Related
I cannot believe this. After more than a year, the android platform still don't have many good games....still far far worse than the ipad.
It is true that the ipad has been around longer....but so what. I think that Android should already have time to catch up.
Look at the Playstation 3. It came out after Xbox 360 but now it comes out with almost the same games as the Xbox 360. Whatever good games the Xbox 360 has, the PS3 also has it too (for the most part).
The games for android is pathetic. It is not even 25% of the quantity and QUALITY of the ipad games.
That is my RANT for today.
many developers don't like android because they feel the market wouldn't maximize profits. Thats why gameloft goes with selling games through their own website.
also the fact that each android device is different makes it hard for game developers too. albeit the ps3 came out after the xbox but at least EVERY ps3 has the same hardware, components, etc. that's why it's a lot more attractive to develop games for the iOS platform.
HOWEVER,
we have n64oid, gameboid, snesoid, fpse, and the like. So I'm happy.
Because, not all android phones are made equal. iPhone is ONE phone made my ONE manufacturer. Android phones are made by several people, with different hardware. Take the Fascinate and Droid X for example, they both have nearly exact same specs (1ghz processor, 512 ram, screen size, etc.) but the Fascinate has a slightly better GPU than the Droid X, which makes, or made it the BEST gaming android phone out there. Now with the Tegra 2 processors out there, you WILL see better games for the Android OS, with the Xperia Play coming and what not.
EDIT: Guy above me beat me to the punch, in a more simpler way.
Earthbrain said:
I cannot believe this. After more than a year, the android platform still don't have many good games....still far far worse than the ipad.
It is true that the ipad has been around longer....but so what. I think that Android should already have time to catch up.
Look at the Playstation 3. It came out after Xbox 360 but now it comes out with almost the same games as the Xbox 360. Whatever good games the Xbox 360 has, the PS3 also has it too (for the most part).
The games for android is pathetic. It is not even 25% of the quantity and QUALITY of the ipad games.
That is my RANT for today.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Are you kidding me? Android has lots of lookout games.
Sent from my MB611 using XDA App
Thread moved to General.
I can't believe the ATI(Adreno in spirit) and Nvidia(Tegra 1,2,3) battle is now in the mobile era, although the cpu core race is even more daunting...
It was not that long ago when 1 core dominated the market, but now we have Dualcores & Quadcores...My issue with this change is that I don't feel either are exactly required; for instance, WP7 & iOS are faster than Android, but are able to run on older hardware. And lets not forget the iPhones normally run at surprisingly low speeds, however they can get a lot done still.
I mean Samsung's SIII has a Quadcpu, but I doubt that's even necessary, what's wrong with staying in the dualcore/single range and focusing on improving the UI and general performance!?
I know I'm gonna get a lot of backlash for thinking this way, but developers will be lazy with programming if they know the HW will run whatever crap they throw at it. It's just hard to understand the logic behind increasing the core count/speed without actually fixing the problems that plagued the software(android in this case) , if you just take the time to fix the quirks then the device will run smoother. Though, it just seems companies are just interested in marketing gimmicks that most end users won't actually notice, plus most dual cores(S3, exynos,T2, etc) are competent with intensive apps.
The race for now is to produce phones with the most potential. Quad cores, when correctly optimized anyway, have much higher processing capacity and much lower power consumption when doing trivial tasks. The goal is to create interfaces that don't stutter or lag no matter how much you have going on and do so efficiently. There's also the backing of chipsets like the Tegra for high-end mobile entertainment. The end game is superphones, and the game is well afoot.
As to the necessity of it, just depends. I think most business users will be fine on dual core offerings with plenty of ram and a well-implemented overall system. For those who like to max their phones out the possibilities of the high-end development coming out is pretty great. Think about something like the Note with enough processing ability to act as a full input tablet for graphic designers, or that allows programmers to run and edit complex code on the go instead of having to drag a full-size tablet around with them. Think about doctors or researchers being able to monitor multiple sets of real-time data directly from their phones. There's certainly a market for all this, and I don't think it's an arms race just for the sake of showing off.
My $.02; hope that was all coherent.
MissionImprobable said:
The race for now is to produce phones with the most potential.
There's certainly a market for all this, and I don't think it's an arms race just for the sake of showing off.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Your points are all valid, but I still fear that the Software remains on a level much lower than the hardware; there are tons of Android configurations out there that prevent High Quality HW from performing optimally, due to this, the "potential" of certain devices may never be recognized.
I understand that more cores promotes a sense of efficiency and less power draws, but this tends to lead programmers to optimizing less often. Sense 3.0 was extremely sluggish, same with 4.0, but do you notice the trend? Both Sense 3/4 were made for fast SoCs, to my surprise the result was still horrid. And for your point about the mini tablet(Note), I personally feel you would see those types of Apps on iOS devices instead. For the sake of it, I don't want you to think I am an Apple fan boy(just playing devil's advocate).
Maybe those were the kind of things you only saw on Apple previously, but clearly Samsung and others are serious about competing with them.
I am on a bent for the new Google phones that are going to be being produced. Now, I am not the largest fan of quad core yet but I see great potential in dual cores. Like for running Ubuntu Android, an Ubuntu desktop from your phone to a monitor!
These new phones are looking to have 28nm cortex A15 dual core chips, that would be one hot cookie!
Sent from my PC36100 using xda premium
First, for the dispassionate stuff:
Ace42 said:
but developers will be lazy with programming if they know the HW will run whatever crap they throw at it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Developers should be able to be "lazy" with programming: you don't see anyone going back into assembly in order to optimize their programs. Programmer cycles are a lot more valuable than machine cycles, and here more power is a good, not a bad thing.
Ace42 said:
I mean Samsung's SIII has a Quadcpu, but I doubt that's even necessary, what's wrong with staying in the dualcore/single range and focusing on improving the UI and general performance!? ...It's just hard to understand the logic behind increasing the core count/speed without actually fixing the problems that plagued the software(android in this case)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The "logic" required is elementary economics. A competitive market causes innovation: each firm has to distinguish itself, and match the features of the others in order to stand a chance. Now, some features are more important in consumers' eyes than others, and in particular, core count/speed are very comprehensible, very easy numbers, and viable to innovate. They have to go up asap in order to compete. And so they have.
This does not mean, of course, that your "problems" must remain. In fact, looking at the S3 demos so far, I haven't yet noticed any lag at all, so perhaps they really did "fix" your problems, as you desired.
Now, for the bashing part.
Ace42 said:
My issue with this change is that I don't feel either are exactly required; for instance, WP7 & iOS are faster than Android, but are able to run on older hardware.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This comes at a cost of so much less customizability. I find WP7 to be particularly guilty of this: only supports 480x800 resolution, no start screen background or landscape? My Launcher 7 is already more powerful than that and, thanks to not attempting any serious 3D stuff, shows no lag at all.
Ace42 said:
And lets not forget the iPhones normally run at surprisingly low speeds, however they can get a lot done still.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The iPhone, however, makes us pay with user speed as well. Scrolling is slow, in order to maintain the illusion of smoothness, and the simplistic launcher without widgets forces you to switch around and manage everything yourself, getting data only by clicking on the appropriate app. As I hinted at the beginning, people cycles are so much more valuable than computer cycles, and sacrificing the former for the latter is nothing less than a travesty.
Currently mobile phones are more powerful than my laptops and i think this will not change. In the next few years we will have quad-core processors in watches
goompas said:
Currently mobile phones are more powerful than my laptops and i think this will not change. In the next few years we will have quad-core processors in watches
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
completely agree
Google sells ads, not software, they don't really give a crap about optimizing it to the max. They leave this dirty job to OEMs, and OEMs want to sell hardware, so they only optimize it for the tiny bit that is strictly necessary in order to sell. They'd rather make better hardware than better software, and no need to blame them: they just do what they know better. Microsoft and Apple instead sell either software or a complete package of both software and hardware, so guess why they care more about it...just my 2 cents. Btw, not that one approach is better than the other, choice is good, you pick what you want.
Sent from my Lumia 800 using XDA Windows Phone 7 App
vnvman said:
Google sells ads, not software, they don't really give a crap about optimizing it to the max. They leave this dirty job to OEMs... Microsoft and Apple instead sell either software or a complete package of both software and hardware, so guess why they care more about it...just my 2 cents.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This analysis doesn't make sense (at least, not as gross as it is right now). A company optimizes software when there's some form of competitive pressure, not because they "sell software". Just look at internet explorer: that didn't get seriously worked on for years, until alternative browsers started to become rightfully popular (that is, while microsoft is surely a software company, they still managed not to "give a crap").
Maybe you mean to say that companies only bother to improve something so that it's "good enough" to face off against the competition - and that's pretty much true. For example, after grabbing the market share, apple has only been innovating just hard enough not to be too far behind its competition.
Maybe you also mean to say that companies innovate better, the closer their incentives are aligned with the innovation. This is also true, but highly misleading. For one thing, the factor most affecting one's incentives is not "the thing they are selling", but (you guessed it from above) competition. Selling software or hardware when you have a monopoly, for instance, gives you little or no incentive to innovate (whereas your criteria would've suggested the opposite).
Mind you, I think you are hitting on something; it just requires a much more thorough analysis of the incentives than just "are they selling software or ads?"
And the incentive situation is itself weird. On one hand, android ad profit is (supposedly) pretty low for google, but on the other hand, they are able to delegate the whole manufacturing and execution to other firms. Fewer rewards, but also lower costs. They do have the majority of the phone market right now (getting dangerously close to monopoly there), but this is a fragile equilibrium, with tablets a whole 'nother story. And, since they are dying to get more stock phones out (with those giant "Google" permanant search bars), one can indeed argue that they've started to care not only about selling ads, but the whole damn thing. It's gotten to the point where they need to improve stock itself (and probably the phones too, hence the motorola acquisition + multiple Nexii partnership) in order to improve their ads. And so you see that the incentives may not be nearly as maligned as you'd originally supposed.
I think that we can only benefit from this race
thebobp said:
First, for the dispassionate stuff:
Developers should be able to be "lazy" with programming: you don't see anyone going back into assembly in order to optimize their programs. Programmer cycles are a lot more valuable than machine cycles, and here more power is a good, not a bad thing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Being "lazy" is the reason why so many Android apps run poorly across the board; fine, I understand more power allows you to offload more work to the cpu, but that doesn't mean that's the correct method. If I were to make an app for a Dual environment I would specifically make sure each core is sharing the burden. When Dual core phones & Ginger were(and still are) united, the result was simply stunning—Ginger was definitely not optimized for dualcores. And it showed, my Sensation was so laggy under 2.3.x, it was so disheartening to see my single core devices could challenge the dual beast with ease.
thebobp said:
Now, some features are more important in consumers' eyes than others, and in particular, core count/speed are very comprehensible, very easy numbers, and viable to innovate.
This does not mean, of course, that your "problems" must remain. In fact, looking at the S3 demos so far, I haven't yet noticed any lag at all, so perhaps they really did "fix" your problems, as you desired.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The average consumer doesn't know or can't even comprehend the raw power that certain SoCs are capable of, so I doubt they care if X phone has 2GHz and the other has 1Ghz. Apple normally doesn't boast about the CPU count in commercials, they boast about their OS & siri, that's how they win over millions each year. Everyone and their grandmothers know how flawless iOS is. Now I know I'm bashing Android severely, though I am a long time Android user and these are some of my views.
thebobp said:
This comes at a cost of so much less customizability. I find WP7 to be particularly guilty of this: only supports 480x800 resolution, no start screen background or landscape? My Launcher 7 is already more powerful than that and, thanks to not attempting any serious 3D stuff, shows no lag at all.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
True, WP7 offers the bare minimum when it comes to customization, which is an unfortunate sacrifice for speed. And Microsoft has set HW limitations to prevent fragmentation, which if I may, is devastating the Android market. We have Exynos over there, Snapdragon under there, and Tegra round yonder, and a large variety of screen types.
thebobp said:
The iPhone, however, makes us pay with user speed as well. Scrolling is slow, in order to maintain the illusion of smoothness, and the simplistic launcher without widgets forces you to switch around and manage everything yourself, getting data only by clicking on the appropriate app. As I hinted at the beginning, people cycles are so much more valuable than computer cycles, and sacrificing the former for the latter is nothing less than a travesty.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Scrolling is slow? Are you using the 1st iPhone or something? Last time I tried my friend's 4S is was quite speedy, iOS has always been the fastest mobile OS available. If memory serves, iOS has also been GPU accelerated since the old days, a feature relatively new to Android and maybe WP7. I pretty sure you can visit every Android forum on XDA & at least 10 users will report that they have lag in X, Y, Z app. However if you did a poll with random iOS users I doubt if you would even find a black sheep.
Considering that Ouya will be built with the same CPU/GPU/RAM specs as the Infinity, I feel like it's safe to assume that if it does even moderately well, we'll be getting to see a lot of games that truly push our hardware. We've seen many Tegra 3 games come out so far - some incredible, some disappointing, but overall not a bad start for high quality mobile gaming.
If the Ouya does really well, the TF700 gamers may wind up with an insane catalog of games that most people will only be playing at home with any decent quality. It could make the TF700 a very good competitor for portable gaming. I'm kind of excited to see what happens, but I'm trying not to get my hopes up before we start seeing the actual production of the Ouya and developer support that follows.
What is everyone's thoughts on the matter? Any specific games announced so far that your excited for?
Also, it's been said that the talked about Oculus Rift will have Android support later on, though I have no clue if much would come of that.
Nvida's tegra push did narrow my field of tablet options some. I would love to see higher end games and a more PC-like set of tools (more control options, more performance scaling, more flexibility in general), and nvidia seems to have their eye on something similar. No one Android maker has the clout or sales to make android a more serious gaming platform right now, but nvidia might. They've got a certain credibility with players and producers that stands out and raises a particular set of expectations that even the biggest maker, Samsung, can't bring to the table.
While Ouya can bring more living room games to the fold, perhaps more controller utilization, the Nexus 7 might be equally influential at broadening support through sheer numbers. Storage is the main handicap, but it still has lots of potential.
That said, I don't expect much from even a best case scenario. Game investment is a lot more complicated than many players seem to realize. My favorite small dev is trying to fund an expansion of the best Tower Defense ever through kickstarter and its not uncommon for someone to accuse them of unconscionable greed for not being able to completely self-fund from the proceeds of their first game -- this while storied studios backed by major pubs are closing their doors. It's a struggle for survival out there. Small devs doing high end original content are taking huge risks.
Best case here is more big studios/publishers start testing the waters at tegra 3 and actually produce a serious and well stocked platform at tegra 4 or 5. Infinity should have more gaming options than her predecessors, but I doubt she'll be a gaming beast.
Not likely. Ouya, at this point, is more about the idea of trying to bring the independent developers to the living room with less cost through the Android platform. As eluded to, it costs a lot of money to make AAA games on the consoles or PC. I've chosen to back them, but I'm skeptical. I think Ouya may be redundant, as you're indirectly eluding, since all you need is the microHDMI cable and blue tooth controller. It's just a matter of the game developers adding the code for the controllers.
One thing is certain, there is market for games on the mobile platform--Android and iOS--beyond these "casual" games such as Angry Birds, Plants vs Zombies, Bejweled, Words with Friends, Draw Something, and so forth. There's some indication people may want a more traditional console/PC game with some decent success of games like Shadowgun and Dead Trigger, and so forth; sorry I wasn't able to list a more diverse list, but I don't play many mobile games. Add that up, with more powerful mobile devices, you'll see the games improve. Just don't quite expect a game to look like PS3/360 game, nor give you that over ten hours game experience with cut scenes and so forth. Well, not while people are complaining about games being over a dollar, and piracy being very easy to do, like the old days on the PC.
On a side note, you may see something you're thinking with technology that OnLive is developing. That has the potentional to bring the similar game experience across multiple game platforms. I use it on the PC and my HTC Evo 4G. I tried it out on a buddy's Nexus 7.
On a side note, I did see EA did an update for Dead Space for the Nexus 7, so some developers are thinking about tablets.
I noticed that the UDK supports Android (it specifically mentions honeycomb though) which might indicate at least an industry consideration for such focus. As far as indies go, frameworks like this being offered to small-time devs will provide the potential for an Android "real gaming console". The estimated price of specifically the Ouya would make for other poorer countries to acquire and put as a target platform for development, in which case Android focus could increase world-wide (PS3 for R$1100 or Ouya for R$400?). I'm still skeptical, but the distribution of the system globally will really tell who's going to make it into a priority. If the saturation gets high enough, everyone will be jumping on that wagon.
Your Android phone isn't just for widgets, talking, Google Now and photos. It can also be one of the world's best gaming platforms, if you're willing to spend a little time on it.
Once the domain of tinkerers and super-nerds, Android devices have exploded in popularity over the last couple of years, spurred on by the emergence of superphones like the Samsung Galaxy S 4, HTC One and Google's own Nexus 4.
Despite this increase, there remains the perception that - at least in terms of gaming - Android phones are somehow a step behind the iPhone. That things like piracy, a lack of apps and convoluted system specs are hindering the development of games on the platform.
I'm here to tell you this is bull****. Chances are that if you own an Android phone, and picked it up within the last 18 months, you've got in your pocket a silent killer in terms of portable gaming.
Below you'll find four steps you can follow to turn that humble little smartphone into something a little more gamey.
1. USE GOOGLE PLAY
Well, duh. But if you're a new user, or someone contemplating making the switch, this is important.
Android users have a bad reputation for pirating software, including games, and in many ways that's a fair assumption. Pirating games for the platform is way too easy.
Don't be that guy.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You'll even find some hot exclusives. Kairosoft's entire catalogue of addictive-as-hell management games is on the Play Store, for example, while only a handful have ever made it to the App Store.
Seriously, there are enough quality games on there already that we could end the guide right here and you'd be set. Luckily, we're not ending the guide here.
Those remaining developers who either delay bringing their games to Android, or don't do it at all, usually cite piracy as one of the big concerns. The more people actually pay for apps and games on Android, the more of these developers will be encouraged to bring their wares to the platform. So do it.
2. GO RETRO
Let's say you want to play something more substantial than most mobile titles can offer. Or a classic game from your childhood that, for better or worse, isn't available on the Play Store. The great thing about Android phones is that you can still play these games, and it's a lot easier - and more legal - than you might think.
Two of the most popular means of running old PC games on modern systems - DOSBox (for old DOS games) and ScummVM (for old adventure games) - both have versions available for Android devices.
Before we go any further, then, you're going to need install these three applications:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ScummVM for Android
DOSBox Turbo for Android
DOSBox Manager
.
What DOSBox Manager does is let you create a quicklaunch screen for the games, so instead of having to enter command prompts every time you want to play a game (which is normally how DOSBox works), you just tap some box art, same as a regular app/game.
If you need help using DOSBox Turbo and/or getting your games running, the best place to start is the app's site, which has helpful (and easy to understand) walkthroughs and guides.
ScummVM is an easier proposition, but if you have trouble setting it up, the official guide gives you a great walkthrough on getting set up.
A word of caution, though: be careful which games you bring over. Your phone has limited inputs, most likely just a touchscreen, so trying to play a fast-paced RTS or shooter might not be the best idea. Slower, mouse-driven genres like adventure and turn-based strategy are a good place to start.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Unless, that is, you want to...
3. GET A CONTROLLER (OR USE A MOUSE)
It sounds crazy, I know. Buying an external controller for your phone defeats the entire point of playing games on a portable device. But the fact of the matter is, as phones become more powerful, phone games become more powerful, and it's a tragedy that people try to play something like Real Racing using touchscreen or tilt controls. Stick a pad on there and some of these newer games will feel like a console game, instead of just looking like one.
There's also the benefit it brings to the retro games you'll be playing. Use a gamepad and suddenly all those amazing old shooters are playable. Connect a bluetooth mouse to your phone and anything you can't play with a pad, you can probably play with it.
Doing this is pretty simple; provided they don't need drivers, Android natively supports bluetooth peripherals, including keyboards, mice and control pads. It'll even display a mouse cursor if it detects one. Just find your phone's bluetooth settings and pair it up.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
To save you buying a gamepad, there's an app that lets you connect a PS3 pad to an Android device (though note: your phone needs to be rooted for this to work). Alternatively, you can sync a Wii Remote, since it also connects via Bluetooth (and can be configured with this app).
Again, this might sound crazy since you can do this a lot more easily on a regular computer, but consider this: old PC games weren't designed to run on giant 23" desktop monitors. You either stretch their visuals until they look like garbage, or run them in a window.
Phone screens, though, are at the cutting edge. Relatively tiny yet packing amazing colours and now sometimes even 1080p resolution, they breathe new life into your old games. Trust me, fire up something like Colonization or X-Com on a contemporary phone and it'll look better than ever.
4. GET A BIGGER BATTERY (OR BATTERY PACK)
The one major downside to the crop of modern Android smartphones is that, almost to the last, they've got terrible battery life. Most can barely last a single day, even with infrequent use. If you're planning on playing a game at home, that's not a problem, but let's be honest, how often will you be playing a phone game at home?
Running 3D graphics - or even just leaving a big bright screen on for long stretches - will kill your battery. So if you're serious about gaming on your Android phone, you should think about getting a bigger battery (if your phone supports removable batteries) or an external battery case/charging pack (if it doesn't).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
5. SIGN UP TO ONLIVE
It's easy to forget about the company these days after all the problems it went through last year, but streaming service OnLive is still around, and it works on Android devices. Your mileage may vary depending on your device - it's more suited to tablets than phones - but if you've got a gamepad solution for your phone, and your connection is fast enough to pull it off, you can play all kinds of games that would normally never be available on the platform..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
SOURCE
*Lifehacker
Great guide. Bought a NES controller and female USB to microUSB a few weeks ago. Waiting for them to be shipped! Will tell you how it works when I have them in use.
i have my OTG cable but sad to say i don't have ps3 or wii.. hehehehe..
thanks for a great info!
Sent from my GT-I9505 using xda app-developers app
I've got a moga pocket controller its great and more and more games are getting supported. My GS4 clips right into the phone holder and im off.
Specially the onlive thing, gotta love it.
Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk 4 Beta
Awesome guide! I can vouch for DosBox Turbo. I have about 50+ games installed and regularly play Warcraft II networked multi-player with my buddies on their Android devices.
anyone actually get scummvm to work? i couldn't get it to recognise any games no matter what i tried.
Gloris said:
anyone actually get scummvm to work? i couldn't get it to recognise any games no matter what i tried.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Working perfectly for me.
Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk 2
What folder structure and file type did you use? I tried zip files I tried unzipping them. Tried putting them in various folders but I can't get it to recognise any games.
We are doing just that with our new product Ingeo.
We want to turn any Android phone into a TV game console.
It is an HDMI dock and a wireless controller.
Check it out here
Any difference using it?
Sent from my GT-I9500 using xda app-developers app
gampad
I 've a Razer Onza
But when i connect to my s4 it does not work
Can you show me how to connect that controller to my S4
Thanks so much
duythanh90 said:
I 've a Razer Onza
But when i connect to my s4 it does not work
Can you show me how to connect that controller to my S4
Thanks so much
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Using OTG cable. It's that simple
"Thanks button is just to avoid "THANKS" posts in threads. Nothing more than that. Don't ask in signature or post for it and defeat the purpose why it was introduced"
Is there a 'best phone for gaming'? I know it's a broad question, but I want my next phone to be really good for gaming in terms of tech specs and ideally in terms of community, exclusives etc.
If someone asked me what the best console setup is, I would say PS4 and for PC, Alienware is debatably the PC for gamers/gaming. Somewhat surprising that there isn't a best for mobile gaming. Suggestions?
When it comes to gaming on mobile devices, your choices are Android and iOS. There's lots of really cool games that are exclusive on iOS, so if you want the most variety, an iPhone (the Plus sized one) or iPad will give you the most games. That's a lot to spend just on a device to game on though.
Android obviously has the most variety of devices. My choice right now is the Nexus 6. Big screen, powerful front-facing stereo speakers. Hardware is slightly aged, but will still play any game I can throw at it. Previously I used a OnePlus One, and I can tell you that I'll never go back to bottom-firing speakers.
Interesting, I just read on techcrunch that the founder of Atari is working on a phone for gamers called wonder. Doesn't say when it will be out yet.... and doesn't look like techcrunch has a ton of faith in it. Hopefully this is what I'm looking for.
As much as I really love Android - as a developer, I have plenty of phones and tablets here! - I will have to say... if gaming is a priority, just get an iPhone. Mind you it's not about the "quality" or even performance (since most apps are cross-platform now anyway) but the different approach to monetization that's still present in many many titles. Most iPhone games can do just fine with 2$ versions and fair ads, while the Android equivalent doesn't make much from regulars users and needs to target whales instead (heavy grinding unless you pay).