Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Pokémon GO: The Data Behind America’s Latest Obsession

similarweb.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 342 posts

Re: Pokémon GO: The Data Behind America’s Latest Obsession

#231

Post by nightpool »

chatmasta wrote: post #142
kalleboo wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn't that depend on if they can make money on this model? This is a 126-year-old business, not a startup that's starving for "eyeballs" to increase their VC valuation. Selling hardware and $60 games could be a better (and more long-term) business than selling in-app "coins". (Or not!) I guess we'll see now.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but Nintendo is not the creator of the Pokemon Go game. Niantic (spelling?) licenses the Pokemon brand from Nintendo. So in this case the comparison is not between selling in-app coins vs games. It's between licensing IP to the company that sells coins, vs selling games.

I believe the app is a collaboration between Niantic and TPC, rather then just a straight licensing. Niantic has the AR-game expertise and has very clearly learned a lot of good lessons from running Ingress for three (4?) years now, while the Pokemon Company obviously knows a lot about making a good Pokemon game and probably had a lot of creative input.

Re: Pokémon GO: The Data Behind America’s Latest Obsession

#233

Post by flatline »

efaref wrote: post #118
flatline wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's too bad in a way, Pokemon Go is a way better idea, Ingress always felt like some cool ideas thrown together in search of a unifying theme. It is the only AR game with any real lasting appeal that I'm aware of, until perhaps Pokemon Go, but a lot of the choices made in building Ingress are less than ideal for Pokemon, and yet they form its foundation. I was never really clear what kept Niantic afloat, I always fi…

I thought the purpose of Ingress was to crowdsource location data and photographs of points of interest for Google Maps.

A common speculation, but I can't fathom how much value this adds to Google Maps, if any, what with street view and other 360 degree content they have at their disposal. I suppose that the crowd-sourcing aspect of it could serve to identify small sites of interest off the beaten path? Again though, what possible value does this provide to Google maps? Plus, a lot of the sites are already well known locations (churches) or are bunk (the "big red ball" out front of a local target)

Re: Pokémon GO: The Data Behind America’s Latest Obsession

#234

Post by funkaster »

EtienneK wrote: post #199
donkeyd wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yet I've seen a lot of comments of people who really enjoy the augmented reality part of it, which was inherited largely from Ingress. Sure, the Pokemon IP is a huge part of the reason it took off. But the reason people actually like it is much bigger than that.

Strange, 'cause most of the tips online say to turn off the AR stuff since it makes it more difficult to catch Pokemon. I don't use it at all anymore.

AR != Just the camera. It's the geolocation of stuff. The camera part is just a gimmick and pretty annoying.

Re: Pokémon GO: The Data Behind America’s Latest Obsession

#235

Post by ythl »

burkaman wrote: post #232
skc wrote: post #228

This game has all the makings of a fad. The AR angle is new but this is simply Flappy Birds all over again.

You don't think including a brand that has been globally popular for 20 years changes anything?

I think the layman that is just jumping on the fad wagon will get bored of Pokemon Go within a month or two. The diehard Pokemon fans will continue playing, but I don't see how they can keep the hook in for long.

It's like Pokemon Cards - they went from cards to practically currency back to cards within 6 months.

Re: Pokémon GO: The Data Behind America’s Latest Obsession

#236

Post by masklinn »

Niksko wrote: post #230
NamTaf wrote: post #88

If Google had any sense, they would be throwing a tonne more at this. It may be Ingress with less features and a Pokemon skin but that latter part is exactly the mainstream appeal they need to make AR big. This is their big chance to create a new market. If they sort out the bugginess and roll out decent features in the next couple of months to keep retention, they're onto something big. At near-on midnight on Saturd…

It just feels like such an enormous misstep to me, I can't even fathom it. Why not wait until the game was much more polished and had many more traditional Pokemon features before release? Nobody will be playing this in a month unless Niantic are really really fast with the content updates. Like, one per week fast, until it's much more deep than it currently is.

> Why not wait until the game was much more polished and had many more traditional Pokemon features before release?

The game has all the G1 pokemon. I've had friends ask if it had "that modern garbage" before considering installing it, so having just G1 sounds like an excellent pick, it doesn't hinder younger people and recaptures the RGBY generation which didn't keep up with the series.

There's plenty of things to add and improve (including but not limited to the servers) and the rest of the international rollout to complete before there's any reason to expand to Gold and Silver.

Re: Pokémon GO: The Data Behind America’s Latest Obsession

#237

Post by 27182818284 »

chatmasta wrote: post #142
kalleboo wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn't that depend on if they can make money on this model? This is a 126-year-old business, not a startup that's starving for "eyeballs" to increase their VC valuation. Selling hardware and $60 games could be a better (and more long-term) business than selling in-app "coins". (Or not!) I guess we'll see now.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but Nintendo is not the creator of the Pokemon Go game. Niantic (spelling?) licenses the Pokemon brand from Nintendo. So in this case the comparison is not between selling in-app coins vs games. It's between licensing IP to the company that sells coins, vs selling games.

Nintendo became an investor in Niantic in October of 2015

Re: Pokémon GO: The Data Behind America’s Latest Obsession

#238

Post by bargl »

savanaly wrote: post #229
skc wrote: post #228

This game has all the makings of a fad. The AR angle is new but this is simply Flappy Birds all over again.

Not saying it's not a fad, but isn't it different in quite a number of ways? The Pokemon brand and geo coordinate aspects had all my friends ("core gamers", if you will, who would probably not have dreamed of playing flappy birds for fun) playing it all weekend.

I'm into this game. It's fun, it gamifies walking and going to parks. I love that I can play this for a few minutes while walking my kid to the park, or while he's at the park playing.

Is it perfect? Hell no, but I play it in spite of how popular it is. It is fun, engaging, rewards activities I want to do more (walk) and really doesn't work well in the house. My wife likes that I wanted to get out of the house more this weekend.

Is it kinda sad that I need a videogame to make going outside fun for me? Yeah sorta, but that's who I am.

EDIT: One final note. This game uses the Pokemon I played with as a kid. The ones I traded on cards and really leverages that nostalgia to make it something I want to do. I want to catch these specific pokemon because I've done it before. And it's more rewarding because I have to physically earn them too.

Re: Pokémon GO: The Data Behind America’s Latest Obsession

#239

Post by AndrewOMartin »

panglott wrote: post #208
skilled wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that's a very short-sighted judgement to say that the game is nearing anywhere close to the level of games like Wow and CoD, and sadly -- it will never get there. There isn't very much flexibility that the game offers, and even it if will offer it in the future, the initial moon phase will be over by then. It's a nice example of launching a product and getting people to use it, but within a few weeks Pokemon…

Pokemon Go reminds me of nothing so much as the Macarena in 1995. It's a fad that will run its course. But a game getting that level of cultural penetration will be a real watershed.

I speculate that Tetris (possibly even just the 1989 GameBoy version) was bigger than the Macarena.

Re: Pokémon GO: The Data Behind America’s Latest Obsession

#240

Post by distantsounds »

jolux wrote: post #174
donkeyd wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yet I've seen a lot of comments of people who really enjoy the augmented reality part of it, which was inherited largely from Ingress. Sure, the Pokemon IP is a huge part of the reason it took off. But the reason people actually like it is much bigger than that.

Yes except almost nobody plays Ingress and this game hasn't been out a month and it's about to pass Twitter in popularity...

I'd love to see where you get your numbers from considering Niantic doesn't publish active player stats for Ingress.
Post reply on HN