Apple arcade is mostly casual games, which I usually don't like. BUT they do have Fantasian, an old JPRG game, which IMO is a masterpiece (if you like the genre) and will take you a lot of hours to complete.
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.
Apple Arcade Gaining 'Alto's Adventure: The Spirit of the Mountain' Game
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
has graphics not much better than ANGRY BIRDS it looks like.
Over in the Android world They have Windows 11 running on a snapdragon phone.
Plays Games Too.
Over in the Android world They have Windows 11 running on a snapdragon phone.
Plays Games Too.
Because they’re quite different machines, and they are used in different ways.
The PS4 is plugged into AC power whenever it’s used, and is a bit famous for spinning up its cooling fans to sound like a leaf blower when running some AAA games. The iPhone 14 is pretty much always operating on battery.
The PS4 has a controller designed to be operated entirely by touch, and using it doesn’t detract from the screen in any way. iPhone games operate with on-screen touch controls, which by necessity involve hiding part of the screen under your fingers - you can’t see the bit of the screen that is under your thumb without lifting up your thumb. And you can’t feel whether your fingers are on the proper controls, you have to look, or, at best, guess based on where your hands are in relation to the edges of the phone. (Yes, a game can also do some control using the accelerometers, but that can only substitute for a couple of axes of a controller.)
As well, the PS4 is in a fixed location with dedicated resources around it - using it kind of requires a TV, and an AC power supply, and somewhere to sit and watch the big screen, and you sort of have to make time and arrange to play it. On the other hand, the iPhone can be used and played with just about anywhere. And thus someone on the iPhone is more likely to be interrupted by, say, their bus arriving at its destination, their meeting starting, their food arriving at their table, or any of a thousand other things.
Also, orientation of the device comes into play - the PS4 is aimed at someone who is completely focused on playing games (at least while they’re using it). You don’t buy a PS4 to surf the web or read email. You might be able to sort of make it do something resembling those things, but it won’t be pretty. It’s a purpose-built device for gaming. The iPhone, on the other hand, is more of a universal device - you get one for keeping in touch and staying informed (that covers phone, email, text, social media, web surfing, and a whole bunch of related uses). It can also play games but that’s not the primary focus. Few people buy a phone only to play games.
So, the developers for each platform target their perceived audiences differently: developers for the PS4 go for the most eye-popping graphics and immersive environments, with the expectation that you’ll play for hours at a time, while developers for the iPhone largely go for things that can be played for minutes at a time, with the expectation of interruptions by your surroundings.
If a developer were convinced that they could make a ton of money by writing a “AAA” game for an iPhone, they probably would do so. That is mostly not happening. And the reason isn’t because the iPhone can’t display the graphics, as you've noted - it can. Rather, it’s alm the other factors.
I’m not saying that a PS4 is in any way superior to an iPhone, they’re just aimed at quite different targets. Part of the reason you don’t see much in the way of “AAA” games on the iPhone is technical (power issues, controls, etc.), but a whole lot of it is usage patterns (pushing phones towards casual games) and perceived audience (the very notion that ”phone gamers are casual, console gamers are dedicated”) that affects what developers are willing to invest their time, money, and resources into developing. Unless it’s a “labor of love”, no developer is going to pour a bunch of time an money into developing a game unless they’re pretty confident that they’ll make back substantially more money than it cost to make.
FWIW, I’ve done a fair bit of gaming on the iPhone in the past, and not just “casual” iPhone gaming - I spent quite a while out running around the city as part of highly organized and dedicated groups, playing Ingress and Pokémon Go, while the “hardcore” console gamers sat on their couches - I was hanging out with players who would (in jest) call each other “filthy casuals” if they weren’t prepared to drop everything and head out the door on a moment’s notice, at midnight, with their phone, their battery pack, and their car keys, to drive 10 or 20 miles to go capture a rare Pokémon or take over a section of town - in fact, the camaraderie in the community was a big reason for playing… But, since the pandemic started, I got a PS5 and now spend most of my gaming time budget on that (in the last year I’ve spent more time than I care to mention running around in the Borderlands franchise).
I think Apple Arcade is a terrific resource for “casual” gaming, but I just don’t have the time/need for it. If I were in a situation where I was spending a lot more time away from home, with lots of bits of downtime, I could imagine subscribing to Apple Arcade.
Keep tilting at that windmill. Apple could do AAA gaming, if they perceived that it was worth their while. Which would only be the case if a majority of their users showed a really strong interest in it. They have something approximating all the money in the universe, and could buy their way into the market (acquiring talent and companies). Instead, they’re going in other directions (iPhone, iPad, watch, AR/VR, car) because they see those as being more lucrative.
I’d love to see Apple invest the resource to make some future Apple TV into a first-rate gaming console, with the talent and resources to compete with the likes of Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo. Competition is good.
On the other hand, you can go out today and buy a PS4/PS5 or Xbox to okay AAA games, or an Android phone to run emulators for old games on the go, if that’s what you want.
But don’t kid yourself that the thing standing in the way of AAA games on the iPhone is “Apple is incapable of doing AAA games”. They’re doing Apple Arcade, because they perceive that that’s where the money is, in gaming, for them, on iPhones. The majority of their customers, if they’re at all interested in playing games in the first place, would rather play something more accessible than a AAA title.
But it’s apple who is making that connection by being complete dicks about having any gaming streaming service in the App Store. It would be entirely possible to have both but Apple won’t allow it without making it super difficult that no one will take them up on the offer.
I don’t think that’s the reason they don’t allow them, due to Arcade, that’s nuts.
They’re are clearly overzealous on how they manage the App Store, third party payments, third party content, there of course maybe an anti-competitive motivation, as games represent a good chunk of the store’s revenue. If there are AAA games available on the iPhone they want it to go through as a native app using Metal, etc. on the store with Apple processing the payments and IAP and not be streamed through a third-party.
To think is because of Arcade is again, nonsense, there are Arcade-like services available on the App Store aready, they due however go through the whole process.
Means they made their own audio. Most games source it from other places, like sound libraries. They may modify it a bit but it's similar to using a stock photo library.
My family does. Any time my kids feel like they want to try something new (say, on a road trip or something), they know that they can go right to the Arcade tab in the App Store and I'll probably approve it because they are ad- and purchase-free. It's honestly quite refreshing.
The day I can use the iPad on an external monitor with full screen display (without the black lines) I and maybe others will use the iPad more to play games. I am a gamer and I have a nice collection of games on the iPad from the Apple Arcade but I am not a fan of gaming with my thumbs or using the controller to look at the iPad display when I have a 27 inch monitor.
I do with my iCloud + subscription. I'm not a gamer... not enough time. I play a few minutes a day to relax. I think it's great for that.
Nah, I genuinely think it’s because they don’t want a distraction from Apple Arcade, considering you pay a monthly price for Xbox gamepass to unlock countless games - including arcade ones FWIW. I can easily see people saying “well I have gamepass, which costs more but works almost anywhere and Apple Arcade, but I don’t need both” so Apple Arcade gets the axe.
If we’re able to stream films of a varying quality based on your connection, why not gaming? Xbox gamepass works quite well in the browser on my phone (except for the occasional lag) so I imagine an app would only be better.
The fact they made it so difficult by requiring MS to create separate apps instead of just the one reeks of anticompetitiveness for me. That and while Metal is great it’s not like a streamed game from an Xbox Series X is going to be terrible.
I respect your opinion, I’m a big fan of GeForce Now, which I use through fiber and ethernet thus achieving great results, to me it is the future, a dumb terminal to play AAA games, just the tv and a gamepad.
I however don’t think Apple sees Arcade as a vis-a-vis competitor to Game Pass, more so: even if they did, I don’t think that’s the reason behind the App Store policy in question. But, of course, I can be wrong.
My wife and (adult) daughter use it all the time. Me, not so much. But when I was about to cancel it after my free trial, they both rebelled.
