Pokémon is back and better than before

Creators develop successful new trading card game


News Desk December 21, 2024
Pikachu is a popular character in Pokémon. PHOTO: AFP

print-news

With over 60 million downloads and an estimated USD180 million in revenue since late October, a new Pokemon mobile game app is enjoying worldwide success as the latest incarnation of the hit Nintendo-owned franchise.

Released on October 30, Pokemon Trading Card Game Pocket is a virtual version of the collectible card game that has captivated schoolyards since the late 1990s.

Developed by The Pokemon Company, a Nintendo subsidiary, it combines opening "boosters" - the equivalent of sealed card packs - with collecting creatures and online battles. "Pokemon TCG Pocket is showing one of the strongest performances of any mobile game of all-time," Sam Aune, an analyst at digital market intelligence firm Sensor Tower, told AFP.

The group estimates it generated around USD180 million through the Apple and Google app stores in just six weeks.

Developed by the Japanese games studio Creatures Inc., Pokemon TCG Pocket ranks second among mobile games measured by their first-month revenue, surpassed only by another Pokemon franchise title, Pokemon Go.

The global phenomenon of 2016, Pokemon Go generated over USD200 million in its first month and drove millions of players outdoors to hunt for virtual creatures which appeared on their mobile phone screens.

As well as creating vast online revenues, the new surge in interest in Pikachu and his fellow cast of characters is spilling over into the offline world. Sales of physical cards are rising - and the game is back in fashion among school children.

"It brings players back into the Pokemon brand," explained Frederique Tutt, a toy market expert at Circana, a market research firm. "And physical cards remain the heart of the brand, something collectors want to own for playing and trading."

COMMENTS

Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ