Not necessarily. It could be used as a wireless multitouch trackpad, with some hotkeys on the side. Or to simply mimic a basic gamepad:
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Could Apple make a good console machine
- Thread starter Slamman500
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Not necessarily. It could be used as a wireless multitouch trackpad, with some hotkeys on the side. Or to simply mimic a basic gamepad:
The most expensive game controller in history. That's really gonna make the competitors squirm.
The most expensive game controller in history. That's really gonna make the competitors squirm.
Well as I said before, I think the closest Apple will come to a console is AirPlay. Meaning that this would just be an alternative mode for iPhone/iPad games that puts the main game window on your television.
That totally changes the gaming experience the iDevices currently offer though and puts them head to head w/'traditional' gaming device and in a head to head battle the iDevices lose, IMO.
Lethal
I disagree that it would totally change the experience. Many iOS games already use a gamepad-like setup, with virtual d-pad/analog on the right and buttons on the left. So these controls wouldn't have to be altered much if at all. A trackpad is a natural stand-in for adventure, RTS, and other so called "point and click" genres. And of course you would still have the tilt sensor for the racing genre and other games that use it.
The iPhone and iPod touch are already compared with, and generally seen by the core gaming community to be inferior to, dedicated gaming handhelds from Nintendo and Sony.
Last edited:
There is a big difference though between looking at 'soft controls' overlaid on the screen you are interfacing with and looking at TV while trying to operate soft controls by muscle memory. At that point you are just using the iDevice as a controller so you might as well be using a real controller (which costs less and does more).
With w/regards to point and click based games, Battle Hearts let's say, how do I look up at the TV and control the game at the same time when there's no cursor in iOS and no concept of hovering? It's not like a track pad in a desktop OS where I can move a mouse around and then click on the things I want to interact with. iOS was specifically designed to remove that abstraction layer and have the user interface directly with device as opposed to using a mouse, keyboard, or stylus as a middle man. Maybe someone could make an interface where just touching the screen displays a cursor and you need to double tap to interface w/game elements but that just sounds clunking and limiting.
There are games that are great for touch interfaces and their are games that aren't so great for touch interfaces just like there are games that are great with controllers and games that aren't so great with controllers. I like it when companies stick to their strengths.
My dark horse candidate for Apple getting into the traditional console market is partnering with OnLive and iDevices supporting blue tooth controllers.
Lethal
Okay, it seems I misinterpreted your initial post. I thought you were talking about AirPlay. Using an iDevice in combination with an AppleTV to offer a gaming experience on the TV.
Well actually I meant that the game would produce a cursor. I know it can be done, since the classic mode in "The Secret of Monkey Island: SE" has one. It functions just like an ordinary trackpad-driven cursor. There is a lite version, so if you like you can go check it out.
Last edited:
If Apple is serious about getting into the gaming console market, they will kick everyone's a$$ no problem.
Yes I think if they did they would lay waste tothe opposition but whether they ever will is a totally different story......
How? Anyone who's serious about gaming would choose a platform that already has an amazing catalogue of games. Apple has a great mini game platform in iOS, but for real gaming they are the last choice.
I feel like I'm shouting at a wall, there are a lot of great games for ios more complicated than the "Cut the Angry Birds Rope" variety. I've posted many. Including simulations, rpgs and strategy.
Yeah, but none really compare to pc or console games from even 5 years ago. Is there anything close to Diablo II? Oblivion? COD? The touchscreen is horrible for serious gaming, nothing compares to a good gamepad or keyboard/mouse setup.
EDIT: I went back and looked. You only posted one. That's not lot's.
Last edited:
Couldn't have said it better myself. Touchscreen only gaming is great for casual games. Unfortunately casual games only go so far in one's gaming desires.
How about "The Longest Journey"? That's a 10 year old game and is there anything like it on iOS yet?
What is wrong with wanting to make a profit? Does the fact that Sony took a loss for sometime make them a white knight in shining armor? Sony is a large corporation with several business units so they could afford to take a loss on the gaming unit. But Sony had to rely on the cash generated from other product lines in order to be able to subsidize its gaming unit. Same with Microsoft.
Frankly, I see nothing wrong in wanting a product line to be profitable from day one. Despite what you may think, a business that eats losses on product lines is not a noble thing. Maintaining an unprofitable product line is not sustainable.
I'm fine with you wanting to criticize Apple, but back it up with some facts. Apple routinely signs multibillion dollar component deals with suppliers. So I think they would have no problem making the required upfront investment for a gaming console line.
The main question that any business should ask itself before entering a particular market is: How do I convince my potential customer base to buy my product over competitors' products?
Don't worry, Gameloft will probably make their own version of it which copies The Longest Journey plot for plot. It'll be called The Big Quest and will be Freemium so you'll have an energy bar that will only let you visit one place a day unless you pay $10 to refill it.
The day they release it, it'll become the number one game in the app store. Number 2 will be Angry Birds: Saint Patrick's Day, which is basically Angry Birds with a green background. Number 3 will be an Angry Birds clone that replaces birds with Pirates. Number 4 will be a flash game that starts with the word Doodle
Old thread but no were was I criticizing Apple. I was stating a fact. Apple not going to do anything that does not have a short term path to be profitable. They are not going to be willing to invest the upfront cash for something that will have may have a long term gain.
To break into the counsel market it requires a huge upfront investment. Something Apple is not going to be willing to do. If you want to make stuff profitable day one from entering the market console is not the place to do it.
Look at the products Apple releases they tend to be in a smaller market and something they can break out in.
I know other companies will not enter a market unless they can be number 1 or number 2. Nothing is wrong with that. For example there is a reason you do not see any BP gas stations in Texas (and Amoco before that) because they had/have a policy they want to be number 1/2 in a market and Texas it was just to competitive to be able to pull it off. Kicker is Texas is were their largest plants are based.
It just a stances. Apple not a company that goes for for short term losses for long term gains.
Apple is already hurting gaming consoles with iOS devices. Even if Apple does nothing else, the simple fact that iOS devices can project images on television screens can shake things up.
For years, Nintendo's Gameboy / DS line was dominating portables. I think iOS... with their 99¢ (and often free) games ...has changed the way portable gaming works.
Apple TV is basically running iOS too. With some minor upgrades, and a cool controller/remote, the console wars could go insane. If the Apple TV included an app store and a web browser, it could quickly become a hot item for the living room.
At the last World Wide Developer Conference, Apple stated...
and...
How is it pointless to build a gaming network with millions of users... IN LESS THAN A YEAR?
Yeah, they're degrading the quality of portable gaming to the point that these games need to cost 99 cents because if they cost any more, nobody would buy them. Not the kind of change most gamers want.
No worries. Nintendo and Sony, which haven't done anything significant in the portable market for over half a decade, are now coming back to innovate.
I've seen your blog and seen you repeat those quotes all over the internet. If you use sheer number of users as your only metric, then yeah the Game Center is a success. But that ignores the finer realities. For example, over half of XBox Live users pay to use that service. How many iOS users do you think would be willing to pay to keep an ugly looking scoreboard on their phone? Speaks volumes about the quality of Game Center and shows no matter how many XBox Live comparisons get thrown around, they're not equal.
Same goes with AAA gaming vs this Freemium bubble I'm waiting to pop but all the analysts who don't play games are insisting is supposed to be the future of gaming. When you have zero expectations when it comes to quality, everything is interchangeable.
I'm really really interested in what you have to say and I'ma let you finish, but people do tend to have more than one gaming console. If everyone had to choose one console and one console only, I'm pretty certain that they'd be only *LTD* playing games on iOS. As ten minutes of angry birds whilst waiting for the bus, isn't that necessary. Or at least not as necessary as the two hours playing Call of Duty on a console whilst relaxing after a days work.
I wouldn't say everyone. I know my mother would find Angry Birds more appealing than CoD. Though at the same time I'm sure she'd rather play one of her "find the object" games than either of those.
Anyway, she is far from alone. The fact is that very casual gamers like her make up the majority of the gaming market as a whole.
As far as iOS gaming goes, we are waaay past Angry Birds.
If you actually kept up with gaming developments on iOS your comments would be more in touch with reality. Take a look around the iPad App Store the next time you fire up your iPad. And this is barely a year and a half after the iPad's debut.
If you count both control methods i would have to agree. Well except that I wouldn't call it horrible; just a bit awkward.
However keyboard+mouse is not really a viable input method for the handheld or couch gaming we're talking about here. So we should just be comparing it to the gamepad. Now a gamepad is still more practical for many genres, but for some like like RTS, Adventure, and certain types of RPG I'd argue that a touchscreen can work at least as well if not better.
Last edited:
I don't have an iPad anymore. And yes, I agree that we are way past Angry Birds. It still doesn't disprove the fact that people will prefer their TV consoles over a touchscreen tablet. As I said, the game has to be either simple to control or it is too complicated an hard to play.
The only PC/Console title that has been ported to iOS that I think has had any justice is Plants vs Zombies. But the game works brilliantly with a touchscreen and doesn't need any dumbing down or simplifications.