Recent Bombcasts and discussion for GOTY has had several IOS games in the heat of the discussion. Games like Super Bros, Draw Something, and Infinity Blade 2 have been talked about for some amount of time in recent memory. Should Giantbomb cover IOS games more often and add it into more discussions or should it stay the same? Please don't make this discussion into another war against IOS games and whether or not their real games. They have their place in modern gaming and are successful enough to not be ignored.

Why didn't you turn it into a poll?

My answer would be: No

I don't think so. Like you said above with the game you listed, those games were worth mentioning or covering, where most iOS games are not. It seems like if a game is good enough it will get some sort of mention, whether it be the Bombcast or in Patrick's 'Worth Reading' posts.

Mobile games are tame-waster/throw-away games, just like they always have been. Yes, there are some more robust ones, but, imo, none have shown they can actually be 'great' games.

No.

I'd rather have them give their full attention to real games. You can go to Tested for great coverage on iOS apps.

That would probably fuck up the wiki pretty good...

No. Their coverage of the standard console/pc market is thin enough as it is.

If people were paying $60 for them and they were worth $60 then yes. Most IOS games are throw away games at throw away prices. People don't look for information about them beyond looking at app store reviews.

No, they barely do any coverage already, let's not spread it any thinner. Plus iOS sucks.

I think it's fine when they discuss it at the beginning of the podcast when they talk about what they're playing. A few Quick Looks of some of the more expensive and higher profile games is fine. I don't expect reviews, video reviews, or much coverage beyond that though. These games are mostly $1-$3 and people need less guidance in trying to decide if they're worth the time/money.

Nope, I'd rather they expand their coverage of real games.

@TooWalrus said:

That would probably fuck up the wiki pretty good...

They are already in the wiki...

Now that Tested is gone, it would make sense, but I hope they don't.

Only if it's to point out that GTA3 is on iPhone or whatever. I don't need a review of Angry Birds in Dimension X.

They should cover good games. What platform they appear on is inconsequential.

Hell no.

@Skald said:

They should cover good games. What platform they appear on is inconsequential.

I like my iOS games on occasion, but real gems are still rare.

Sword & Sworcery would have been a good example of something that deserved coverage, but I can't think of much else. So while I appreciate iOS games, I'm going to say "No."

Actually Giant Bomb did cover Infinity Blade II. I don't see a need for any great increase in the number of iOS games they cover, but I guess it'd be cool to see them spend at least a little time with games like Draw Something, or anything that's particular original and popular on the marketplace. I'm not hugely bothered. Really the whole iOS thing used to be covered by Will and Norm but I don't even know what's going on there any more.

@EuanDewar said:

@Skald said:

They should cover good games. What platform they appear on is inconsequential.

Don't agree with that at all, some of the best content on this site is them covering extremely bad games. I rather have them cover a bad console or pc game than a good iOS or Android game. They have a limited amount of time and I would like them to keep their current focus. Or get an extra staff member for this stuff of course.

Maybe the "major" ones but in general I'd say no: there are too many mobile games coming out each week.

I have no bias against iOS gaming (really it should be mobile gaming as to not ignore Android devices which now outnumber iOS devices), so I say WHEN there is a legitimate mobile game that has the story,presentation, gameplay, and longevity worth covering, then it should be covered. Sorry to say there aren't many mobile games that fall in this category. Really, do we really want Jeff writing a review/preview of Angry Birds in Space? or doing a quicklook of Temple Run? The gameplay/mechanics for most mobile games can be learned and previewed in 2 minutes. I really doubt it is worth their time.

They should not do Reviews of of IOS games there to small of a game to put time into when there are big AAA titles that need reviews of.

I think I read on one of their Twitters or Formsprings or something, that the reason they don't do more iOS coverage is that the users seem to throw hissy fits whenever they do.

No! Do you see what they do this week? Next to nothing because of PAX and Jeff being in Rome. They would need 2 more people on staff to even cover all the interesting games that come out on the regular platforms.

IOS would be fucking suicide with the staff they have now. For the record, I think they should hire one or two more guys or get Kevin van Ord or Justin Calvert from Gamespot :D

No that market is way too oversaturated for them to be glancing towards. The way they've handled it so far, by touching on games that bear mentioning in passing in such a manner as to just giving a game certain exposure, has worked out well for me in finding games in the sea of titles on the App Store. If I'm unsure about the quality of an iOS game, more often than not, Youtube has been a great avenue in getting a glimpse into what I'd possibly be buying as these experiences are very well documented in brief snippets of video, and not to mention the App of the Day features the Tested guys used to put out.

Remember: Giant Bomb is a site with a smaller team of dudes who tend to review a much smaller pool of games. While it is certainly in their realm to review an iOS title, it is not their focus, so chances are they'll only review something that is huge.

No, stay away from the great evil!

There really is no point in reviewing $0.99 games, nobody is reading a review to make such a frivolous decision.

Oh no I spent a DOLLAR on one shitty iOS game!

There's no point in offering in-depth coverage of games that cost a dollar.

@Kidavenger said:

There really is no point in reviewing $0.99 games, nobody is reading a review to make such a frivolous decision.

Isn't there a worth to presenting a critical opinion regardless of the cost? One might say that Steel Battalion was so ridiculously expensive that no one was going make such a frivolous expenditure, but sites still reviewed it. Regardless of the cost, whether cheap or expensive, we can still make critical judgements that aren't just about cost vs. quality.

I'd be interested to see what reviewers think of specific games. The final score might simply be less determinative of whether or not I make that final purchase.

@Sooty said:

There's no point in offering in-depth coverage of games that cost a dollar.

So a free-to-play game should never be reviewed?

@BrockNRolla said:

@Sooty said:

There's no point in offering in-depth coverage of games that cost a dollar.

So a free-to-play game should never be reviewed?

It's pretty obvious those games are not only cheap but also lack any real depth to get into, didn't think that needed stating. The combination just makes them not worth covering. I'd argue that reviewing free to play games is also a strange idea because many of them are MMOs or constantly evolving games like League of Legends.

Who is going to read a page long review of Angry Birds, I mean, really? The simple reviews on the app stores is a good fit for the platform.

The majority of notable releases on the mobile platforms can usually be summed up like this: YEP this is a game and it's pretty fun for a dollar. 5 STARS.

Leave it to IGN.

If there are people playing iOS games (probably mostly patrick) and they feel like one should be talked about then it will. Otherwise there no reason to force converge on it if no one wants to cover it.

@Sooty said:

@BrockNRolla said:

@Sooty said:

There's no point in offering in-depth coverage of games that cost a dollar.

So a free-to-play game should never be reviewed?

It's pretty obvious those games are not only cheap but also lack any real depth to get into, didn't think that needed stating. The combination just makes them not worth covering. I'd argue that reviewing free to play games is also a strange idea because many of them are MMOs or constantly evolving games like League of Legends.

Who is going to read a page long review of Angry Birds, I mean, really? The simple reviews on the app stores is a good fit for the platform.

That seems like a rather unfair assumption to make and an arbitrary piece of evidence to make the assumption upon. Sword and Sworcery is several hours long and includes an incredible original soundtrack along with its other game elements. A lot of more expensive games don't even have those things. A $0.99 price point could as easily be a business model as is could be a judgement of value.

I'm not claiming Angry Birds should be reviewed either. There isn't enough depth there worth a full review. But, that isn't true of every game on the App Store. My response to the overall question was that GB shouldn't increase their coverage of iOS games because there aren't a lot of games worth reviewing on the App Store, but there are some games that do deserve coverage. Making a blanket statement that a game for a dollar isn't worth covering puts an arbitrary limit on what should or should not be reviewed for a reason that isn't conclusive of anything but the amount of money you'll spend for the experience.

NO!

Depends on the game.

The next Angry Birds is probably not interesting (but theoretically could be?) But if something good comes along that they want to quick look? Sure.

As long as the focus of the site remains as is and it doesn't suddenly become exclusively reviewing facebook games, I'd be fine with it.

I think the lead word, as always, is "would it be interesting to cover this?"

Fuck no.

@BrockNRolla said:

@Sooty said:

@BrockNRolla said:

@Sooty said:

There's no point in offering in-depth coverage of games that cost a dollar.

So a free-to-play game should never be reviewed?

It's pretty obvious those games are not only cheap but also lack any real depth to get into, didn't think that needed stating. The combination just makes them not worth covering. I'd argue that reviewing free to play games is also a strange idea because many of them are MMOs or constantly evolving games like League of Legends.

Who is going to read a page long review of Angry Birds, I mean, really? The simple reviews on the app stores is a good fit for the platform.

That seems like a rather unfair assumption to make and an arbitrary piece of evidence to make the assumption upon. Sword and Sworcery is several hours long and includes an incredible original soundtrack along with its other game elements. A lot of more expensive games don't even have those things. A $0.99 price point could as easily be a business model as is could be a judgement of value.

I'm not claiming Angry Birds should be reviewed either. There isn't enough depth there worth a full review. But, that isn't true of every game on the App Store. My response to the overall question was that GB shouldn't increase their coverage of iOS games because there aren't a lot of games worth reviewing on the App Store, but there are some games that do deserve coverage. Making a blanket statement that a game for a dollar isn't worth covering puts an arbitrary limit on what should or should not be reviewed for a reason that isn't conclusive of anything but the amount of money you'll spend for the experience.

Well that's just a 99% vs 1% thing, I don't think all the games on iOS are short/depthless/throwaway, just a lot of them are, especially the cheap ones. Of course there's nothing wrong with a game being throwaway for that price point, I just don't think the platform sees many games worthy of 'real game like' coverage.

No.

I'd love to hear about good iOS games. It's not about deciding whether to spend $0.99 or not, it's about finding out that game exists in the first place. I'd love to see the guys cover more free indie PC games as well. They're worth the money, but are they worth my time?

Games are games, people. Hating on iOS is just as cringeworthy as when PC gamers hate on consoles.

@Snail said:

No.

I'd rather have them give their full attention to real games. You can go to Tested for great coverage on iOS apps.

Absolutely not, no.

Yes, absolutely. I wouldn't mind some iOS game coverage here and there seeing how they cover 3DS and Vita.

Besides, I would rather see iOS coverage over Kinect or Move.

No, it's fine if they talk about the truly outstanding titles that don't exist anywhere else but I don't need any more coverage of "random puzzle game that I had fun with for 10 minutes while waiting for Pizza".

Nope.

They should cover the games they are interested in, regardless of platform.

No.

Nah.