/vr/ - Retro Games

>>3589341
>>3589354
>thus, arcade games had to be GOOD to motivate you to go visit them and spend your money
So do mobile games; the same logic applies when attracting customers on app stores.
>lastly, again due to costs of development and distribution, anyone wanting an easy buck can develop a shitty, addictive game for mobile
>thus, games like Final Fight and Street Fighter II thrived in arcades while games like Flappy Bird thrive on mobile
Shitty arcade games still existed back then. Arcades were also filled with carnival-style games requiring little resources and expertise to make. A claw machine probably got more use out of any fighting game in a given arcade in it's lifetime. Mobile games with a similar amount of depth appeal to the mainstream demographic.

Pic related is a $5 fighting released for iphone comparable to the standards you're using of arcade fighting games.

Why didn't you use this game in your comparison instead? Because you never heard of it.

Games like these are not as popular as Flappy Bird for a reason: they don't meet the target demographic for mobile users.

You're choosing to make an unfair comparison.