Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
They should of been able to easily handle chip manufacturing for Apple TV if they can handle iPhone sales. Maybe they should put lead weights in it like the beats headphones to make me think I really have something amazing . I don't want to connect and charge bluetooth headphones.

Apple can't handle iPhone sales. Everything is sold out and phones will probably be in short supply in certain sizes and colors across the world until December. We have no idea how well iPad Pro will sell. Adding Apple TV sales to compete for the supply of A9 chips would make things a bit harder.

Also the A8 chip is plenty powerful. The A5 chip currently uses works fine for streaming and the A8 is much more powerful.
 
I was not comparing the two products, rather outlining a feature I wish Apple would have implemented. You're the one who got into a pissing match. Personally, I own a Roku 3 and think it's the best streamer out there.
Didn't want to push this into a pissing match, apologize if that's how my comment was implied. I simply find the FireTV device lacking and I'm glad I didn't pay full price for one. While we don't agree on gaming, I think the Apple TV is well positioned as far as streamers go.
 
Well Apple submitted a stylus patent in 2010 while Steve was still around, so... I think people are being intentionally obtuse with this thing.

http://www.cnbc.com/2014/12/31/apples-next-big-devicea-pen.html

They definitely are. Jobs was against the stylus as the means of interacting with the UI, not as an accessory. The pre-iPhone touchscreen era was dominated by the stylus, where the main UI interaction was tapping tiny elements with the stylus.

The idea that Jobs would have thought iPad users shouldn't be able to draw, or practice using a scalpel, or any of the many other fine motor actions one can do with the stylus... that we should just sacrifice those kinds of activities entirely to appease some Jobsian anti-stylus dogma... that's just absurd.
 
People who are criticizing the Apple remote clearly have not themselves played a game recently.
I am former fan of Unreal Tournaments series and currently an active high level player of FIFA soccer series.
Let's talk in details, not in general, about the game:

1. This not a trackpad, but a Glass touch surface. Done. This glass touch area allows for VERY large number of movements (actions), totally replacing usual 4 buttons needing to manage directions. Those who played FIFA soccer, understand what I mean. The joystick on screen replaces all the left side of usual controller, which shows direction. The glass area can do the same (and even more because virtual joystick is more advanced). Moreover, it may also record touch length and strength as in TouchForce or 3D Touch, then it allows for even wider variety of movements, exceeding actually a usual gamepad.

2. That leaves 6 buttons free on the remote . + and - are placed on one button, but will record different movements. Therefore, there are 6 buttons for play actions. 6 buttons (5 physical) are more than enough for anything you may want.
iPega-Bluetooth-Controller-Android-Wireless-Game-Controller-for-Phone-iPhone-iPod-iPad-Android-Phone-Tablet-PC.jpg

remote-and-interaction-remote-diagram_2x.png


as you see, most probably will use the remote in horizontal by using both hands just as usual gamepad.
This gives you left side of remote for virtual joystick and right side will give you at least 5 buttons. This is actually more than you have on the standard gamepad with XYAB buttons. Even if pause is reserved, which is fine because it will be lowest button if you play remote horizontally, you have the same XYAB combination with remaining 4 buttons of the remote (menu button as X, volume as B, etc).

3. The real kill feature. The remote has gyroscope. What it means that it DOESN"T need D-pad!! The angle and tilt of the remote itself will manage directions! For example, in FPS, you have just to tilt remote in direction you want to run, steeper as you want to run faster. Done. With that you can manage both movements, running, executing actions (like shooting). If you want to use remote as a virtual sword, glass touch area can serve as Dpad, allowing you to use gyroscope as a weapon direction manager. Thats how it manages complex games like FPS.


4. Using the remote for driving games is no brainer with gyroscope. You just turn the remote as a real wheel and use buttons for braking and acceleration.

5. Using for casual games. Most casual games require simple input. No brainer either.

6. For sports game, the gyroscope is extremely important to give the strength and direction of touch, for example as for kicking ball. So I can imagine swinging the remote as a tennis racket etc. or as in hockey, possibilities are endless. I really would like to play FIFA football on AppleTV because TV screen is so much larger than iPad. with ATV connected to TV, you don't have any lag and latency is low, giving you a dynamic, engaging connection of remote with images. I imagine that ATV also can provide great sound, much better than anything iPads' tiny speakers can give.

So I see the remote as being adequate for 99% of games. The only ones which may be difficult to play will be games like Age of Empires, where you have select by mouse multiple functions. This type of games really sucks on any console.

With Metal API, the AppleTV can present games with very complex graphics ala PS3-4 in HD, of course. I am not sure about games like Battlefield, which are already playable on iPads, but games like exploration are perfectly suitable.
 
Last edited:
yes... and even at that time stylus's did the same things the pencil does now so yes i am

2. That leaves 6 buttons free on the remote . + and - are placed on one button, but will record different movements. Therefore, there are 6 buttons for play actions. 6 buttons (5 physical) are more than enough for anything you may want.
remote-and-interaction-remote-diagram_2x.png

Did you read the tvOS docs?

This is what Apple says:
  • The touchpad on the remote can be used as a D-pad. The D-pad provides analog input data.

  • The remote can be used in either a portrait or landscape orientation. Your app decides whether the profile object flips the input data automatically on your behalf.

  • The touchpad is available as a digital button (button A), by firmly pressing on the touchpad.

  • The Play/Pause button on the remote is a digital button (button X).

  • The menu button on the remote is used to pause gameplay, calling the controller object’s pause handler.

They are listing a total of 2 buttons there (one not even being a button, just pressing the touch area on the remote. It seems unlikely they would do something like take away your volume buttons during a game for gameplay for example.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rbrian
see what’s wrong about this policy. Think about it. Imagine that you bought a game, and then the game says ” Sorry, you have to pay additional 99 dollars to play this game” That will be more ridiculous then requiring all games to play by siri remote.

You mean like if buy a game for my iPad 4 only to find out it needs an iPad Air 2 to run?
 
  • Like
Reactions: rbrian
wii-remote-plus-2imt-800.jpg

It baffles me why people keep referring to the motion sensors in this remote as some revolutionary thing that can totally replace traditional controls.
 
  • Like
Reactions: k1121j
wii-remote-plus-2imt-800.jpg

It baffles me why people keep referring to the motion sensors in this remote as some revolutionary thing that can totally replace traditional controls.

Exactly! The wii remote was more practical than the Apple TV remote. Every wii came with a nunchuck which plugged into the wii remote that would enable you to have an analog stick and trigger button.

Also Apple TV remote is a lot smaller and is more prone to cause hand cramps
 
The iPhone compensated for a lack of physical controls with multitouch. How the **** is this going to compensate? It's not like the concept of a remote with gyroscopes/accelerometers is actually new to the world of gaming; We know how well that works by itself thanks to the Wiimote (which had way more usable buttons than this). The only thing "new" this offers is a trackpad (which isn't really new since the PS4 controller has one). That's not going to be enough for games that require more complicated controls.
Q.E.D.
 
Did you read the tvOS docs?

This is what Apple says:
  • The touchpad on the remote can be used as a D-pad. The D-pad provides analog input data.

  • The remote can be used in either a portrait or landscape orientation. Your app decides whether the profile object flips the input data automatically on your behalf.

  • The touchpad is available as a digital button (button A), by firmly pressing on the touchpad.

  • The Play/Pause button on the remote is a digital button (button X).

  • The menu button on the remote is used to pause gameplay, calling the controller object’s pause handler.

They are listing a total of 2 buttons there (one not even being a button, just pressing the touch area on the remote. It seems unlikely they would do something like take away your volume buttons during a game for gameplay for example.
dude go read what i was replying to you are missing the context i geez
 
The $199 model should come with a controller. That way they don't sell controllers to consumers who won't use it, they won't have to worry about compatibility and the main audience for a set top box with more on board storage would, I assume, be gamers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rbrian
4 individual buttons + volume controls and a touch pad = an ergonomic mess? Please describe your preferred layout.

Have you EVER IN YOUR ENTIRE LIFE SEEN A GAME CONTROLLER???? The answer is an obvious NO or you wouldn't ask such a ridiculous question. That remote isn't well suited even to Nintendo style Wii controller games. The buttons are laid out for video playback, not games. Apple is proving itself to be run by MORONS at this point. Why even bother offering ANY games would be the best question one could ask Apple.

One is better off sending Mac or iOS games via Airplay to a TV (the old ATV2/3 will work) and then playing games via a Bluetooth controller (I use a PS3 controller and it even works on the other side of the house from my Mac Mini. I had no trouble playing The Cave, for example with a PS3 controller from a Mac Mini to an ATV2. No noticeable lag, no issues. Try to play that game...ANY game with a remote that doesn't even have enough buttons to do diagonal directions. Hell, you'd have to use the VOLUME ROCKER BUTTON (it's a single connected rocker for god's sake; wtf's bright idea was THAT to use for "gaming" ??) to even get 4 directions on an Pac-Man style game and you'd have no buttons left over to fire a weapon (Siri, "Pow! Pow! Pow!" LOL. It's ridiculous).

You don't NEED to.

All this means is that games have to work with the included remote, not that developers CAN'T support third-party controllers. They just can't require that you buy one to use the game at all.

OK. You tell me how you can offer something like Call of Duty 1 & 2 (they would have no problem running hardware wise) and be able to offer ANY KIND of control layout that would work PERIOD with that ridiculous remote layout. It would work fine with a PS3/4 or XBox style controller (almost any game would), but because the developers won't be able to supply a remote layout for a bare-bones remote control with a whopping 2 buttons and a rocker button (and no directional stick or anything to substitute for one; you can't keep pointing left to move left), they simply won't be able to offer that type of game (or any FPS of normal design) WHAT-SO-EVER regardless of whether it COULD run or not.

It's clear to some of us Apple royally screwed this whole AppleTV thing up. They either should have just updated the old one to support "playback" type Apps and that's it or they should have gone full throttle and put an A9, 4K and a controller with this thing and made it an actual competitor. At the VERY least, they could have thrown in a directional controller and a few extra buttons for developers to use for gaming. They did NONE of that. That remote is USELESS for 80+% of the games out there. It'll work with one click shooting games or something (ala Duck Hunt) and possibly some racing games (because a remote is so much like a steering wheel).

Apple is truly CLUELESS when it comes to gaming. MORONS isn't a strong enough word to describe them, even. Frankly, it's hard to believe they are worried about customer complaints when they have no issues with making iPod Touches and iPhones obsolete every year with software updates that are too slow to use on them or don't support them. Just put a damn CONTROLLER icon next to games and even a prompt saying, "You NEED a standard gaming controller to play this" and they're covered. That would at least let SOME games work on this system. As it is, NO ONE will bother except cheap puzzle games and the like. I don't even see how they can offer Guitar Hero type games as they are highly controller dependent.

You'll remember this when in 2 or 3 years here will be hundreds of games available.

Correction. Hundreds of CRAPPY games. :apple:

I think the point you just made is lost on a quite a few folks who are responding.

I think you haven't LOOKED at the remote included. See above. There aren't enough controls to make most controller style games function, even bare-bones. Apple included JACK SQUAT for controls. They could have easily fit some auxiliary buttons on there, but they seemed to be thinking "Simplicity! Simplicity!" while 100% forgetting they are offering this as an App Store console that is supposed to be able to play games (even old ones need controllers).
 
Last edited:
Have you EVER IN YOUR ENTIRE LIFE SEEN A GAME CONTROLLER????.

The Apple II models came with 2 single-button game paddles or 1 joystick. The Atari 2600 also came with 2 game controllers: directional joysticks each with a single button. Both ran some of the most classic video and computer games ever.
 
So why can't the developers create a basic functional set of controls that will work with the Apple Remote and have a much greater set of controls that can be access through 3rd Party controllers.

That's exactly what game developers who want to attack this market segment will do (the App store produces Billions of dollars in game revenue.)

Is Apple going to require that the set of controls be the same for all devices?

Not possible. That's an impossible requirement if they want their controller MFi royalty to be non-zero.
 
Have you EVER IN YOUR ENTIRE LIFE SEEN A GAME CONTROLLER???? The answer is an obvious NO or you wouldn't ask such a ridiculous question. That remote isn't well suited even to Nintendo style Wii controller games. The buttons are laid out for video playback, not games. Apple is proving itself to be run by MORONS at this point. Why even bother offering ANY games would be the best question one could ask Apple.

Alright, now that you've gotten that out of your system let's understand something. The name of the device is Apple TV. Not Apple Gamebox or AppleStation. You're confused at how they're marketing this device. It's MOSTLY marketed towards media consumption and gaming is (in my opinion) not a very large focus. They mentioned some games geared towards the Apple TV in the keynote. Doesn't seem like they designed the Apple TV for Call of Duty... so that's why the remote looks the way it is. Its not like Apple thought... "hey lets make an Xbox competitor and stick a crappy remote on it so all they can play is flappy bird and crossy road." Its not an Xbox/Playstation competitor.
 
Doesn't seem like they designed the Apple TV for Call of Duty...

Call of Duty came out in 2003, running on single core Pentium 4s and graphics cards of that era. The A8 in the Apple TV contains 2 faster CPUs, and I'm guessing that the A8 GPU with Metal easily exceeds the OpenGL performance of PC graphics cards from the 2003 era.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rbrian
So why can't the developers create a basic functional set of controls that will work with the Apple Remote and have a much greater set of controls that can be access through 3rd Party controllers. Is Apple going to require that the set of controls be the same for all devices?

That's exactly what they're going to do. This rule that every game has to work with the Apple TV "Siri" remote is already a rule on iOS (every game has to work with the touch screen) the result isn't bad at all, everything is fine. In many games the controls are simplified for touch screen, FOR EXAMPLE: many games have automatic shooting, automatic throttle or braking, and many more automatic things, but once you use an actual controller you get actual console controls and the game is 10 times better and actually feels legitimate(Apple doesn't care if the set of controls is the same, as long as it works properly, hope this answers your question). This is exactly what 's going to happen with the Apple TV and it's going to be fine. And by the way there are a total of 11 inputs to control a game with using the "siri remote" and they are starting with the touch pad(swipe; left, right, up, down, or use it as an analog stick, and tapping on the touch pad) The accelerometer(tilt; left, right, foward, backward) and the "play/pause button"(<- if you know of any more, let me know). And a "REAL (iOS) CONTROLLER" contains 14 inputs, just 3 more than the "Siri remote" unless with the new "nimbus" controller the analog sticks can click down, then it's "16 inputs". I'm not saying that the "Siri remote" will compete with console styled 3rd party controllers, I'm just saying that the developers can make it work, the 3rd party controllers will be far better to use with many games, especially the console quality ones. Just like with "modern combat 5" on iOS, with the touch screen it's kinda shotty, but with a controller it's phenomenal! It feels like I'm playing on a console. With all this being said, I believe the developers can make it, I just hope it's not too much of a hassle and they still want to.

Edit: there may be more controls with the "sire remote" if not just tilting the controller foward, back left right, but you can also move the controller foward back left and right as seperate inputs from tilting the remote, that would make for some interesting controls, and could possibly make many games more fun in unexpected ways, and this would bring the total number of inputs for the "Siri remote" up "15". Well, I guess we'll have to wait and see
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: rbrian
The Apple II models came with 2 single-button game paddles or 1 joystick. The Atari 2600 also came with 2 game controllers: directional joysticks each with a single button. Both ran some of the most classic video and computer games ever.
Yet after the NES, pretty much every system used a gamepad. Even the Atari Jaguar and Apple Pippin.

Also since many systems in the 80s used the same controller port as Atari, there were plenty of substitutes for the joystick later on. The Genesis gamepad being perhaps the most popular.
 
Last edited:
Edit: there may be more controls with the "sire remote" if not just tilting the controller foward, back left right, but you can also move the controller foward back left and right as seperate inputs from tilting the remote, that would make for some interesting controls, and could possibly make many games more fun in unexpected ways, and this would bring the total number of inputs for the "Siri remote" up "15". Well, I guess we'll have to wait and see
You're speculating on something which has been present in the gaming world for almost a decade.
 
see what’s wrong about this policy. Think about it. Imagine that you bought a game, and then the game says ” Sorry, you have to pay additional 99 dollars to play this game” That will be more ridiculous then requiring all games to play by siri remote.

Also some complexed game such as asphalt 8 works fine at siri remote. I can’t see why macrumors. is complaining about this policy.

/facelpalm

That's why they should put in a warning like Nintendo did with the classic controller.

...how can people be so small minded
 
  • Like
Reactions: APlotdevice
Based on what? Ouya? Fire TV? Those TV set top boxes are a failure for gaming because the games are failures for gaming.

Games sell game systems.

Yes! You are so right! And Apple already has the console version of Disney infinity ready for release on Apple TV ( which is BIG for a lot of people) and fire tv and quya have no console games, and they've been out for a long time (compared to Apple TV)
 
I quite enjoy iOS game on iPad WITHOUT any controller, just with virtual buttons and gyroscope.
With physical buttons, nunchak controller, they gonna be fantastic.
And they can support complex gamepads, remote is just minimal basic requirement (not a limit).
 
The Apple II models came with 2 single-button game paddles or 1 joystick. The Atari 2600 also came with 2 game controllers: directional joysticks each with a single button. Both ran some of the most classic video and computer games ever.

And this remote HAS NO JOYSTICK ON IT! What part of that isn't registering? It has 4 buttons, two of which are part of a rocker switch/button. It has no control pad or joystick on it. Pointing it to the left isn't the same thing. Moving your finger across a trackpad isn't the same thing. It's not a joystick. It never will be a joystick. It's damn near worthless for gaming and Apple has just ensured no real games will EVER be made for this thing including Guitar Hero type games (they all need a real controller).

Alright, now that you've gotten that out of your system let's understand something. The name of the device is Apple TV. Not Apple Gamebox or AppleStation. You're confused at how they're marketing this device. It's MOSTLY marketed towards media consumption and gaming is (in my opinion) not a very large focus. They mentioned some games geared towards the Apple TV in the keynote. Doesn't seem like they designed the Apple TV for Call of Duty... so that's why the remote looks the way it is. Its not like Apple thought... "hey lets make an Xbox competitor and stick a crappy remote on it so all they can play is flappy bird and crossy road." Its not an Xbox/Playstation competitor.

Sadly, it's not even good for casual games. Look at the layout. It's not designed for ANY KIND of gaming. it's designed to play movies. That's it. Why even advertise it for gaming? Why even ALLOW gaming? It's stupid. Either support gaming fully or don't bother. But at $150-200, it ought to do SOMETHING more than the standard $69 3rd Gen ATV an I'm just not finding it. Siri. Yippee. 4K? Nope. In other words, at best it can do XBMC/KODI or something at some point (in other words, play formats that Apple doesn't support like AVI, MKV, etc.) I don't see where this thing can do ANYTHING else. They didn't even include a cheap web camera to do Facetime calls from your TV. NOTHING. It's very disappointing. I'm thinking of just getting a $69 Gen3 and converting an old Gen1 into a Kodi box via Broadcom card (have one sitting right here in fact if they'd ever get their new installer running for it).

Actually, I just saw the new Amazon Fire TV, now with 4K Ultra HD for $99 ($139 with a dedicated gaming controller; apparently Amazon "gets" it and Apple gets stupid). Sorry Apple, YOU LOSE! Too little, too late and too out of date. Apple is run by morons. Its days are numbered.

FireTV has a Siri-like option (Alexa). Check. 4K? Check. Gaming controller option? Check. Kodi available for FireTV? Check.
 
Last edited:
And this remote HAS NO JOYSTICK ON IT!

Neither does an iPhone, but that hasn't prevented a whole bunch of classic games from the Atari 2600 era from being ported to it. If game developers could figure out how to create great video games with only 256 bytes (not GB, not megabytes, not even kB, but bytes) of RAM, they'll figure out how to use the AppleTV controller.

Some gamers here are starting to sound like people who won't drive a Tesla because they can't find a clutch pedal... or stirrups.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ErikGrim
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.