Apple TV A Gaming Platform?

[thejadedmonkey]

If you want to make TV dominate the living room give it a bigger HD and use it as a home server.

Like the X-Box 360?

 

[A is jump]

oooo... what about a touch screen Controller!? one where the buttons change depending on the game, or depending on what is happening in the game?!

it would be incredible for strategy games, or puzzle games.... come to think of it, that would be incredible for just about any game.

 

[Curtis72]

Icing on the cake...

I have an Apple TV on order and if it does support iPod Games, then I'd welcome it. More functionality without any additional cost except for the $5 games.

But why is there so much comparisons of Apple TV to XBox, Sony Playstation, or Nintendo game consoles?

Nothing in the original interview said anything about "high end" video gaming capabilities?

And if Apple is target the high end gaming market, it will not be with the Apple TV. But some other product.

 

[A is jump]

Like the X-Box 360?

right... only, not so expensive... cooler... like the Wii. more focus on the experience, less geeky. Xboxs are for geeky gamers with bad mustaches... kind of guys that also play D&D, collect Pokemon cards and wear tint glasses. ha ha.. ;]

oh I can see the Ads now!

 

[Doctor Q]

Maybe TV isn't powerful enough for the high-end games that the serious gamers demand, but maybe, at long last, with Apple's help, we'll finally be able to play Pong on our TV sets.

Even if they aren't the cream of the crop, having any games for TV will help sell the product.

 

[eddyg]

No need to complete with Wii etc

Hi,

I don't think the TV needs to compete with the gaming machines. It's a remote front end for streaming stuff from your Mac, first and foremost. Apple want people to buy Macs as well as TV.

Maybe not all the existing TV owners have or want a gaming machine, but would like the occasional game. Then the TV could easily facilitate that.

It's like the iPod, who buys an iPod for the games, but they are kinda nice now and then when bored silly.

To sweeten the deal I'm sure Apple will introduce games on to the TV, it's got a big enough HD to download them, and it can easily have a wired or wireless controller added via the USB port.

I for one am looking forward to see what they intend to do. Being in NZ I should be one of the first to get the TV, 2nd of March

Cheers, Ed.

 

[eddyg]

Maybe TV isn't powerful enough for the high-end games that the serious gamers demand, but maybe, at long last, with Apple's help, we'll finally be able to play Pong on our TV sets.

Even if they aren't the cream of the crop, having any games for TV will help sell the product.

You mean like the Wii isn't powerful enough? Which it isn't in comparison with the Xbox360 and PS3. However it has very playable and addictive games.

So just maybe the appeal of a game is not in how good the graphics are but in how good the gameplay is?

Cheers, Ed.

 

[ethansisson]

Hmm...I doubt it. I think that Apple understands that there is not a lot of money to be made in video games in contrast to other markets. Especially considering the extreme difficulty in entering the market, this does not seem to be a direction that Apple is likely to take. Jobs himself pointed out in this year's Macworld keynote that video gaming was not money-making market.

The only thing I can see Apple doing is iPod-style games - cheap, fun games for when you're bored. I know this is kind of a given, but it seems many people think Apple may want to compete directly with the big 3 (MS, Sony, Nintendo). If they provide games for Apple TV they will not position them as direct competition to serious gaming platforms.

 

[Stella]

I wouldn't touch an Apple console with a barge pole.

Apple would control the 3rd party games - just like the iPhone.

Apple should keep away from games, and leave that to the others, who know what they are doing.

Games on iPod stink - horrible control.

 

[Stella]

Yes the Wii is plenty. Its a powerful machine - more than the XBox 1, including graphics. The graphics on Xbox 1 got pretty good - so expect more from the Wii in the future. Trouble is, so far, no games take full advantage of the Wii graphic's ability and so don't look that much better than GameCube. Game play should be more important than graphics - graphics don't make a game.

The Wii is more fun that any other console I've found - truly innovative.
1. Gameplay
2. Graphics.

You mean like the Wii isn't powerful enough? Which it isn't in comparison with the Xbox360 and PS3. However it has very playable and addictive games.

So just maybe the appeal of a game is not in how good the graphics are but in how good the gameplay is?

Cheers, Ed.

 

[SheriffParker]

oooo... what about a touch screen Controller!? one where the buttons change depending on the game, or depending on what is happening in the game?!

it would be incredible for strategy games, or puzzle games.... come to think of it, that would be incredible for just about any game.

Nintendo DS anyone?

 

[Chaszmyr]

oooo... what about a touch screen Controller!? one where the buttons change depending on the game, or depending on what is happening in the game?!

it would be incredible for strategy games, or puzzle games.... come to think of it, that would be incredible for just about any game.

Most video games require you to constantly be looking at the screen to play well, which means you need tactile feedback from the controller.

 

[wnurse]

come on apple, you know you want to team up with nintendo.. come on, do it. DO IT!

Maybe they already asked Nintendo but Nintendo turned them down cause Apple wanted control of all customers who bought their games, told Nintendo to commit to them without even knowing what games apple would make and also demanded that Nintendo scap their system and replace with OS X and then turn over customer serivce of the gaming system to Apple.

Perhaps Nintendo saw how Cingular got punked and passed on the opportunity.

 

[bommai]

I thought HDMI 1.3 wasn't even out yet.

The final specs for 1.3 were finalized in July 2006. PS3 is one of the first products to take advantage of that. I believe the Toshiba HD-XA2 also have 1.3. 1.3 is not a big deal since most of the equipment cannot take advantage of it anyway. However, having HDMI itself is great. I have two HDMI ports in my TV and both are used (one for PS3 and one for a HD-DVR). I still have not decided about Apple TV.

 

[Thanatoast]

I had a bit of an out there thought.... I was thinking that one of the secrets to Leopard could be a new gaming environment. This turns every mac (prob intel only) into a gaming station. This would instantly put a gaming pltform into the hands of millions of Apple users. The TV will provide the link to your Television and a Wireless Controllers will be used over your home network. This would be great added marketing for Leopard and also the TV

Play your computer games on your big screen tv? With the power of your home compouter behind you? Hm, now *that's* an interesting idea...

 

[MattInOz]

Yes the Wii is plenty. Its a powerful machine - more than the XBox 1, including graphics. The graphics on Xbox 1 got pretty good - so expect more from the Wii in the future. Trouble is, so far, no games take full advantage of the Wii graphic's ability and so don't look that much better than GameCube. Game play should be more important than graphics - graphics don't make a game.

The Wii is more fun that any other console I've found - truly innovative.
1. Gameplay
2. Graphics.

If Apple TV and Wii are speced about the same, then couldn't Apple go the other way, instead of trying to compete in crowded market, they could sell Frontrow as an software title for Wii, Xbox or PS depending on which ones it worth paying the licensing fees on.

Sure it would have to be streaming only sort of device, but it would great exposure to the young'uns. I mean it's not like apple doesn't have experience with programming PowerPC style processors.

 

[casik]

hahahaha

I'd love to see Apple team up with Sony. That would be one kick ass system.

That will never happen... sony is so far behind when it comes to gaming. Sony shoudl stick to home theater and thats about it. Sony has never been behind Apple and that will never happen... but when I look at video games and i see nintendo... i see the apple of computer games. that is to say nintendo is to video games as apple is to computers... they are innovative and know what they are doing... i would loooooooove to see something come out from both of them... maybe buy games of the apple store?

 

[RMD68]

"I'll take Apple/Bandai Pippin for $500 Alex."

 

[Eckels]

When I picture an apple video game console, I picture a controller that would require you to use a steering wheel and a joystick to play mario bros.

If this rumor is true, to the extent that you're all seeming to make it out to be, I think it's wholly possible that we are witnessing the beginning of the end for Apple. I just hope they have enough money to keep themselves afloat when the iPhone and an Apple Video Game Console both fail horribly.

I pray that they only intend for the Apple TV to play basic flash games, like I imagine it could do, very easily. Think Pogo on your TV. That would work fantastically, in fact. But an Apple Game Console would be like burning billions of dollars, I assure.

Disclaimer, I have no opinion whatsoever about the Wii, the PS3, or Xbox. I just think the gaming market is about to go through some seriously bad times, and it would be a huge mistake for Apple to jump into it now, and hope to compete on the same playing field as the other consoles. A TV console for flash games would fill an empty niche, on the other hand, and I think it would be a wiser move.

 

[Ninja_Turtle]

nintendo and apple

nintendo and apple
both inovaters and what not

i think its like this

nintendo lost terribly i think with n64 and worse with the gamecube, but they ruled with NES and SNES and DS Lite

apple also had a shady history aswell and a boosting industry.

both underdogs get together, im sure itll be a nice gadget to have.

 

[e12a]

Interesting... I wonder if apple will make us pay for a "game system" enabler...


you know, for the "unadvertised" features.

 

[A is jump]

Nintendo DS anyone?

I suppose thats true... but the DS has a stylus, and you have to use that tiny screan to play on... I"m talking about playing on a big screen TV, on more powerful machine. nobody is doing it there.

Most video games require you to constantly be looking at the screen to play well, which means you need tactile feedback from the controller.

sure... action games. what about more interactive games? maybe if you're playing mario cart or some shoot 'em up game it wouldnt be super great.
but think final fantasy, or any RPG style game, strategy games, puzzle games (think Myst) it would really make the games intense...
on your TV, the game... and in your hand, an interactive controller for the game.

 

[dAlen]

Apple will be crushed like a bug in the video game market. Apple will need to partner up with Nintendo if they are going to make any sort of impact on the industry.

Edit: I will probably eat my words in a year or so.

Nintendo? Its low cost, thus low graphics...it has a nitch for those that dont have the money for Sony. (I dont have the money for sony, but it doesnt mean that Nintendo all of a sudden is a true competitor...it just means there is something for folks with less money to play with, albeit much inferior in graphics to Sony.)

Having said that Apple and sony need to merge...now that would be an ultimate platform, that is using what is currently available in the market.

Peace

dAlen

 

[dAlen]

So just maybe the appeal of a game is not in how good the graphics are but in how good the gameplay is?

Cheers, Ed.

Graphics mean a lot to some...it does for me.
Looking at Nintendo is like looking at...Nintendo 10+ years ago.

Looking at Sony vs. Nintendo...I mean if sony sold for the same price as Nintendo, I could bet that no one would have this conversation.

People like to convince themself that they have the best of something...it comes down to money, and as I mentioned in above post, I dont have money for Sony...but Im not going to start comparing Nintendo to Sony.

And as far as game play...Not sure there is that much of a differnce in Sony vs. Wii (pretend the price is the same) to make a difference, the graphics would impact me more. - pong or a modern day interface.

(Actually pong rules.)

Peace

dAlen

 

[A is jump]

Nintendo? Its low cost, thus low graphics...it has a nitch for those that dont have the money for Sony. (I dont have the money for sony, but it doesnt mean that Nintendo all of a sudden is a true competitor...it just means there is something for folks with less money to play with, albeit much inferior in graphics to Sony.)

Peace

dAlen

with all due Respect, I could care less about the PS3 or Xbox360. i find nothing appealing about paying that much money to do what I could already do on their old systems.
Nintendo practically re-invented gaming as we know it.
prior to the wii, I was completely satisfied playing PS1 games or N64 games for that matter. could hardly justify paying $50 for a used game cube, certainly not for a PS2, or xbox...
but with wii out, I'm saving up my bucks... that thing is amazing.
nintendo is the Only game in town as far as I'm concerned.

and I 'd say the same thing if they were charging $500 for the wii. I'd still want it, and I'd still be saving up. Sony didn't do anything amazing with the PS3, its just a PS2 with better graphics.
if the PS3 was as cheap as the wii, I still wouldnt be interested.