Do you think Apple will ever make a Video game Console? [Archive]

synergy

Jul 23, 2002, 07:54 AM

My theory has always been that Apple will not make a game console of their own but would likely put together a box based on the Nintendo Gamecube. I believe Apple gave the motherboard design for the Gamecube to Nintendo. Notice the small MB of the Gamecube along with ATI video card. In Japan Panasonic was allowed to release a Gamecube compatible machine called the Q which also played DVDs as well as Nintendo Gamecube games. Why aren't they selling it in the US? Other than being funky looking, which could be remedied for the US market, they could have sold decently here. My guess is Apple signed an agreement with Nintendo that they would be the ones to release a combo unit of sorts in the US and Europe. Probably would sell it in Japan too.

Think about it. A tivo like device that plays DVDs as well as Gamecube games. Nintendo just released their Wavebird wireless controllers as well. It could be wirelessly controlled. Maybe the unit will debut when Nintendo starts selling the modem and broadband addons for their gamecube. Then thre could be mucho Gamecube networks galore. The Apple set-top unit would be just fine with a G3 processor in there to handle the Gamecube as well handle the tivo and DVD playing.

Its all speculation right now on my part, but it would be pretty cool.

topicolo

Jul 23, 2002, 08:43 AM

I doubt Apple will ever release a console in a market like this, even if they joined with Nintendo. First, like iGAV mentioned, there hasn't been more competition in the VG market for a long time. Second, Nintendo has to sell their consoles at a horrific loss so that they can hope to make money by selling games and accessories and Apple wouldn't be able to afford that AND do its regular R&D for the mac and all the iGadgets it's going to be releasing (Apparently, it's costing M$ 2 billion a year to keep the xbox on the market--Apple has only about $3 billion in cash and marketable securities). Third, selling a console at below cost will go against Apple's tendency of selling quality equipment at a premium and finally, Apple was REALLY badly burned by its collaboration with Bandai to make the Pippin and I doubt they'll try that again anytime soon in this kind of an economy.

synergy

Jul 23, 2002, 09:08 AM

Originally posted by topicolo
I doubt Apple will ever release a console in a market like this, even if they joined with Nintendo. First, like iGAV mentioned, there hasn't been more competition in the VG market for a long time. Second, Nintendo has to sell their consoles at a horrific loss so that they can hope to make money by selling games and accessories and Apple wouldn't be able to afford that AND do its regular R&D for the mac and all the iGadgets it's going to be releasing (Apparently, it's costing M$ 2 billion a year to keep the xbox on the market--Apple has only about $3 billion in cash and marketable securities). Third, selling a console at below cost will go against Apple's tendency of selling quality equipment at a premium and finally, Apple was REALLY badly burned by its collaboration with Bandai to make the Pippin and I doubt they'll try that again anytime soon in this kind of an economy.

Uh sorry Nintendo does not take a horrific loss on the hardware. Xbox does yes.
Some have even said that Nintendo is at the point of break even on their gamecube hardware. Even if not they are no where taking horrific losses. Sony and Nintendo would like you to believe that.
Their financial numbers always show the profit is huge. Especially with Nintendo who is only a video game company.

http://www.tomshardware.com/smoke/99q3/990917/

See the link for them talking about Sony making a profit on the hardware.

Here is one on Nintendo:
http://www.consolewire.com/news/item.asp?nid=1372

Apple does not have to lose any money since they will be adding on features others don't have.
But as alawys its just speculation.

kaneda

Jul 23, 2002, 09:48 AM

yeah, they make a 16 bit console and price it at $299...over charge everyone as usual with old tech...

LimeiBook86

Jul 23, 2002, 01:16 PM

Originally posted by elmimmo
and failed. Make a search for Apple Pippin (http://www.google.com/search?hl=es&ie=ISO-8859-1&safe=off&q=%22Apple+pippin%22&lr=)
WOW! Cool! Did it ever market? If so I WANT ONE! Do they sell them? Or can I find one on eBay! They look so cool!:D :D :D

topicolo

Jul 23, 2002, 03:04 PM

Originally posted by synergy

Uh sorry Nintendo does not take a horrific loss on the hardware. Xbox does yes.
Some have even said that Nintendo is at the point of break even on their gamecube hardware. Even if not they are no where taking horrific losses. Sony and Nintendo would like you to believe that.
Their financial numbers always show the profit is huge. Especially with Nintendo who is only a video game company.

http://www.tomshardware.com/smoke/99q3/990917/

See the link for them talking about Sony making a profit on the hardware.

Here is one on Nintendo:
http://www.consolewire.com/news/item.asp?nid=1372

Apple does not have to lose any money since they will be adding on features others don't have.
But as alawys its just speculation.

1) the first link is over 3 YEARS old, the info is completely outdated. Here's (http://www.gti.net/hysteria/nuonline/ed062100.html) some info from an (albeit) less old source that says that at $350 per console, Sony was losing $50-$100 on each console sold. With its price now down to $199, the PS2 would theoretically be eating $200-$350 into Sony's wallets per console. Let's say that manufacturing efficiencies reduce this by 3/4, then Sony would still be losing $50-$87.5 per console, which would be a loss of up to 43% PER CONSOLE!!! Granted, Sony made money in their games division, but that's only because they have a huge library of established, good games making money for them through licensing that any apple console would not have upon introduction and may not have until it has been out for 2 years or longer, if ever.

2) As for the Nintendo link, the Merrill Lynch analyst estimated that Nintendo was losing $20/per machine BEFORE 6.6.2001 (date of the article), when the gamecube's price was $199. Now that it has dropped to $149, each gamecube should be costing Nintendo $70, which is a 47% loss per console.

Well, these financial numbers don't seem to show that the profit is "huge." Also, by adding more features, Apple will have to increase prices, which moves the Apple console beyond the acceptable price range for a gaming system, which means much fewer sales.

The best price range is the $149-$199 range we're in right now, as it is shown by the 131% spike in sales of the XBOX after its price slash click here (http://news.com.com/2100-1040-945834.html)

kiwi_the_iwik

Jul 23, 2002, 03:31 PM

Geez Lime, you're kidding, aren't you?

I remember when the Pippin reared it's little head - backed by Bandai. Basically, a cut-down PowerPC 603 with a CD-Rom drive. See how old that technology is?!?

With the way games are coming along in leaps and bounds now, I honestly cannot see the point in committing to a certain kind of hardware as a standalone games device. Look at the Xbox - I can guarantee that it's technology is already rendered obsolete, and next year sales will have dropped considerably if MS don't upgrade the internals (or lose out from software companies on decent ports of games).

Sony's and Nintendo's success is solely due to the software companies swinging their weight behind the consoles. It's what killed the Atari Jaguar, the Panasonic 3DO, the Amiga 32, and the Sega Saturn and Dreamcast. And, of course, Pippin.

Apple computer users are having a hard enough time as it is getting games. I doubt whether that would change with the advent of a Mac Gaming Console.

Sorry... :(

topicolo

Jul 23, 2002, 03:56 PM

Well put Kiwi :-)

whfsdude

Jul 23, 2002, 04:08 PM

A friend: Will, what's this?
Me: It's a porno box.
A friend: But isn't this made by apple.
Me: Yes
A friend: So why are you using such an expesive gaming console to store porno.
Me: Haven't you heard? Apple gives you the best experience :D

synergy

Jul 23, 2002, 05:06 PM

iginally posted by topicolo [/i]

1) the first link is over 3 YEARS old, the info is completely outdated. Here's (http://www.gti.net/hysteria/nuonline/ed062100.html) some info from an (albeit) less old source that says that at $350 per console, Sony was losing $50-$100 on each console sold. With its price now down to $199, the PS2 would theoretically be eating $200-$350 into Sony's wallets per console. Let's say that manufacturing efficiencies reduce this by 3/4, then Sony would still be losing $50-$87.5 per console, which would be a loss of up to 43% PER CONSOLE!!! Granted, Sony made money in their games division, but that's only because they have a huge library of established, good games making money for them through licensing that any apple console would not have upon introduction and may not have until it has been out for 2 years or longer, if ever.

2) As for the Nintendo link, the Merrill Lynch analyst estimated that Nintendo was losing $20/per machine BEFORE 6.6.2001 (date of the article), when the gamecube's price was $199. Now that it has dropped to $149, each gamecube should be costing Nintendo $70, which is a 47% loss per console.

Well, these financial numbers don't seem to show that the profit is "huge." Also, by adding more features, Apple will have to increase prices, which moves the Apple console beyond the acceptable price range for a gaming system, which means much fewer sales.

The best price range is the $149-$199 range we're in right now, as it is shown by the 131% spike in sales of the XBOX after its price slash click here (http://news.com.com/2100-1040-945834.html) [/QUOTE]

Regardless they are not taking horrific losses on the units. Yes Merrill Lynch speculated at about 20 dollars loss at the 199 price point, but with Nintendo coming towards break even within 6 months. Guess what, 6+ months passed.
As well those are estimates based on Merrill Lynch's guesses. More likley both Nintendo and Sony are making money of the hardware right now. Albeit not a whole lot. The myth that they lose money on it or lose a lot of money on the hardware is simply not true.

You also look at this device that is proposed as a video game console. It is not and neither does Microsoft want it to be in the future. The gaming aspect is just a small part. The hardware has already been subsidized previously. The MB design from the G4 Cube would work fine. Apple then needs the software to make a Tivo like device. You only need one motherboard to handle it all. The Gamecube is a modified PPC and ATI video card. To handle DVD playback and video game capabilities would not cost that much more since its an all in one unit.

synergy

Jul 23, 2002, 05:17 PM

Originally posted by kiwi_the_iwik
Geez Lime, you're kidding, aren't you?

I remember when the Pippin reared it's little head - backed by Bandai. Basically, a cut-down PowerPC 603 with a CD-Rom drive. See how old that technology is?!?

With the way games are coming along in leaps and bounds now, I honestly cannot see the point in committing to a certain kind of hardware as a standalone games device. Look at the Xbox - I can guarantee that it's technology is already rendered obsolete, and next year sales will have dropped considerably if MS don't upgrade the internals (or lose out from software companies on decent ports of games).

Sony's and Nintendo's success is solely due to the software companies swinging their weight behind the consoles. It's what killed the Atari Jaguar, the Panasonic 3DO, the Amiga 32, and the Sega Saturn and Dreamcast. And, of course, Pippin.

Did the Pippin ever see the light of day? I thought it was a concept piece that Apple killed when times got tough?

As for the Xbox being obsolete it is if you are looking at it as a PC. Its not a PC though. If Microsoft were to update the hardware in anyway they would screw over early adopters as well as developers of the games themselves who might then have to write two different versions of the game. They won't do that unless they are really stupid. The reason the hardware console gets the developer support and for such a long time is that the developers don't have much of a moving target with regards to the hardware like they do on the PC side. Being purely for gaming, game makers make the most money from game sales for consoles as well. You can't view a console with the same category as the desktop computer because they are not the same. Xbox in terms of console is the most powerful of the three consoles thought their lack of developer support is really what hurts them.

digital1

Jul 23, 2002, 05:20 PM

I think it would be awesome. They have the know how to push something like that now. Back then Pippen didn't do well. But as we all know, Atari failed at making it in the hardware console business later, apple failed at newton. I Think the market is ripe enough for them to give it another try in the next set of consoles. It is WAY to late now, but an apple console with a decent processor (Power4 processor perhaps) could do some good stuff I think. Just my 2 cents.:)

digital1

Jul 23, 2002, 05:43 PM

Originally posted by synergy
iginally posted by topicolo [/i]

1) the first link is over 3 YEARS old, the info is completely outdated. Here's (http://www.gti.net/hysteria/nuonline/ed062100.html) some info from an (albeit) less old source that says that at $350 per console, Sony was losing $50-$100 on each console sold. With its price now down to $199, the PS2 would theoretically be eating $200-$350 into Sony's wallets per console. Let's say that manufacturing efficiencies reduce this by 3/4, then Sony would still be losing $50-$87.5 per console, which would be a loss of up to 43% PER CONSOLE!!! Granted, Sony made money in their games division, but that's only because they have a huge library of established, good games making money for them through licensing that any apple console would not have upon introduction and may not have until it has been out for 2 years or longer, if ever.

2) As for the Nintendo link, the Merrill Lynch analyst estimated that Nintendo was losing $20/per machine BEFORE 6.6.2001 (date of the article), when the gamecube's price was $199. Now that it has dropped to $149, each gamecube should be costing Nintendo $70, which is a 47% loss per console.

Well, these financial numbers don't seem to show that the profit is "huge." Also, by adding more features, Apple will have to increase prices, which moves the Apple console beyond the acceptable price range for a gaming system, which means much fewer sales.

The best price range is the $149-$199 range we're in right now, as it is shown by the 131% spike in sales of the XBOX after its price slash click here (http://news.com.com/2100-1040-945834.html)

Regardless they are not taking horrific losses on the units. Yes Merrill Lynch speculated at about 20 dollars loss at the 199 price point, but with Nintendo coming towards break even within 6 months. Guess what, 6+ months passed.
As well those are estimates based on Merrill Lynch's guesses. More likley both Nintendo and Sony are making money of the hardware right now. Albeit not a whole lot. The myth that they lose money on it or lose a lot of money on the hardware is simply not true.

You also look at this device that is proposed as a video game console. It is not and neither does Microsoft want it to be in the future. The gaming aspect is just a small part. The hardware has already been subsidized previously. The MB design from the G4 Cube would work fine. Apple then needs the software to make a Tivo like device. You only need one motherboard to handle it all. The Gamecube is a modified PPC and ATI video card. To handle DVD playback and video game capabilities would not cost that much more since its an all in one unit. [/QUOTE]

--------------------

Actually, I think you forgot about the little news article that said that sony can now combine the Emotion Engine Processor and Graphics Synthesizer chips together into one chip, so they are actually developing a smaller, at less of a loss, if they are taking any loss at all, here is the link.

http://www.games-chart.com/news_7_4_02_ps2shrunk.html

Honey I Shrunk Your PS2 7th April 2002

Sony may try shrinking the size of their top selling console, let's hope they shrink the price as well

A new manufacturing process will allow Sony to cut the number and size of the chips needed to power your beloved black box.

Ken Kutaragi, President of Sony Computer Entertainment, revealed that it is now possible to put both the Emotion Engine and Graphics Synthesizer onto one chip, reducing the cost and size of the components used in the PS2. This may lead to even cheaper PS2's and a possible cosmetic change a' la PSOne fingers crossed.

Source: Gamespot.com (US)

awrc

Jul 23, 2002, 06:10 PM

Most recent I've heard is that after they got the Graphics Synthesizer and Emotion Engine on the same die, Sony were making decent money on the PS2 at $299, and the price drop to $199 put them in break-even/small-profit territory.

jadam

Jul 23, 2002, 06:14 PM

Originally posted by topicolo

1) the first link is over 3 YEARS old, the info is completely outdated. Here's (http://www.gti.net/hysteria/nuonline/ed062100.html) some info from an (albeit) less old source that says that at $350 per console, Sony was losing $50-$100 on each console sold. With its price now down to $199, the PS2 would theoretically be eating $200-$350 into Sony's wallets per console. Let's say that manufacturing efficiencies reduce this by 3/4, then Sony would still be losing $50-$87.5 per console, which would be a loss of up to 43% PER CONSOLE!!! Granted, Sony made money in their games division, but that's only because they have a huge library of established, good games making money for them through licensing that any apple console would not have upon introduction and may not have until it has been out for 2 years or longer, if ever.

2) As for the Nintendo link, the Merrill Lynch analyst estimated that Nintendo was losing $20/per machine BEFORE 6.6.2001 (date of the article), when the gamecube's price was $199. Now that it has dropped to $149, each gamecube should be costing Nintendo $70, which is a 47% loss per console.

Well, these financial numbers don't seem to show that the profit is "huge." Also, by adding more features, Apple will have to increase prices, which moves the Apple console beyond the acceptable price range for a gaming system, which means much fewer sales.

The best price range is the $149-$199 range we're in right now, as it is shown by the 131% spike in sales of the XBOX after its price slash click here (http://news.com.com/2100-1040-945834.html)

uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

Sony managed to combine the Emotion Engine and graphics Synthesizer into one piece of silicon. This saved A LOT OF MONEY for Sony. MS are the only ones losing money on their console thats because they can afford to do that. And, Do you really think nintendo is losing money on GameCube??? SERIOUSLY??? i mean for gods sake, that thig costs them like $50 to make, look at the components, how expensive does it look liek to you???

iH8Quark

Jul 23, 2002, 07:26 PM

M@iginally posted by topicolo [/i]

1) the first link is over 3 YEARS old, the info is completely outdated. Here's (http://www.gti.net/hysteria/nuonline/ed062100.html) some info from an (albeit) less old source that says that at $350 per console, Sony was losing $50-$100 on each console sold. With its price now down to $199, the PS2 would theoretically be eating $200-$350 into Sony's wallets per console. Let's say that manufacturing efficiencies reduce this by 3/4, then Sony would still be losing $50-$87.5 per console, which would be a loss of up to 43% PER CONSOLE!!! Granted, Sony made money in their games division, but that's only because they have a huge library of established, good games making money for them through licensing that any apple console would not have upon introduction and may not have until it has been out for 2 years or longer, if ever.

2) As for the Nintendo link, the Merrill Lynch analyst estimated that Nintendo was losing $20/per machine BEFORE 6.6.2001 (date of the article), when the gamecube's price was $199. Now that it has dropped to $149, each gamecube should be costing Nintendo $70, which is a 47% loss per console.

Well, these financial numbers don't seem to show that the profit is "huge." Also, by adding more features, Apple will have to increase prices, which moves the Apple console beyond the acceptable price range for a gaming system, which means much fewer sales.

The best price range is the $149-$199 range we're in right now, as it is shown by the 131% spike in sales of the XBOX after its price slash click here (http://news.com.com/2100-1040-945834.html) [/QUOTE]

SO YEAH!..........what he said. :p

jefhatfield

Jul 23, 2002, 08:08 PM

Originally posted by LimeiBook86
I have herd a lot of things about Apple and Nintendo "joining" togeather and making games (yeah right:rolleyes: ) But do you think Apple will ever make a gaming system? Think of it! A huge Apple case with a DVD player, FireWire ports for system to system networking, and an ethernet port to connect to your Mac, come on Microsoft did it (XBOX) Why can't we!? I think the memory cards should be shaped like the original iBooks, and they should be Key Lime (LOL) ;)

IF THERE IS STILL ROOM IN THE MARKET AND APPLE HAS THE MONEY FOR R AND D

APPLE IS ONLY ONE COMPANY SO ITS HARD TO get into everything

if apple was like ibm, then they could have all those employees and vast resources but being many times smaller, its hard for apple to enter other markets

bousozoku

Jul 23, 2002, 08:09 PM

It seems to me that the console was sold very briefly in Japan and there were something like three titles available including a Mobile Suit Gundam game. You may remember the QuickTime video preview of that.

Ifeelbloated

Jul 23, 2002, 08:21 PM

No they won't. But as long as Nvidia and ATI tech keep cranking out those sick GPUs for the Mac, I'll be happy.

topicolo

Jul 23, 2002, 08:52 PM

Originally posted by jefhatfield

IF THERE IS STILL ROOM IN THE MARKET AND APPLE HAS THE MONEY FOR R AND D

APPLE IS ONLY ONE COMPANY SO ITS HARD TO get into everything

if apple was like ibm, then they could have all those employees and vast resources but being many times smaller, its hard for apple to enter other markets

That's exactly what i've been trying to get across, as well as the fact that Apple will never be able to get a large enough gaming library quickly enough to sell enough games to offset any losses that they WILL incur on their hardware. I mean, look at the XBOX: it had a huge launch library, but most of the software sucked and M$ had the time and the money to promote their development system, as well as having a (generally) more intimate relationship with game developers than Apple does.

Basically, when you're pricing consoles at their introduction, the lower the better--if you're making a profit on them, the price isn't low enough! Like most of you have proved, console companies work like crazy to reduce their manufacturing costs but they reduce their losses only a year or two after they release the system. Apple doesn't have the deep pockets of Sony and M$, nor does it have the experience of Nintendo. If they release a console, they'll be doomed.

I don't think an expensive TiVo-like set-top box with wireless ethernet is out of the question tho.

I'm beginning to feel like eye now, except I'm putting down consoles instead of pdas. Now if only Jobs made a comment on how they're not going to make a console, I could quote it all over the place like eye :D :D :D

alex_ant

Jul 23, 2002, 09:55 PM

I was watching CNN during their coverage of the 1996 E3 expo, where they covered the Apple Pippin briefly. I'll never forget it - it was that higher-up at Apple, what was his name, he was wearing the towel on his head and he said, in his Abu-like accent, and I quote,

"It's the computer for people who don't want a computer!"

From that point on until the NeXT merger, I knew Apple was finished...

MacLuver23

Jul 23, 2002, 10:28 PM

Originally posted by kiwi_the_iwik
Geez Lime, you're kidding, aren't you?

Actualy...no....

I found one on eBay! Its was 10 bucks but now its like at $41.99! Search for
"PiPPiN@World"

Anyways... I wanted it not so I can play games on it but to cherish it! It looks so cool.... Like a MACITOSH DREAMCAST! I thought it would be cool to have!

On eBay the guys selling it doesn't have any wires or controllers with it....

Besides I'm getting really into Pac-Man and Mrs. Pac-Man now... Those games rock, I beat Mrs. Pac-Man TWICE! WHOO GO ME! :p

Well so I guess I'm not kidding kiwi... :D

kiwi_the_iwik

Jul 24, 2002, 02:40 AM

Well, I suppose if you're into retro, it's a good buy.

My first computer was a Sinclair ZX81 - with 1K of onboard Ram, a 16K Ram pack, and a small thermal printer - back in 1981. I bought it for $537 (in New Zealand) - and sold it for $70, WITH a black and white TV!!!!

Now, you can't get them for love nor money...

May I suggest getting MacMame if you only want to play arcade games? It's bloody good - and free, to boot!

;)

kaltsasa

Jul 24, 2002, 02:00 PM

The pippen sucked back in its day, but now they are quite the collectable...wouldn't mind one for my collection of apple goodies. As for MacMame, very nice...I'm actually building my full size mame cabnet with a starmax as my computer, no stinkin pc for me. But check back in like 3 years when i actually get that baby finished lol.

cryptochrome

Jul 24, 2002, 05:02 PM

The X-Box is getting killed in the console wars. Gamecube is selling about the same number of units but making better profits, and PS2 is way ahead of them both. To paraphrase, it's the games, stupid.

Thus if apple were going to team with game architecture they'd be better off with PS2, although GC might be easier. And if MS has any brains, they'll accellerate their plans for the X-Box 2 and bring out an X-Box plus with the same game capabilities but a new case, a bigger drive(s), and a small processor with the relevant software to handle PVR/Music library capabilities. (They are working on this - that's why they moved the UltimateTV staff to the X-Box division). Or offer a mod for the original box, although that 10GB drive is a little light for such things.

ibananarama

Jul 24, 2002, 05:30 PM

Originally posted by Geert
Apple won't make the same mistake as M$.
M$ failed with delivering a game console.

It would be better for Apple if they would make an agreement with nintendo en sony to port the games to the mac.

actually...the xbox has much better sales and satisfaction rate than the gamecube does. microsoft is also doing better in the games department (ie. selection/quality)...take a look in stores and tell me how many games you see for each system (don't count ps2 games, there are too many to count).

overall, everyone should just buy a ps2

besides, the gamecube is not HD ready and also does not have a digital sound output...such a waste

ibananarama

Jul 24, 2002, 05:33 PM

Originally posted by cryptochrome
The X-Box is getting killed in the console wars. Gamecube is selling about the same number of units but making better profits....

..... Or offer a mod for the original box, although that 10GB drive is a little light for such things.

sorry for the double post, but i caught this a little late...

it's a 4 gig drive in the xbox, people have complained because they were all told in stores that it was 10 gig, but if you check out the specs...you'll find out you are wrong

guv

Jul 24, 2002, 05:47 PM

in europe at least... 30mil ps2 bben sold, 4 mil xboxs+gamecubes. plus its a g3 chip in the gamecube. my ps2 rules.

NatronB

Jul 24, 2002, 06:29 PM

Originally posted by guv
in europe at least... 30mil ps2 bben sold, 4 mil xboxs+gamecubes. plus its a g3 chip in the gamecube. my ps2 rules.

My XBox plays Halo.:D

guv

Jul 25, 2002, 07:18 PM

ah but GTA 3???????????????????????????????? that taruley is the greatest game. its in bisuit terrotry

daveg5

Jul 25, 2002, 08:08 PM

Only if they want to loose some money. I can see them, however, buying a game developer to make sure good games are available for thier machines. But it would be easier if they just paid or license Sega to make some sports, racing, and arcade games for them.This is apples weakest catagory (games that is}, and all of their current machines have at least a 600 mhz g3 and 16MBVRAM. so they can handle basically any console type game.
Even better would be a licensed PS@, XBOX, or Gamecube emulator.
but i think apple will never put much emphasis into games. have they ever?
peace

LethalWolfe

Jul 26, 2002, 12:36 AM

It is standard practice for console companies to lose money on system sales, and make money hand over fist with games sales. That's why is so important for console makers to be backed by big/well known game making companies. Does that mean the company is losing money? No. The profit from software and accessory sales more than makes up for the loss taken on the system sales.

If I had the $$$ for a console I'd go w/the GC. For games I'm like it has the strongest line-up. Especially w/Zelda, Metroid, and Mario Sunshine waiting in the wings. Also I prefer the GC controller to the X-Box or PS2 controller. As for not being HD ready... Well, by the time I can afford and HD TV the next gen consoles will be out so it's a moot issue in my case. ;)

Lethal

jefhatfield

Jul 26, 2002, 12:43 AM

Originally posted by Ifeelbloated
No they won't. But as long as Nvidia and ATI tech keep cranking out those sick GPUs for the Mac, I'll be happy.

i could live with that

but

ibook should be to 32 MB
tibook should be to 64 MB DDR

that's where comparable pc laptops are right now

but that will happen, predictably by next year as is almost always the case with apple offering the video capabilities six months to a year later

like i mentioned in another post, there's this pc laptop, priced the same as the 14" inch ibook, with a 64 MB DDR video chip already

-------------------------------------

but one thing i have noticed with the lcd screens in laptops is that for fast moving games, there always seems to be some ghosting and nothing seems quite as fast as a desktop with a good crt...i don't notice the ghosting there

the lcd screens i have seen with desktops and gaming has some ghosting, too...but not as bad as on laptops

i wonder if lcd screens will ever get over that problem?

i am not that fast anyway, so it does not really make that much of a difference:p

LethalWolfe

Jul 26, 2002, 01:00 AM

Originally posted by daveg5
Only if they want to loose some money. I can see them, however, buying a game developer to make sure good games are available for thier machines. But it would be easier if they just paid or license Sega to make some sports, racing, and arcade games for them.This is apples weakest catagory (games that is}, and all of their current machines have at least a 600 mhz g3 and 16MBVRAM. so they can handle basically any console type game.
Even better would be a licensed PS@, XBOX, or Gamecube emulator.
but i think apple will never put much emphasis into games. have they ever?
peace

"...handle basically any console type game." I really hope you don't think a 600mhz G3 w/ a 16meg vid card could play Dreamcast, PS2, Xbox, and/or Gamecube games.

Lethal

LimeiBook86

Jul 26, 2002, 01:37 AM

Wow one of my own posts have got so many replies!

COOL!:D

Shrek

Jul 26, 2002, 02:00 AM

Originally posted by Geert
Apple won't make the same mistake as M$.
M$ failed with delivering a game console.

That's because MS doesn't innovate like Apple does, and I think Apple should do it! :D

bunton

Jul 26, 2002, 02:09 AM

What the heck
1) Apple is freinds with sony allready so y Nintendo???
2) A computer is a digital hub to apple at least
3) Computers allready have games
4) Just why?
5) Look at the X
6) Just a Apple video game machine? What would that do
7) Mr. Jobs doesnt like games like Billy Boy!!!!!!!!

Shrek

Jul 26, 2002, 02:11 AM

Originally posted by bunton
6) Just a Apple video game machine? What would that do

It would definitely be a lot cheaper! :D

Shrek

Jul 26, 2002, 02:19 AM

Originally posted by bunton
7) Mr. Jobs doesnt like games like Billy Boy!!!!!!!!

If Jobs doesn't like games, then maybe he should separate the two by forcing companies to forfeit the right to make games for the Mac and instead make games for their console. That would balance things out by forcing Apple to lower the price of their Macintosh computers (due to lack of capabilities), and transfer those revenues to the new console. It would also make Apple's platform a better platform for gaming because consumers would have a machine that is completely dedicated to gameplay! :D

synergy

Jul 26, 2002, 08:43 AM

Originally posted by ibananarama

sorry for the double post, but i caught this a little late...

it's a 4 gig drive in the xbox, people have complained because they were all told in stores that it was 10 gig, but if you check out the specs...you'll find out you are wrong

While I don't own and Xbox and don't intend to unless I can use it as a linux machine the above is false. It is a 10GB hard drive.

http://www.gamespot.co.uk/stories/news/0,2160,2045062,00.html

jefhatfield

Jul 26, 2002, 08:54 AM

Originally posted by Shrek

If Jobs doesn't like games, then maybe he should separate the two by forcing companies to forfeit the right to make games for the Mac and instead make games for their console. That would balance things out by forcing Apple to lower the price of their Macintosh computers (due to lack of capabilities), and transfer those revenues to the new console. It would also make Apple's platform a better platform for gaming because consumers would have a machine that is completely dedicated to gameplay! :D

an apple gamecube type thing would be nice

gaming is a huge market and one that the mac had a big handle on in the past

mac games are still not that shabby though on the computer but a console would definitely sell

topicolo

Jul 26, 2002, 09:19 AM

I seriously doubt it

jefhatfield

Jul 26, 2002, 09:42 AM

if apple could get in the market with a $199 dollar game box that is small with a dvd player, then that would be nice

the games could pay for everything as is the case with the other companies

make it able to interface with the digital hub concept along with the digital music player and hopefully, cross my fingers, and apple pda and apple camera

there must be a reason for a digital hub...more than just a digital music player

a whole range of accessories, also pc compatible, would revolutionize apple becasue they realize that there is not as much money in personal computers anymore

the future will bring smaller and smaller gear until the desktop computer for the average user, as we know it, will just fade out of existence

and either melt into a pda, a cell phone, built into homes and businesses, or something else

having the average user have a desktop unit sit in there house will become obsolete when pda's and laptops can do just fine

we already got rid of beige and apple's computer designs are going away from the basic sharp rectangle that most pc side machines are today

at least the pc side is slowly getting rid of the beige look

i have already seen desks with thin computers built under the desk or in the tabletop...totally, or mostly out of view...basically disappeareded like the futurists envisioned

in some ways, the cube seemed so nice to look at that it did not seem like a computer on the desk...where i live there is this architecture firm with silver and wood design and a couble of cubes and they fit so nicely into the decor the office really has the effect of having no computers in it

the cubes look more like decor or sculptures

i thought about...fantasied about building a desk which would house the mac server in it and have a flat panel built into the tabletop which could pop up or out, if needed or preferred, and have the total appearance of the "disappeared" or "invisible" computer

just give it a few years...no more desktops (visible) for some of us users...only laptops in sight and some pdas

in my house...two laptops and no desktops

jefhatfield

Jul 26, 2002, 09:57 AM

Originally posted by Shrek

That's because MS doesn't innovate like Apple does, and I think Apple should do it! :D

as much as i find microsoft boring, i do like the xbox and this may not make a lot of gamers agree

i have not given the gamecube or playstation a honest try yet but they do look good while played in the stores

most stores carry all three boxes, so why not apple?

i know they can sell, but will they to a level of profit? and will a profit come right away?

apple is much smaller than the game console companies and microsoft, so they can't swallow a loss with only six billion in the bank

heck, sony probably pays more in taxes each quarter!

Shrek

Jul 26, 2002, 07:20 PM

I think if Apple made their own game console, they should call it the gMac (Game Console Mac), and make it better than the XBox 2 (by that time, M$ should have an XBox 2), and sell it for around the same price as an XBox 2. See how M$ likes that! HA!!! TAKE THAT!!! AND THAT!!!

THAT WOULD ROCK MINE AND MILLIONS OF OTHER PEOPLE'S WORLDS!!! :cool:

jefhatfield

Jul 26, 2002, 08:43 PM

Originally posted by Shrek
I think if Apple made their own game console, they should call it the gMac (Game Console Mac), and make it better than the XBox 2 (by that time, M$ should have an XBox 2), and sell it for around the same price as an XBox 2. See how M$ likes that! HA!!! TAKE THAT!!! AND THAT!!!

THAT WOULD ROCK MINE AND MILLIONS OF OTHER PEOPLE'S WORLDS!!! :cool:

the gmac, that is a great idea...and they should make not just one, but a whole string of gmacs...

...and call them the gmac game console 1, gmac game console 2, gmac game console 3, etc

and call the string of game consoles the g-string series from apple...that has kind of a good ring to it:p

jefhatfield

Jul 26, 2002, 09:39 PM

Originally posted by LimeiBook86
Wow one of my own posts have got so many replies!

COOL!:D

yes, this is one of the better ones of late

beats all the SMG talk...i'm guilty here:D

Shrek

Jul 27, 2002, 02:27 PM

Come to think of it, if M$ does make a gMac, I think that they should try and get it out months before M$ comes out with the XBox 2; that way they'd be one step ahead of M$. M$ may try and make XBox 2 more innovative than the gMac, but considering that M$ doesn't innovate that much I don't think that's going to happen.

The gMac would be a great way for Apple to bring in the BIG $$$!!! Of course not from sales of the gMac, though, but from the sale of games for it. Imagine Apple selling hundreds of millions or possibly billions of games for the gMac?!?! And they wouldn't have to spend money to market the games either (unless they make their own games). THAT WOULD BRING IN SOME SERIOUS CA$H!!! Then they could use that money to lower the price of their PowerPCs and be able to spend more money to keep up with rivals like Dell, IBM, and Microsoft. Of course they should probably buy out Motorola, too! ;)

Just food for thought. . . :D

mnkeybsness

Jul 27, 2002, 03:43 PM

keep dreaming little boy

kiwi_the_iwik

Jul 27, 2002, 05:32 PM

Let Nintendo and Sony battle it out for top console. After all, they already have a huge following - gaming IS Nintendo's primary industry (and Apple could hardly compete with that, could they?). As for Xbox, it would just be another Microsoft hurdle to jump before they could even make in-roads into sales - since Microsoft already would have a year lead on Apple in support and sales for their product.

Not only that, I doubt whether software companies would go out on a limb on the premise that vast numbers of Apple games consoles will be scooped up by a waiting public.

Therefore, I would rather Apple put their R&D into faster processors, better graphics capabilities and improved iApps. Anything else would be a waste of their time.

And we'd still be able to play games on our fully upgradeable Macs, which are truly multifunctional, and won't be as outdated as a dedicated games machine will be by this time next year.

:)

jefhatfield

Jul 28, 2002, 12:27 PM

Originally posted by kiwi_the_iwik

And we'd still be able to play games on our fully upgradeable Macs, which are truly multifunctional, and won't be as outdated as a dedicated games machine will be by this time next year.

:)

a game console, while also prone to getting obsolete, is less likely to get outdated as fast as a computer for many powerusers

just look at all the posters here who get a computer every year...or more often

how many people buy a new console every twelve months?

kiwi_the_iwik

Jul 28, 2002, 12:39 PM

Originally posted by jefhatfield

a game console, while also prone to getting obsolete, is less likely to get outdated as fast as a computer for many powerusers

just look at all the posters here who get a computer every year...or more often

how many people buy a new console every twelve months?

Yes, granted, Mr. Hat.

But my major point is that Apple can't possibly drum up enough support for games OR buyers to justify the R&D for a dedicated games platform. Especially since:

1. There is already a ton of support for existing games consoles;

2. Apple failed in their attempt once before (Pippin), and;

3. Have you gone down to the local computer store lately? There are literally only a HANDFUL of Mac games out there on the shelves. What makes you think that the software houses will even port EXISTING games over to the platform, when we have enough problems "begging" for the latest-and-greatest titles to come to our Macs?

;)

isogonic

Jul 28, 2002, 02:40 PM

Nintendo's development tools were originally run on a powermacs based emulator. It seems to me that Nintendo should compile their dev tools emu and release them for approx $80 US. If this title included a USB based GameCube controller, it would totally rock! Nintendo would perhaps make more per unit than with their GC. Their is no question that I would purchase such a product, though I don't see that occuring.

pass

Jul 28, 2002, 03:24 PM

In the US the Xbox is *currently* outselling the GameCube. I'm not sure if they've managed to catch up to the total GameCube sales though as until the price drop the GameCube was outselling the Xbox. In Japan and Europe the GameCube is outselling the Xbox.

However the PS2 is outselling the two of them combined. And has a huge lead. THe PS2 has won this generation. Nintendo will probably come 2nd and MS 3rd.

Nintendo (or MS too I guess, it is still really early) might be able to pull off a respectable 2nd because hardware doesn't matter. Most people don't care their system has 6.4gig/sec of bandwidth and vertex shaders (hell, some people on this board though their computers could play console games!). Which system has Tony Hawk, Grand Theft Auto 3, Gran Toursismo, Pokemon, Mario games, etc? That is what matters. If Nintendo can release software to drive demand they may come back.

Originally the GCN (GameCube Nintendo, NGC was already taken by the NeoGeo Color portable) was 66% the price of the other systems ($200/$300), but now it is 75% ($150/$200) the price. The GameCube was designed with price/performance in mind. Xbox and PS2 have automatic loading trays while the GC you have to snap the disc in place by hand. Heck, just pick all three systems up. THe GameCube feels like it is an empty plastic box compared to the other two systems.

THe original manufacturing costs for the GC were estimated at $180 (Nintendo still lose $20 by the time each console was sold), but you can be sure they've come down. If NIntendo can get their system down to just $99 this Christmas and can show a couple great games like Mario Sunshine they may catch or beat Sony's sales (but I doubt catch Sony's huge lead).

Finally Apple had nothing to do what so ever with the GameCube. The Gekko processor is basically a G3, but it has "pair single" floating point instructions, not quite Altivec, but still two floats can get processed in parallel instead of a single double. There is also a couple instructions of prefetch cache control I don't belive the standard G3 has.

Wry Cooter

Jul 28, 2002, 06:15 PM

Originally posted by LimeiBook86

WOW! Cool! Did it ever market? If so I WANT ONE! Do they sell them? Or can I find one on eBay! They look so cool!:D :D :D

They were available at MacWarehouse and a few places for hmm maybe as long as the Cube was available.

The huge problem with the Pippin was, it was a closed video game system, and no one developed for it. When what it COULD easily have been and should have been, is a WebTV type device, that could read existing Mac CD-Rom materials.. If they merely made it able to read existing CD Roms for Macintosh (not a technical hurdle, but one that was merely closed off due to marketing ideas) they would have sold a load of them. At the time the only reason my dad wanted a computer of any sort at all was to read and search CD Rom reference material. The Pippin could have done this. Instead it became a widget with next to no software whatsoever.

topicolo

Jul 29, 2002, 10:01 AM

There was also the fact that the pippin had NO 3D hardware whatsoever and thus it was limited to 2d platformers and other Super Nintendo style games, not the newfangled 3d graphics of the playstation, which came out at about the same time. That was a huge disadvantage.

hesdeadjim

Jul 29, 2002, 10:04 AM

i'm sorry, but it's not going to happen now. i would say at the earliest, if ever, it would happen about 6 months before the latest crop of consoles goes to the next generation. then apple can innovate and not try ot infiltrate an already flooded market. and, they only way apple can make money is if they get in good with game makers. xbox isn't doing as well because the games they offer, with the exception of halo, or either horrible, or can be found on other consoles. nintendo on the other hand has a whole lineup only available for gamecube. i don't know about you, but i'm not willing to spend $199 plus $50 for halo, espically when i like metroid, mario, and zelda. also, it would make more sense for apple to get in good with nintendo, they already use a modifed G3 (to make it 64 bit or 128 bit or whatever), and nintendo shares a cult following similar to apple, but i still don't think it will happen. at least until nintendo is going to realease the next console. that's my two cents.:) :)