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

babaroga73 said:
"Your game must support the Apple TV remote. Your game may not require the use of a controller."
Click to expand...

I'm not a gamer. The way I read this is that all games must be able to use the ATV remote for all game functions...in some way or fashion. It doesn't say they have to be convenient. The use of a third party controller might make it way more convenient.

The issue then is how to bundle/sell/explain this so gamers wont do neg reviews that don't have a real controller.

I suspect folks will figure this one out somehow...
 
Wouldn't Nintendo and Sega make a ton of money releasing official emulators and selling games for 79p? Seems like minimal work for a steady stream of income.

Of course the Apple TV controller rules would make it tricky in this case.
 
Does Apple allow a Sony PlayStation controller work with the Apple TV as this would be a simple way to solve this problem.
 
AxoNeuron said:
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.
Click to expand...


I haven't seen a more stupid comment in such a while, but yours takes the cake. Do any of those devices have an App Store? No. Will they do gaming? No. Will they connect you to major video streaming services? No. Do they have voice control? No. Why? Because they're Micky Mouse devices in comparison.

If you even understood what Apple are doing here you would have half a clue, and that "rudderless ship" is the most valued tech company on the planet by a long way, and rising since Jobs death. Somehow I don't think Apple will be calling you for advice anytime soon, thank god. :rolleyes:
 
Corrode said:
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.
Click to expand...

If the app store is on the TV itself (not really looked) you just have the store require a button press on a controller to confirm the purchase where a controller is required.
 
AxoNeuron said:
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.
Click to expand...

How are they forcing developers to dumb down their games again? BTW, there's more than one button on the remote in case you didn't notice. It even has a trackpad. Does Roku or chromecast remotes have one? Can you game on those devices? Seriously, if you're going to make comments, at least make them half intelligent.
 
Piggie said:
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 :(
Click to expand...

Care to back up anything here? What software are Apple not allowing again, I must have missed that story?

You do know there will be an App Store with apps for the new ATV don't you, or are you just here to make ridiculously dumb rants?
 
Piggie said:
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.
Click to expand...


You, like so many others just keep missing the important facts as pointed out before. The game should be able to be controlled by the ATV remote (menus, games start etc), but its not required to actually play the game, which is why third party controllers are supported. How hard is it to understand?
 
Kroo said:
Care to back up anything here? What software are Apple not allowing again, I must have missed that story?

You do know there will be an App Store with apps for the new ATV don't you, or are you just here to make ridiculously dumb rants?
Click to expand...

It was some time ago, I recall reading the story/stories on these forums, about apps Apple blocked, but they did not break any Official Rules. Apple just decided (as it retains the right to do) that, it did not like/want the app on the store.

Perhaps someone else can remember the stories I'm referring to?
 
Piggie said:
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.
Click to expand...


More unsubstantiated comments, but calling the commenter a liar shows the depths of your delusion. Now if you would care to actually provide links to back your statements up, and not call others liars, some people might just take the rubbish you sprout as being half true. I await proof to back up your comments.
 
Kroo said:
You, like so many others just keep missing the important facts as pointed out before. The game should be able to be controlled by the ATV remote (menus, games start etc), but its not required to actually play the game, which is why third party controllers are supported. How hard is it to understand?
Click to expand...

Is that true as that's not the understanding I had.

So, you are saying People will be able to create apps for the app store that are not playable without a 3rd party controller, as long as you can use the Apple Tv remote to fire up the game in question and let's say pick some options and press START.
 
Kroo said:
More unsubstantiated comments, but calling the commenter a liar shows the depths of your delusion. Now if you would care to actually provide links to back your statements up, and not call others liars, some people might just take the rubbish you sprout as being half true. I await proof to back up your comments.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying "LIAR"
I am pointing out it's not true that just because you have no broken the rules, Apple has to and will allow your app in the store.
Apple can and does set out rules, and you can make an app that does not break any rules, but Apple still reserves the right to disallow an app for other reasons it may choose to dislike about the app.

I don't have the time now to trawl thru masses of old new stories, but I assure you Apple have done this in the past, has been talked about, and no doubt will do it again.
 
Piggie said:
Is that true as that's not the understanding I had.

So, you are saying People will be able to create apps for the app store that are not playable without a 3rd party controller, as long as you can use the Apple Tv remote to fire up the game in question and let's say pick some options and press START.
Click to expand...


You came here with a clear misapprehension of the facts, then made comments based on those facts (which makes you look stupid), you call another poster a liar, but can't back anything up with any hard facts, just a "I read it somewhere", then ask other people to do your homework for you. Go do it yourself. If you want to have an intelligent conversation based on facts, not rhetoric, have some actually basis to back yourself up with first, because you make it o easy to tear your comments apart. If you come here with a bias, just say so, cause your charade is paper thin.
 
Piggie said:
Is that true as that's not the understanding I had.

So, you are saying People will be able to create apps for the app store that are not playable without a 3rd party controller, as long as you can use the Apple Tv remote to fire up the game in question and let's say pick some options and press START.
Click to expand...

No, your comments are not true. Not one bit true, but I challenge you to prove otherwise. You can't just go around calling people liars and not back it up with any facts.
 
Kroo said:
You came here with a clear misapprehension of the facts, then made comments based on those facts (which makes you look stupid), you call another poster a liar, but can't back anything up with any hard facts, just a "I read it somewhere", then ask other people to do your homework for you. Go do it yourself. If you want to have an intelligent conversation based on facts, not rhetoric, have some actually basis to back yourself up with first, because you make it o easy to tear your comments apart. If you come here with a bias, just say so, cause your charade is paper thin.
Click to expand...

Wow, must be a really bad time of the month for you :(
Chill out, and again, As you are having trouble with English I can tell, not your 1st language?
I told you, I was not (it that plain enough for you to grasp?) NOT calling anyone a liar, I was pointing out, for the 3rd time, that Apple don't have to allow apps in just because you've not broken any rules they have laid out.

My original post was:
=========================

"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."
=========================

See, my little, "not having a good day friend"
Nothing about LIAR.

Just posting the point about Apple reserving the rights to disallow anything they don't like.

You disagree with this do you?
You think Apple has to allow anything onto their store, even if they hate it, simply because it does not break the listed rules?
 
Piggie said:
I'm not saying "LIAR"
I am pointing out it's not true that just because you have no broken the rules, Apple has to and will allow your app in the store.
Apple can and does set out rules, and you can make an app that does not break any rules, but Apple still reserves the right to disallow an app for other reasons it may choose to dislike about the app.

I don't have the time now to trawl thru masses of old new stories, but I assure you Apple have done this in the past, has been talked about, and no doubt will do it again.
Click to expand...

You have time to troll these forums but can't do a simple google search. Then your comments are just lies. Feel free to turn your lies into facts. If it is as you say, it can't be hard to provide a link, can it? Or do you just go around throwing unsubstantiated lies around, expect people to swallow it and not question you? If you want to make an accusation, have proof to back it up with buddy, otherwise it just garbage.
 
Kroo said:
You have time to troll these forums but can't do a simple google search. Then your comments are just lies. Feel free to turn your lies into facts. If it is as you say, it can't be hard to provide a link, can it? Or do you just go around throwing unsubstantiated lies around, expect people to swallow it and not question you? If you want to make an accusation, have proof to back it up with buddy, otherwise it just garbage.
Click to expand...

Sorry my friend.
You're childish and petty tantrum of aggressive replies has become tiresome.
I'm sure no one wants to read this stuff here, so I'll leave to you simmer down.
I really can't be bothered talking to you any more on this point, so have a good day my friend.
Hope you have a better less stress day tomorrow. Goodbye as far as this topic between us is concerned. :)
 
Jeremy1026 said:
Couldn't agree more with Steve, requiring all apps/games work with the Siri remote is going to serious stifle development.
Click to expand...

If they will allow users to map their own control settings would that satisfy the requirements? They should allow games to have a 'game pad required for play' comment on the AppStore.
 
Piggie said:
Wow, must be a really bad time of the month for you :(
Chill out, and again, As you are having trouble with English I can tell, not your 1st language?
I told you, I was not (it that plain enough for you to grasp?) NOT calling anyone a liar, I was pointing out, for the 3rd time, that Apple don't have to allow apps in just because you've not broken any rules they have laid out.

My original post was:
=========================

"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."
=========================

See, my little, "not having a good day friend"
Nothing about LIAR.

Just posting the point about Apple reserving the rights to disallow anything they don't like.

You disagree with this do you?
You think Apple has to allow anything onto their store, even if they hate it, simply because it does not break the listed rules?
Click to expand...


So when you say, "Thats not true", that means its a lie, because the opposite of the truth is a lie, so you're inferring the poster is lying.

You now change your comments to back out of your claim that Apple just block apps for no reason. Apple DO block apps, but for many reasons, but you seem to miss these facts, just a blanket "they block apps" and "they don't allow apps", just garbage.

I can see my challenging you has clearly upset your delicate nature, as you can see, my english is eloquent and cohesive. So you refer to the female menstrual cycle as a response to my challenge. Gee, how intelligent of you. I'm so hurt.

Still waiting on evidence to substantiate those claims you keep claiming as truth, but I think your mental abilities have reached their upper limits for today.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Back
Top