[combray]

That's funny, I started playing Threes, was addicted to it for a while, and when I found 2048 I never looked back. I find 2048 to be a clearly superior game both in terms of visual clarity and repeat playing. The mechanics of Threes are super annoying, especially the end game swipe when there are no more moves, swipe through the pointless point tallying, click next, etc. etc. etc. The cutesy noises and animations seem sort of unfinished to me.

The max card I've gotten with threes is 384, while the max card I've gotten on 2048 is 8,192. With Threes I don't really care about not getting any better, while with 2048 I feel close to getting 16,384 and still think it's interesting to do so. Threes just doesn't have the staying power, the mechanics are simply more frustrating.

I've seen your argument before -- the big post the Threes guys did had it also, that they felt their game was clearly better. I can understand why they felt that way, but I don't get it. And given the taking over the world popularity of 2048, I'm not sure that the evidence is there to support that position.

[caolica]

Most of 2048's fanbase enjoys it because it makes them feel smart. It gives them an adrenaline rush as they tap buttons or swipe the screen, watching the numbers combine and become higher and higher. Some say that playing 2048 makes them "feel like a computer", and that Threes does not.

If pushing buttons quickly and watching numbers fly everywhere /and somehow not cause you to lose/ makes you feel like a computer, then Threes absolutely does not make you feel like a computer. You can get pretty far in 2048 just by rapidly pressing two buttons and then adjusting when the board gets messy. That is the entirety of 2048's strategy. I've been playing Threes since its release three months ago, and I still find that my scores are improving as I notice new strategies. Threes has infinitely more depth than 2048, which is what keeps me coming back for more.

The only reasons 2048 is more popular than Threes is that a) it's free, while Threes costs $2, and b) it is EXTREMELY friendly to newcomers. It's absurdly easy to get a 2048, while it actually takes thought to score high in Threes.

So yes, if you're looking for a mindless free time-waster, 2048 is the game for you. If you're looking for a deeper, more polished puzzle game, Threes is superior in every way.

[combray]

I think what you mean by the first sentence is "most of 2048's fan base enjoys it because it's fun".

Your back and forth strategy doesn't work as you get to the higher point levels in 2048 btw. It certainly may get you to 2048, but not really that much further past that. The fact that the ideal strategy changes as you get to 4096 and 8192 is something that makes the game more fun to me.

If you like Three's better that's great, but like I said, I started with Threes, got addicted to it for a while, and then moved on. I got addicted to 2048 for a lot longer than I did Threes. It's not a matter of one being free or more accessible. 2048 is simply more fun, which is another way of saying it's a better game.

[bobbles]

meh... Threes has some annoying UI issues. Any time anyone in history has thought "its only one extra click/tap/swipe, who cares" they are wrong. These things add up.