The only "Apple Approved" controllers will be iPod Touches, iPhones, and iPads.
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.
Xbox Founding Engineer Says Apple TV Could Destroy Console Gaming with Third-Party Apps
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The only "Apple Approved" controllers will be iPod Touches, iPhones, and iPads.
Look, we get it - you like to argue and dont like Microsoft
I'm looking at the long run here, not the TODAY market. The new consoles will be out by xmas and will likely support 4k - given that TV manufacturers have already said that 4k pricing will be a hell of a lot more reasonable by 2014, its not unrealistic to expect that over the next couple of years we'll see it adopted a lot more widely.
So, come 2014 lets hypothetically say 4k tv's are at a semi-reasonable price, why the hell would someone want to have an Apple TV with cut-down games they can get on their phone, when they can get a real console, with real online multiplayer gaming with beefy games.
Games like LA Noire for example take up 16GB Space minimum. Distributing games like that over an AppStore is just not feasible.
There's too many things that Apple would have to overcome. The filesizes (and no, dumbing down the games is not the right way to go, and people wouldn't accept that).
Realistically the only way Apple could do it is with technology such as onlive.
I've been a console gamer all of my life. I've owned every console and handheld since the Atari 2600. Remember the virtual boy? Game gear? Turbo Express? Turbo Grafix 16? Neo Geo AES? Sega Saturn? So i'm well aware of what consoles are, in fact it kind of ties into my day job (signature). I'm well aware of where the console market is heading and what will happen next. I'm also aware that someone as hardcore as myself now prefers to play games on his iPad vs the xbox 360, ps3 and nintendo wii which are collecting dust. My daughters have a nintendo wii in their bedroom (it never gets played), they also own several nintendo ds handhelds and a psp(those don't get played either). Do you know what i bought my oldest daughter for christmas? An iPad mini, my youngest daughter still plays her iPod touch and borrows her mom's iPad as she is still too young to have one of her own. If someone like me can change their spots then it means the market is pivoting.
Which would be an instant fail given that you need to be able to feel what buttons you're pressing.
Look, we get it - you like to argue and dont like Microsoft
I'm looking at the long run here, not the TODAY market. The new consoles will be out by xmas and will likely support 4k - given that TV manufacturers have already said that 4k pricing will be a hell of a lot more reasonable by 2014, its not unrealistic to expect that over the next couple of years we'll see it adopted a lot more widely.
So, come 2014 lets hypothetically say 4k tv's are at a semi-reasonable price, why the hell would someone want to have an Apple TV with cut-down games they can get on their phone, when they can get a real console, with real online multiplayer gaming with beefy games.
Games like LA Noire for example take up 16GB Space minimum. Distributing games like that over an AppStore is just not feasible.
There's too many things that Apple would have to overcome. The filesizes (and no, dumbing down the games is not the right way to go, and people wouldn't accept that).
Realistically the only way Apple could do it is with technology such as onlive.
don't expect 4K TV's to sell in volume until they are in the $1000 price range. maybe $2000.
only a few techno fiends even care about 4k at this point. my next TV is going to be a plain 1080p model, maybe with an ethernet port. i might buy 4k in 10 years or so
There's your problem. You're the wrong market.
Teenage boy, sitting in his room, playing COD online with his headset and his friends. You honestly think he's going to ever do that on a tablet?
Last edited:
Because so many casual gamer actually play on the Wii and don't just buy it to look at it? Please, Nintendo has always been a one man army. Without their first party titles, they would not be where they are today. Even if Apple would make gaming on the ATV possible, it would not interfere as much with the console market as many people think it would. The console market has been doomed, well since forever. It's still there, maybe not as strong as it used to be, but that's mainly the fault of the economy and lazy devs. Let's make a port of a port of a remake of whatever. On iOS however you see fresh games, not all with new content though, as many are just rip offs of other games, but most of them are new.
You do realize Grand Theft Auto is available as an iPad app? https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/grand-theft-auto-3/id479662730?mt=8
I've never played it on any platform so I can't compare the quality, nor do I know how much it cost to develop, but it does exist on iPads.
Call it whatever you want, but Apple isn't likely to endorse any 3rd party products. They will either make their own or provide bluetooth support (or both), but don't plan on seeing any Logitech controllers with Apple logos on the box.
That was the point I was trying to make.
10 years is a bit much, given that 10 years ago most of us were on 32" CRT TV's. Maybe 5 years is a bit more realistic.
Why would they do this, when Apple would be, in one fell swoop, handing Sony (and M$) one of their most cherished objectives on a silver platter? By which I refer to the elimination of the used video game market. Far more than half of all physical console media sales are used, so even if prices dropped by 50% (which they wouldn't), Sony and M$ and the rest would see revenue go up sharply. Especially considering how the demand curve works. I forget where I read it, and the recent articles on the topic are spamming over my Google-fu, but apparently an X360 game bought new will be resold something like 6.4 times before scratches and disinterest attrition it away.
Hardcore gamers will pay more for a console with more guts, and it's an entire separate market from where Apple is targeting. This has always been true. In 1983, hardcorers discarded Atari 2600 shovelware and spent billions of quarters in arcades. In 1993, they let the plebes have their Genesis/SNES while they bought a Neo Geo. In 2003, they modded and tweaked their Xboxen and bought immersive deluxe controllers and accessories for costs approaching that of another console (Steel Battalion, anyone?). In 2013, they'll buy the X720/PS4 and play Hero's Duty 7 with glee while one hundred million proletarians have a blast playing Sugar Rush 2 or Rock Band 5 on the ATV4.
Look, we get it - you like to argue and dont like Microsoft
I'm looking at the long run here, not the TODAY market. The new consoles will be out by xmas and will likely support 4k - given that TV manufacturers have already said that 4k pricing will be a hell of a lot more reasonable by 2014, its not unrealistic to expect that over the next couple of years we'll see it adopted a lot more widely.
So, come 2014 lets hypothetically say 4k tv's are at a semi-reasonable price, why the hell would someone want to have an Apple TV with cut-down games they can get on their phone, when they can get a real console, with real online multiplayer gaming with beefy games.
Games like LA Noire for example take up 16GB Space minimum. Distributing games like that over an AppStore is just not feasible.
There's too many things that Apple would have to overcome. The filesizes (and no, dumbing down the games is not the right way to go, and people wouldn't accept that).
Realistically the only way Apple could do it is with technology such as onlive.
Theres a very good reason why someone would want an apple tv. Its called cutting the cord and is something my family did several years ago. We used to spend over $1400/yr on satellite tv. Now we spend $7.99 for netflix + $7.99 for hulu plus. My apple tv is on all the time, so i don't have to change inputs or do anything else if games were available for it. Not to mention the fact that games could be ported to the apple tv very easily so the existing game catalog could be ported in a very short amount of time with minimal cost to do so.
The controller would be your $300 iPad mini, $500 iPad, or $600 iPhone and could be a lot like the Wii U. The handheld iDevices could (?) offload some of the processing too.
Graphics aren't any better than the PC version. The controls on the iPad version are horrible though.
AppleTV has a USB port
"... Micro-USB (for service and support) ... "
http://www.apple.com/appletv/specs.html
And Apple isn't keen to letting folks use it as general usage storage. If they did anything it would be like a Tivo storage drive thing where the only supported option was sold pre-configured.
I don't think Apple is looking for more support calls because someones Banana Jr 3000 HDD is acting quirky with the Apple TV.
If anything AppleTV is tracking in the other direction. Into the TV itself not adding external HDDs to folks media cabinets. The iterative refinements made to AppleTV have been to make it smaller.
Relatively small, load-on-demand cloud stored games would work. AppleTV might cache the latest small game so the start up time was slower. But not the multi-GB stuff of console games leverage.
And what 'cord' needs cutting with a console? Sure the Xbox has Xbox Gold membership, but the PS3 has no subscription.
Also, what difference is there if you buy a game from an AppStore or a shop? You're still paying for the game, you're not getting any sort of contractual discount like you do with Netflix vs Satellite.
Hardly a comparison really is it.
Its an older version of the game but its still a valid point. As technology gets better, faster and smaller we are able to do things with tiny devices what used to take giant consoles to pull off. The days of 100 million dollar games are behind us. A few will come out from time to time but the money is quickly shifting into the mobile marketplace. I'm just shocked that a company with dreams of combining an ipod with a phone is the one who is leading the charge.
I made an account just to reply to this message. It is wrong on so many levels, and demonstrates an inept understanding of what this benchmark is representing.
I will be very brief. Most will understand what i'm getting at promptly.
You've basically shown us a benchmark demonstrating CPU capability. Not GPU prowess. The benchmark would be relevant had it shown competing systems both with an I5 and then the iGPU vs. the PowerVR GPU.
The simple fact is that a game like World of Warcraft is more heavily impacted by CPU prowess. The inept Atom which is an ultra low power x86 implementation is what is holding those two powerVR systems back.
In the case of Apple (A5/A5X) they are capable of pushing current-gen console quality graphics at this point in time. Not many games use this power though. The soon to be released Real Racing 3 is about the only game to make use of this increased compute power.
I won't bother going into further detail why this is possible. It doesn't require much thought. The point is that the series of benchmarks you linked to does not support your opinion.
Apple wouldn't do this. For Apple its a case of buy one with X storage for this price, or X storage for this price. I highly doubt their upgrade solution for a console would be 'just plug in a USB hard drive'.
If that were the case, why are we not seeing all console games being ported in full to iOS? Instead we see cut down, poor gfx games.
Most mobile games you are some forgettable hero in a tower defense, tap platformer or physics game that has been done in almost every other mobile game in history
You are greatly over exaggerating their quality
I can over generalize too!
10 years ago going from SD to HD was a big deal. same with CRT. a 40" CRT TV was in the 200 pound range and you needed 40" of depth. a 40" LCD takes less space.
other than quality what does 4K give you? why would anyone upgrade?