Sonic the Mobile Hedgehog: How Sonic Should Play On Mobile Devices

[KHCast]

Why exactly is it a bad thing if a AAA developer isn't making tons of money off a app given the fact that they are multi billion dollar companies. They don't HAVE to or NEED to, like how companies don't HAVE to charge for costume DLC. It just comes down to this as Jim sterling puts it: They'd rather no money, than some money, if they can't have ALL the money. Sega doesn't need to do all this shit for survival. They want to try and money grab their consumers cause they like getting away with it and filling their pockets. The second fans realize that and stop defending AAA practices like that, the better.

[Sean]

Just copy Rayman Jungle Run. Instant perfect Sonic mobile game

[Blacklightning]

 

The reason why Runners is making more money off a retail game is because 1) ads and 2) in-game currency. Get rid of those, then not so much. And I'm not saying by Sega setting the price for the game $2-5 won't make them a lot of money, it can, but not as much as putting ads in game or the F2P method at all (not even close) and eventually the money they earned will run out as they have to maintain the leaderboards daily. Sega *will* lose money eventually from this game if they don't put ads or a subscription model. They have to pay the staff someway.

That's why you keep consistently supporting the game in order to bring in more players. More content brings more interest, more interest brings more money, more money brings more content. This is the third time I've mentioned this and you've consistently ignored it every single time, despite the fact that it was a perfectly normal and functional business model before microtransactions became mainstream for some stupid reason.

Do microtransactions make more money? I don't doubt that. But it is absolutely not worth making games worse to play over it. This is about providing a pleasant experience for customers, and contriving arbitary obstacles to playing the game designed to tempt people into paying more money for it is anything but pleasant.

 

 

And how many of those 2 million have deleted the game? I'm certainly one of those who have deleted it. Hint: Just because they reached the 2 million download mark doesn't mean there are 2 million active users playing the game. Not to mention people making multiple accounts just to get Amy etc.

If someone purchases a paid game, Sega has already made their money's worth off them, so I'm not sure how you think this is a point.

 

....I wasn't thinking that though. Yes they do have other things to fall back on, but Sega doesn't want to do it. Why? Because they want Runners to give them a profit, not a loss. Why create something that is going to give you a loss? They certainly don't want their merch profits to be eaten up by Runners.

Yet when Nintendo does this it's okay because... reasons? Look, you were the one who made this point, you don't get to back right out of it just because you've been caught in a double standard.

 

Now here's the difference and here is why ads are very important to stay. Eventually, keeping up the Splatoon servers is going to make Nintendo lose money regardless if 10,000+ play it 5 years from now. Nintendo are not earning any money from the 10,000+ users that play it. Why do you think Brawl is no longer available online? Why do you think most Wii online games are shutdown? They aren't making any money by keeping them online and they are losing money at the same time.

 

For Runners, it's a completely different story. 5 years from now, if 10,000+ users still play Runners, Sega is still earning money from them. Because of the ads. As long the ads are active in the game, any active user who plays Runners will give Sega cash to maintain the game. Take that away, and yes, it'll end up like Splatoon in like 5-6 years, most EA online games etc. This also motivates Sega to keep on doing events for Runners to get them even more money.

5 years is basically an entire console cycle, so that's actually a pretty respectable time for an online shooter. But I digress. Do you know why Brawl is no longer available online? It's certainly not because Nintendo could no longer afford to keep the servers up - it's because, you know, they had a brand new game in the series that was superior to it in almost every imaginable way, you might have heard of it sometime down the line.

 

 

That's the other thing about the games industry - nobody plays the same games forever, but there's really not even any need to. By the time one finally stagnates despite all the support their developers offer it, they've still made enough bank to make a brand new game off of it. Do you... not think this is a good idea? Because it's basically how the concept of franchising works. Sonic wouldn't have lived this long if Sega couldn't just take their earnings while they were ahead and funnel it straight into new projects. You talk a pretty big deal of games that will eventually stagnate and die, but honestly, not only does that work both ways, (remember, there were 2-3 whole freemium Sonic games before Runners, and those were released about a year apart at best), it... isn't really even that big a deal. If it saw success in its heyday and the demand is still there, a new game is made which overall improves on the old one, and the cycle continues anew.

 

These games do have offline modes, by the way, so it's not as though they suddenly become unplayable once their servers die.

 

Really? How about those who spent 1000+ hours of playing time in Runners, worked their butts off to the ground earning all buddies and characters ONLY to find out next day Sega puts a notice up "Sonic Runners is closing down. From March 20th, you are no longer to download or sign in to Sonic Runners."...then what? That screws the long time user even more. All that hard work, gone. Runners will close down because of they aren't getting money off it, they will *never* close down a game that is making them money daily.

Woah, slow the fuck down there. Who said anything about closing down freemium games that are already running? Literally all I said was that I prefer paid games to microtransaction-ridden ones. At worst, all that means is that I want Runners to be the last one. That's all.

 

Don't get me wrong, I would love Runners to be an offline, paid game too. But they'll have to change a lot of things to make that happen including removing the online leaderboard and events. Which will make the game duller.

Sonic games have always been perfectly playable without leaderboards, and anyone into WR-serious territory is already using offsite archives to compare their runs anyway. You keep putting a lot of stock into this thing, but even if there weren't decade-old flash games with still functioning leaderboards it isn't ultimately that important in the grand scheme of things - you can have a game keep record of your times offline and compare it to par times, big whoop, that's what Sonic games already had their ranking system designed around beforehand.

And then on the subject of events... this might sound like a crazy idea, but maybe you could, oh I dunno, use the calender?

This isn't anything new for a videogame. You want consistent special events that are timed and don't last forever, the developer is every bit as capable of simply storing them in game data right from the start and unlocking them in specific actual time periods. Sonic Adventure was released December 23, so you unlock content from that day onto about a month later and it works every bit as well, bam, problem solved. If anything this is more versatile than keeping a server maintained, because once it's added to the game it keeps happening on its own every year regardless of the developer's plans for it.

More to the point, why the fuck are you sticking up for them if you don't even agree with the way they're running things? You know as well as I do that Sega isn't so far gone that they can't afford to still make games that promote fun over money and still make enough to keep their lights on, especially if they're going to be budget mobile games anyway. I take back what I say earlier, this is blatant apologism and you're literally a part of the problem here.

[KHCast]

The only thing I disagree with is the multiplayer thing. Certain games that are mostly built around multiplayer or online like Halo or Destiny I think should have some way to access those modes. It's thing I actually appreciate PC for. Once support for those games are done, there's no fear of online being gone on it.  I think it's unfair to expect people to be okay with those kind of games ending those online functions. (Plus, some people prefer previous installments over the latest, and some games don't even get sequels.)

[Blacklightning]

The only thing I disagree with is the multiplayer thing. Certain games that are mostly built around multiplayer or online like Halo or Destiny I think should have some way to access those modes.

Oh, absolutely. A game should by all means still be able to multiplayer locally or through LAN even after support for it dies out, which is why for the life of me I can't understand why so few developers actually support LAN gaming on consoles anymore, even though they're cheaper on both consumer and publisher and even though there's literally no downside to it connection-wise. This just ties back into the fact that the games are built specifically to filter people through an online service, which is every bit as much an issue with Runners as it is a dead and forgotten multiplayer-focused shooter - both become unplayable once the servers are down, even though there's literally no reason they should be.

[Ming Ming Hatsune]

Why exactly is it a bad thing if a AAA developer isn't making tons of money off a app given the fact that they are multi billion dollar companies. They don't HAVE to or NEED to, like how companies don't HAVE to charge for costume DLC. It just comes down to this as Jim sterling puts it: They'd rather no money, than some money, if they can't have ALL the money. Sega doesn't need to do all this shit for survival. They want to try and money grab their consumers cause they like getting away with it and filling their pockets. The second fans realize that and stop defending AAA practices like that, the better.

Well, unless you are a non-profit business, you're gonna have to find ways to make money. As for Jim's quote: Then what is "ALL the money?" $3.99 from 100,000 users  or $70-100+ everyday from ads until the active userbase decreases to the point hardly anyone plays the game? And keep in mind, Runners is an online game. 

However if you're just talking about the in-game premium currency stuff and DLC, then I pretty much agree.

 

That's why you keep consistently supporting the game in order to bring in more players. More content brings more interest, more interest brings more money, more money brings more content. This is the third time I've mentioned this and you've consistently ignored it every single time, despite the fact that it was a perfectly normal and functional business model before microtransactions became mainstream for some stupid reason.

And how exactly do you bring in more players huh? More content? Where would they get the money from to deliver "more content?" By getting new players? Sega wouldn't get more profit for their hard work especially with Runners with multiple staff working on the creative side, keeping the servers up AND making the leaderboards cheat-free. Delivering new free content, does not guarantee thousands of new players to the game. It just doesn't. If Goat Simulator adds 100s worth of free content tomorrow, I still wouldn't go running to buy it. 

You know what's a guarantee though? The existing consumers who *already* paid for the game because they are getting more out of their $3.99. That's good, in the consumer's eyes but for Sega, who has lost a lot of money in recent years it really isn't.

And for goodness sake, what are we talking about here? Ads or microtransactions? Because I am not defending microtransactions here, just to make that clear. Ads and microtransactions are not the same thing.

 

If someone purchases a paid game, Sega has already made their money's worth off them, so I'm not sure how you think this is a point.

Incorrect. Consumers can easily request a refund now. If they don't like it, they can refund the game within 24 hours. However consumers cannot request their moneyback off Sega on what ad money they generated off them.

 

Yet when Nintendo does this it's okay because... reasons? Look, you were the one who made this point, you don't get to back right out of it just because you've been caught in a double standard.

You are ignoring the fact that Nintendo can afford to do these things when Sega can't. Sega is not as rich and powerful as Nintendo. Sega has lost a lot of money in the past, especially with what happened to Sonic Boom and they have to find ways into getting the money back. Your solution on free content and new players, isn't a guaranteed, steady stream of income for them.

 

5 years is basically an entire console cycle, so that's actually a pretty respectable time for an online shooter. But I digress. Do you know why Brawl is no longer available online? It's certainly not because Nintendo could no longer afford to keep the servers up - it's because, you know, they had a brand new game in the series that was superior to it in almost every imaginable way, you might have heard of it sometime down the line.

...So? Just because they have a newer game available doesn't mean you should takedown Brawl. There are more Wiis out there than Wii Us. My friend can no longer play Brawl online unless she hacks her Wii (and she will not get a Wii U) so it's over for her. Me and her can't play online together anymore. That isn't really an excuse to takedown Brawl. If Nintendo can afford to leave the servers up, then LEAVE THEM UP! But I understand why they tookdown Brawl IF they can't afford to keep the servers running.

That's going to happen with Splatoon and I'm fine with that IF they can no longer afford to keep the servers running.

 

That's the other thing about the games industry - nobody plays the same games forever, but there's really not even any need to. By the time one finally stagnates despite all the support their developers offer it, they've still made enough bank to make a brand new game off of it. Do you... not think this is a good idea?

Again, talk to my friend as once a while me and her play Brawl when I visit her house. With single-player games, I agree with you that no one plays the same games forever, but for multiplayer games, people still play COD 4 to this VERY day. 

And sure, they can make a new game/sequel out of the money they have gotten, I'm not against that...at all (don't know where you think I'm against that?) But if in return they shutdown the predecessor online servers so they can force players to buy the new game, and we both know they still can afford to keep the old servers running, then I'm not happy.

 

Sonic games have always been perfectly playable without leaderboards, and anyone into WR-serious territory is already using offsite archives to compare their runs anyway. You keep putting a lot of stock into this thing, but even if there weren't decade-old flash games with still functioning leaderboards it isn't ultimately that important in the grand scheme of things - you can have a game keep record of your times offline and compare it to par times, big whoop, that's what Sonic games already had their ranking system designed around beforehand.

Runners is built around the leaderboard and the microtransaction systems though. I'm not arguing that Sonic games cannot be done without a leaderboard. I'm only saying for Runners, they'll have to change the wholeee system if they are going to remove ads and especially microtransactions. 

They can make Runners a level based game like Rayman Jungle Run something like that.

(And btw, not everyone knows how to screenshot stuff. And not everything you see online is legit).

 

This isn't anything new for a videogame. You want consistent special events that are timed and don't last forever, the developer is every bit as capable of simply storing them in game data right from the start and unlocking them in specific actual time periods. Sonic Adventure was released December 23, so you unlock content from that day onto about a month later and it works every bit as well, bam, problem solved. If anything this is more versatile than keeping a server maintained, because once it's added to the game it keeps happening on its own every year regardless of the developer's plans for it.

Well, that's a good idea. Too bad it's also a bad one because of hackers. Hackers will find a way to unlock those events for themselves, unlock characters that aren't supposed to be available yet and make it unfair to everyone. And Sega wouldn't want hackers unlocking those characters/events. You can't tell me this can't happen, because it can especially if the hackers have a modified iOS or Android device to manipulate the game.

 

More to the point, why the fuck are you sticking up for them if you don't even agree with the way they're running things? You know as well as I do that Sega isn't so far gone that they can't afford to still make games that promote fun over money and still make enough to keep their lights on, especially if they're going to be budget mobile games anyway. I take back what I say earlier, this is blatant apologism and you're literally a part of the problem here.

WTH are you talking about? There is absolutely nothing I'm contradicting here. From the very start, I told you why I understand Sega putting their game up with ads. I don't like it, but I understand business-wise. That's why we have ads in Sonic Stadium. Ads in Google. Ads in YouTube. Ads on TV. Basically ads is *everywhere* unless it's a paid product. And before you even go there and say "Runners should be a paid product then", replace Runners with "Sonic Stadium/YouTube/Google". Because that's what Runners is. An online service. The only other way to avoid ads and microtransactions, is make Runners a subscription game like Final Fantasy XIV and World of Warcraft.

I'm going to make this clear on what I'm arguing here one more time: I am defending the use of ads in Sonic Runners, not and I repeat NOT microtransactions. That is a different ballgame.

[KHCast]

I was mainly referring to the microtransactions yes, as some members here sounded like they were defending the practice.(and I have seen the attitude expressed a couple times here on the forum)

 

a few few things outside that: Sonic Boom is actually doing very well apparently for Sega due to the show and merchandise. Not sure what the sales for the games are however. And Sega actually have been picking themselves up lately and are not as dirt poor as you're making them out to be. They aren't capcom.

 

2. Online services like the Wii's online should be continuing. SHOULD. However,  due the nature of consoles lately, keeping a online service online forever just isn't viable unless it's a pc. Install bases lessen over time, and with the 3DS and Wii U being the big focus and having the most tweaks and updates and attention, keeping the online on for the Wii would seem redundant and from a business point, not smart.(3 separate online services at once? Unless you're Sony, that ain't happenin.) They can't really update anything at this point, most people in the 1st world countries(the big focus of these corporations) have moved on by now, and even if lots of people in smaller countries still own Wii's, the servers are crap on that thing. Nintendo just doesn't see any worth to keep it on.

[Ming Ming Hatsune]

I was mainly referring to the microtransactions yes, as some members here sounded like they were defending the practice.(and I have seen the attitude expressed a couple times here on the forum)

 

a few few things outside that: Sonic Boom is actually doing very well apparently for Sega due to the show and merchandise. Not sure what the sales for the games are however. And Sega actually have been picking themselves up lately and are not as dirt poor as you're making them out to be. They aren't capcom.

 

2. Online services like the Wii's online should be continuing. SHOULD. However,  due the nature of consoles lately, keeping a online service online forever just isn't viable unless it's a pc. Install bases lessen over time, and with the 3DS and Wii U being the big focus and having the most tweaks and updates and attention, keeping the online on for the Wii would seem redundant and from a business point, not smart.(3 separate online services at once? Unless you're Sony, that ain't happenin.) They can't really update anything at this point, most people in the 1st world countries(the big focus of these corporations) have moved on by now, and even if lots of people in smaller countries still own Wii's, the servers are crap on that thing. Nintendo just doesn't see any worth to keep it on.

Well I didn't say Sega are on the verge of going out of business, all I said was they are not as rich and powerful as Nintendo. Which is correct, right? And Sega isn't Nintendo. Sega doesn't have the same resources, the same creative employees, the same number and quality subsidiaries as Nintendo. Sega isn't a juggernaut of a company like Nintendo. Activision and EA are even much bigger than them today. Sega have been picking themselves up lately and I will not be surprised if Runners is one of the games that is helping them grow.

And for the Wii/DS online services, I agree because it falls down to what I said, about them affording to keep the servers up. Keeping them up, costs money, time and space when they can use that time, money and space for something else that is much better.

But I'm still finding it hard to agree on anyone that says it's okay to shutdown the servers because a newer game for it is out and that company has the money in the world to leave the old servers up, but removes them anyway to force players. 

[Blacklightning]

EDIT: You know what, I'm just going to dial the rest of this post back, because this part pretty much said everything that needed to be said anyway. If this doesn't get through I'm not even going to bother.

WTH are you talking about? There is absolutely nothing I'm contradicting here. From the very start, I told you why I understand Sega putting their game up with ads. I don't like it, but I understand business-wise. That's why we have ads in Sonic Stadium. Ads in Google. Ads in YouTube. Ads on TV. Basically ads is *everywhere* unless it's a paid product. And before you even go there and say "Runners should be a paid product then", replace Runners with "Sonic Stadium/YouTube/Google". Because that's what Runners is. An online service. The only other way to avoid ads and microtransactions, is make Runners a subscription game like Final Fantasy XIV and World of Warcraft.

Don't be naieve. Runners as a game, is a game first and a subscription second, and even in the latter case only because they ramshackled some semblance of a game into it. I mean, look at this.

Ask yourself a few things. Do you see any other players? Is Eggman controlled by the cloud? Does he need to be? Is there any reason your personal stats and gains can't be stored on your phone? No? Then what about this can you actually call a subscription? Nothing important. This entire game can theoretically be played on your phone alone, basically the only reason it can even be defined as a service is because Sega says it's one. It's literally an Xbone situation designed to fleece people of much more money than the game's actually worth, and developers only ever get away with this because they can convince people like you that it's somehow a necessary evil and that the game is somehow incapable of functioning on a basic level without pinging a server. Ridiculous. It's a platformer that keeps some online leaderboards up to date. That's it.

If you can't see through a scheme that blatant, then I don't even know why I'm wasting my breath on you.

Edited September 9, 2015 by Blacklightning

[KHCast]

I'd first believe Aliens Isolation, Sonic Boom and Atlas, and the multiple partnerships with Nintendo are probably bigger factors. 

 

That at south park episode about microtransactions is actually quite informative about freemium games. Not a lot of people actually spend money on the the bundles and packages enticed. So if it's just the ads that give the big portion of the money to Sega, and most players only spend maybe 10 minutes every now and then, I'm sure they still are getting more from actual console games.

[Ming Ming Hatsune]

EDIT: You know what, I'm just going to dial the rest of this post back, because this part pretty much said everything that needed to be said anyway. If this doesn't get through I'm not even going to bother.

Hmmm, okay.

 

Don't be naieve. Runners as a game, is a game first and a subscription second, and even in the latter case only because they ramshackled some semblance of a game into it. I mean, look at this.

*pic*

I think you are missing the point...but I'll mention that below.

 

Ask yourself a few things. Do you see any other players? Is Eggman controlled by the cloud? Does he need to be?

No, the main portion of the game is offline. I know that. But Sega implemented a lot of things around it to make it an online-only game. Which I will back in to in a minute.

 

Is there any reason your personal stats and gains can't be stored on your phone? No? Then what about this can you actually call a subscription? Nothing important.

Your personal stats are stored in your phone though, like how many RSRs/rings you earned and purchased, the distance etc. It's just that it's also in sync with Sega's servers. 

I didn't call it a subscription. I called Runners a F2P game. But if you want them to remove the ads, then they have to get the money back from the servers somehow. Would you like them to force them to show more microtransactions in our faces? (Which will backfire from Sega). The servers and the staff aren't going to PAY for themselves, which is why I said if you're going to remove the ads, they have to put some kind of a monthly subscription. You've got to stop pretending that $3.99 is enough for the staff salaries and keeping the servers up for years to come. Free DLC, "word of mouth" (yes I saw your post before you edited it =P) and free content I repeat: *isn't* a guaranteed way of getting money monthly to hold up the costs. What is Rayman Jungle Run earning now by the way?

 

This entire game can theoretically be played on your phone alone, basically the only reason it can even be defined as a service is because Sega says it's one. It's literally an Xbone situation designed to fleece people of much more money than the game's actually worth, and developers only ever get away with this because they can convince people like you that it's somehow a necessary evil and that the game is somehow incapable of functioning on a basic level without pinging a server. Ridiculous. It's a platformer that keeps some online leaderboards up to date. That's it.

It can in a way, but it will be more boring. No leaderboard, no score to compare it too unless you post it on Facebook, Twitter or a forum, and most likely no events either unless the user pays for it (which then becomes paid DLC).

Runners takes your score, puts it in the leaderboard, do well, you move up a leaderboard rank and one buddy (Shahra) levels up. If you get a poor score, you could be on the verge of relegation, which makes you boot up the game again, determined to higher your score. 

You get better gifts for going up the ranks as well. One of those gifts is RSRs which you use to get better buddies. That can give you a better score. Yes, they could have used normal rings instead and that's why I don't like microtransactions and their in-game premium currency.

And I don't get why making more money than the game's actual worth is a BAD thing. That is more than a good thing, in fact, if it's making less money than the game's actual worth, that is a complete actual disaster. This is how you run a profitable business. It's only when they tempt you to buy their microtransactions directly or indirectly is what I hate. And that is what Runners is doing.

Fleece people? What are Sega fleecing OFF me from watching a 10 second ad? And I in return, get a free revive?

Here are the only times Runners ping to the server:

• Making sure the app version you're using is up to date (so no one cannot use the Shahra exploit anymore)
• Making sure the user has got the downloaded files for events
• Receiving and updating your data on rings/RSR and your position on the episode
• Posting your score on the leaderboard
• Loading the online leaderboards
• Loading the stage so it takes away -1 life off your life count
• Watched an ad, and tells the server so you get your free revive

These are reasonable "pings", there is no "Hey, I'm gonna ping anyway because this game is online!" ping, although it is annoying as the loading times are longer and I cannot play without an internet connection.

Online stuff and moderation makes the game better. Angry Birds was in Sonic Dash not too long ago, and a few people cared for it (at least in SSMB). Dash uses Facebook and Game Center servers to have a friends leaderboard, not a global one (because FB/GC servers won't let developers have global leaderboard for the game in-game). And even if there is one, it's going to be easily hacked with fake scores. No control. Do people still play Dash today? Yeah, but very few. 

 

If you can't see through a scheme that blatant, then I don't even know why I'm wasting my breath on you.

Let's not patronize now, please...

 

And can I ask you this. Why are you against Sega putting ads in a F2P game? Are you paying them to see the ads or something? Again, if you hate Sega for putting ads in a game because they have "the potential to make more money than what they developed for the entire game", then you have no idea how a business runs.

[KHCast]

Wasn't Sonic Runners ad free before the global launch though? And it was apparently doing pretty well still. A lot of the issues people have with the game(the wheel, red rings, etc.) weren't present until the global release, so acting like those problems have to be there for the game to work is a bit misguided.

 

BL mentioned Splatoon before, and even more recent, Until Dawn through word of mouth spread like wild fire. So it's a good method to go by in many cases.

 

the problem isn't that the game is getting more money than it's worth. The problem would be in cases like Dungeon Keeper or even Clash of Clans and Candy Crush that nickle and dime, and that's how they become huge successes. It's how it's done and made successful, not that it's just successful.

[Ming Ming Hatsune]

Wasn't Sonic Runners ad free before the global launch though? And it was apparently doing pretty well still. A lot of the issues people have with the game(the wheel, red rings, etc.) weren't present until the global release, so acting like those problems have to be there for the game to work is a bit misguided.

 

BL mentioned Splatoon before, and even more recent, Until Dawn through word of mouth spread like wild fire. So it's a good method to go by in many cases.

 

the problem isn't that the game is getting more money than it's worth. The problem would be in cases like Dungeon Keeper or even Clash of Clans and Candy Crush that nickle and dime, and that's how they become huge successes. It's how it's done and made successful, not that it's just successful.

Sonic Runners was ad-free yes, but the game was only available through Canada and Japanese stores, meaning less active users in the game and probably had less things to pay for. All products and services are created from a loss, so most likely what happened pre-global launch Sega was losing money with Runners. Because, hardly anyone is going to buy red star rings. And there were no ads. Again from the consumer's point of view, it looked fine but on the opposite is a different story.

I know about Until Dawn, I have interest, but I still don't have the game. I'm not saying word of mouth is a bad method, in fact it's actually pretty good, but word of mouth can only get you far. Will people still talk about Until Dawn 6 months from now?

And lol at Dungeon Keeper and Clash of Clans. Clear examples of microtransaction money-grabbing. Is Dungeon Keeper a success? I know CoC is for the wrong reasons, but DK? 

[KHCast]

DK I don't think was, but it's the clearest example of when companies try to get away with that shit.

 

Well Until Dawn did something pretty innovative and different in this game industry, so I think it's safe to say it won't get lost in the dust. Just like Last of Us now that I think about it. I mean lots of games are still talked about months after. Smash Bros? Zelda? Kingdom Hearts? Lots of titles are still relevant.

[Ming Ming Hatsune]

DK I don't think was, but it's the clearest example of when companies try to get away with that shit.

 

Well Until Dawn did something pretty innovative and different in this game industry, so I think it's safe to say it won't get lost in the dust. Just like Last of Us now that I think about it. I mean lots of games are still talked about months after. Smash Bros? Zelda? Kingdom Hearts? Lots of titles are still relevant.

But let's be honest. Runners, even if it was an offline game will not be talked years after like Smash Bros, Kingdom Hearts etc. Those titles are more unique and innovative than Sonic Runners. Runners is just a 2D endless runner.

And I'm going to be honest here, I don't know much about Until Dawn but I certainly heard good things about it. If it's as good as The Last of Us, Uncharted, Heavy Rain and such, then it will be talked for years I guess.

[KHCast]

As shady as Warner Bros is, I'll have to give them credit here on Mortal Kombat iOS. The game is organized and knows what players want. It doesn't pound you with notifications, can be played offline, and you can get characters fairly without needing to gamble. Oh and no advertisements and it's a free game. I haven't spent a dime and got one of the strongest characters in the game. This is a game made by WB and it feels way more consumer friendly. Yeah the microtransactions are there, but you actually have to select the store icon for them to show up. And there's a good balance of in-game purchasable and real world purchasable things. (You can use souls and Koins to get character packs, items,etc.) 

 

runners is Sonic Teams first mobile game, and it really shows, when compared to other games on the platform. It's honestly a mess, even if under the mess is a decent game.

[NoirSuede]

As shady as Warner Bros is, I'll have to give them credit here on Mortal Kombat iOS. The game is organized and knows what players want. It doesn't pound you with notifications, can be played offline, and you can get characters fairly without needing to gamble. Oh and no advertisements and it's a free game. I haven't spent a dime and got one of the strongest characters in the game. This is a game made by WB and it feels way more consumer friendly. Yeah the microtransactions are there, but you actually have to select the store icon for them to show up. And there's a good balance of in-game purchasable and real world purchasable things. (You can use souls and Koins to get character packs, items,etc.) 

 

runners is Sonic Teams first mobile game, and it really shows, when compared to other games on the platform. It's honestly a mess, even if under the mess is a decent game.

MKX iOS is a companion app designed to promote Mortal Kombat X while Runners is it's own thing, while Warner Bros can afford to lose money on that game as long as MKX sells more than enough to cover that game's cost, Sega can't afford to lose money on Runners because it's a standalone game with it's own budget.

[Blacklightning]

 

And can I ask you this. Why are you against Sega putting ads in a F2P game? Are you paying them to see the ads or something?

Both make money at the expense of the player's convenience, so there's really no reason to paint them under separate brushes. You can argue all you want that one is a lesser evil, but it still stands to reason that the game could have - and did, as mentioned by Mike - worked without them.

That's all the clarification I wanted to give. Otherwise, I'm done here.

[AshGreninJovan]

MKX iOS is a companion app designed to promote Mortal Kombat X...

It's not a companion app because it's about 1 GB to download.

[KHCast]

MKX iOS is a companion app designed to promote Mortal Kombat X while Runners is it's own thing, while Warner Bros can afford to lose money on that game as long as MKX sells more than enough to cover that game's cost, Sega can't afford to lose money on Runners because it's a standalone game with it's own budget.

however Sega does have big blockbuster titles to make their big money. And Sonic Boom merch. And Sonic overall. So, they still have other ways to make tons of cash, so probably could stand to take a page out of MKX's book. I say it again, Sega isn't some small developer with barely any money that needs to do these. They're a AAA Developer that rakes in shit tons of cash. If a game isn't "successful" and didn't bring enough cash to them, it's usually cause they bloated production or didn't advertise the damn thing.

Edited September 9, 2015 by Michael Munroe

[Multikaris]

Alright, we need to shift off the freemium crisis and talk about how Sonic should work. I'd say Runners got his gameplay and genre downpat, but it doesn't really have the edge Sonic is supposed to have.  I'd say make the graphics a little bit more detailed, but still colorful and abstract. Some characters do look good in that chibi-style, like Tikal. I suggest adding in more immersive features to mobile Sonic games, such as the ability to scan things with NFC or simpler scanning processes. For example, "Transformers: Robots in Disguise" allows players to scan (the symbols on) RID toys to add the corresponding character to the game. I think one should also be able to scan the palm of their hand to gain power in the game. Augmented reality elements would also be really cool.

 

Also, no required gambling for obtaining characters.

[Milo]

runners is Sonic Teams first mobile game, and it really shows, when compared to other games on the platform. It's honestly a mess, even if under the mess is a decent game.

The really odd thing is that the game seemed to run fine in the majority of instances during the soft-launch period.

Then the worldwide launch happened. Phones started to heat up, gameplay started to freeze up, data started getting eaten up...everything went to hell.