The lack of offline play on the iPad, for instance, is a shitstorm waiting to happen.
Seriously, can someone explain why this would be?
Because basically every other deckbuilding game adapted for the iPad has it, and because not everyone's iPad is in a Wifi hotspot at all times. Also see Diablo III.
...and because iPad users demand that everything be optimized for their device.
I know this is trolling, but I feel compelled to respond anyway.
First off, buying a non-iOS mobile device is like using a non-Windows desktop OS. You just can't expect as many games, because most of the game developers primarily target iOS/Windows, and most people who care about games use iOS/Windows, because of that. So while you're free to choose whichever mobile device you like, it rankles me a bit to complain about games when you chose a platform that gets fewer games, just like an iOS user would be silly to complain too much about lack of customizability.
Second, mobile devices benefit a lot from native apps, much more than desktop OSes. For example:
- Mobile devices are not as powerful as even laptop computers, so performance is a big deal.
- Screen size is limited, so the app needs to be designed for the particular screen. Each device with a different screen size potentially needs a re-thinking of the design in order to have a good interface.
- It's difficult to accurately fake native touch response, for scrolling, etc.
Third, iOS devices alone are a big games market. If the market is that big, it's not unreasonable to expect a top-notch offering. If it isn't top-notch, there are lots of alternatives to play instead.
So, uh, I wasn't actually trying to troll. Just making an observation that you seem to in fact agree with. Like, I am not saying you are wrong to demand such things, just that you demand them.
In this particular case, I find it funny, because their software is just total garbage everywhere, and people are like "it isn't optimized for us", and I'm like, "it's a terrible product everywhere - it's not that they hate you particularly".
Having said that, your argument for 'well, but they should pay more attention to us' is sorta messed up. If it were a question of iOS vs some other mobile platform exclusively, then yeah, that would sorta make sense (though on the other hand, your reasoning is the exact same thing as the crappy price scale, except it favors you here). But that's not the comparison - you're also looking at people playing from browsers on laptops and desktops and what have you, and that's a much bigger market.
Of course, what we actually have is something that work well exactly nowhere - well, maybe in their headquarters it works fine. But nowhere for the public. Which makes the whole thing kinda moot...
Fair enough, I just see enough "iPad "-type comments that I read more into your post than was there.
The thing is that optimizing for the iPad doesn't mean being platform-exclusive. The real question is whether the same client codebase should be targeting every platform, or whether each targeted platform should receive separate development. FunSockets has apparently based their entire business around developing in HTML5 to hit every platform at once (which is bold and likely why they got funding), but it's really not clear that HTML5 is up to the task yet, especially on mobile devices.
The difference between the Goko-on-desktop situation and the Goko-on-mobile situation is that, once the launch and security problems are worked out, Goko on desktop will be pretty good. (Not quite as good as isotropic, true, but a totally reasonable implementation.) On the other hand, Goko-on-mobile was reportedly quite a bit less playable in the beta, and there are fundamental problems that can't be easily fixed--offline play, for example, will take a ton of work given that they apparently weren't planning to support it.
Two things: One, you have a lot more optimism than I do. It seems to me that they know how to code some stuff, but you know, I know how to code some stuff, and I would never ever try to write a platform* like they are....
Second, I guess the real thing is you are trying to make this like, apples-to-apples comparison, right? But then you start talking about offline play, which is something you... don't get in a browser. So really you want something different. Not that there's really anything wrong with wanting that, but the thing I don't understand is why there is this presumption that you are expecting to get it. Like, you start out saying, oh, it can all be the same, but by the end of your paragraph, you're back to looking for me-specific things. Which again, there's nothing wrong with wanting that. But at the same time, if you don't get it... okay, you didn't get it. They didn't choose to go that route. Deal with it?
Like, no, I agree with you, in a fantasy-land, you would have all kinds of nice niche features that fully show off the capabilities of every possible kind of platform. Like, man, I can have it all gussied up to work just swell on Windows 3.11, and you can have it work just perfectly for the Macintosh II, and my friend has it running nice on his Commodore 64, Billy has it running on his iPhone, Joe has it on his Android phone, Bob has it going on his windows 8 device, Cindy Lou Who can play it on her candy-canes, whatever. That would be sweet, there's no denying. But it's also unfeasible. So, I guess what it comes down to is, you accept they can't make it perfect for everything, why do you think they should, from *their* perspective, put the effort in to make it perfect for your platform? Because it seems to me, making it just good everywhere and perfect nowhere would be a reasonable thing (or maybe it's impossible to design something that way, and we are seeing that by this spectacular failure; but at least you could see the motivation anyway). And then really, where is the motivation to tailor it for ANY specific kind of platform, because you as a customer are going to be pretty upset if they charge you extra for that platform customisation, but really, it's not like that is free.
Well, okay, I also don't understand why you'd WANT offline mode; playing those bots gets so boring, so fast.
*hey company that wants to hire me to write a platform for you after sending me through a couple years of schooling - I will take that offer