Well, if there’s one thing you can always count on, it’s never being able to count on anything. The original idea of this podcast episode when we were throwing together some notes about it was we were all going to get our new iPhones, set ’em up, and talk about what it’s like gaming on them. Problem is, UPS didn’t show up for Jared until it was super late (they actually deliver his phone while we’re recording) and my iCloud restore took so long I couldn’t really do much beyond use the stock apps for most of the day. So, with all of our good plans out the window, we just sort of talk about our first impressions and how weird it is that we’ve seen so little perceived advancement in mobile 3D graphics (among other stuff). We’ll have a more normal episode next week, I promise.
Don’t forget to shoot us emails with any questions, feedback, or anything else relevant or irrelevant to [email protected]. We read ’em all, and love decoding messages written entirely in emoji. 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
Stitcher: The TouchArcade Show via Stitcher Radio for Podcasts
RSS Feed: The TouchArcade Show
Direct Link: TouchArcadeShow-274.mp3, 49.5MB
I think that the smartest thing Niantic and company could do is to keep the economic model as it is (basically uninvading) and push hard on partnerships.
I mean, if you make a rare pokemon available only inside of, let's say Gamestop (which the main titles already do, btw), or Mac Donald's, or Nike or Name It, they could easily make buckloads of money not seen in the App Store.
It's a lot harder to sell pokestops/rare poke blinds when you're seen as a has-been.
With stuff like this happening I'm now curious as to whether or not Apple and Google are trying to stealth tank Nintendy.
What do Apple or Google have to do with Supercell or Niantic?
Apple is the platform for all the iOS games, they get at least 30% of all app store purchases, including IAP (which is one possible discredit to the stealth tank possibility). Google, their competitor, owns Niantic, and is possibly also the opponent of Nintendu. I'm trying to figure out if Nintendo didn't want the game to compete too much with their own (but then why have a peripheral?) or if Niantic/Google/Apple didn't want it to do as well as it was... (Apple only advertises the game on the app store once it starts doing poorly, the peripheral finally comes out when the game is at its worst) The game really has insane amounts of potential, I'm just not sure why it wasn't acted on... I can't see all the pieces though...
Oh and Supercell... if I had to put it in there somewhere, is a competitor but I don't see it directly factoring into the Pokedrama...
This week i spent money for Clash Royale the first time after playing it daily since the first day. And why? Because there was a superdupercheap one-time-only-offer (10 € for 50 € goodies) and i already had decided to spent a bit just to honor this great and well done game.
I think that many others took this offer too, so there was a boost in sales.
Part of Pokémon Go's appeal/non-appeal is that it gets people out and moving around. I've discovered artistic and historical treasures that please me greatly, and I'm walking, which with my age and medical condition, is a very good thing! But. It's just collecting more and more of the same thing, and fighting for Gyms one can't hold for long. It gets old. And when I'm at home/someplace else with no Pokestops, no Gyms and walking isn't an option, and still want an amusement, PG gives me nothing to do.
I've enjoyed it, and bought many an incubator. But I've gotten to the point where I won't be putting more money in it. Not enough ROI.