A Few Thoughts About AAA Mobile Gaming (Premium)

Thanks to a perfect storm of technological advances, the devices we use every day–PCs, smartphones, tablets, and more–are getting better through the almost magical combination of performance, efficiency, and reliability made possible by the Arm processor architecture.

These advances are particularly notable on mobile, and the system specifications of modern smartphones are often dramatically superior to what’s found in a typical PC. Indeed, the most impressive thing about smartphones today is how much we take for granted: Not only do these devices stay on all day, accompanying us everywhere, but they come on instantly when needed, run and switch between apps quickly, and just work in ways that are often comically impossible with PCs.

These advances are coming to the PC, of course, just more slowly. We just experienced the biggest leap forward with the launch of Qualcomm’s Arm-based Snapdragon X processor platform for PCs–that integrates mobile-like CPU, GPU, and NPU cores into a single system-on-a-chip (SoC) package with integrated RAM, like we see on smartphones–which doesn’t compromise on performance or introduce major compatibility issues. But AMD and Intel aren’t far behind: These chipmakers aren’t embracing Arm, but they are adapting their x64-based chips with more efficient Arm-like designs that could deliver similar efficiencies. This wouldn’t have happened if it weren’t for Arm.

Regardless of the architecture, the chips that power our devices are getting better in other ways. The integrated graphics in the Intel processors of 2006 were woefully bad, incapable of even running the Aero glass display mode in Windows Vista. But the integrated graphics in modern AMD and Intel processors are edging into low-end gaming PC territory, as I recently discussed in A Few Thoughts on Portable PC Gaming (Premium). This is a fascinating change that will democratize game playing for those who can’t afford expensive hardware. And when you combine these advances with the efficiencies of modern chipsets and their integrated NPUs, it’s clear we’re on the cusp of a PC renaissance.

That’s good for PCs and the fans of that platform. But when it comes to games, PCs are in the minority. Roughly as many people play games today on dedicated consoles like Nintendo Switch, Sony PlayStation, and Microsoft Xbox, drawn, no doubt, to the unique combination of ease-of-use, performance, and graphical quality these devices provide. But more people play games on mobile–mostly smartphones, but also tablets–than the PC and console market combined.

There are different ways to measure the success of gaming on mobile–usage, device market share, overall revenues, and so on–but much of the gaming that happens on the go is thoroughly uninteresting to me. There’s nothing wrong with titles like Words With Friends, Candy Crush, Angry Birds, and their ilk, they’re pleasant diversions for life’s more boring moments, and I get that. But I’m coming at this from a different direction. I had started out gaming on PCs and then spent 20 years gaming on consoles. Where has mobile landed all these years later?

When you think about the advances in PC chips making better gaming experiences available to more people, or why someone might choose a console over the PC, some key themes emerge. What this is really about, at a high level, is having a high-quality gaming experience–great graphics, sound, and performance–without any of the complexity or expensive of a traditional gaming PC. Microsoft has done platform-level work to improve game playing on Windows, so when you exit a game, your other apps and windows are where they were before, not resized and unusable. Chipmakers, as noted, are creating better and more efficient hardware. And consoles deliver PC-like quality without any complexity, good enough quality for most.

The thing is, the advances we see on mobile far outstrip anything we see in the PC space, especially when we look at that nexus of good enough quality, efficient, reliability, and simplicity. My iPhone 15 Pro Max has a sophisticated display with an adaptive high refresh rate and a high resolution of 2796 x 1290, superior to the typical Full HD+ (1920 x 1200) resolution found on most PCs. And its processor, an A17 Pro with a 6-core CPU, 6-core GPU, and 16-core NPU, is more powerful than those in most PCs. This device can play games. Great games at great speeds and at high resolution.

Granted, it’s also a phone. That means the screen is relatively small and that most interactions will be via multitouch. This isn’t a problem for my 20-something kids, but it’s an issue for me. Fortunately, there’s another product, one that infamously sits between a phone and a computer. One that benefits from all the advances we’ve seen in mobile while providing a bigger display akin to that found on laptops.

I am referring, obviously, to the iPad. And the iPad I now own, an iPad Air, has a modern M2 processor–with an 8-core CPU, 9-core GPU, and 16-core NPU–lots of RAM (for a mobile device), and a large 13-inch display with a 2732 x 2048 resolution. There are lesser (and smaller) iPads, and even better iPads, thanks to the iPad Pro line. But any modern iPad is capable of playing games. And I’ve been wondering whether the steady advances in the hardware and software powering these devices had resulted in meaningful changes to the game-playing experiences. That is, are we at the point where an iPad–or for you younger folks, an iPhone or Android phone–could replace a console as a simpler, good enough replacement for a PC for playing games?

This may be obvious to some of you, and perhaps shocking to others, but the answer is a resounding yes. It’s … very good. It’s certainly good enough.

This isn’t surprising to me per se, I at least pay attention to this space, and I’ve played my share of games on mobile–smartphone and tablet alike–over the years. I’ve even completed entire games on mobile, including most notably the first few titles in the Walking Dead: The Game series from Telltale Games (now Howyaknow).

Those games are terrific to this day, but I am more interested in first-person shooters of the Call of Duty variety. I’ve been avoiding that game, which I’d played a bit too much over 20 years on console, but over the past year and a half, I’ve revisited numerous classic shooters on the PC. And in more recent months, I’ve been playing through mostly modern titles like Doom (2016), Doom Eternal, Control, Senua’s Saga: Hellblade II, and others. There’s no reason mobile couldn’t accommodate titles like these: The hardware capabilities are there. But what’s the game selection and quality like?

Before getting to that, consider a related development. I don’t recall the exact timing, and it doesn’t really matter. But for several years, those playing Call of Duty on Xbox could take part in multiplayer games with others online, and they would play against other gamers on Xbox. PlayStation gamers faced a similar situation, as did PC gamers. But over time, Activision brought console gamers together, so that you could play Call of Duty multiplayer games in which there were both Xbox and PS users. And then it integrated the PC into the mix (requiring that PC users play with a control to level the playing field.) This is better for everyone: There’s a bigger audience playing these games, and it doesn’t matter which device they own.

We have these different platforms–mobile, consoles, and PC–each of which is capable of playing high-quality modern games, including the shooters I prefer. Mobile and console are already integrating in interesting ways, as noted above. But where is mobile? What’s that like?

Sticking to the Call of Duty example, I followed along as Activision released Call of Duty: Mobile in 2019 and then Call of Duty: Warzone Mobile this past March. I’ve experimented with COD: Mobile many times, and I love the idea: This game is in many ways what I’d been asking for, for years, a collection of the very best COD multiplayer maps combined into a single experience. The problem, at first, was that COD: Mobile was, well, a mobile game. It was designed with multitouch as the primary interface, and I’m just never going to adapt to this system of on-screen controls for a fast-moving action title like this.

Activision added support for Xbox and other controllers, however, and that was interesting. But in keeping with the game’s mobile roots, it was a bit dumbed down. Modern controllers offer two thumb sticks so you can “free look”–move in 3D space with one while using the other to look arbitrarily in other directions–mimicking both the multitouch controls and how these games play on PC and console. But instead of giving you full control over firing your weapon, COD: Mobile offered a compromise for the multitouch majority: It would simply auto-fire whenever you were facing an enemy.

This was … OK. It required a bit of adjustment for COD veterans such as myself. But it didn’t make much sense if you were using a controller. Other than that, COD: Mobile was impressive. The graphics looked great, especially on higher resolution iPads. The performance was terrific. And so was the sound. But it was always sort of a “Call of Duty Lite” experience. Like COD, but not “real” COD.

Anyway. I got this new iPad Air. I use it as I used its predecessors, mostly for reading. But it has a bigger display–13 inches vs. 10.6/11 inches–a more capable processors, and more storage. That latter bit was more important than I’d realized: The 64 GB in my previous iPad Air was sufficient for my needs, but with a base 128 GB of storage now, there’s more room for apps that I had previously excluded from its predecessors.

There’s also room for games. I installed a few, intending to see how things had changed. I knew that Apple had made a big push for PC-quality games on the iPhone, but that only a few titles–Death Stranding, Resident Evil Village, Assassin’s Creed Mirage, and so on–had emerged, and the experience wasn’t ideal. I had looked at what was available for the MacBook Air M3, but that offers an even smaller library of modern-ish titles. And I had my random experiences with COD: Mobile and other mobile games.

What I see on the iPad today is more impressive.

First, the game selection is a bit better, especially for the types of games I’d like to play. Alien: Isolation, Resident Evil 7 Biohazard, Assassin’s Creed Origins, and others are available, in addition to Call of Duty: Mobile and Call of Duty: Warzone Mobile. Modern-looking shooters I’d never heard of, like Blood Strike. And then some non-shooters I’m curious about, like Diablo Immortal. Nothing threatening to the console or PC, I guess. But a start.

I tried Alien: Isolation first. It’s a game I’ve tried on Xbox but never got too far into, but it’s the type of thing I like, a nice mix of first person action and horror. And while I’m not fully sure how it lines up quality-wise, my rough guess is that it looks about as good as the game would on an Xbox Series S. Which is to say, terrific.

The sound, if anything, is better. And better still, the game play–using an Xbox controller, which is key to this experience for me–works normally and feels right. For my needs–good enough quality combined with the simplicity/ease-of-use of a console–this is a no-compromises experience. Which is what I had hoped for.

Call of Duty: Mobile was an even happier surprise. There are high-resolution textures now, which makes the game look better than ever. But Activision has made an even more significant change since the last time I’d looked: In addition to the old “fire when you’re facing the enemy” mode, you can now enable a manual fire mode, in which you control weapon firing. It works just like COD on the console or PC, meaning it’s the “real” COD, finally. On mobile.

I have dominated while playing the game this way. In fact, I’ve played more COD in the past 24 hours than I’d played in the previous 18 months or more combined. It was terrific fun, and a great reminder of everything I loved–and loathed–about COD multiplayer. My favorite maps. The look and feel I want from this game. And … yes, some nimrods bleating away over their microphones. Plus some annoyances specific to mobile: This is a busy game with numerous in-app upsells and distractions. But it’s COD. It’s real. And it raises that possibility I mentioned earlier, of a future Call of Duty in which mobile, console, and PC gamers all compete together online. I feel like this could happen now. Right now.

My success in COD: Mobile drew me to COD: Mobile Warzone. I’d never really gotten into Warzone, a battle royale offshoot triggered by the success of Fortnite. But what the heck. It looks and works much like COD: Mobile on the iPad, of course. And after an annoying training mission that required me to use multitouch controls, I was off to the races. That said, the few games I played were standard COD multiplayer, not the battle royale I expected. But that was great for me–I may never tire of the map Crash–and I had some fierce battles with players who, in this world, were much more advanced than me. But not really: I continue to excel at COD, which is nice on some level.

Assassin’s Creed Mirage feels like a port–it runs in a letter-boxed area mid-screen instead of truly full-screen–but it is at least gorgeous, especially with its graphics set to High. And it plays fantastically well.

Blood Strike is yet another take on battle royale–you parachute onto an island, and so on–and I assume it’s a mobile-first/mobile-only title based on the graphics. But it’s another interesting option, and the performance is fantastic.

During all this, I was struck by how familiar the gaming experience was, how much it resembled playing on a console. My iPad Air has the largest display you can get in an iPad, but I wished it was a bit bigger still.

Perhaps the next step is playing on an external display. What a world we live in.