Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Gaming On the iPad 2 and What It Means For Apple

Soulskill posted more than 3 years ago | from the i-hear-sony-users-are-looking-for-a-new-horse dept.

Handhelds 93

The Digital Foundry blog took a detailed look at gaming on Apple's recently released iPad 2. While most reviews of the device focus on the tablet's size, accessories and software features, this one puts the new A5 processor through its paces, finding "anything from a 4x to 7x leap over what was seen in the original version of the tablet." The authors suggest that it has boosted mobile gaming to a point where Apple could be preparing for a much bigger entrance into the gaming market. "Either we are looking at a company looking to consolidate its iron grip on the mobile games market by combining its existing unparalleled developer support with state-of-the-art technology, or else iPad 2 represents the first stages of a plan to expand iOS' reach from mobile phones and MP3 players through to tablets and perhaps in the near future, home games consoles. ... Technical and hardware challenges aside, there's no doubt whatsoever that Apple is extremely well-placed to expand its reach in the games market and launch a new, disruptive assault on the status quo every bit as effective as its mobile offerings have been. There have been plenty of creditable attempts at claiming the multi-purpose set-top box market, but there has been no outright winner. Arguably, Apple has the brand presence, the games, and the music/video services to actually make it happen."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Pippen pad? (2)

AHuxley (892839) | more than 3 years ago | (#36007894)

Back to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Bandai_Pippin [wikipedia.org]
But will do a basic 1080p unlike the like 640p is 720p HD efforts still on sale.
Lets hope the SDK is easy to work with and cheap.

Re:Pippen pad? (1)

Stormwatch (703920) | more than 3 years ago | (#36007922)

Well, I'd rather play on the Pippin than on a friggin' touchscreen.

Re:Pippen pad? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36008086)

Once you get used to the touchscreen it is very playable. Likewise with the keyboard.

I played "Galaxy on Fire 2" all weekend. Excellent game and shows off the iPad2 as a games console better then Rage/EC would.

Re:Pippen pad? (1)

Luckyo (1726890) | more than 3 years ago | (#36009050)

Galaxy on fire would play far, far better with a proper mouse or analogue controller. Refer to: Freelancer.

Re:Pippen pad? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36009474)

Hmm, quite.

Re:Pippen pad? (1)

Dragonslicer (991472) | more than 3 years ago | (#36009880)

Oh man, I loved Freelancer. I never could find a Linux equivalent (suggestions are welcome).

Re:Pippen pad? (1)

larry bagina (561269) | more than 3 years ago | (#36010116)

I suggest you write a GPLv3 FREElancer clone.

Re:Pippen pad? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36011160)

VegaStrike, Privateer Gemini Gold

Re:Pippen pad? (1)

AHuxley (892839) | more than 3 years ago | (#36008110)

Got the usb port for the next gen AppleJack controller?

Re:Pippen pad? (1)

CheerfulMacFanboy (1900788) | more than 3 years ago | (#36008808)

Re:Pippen pad? (1)

StuartHankins (1020819) | more than 3 years ago | (#36009868)

Thanks to both of you for mentioning this!

Re:Pippen pad? (2)

itsdapead (734413) | more than 3 years ago | (#36009294)

Well, I'd rather play on the Pippin than on a friggin' touchscreen.

It depends on the type of game and how it is designed - On the one hand, we have FPS, for which I don't think they've cracked the touchscreen controls yet, but in the case of (say) Plants vs. Zombies, the touchscreen works well (if anything, it made PvZ a bit too easy and they should have cranked up the difficulty a bit to compensate). Settlers was fine, too (except for the unforgivable lack of skirmish mode).

ISTR the iPad2 has better motion sensing than the original - which could make for better FPS games where you look around by physically moving the tablet, not to mention "augmented reality" style games using the camera. Plastic machine gun with an iPhone dock as a "sight", anybody?

So, they might have to be innovative with game concepts and game controls rather than just keep turning out Doom N+1. It worked for Nintendo. Or, just concentrate on types of game that are poorly catered for on consoles (e.g. RTS) and work well on tablets.

Pieces of the Puzzle (2)

high_rolla (1068540) | more than 3 years ago | (#36007936)

So the Apple TV becomes your console and the iPad becomes your controller. You wouldn't play your typical games on it but with a bit of creativity I could see some rather interesting games coming out of it. Board games could work really well under this scenario. Especially quite complex ones.

Re:Pieces of the Puzzle (1)

somersault (912633) | more than 3 years ago | (#36008186)

I suspect the iPad 2 is more powerful than the Apple TV. Why would that be your "console"? And if you think there's a big market for board games on PC then.. oh, why do I even bother..

Think different... (1)

itsdapead (734413) | more than 3 years ago | (#36009534)

I suspect the iPad 2 is more powerful than the Apple TV. Why would that be your "console"?

Because the Apple TV is wired into your TV - its hard to use the iPad/iPhone as a Wii-style kinetic controller if its got an HDMI cable hanging out of it. Maybe Apple will speed-bump the Apple TV before this can come to fruition - or maybe the iPad will be the console and smaller iDevices the controllers? Or maybe Apple would like you to buy a Mac Mini or an iMac as your home entertainment centre

And if you think there's a big market for board games on PC then.. oh, why do I even bother..

In other news, there wasn't a big market for tablet PCs until the iPad came along. One way iPad distinguished itself from previous tablet PCs was by being "its own device" and not trying to do the things a PC does better (such as running an OS and applications designed for full-sized PCs).

As for board games, PCs are rather solitary devices - best for single-player games or playing over a network with people you can't see, whereas board and card games have a huge social element (which is why there is still a market for board games on boards). Sit a lot of people around a big TV with individual iP(od|hone|ad) controllers and you have a social game. The Wii has already tapped into this somewhat, but each player having an iDevice adds new possibilities.

For example, already, the iOS version of Scrabble lets you use the iPad as the "board" with individual players using iP(od|hone)s as their personal letter racks. The extension to card games and more complex board games (we're not talking snakes and ladders here) is obvious.

Or how about a co-operative shooter where the TV screen showed a third-person view and the iDevices showed individual first-person views?

Re:Pieces of the Puzzle (1)

SeaFox (739806) | more than 3 years ago | (#36008288)

So the Apple TV becomes your console and the iPad becomes your controller.

AppleTV is unneeded when the iPad already has more horsepower.
There's already a dock -> HDMI adapter.

You wouldn't play your typical games on it but with a bit of creativity I could see some rather interesting games coming out of it. Board games could work really well under this scenario. Especially quite complex ones.

Why wouldn't we play typical games? [ubergizmo.com]

Re:Pieces of the Puzzle (1)

rsborg (111459) | more than 3 years ago | (#36017200)

So the Apple TV becomes your console and the iPad becomes your controller. You wouldn't play your typical games on it but with a bit of creativity I could see some rather interesting games coming out of it. Board games could work really well under this scenario. Especially quite complex ones.

Problems: 1) TV output 2) Response Latency 3) Wired controllers (esp detachable connector) suck for moving around.

Solution: How chopper2 [apple.com] (and probably other games) have resolved it... iPad (or iPhone) is the console/connector, iPhone/iPodTouch is the controller via bluetooth (or wifi, unsure). It works on the iPad2 with 1080p.

The only thing keeping this from flourishing (and disrupting consoles) is that the "controller" is rather expensive (at least $200). If there were a "controller" from Apple which games could standardize on, this model could completely upend/disrupt the console market. Also, no reason that the AppleTV (or an iMac for those without a TV) couldn't be your conduit to the screen (lacks bluetooth).

Re:Pieces of the Puzzle (1)

fadir (522518) | more than 3 years ago | (#36021036)

Meanwhile full fledged mmos have arrived on the i-devices in the meantime. I do not see any reason why you couldn't play pretty much any game on such a platform, including shooters and racing games (pretty much the figureheads of console games).

Re:Pieces of the Puzzle (1)

Slider451 (514881) | more than 3 years ago | (#36048552)

So the Apple TV becomes your console and the iPad becomes your controller. You wouldn't play your typical games on it but with a bit of creativity I could see some rather interesting games coming out of it. Board games could work really well under this scenario. Especially quite complex ones.

That's what I'm looking forward to. A complex board game or tabletop RPG where each player holds a pad/phone that links to a central large tabletop screen or TV where the main "board" is shown in spectator mode. Apple TV or a MAC/PC linked to a large monitor or TV would serve as the "board".

yeah right (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36007950)

wow I already see anti aliased angry birds on the horizon!

Right. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36007988)

Because it's the CPU holding back the iPad for gaming and not the useless fucking controls.

Do you remember (1)

hardtofindanick (1105361) | more than 3 years ago | (#36008028)

how rock band like games were the thing not so long ago? I feel like the same hype is brewing again but this time with mobile games.

Re:Do you remember (2)

somersault (912633) | more than 3 years ago | (#36008208)

Rock Band games could still be "the thing" if they didn't oversaturate the market, and pump out expensive new peripherals (that you need if you want to get the full features of the game) each generation.

Hype will brew sure, but mobile games won't just die away after the hype has died down (same as Rock Band will probably still be going in a couple of years time, even if Activision have done their best to destroy Guitar Hero). The market has always been there, just that a lot of people were stuck playing "Snake".

Not an all in one solution (3, Interesting)

Andtalath (1074376) | more than 3 years ago | (#36008034)

Gaming boxes are poorly equipped to be a general solution for loads of reasons.
Also, the margins on a machine that is just used for games can't be as high as apple likes to sell its hardware.

The real question is whether people will care about high-performance gaming or not, if so, apple is an equal competitor with an already functioning market.

So, no, a console has too many requirements to behave in the same fashion for a long while to suit apples needs.

Re:Not an all in one solution (1)

somersault (912633) | more than 3 years ago | (#36008240)

The summary is talking about using a general solution (tablet) for gaming.

As for gaming boxes being "poorly equipped to be a general solution", the PS3 and Xbox are like an iPad on steroids. They are very powerful and had app stores before the iPhone even existed. They're very well equipped, it's just that Sony and MS probably don't want their games consoles eating into the PC market. In Sony's case they would lose out on hardware sales, in MS' case they'd lose out on Windows/Office sales..

Re:Not an all in one solution (1)

brkello (642429) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012158)

What gaming machines are just used for games anymore? If you care about high-performance gaming, you don't care about Apple. Apple can sell anything for any price and people will buy it.

Re:Not an all in one solution (1)

shmlco (594907) | more than 3 years ago | (#36015654)

"Apple can sell anything for any price and people will buy it."

Fat nano. People didn't like it. Skinny nano. People liked it. Apple TV version one. It was a bit confusing to use and didn't work well. People didn't buy it. Apple TV 2. Cheaper and easier to use. Selling well. iPod Hi-Fi. Rather expensive, no killer features, and it didn't sell. iPhone. It worked great, reinvented the market, and sold like hotcakes. The Apple Bluetooth headset for the iPhone. Poor battery life, poor reception. Didn't work well, and people didn't buy it. iPad. Worked great, again reinvented the market, and also sold like hotcakes.

See a pattern here? People don't just buy anything with an Apple logo on it.

Re:Not an all in one solution (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36016530)

Also, the margins on a machine that is just used for games can't be as high as apple likes to sell its hardware.

You're wrong. First of all, serious gamers will spend whatever it takes to get the best games. And casual gamers are happy with mediocore graphics. They're different markets, but both allow great profit margins.

And unlike microsoft, sony and nintendo, apple has the engineering chops and the money to develop their own custom chipsets, driving prices down. This new iPad's CPU with 5x to 7x better gaming performance? That's one of apple's first in-house chips.

The only question is whether or not they want to enter the market, and if so which segment of gaming will they target?

Re:Not an all in one solution (1)

rsborg (111459) | more than 3 years ago | (#36017308)

Gaming boxes are poorly equipped to be a general solution for loads of reasons.
Also, the margins on a machine that is just used for games can't be as high as apple likes to sell its hardware.

The real question is whether people will care about high-performance gaming or not, if so, apple is an equal competitor with an already functioning market.

So, no, a console has too many requirements to behave in the same fashion for a long while to suit apples needs.

The key to disruption is to provide key functionality the incumbents don't or can't provide, while ignoring many "hard requirements" that incumbents feel they must cater to. mp3s disrupted the music market because though they were much lower quality than CDs (seriously lower in the early days), they were a) free and b) considerably more portable. A y2k mp3 player could tote the equivalent of 100 discs in a smaller form factor or maybe 1-2 discs in an extremely small, solid state, form factor.

Apple is busy disrupting their own technology and products with new ones (see ipod nano vs. ipod mini - Apple cannibalized their own product to push flash memory where they could dominate the supply) and wouldn't mind neatly folding in your profitable business into their new product. Companies like Nintendo are right to fear Apple.

No buttons, no deal (4, Interesting)

Coolhand2120 (1001761) | more than 3 years ago | (#36008074)

Without the traditional set of buttons, a joystick and for FPSers a mouse it's really a non-starter. Pressing virtual buttons on the screen will never be as satisfying or as technically accurate (a big deal for video games) as a physical button/stick/mouse. If you were to add the buttons, a mouse and/or a joystick the lovely touchscreen becomes a regular monitor and is ill suited to deal with the dedicated gaming rigs (laptop or desktop) and won't be much competition for the next gen gaming consoles, even more so when you consider these newer gaming consoles will be running 1080p on a 60" 3D screen. You may have some weekend gamers pick up a bubble buster game or two in lieu of reading a book or watching TV but hardcore gamers will never touch it.

Re:No buttons, no deal (2)

EponymousCustard (1442693) | more than 3 years ago | (#36008102)

wouldn't a bluetooth hand-held controller remedy that problem?

Re:No buttons, no deal (2)

MemoryDragon (544441) | more than 3 years ago | (#36008134)

Yes, thats one point apple definitely has overlooked they need to push a standardized gaming api for such controllers so that the game makers can hook into. There already are bluetooth gamepads for the iphone but none of them has standardized apis so they have to rely on the mercy of the gamemakers to support them.

Re:No buttons, no deal (2)

Vectormatic (1759674) | more than 3 years ago | (#36008382)

the problem here is how to hold the things, if you have a seperate controller, then the controller/pad/phone combo gets rather wieldy, you either have to set the tablet down (at which point you might as well suck it up and get an xbox with a tv), or dock the tablet/controller, making for a very poor form factor psp/ds competitor, and device specific controllers.

a plug-in controller would allow me to play decent nes/snes games on my 7" android tablet (no bluetooth sadly, and only a resistive screen), but for gaming on the go my PSP or DS would be superior (or for stuff like angry birds, my phone), and if i'm gonna sit down and set the tablet down i might as well turn on the 360

Re:No buttons, no deal (1)

Coolhand2120 (1001761) | more than 3 years ago | (#36011962)

I mentioned that...

If you were to add the buttons, a mouse and/or a joystick the lovely touchscreen becomes a regular monitor and is ill suited to deal with the dedicated gaming rigs (laptop or desktop) and won't be much competition for the next gen gaming consoles, even more so when you consider these newer gaming consoles will be running 1080p on a 60" 3D screen.

similar to what people said about the Wii (3, Insightful)

fadir (522518) | more than 3 years ago | (#36008154)

I heard pretty similar comments when the Wii came out first (no HD, no conventional controller, etc.) and yet it was a huge success.

Apple is known for taking a different approach when trying to solve issues. That's the way they succeeded with the iPod (hard disks instead of tiny flash RAM back then), the iPhone (all touch, almost no buttons) and the iPad. I won't be so fast to predict a failure because of the lack of conventional and established controller styles here. Don't forget that there is a huge market with people who are not die-hard players, who do not care about how a PS1 controller looked like, etc.

It's a fairly common mistake to think only the hard core games matter. They only do matter if you have a hard core game. For all the rest it's the casual gamers that count and there ease of use is the key.

Re:similar to what people said about the Wii (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36008990)

Hard core gamers will also tend to pay a lot of money for games. Casual gamers i know balk at paying $0.99 for games, they want all the free ones, play em constantly for like 3 weeks then move on.

Re:similar to what people said about the Wii (1)

smash (1351) | more than 3 years ago | (#36009240)

multiple $3 releases for 100 million copies > $50 release with associated longer dev time selling maybe 1 million copies to "hard core" gamers. development costs likely far less, too - and also due to the dev costs being far less, more outrageous ideas are less risky to pursue.

Re:similar to what people said about the Wii (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36009964)

However, you can reasonably expect the market for the $50 game to be largely the same in three years time. The phone game market could fall through tomorrow (look at the Wii, people bought it on novelty appeal and soon got bored, now developers are fleeing it in droves sensing the death knell).

Re:similar to what people said about the Wii (1)

shmlco (594907) | more than 3 years ago | (#36016132)

"However, you can reasonably expect the market for the $50 game to be largely the same in three years time."

Tell that to Rock Band. Yes, they oversold, but -- like Rock Band -- how long are people going to continue buying games that are just "more of the same"?

On the flip side of that argument, I half suspect that the major-release $50 two-years-in-the-making video game is going to diminish in favor of $5 downloadable once-a-month add-on maps and missions for things like Halo or Mass Effect. Or the same, but subscription-based.

Re:similar to what people said about the Wii (1)

smash (1351) | more than 3 years ago | (#36009226)

besides controllers via blu-tooth would be piss easy to support with a firmware upgrade.

i reckon an appleTV style box for say 300 dollars with ipad 2 hardware would be well within the ballpark given that it won't need gps, 3g, gyroscope, touch screen, etc.

There's a HUGE developer base currently writing for IOS who will be able to do some pretty interesting things with more powerful hardware. to develop for a console has previously required learning a new API/toolkit, etc. IOS is already familiar.

Re:similar to what people said about the Wii (1)

tlhIngan (30335) | more than 3 years ago | (#36011558)

besides controllers via blu-tooth would be piss easy to support with a firmware upgrade.

i reckon an appleTV style box for say 300 dollars with ipad 2 hardware would be well within the ballpark given that it won't need gps, 3g, gyroscope, touch screen, etc.

There's a HUGE developer base currently writing for IOS who will be able to do some pretty interesting things with more powerful hardware. to develop for a console has previously required learning a new API/toolkit, etc. IOS is already familiar.

This may be the real reason behind the AppleTV 2. Look at it so far - it plays media, yet is capable of running apps (it's iOS under there, after all) and can be jailbroken all the same.

It's WiFi module [ifixit.com] does Bluetooth as well.

It's quite well on its way to being a cheap console box - $99 plus $50 for a controller, and the App Store. Apple's approval process is far less draconian than Microsoft/Nintendo/Sony, and their development requirements are far lower than those three as well.

Apple may have inadvertently re-entered the console market. Perhaps that's something for iOS 5. Maybe even unified gaming (play on your iPhone/iPad or AppleTV). Or control your AppleTV game with your iPhone/iPad (lots of situations where you want to do things without letting everyone else playing on the couch know what you're doing - e.g., sports games and plays).

Re:similar to what people said about the Wii (1)

smash (1351) | more than 3 years ago | (#36021306)

My only caveat with the current apple TV2 = lack of flash. it has 8gb sure, but that won't go very far unless they're planning to use it merely as cache and stream content from the cloud (possibility? would suck without decent net speed though).

Perhaps they can re-jig the usb port to support additional storage?

Re:similar to what people said about the Wii (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36009734)

The Wii was also inexpensive. Not exactly what Apple is known for.

Re:similar to what people said about the Wii (1)

shmlco (594907) | more than 3 years ago | (#36016218)

Are iPods not competitively priced at a wide variety of price points? Are iPhones not available for the same $199 or $49 carrier subsidy as Androids and Blackberrys? Are tablet manufacturers not having fits trying to meet the iPad's $499 price point?

Stop repeating what everyone "knows"...

Re:similar to what people said about the Wii (1)

Coolhand2120 (1001761) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012196)

So many demonstrably false statements (Apple won because of this, Apple invented this) I don't know where to start. I'll just get the low hanging fruit, maybe someone else can do the rest of the cleanup.

I heard pretty similar comments when the Wii came out first (no HD, no conventional controller, etc.) and yet it was a huge success.

The Wii came with conventional controllers as well as the option to plug in 'classic' controllers. There isn't a game for WII that I'm aware of that didn't use the traditional control surface of 'd-pad + buttons'. They may have incorporated the accelerometer and 'mouse' control as much as possible, but mostly to the detriment of the gaming experience. I can think of some times where I wanted to throw my Wii controller out the window while playing Zelda. But the idea that Wii didn't come with conventional controllers is false.

It's a fairly common mistake to think only the hard core games matter.

Oh, it's so common? I'm sure you see that happen a lot. Maybe you can provide an example.

They only do matter if you have a hard core game.

What?

For all the rest it's the casual gamers that count and there ease of use is the key.

Huh? Who is "all the rest". And I thought enjoyment of the game was paramount. Aren't games supposed to be challenging? Ease of use? Are we talking about a handicap bathroom stall or video games?

I'm getting a headache now.

Re:similar to what people said about the Wii (2)

thegarbz (1787294) | more than 3 years ago | (#36016446)

The comments to the Wii still apply. Take a look at some of the most successful games on the Wii, the Mario franchise and the new release of Donkey Kong. The thing about the Wiimote is that while it was fundamentally a motion controller it still had a D pad and 2 buttons. The Nunchuck despite how it is used in the boxing game ultimately still ends up being a joystick and two buttons. This is essentially a classic game controller that has been sawed in half.

Many of the games on the Wii opt to allow a traditional form of gameplay. Super Maro Bros Returns, and Donkey Kong Country Returns both have at message at the beginning saying "turn controller sideways". That essentially turns them into NES controllers with motion control, and a quick flick of the controller is the only additional interaction. Even racing games give you the option of using the controller as a steering wheel or just plugging in the Nunchuck to get your joystick back.

My point is games need to take into account their controllers. This is fine in the current range of games. I really like the gameplay in Angry Birds, Infinity Blade, Doodle Jump etc which are designed from the ground up to be a touch / motion interaction. However I don't like the countless ports of Geometry Wars, not to mention console emulators which place a button region on the screen. There is no tactile feedback and the first time you realise your thumbs no longer in the right place is when Mario starts running backwards or doesn't duck etc. Any game that relies on the traditional control scheme is going to be borderline unplayable.

The key point of the parent is not that games on the iPad are doomed, just that competing with traditional consoles using traditional games is doomed. Ironically the only traditional game I see the iPad being any good at is Strategy games, and I still find a point and click interface the most retarded thing to ever have been ported to a console with only a Joystick available. /Eagerly awaits angry Birds 3D :-)

Re:similar to what people said about the Wii (1)

fadir (522518) | more than 3 years ago | (#36021016)

There is a lot of true and useful information in the post above. Most significantly that a game needs to be designed with awareness of what kind of input method is available and common. Especially strategy game (also mentioned above) are very well suited for the iPad and similar devices due to the fact that touching your units (or whatever you have to deal with) or group selecting by spanning a square over the units in question is very natural on a tablet and works even better than classic mouse controls on a pc.

It's a little different when you look at jump&run games. The majority of iPad-jump&runs have questionable input methods which makes it rather difficult to play those games.

So as long as the games are designed properly (Have a look at Order&Chaos from Gameloft that has just been released, an mmo for the i-devices. It has a pretty solid control mechanism that works pretty good.) for the respective target device I don't see any reason why the iPad couldn't be a successful game platform. In fact it already is a pretty successful gaming platform.

Re:No buttons, no deal (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36008372)

> Without the traditional set of buttons, a joystick and for FPSers a mouse it's really a non-starter.

They are just what you are used to. There are already FPS out for the iPad. The most famous being Nova2 which includes 10 player multi-player.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D1mf8hDA4-Y

Re:No buttons, no deal (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36008818)

it controls terrible. this control scheme has no hope of replacing even dual analog in shooters. touch and rotation/acceleration data are error ridden inputs

Re:No buttons, no deal (1)

Luckyo (1726890) | more than 3 years ago | (#36009074)

Sure. There are also flight sim and FPS games for keyboards without mouse.

There are also various whips and clamps and such for people who are slightly more true to themselves as to why they really play with those things.

X-Plane (1)

srussia (884021) | more than 3 years ago | (#36008598)

It's excellent on the iPad. No force feedback, but if you mount it on a gooseneck, the iPad does a reasonable imitation of a yoke.

Re:X-Plane (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36009068)

It sounds like you have to put up with some crap and compromises just to play on the ipad. Why bother when there are better and cheaper solutions?

Re:No buttons, no deal (1)

thesandtiger (819476) | more than 3 years ago | (#36009040)

I would much rather have the casual gamer market than the market that is hardcore enough to worry about issues like mouse vs. Gamepad vs. Motion interface when gaming, were I interested in being a gaming company.

First, economically, it makes sense. Inexpensive to make games that can be quickly brought to market and when one takes off you can quickly crank out sequels and add-ons completely change the risk:reward situation. It let's you capitalize on fads in a way not possible in the AAA marketplace.

Second, as a gamer, it means that without all the risk of massive economic losses if they release a turkey, I'll get more games of an experimental nature that otherwise might languish in the wasteland that is open source game development. Granted, 99% will be shit, but 99% of everything is shit, and I'd rather spend a buck on a lousy game than $50 on one that's mediocre.

Third, as a company that makes hardware and focuses on user experience rather than specs, I wo uld want the casual market because that way you can sell a multipurpose device that happens to have a lot of games, which will let me reach tons of markets that dedicated consoles will never reach.

There will always be a market for hardcore gamers, it just won't be THE market like it has in the past that everyone tries to capture. I predict it'll be something like the serious audiophile market, where you have ever more sophisticated and niche equipment and parts being sold at a very large premium to people who really, really get into it, while everyone else is satisfied with the mass market stuff.

Re:No buttons, no deal (1)

delinear (991444) | more than 3 years ago | (#36010080)

The problem for the casual game producer is that the market is way, way more open. A major game studio knows exactly what it's going to be competing against when it releases in the pre Christmas rush. The casual game producer might find it's release window dominated by something a kid in his parents' basement threw together over the summer. How many failures, even cheap to produce failures, can a company sustain and remain viable?

Of course, upping the capabilities of the machine can help by making game production more complicated/expensive (better graphics, for instance, mean games need real graphic designers to stand out and stick-man efforts will struggle to get the recognition even with solid gameplay), but then you incur higher development costs, which means breaking certain cost barriers to try and recoup your investment (it also ups the risk factor if that basement hit still outsells you), and you only go so far down that road before you're competing against the traditional big game producers (and if you're showing them the market is lucrative even with high production costs, expect them to come eat your lunch imminently).

Re:No buttons, no deal (1)

shmlco (594907) | more than 3 years ago | (#36016370)

"How many failures, even cheap to produce failures, can a company sustain and remain viable?"

Hasn't that been the main business model for the music industry? The book publishing industry? The movie industry? Heck, for the venture capital industry?

You produce a lot of stuff, most at least make their bones, and the occasional blockbuster more than subsidizes all of failures.

Re:No buttons, no deal (1)

Mr_Silver (213637) | more than 3 years ago | (#36010250)

Without the traditional set of buttons, a joystick and for FPSers a mouse it's really a non-starter...

...for traditional games.

A device with a multi-touch interface opens up all sorts of new possibilities for gaming which would be impossible (or, at least, difficult) to do with traditional control methods. For example, I cannot see how someone could implement two player "Flight Control" using buttons, a joystick and a mouse and get it to be remotely as enjoyable as the version on the iPad.

Personally I think the FPS genre has been done to death like the 2D platform genre before that. It's time to move on to newer more inventive genres without having developers imaginations hamstrung by the limitations of older control methods.

Re:No buttons, no deal (1)

Coolhand2120 (1001761) | more than 3 years ago | (#36011912)

I cannot see how someone could implement two player "Flight Control" using buttons, a joystick and a mouse and get it to be remotely as enjoyable as the version on the iPad.

Is the iPad a fun and convenient way to look at web pages and read books? Maybe. A flight simulator it is not.

The best flight simulator setup is a yoke/stick, throttle, pedals and a huge LCD screen or projector and a TRACKIR, and you would probably have enough left over from not buying an iPad to buy a few games like: Microsoft Flight Simulator, Lock On Modern Air Combat, IL-8 or any of the other totally awesome flight sim's for PC. But don't take my word for it, ask any major airline or military using PC simulators - and not iPads.

Personally I think the FPS genre has been done to death like the 2D platform genre before that.

So because you've declared FPS and platform games dead the whole lack of controller doesn't matter? I'm sorry, did the iPad invent a new ground breaking genre that I'm not aware of? Or are the same genres every system has had since the beginning of time? Seems to me they make a whole lot of FPSs and platform games for the iPad and then try to duct tape together controls that emulate buttons/controllers after the fact. But if you think that's the best control surface for... whatever, I guess you have your right to be wrong.

Re:No buttons, no deal (1)

Mr_Silver (213637) | more than 3 years ago | (#36022402)

Is the iPad a fun and convenient way to look at web pages and read books? Maybe. A flight simulator it is not.

For someone who claims I have a right to be wrong, you've managed to get off to a fine start. Flight Control a flight simulator? Are you joking? Have you actually heard, seen or even played the game? [youtube.com]

So because you've declared FPS and platform games dead the whole lack of controller doesn't matter?

Assuming you weren't trying to put words into my mouth, then you misunderstood the term "done to death". It means we have rather a lot of them and not that they "are dead".

What I did say was that if we agree with the OP's assertion that a mouse and keyboard are essential for games then we are ignoring a whole bunch of opportunities for new and inventive games which aren't constrained by these control methods. The Wii is a good example, many of it's games simply wouldn't work (or be enjoyable) with a keyboard and mouse.

I do, however, agree with you that FPS games are rubbish on touch screen devices. Every different control method has it's pros and cons, touch screens are no different.

Re:No buttons, no deal (1)

Paradise Pete (33184) | more than 3 years ago | (#36010370)

The iPad is already more powerful than the original XBox. In one or two more generations it will be more powerful than any existing console. It already has HDMI out. Add a wireless controller and you have an instant portable full gaming system.

And production companies don't have the enormous barrier to entry that the consoles do, so lots of high-quality indie games will emerge.

Consoles are already dead. They just don't yet know it.

Then buy the buttons (1)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 3 years ago | (#36010674)

Without the traditional set of buttons, a joystick and for FPSers a mouse it's really a non-starter.

Start 'er up then, because buttons are simply something you can buy [thinkgeek.com] them [icontrolpad.com]

I don't think you or many other people on Slashdot understand the HUGE depth of the third party accessory market based around iOS devices. That "mini cabinet"? Used by the Atari Greatest Hits app. When you get the device count Apple has reached with a relatively small number of devices, a range of really interesting accessories become cost effective to manufacture.

Re:Then buy the buttons (1)

Coolhand2120 (1001761) | more than 3 years ago | (#36011702)

If you're holding a controller, the iPad becomes a TV, assuming you'll put down the iPad to hold the controller that is. Once the the iPad is just a screen it has nothing over any of the other entrants into the arena. Oh besides it's locked down by Apple so you can kiss off any sort of MAME like setup without jailbreaking the damn thing.

I don't really give a rat's ass what sort of "third party accessory" Apple makes for the iPad, it's not a gaming platform without a decent control surface. Once you add a 'regular' control surface (joystick/keyboard/mouse) it looses its novelty and becomes another gaming console, but without many games or respect from its developers.

I can only hope that Apple allows a cross platform FPS so people playing with an iPad can compete against people playing on a computer. I reminds me of "Shadow Run", a FPS that allowed xbox players to play with PC players. Xbox players used a joystick, and of course PC players used their mouse/keyboard. Guess who won.

You seem more intrested in how much money it will make Apple. I'm only interested in if the thing would make a decent gaming platform, and it would not.

It's not the screen, it's what is behind (1)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012150)

assuming you'll put down the iPad to hold the controller that is.

Since neither is true of either link I provided WHY are you assuming that?

In fact your comment is exactly backwards because the other way you can go is that the iPad or iPhone runs the game out to an external display, and you are using the device just as a CONTROLLER, not a SCREEN.

Once the the iPad is just a screen it has nothing over any of the other entrants into the arena.

Yes it does. Software.

I don't really give a rat's ass what sort of "third party accessory" Apple makes for the iPad

The very definition of "third party" is that Apple is not making it.

Once you add a 'regular' control surface (joystick/keyboard/mouse) it looses its novelty and becomes another gaming console, but without many games or respect from its developers.

Dude, have you been under a log for the last few years? The iPad/iPhone game market is huge. ALL of the major studios have games out for the systems, including streamlined versions of AAA names like C&C. You might want to read Carmack's post about how he just can't do Android game development yet but the iPhone is working great for development. I'd say that's pretty significant "respect" from the most well known game developer on the planet.

I can only hope that Apple allows a cross platform FPS

"Allows"? It's up to the game maker. Apple doesn't care. Apple has never cared what you made work with what.

You seem more intrested in how much money it will make Apple. I'm only interested in if the thing would make a decent gaming platform, and it would not.

What's hilarious there is your comment about money goes right to failing to understand the term "third party" which makes me think you aren't a gamer AT ALL. "Buying the buttons" sends money to anyone EXCEPT APPLE.

I'm interested in reality first of all, in describing what IS. You frankly seem not just disinterested in that, but as noted seem to have taken an active avoidance to any understanding of what is.

Secondly I am interesting in gaming. On that front, the iPad/iPhone are AWESOME. They have great graphic performance, a good CPU, and really solid SDK's that have made a lot of really good games possible, and touch controls are fantastic when a game is built around them. Are the going to replace computers or consoles for gaming? Of course not, but they are currently tromping on EVERYONE in the hand-held gaming space (including Nintendo).

Not the screen, what's behind: Readable version (1)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012224)

Missed a closing tag back there... here's the readable form.

assuming you'll put down the iPad to hold the controller that is.

Since neither is true of either link I provided WHY are you assuming that?

In fact your comment is exactly backwards because the other way you can go is that the iPad or iPhone runs the game out to an external display, and you are using the device just as a CONTROLLER, not a SCREEN.

Once the the iPad is just a screen it has nothing over any of the other entrants into the arena.

Yes it does. Software.

I don't really give a rat's ass what sort of "third party accessory" Apple makes for the iPad

The very definition of "third party" is that Apple is not making it.

Once you add a 'regular' control surface (joystick/keyboard/mouse) it looses its novelty and becomes another gaming console, but without many games or respect from its developers.

Dude, have you been under a log for the last few years? The iPad/iPhone game market is huge. ALL of the major studios have games out for the systems, including streamlined versions of AAA names like C&C. You might want to read Carmack's post about how he just can't do Android game development yet but the iPhone is working great for development. I'd say that's pretty significant "respect" from the most well known game developer on the planet.

I can only hope that Apple allows a cross platform FPS

"Allows"? It's up to the game maker. Apple doesn't care. Apple has never cared what you made work with what.

You seem more intrested in how much money it will make Apple. I'm only interested in if the thing would make a decent gaming platform, and it would not.

What's hilarious there is your comment about money goes right to failing to understand the term "third party" which makes me think you aren't a gamer AT ALL. "Buying the buttons" sends money to anyone EXCEPT APPLE.

I'm interested in reality first of all, in describing what IS. You frankly seem not just disinterested in that, but as noted seem to have taken an active avoidance to any understanding of what is.

Secondly I am interesting in gaming. On that front, the iPad/iPhone are AWESOME. They have great graphic performance, a good CPU, and really solid SDK's that have made a lot of really good games possible, and touch controls are fantastic when a game is built around them. Are the going to replace computers or consoles for gaming? Of course not, but they are currently tromping on EVERYONE in the hand-held gaming space (including Nintendo).

Re:Not the screen, what's behind: Readable version (1)

Coolhand2120 (1001761) | more than 3 years ago | (#36015282)

You are obviously still in high school or middle school, your grammar is terrible, and when you're not outright stating a falsehood you're totally incoherent. Did you even read the message you wrote? I cringe for your future employer.

Missed a closing tag back there... here's the readable form.

No. I'm not sure what you're looking at, but it reads fine for everyone but you.

Since neither is true of either link I provided WHY are you assuming that?

Because the devices you linked to are so incredibly lame that I was hoping you weren't serious about using them. I thought it was more a Proof of concept.

Yes it does. Software.

Apple is epic in their abuse of their developer community. Intentionally vague TOS language, last minute app rejections, locking down their platform to only allow apps that don't compete with their apps, not even allowing other IDEs to be used! Then there's the restrictions on content! Do you seriously thing Steve Jobs will allow a GTA style game on the platform? There is more in Apple to scare away software developers than in any other hardware platform, that you suggest that this is one of their strong points speaks volumes of your knowledge of the subject.

The very definition of "third party" is that Apple is not making it.

I know very well what third party means, I don't care about third party bull shit for any platform. If the platform cannot survive on its own out of the box then what the fuck was the developer thinking. Of course in this case they were thinking "This isn't primarily for games, so lets remove the buttons". And the reason every portable game system has buttons and a D-pad is because they are required to play games.

....I'd say that's pretty significant "respect" from the most well known game developer on the planet.

I'm not bashing the hardware's capabilities, I'm telling you without a decent control surface the thing is rather useless. I don't much care what game is on the platform, if it's done by pressing virtual buttons and hefting a screen to use an accelerometer, all on a inferior size screen, I'm not going to play it. I'll stick to my traditional keyboard/mouse/joy/pad/stick on my 42" LCD until something better comes along and this is not better by any stretch of the imagination.

"Allows"? It's up to the game maker. Apple doesn't care. Apple has never cared what you made work with what.

Apple does every thing but "not care". about what is made to work with what. If you read slashdot, you must have been exposed to the numerous times Apple has caused an uproar because they didn't want 'something' to work with 'something', from flash, to porn, to IDEs and much much more.

What's hilarious there is your comment about money goes right to failing to understand the term "third party" which makes me think you aren't a gamer AT ALL. "Buying the buttons" sends money to anyone EXCEPT APPLE.

Then you say something that is perhaps ignorant, but elucidates your age. You suggest that Apple doesn't make money from from third party hardware. Apple, most defiantly makes money, and shit tons of it, through licensing of third party hardware. That you don't know that once again speaks volumes of you. I assure you I've been playing video games long before you were even a twinkle in your daddy's eye. My nerd credentials are irrevocable, and I most definitely know what I'm talking about.

I'm interested in reality first of all, in describing what IS. You frankly seem not just disinterested in that, but as noted seem to have taken an active avoidance to any understanding of what is.

I really don't understand what you're saying. If you're trying to say "I'm interested in realism", please explain how iPad as a platform is more 'realistic'. Simply saying touching a screen or heaving around the iPad is more realistic will not cut it. Then you seem to state my point of view when I haven't even stated or implied it. I am very interested in realism in my games, and in every scenario any other platform gives a more 'realistic' experience simply because you perceive the controls less (You can't see them!) and in the best cases, flight sims, racing games etc. the game uses the actual controller the actual machine being simulated uses and you don't get much better than that, and twisting an iPad is LAME compared to a Logitech G27. And you'll say "Hook up the G27 to the iPad". And I'll say, what's the difference than between the iPad and the PC besides a total lack of good games and free development environment. Maybe you can give an example where the iPad is more realistic than say... anything else.

... and touch controls are fantastic when a game is built around them ...

And that's the catch, the game must be built around the controls. And if the game is not, i.e. it requires buttons/d-pad/joystick like 90%+ of the game in existence today, the game will suck. You'll say "Oh, but they can buy these 3rd party controls!". The problem is that no developer will design a game betting that you'll buy some 3rd party control that just might work with it. Until Apple comes out with an API for a controller (and they have not) developers will not design games to be used by controllers, leaving the weak as a control surface touch screen. You can't seriously tell me you prefer 'tilting' the screen or using an on screen 'd-pad' to using a real d-pad, can you?

Of course not, but they are currently tromping on EVERYONE in the hand-held gaming space (including Nintendo).

Do you have anything to cite to backup your claim? Last I checked Android has overtaken iDevices in the mobile market.

My whole point is that the iPad won't be a serious gaming device because Apple isn't serious about making it a gaming device. If they were they would appeal to gamers by making a serious control surface. I'm not saying they can't do it but they certainly aren't trying to do it and cobbling together 3rd party hardware and software is not any sort of solution.

Re:Not the screen, what's behind: Readable version (1)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 3 years ago | (#36016926)

You are obviously still in high school or middle school, your grammar is terrible, and when you're not outright stating a falsehood you're totally incoherent.

All superior to being willfully stupid like yourself.

Only idiots confine themselves to precise grammatical conventions.

And a little hint about age? Look at my UID. It's older than you are.

No. I'm not sure what you're looking at, but it reads fine for everyone but you.

My god. Can you really be this stupid? Note the subject said "readable version", which implies another version, which there is - and it's all italics. I thought I was a bit silly for missing the close but you missed a whole post! Amazing!

Because the devices you linked to are so incredibly lame that I was hoping you weren't serious about using them.

Translation: You didn't follow the link and realized you were wrong. That's another swing and a miss!

I thought it was more a Proof of concept.

See everyone? Told you he didn't read the link. Both were for sale. One integrates with an Atari app so it's hardly "proof of concept" level. If only you had followed the link that burning shame you feel now would be gone altogether!

not even allowing other IDEs to be used!

What's epic here is that you can use other IDE's with iOS development! The Mono guys for one would sure be surprised at your statement! I keep thinking, there must be some bottom to the stupid hole he is digging! But no, no, like John Henry he just keeps hammering into Stupid Mounting, getting further with every stroke!

I know very well what third party means,

Yeah right that's why you claimed TWICE Apple made and benefitted directly from sales of third party products. Sorry sir but that step-stool you brought to the conversation will not enable you to climb out of a hole THAT deep.

the platform cannot survive on its own out of the box

Oh, it can. And when it grows big enough people make other boxes, that build a wall around the product, which keeps others from getting close. That's a metaphor by the way, you can ponder the meaning while everyone else nods knowingly here.

If you read slashdot, you must have been exposed to the numerous times Apple has caused an uproar because they didn't want 'something' to work with 'something

The examples you gave were direct things, not integrations (and as noted the IDE thing was just plain wrong).

I really don't understand what you're saying.

All of that was pretty clear, go back and read it. I have no interest in parsing and correcting your fevered dream interpretations.

You suggest that Apple doesn't make money from from third party hardware. Apple, most defiantly makes money, and shit tons of it, through licensing of third party hardware.

Nice try buddy but you obviously meant direct sales. What a moron!

And that's the catch, the game must be built around the controls.

Stupidity, you have found a permanent nest I see!

Jail broken users can use games directly. But that hardly matters because like I said, big names are adapting some games that also make use of these controls - like Atari with a huge range of classic arcade games that use the mini-cabinet I linked to. Perhaps you have heard of them.

Meanwhile other games are built specifically for touch and do not need the buttons. But when you have a big enough ecosystem, lots of games are, can and will be developed for the third-party control systems.

Do you have anything to cite to backup your claim? Last I checked Android has overtaken iDevices in the mobile market.

The ignorance is powerful with this one. Because your "checking" forgot to include iPod Touch units and the iPad, after all we are talking about MOBILE GAMING here which means the whole mobile device space, not just phones.

When you combine iOS devices Apple has a huge lead still. [gizmodo.com.au]

I'll let you have the last post, I've found in the past it's fruitless to argue with people who cannot read and are unwilling to learn. People with this lack of intelligence generally demand the last word, so you may have it.

Though honestly at this point who would read it since you've demonstrated you don't know what is going on (and that, by the way, is a hint as to what "realism" is about).

Re:No buttons, no deal (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36012328)

Pressing virtual buttons on the screen will never be as satisfying or as technically accurate (a big deal for video games) as a physical button/stick/mouse.

Well, lack of accuracy hasn't stopped FPS to be played on consoles with gamepads... I guess the games will just be tweaked for the new "controller".

Re:No buttons, no deal (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36015018)

Agree! I love playing on Mame machines, Shinobi is so much funner with big clicky buttons and a joystick. Games are all about the feel.

Re:No buttons, no deal (1)

Rexdude (747457) | more than 3 years ago | (#36023936)

You may have some weekend gamers pick up a bubble buster game or two in lieu of reading a book or watching TV but hardcore gamers will never touch it.

Except that the mass market that Apple targets is not composed of hardcore gamers. Look at the Wii, it outsold the Xbox and Playstation because of targeting casual gamers and older people; many of its customers were probably first time gamers.
Hardcore gamers will continue to play their blockbuster releases on consoles or monster PC rigs.

Re:No buttons, no deal (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36079242)

Then make games that are better suited to a touch interface than buttons and joysticks.

Try playing Harbour Master with a joystick and buttons...

Onlive (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36008380)

Onlive.com works on ipad. The idea of needing a good console or powerful computer to play video games is going to go the way of the dinosaur, if they ever eliminate bandwidth caps.

It's NOT a console (2)

Skywolfblue (1944674) | more than 3 years ago | (#36008502)

There have been plenty of creditable attempts at claiming the multi-purpose set-top box market

Apple would have to be kinda suicidal to try a Set-top-box with Sony and MS hogging that spotlight, and the last time they tried it it didn't work so well.

The iPad is not a universal set-top box for playing "traditional" (AKA console controller based) games. The iPad/iPhone have a heavy dose of casual/popcorn/social network gaming, and that has been a huge part of their success. That type of gaming is shooting through the roof while more "traditional" gaming struggles.

TL:DR version: You won't be using an iPad to play Gears of War, but since everyone in the future is playing Angry Birds...

I can't believe they haven't released a controller (1)

wintermute000 (928348) | more than 3 years ago | (#36009086)

I'll never understand why apple hasn't released a controller, and either a dock for ipad or grip for Iphone (so the controller holds the phone in place)
They have the critical mass so all game devs will start supporting it. How hard would it be, and not exactly expensive to develop either.
Such an official Iphone grip and a bunch of fps and racing titles and sony/nintendo can kiss the portable market goodbye.

Re:I can't believe they haven't released a control (1)

Prof.Phreak (584152) | more than 3 years ago | (#36009218)

I'll never understand why apple hasn't released a controller,

According to Jobs, buttons are stupid.

Re:I can't believe they haven't released a control (1)

RyuuzakiTetsuya (195424) | more than 3 years ago | (#36009330)

i think that needs to be taken in context.

In context with day to day ordinary use, Jobs is one hundred percent correct. Buttons suck.

With gaming? Different story.

An official controller stack via bluetooth or dock connector(or both) would really create an actual threat to nintendo and sony in the handheld field. Playing games like Street Fighter and Sonic on the iPhone kind of blew compared to playing it on the PS3 or 360(Sonic 4 ep 1 was a full 5 bucks cheaper on the iPhone; making it worth it for me; plus it was portable).

Re:I can't believe they haven't released a control (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36033484)

I'm sick of my touchscreen phone randomly doing shit while I am taking a call with my ear to the screen... signing up to services, rifling through address books, putting the call on hold - that never used to happen with a phone that had proper buttons.

Re:I can't believe they haven't released a control (1)

wintermute000 (928348) | more than 3 years ago | (#36009346)

Its an addon, devs can use it or not.
If its there then its trivial to say map all those gameloft clone fps and action games across, and you can be sure more will follow.
At say a 100 bucks it will sell like wildfire esp if it fits an ipod touch (kiddie market...).

From what I've seen ipod touch / iphone graphics are on par if not better than psp. 100 buck optional snap on for instant PSP, those who like buttons will devour, those who don't can stay away, Apple wins (and it would be such a tiny outlay that even if it failed to gain traction they wouldn't even notice the money burned, none of the tech is new, how much is a bit of ergonomic design).

I know I would pay a hundred bucks for a good quality droid version, in fact I donated via kickstarter to this guy's project game-gripper, but it couldn't get across the line. I would pay a hundred bucks even if it only worked with emulators lol (entire SNES, MAME and neogeo catalog on my phone with real buttons? sign me up)/

Possible Market (1)

DrYak (748999) | more than 3 years ago | (#36010710)

...and if an Android gamepad gets sufficient success, you can bet that at least some company will attempt to build a "portable game console + PDA/Smartphone" hybrid.
Something like Tapwave did with their Zodiac (running PalmOS, both usable as a PDA and as a game console).

With proper marketing, this could become a real success among young students. And as a Smartphone hybrid, it could get better subsidized and thus cost less than the next-gen Sony portable console.

Re:Possible Market (1)

spire3661 (1038968) | more than 3 years ago | (#36011768)

I have a strong feeling the next consoles will be tablets with TV out and bluetooth controllers, at least one of them.

It really only threatens the mobile market (1)

cowscows (103644) | more than 3 years ago | (#36009120)

Since we got iPhones, and eventually an iPad, the real loser in my household has been the Nintendo DS, which went from being the usual way to wind down before sleep or to kill a little time on a lazy saturday afternoon, to being basically a paper weight.

Angry Birds and the like are just as compelling, well suited to short play times, offer about the same portability on similar or bigger screens, and way way cheaper. Even if you choose to ignore the many quality and totally free games on the App Store, you can still purchase 10-30 decent games for the price of a decent DS game. And all of this on a device that's significantly useful for a number of things besides gaming.

I still think there's plenty of space in the market for dedicated gaming machines, but that space is tethered to a big TV. I think smartphones are going to all but own the mobile gaming market in a few years.

Re:It really only threatens the mobile market (1)

Flint Dragon (597473) | more than 3 years ago | (#36010178)

The DS I still believe to be the superior gaming platform. It's got buttons and some touchscreen capabilities. The problem, for me at least, is that the games aren't really all that much better than the games on iOS but for some reason costs 30x more in some cases ($35 vs $1 games). iOS is killing Nintendo because of price and the real value of their games.

Re:It really only threatens the mobile market (1)

rsborg (111459) | more than 3 years ago | (#36017482)

Since we got iPhones, and eventually an iPad, the real loser in my household has been the Nintendo DS, which went from being the usual way to wind down before sleep or to kill a little time on a lazy saturday afternoon, to being basically a paper weight.

I'll offer a similar anecdotal experience, although I do pine for some higher-quality Advance-Wars or Zelda type games, the DS offers nothing similar to titles like Sword&Poker, Battleheart or Carcasonne which are unique in their mechanics, playability, controls and graphics (Carcasonne is amazingly beautiful and the push notification turn-based-over-network is quite workable).

What it means for Apple, and the industry. (2)

RyuuzakiTetsuya (195424) | more than 3 years ago | (#36009156)

The question this is all dancing around is, will this kill traditional gaming platforms?

Short answer is no.

Long answer is no, and I consider your argument ignorant and misinformed.

Nintendo and Sony made roughly the same gains they otherwise would have in the market. Apple being around isn't going to stop Hideo Kojima from putting out Metal Gear on the PSP or Nintendo from putting out Pokemon on the DS.

What Apple IS doing is expanding the market place for mobile devices, they're making the pie bigger and taking that expanded pie away. There's some pull over, but, the types who were crazy for portable gaming before aren't going to stop because they have an iPhone or a Droid somethingoranother.

What is happening is that those who wouldn't have normally been gaming on the go, or even gaming for that matter, are now gaming on their phones in their down time. A few levels of angry birds before bed, a sudoku while waiting at the dentist, etc. I don't think that Nintendo largely has anything to worry about. They're digital crack dealers and just because someone, say Apple, comes by offering digital heroin doesn't mean that their bottom line is compromised.

my idea (1)

smash (1351) | more than 3 years ago | (#36009206)

I emailed jobs a few months ago with just such an idea. There a millions of developers on IOS who are surely chomping at the bit for a beefy system comparable to the ps3 to code for using the same familiar API.

I had no response, so i reckon it was close to the mark :D

Re:my idea (1)

jo_ham (604554) | more than 3 years ago | (#36011610)

The phrase is actually "champing at the bit", but otherwise yes.

just give it a dock and some controllers, WINNER (2)

alta (1263) | more than 3 years ago | (#36009786)

Seriously, they've already got all the power they need in the ipad... It just needs a few, rather cheap, pieces to bring it all together.

First off, give it a dock, something nice looking, but small to fit in your stack of electronics. On the front, nothing except maybe a light to let you know there's something docked. On the back, power, video/audio out. Maybe ethernet, but that's not really apple's way.

As for controllers... just make it bluetooth. This way, when you're travelling with your games, you don't need the dock, just grab your pad and controllers and go.

$50 for the dock, $25 for each controller.

So, now, for everyone who already has an ipad, for $75 or $100 they can now have a console that's considerably more capable than a wii. Oh yeah, it's also a damn good web browser. Oh, and facebook. And outlook, and gmail, and maps, and reminders and media player and everything else you can imagine. Oh, and lets add facetime to it. Cisco is now trying to get into home video chat. This may raise the price of the dock a bit because when docked the camera wouldn't necessarily be exposed.

It may not be as powerful as an xbox360, but id has already shown that some good stuff can come out of it. And who needs 55million poly/sec for angrybirds?

Re:just give it a dock and some controllers, WINNE (1)

polyp2000 (444682) | more than 3 years ago | (#36011562)

"It may not be as powerful as an xbox360, but id has already shown that some good stuff can come out of it. And who needs 55million poly/sec for angrybirds?"

You would buy a games console for the promise of playing Angry Birds? ....

Yeah .. The cost of the iPad 2 (plus the accessories you mention) vs the cost of a Wii / 360 / PS3 - Hmm tough choice . Lets see ... a games library of Angry Birds clones / Physics games or a huge back catalogue of content rich engrossing games spanning many different genres.

Nah ... I dont think iPad + dock + controllers is a winner AT ALL. I think you are fantasising some what.

If apple want to create a successful games console they are going to have to "Think Different"(tm) (vomits in the corner).

As far as innovation is concerned Nintendo appear to be ahead of the curve right now - although im not really big on nintendo game library which is a bit too cutesy for me.

Re:just give it a dock and some controllers, WINNE (2)

alta (1263) | more than 3 years ago | (#36012516)

The point is, many people already HAVE an ipad, based on it's current merits alone. No one in their right mind would buy an iPad to play angry birds... But if they already had one (and maybe an iphone4/5 as well) and all they had to do was buy a dock and controller, no brainer.

But how many people WOULD spend $500 for a box that plays games, surfs WELL, has TONS of free apps and overall does a lot more than an xbox or 360. Sure those two devices have the hardware to do all this, but they don't have the software, and with the amount of developers between the different platforms, they'll never come close to what apple has.

Huge back catalog of games? No. And worse, it's 99% games.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Xbox_360_games [wikipedia.org]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Wii_games [wikipedia.org]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_PlayStation_3_games [wikipedia.org]

Wow, that's pretty sad. where are the productivity apps? where's everything that's NOT a game? Oh, I see.

And lets see, prices? If you pay less than $30 it better be used or it's going to suck. Want an AAA game? Yeah, that's $60. So, for the price of two first class xbox360 games I can buy my fictional ipad dock. Or an existing apple tv...

Nintendo ahead of the curve? They came out with weak device that plays cute, yet overpriced, games and doesn't do HD. Have you looked at the wii/ds store? Wow, what a load of crap! My kids have a DSiXL and a Wii... The amount of downloadable content there is a joke. The DS has almost nothing. Yeah, they had a good idea on the controller. I use it on my PC as an extra input. My kids have a DS and about 25 games between them. What do they constantly want to play? my iphone. If I ever can't find my phone, the kids have it. Nintendo is a has-been.

Re:just give it a dock and some controllers, WINNE (1)

pandrijeczko (588093) | more than 3 years ago | (#36055306)

When the iPad originally came out, we netbook owners were comparing the iPad features to netbooks (which were and still are very limited in comparison) and the Apple crowd on here kept responding with "But the iPad isn't a netbook or portable computer".

However, now you are saying it IS a games console - so I'm not sure I understand where this ever-increasingly complex set of comparitive rules for the iPad actually starts or ends.

Apple Games Console ? (1)

polyp2000 (444682) | more than 3 years ago | (#36011382)

The article suggests Apple may be considering a future Games Console. On the face of it though might sound like a nice idea - However - Im not sure I like the idea of replacing my games console every 6months to keep up with apples upgrade cycle. If i wanted that kind of experience i would go back PC gaming. You can count me out on that one thankyou very much !

N.

wiat what (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36017984)

"a company looking to consolidate its iron grip on the mobile games market"? Nintendo begs to differ.

The real gaming iPad will be the 3D iPad3 (1)

WillAffleckUW (858324) | more than 3 years ago | (#36026262)

While having a dual core is nice (and I mean that on a personal level, since my "laptop" is an iPad2), the actual "gaming" iPad will be the 3D iPad (iPad3). The only problem with the alpha of that has been the battery life when you're in 3D mode, and personally I found it hard to play for more than an hour, but then I'm not that young.

I think this version will be the one to attract younger gamers, and will sell like hotcakes.

me, I'm sticking with my iPad2 now - the week long battery life (when not doing video shows or image editing) is a major plus

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?