Doom game creator suggests Apple embarrassed about iPhone gaming

[teckstud]

Originally Posted by 2oh1

If Apple were embarrassed about iPhone gaming, why did they run ads showing how well the iPod Touch works with games? It doesn't make sense.

Well what else were they gonna advertise it for? It didn't get a camera!

[teckstud]

Originally Posted by Shunnabunich

The Macintosh platform.

/thread

What games are available for MAC platform? Google it and see what comes up?
Basically NADA.

[ascii]

Maybe they want it to be an education tool. Apple has always been in to education since the start. The tablet/slate should have good potential in that area.

[monstrosity]

what a complete load of twaddle

[ltcommander.data]

Originally Posted by 2oh1

If Apple were embarrassed about iPhone gaming, why did they run ads showing how well the iPod Touch works with games? It doesn't make sense.

The word "embarassed" was AppleInsider's interpretation of John Carmack's words. The specific quote was:

Originally Posted by AppleInsider

"At the highest level of Apple, in their heart of hearts," Carmack reportedly said, "they're not proud of the iPhone being a game machine, they wish it was something else."

It can obviously be interpreted many ways, but I read it as Apple doesn't want the iPhone to be primarily known as a gaming device that is also a phone and media player. Apple would probably want the iPhone to be known more as the first of a new type of universal, truly mobile computer device that can cohesively integrate computer productivity, entertainment, and communication functionality. As such, having a disproportionally large number of games in the App Store could compromise the broader iPhone vision.

Originally Posted by AppleInsider

Furthermore, the average App Store game is in the $5 to $10 dollar range while the average DS game hovers closer to $30.

http://www.pocketgamer.biz/r/PG%2EBi...re.asp?c=16245

If only it were true that the average App Store game were $5-$10, then there would be more interest in developing iPhone specific titles that are more expansive in scope, more comparable to console games. As it is, the average price of the top 100 games is $2.76 and in general, out of the top 100 games, the number of games priced above $5 is in the single digits. Gameloft and EA have been among the few developers to price their games above $5 while providing the content and quality to justify the higher price. I'm not saying there shouldn't be cheap games, but I'm definitely hoping the App Store community keeps a willingness to support higher price points for bigger budget games that are more likely to push the envelope of the iPhone becoming a legitimate portable gaming console.

I'm particularly interested to see what Rockstar is going to do with Grand Theft Auto Chinatown Wars on the iPhone. It was just released at $40 on the PSP so it's hard to see it being in the single dollar digits for the iPhone. I'm thinking they may release part the game at $10 and the rest as DLC, maybe divided by islands with bridges severed as is traditional in GTA. Certainly, given the detail and gameplay available in even one island of Chinatown Wars, a $10 chunk of Chinatown Wars would compare favorably to existing games on the iPhone. In any case, I'm looking to Rockstar to be able to provide the content and quality to justify higher prices than have traditionally been the case of App Store apps. I'm not looking to pay more for less, but I'm certainly hoping developers would offer more for people willing to pay for it.

[Bregalad]

Originally Posted by ltcommander.data

The word "embarassed" was AppleInsider's interpretation of John Carmack's words.

It can obviously be interpreted many ways, but I read it as Apple doesn't want the iPhone to be primarily known as a gaming device that is also a phone and media player. Apple would probably want the iPhone to be known more as the first of a new type of universal, truly mobile computer device that can cohesively integrate computer productivity, entertainment, and communication functionality. As such, having a disproportionally large number of games in the App Store could compromise the broader iPhone vision.

I think that's a very good interpretation.

It's instructive to remember that when the Macintosh first came out people called it a toy. Steve Jobs was so insulted that he spent the next 25 years trying to get people to take his products seriously. Games are too close to "toys" for him to truly open his heart to them.

Had Steve taken that initial jab and said "fine, then I'll make Macintosh the best entertainment device the world has ever seen", things would have turned out very differently.

[teckstud]

Originally Posted by Bregalad

I think that's a very good interpretation.

It's instructive to remember that when the Macintosh first came out people called it a toy. Steve Jobs was so insulted that he spent the next 25 years trying to get people to take his products seriously. Games are too close to "toys" for him to truly open his heart to them.

Had Steve taken that initial jab and said "fine, then I'll make Macintosh the best entertainment device the world has ever seen", things would have turned out very differently.

Then how do you explain his "toying" of the Touch?

[bryand]

Originally Posted by extremeskater

Microsoft became the largest and most powerful in business and then years later became the most powerful in gaming. So the business market had already been secured.

Also if Apple really wanted to make a real attempt to get into business they could start by trying to make a decent office suite instead of iworks. While Pages and keynote are good numbers is beyond sad and to date nothing comes close to competing with Excel.

Not mention most large companies still like desktop systems not AIO or really overpriced notebooks.

Back in the 80s, Apple was dismissed as a manufacturer of toys. The reason: The Apple II was the best gaming platform of the day and the Macintosh had all those funny icons, while the serious business machines were being made by IBM with the business like command line interface and greed monchrome displays. Apple downplayed gaming on the Mac because they wanted to be taken seriously by the business market. It didn't work, but the Mac was forever hobbled as a gaming platform.

I don't think that Apple will repeat the mistake with the iphone. Its a cool device and already has a music play built in. Apple recognizes that it can be both a cool music player/game console and a serious business machine. Why not? Microsoft became a favourite for gamers after their business reputation was cemented.

[huntercr]

Originally Posted by extremeskater

I could see a Doom classic or even a version of Quake on the iPhone but I have no clue how they are going to make an iPhone version of Rage that even remotely looks like Rage.

http://www.rage-game.com/home.action

Wow... Off topic, but the only way that game could be any more like "Half-Life 2" would be for there to be G men.

It looks like Carmack *really* wished he had made that game.

[mytdave]

Originally Posted by extremeskater

Microsoft became the largest and most powerful in business and then years later became the most powerful in gaming. So the business market had already been secured.

Also if Apple really wanted to make a real attempt to get into business they could start by trying to make a decent office suite instead of iworks. While Pages and keynote are good numbers is beyond sad and to date nothing comes close to competing with Excel.

Not mention most large companies still like desktop systems not AIO or really overpriced notebooks.

I basically agree with what you say here. I guess the point I was trying to make with MS wasn't so much what they did first, but that they are both in businesses and in games and that doesn't seem to bother corp. IT weenies. Ironic, isn't it, that many IT types call the Mac a 'toy' yet it's Windows that has more toy-like things (namely games), not to mention the Fisher-Price interface of XP.

I think the latest iWork suite competes very favorably to MS Office. The only app still in need of tweaking is Numbers, but in one respect it thrashes Excel - charts & layout. The image quality of page layout (especially noticeable in charts) in Numbers puts Excel to absolute shame. I always use Numbers now when I'm generating tables and charts that will go into company presentations. The Numbers results are smooth, polished, 3-dimensional, professional looking layouts, but Excel results look like stick figures.

Yea, companies like traditional boring desktops. Sad, but true. There are legitimate reasons for not buying AIOs for sure. Our company keeps monitors until they die, but changes the computers every 3 years. You can also juggle monitor sizes, types, if they are separate. Mac minis are actually a great fit for most business purposes. Some companies are starting to see that. We've purchased 4 of them (out of 30 PCs). Hey, it's a start. One surprise - the Mac mini was ~$300 less than our standard corp. PC.

If Apple could just put even the slightest effort into the business computing market, they would get more traction and respect in that arena. And they don't need to be scared of games. Games won't deter businesses - it's Apple's lack of attention that deters businesses.

[elroth]

Originally Posted by MacTripper

I think Apple is just sore that they missed such a huge market by ignoring 3D gamers all these years because they had this complex of trying to be taken seriously all the time.

Poor Apple, they built a all purpose device and let the free market and consumers dictate what it was going to be and now they are moaning because they are making tons of money and people just want to escape the pressures of life, the economy and lack of jobs etc, by killing time playing games.

Hello Apple! Your a (impulsive) luxury consumer products company.

You're Trippin'. The route Apple took (ignoring gamers) was the most profitable. They weren't going to build a line of computers for gamers, taking away R&D money and building systems for a limited group of people.

But the speculation of this story comes from a game developer's head. He has no facts to back it up - he just says he "thinks" Apple doesn't like the fact games are popular on the iPhone/iPod Touch. No moaning from Apple, no basis in fact. He's trippin' right along with you.

[GQB]

Who says it can only be one thing?

People get so boxed in!

[ltcommander.data]

Originally Posted by teckstud

Then how do you explain his "toying" of the Touch?

I think that's a recognition of the reality of the situation. The priority right now is to get the iPhone and iPod Touch into as many people's hands as possible to gain a large user base and maintain first mover momentum. If games are the way to do it, then so be it. Once the platform is in a more secure/stable position, then Apple can try to convince existing users of whatever broader vision they have for the platform.

And besides, Apple labels the iPod Touch as the funnest iPod ever. They advertise games since that just happens to be what's available. If they had integrated a camera in the Touch, they would probably still promote it as the funnest iPod ever, but instead demonstrate the ability to take quick, candid shots and edit them to share with friends and family all directly from an iPod.

[David Steuber]

So Apple goes and releases a darn near perfect gaming API (OpenGL ES & OpenAL) and is upset that their pocket Macs are darn good gaming platforms? How could they not see this? They even went to great lengths to make sure that the GPU was a fully fledged co-processor on the device rather than some side show.

That is just too rich. I suppose that OS X isn't a gaming platform either. OMG! What if those big gaming companies start optimizing their games for OS X over DirectX?

The horror!

[masstrkiller]

Originally Posted by delreyjones

I don't really know anything about Carmack. You say he's mature and credible, but common sense and all the visible evidence says that Apple is plenty happy with their success with gamers. I for one would like to see more proof that he's believable. Show me some evidence from Apple itself that it's opposed to gaming.

John Carmack is really the godfather of 3D video games. The entire industry was influenced by him and some of his colleague programmers back in the early and mid nineties. This guy is the real deal. The video game industry looks the way it does in part to this guy.

It's just something in internally Apple that does not want to see their products as "toys". It is well documented from the past that Carmack has tried speaking about with Apple in the past about gaming and then following up with Apple people some time later only to see nothing progressed.

It is my opinion that Apple has never had games on the priority list. I am a gamer and a mac user since 1984. Its just not part of "Apple" culture. something hard to understand since there is so much money in it. But then again Steve Jobs is not in it for the money.

[masstrkiller]

Originally Posted by Bregalad

I think that's a very good interpretation.

It's instructive to remember that when the Macintosh first came out people called it a toy. Steve Jobs was so insulted that he spent the next 25 years trying to get people to take his products seriously. Games are too close to "toys" for him to truly open his heart to them.

Had Steve taken that initial jab and said "fine, then I'll make Macintosh the best entertainment device the world has ever seen", things would have turned out very differently.

Very good point there about Steve Jobs. He is a master at many things but especially in the early days he wouldn't bend even when it might have been the right decision.

[extremeskater]

Originally Posted by huntercr

Wow... Off topic, but the only way that game could be any more like "Half-Life 2" would be for there to be G men.

It looks like Carmack *really* wished he had made that game.

Carmack has seen his day come and go. Valve blows away ID Software.

[4metta]

Originally Posted by Ronbo

Carmack is a very intelligent guy, who is tremendously pragmatic and has few pets or favorites. He's not a vindictive turd, but rather a guy who has had so much success that he can speak his mind. If anything, he tends to be fairly reserved in his speech. Even when he's frustrated, he doesn't appear to try to blow things out of proportion. But he doesn't necessarily avoid treading on toes. The few times he's been critical of Apple, he's usually got his thumb right on it.

What he said...

[4metta]

Originally Posted by jwervel16

Kind of moot, considering you can natively run Windows on Macs. Thus, you can indeed enjoy shooting all the same 3D aliens.

Really, gaming was the last genuine bastion of the anti-Mac crowd. Bit for bit, they lose on everything else (including value, and resale in particular). What do they have left?

It's not the same. I tried running WoW on my macbook through Bootcamp and while I did get much better framerates, it was still terrible in certain cities. Here's the catch: If I would have spent the money I spent on my macbook on a pc I would be running WoW at much better settings and higher framerates.

Then there are games that really would not do well at all unless you grabbed a mac pro which would be quite expensive.

[4metta]

Originally Posted by MacTripper

80% of luxury sales are impulsive. This is a proven statistic.

The shiny screens on new Mac's and Apple Store locations are just further proof.




Impulsive sales occur at all stages of buying ability, it just happens more if it's less in price as more people can afford to be impulsive.





Most PC 3D gamers are interested in the least expensive, most expandable/customizable and most compatible software to play others online with.

Apple doesn't offer a sub $1000 expandable tower, thus few games and few graphic card upgrades. And also for the longest time Mac's didn't give up control of the hardware to game software like it did on Windows for the best performance. (Now Mac's can give up control of the OS to other OS's. It's a start)

So even if you got a cross platform 3D game, in the old days, on the Mac side it would run slower, because the OS didn't give up control of the hardware.

Of course this is all history now, as dedicated consoles 3D game much better and cheaper, look just as good as PC gaming. Lots of players online too.

And you get a up to 9 core and a BlueRay drive too in PS3's...

There are still games that play better with a mouse and keyboard though. Shooters and rpgs like Dragon Age:Origins are great examples. Also pc versions of games like Fallout 3 enjoy an endless amount of fun player-created mods you can add on for free.

But yes, consoles are much improved nowadays.

[4metta]

Originally Posted by rorybalmer

Just a quick response to this.. While its true that most gamers get a PC, I don't believe its for Mac's lack of ability to game (try call of duty 4 on an iMac and you'll see what I mean) It's because gaming companies generally don't make Mac versions of their games. The Mac computer market is only a fraction of the PC market, and a large majority of mac owners use the computers specifically for video editing, and recording music..

Good point but just part of the picture.

[Mac Jones]

I don't get it.

Gaming is only going to grow.

Escapism is by definition irresponsible so what's the big deal?

They would be proud if was a just a mundane tool or one to improve youself?

yeah right.

[rorybalmer]

Originally Posted by extremeskater

The PSP Go is light years ahead of anything on the iphone. Take a look at Assassin's Creed for the GO and it blows away anything the iPhone could even remotely handle.

Thats true.. but so was the PSP.. so why come out with the go? Smaller.. compact.. fits in your pocket.. and downloadable games at lower pricing.. The GO was released 100% to compete with the App store.

[esummers]

I think that major game developers are used to being pampered by console makers. Apple treats game developers the same as non-game developers. Nobody gets special treatment. The Indy's and the large dev houses get equal treatment for the first time. It reminds me of when Steam was complaining about Apple not taking gaming seriously even though they could not name one thing that Apple was doing wrong...

[ort]

Carnac should be embarassed about DOOM Classic on the iPhone. It's controls make it unplayable.

[Franck]

Originally Posted by elroth

You're Trippin'. The route Apple took (ignoring gamers) was the most profitable. They weren't going to build a line of computers for gamers, taking away R&D money and building systems for a limited group of people.

But the speculation of this story comes from a game developer's head. He has no facts to back it up - he just says he "thinks" Apple doesn't like the fact games are popular on the iPhone/iPod Touch. No moaning from Apple, no basis in fact. He's trippin' right along with you.

You really don't know.
Apple could have took an even more profitable route embracing gamers.

[Franck]

Originally Posted by David Steuber

So Apple goes and releases a darn near perfect gaming API (OpenGL ES & OpenAL) and is upset that their pocket Macs are darn good gaming platforms? How could they not see this? They even went to great lengths to make sure that the GPU was a fully fledged co-processor on the device rather than some side show.

That is just too rich. I suppose that OS X isn't a gaming platform either. OMG! What if those big gaming companies start optimizing their games for OS X over DirectX?

The horror!

MacOS X may be a gaming platform, but the Mac hardware surely isn't one.
The MacPro is overpriced for gamers, an the iMac totally irrelevant, as a all-in-one solution with a big screen and a lame GPU.

[ilogic]

Who cares what this guy says, he always opens his mouth just because he can

[hiimamac]

Originally Posted by elliots11

I could believe this. Wouldn't Apple have released a control pad if they really wanted it to succeed in gaming?

They could at least suggest a standard so third party accessory and case makers could build a single interface. Plus game makers need to feel comfortable programming for these so there's not like 5 of them out there that no one programs for, which is probably what'll happen eventually without some kind of leadership.

I think it's more like this.

You know how the iPhone is selling REALLY WELL?!?! And also how PC (non MAC) have 80% of corporate world? I think they (Apple) wanted the iPhone to take off in the corporate field, but they never got the Exchange quite right. Having worked in IT, Exchange is a wonderful thing, it's powerful and requires only a few steps to set uo a new uers where everything is secure, synched, and tightly integrated with the company system, mail, notes, to-do's, meetings and so on, however, since its (wrongly to some extent) seen as a gaming device, they might feel it will never achieve that level of penetration into the corporate marketplace that it could have, with iPhones being everywhere, as most people I know have a work HTC and a personal mobile iPhone.


Bummer really, but Apple never got the Exchange right and yet we mock MSFT for having to handle so many 3rd party platforms, hardware and applications where Apple can't get just this one to work correctly. Bummer.

Peace..

[James Beatty]

As this is my first post I'd like to say hello to everyone here. I've been reading this site and the forums for years. Since the discussions seem to usually be quite civil and insightful I have finally decided to join in.

I must say in advance that while I love my early 2008 Macbook Pro 17", 30" Apple Cinema Display, and iPhone 3G S I do believe there are gaps in Apple's product line-ups.

Towards that end.....I think Carmack may well have a point. Apple certainly does Gamers no favors when it comes to their computers. The graphics chipsets Apple puts in their Mini's, iMac's, and notebooks are underpowered for many of the latest games regardless of which OS one launches in Boot Camp. And while a Mac Pro is up to the task with it's upgradable dedicated graphics card, it starts at $2,499 which places it far outside of the average Gamers price range. One can build a Windows gaming box with a sweet GPU for under $1,000 total; as I recently did for my brother. Also Apple lacks an SLI or Crossfire equivalent for mega gaming rigs. These huge holes in their system lineup has lead in large part to Gamers and Game Developers looking elsewhere, such as Windows boxes or consoles. I feel Apple is rather glaringly missing an opportunity as the Gaming Industry is a multi-billion dollar behemoth. No laughing matter. Personally I don't care for now as WoW plays fine on my Macbook, but when Diablo 3 comes out I may have a hard choice ahead of me.....

As for the iPhone and Touch, I could easily believe Apple only accidently designed hardware that plays MOBILE games competitively; but only because from the beginning they were competing against a Nintendo DS and Sony PSP which were already a few years old, and showing it. When the App Store started selling those games like hotcakes, the surprised executives at Apple were more then happy to accept our money.

For the record I don't think I've bought a mobile game for my Nintendo DS or Sony PSP since buying a first gen iPhone, or since upgrading to my iPhone 3G S. It truly is the ultimate portable gaming unit.....at least until Nintendo and Sony wake up and release something totally new complete with competitive game prices.

[SDW2001]

This is a stupid article. Even if "Mr. Doom" was quoted accurately, he's insane. Why the hell would Apple be annoyed that the iphone/touch have been successful in an area? Why the hell would they care, even if they didn't originally intend the platform to be so gaming-oriented? They are a corporation, and they are making money. Lots of it. And what's this? They are promoting the gaming aspects of the platform--all while not being happy about it? Stupidity has no bounds, apparently.

Apple might not have expected it, but they are as happy as pigs in shit over the success.

[masstrkiller]

Originally Posted by extremeskater

Carmack has seen his day come and go. Valve blows away ID Software.

That's idiotic as it is preposterous! John Carmack is as relevant today as he was ten years ago. The biggest thing about him is his game engine design will wind up spawning 25 more games all thanks to him.

People love to hate.

[philipm]

Originally Posted by LTMP

Really?

The company I work for has about 30 Macs. Two of them are exclusively for graphics/video.

Most of my family and friends have Apple computers. Only one of them uses it for video editing, and that's only part time.

When I travel, I see WAY more Apple laptops than anything else. Lot's of video watching, but no editing.

The large majority of Mac owners use the computers for all the same stuff you'd use a Windows machine for.

Could it be that Carmack is annoyed that Apple takes games seriously in a niche he doesn't occupy? Apple did in the early days of the Mac discourage game development but that was because they didn't want it to be seen as a toy vs. the established "serious" IBM PC, particularly as GUIs were not well known at the time, and icons etc. were derided by some as toy-like. But that was 1984, not 2009.

In my (bioinformatics) lab most people use Macs and most of them do not create videos or graphics (other than to illustrate their work). I use a Mac because (a) I can do UNIX-style development on it for my research (with a good version of LaTeX for technical writing) and (b) the commodity apps all work pretty well.

A few days ago I gave a seminar and the head of my group sent me home the day before with adjustments to make after a final preview of my slides. He uses PowerPoint, and I use Keynote. The next day he was really impressed with the improvements I made on his advice, and said, "You must have been up really late." I wasn't. It's not that he's super-inefficient either; he's actually pretty good at most things I've seen him do.

Having someone like Steve in charge of Apple, who makes a product really usable even if it's idiosyncratic to his style, is something I will take any day over design by committee.

[Celemourn]

screw gaming on ipod touch, I want games on my Mac Pro without having to use windows! :P

C

[masstrkiller]

Originally Posted by SDW2001

This is a stupid article. Even if "Mr. Doom" was quoted accurately, he's insane. Why the hell would Apple be annoyed that the iphone/touch have been successful in an area? Why the hell would they care, even if they didn't originally intend the platform to be so gaming-oriented? They are a corporation, and they are making money. Lots of it. And what's this? They are promoting the gaming aspects of the platform--all while not being happy about it? Stupidity has no bounds, apparently.

Apple might not have expected it, but they are as happy as pigs in shit over the success.

Happy over its success yes. But maybe not as that it is being seen as a toy. Steve Jobs and Apple aren't into games never have been. It would not surprise me if Apple was less enthusiastic about this perception. Knowing Apple and Jobs I think they were looking for the respect that a smartphone like blackberry get's in the business world.

[digitalclips]

Originally Posted by solipsism

1) Nintendo’s excessive drop in profits seem to stem more from the dropping Wii sales, which the Touch doesn’t directly compete with.

2) The DSi has OTA downloads of games.

3) The link is a little more telling about Carmack’s plan for iPhone OS games, their profit compared to other platforms and why the Android platform currently holds little interest…

• http://www.cnbc.com/id/33721096/site/14081545

Thank you for the link. What a totally different feeling one is left with after reading that compared to the one above. There seems to be nothing but a negative spin in the AI article whereas I am left excited about his enthusiasm for the iPhone and Apple's approach after reading the CNBC interview.

[brucep]

Originally Posted by Quadra 610

Except that the gaming element is one of the key driving forces of iPhone, and is heavily promoted (publicly) by Apple.

The iPhone does *everything.* As it should. and it does a damn good job. No reason for Apple to have a problem with this. Its perfectly in line with the consumer market strategy for the iPhone.

Unless of course, the whole gaming scenario is what might be holding the iPhone back from significant enterprise adoption.

The rest of the time, the gaming is a plusl and has paid off handsomely.

I'm not sure how much truth there is to Carmack's ideas.

STOP me when i hit fanboi over load
RANDOM thoughts from A staten island ferry >> nyc subway local one line rider.
For years we were abused and bored to tears with tiny cell phone stupid games on a tiny screen while hitting hitting tiny rubber bumps .
AND  came about and created the most valuable real estate in then world !! By creating the iphone touches.
Maybe was  stunned by all this. By giving away free for free millions of touches to schools kids what did they expect? >> wall street action or gaming action .
i was not stunned /the first thing saw a better looking psp. Also the millions of people who suffered thru tiny screen stuff we're handed the keys to the kingdom with the touches That 20 to 50 minute commute on 2 or 3 different modes of transport lends it self to the ipod/iphone very nicely.First person high quality shooting games will soon arrive and send this platform over to the hard core gamers . THE ipod touch will soon eclipse the iphone if data costs remain high . or if  increases the power even more in the touch . maybe we could even Skype call from the touch .

All this gaming stuff is ad hoc right now quandra ,Wait until all those insane creators make multi-layered multiplayer 3D movie like media > connected worlds for all of apple freaks to join >and play and explore . Think about rushing out of a meeting because you cell phone is under world wide attack and you're the gunner guy for squad 6 of the Nyc foo fighters . My fanboi alarm just rang
gotta go
peace



9

[brucep]

Originally Posted by digitalclips

Thank you for the link. What a totally different feeling one is left with after reading that compared to the one above. There seems to be nothing but a negative spin in the AI article whereas I am left excited about his enthusiasm for the iPhone and Apple's approach after reading the CNBC interview.

This guy will write some incredible doom/quake like code for a few top level games for all APPLE PLATFORMS .

He will become very rich "> : should buy him out ,

[pmz]

Originally Posted by extremeskater

The PSP Go is light years ahead of anything on the iphone. Take a look at Assassin's Creed for the GO and it blows away anything the iPhone could even remotely handle.

Right. So can the previous gen PSP, and the PS3.

That doesn't make it lightyears ahead of anything, let alone the iPhone. The iPhone IS LIGHTYEARS ahead of the PSP Go in terms of sales volume, adoption rate, total available games, and average price per game by large large large margin.

That's what matters. Not what assassins creed looks like. LMAO.

[pmz]

Originally Posted by masstrkiller

Happy over its success yes. But maybe not as that it is being seen as a toy. Steve Jobs and Apple aren't into games never have been. It would not surprise me if Apple was less enthusiastic about this perception. Knowing Apple and Jobs I think they were looking for the respect that a smartphone like blackberry get's in the business world.

^ One of the first smart, halfway insightful posts in this entire discussion.

No business is upset about success. That is, of course, not the whole picture. Not surprisingly, this entire thread misses the whole picture. Not surprising.

Perception is everything in terms of longevity. Til now the perception of the iPhone has included:

#1. A touch screen iPod
#2. A portable web browser/e-mail checker. Replacing anyone's "need" for a 3G-equipped netbook.
#3. A cheap handheld gaming device.

These 3 perceptions have all driven the wild sales of the iPhone since last year. For a year before that, it was ONLY the first two that sold the device.

Apple did not start with a gaming device, but they couldn't ignore the opportunity to knock all others out of the park. Now that they have, they realize a few things:

a) the limited opportunity of gaming. Gaming, while popular and money making, has a limited potential that has been realized and observed in markets before.

b) Pushing it as gaming device WILL slow its adoption in the business world. There is no avoiding this. Seriouz Businezz Ownerz won't be opting for 100 iPhones for their department when they see commercials showing off extremely fun-looking games. Doesn't matter that you could spend all day playing lame Texas Hold'Em or Solitare on a Blackberry, but there is no multi-million dollar advertising campaign showing people playing games on their Blackberry.