Apple TV Games Must Work With Apple TV Remote, May Not Require External Controller

[neuropsychguy]

Yeah except that it will guarantee that games are no more than iPhone clones or motion based. There won't be any first person games of any sort coming to Apple TV now. Too bad, Apple could have made a lot with their 30% take of all those games.

Why not? Twist your wrist around to move and tap/hold the touchpad to shoot. The remote has an accelerometer and a gyroscope. Change weapons with one of the other buttons (play/pause, according to Apple specs) or with a swipe up/down. Not perfect but it would work; it'd be better than FPS on the iPhone/iPad.

For an FPS, the developers could do targeting and movement assist with the standard remote and turn them off when a full game controller is connected.

In any case, this isn't meant to be a "serious" gaming platform (yet). It will however make some people and companies (developers) a lot of money.

 

[usarioclave]

If you're a "serious gamer", stay on a serious gaming platform.

 

[Mac21ND]

Anytime there's a post that says, "Apple requires ____ to do _____," people are going to go crazy.

 

[Zoboomafoo]

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?

This seems like a perfectly reasonable approach. Like, a simple mode for the remote and an advanced mode for controllers. And yeah, advanced might simply mean "the way we meant it to be played".

Of course, that's a whole new game mode the developers may have never wanted to make.

 

[DotCom2]

This seems like a perfectly reasonable approach. Like, a simple mode for the remote and an advanced mode for controllers. And yeah, advanced might simply mean "the way we meant it to be played".

Of course, that's a whole new game mode the developers may have never wanted to make.

They could make the game free with the remote, but then offer and upgrade or Pro version with a controller?

 

[foobarbazqux]

What does Apple have against the gaming industry? It's like they're intentionally trying to make the AppleTV 4 fail.

 

[Mac21ND]

They could make the game free with the remote, but then offer and upgrade or Pro version with a controller?

It's no different than how some current iOS games on iPhone/iPad say "optimized" for a controller. If you want a button masher, buy a button masher.

 

[Duane Martin]

OK, there's Bejeweled and its clones. And ... ?

Seriously? Angry Birds is iconic and better known than most console games. World of Tanks Blitz is fantastic. Clash of Clans has a huge following. MacWorld UK recently listed 118 of the best iOS games and "Bejewelled and its clones" didn't make the list. In 2013 36% of gamers used Smart Phones and considering how much better the phones and games have gotten since then I would imagine the number is much higher.

When did cynicism an ignorance become badges of honour?

 

[TallManNY]

** waive hand **

"These are not the games you are looking for."

** waive hand again**

"Move along"

 

[iAshley]

They probably don't want to have to deal with the inevitable onslaught of "I bought this game and I didn't know I needed to buy some accessory! I want a refund!" (even though the requirements were listed right on the app page).

Apple could just have a games category specifically for the controllers.
And also only allow you to download said games if you have one of those controllers paired to the Apple TV

 

[usarioclave]

Apple could just have a games category specifically for the controllers.
And also only allow you to download said games if you have one of those controllers paired to the Apple TV

You don't deal with the public much, do you?

 

[iAshley]

I can see consumers buying games and not realizing a controller is needed and then trying to get a refund on the game or something...No matter how clearly they put on the app store page for the game "EXTRA CONTROLLER NEEDED, DOES NOT WORK WITH REMOTE" you know a billion people are gonna buy it anyways and then complain/be upset when it doesnt work with the remote and leave 1 star reviews "DIDNT WORK WITH MY REMOTE!!! AVOID THIS GAME ITS A SCAM"....the problem is people are dumb....

Apple could create a games category specifically for games that require the controller and only allow downloads if that controller is paired

 

[superberg]

I would love to see developers get a game like Arkham Knight or Fallout 4 playable on that dinky remote. Granted, those are extreme examples of games with complex controls schemes, but it makes the point perfectly: the Apple TV remote simply isn't capable of meeting the demands a game like that would create. You'd have to simplify the controls to an obscene level.

To say nothing of the fact that, with its main buttons in the middle, the Apple TV remote an ergonomic nightmare to use horizontally. You're either reaching too far from one side or reaching up from under to hit those buttons. Look at the Wii remote -- the main action buttons are at the ends, not in the center. And no one mistook the Wii remote for a comfortable, ideal device. We can laud innovation while realizing its shortcomings.

If we're going to keep comparing the new ATV to the Wii, let's not forget that for third parties, the Wii was far from a success. Most major publishers and developers shunned it after the software library was loaded with horrible shovelware.

Honestly, Apple had an opportunity to disrupt the console market and tossed it away due to lack of vision.

 

[techwhiz]

Not surprising. Many customers would complain if they needed to buy an additional accessory. People with 3rd party controllers will just be getting the high scores

Exactly. The experience might be better with a controller but making a third party controller necessary kills it.
Software needs to work out of the box.

 

[_Refurbished_]

Apple TV starts at $150. Not $200.

So the main difference the FireTV is "better" than the Apple TV is because of a "Recently Viewed" section? Your talking about the FireTV that literally has an ad on the top of the main screen? I own one too and it's not that much better than a 3rd gen Apple TV aside from Plex. The rest of the Amazon Fire TV app store is a joke. And the FireTV "casting" is poor compared to Airplay.

We're going to be pretty surprised what apps are made for Apple TV and it's remote. It doesn't have to imitate an XBox One or PS4 to be a player in this space.

I know how much an Apple TV costs, thanks for the info.

I also was making a complaint about one feature I wish Apple would have implemented, not comparing the two products. I have

Apple TV starts at $150. Not $200.

So the main difference the FireTV is "better" than the Apple TV is because of a "Recently Viewed" section? Your talking about the FireTV that literally has an ad on the top of the main screen? I own one too and it's not that much better than a 3rd gen Apple TV aside from Plex. The rest of the Amazon Fire TV app store is a joke. And the FireTV "casting" is poor compared to Airplay.

We're going to be pretty surprised what apps are made for Apple TV and it's remote. It doesn't have to imitate an XBox One or PS4 to be a player in this space.

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. I have used all streamers extensively and feel Apple caught up to the competition, but didn't eclipse them (except for a slightly better voice search interface).

Also, it's $200 if you want any room to store apps. Go ahead, spend $150 and get ripped off. To use it to its potential you'll need to pony up $200. Apple has always been cheap with storage.

And as an avid gamer: You're wrong. It looks terrible. Doesn't compete with anything and it could have, which is th sad truth and why I'm disappointed.

 

[Kar98]

MacWorld UK recently listed 118 of the best iOS games and "Bejewelled and its clones" didn't make the list.

Ctrl/Cmd F... "Bejeweled"... There it is.

 

[citysnaps]

Entire genres of games will simply not happen on this platform.

It doesn't matter though, because the TV set top box is already a proven failure for gaming.

And where is this "proof?"

 

[Kar98]

If you're a "serious gamer", stay on a serious gaming platform.

Damn right.

 

[WestonHarvey1]

And where is this "proof?"

Oh right! I forgot about UnicornTV and its incredible impact on console gaming.

 

[APlotdevice]

So people think it's a good idea for Apple to allow companies to make games for Apple TV that NEED a third party peripheral LOL

Do you people not realize how many million people will download games not realizing that can't even play it because they didn't buy another accessory? The complaints for refunds would be through the roof and is just a stupid PR move

it would be like Sony allowing publishers to release games on the PS4 that don't even use the DS4

No, it would be like Nintendo publishing games for the Wii that required the Classic Controller. Which they did, and addressed by simply including a warning in the menu.

The fact of the matter is that complex games would be difficult if not impossible to control with this remote. It's not like a touch screen where you can just add buttons as necessary.

 

[scaramoosh]

Whocares? It's an iPhone 6 in a box... just use your iPhone for gaming.

 

[Soccertess]

Apple made the right choice for consistency.. imagine companies release games for there own specific controllers (which they will anyways but have crappy interface with the remote). So really.. it was pointless.

That being said, another poor move by Tim. He should have made an Apple controller, some amazing controller where Sony, Microsoft, and nintendo failed. Something like Oculus's controller but better.

Tim, you are fired.

 

[citysnaps]

Apple made the right choice for consistency.. imagine companies release games for there own specific controllers (which they will anyways but have crappy interface with the remote). So really.. it was pointless.

That being said, another poor move by Tim. He should have made an Apple controller, some amazing controller where Sony, Microsoft, and nintendo failed. Something like Oculus's controller but better.

Tim, you are fired.

And how do you know one isn't in development right now, with beta units in the hands of select game developers? Not that I know anything about such matters.

 

[petsounds]

This is a huge mistake. Forcing developers to support the Remote means that their control scheme must be limited even on dedicated game controllers. Certain types of games just won't work with the Remote. Sure, a developer could create some alternate control scheme for the Remote which 'dumbs down' the controls, but it would not be an equivalent experience, and there's a good chance the game will get bad reviews if the controls don't work with the style of game. So I am not seeing how developers can create sophisticated games with this requirement. Some developers will be able to create elegant control systems which can feel complex, but this will only get developers so far. For instance, you won't see Street Fighter or Tekken on the Apple TV with this requirement to support the Remote.

Instead of letting game developers drive innovation on the Apple TV, Apple is trying to control how games are played (and thus trying to control the focus of what games are developed). Why even support 3rd-party controllers? Apple should just admit that they don't care about anything other than simplistic games on the platform.

 

[APlotdevice]

Why not? Twist your wrist around to move and tap/hold the touchpad to shoot. The remote has an accelerometer and a gyroscope. Change weapons with one of the other buttons (play/pause, according to Apple specs) or with a swipe up/down. Not perfect but it would work; it'd be better than FPS on the iPhone/iPad.

For an FPS, the developers could do targeting and movement assist with the standard remote and turn them off when a full game controller is connected.

In any case, this isn't meant to be a "serious" gaming platform (yet). It will however make some people and companies (developers) a lot of money.

Have you ever played a Wii? Really the only thing that worked completely reliably with that controller was the pointer, and that's because it used two IR lights as a point of reference. Sure the motion plus was pretty good, but only if you kept calibrating it.