers quite a lot that is not obvious. It is a dedicated gaming platform, and people who are looking for that will still want it even _if_ they already have an ipod. It will be the only place where you can get mario, and pokemon, zelda, and layton, and phoenix wright, for a long while.

The online stores for the various consoles (and steam) are packed with games for under $5, that doesn't stop people from lining up at midnight to plunk down $60 for the next call of duty.

The reason? The games are _that_ much better, and the people who care and play those games know the difference.

> I now I've sat there and played Angry Birds for an hour. Me too. Angry birds is decent (have it for ps3 -- bug screen w00+!), with a lot of levels (i'm about 65% through the levels, though not trying to get 3 stars). Its still a really basic game, the production values are low and is decidedly "casual".

That, and it seems that it is your example for a good game, and seems to have taken the throne from plants vs zombies. Cool, so as a gamer, if I want a portable system, what do I get after that?

It literally took me a couple _years_ to get through the whole phoenix wright series (5 games). Thats playing regularly, but not daily, and many sessions of more than an hour. This is for a largely text/dialogue based game with point-and-click adventure elements. There were other things I played as well, and there are a lot of options after that.

Maybe my opinions show that I don't have a complete understanding of "mobile gaming", but you seem to not really understand "gaming" in general. And I am not even a hardcore gamer.

>> ... with a better attitude towards their customers > I think your bias is showing here.

Here is a real simple example: When the wii came out there were some problems: the straps were too weak, and the gyro at the tip of the wii-mote was fragile. Nintendo came out, acknowledged it, fixed it with future production and sent out free replacements and cases for all their current models without question.

Apple released a new iPhone with a known reception problem, Jobs said "just don't hold it that way". Eventually, they grudgingly offered a refund on a case, never admitting there was a problem and blaming the users.

Or maybe look at the huge amount of fan remakes, hacks, fan-art, and dedications to nintendo and their cultural impact. Then consider that apple was suing its fans for using the term 'podcast', when the term itself is in reverence to the ipod itself.

Not to mention that they supported and would service replace ALL of their hardware until ~2007 (with the wii virtual console, they finally EOL'd support for the NES/SNES).

Anecdotally, when I was in high school they replaced a 10 year old controller with a brand new one for free when I took it in for repair. Also, I don't know any 10 year olds, and I don't know anyone who owns an iPod touch (but quite a few with iPhones). I know lots of people with DS's, even the ones that aren't serious gamers. I have one friend that has two, just to play mario kart, and the second so a friend can play along.

> True but, in the phone market as one example, I'd rather be Apple than, say, Nokia or RIM.

I agree, and I'd rather be Nintendo than THQ or Sega.

An install base of 135 million is nothing to sneeze at, and people have been second guessing and trying to bury nintendo for 25 years, ever since they reinvented the console and proved there was a market there in the early 80s.

Apple will have its share of success, but nintendo knows how to make and sell games better than _anyone_, and they know how to do it while widening its audience and making a profit on every piece of hardware sold.

In the end, I'm really just pointing out that Apple is entering a market where they have been traditionally weak (games), with a competitor that is traditionally very strong, with a long track record of success, and a phenomenally large install base, yet the prevailing HN attitude is that they should be shaking in their boots.

Games make the system, not processing power, or hardware specs, or "retina vision", or whatever else. This has been proven time and time again. iOS has a few fun casual games that are popular, but they are in a race to the bottom with prices that for the most part have not pulled in support for major studios or flagship games. That is not to say that they never will, but the mobile market as it is is decidedly casual and geared toward small studios.

[jokermatt999]

It's entirely different markets. The "gamer" market segment generally isn't going to settle for iPod touch games. It's like saying Flash games will kill PC Gaming.

[slantyyz]

You know, I used to dismiss the iPhone/iPod touch as a gamer device, but I don't any more.

I think your argument is a little inaccurate. The "gamer" market segment may not settle for casual games, but there are plenty of deep gamer quality titles on iOS, they just don't get the same attention as the casual titles.