Apple TV Dev Tidbits: First Emulator Available, Old Remotes Work With New TV, Siri Remote Limited for Gaming

[Juicy Box]

I am surprised that this thread has not turned into a 4K vs 1080p thread like every other ATV4 thread has.

I disagree that this will be a flop though. I think it will sell well even though it has not met everyones expectations. When has Apple met everyones expectations with new products lately, and they still sell stuff like crazy.

 

[mw360]

I feel like this would be bad for users and the AppleTV reputation because not everyone will know that they should buy a controller to play it properly.

Apple could reverse the decision, but how do they warn people to make sure they have a controller before buying the app? Could be a mess for them and making sure all games work with the Siri remote saves them some trouble.

That being said, it means that games won't be all that great on AppleTV which is disappointing.

All this mess just because Sir Jony and friends can't stomach designing an ugly blob covered in sticks and buttons. I bet they tried, but couldn't pull it off with lozenges and straight edges, so saddled us with this instead.

 

[mw360]

The fact that it is $149 means it's dead on arrival. Sure, the Apple Faithful will buy it, but it will never become a truly global-scale product like Roku or the Chromecast. And really, it doesn't seem that revolutionary to me.

The fact that is $149 means that I can buy one, and an Amazon thing and a Google thing for a combined total less that my first VHS player, or first DVD player.

 

[John Mcgregor]

I have a simple solution to this problem. JUST DO NOT DEVELOP ANY GAMES FOR IT. I hope you can see that if you are not going to show middle finger to Apple they will just use you as a puppet and just drain you as much as possible. Grow a spine.

 

[Seoras]

I've been calling for this for ages. They could back-in the FaceTime app and just have it appear when a camera is connected.

Maybe that'll be a feature for the next AppleTV.

In terms of software and hardware it's a no brainer really and the current ATV is perfectly suited to supporting it.
-IF- you can add a camera.

I just hope that it's not the design guys getting a bit too "those pants don't go with that top" when it comes to bringing back something like the iSight accessory for connecting it to your Apple TV because it has a long ugly cable.
For aesthetics it will probably have to be wireless using a combo of bluetooth for setup and WiFi for bandwidth.

It's more than just adding the FaceTime App, you need your contacts App too, Siri integration, etc

 

[AxoNeuron]

The fact that is $149 means that I can buy one, and an Amazon thing and a Google thing for a combined total less that my first VHS player, or first DVD player.

The difference is that at that time there weren't many substantially cheaper ways to do the same exact thing (play VHS in your case).

When people buy something for their TV, they expect to watch media. They don't want to get an app when they can almost universally do the same exact thing on their phone in a tenth of the amount of time. And now that Apple is forcing most games to essentially dumb-down their games enough to be playable on a controller with ONE BUTTON, they've ruled out the possibility that it could ever be a very popular game platform.Basically, this new Apple TV was completely irrelevant in nearly every single avenue before it was even announced.

 

[T'hain Esh Kelch]

Apps, including Plex *and* a sideloaded Nintendo emulator? Geez.. I really need to consider selling my current media center.

 

[JoeShades]

I

The difference is that at that time there weren't many substantially cheaper ways to do the same exact thing (play VHS in your case).

Basically, this new Apple TV was completely irrelevant in nearly every single avenue before it was even announced.

Terrific, enjoy your Roku, bye. They have forums, Enjoy

 

[lvalenta]

I generally have 2 problems with the new Apple TV as a owner of current. 1. They didn't put their best HW into it - at least A8X would be nice (if not A9X). More graphics performance could bring some better games. And the second is the rule that every app has to use Siri Remote. To be honest, I'm not big gamer, I don't play very often. Therefore I was hoping Apple TV would make a deal. To be also small console. I was hoping to play NHL again, since it is the game I really want to play but buying a expensive console because of it? Nah. I'm not sure now if Apple TV would be also a console.

Generally I'm very happy with new Apple TV. I'm very excited and I'll buy it immediately. It's just not perfect.

 

[Piggie]

I do wish, just for once Apple would not screw up something and make it worse than it otherwise could be due to their lockdowns and rules.

1: We won't allow such software on our store, despite it being made, is working and millions would love it.

2: We won't allow any apps, no matter how good that don't work amazingly with our unsuitable gaming controller.

Such a shame that AGAIN it's looking like over control and arrogance is going to get in the way of the best software products and experiences

 

[babaroga73]

Couldn't agree more with Steve, requiring all apps/games work with the Siri remote is going to serious stifle development.

"Your game must support the Apple TV remote. Your game may not require the use of a controller."

OK.... Am I the only one who reads this as : Your game have to support ATV remote (in menus and such) ... And Your game may not require ( but also but may require) use of a controller.

English is NOT my first language, please explain it to me , why all of You think every game MUST work with ATV remote completely?

EDIT: OK ...I just googled "require" and it turns out it means, You can't make a game that demands the use of external gamepad, and can't work with remote only ??? Am I right this time .... Jeeeess .... this will be brutal. And only one button too ?? Well, two if you count tap on touchpad. Insanity.

 

[lvalenta]

The reason is that Apple determines whether the game will see a Store shelf. You probably wouldn't make a game for thousands of dollars which would not be allowed to be sell, right?

 

[JoeShades]

Couldn't agree more with Steve, requiring all apps/games work with the Siri remote is going to serious stifle development.

Of course all regular apps will need to work with the Remote, and none of these boxes is ever going to be a big gaming platform. It is meant to be for casual gamers and that is all. There will never be great development for games, if that bothers some of you go get an Xbox

 

[goobot]

aTV3 has never been jailbroken, so I doubt aTV4 will be. Apple figured out how to prevent it. I hope I'm wrong.

You are wrong. The lack of AppStore made it hard to access the system, guess what's different about this Apple TV?

 

[peterdevries]

The fact that it is $149 means it's dead on arrival. Sure, the Apple Faithful will buy it, but it will never become a truly global-scale product like Roku or the Chromecast. And really, it doesn't seem that revolutionary to me.

And now they're adding this pointless requirement. It seems like they almost want it to be a flop. Given this stupid decision, and the large amount of other astonishingly stupid decisions they've been making the last year or two, and it's really starting to seem to me like Apple is becoming a rudderless ship.

Your comment seems out of touch with reality. Apple is doing better than ever: wider global reach of products, a wider product portfolio, harder focus on software, more sales, more revenue, more profit. If that is a rudderless ship, then I want to be on it.

Roku is not a global scale product by any means. You should look beyond the US and UK. The chromecast is targeting a different use case than the new Apple TV.

What you consider "Apple Faithful" is by now the largest consumer electronics base in existence. You might not like the product and that is perfectly fine, but the single message that Apple has taken this product out of the hobby category will ensure that this things will be the best sold streaming device for the next years.

 

[Piggie]

I can tell you right here and now the BIGGEST test that needs to take place to see how Apple is going to deal with this.
The following scenario will be a very VERY important one.

You make a great game. A "Call of Duty" type of game, many controls, weapons, walking around, aiming methods etc etc.

You develop it to work amazingly well with a "Proper" games controller, and it's the best game every for the Apple TV.

To follow Apples rules, you also make it playable, but not very well, as it's simply not suitable, with the Apple controller.
So, you have complied with the rules as requested by Apple.

What will Apple do?

This test needs to happen as this will affect the entire future of quality games for this device.

 

[Manderby]

"Your game must support the Apple TV remote. Your game may not require the use of a controller."

English is NOT my first language, please explain it to me ...

This means that you may, but must'n, although they could which in fact they should, allowing us to can instead of must which might, but in the end we won't.

Story of AppleTV.

No honestly, I have no Idea what they try to say with this sentence.

 

[peterdevries]

I can tell you right here and now the BIGGEST test that needs to take place to see how Apple is going to deal with this.
The following scenario will be a very VERY important one.

You make a great game. A "Call of Duty" type of game, many controls, weapons, walking around, aiming methods etc etc.

You develop it to work amazingly well with a "Proper" games controller, and it's the best game every for the Apple TV.

To follow Apples rules, you also make it playable, but not very well, as it's simply not suitable, with the Apple controller.
So, you have complied with the rules as requested by Apple.

What will Apple do?

This test needs to happen as this will affect the entire future of quality games for this device.

Your signature shows where your preferences are, but the Apple TV will be in the living room of many homes that do not have that orientation towards gaming. I would love to see a good controller scheme, but we shouldn't assume that the majority of Apple TV owners in the future are looking for console quality. And judging by the implementation Apple is not aiming for that segment either.

So no, that is not the test. The test is whether users will pick up gaming on this Apple TV in the same way they have done on their iPhones and iPads.

 

[doelcm82]

The fact that is $149 means that I can buy one, and an Amazon thing and a Google thing for a combined total less that my first VHS player, or first DVD player.

$149 is twice the cost of a steak dinner for two at a chain restaurant where there is a bucket of peanuts in the shell on the table when you sit down. I don't eat such steak dinners every night, but occasionally I splurge. I can spend $150 on a multi-use electronic gadget that will give me a couple years' use.

What does a month of DirecTV cost?

 

[0098386]

Always find the Mac community fascinating.
1) You must complain about Samsung stealing ideas
2) You must play old games made by another company for other devices, even if they're sold elsewhere
3) You must want a company to stop making their own products and make them for Apple

Any newcomers here just follow those rules and you'll fit in just fine.

Because the funny fact is, if Samsung provided a platform for you to pirate old Apple software there would be a different attitude. Don't you think?

 

[doelcm82]

The difference is that at that time there weren't many substantially cheaper ways to do the same exact thing (play VHS in your case).

When people buy something for their TV, they expect to watch media. They don't want to get an app when they can almost universally do the same exact thing on their phone in a tenth of the amount of time. And now that Apple is forcing most games to essentially dumb-down their games enough to be playable on a controller with ONE BUTTON, they've ruled out the possibility that it could ever be a very popular game platform.Basically, this new Apple TV was completely irrelevant in nearly every single avenue before it was even announced.

My iPhone only has ONE BUTTON. Apple is doomed!

 

[doelcm82]

I can tell you right here and now the BIGGEST test that needs to take place to see how Apple is going to deal with this.
The following scenario will be a very VERY important one.

You make a great game. A "Call of Duty" type of game, many controls, weapons, walking around, aiming methods etc etc.

You develop it to work amazingly well with a "Proper" games controller, and it's the best game every for the Apple TV.

To follow Apples rules, you also make it playable, but not very well, as it's simply not suitable, with the Apple controller.
So, you have complied with the rules as requested by Apple.

What will Apple do?

This test needs to happen as this will affect the entire future of quality games for this device.

What will Apple do? Apple will approve your game for the Apple TV App Store, since you complied with their guidelines.

Casual gamers will download the app, find it not very playable, and flood your apps page with negative reviews.

Meanwhile other developers come up with ways to make the Apple TV Remote an asset to their complicated games, using gestures and the touchpad creatively, and they make a lot of money.

 

[BornAgainMac]

I prefer native games on the Apple TV.

 

[Piggie]

What will Apple do? Apple will approve your game for the Apple TV App Store, since you complied with their guidelines.

.

Sorry, no that's not true

I think you will find that, even if you meet every rule set out by Apple.
Apple still retains the right to block any app for any reason it deems fit.

I recall apps of years ago that Apple blocked that met all the rules and conditions, but Apple did not like them.

Yes, I accept there are many games where a modified TV remote could be a valid type of controller.
I also am grown up enough to accept that, it's not THE BEST type of controller for games.
Ask Nintendo, Sony, Microsoft, and the millions of gamers if they would rate the Apple TV remote as the best device for gaming. See what the reply would be.

Like a FPS game on a smooth glass touch screen.
It "CAN" be done, it's just not very good an experience.

Humans like to look at the screen and hold nice physical controls with physical buttons in great places, giving great feedback.
As our human hands are here to stay, it's the controllers than have to be made the best to work with the hands.

Something Jony Ive Smooth, and "designer looking" has nothing to do with the real physical best device for human ergonomics world.

 

[Piggie]

$149 is twice the cost of a steak dinner for two at a chain restaurant where there is a bucket of peanuts in the shell on the table when you sit down. I don't eat such steak dinners every night, but occasionally I splurge. I can spend $150 on a multi-use electronic gadget that will give me a couple years' use.

What does a month of DirecTV cost?

And yet, when people talk on these forums about Office 365 and a few dollars a month for the best office suite of apps, perhaps across multiple devices for the small payment, people go batpoo crazy about the price.

They then go out for a coffee and doughnut on the way to work and pay more than 1 month of office 365