High-profile console, PC games failing in iOS transitions

Some major game franchises are failing to carry over their success from the PC and consoles to iOS, <em>BGR</em> notes. One <a href="http://macnn.com/rd/276232==http://bgr.com/2012/12/26/ipad-app-sales-gta-modern-combat-269009/" rel='nofollow'>example</a> is the port of <a href="http://macnn.com/rd/276233==https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/grand-theft-auto-vice-city/id578448682?mt=8" rel='nofollow'>Grand Theft Auto: Vice City</a>, originally developed by Rockstar for the PC and PS2. Although the iOS game hit second place on the US iPhone app chart on December 8, it fell to 36th place by December 22; it only climbed back to 25th place on Christmas Day. The title is doing still worse on the iPad charts, having sunk to 52nd by yesterday. In terms of revenue the game is only 75th, despite costing $5.<br><br><a href="http://macnn.com/rd/276229==https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/baldurs-gate-enhanced-edition/id515114051?mt=8" rel='nofollow'>Baldur's Gate: Enhanced Edition</a>, an iPad port of a famous BioWare role-playing game, has slipped out of the top 200 in terms of revenue. That may be a result of the title's $10 cost. By contrast, many native iPad games are priced at $5 or less, although in many cases that excludes in-app purchases.

Some franchises not based on old games from yesteryear are succeeding, however. <a href="http://macnn.com/rd/276230==https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/minecraft-pocket-edition/id479516143?mt=8" rel='nofollow'>Minecraft: Pocket Edition</a> is currently fifth in paid iPad downloads and sixth in terms of revenue. t's doing even better in the iPhone charts, where it's third for both downloads and revenue, in spite of a $7 pricetag. Rockstar's <a href="http://macnn.com/rd/276231==https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/grand-theft-auto-3/id479662730?mt=8" rel='nofollow'>Grand Theft Auto 3</a> is ninth amongst iPhone downloads, but costs just 99 cents.

No wonder that games simply fail to remain popular as ios ports. Playing them with some drawn controllers on the display is really annoying and kills any joy in playing a game. For some games ios devices work good and for a lot of them they simply don't work. When I play, I prefer to use a physical controler instead of taping on the screen.

I almost got Vice City for my iPad but was hesitant (actually, the app size is what made me decide not to).

Why did it fall off the charts? I figured it's probably a watered down version of the console game? It sounds like everyone got excited about the announcement, then bought it, and realized it sucked. Apple can claim their iOS devices to be a superb gaming platform, but when:

• (most) native apps are novice quality time wasters, and
• the premium quality titles (e.g. Gameslop) force you to spend $$$ through the in-app purchases, and
• console ports suck because of the lack of physical controls

...it isn't going to happen. Period.

The porting quality is great. IMO, if a ten-year-old video game reaches number two on the charts and then stays within the top 25, calling that a "failure" is laughable.

I agree w/ SegNerd...why would anyone expect a 10 year old game to garner huge excitement just because it can be played now on an iPad? Comparatively speaking, a "new" game like Infinity Blade has been a huge success on the iPad. Or how about Angry Birds which started on iPhone, became a worldwide success, and can now be played just about anywhere. Do you think as many people play Angry Birds on PC as play on smartphones/tablets? Not even close!

While the Angry Birds success is commendable and the developers are probably now millionaires, it's still just a time waster.

But despite that- like I said in my third previous point, most ports are lacking because even being 10 years old- they have to adapt to an entirely different control mechanism, for a game that wasn't designed for it. It's kind of like the porting problem the Wii and the Wii U have- taking a game designed for a classic controller and then trying to make it work with motion controls or the new tablet.

I agree with your point too, but I feel it's more a combination of our two posts. There will always be less enthusiasm for a much older game than during its original launch, regardless of the platform.

But as for the "time waster", that really gets to the heart of a different matter. Just like the popularity of tablets now over PCs, games like Angry Birds are vastly successful because they don't require the need for high levels of experience, hardware and time to use in comparison to the complexity of most popular PC games.