Spore and Monkey Ball coming to iPhone Comments by Ellie Gibson

Ooh.

if any of these franchises play as well as the monkey ball demo looked like it did, my trusty gba micro might have a (very expensive) fight on its hands.

Team 17, just leave Worms alone for a bit and get Alien Breed/Project X (hell, even Super Frog) on XBLA or PSN.

This could turn the (IMO amazing) iPhone into the 3rd portable platform, and maybe a DS/PSP challenger. But then again, anyone remember the N-Gage?

Just make sure you include iPod Touch to the deal :)

@JonFE
It seems that all the App programmes will be ipod touch compatible too.

I'm fairly sure they go hand in hand, iPhone and iPod touch apps. Runs exactly the same OS.

ie - if it works on iPhone, it should work on iPod touch, unless it requires a network function, but then there's always WiFi.

And now that the BBC I-Player works as well. My what a wonderful device.

I'm watching Horizon from the other night right now, I can't emphasise enough how brilliant it is. It looks and controls exactly as if it's stored on the iPhone instead of being streamed from the net.

Back on topic, I'm not too sure how responsive the touch screen will be for gaming, though...

/ mark morrison mode

It's the return of the spadge (here it is)
return of the spadge (yeah it is)
the return of the spadge (here it is)
you know that he'll be game game game.

/ mark morrison mode
6/10?

How about some original content? Another worms? Another SMB?

What's important* is that the new iPhone software will work fine with company exchange servers! :)

Right now I'm using the Samsung i600 (company phone) and that's such an incredibly poor piece of hardware with awful software. I'll gladly pay a couple of hundred euro to be able to let that one go... If only my old, trusted Nokia would properly support Outlook contacts (or Plaxo) I'd still be using that.

* But of course less relevant on this site... ;)

edit: some spelling

Port command and bloody conquer to it.

It's got a touchscreen! It's a strategy game based on short fast paced skirmish matches, perfect for portable use!

EA seem willfully oblivious to the potential for this on DS, but by god, please do it on at least one mobile platform

applol.
/

Super_zee. Things are happening with regards to non-Worms, but cannot be disclosed right now. Commercially we'd be quite silly not to take various opportunities if we get the chance (much like Sega, EA and even ID). Most of the non-console device developments aren't actually developed by us incidentally. I'd personally be very surprised if the iTouch ipod doesn't support most (if not all) of this stuff too.

Platforms aimed at the gaming community need established and popular franchises if they are to succeed. The last device pointed at the gaming audience with wholly original titles was pretty much a disaster (Gizmondo anyone?). Once a platform is established, it's possible for publishers to take more risks with original products. Given that the SDK is open, you may well see wildly original games cropping from the Indy scene, which is a very good thing in my mind.

I think claiming that the survival of every platform since the gameboy depended on being able to offer a further reiteration of your tired old franchise is a bit of a stretch, Spadge old chap. Like two competing brands of cola, I couldn't actually tell the difference between Armageddon and World Party, and since then I've not even registered most of the new releases, much less planned my investment on new consoles around the ability to procure one.

Don't get me wrong, I've many a fond memory of hours spent glued to a game of Worms down the years, alone and with friends. But I think a lot of gamers feel you maybe should have had the courage at some point to be a little less indulgent with regards to the 'commercial opportunities' that came your way and decided to have a go at making something new. I mean, let's face it, rereleasing the same game year on year with a couple of new weapons and uninspired 'game modes' qualifies as a 'commercial opportunity' - it's little wonder Epic are smarting this year from the backlash of consumer disinterest having released Unreal Tournament for the sixth time. It's not that I don't see the mutual dependency between financial clout and the capacity to innovate - would anyone be playing a wii without all those zeldas and mario parties? - but surely the [mad] cash cow has churned enough cream over the past 8 years for you to dabble with the idea of releasing a game with a vertebrate protagonist?

Lemmings don't count.

Fair comment, although for the last 3 years we've being doing just what you suggest, the reality being that none of it is particularly visible right now due to release schedules and NDA's. Worms has become a franchise and it will continue to be a part of our title line-up, but we're long past the time whereby it was our only one. Hopefully people will enjoy the other stuff we've got going on.

Prior to the last few years (namely 2002-2005) it was simply about survival in an extremely tough environment where anything original was deemed high risk. When you grow to a studio size of 80+ you can't take as many risks as you did when there was a dozen of you and projects were (a) under your entire control, including the publishing (b) relatively low-risk in terms of revenue.

I realise that established and hard-core gamers may have had their fill of Worms over the years, but the market is expanding and much like people wish to play the likes of Poker, Scrabble etc, quite a few wish to play Worms if the sales are anything to go by. I'd also suggest that as a "tired old brand" it did well to be the 'most played title on XBLA in 2007' - a nice ornate glass award sits proudly amongst the others at our office as testament to that.

As for original titles, I'd simply have a look at all the indy devs out there and who's producing a lot of original IP on major platforms; it's not very many - there's a reason for that, based on risk, time, opportunity cost and more besides. The most originality comes from teams who have much less financial and time-related pressures - and that's obviously a place where all indy developers wish to be, but the truth is very very few can afford to work that way. It's also the reason why many went to the wall - I don't intend to join them.

Incidentally, whilst you're enjoying poking fun at Epic, is it me or did they release a multi-million, system-selling title not so long back that was a completely new IP? Course they did, but I guess that doesn't count either... although it might do now that they're so very obviously beavering away on a sequel - success begets sequels, that's just how it works.

Spadge, thanks for getting back to me (and with such a prompt, frank and honest reply!). My comments, whatever their worth, were those of a gamer, of someone with very much an external perspective - certainly I appreciate that established developers, of a certain size and beyond, must have a difficult relationship with publishers/investors who focus on what has been profitable in the past, and not so much on what could be profitable in the future. Funnily enough, I was still picturing Team 17 being very much the ' dozen or so' that put together the original game; I should have cottoned on when you casually spoke in your first post of the indie scene as something removed from your own position. Being so much bigger a team must, as you've said, greatly increase your commitments and responsibilities.

Evidently Worms is something perfectly suited to a platform like XBLA - starting from the base point of a fun multiplayer game, you've also got quick easy access to opponents the world over, a network purpose built for distribution of such games, and a nice affordable price - what's not to like? And of course the whole service is centralised for and dedicated to (and marketed at the patrons of) gaming. I'd be wary to anticipate similar success on something like a phone or an mp3 player, where these benefits aren't so readily apparent, but what do I know?

It is very exciting to hear that there are original projects in the works. Best of luck with that - and I hope when they arrive, they'll fully justify the years of incremental sequels. As someone who dozes into occasional daydreams of forging a career in the games industry - I've one year left before York uni ushers me, squinting, into the wide world outside the warren - I certainly do hope established developers attract punters to outlets where smaller teams can profitably put out games, while retaining the luxury of control over what they're making. Hopefully the likes of XBLA, the PSN, Wiiware and Steam will come to provide such havens.

I don't know what really happened at Core, but all that we gamers saw was the same game being remade, time after time, until consumers lost interest, sales dropped, and they were stripped of the license - unquestionably a big blow for the UK games industry. Would you say that for having so similar a model - a timeline of releases for your games and theirs between the originals and up to Worms 3D/Angel of Darkness (where they lost the license) is practically a mirror image - you're at all surprised that the result for you has been so different: your team now in a position secure enough to finally push into taking risks and making new games; and the unstaffed, futureless husk that was once Derby's foremost devs?

Edit: regarding Gears of War, I'll hold my hands up on that one. But I'd dare speculate that it was more Microsoft's demand for a new IP they could put alongside Halo and, um, Halo as a reason for gamers to cough up £300 for an Xbox (and then, you guessed it, duly mine for sequels) as it was Epic's burning desire to step out of the comfort zone.

The crux is that the actual business mechanics of the industry are at odds with the gamers perception of the creative/artistic nirvana that they perceive - Its only once you're in the industry you get to understand the reasoning, the decisions, the choices that have to be made. Its a very different place to the scene we entered some 18yrs ago, all as young, single lads - now most are married with kids, mortgages and the rest - none of us retired with 3 ferraris in the back garden!

As for the iphone opportunity, we know it's not got the same business potential as mainstream console formats, but its a great way to expand our market, players, into the USA, on a hot and popular device. For us its little to no risk to get a great version up and running on that (even if we don't handle the work ourselves - as is what usually happens with our titles licensed in the mobile games field).

"hateful old iTunes"

Spot the PC user.

Swish, was waiting for iphone/pod touch game support proper. Worms would be great, Spore might be half arsed but we'll have to wait and see. They should put Peggle on as well, like the iPod classic one, and let people that bought that version switch to the iPod touch version.

Finally, Audiosurf for iPod touch. I don't care how, just someone please make it happen.

"Platforms aimed at the gaming community need established and popular franchises if they are to succeed"

That's to say, as opposed to platforms aimed at .....er, what exactly? The moon? Farmers? Pets? But onto the more key statement above that a platform needs established franchises to succeed, let's review the evidence with regards to some recent successful consoles:

PlayStation: WipeOut, Tekken et al. All new.
Xbox: Halo, Project Gotham Racing et al.
Xbox 360: Gears of War
Wii: Wii Sports

Obviously there are exceptions, but where we're talking failed (handheld) consoles, the key fact has been the games have sucked and the device hasn't been up to much. That's where the divide between success and failure comes; not whether or not they've licensed five EA, Sega and Ubisoft IPs...

Thanks for the clarification on that.

BBC iPlayer support free on all the clouds wireless hotsports and now the potential for extrememly polished games and applications. I'm more and more pleased that i bought an ipod touch over xmas!!