621424_largerThis week was kind of a blur for me with so much cool stuff happening between Bioshock getting announced, desperately trying to beat the Military Quarter in Hearthstone, Dragon Quest IV launching, and so much more. We manage to distill all this amazement into one hour of podcast. Or, try to, anyway.

Don't forget to shoot us emails with any questions, feedback, or anything else relevant or irrelevant to podcast@toucharcade.com. We read 'em all, even if they don't make it into the podcast. As always, you can listen to us with the links below... And if you like what you hear, please subscribe and/or drop us a review in iTunes. Much appreciated!


iTunes Link: The TouchArcade Show
Zune Marketplace: TouchArcade.com Podcasts
RSS Feed: The TouchArcade Show
Direct Link: TouchArcadeShow-167.mp3, 62.0MB



This week's episode of The TouchArcade Show is sponsored by…

Simple Ball, $0.99 - Simple Ball is the brand new physics-based puzzle game for the iPhone and iPod Touch. It's simple by name, but not by nature! Simple Ball can be played by anyone, anywhere.

Your job is to get the ball to hit the finish target by using the shapes and power-ups. Each level increases in difficulty with objects and obstacles that can help or hinder your progress. Best of all, Simple Ball has 75 levels all unlocked ready to play in any order you want!

Simple Ball is available now on the App Store for $0.99. There is also a free version of Simple Ball with 25 levels.

  • Guest


  • MaqueGenio

    Regarding Bioshock it is worth noting that there are tablets in the wild running the game at higher quality then what we have seen on ios so far. And by tablets i mean x86 Atom Baytrail powered tablets that by all measures aren't as powerful as an ipad. There are plenty of videos on YT for those interested. Heres one: watch?v=HGe8RHMWYZE (i wish i could post the full adress without getting stuck on mod approval process)

    • Der-Kleine

      It's also worth mentioning that according to the video's description that footage was recorded with Fraps, not an external capture card, meaning that it would actually run a lot better than what was shown there.

    • WrenDavey

      From what I've read, the Atom used in the tablet is a quadcore. The A7 only has 2 cores. Also the ASUS Transformer T100 has 2 GB RAM, the iPad Air only has 1GB. They don't have matching specs.

      The new iPad is due to be released this fall, but BioShock for iOS is expected to be released before then. I'd wait to see what the new specs are the the next iPad and if 2K updates the graphics for the better specs once they know what those are.

    • WrenDavey

      For some reason my earlier post was deleted by the admin. What I said before is that the ASUS Transformer T100 used in the video has better specs than the current iPad Air (quardcore, 2GB RAM) and it's actually a laptop-tablet hybrid. Basically, it's a laptop with a touch screen that you can detach the keyboard. It's not the same thing as an iPad and shouldn't be compared to it.

      • Der-Kleine

        Most android phones have quadcore processors and 2 - 3GB or RAM as well though, and comparing those with an iPad isn't considered unfair.

        (Also the T100 costs less than the cheapest iPad and is running a full PC OS in the background.)

      • WrenDavey

        See my response to MaqueGenio. The difference between Apple and PC is Apple streamlines there software to work better for specific hardware, whereas Android can not.

        The T100 is not a tablet, it's a lightweight touch laptop with a bluetooth keyboard. Not the same thing. Running full Windows 8 is not a benefit for touch devices. Windows 8 isn't built for touch, touch functionality is tacked onto Windows 8. iOS is built for touch. Huge difference in functionality and user satisfaction.

      • iammane

        Windows 8 is definitely built with touch devices in mind. Using Windows 8 on a non touch device is much more a pain in the ass (good luck getting the charms up).

        Also, server 2012 is exactly the same as Win 8 UI wise. Fun fun!!!!!!!!! Makes sense with all those touch screen servers out there

      • WrenDavey

        It's definitely not. Windows 8 is built for desktop PCs and the Metro part is made for touch. You basically have two operating systems on one device. You using Metro on a PC is exactly the same frustration most Touch device users have using Windows 8 desktop.

      • Der-Kleine

        The whole point of my post was that even if the hardware is faster (I wouldn't know if it actually is) it still has to run a much bigger OS in the background (Windows 8) than an iPad (iOS).

        And the Metro side of Windows 8 is absolutely designed for touch, whereas the desktop part is made for keyboard & mouse.

      • WrenDavey

        You don't need a lot to run Windows in the background and it would take only a little more to run OS X. The point is iOS is made for touch and Windows 8 isn't. Even if the iPad ran full OS X, it's not designed for touch. It would be as frustrating as using a Window's Tablet.

        The Metro side of Winodws 8 is made for touch- somewhat, but it's tacked onto Windows 8. Windows 8 can't decide what it wants to be. You basically have two desktops, apps stored to two locations, and poor implementation of touch commands. It's not much of a benefit to have a full desktop OS on a touch device if it's not suited for touch.

        I own a ASUS Windows 8 tablet. It's incredibly frustrating to try to use native desktop apps using touch. It confuses swipes with mouse clicks AND mouse drags. And that's only the beginning what's wrong with it...

      • MaqueGenio

        Rip, is that you? The amount of spin here.... Amazing. Why wouldn't it be? It's got a tablet form factor, a tablet oriented soc that consumes about the same as any other tablet on the market, 10 hours battery, a touch based UI. So yes it's a tablet. A much more functional than iPad. Maybe that's the problem here and the reason why you are avoiding comparisons.

      • WrenDavey

        It's just common sense. ASUS made the product and they call it a 2-in-1 laptop with a 10 in. tablet. They would know better than you. Because it runs a full OS and not a mobile OS, because of better specs, it puts it into a different class of computers.

        Again, Specs are specs. They don't change based on software. You can compare them all you want, but you are comparing a laptop to a tablet.

        Even though the A7 chip benchmarked slightly better than the Atom on native software doesn't make the A7 chip have better specs than the T100. All it means is that Windows 8 does a crappy job using the processor, and Apple makes better products that out preform devices with better specs.

      • MaqueGenio

        No. Bay trail chip was designed for tablets that are just as thin and light as an ipad. The chip has a power envelope below 5W, so no fans just like iPads. Just because its x86 based and therefore can run any desktop application doesnt mean you can classity it as a laptop chip.

        The assumption that Baytrail is faster only because 4 cores vs 2 cores is ludicrous A7 stomps Baytrail both in CPU and GPU performance. I would gladly link to Anandtech review and benchmarks but as i said my post would be stuck on Approval Pending.

      • WrenDavey

        No, specs are specs. I saw the benchmarks and their pretty amazing. The benchmarks were made using native software. I doubt you can stick an A7 chip in another device and have it preform the same way it does for Apple devices. Specs don't change. The difference is Apple's software is streamlined for specific hardware and they can get the best performance out of it, whereas Windows and Android software are made to accommodate for a whole list of hardware combinations, streamlined for non of them.

        What I'm saying, Apple knows how to allocate the processor to reach those marks on their native apps, but third party developers might not have that privilege. Even if they knew how, it would be foolish to support only the newest iPad.

        Considering how lucrative the App Store is, it's not cost effective because it costs a lot of time, effort and money to port a game. You need to make the game accessible to as many people and devices as reasonably possible in order to profit from the work put into it.

    • http://twitter.com/JaredTA Jared Nelson

      That's great and all, but I'm not sure what the point is that you're trying to make 😛

      • WrenDavey

        He thinks that because the A7 chip benchmarked slightly better than the Atom processor, that Bioshock should look better on the iPad, regardless of specs.

  • http://twitter.com/JaredTA Jared Nelson

    I completely disagree. Bioshock isn't about dynamic lighting and shadows. Even the dumbed down version still retains the amazing atmosphere. The music, the voice acting, the crazy characters and story. Those are what makes Bioshock such a good game.

    I'd say an example of a mobile port completely lacking what made the original so good is Dead Rising. It was years ago, and the hardware was much less powerful, so it's understandable. But still, the thing that made Dead Rising so great was battling dozens and sometimes hundreds of zombies onscreen at once. The mobile port topped out at like ten zombies onscreen, and so while it retained some of the structure and gameplay of the full version it was not even close to the same experience. You can't say that about this Bioshock port, which for whatever it lacks in special effects, is the full original game.

  • Leydz Boomshaka-Irwin

    This is random but can you do more "Tomorrow's Games Today" please.

  • curtneedsaride

    It's weird to hear you guys kind of chide the backlash to online requirements in games. From me, my distaste for it stems from the fact that I grew up playing handheld single-player games on every Gameboy, then DS. So, I was a hardcore handheld gamer. And I happily paid $15-45 per game. And when iPhone gaming came around, it began with mostly single-player premium experiences just like my last DS. In fact, I purchased Final Fantasy III again just to be able to carry only one device with me which would function as my phone AND handheld console.

    But then came the "freemium" revolution, which brought with it a lot of waiting for timers and multiple currencies and of course an online connection to keep the timers going. However, almost all of those games were a FREE initial download. Where some people's frustrations fall now are with these online requirements being needed for what is a single-player, premium experience. Like Gameloft's use of online requirements for Captain America or Spider Man's single-player missions. It just wasn't needed. It drains battery and data. And for us hardcore handheld gamers, we play a lot even where there isn't a wifi single or any phone service at all, like on business trips.

    So, sure, kids at home shooting at terrorists or adults who are casually farming carrots and raising little sheep are happy to play when they can and just not when they can't... But if I pay $5 up to $20 for an iOS game, I want to be able to play any single-player, non-online needed parts of the game at any time if it's possible. I understand games like Avengers Alliance, that are online games, aren't offered off line, but they are actually free. But if I paid $7 to play Infinity Blade III, then they force me to only play online for their purposes, then I'm mad because it's an unnecessary hurdle for me to jump in order to enjoy the content that I've licensed to play. (Thankfully, IB III, as well as my favorite SE games are all offline single-player adventures.)

    You see, if I was a casual gamer, I probably wouldn't mind paying money and only playing when they say I can play. But, having come from a background of gaming when I want with the games I purchased, it has built in me the expectation to be able to play what I paid for under my terms. And I realize that isn't going to be possible for every game. So, I've just stopped buying the games that require an online connection on top of a premium price tag. However, games like Monster Hunter Freedom Unite have shown us it is very possible to only require an online connection when actually needing to play online. And when you want to play offline, you can do so. I happily pay full price for those games.

    So, it basically comes down to whether someone is a hardcore handheld gamer, and if they have expectations. Thankfully, developers are still developing for people like me, even if I'm becoming the minority. Otherwise, I'd probably abandon iOS gaming and opt again for a dedicated gaming machine... which, let's face it, still isn't accepted in executive meetings.