I think you raise some very valid points. I might not have made it clear, but I don’t think smart phones are going to be encroaching on console or PC gaming. I do think they will begin to take a sizable chunk of market share from Nintendo over the coming years.

The number of input keys does have a certain impact on the kinds of games that will excel on a smart phone. As you said, RTS games are probably not a good candidate for smart phones, but turn-based games might really work well.

As far as content, I’d love to see some new IP designed specifically for smart phones because it will be difficult to port existing AAA series to smart phones while still offering the gameplay that made the series famous in the first place.

Developers could also build complimentary gaming apps. For Zelda, maybe Nintendo could build a shooting gallery app to earn rupees while you are away from the console. Or Polyphony Digital, the maker of Gran Turismo, could make a game app to manage your virtual garage by buying and selling cars while away from your console. I think there are good opportunities to expand existing series to the mobile format and not completely destroy what makes them great games.

Games have changed before. They’ll change again. Mulitplayer games upped the ante and online play brought people together like never before. But honestly, it was always the same games with the same stories and objectives–point, shoot, jump across the chasm. Dribble, shoot, play defense. Facebook gaming isn’t just an update to a tried and true formula, it’s a power boost for an industry that’s already more popular than ever.

In the March 2010 issue of GamePro magazine, Julian Murdoch pens “The Rise of Facebook Gaming,” a look at the future of social gaming and the slew of big-name talents lining up to change the world. Tops on that list is Sid Meier, the legendary creator of Civilization and a genius Murdoch dubs “the godfather of turn-based strategy games.” Meier’s taken a break from PC development and is now creating for Facebook. But he’s not just jumping on the Mafia or FarmVille bandwagon. He’s creating something entirely new. “Our idea is not to try and make another Facebook game but to make Civilization for this new technology,” Meier says. “This is a new arena, a new playspace, and we’re still learning. We’re trying something new and not trying to fit an existing genre of Facebook games.”

That’s big talk from a very big name. Meier’s made his career in video games, and if he thinks social gaming and Facebook in particular is the wave of the future, then by golly we should pay attention. I’m excited to see what he comes up with because it has the potential to be different from anything we’ve ever seen. It’s not just an upgrade. It’s a new way of thinking about video games, period. “Is playing FarmVille playing a game?” Meier asks. “Or is it something to do between checking your e-mail and reading the New York Times?” My guess is Meier blows our minds. Yet again.

1. Input types

While an accelerometer can potentially add depth to gameplay, and even form the basis for a game itself, it is an exceptionally limited form of control. As smartphones are a mobile device designed to be used virtually everywhere, developers cannot rely on changes in device rotation or movement to reliably convey user intent.

2. Control layout

The number and configuration of buttons on smartphones is similarly limited. While most phones have between 14 and 18 buttons, they are tightly packed in a grid and typically unsuited to gameplay (users cannot use haptic feedback to locate a given button on most phones, for example.) The buttons in these phones also do not typically have the capacity to identify different levels of user feedback, which is especially important for directional input. The iPhone, currently the most popular mobile gaming platform, does not allow developers access to the physical device buttons at all — and its capacitive touchscreen does not differentiate between different levels of input pressure.

By contrast, console and PC controllers have undergone significant evolutions since the square brick of the 8-bit Nintendo system. The current XBox 360 and PS3 controllers each offer one directional pad, two analog control sticks, and ten or more other buttons. The Wii remote has a similar number of inputs, and on the PC, users have over a hundred keys with a precision pointing device at their disposal.

This obviously does not prevent games on mobile platforms from existing and flourishing, but it does preclude several game types from working correctly. Developers have tried all sorts of workarounds, but each one requires tradeoffs, and some sorts of games in particular have resisted multiple efforts in simplification. A classic example is the abject failure of Starcraft when it was ported to the Nintendo 64.

3. Size

Phones cannot grow too much larger than they already are without sacrificing weight, portability, or flexibility. This constrains the display area, at maximum, to the size of the device — and usually there is a sizable bezel surrounding the screen. In the case of touchscreen devices, the display area is also the input area, which further complicates things. Overall, mobile devices have a much harder restriction on the rate at which they can convey information to the user.

4. Economics

In the absence of a standardized platform for mobile gaming, developers need to target three or four operating systems — each with different requirements — just to hit a reasonable slice of the smartphone market. This requires more up-front development time compared to other investments with similar market numbers (consoles or the PC), and doesn’t often make financial sense for more complicated games.

Similarly, one should note that the console manufacturers control their respective ecosystems; being that these are de facto monopolies, they are also significant profit sources. They are unlikely to give up that control unless they are forced by external factors to do so (see: Sega.)

5. Content

Fans of a given franchise tend to follow it wherever it goes, but they also maintain expectations about the perceived quality of that franchise, and those expectations are often tied directly to gameplay mechanics. So, until someone figures out how to replicate the experience of Zelda, Halo, World of Warcraft, or Final Fantasy with little fuss on devices where gaming is not the primary function, it is unlikely that many of those popular games would make (or survive) the transition. Carrying that to its logical conclusion, developers aren’t likely to take chances with their most popular games.

I totally agree that Nintendo is the current monster of mobile gaming. Their DS line is the most successful gaming platform of all time and and will continue that tradition for the next decade. But I do think we will see a shift.

Parents are going to get their kids mobile phones. Right now they get them the free “feature” phones, but it won’t be that long until we start to see smart phones being offered for free with contracts. As a parent, why buy them a Nintendo DS when you’ve already bought them a smart phone that can play tons of great games? I’m not a parent, so I don’t know all of the factors at play here, but I’d rather just buy them a phone that can game as well.

You are right that Nintendo or Sony could do something with their platforms if they start to expand their wireless coverage. Either through partnering with mobile providers or technological developments of WiFi.

Location-based gaming is certainly innovative, but tying it to the need to have a high-end cell phone with expensive data plan limits its ability to dominate the much cheaper DSi, which uses Wifi to enable its gamers to have a social experience.