Hacker News Reader

Comment by liquidise | Hacker News Reader

I keep seeing these comments foretelling the "inevitable" doomsday from the development community. This is a surprising sentiment. What Pokemon Go has shown, regardless of its future success, is a new ceiling for mobile app virality.

Also notable is that people always cite the issues as the reason for failure. But these issues have affected the app since day 0. Pokemon Go is having this success despite its technical flaws. Further evidence that building the right product trumps building a flawless product.

I say flip the narrative. What Pokemon Go has shown is that a product that fills a burning desire can achieve what seems like unprecedented success levels, quickly. The app doesn't need to be perfect. It needs to be something people want.

View on HN

I've been playing since day one and I've already lost interest. Most everyone I've spoken to is of the same thinking. It was fun at the beginning but there is simply not enough substance in the game to keep anyone interested for more than 2-3 weeks. There are only so many Doduos and Pidgeys you can catch before you are bored out of your mind.

I'm actually at level 23, and I'm trying to "catch them all" - or at least, all that are in my country. Once I do that, I'll probably just wait for more content. That way I'll be well positioned if new content comes out.

The game hasn't even been released in every country, and to be honest I don't think it should have been released at all (at least until the combat system was decent). However, they clearly have an extremely popular game. Even if 99% drop off, and only 50% return they will still be raking in the dough.

Just out of curiosity, how long did it take you to get to that level? I am still rocking a level 12.

Well, I leave the game open at work and just spin the stops near me (there are three). Ive also walk an average of 20k steps per day since Pokemon Go came out.

I usually walk 15k steps, so it was a 30% increase.

I think what you and a lot of other people are talking about is burnout. People who are in the mid-20s levels have likely been playing quite a bit. Even if they started on day 1. But I think the game has a lot of longevity for more casual players.

Terribly true, and in some ways disheartening. Pokemon Go is successful because of the branding and I find it hard to imagine any independent developer achieving even a faint modicum of the same success within the same category (geo-AR games) for lack of that branding. Heck, even amongst established, popular brands which other ones could possibly have gotten the necessary critical mass off their butts and outside playing the game? Pokemon was sort of the perfect storm in that sense.

And that, to me, is a shame. I quite like the overall geo-AR concept. I live in a wholly uninteresting, mostly depressed (economically) area. Pokemon Go brings vibrancy and life to the surroundings, making it worthwhile to get outside and explore this new "world".

But when Pokemon Go dies, the city will go back to being what it always was underneath; a bland mixture of concrete, terrible food, and pay day loans. Will anything be able to pick up Pokemon Go's mantle? I have my doubts, and that's disheartening.

There's alot more that can be done. AR really feels like a chance to merge the real world with the digital finally. The indie developer would build on top of the platform that these new AR experiences create, not necessarily rebuilding these monoliths themselves (there should be no need). Once everyone is "living" in this AR world, we start all over again with new things that need to be made for it.

> building the right product trumps building a flawless product.

Y Combinator has been saying this for years, and I couldn't agree more. Niantic will iterate and fix problems, but Pokemon Go would have been doomed from the start if it wasn't what people wanted.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com