Topic: Nintendo IPs that would work on a mobile phone.

@VeeFlamesNL:
Platformers shouldn't be on mobile. They either have to be dumbed down (auto-running, tap to jump) or they have horrible on-screen controls. It's the same deal with pretty much any game that's about moving a character around a space. A description which covers every game from Mario to GTA. Racing games can work but are never as good because even with fantastic tilt you lose the tactile buttons for accelerate and break. It's even worse for fighting games, fighting games are a joke on mobile.

On the other side of things puzzle games can work brilliantly with everything from bejewelled clones to word games. Then there are turn based strategy games which at a base level are really just slowed down puzzle games. They also work well. There are also games that are more along the lines of expanded mini-games. Fruit Ninja, Flappy Bird, Crossy Road etc. Those games also work pretty well. As do management games like Tiny Tower and Pocket Planes

Pokemon Go looks like its going to do well. You also forgot to mention that there's now Pokemon TV that allows you to watch the anime on phone for free.

Problem isn't the idea, but in potential sales wise. I'm just making @skywake realize that business wise, there's no way it can sell the way that Nintendo expects it to sell.

DeNa is the one that's providing the service here and not Nintendo. If it were Nintendo doing this, then yes I'd like them to do something different like how they did for Rusty's Real Deal Baseball.

@skywake

Some people like my dad for instance aren't very skilled in games despite them being casual. Not every mobile user plays candy crush or what not. The ones that do play them are the ones that have probably seen their friends or family members try out and they do so. They aren't skilled as an average gamer let alone claiming that they are just as great as gamers are.

Lots of games that are on mobile don't work well on mobile because of the fact that it requires a controller and majority of mobile users don't even know what a controller is unless you are talking about dedicated gamers who will rather play consoles than on mobile because they know that's the better way to play games on.

Also, you seem adamant that Advance wars can be broken to five minutes. Can you actually really claim this as you're not the one designing the game but Nintendo is and since they own the series, they know it a lot better than you. The point of this whole Nintendo going mobile is that the IP that Nintendo puts on Mobile should bring out those users to their consoles. Now when was the last time that we saw Advance Wars since Days of ruin? You honestly expect people to get driven into their consoles when the series itself isn't on consoles? I can understand Mii being there as well as Pokemon but advance wars? Really?

And Advance Wars isn't one of those games that requires a controller

Here's a video of an Advance Wars match.

In Advance Wars turns are measured in "days". This video is of a mission so there is some dialogue at the start. So to measure what a typical turn would look like we have to start at the beginning of Day 1 @ 2:19. First they're shown what the opponents moves were which would also exist in a mobile version. Then the player does their moves and ends the turn at @ 3:53. So under 2 mins for the turn.

Can I really claim that a turn would be under 5mins? Well it depends on the player I guess. But in the original game that's about how long a turn took. When you were playing multiplayer on the original Advance Wars that'd be the point where you'd physically pass the GBA to the other person. If it was a mobile game I don't think it's an insane assumption to say that you'd close the app at that point and wait for a notification that it was your turn again.

@skywake: You're further proving my point that the game will be even more complex to those mobile gamers out there. Its a shame really because now I'm more tempted to try out advance wars.....

The whole match lasted about thirty minutes......do you honestly think that you can play that much when on a bus or train? Mobile gamers just want to play something worth like five minutes before they have to get down. Advance Wars isn't like that at all. And the complexity itself proves that its something that Nintendo has to really dig deep to further simplify it. Pokemon made Nintendo lose a LOT of money for the first game itself and while it turned out great in the end, do you honestly think that risk is worth taking especially on mobile?

You guys are always complaining about my opinions that I'm not thinking straight here but when something like this isn't realized, you're not able to think straight here.

@Artwark: And how many turns was it in the match? If you are doing multiplayer, you must pass control after every turn, you can't just do the whole match in one sitting. So when you have passed your control over to the other player, you can put down the game, surf the web, check your facebook or whatever until your opponent has done their turn.

Single player is even easier, just keep the state even if you are in the middle of a match. Phones today know when the program is shutdown, they just need a snapshot at that precise moment.

@Therad: Umm.....you do realize that for these types of games, you have to observe the move that the player has done right and observe every single thing that has to be done so right. That's like playing chess where if such a thing is encouraged, you'd waste so much of time that you have left to further play.....

Its a strategy game, how can you relax when you're suppose to use brainpower here? I can understand something like Pokemon but advance wars is out of the question both in terms of business and in terms of risk.

I literally posted the timestamps. It was less than 2mins for the player to watch the opponents turn and make their moves. And as someone familiar with the game watching it I was, if anything, annoyed at how slow the guy was playing. We're not talking about sitting and playing the entire match in one sitting. That would be impossible unless you sat there with the app open waiting for the other player to move. Which you wouldn't because odds are they're not playing it when you are anyway.

I'll put it this way, here are some stats from my 3DS.
This is the average time played for some of the more "mobile friendly" games I've played.
Pokemon Shuffle - 8mins
Streetpass - 4mins
Nintendo Badge Arcade - 5mins
Internet Browser/eShop etc - 2mins

And for comparison here are some more traditional games:
Animal Crossing - 23mins
Pokemon Y - 36mins
Mario Kart 7 - 23mins
Smash Bros - 23mins
Kid Icarus - 37mins
Ocarina of Time - 25mins

Advance Wars? It would be in the <10min per session category. Easily.

@DarthNocturnal: At the time, the GBA was dominating the handheld market and the fact that this is more of Nintendo testing Intelligent Systems than Nintendo themselves doing it. I admire that Nintendo was open minded for the idea to try out the western market a bit but how much did it sell in the end?

It hardly reached 1 million copies a number that is really mandatory for AAA games and especially mobile and it didn't even reach half of it. Such a move back then was considered safe because Nintendo as of now dominates the handheld market (I feel its a debate if you are to say that mobiles are part of the handheld market.)

But this is mobile and Nintendo can't afford to use IP that they aren't confident that it will sell well and honestly, mobile games are more risky than the actual game market seeing as there are like what billion apps out there that can be better than Nintendo's IP ( Angry Birds....remember that stupid debate that it could beat Mario?)

@skywake: Again, you are making the assumption that it can be about 10 minutes and its pretty easy to think so. I can say the same thing for something like Vantage Master but it turns out that its more than like 10 minutes.

@DarthNocturnal: That process is cheap and it just is saying them that they want quick money. They can't even do proper emulation of their games let alone reach a million. Small budget games are the sole reason why we don't see more of them. No new Metroid games, no new Advance Wars games and no new Golden Sun games and heck, F-Zero is flat out ignored that Nintendo might have completely forgotten that they have something like F-Zero. All because they are small budget games and they can only sell so little. If Nintendo first made a mobile game that made them a lot of money, then it'd make sense to do something like advance wars just to give some variety and even then, I'm doubtful if it will turn out great

But that's something that Nintendo is against doing as what they are doing is again just trying to push those mobile users into their main consoles I'm not against the idea of Advance wars being on phone. If anything, I want to get into the series, but I know deep down that this is something that Nintendo is most likely to ignore because they know very well that it can't sell so much.

Turns in Advance Wars take less than 10mins. I posted a video showing a match and the turns were about 2mins. You are empirically wrong. There's no argument here. Watch the video again, get out a stopwatch if you don't believe me. Time how long it takes between "DAY X" and "DAY X+1" displaying on the screen. How long is it? That's the time we're talking about here and it's not very long at all.

Oh mighty Artwark, armchair analyst, teach me the ways.

Don't worry Skywake, I know what you're talking about and yes Advance Wars would work well. Have multiple games, complete your turn and wait for your opponent to complete theirs. What's wrong with that Artwark?

I'm sure many people have already said this but a Warioware title would be fantastic for the mobile market.

How did they solve it with pass-and-play options? I guess it must be impossible to show your opponents turn before you take your turn... Let's face it, nothing technical stands in the way for advance wars on mobile. It is a pure business decision if it comes to mobile or not.

And therefore they release.... Miitomo! Miis are not an especially strong brand (at least compared with other IPs) and they are trying to get into the social network business. The very definition of risky games and social networks are certainly a red ocean.

You also show your bias here, since you apparently don't see mobile as an actual game market.

Heck, Mario vs Donkey Kong would have been a much more sensible option if they wanted to play it safe. Well-known characters in a puzzle game. And it also would be perfect for IAPs, play 5 levels for free, every 5 levels after that costs 99c.

@Aviator: What's wrong is people like you don't realize that this series is a niche market that can't compete even the likes of Fire Emblem which I have to admit is a niche market itself. And I said earlier, I got nothing against the idea, in business wise its just not gonna sell well. So rather than mocking at my comments constantly, realize that this is unlikely to happen even if the idea can work because great ideas need to make profit and lots of it. Get that point straight.

Fire emblem would work too you know...

@Therad: Wrong. Wii Sports used Miis and that game sold 80 million units using Mii avatars..... Same can be said with Pilotwings. Mario Vs Donkey Kong might actually work because guess what? Its Mario and just one Mario game (if done right) is enough to make Nintendo a load of profit.

Because of this thread I downloaded Outwitters again and have been playing it for the last day. So I don't need any reassurance that I'm right, I know that this sort of game works fantastically on mobile. I literally took a turn while typing this reply.

Miis are not a strong brand when comparing to other IPs owned by nintendo. Which was my point. Have you ever heard anyone getting hyped for a Mii game?

I will venture a guess and say that more nintendo gamers would be more hyped for an AW game on mobile, then they are for Miitomo...

@Therad: No but if they are used in games, then they are considered to be a main IP. Its like saying that Rusty's Real Deal mii didn't make use of it when in reality, the Mii itself played a huge importance both gameplay and story wise. It makes sense for Nintendo to use Mii because seeing as how well it sold, its no wonder why they did that.

latest Pilotwings used Miis and it sold well. Same case for Wii Music as well. Any characters that sell with a brand is known as IP. Toad himself is an IP that Nintendo can make use of.