or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Game makers say Apple, Steve Jobs have most influence on industry
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Game makers say Apple, Steve Jobs have most influence on industry

post #1 of 91
Thread Starter 
A new survey of people working in the gaming world has found that Steve Jobs is the most influential person in the industry, and that insiders believe the iPhone is shaping the future of videogames.

The survey of 1,000 people working in the industry was conducted ahead of the London Games Conference 2011, set to kick off on Nov. 10. The poll found that 26 percent of respondents said Jobs is the No. 1 most influential person in the industry, while 46 percent of respondents included Jobs in their top five.

The late Apple co-founder beat Gabe Newell, co-founder and managing director of Valve, who took second place with 16 percent of first-place votes. In third place was Nintendo's Shigeru Miyamoto, who earned 7 percent of first-place votes.

Coming in fourth place was Tim Berners-Lee, inventor of the World Wide Web, who took the top spot with 4 percent of respondents. And in fifth was Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg with 3 percent.

Apple's influence in the industry extends beyond Jobs, however. When asked to name the most influential product in the industry, 17 percent of respondents said that Apple's iPhone took the top spot, while 53 percent of respondents included the iPhone in their top five devices.

Taking second place among the 1,000 polled was the Nintendo Wii console, with 7 percent saying it was the most influential. Microsoft's Xbox Live service took third with 3 percent, the original Sony Playstation was fourth with 3 percent, and Steam, Valve's online digital distribution storefront, took fifth with 2 percent.

"In just over three years the iPhone and the App Store have transformed what consumers expect of games, and how the industry makes and sells them -- today, download games have come to the fore," said Michael French, editor in chief of gaming magazine MCV.

"Steve Jobs, the iPhones driving force, was the ultimate independent developer -- uncompromising in his vision, with unquestionable influence, and hugely artistic and commercial results. Apple thrived by linking ultra-desirable mobile devices to compelling online services."



Games have become a very important part of the iOS platform, and such titles routinely dominate the top sales charts on the App Store for iPhone, iPad and iPod touch. Other portable game makers, such as Nintendo, have seen their profits sharply decline as Apple's success in the market has grown.

Last year Apple began to make a stronger push for gamers with the launch of Game Center, its own social network for iOS, allowing gamers to compare high scores and challenge each other to online match-ups. The service is similar to Sony's PlayStation Network or Microsoft's Xbox Live.

Apple has even begun to encroach on the console gaming market dominated by Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft. The new AirPlay Mirroring feature in iOS 5 allows iOS devices to wirelessly stream to an Apple TV, and titles like Real Racing 2 HD have utilized it to create a living room multiplayer experience.
post #2 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

A new survey of people working in the gaming world has found that Steve Jobs is the most influential person in the industry...


"is" proves SJ is immortal


btw, I'm first batches. What...what. That's what I thought. If you have anything to say about it, I'll meet you in the playground at 3:30.
post #3 of 91
"Steve Jobs, the iPhone’s driving force, was the ultimate independent developer -- uncompromising in his vision, with unquestionable influence, and hugely artistic and commercial results. Apple thrived by linking ultra-desirable mobile devices to compelling online services."

Except when he does compromise, like when he caved and allowed for apps on iOS. Sometimes it pays to listen to people
post #4 of 91
That is a bit strange since most games on pure touch devices are crap when it comes to the part of controls.

But...there are some very cool games for iPad/iOS too.
post #5 of 91
I've never read about anybody connected with game development saying Apple consistently supported the gaming industry or made gaming a priority. I've read the opposite. When I think of games I don't think of Steve Jobs. Gaming was limited on the Mac because the market share was small and it's big on iOS because market share is large. Steve Jobs probably knew there wasn't a lot he could do besides focus on making Apple successful and hope that would raise all boats. He certainly knew his power in games was limited after the humiliation of having Bungie announce the first Halo game during one of his Macworld keynotes only to see Microsoft buy Bungie and grudgingly release a Mac version of Halo years later and then not do Mac versions of any further games in a very successful series.
post #6 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by Svegard View Post

That is a bit strange since most games on pure touch devices are crap when it comes to the part of controls.

But...there are some very cool games for iPad/iOS too.

You are correct, the real reason.....greed.

A simple iPhone game, probably costs one tenth of a game like Battlefield 3 that is on consoles and PC's. However with as many iphones/ipads that simple game might just make as much as Battlefield 3 in the end (if its good).

The consumer ends up with a bunch nice, simple games but could end up not getting the higher end games in the long run.
post #7 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magic_Al View Post

not do Mac versions of any further games in a very successful series.

You can always build a Cider port of Halo 2 like I did.
post #8 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magic_Al View Post

I've never read about anybody connected with game development saying Apple consistently supported the gaming industry or made gaming a priority. I've read the opposite. When I think of games I don't think of Steve Jobs. Gaming was limited on the Mac because the market share was small and it's big on iOS because market share is large. Steve Jobs probably knew there wasn't a lot he could do besides focus on making Apple successful and hope that would raise all boats. He certainly knew his power in games was limited after the humiliation of having Bungie announce the first Halo game during one of his Macworld keynotes only to see Microsoft buy Bungie and grudgingly release a Mac version of Halo years later and then not do Mac versions of any further games in a very successful series.

Think of it this way. Let say there are 50 million Xbox's out there and maybe 50% of those play Halo. Vs 100 million iOS devices and 50% of them play Angry birds.

Halo cost $59
AB cost $.99

Which cost more to develop?

Which cost more to support?

In the end game makers want to make money. Making money is sales - cost = profit
post #9 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by Svegard View Post

That is a bit strange since most games on pure touch devices are crap when it comes to the part of controls.

I think that's the reason Apple didn't score higher. There's still a dichotomy in the market where a lot of 'l33t' people think that only their games matter. if it's not super high frame rates at high resolutions with bad guys approaching you from all directions and you shooting bazillions of weapons, it's no good. That's BS.

There are different kinds of games for different people. Not everyone wants to play "World of Halo Civilization Deathmatch Killer Zombieland" or whatever the 'cool' people are playing these days.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #10 of 91
Ok, I need to get this straight.

If I'm to belive things I read here and on macrumors. A lot of it does not corespond to the reality I see around me. Apple revolutionized...apple owns...apple most blabla...the "Apple sonn to dominate the worlds"- ish kind.

This game thing is one of them. I do not know a single gamer (and I knows lots, inkl myself) who considers iOS a serious gaming platform. Everyone around me plats PC, PS, Xbox and nintendo games. And funny enough...It is rare seeing anyone I know or see in public places with a iPhone or other touchphone spending any time gaming at all.

What am I missing....
post #11 of 91
"Steve Jobs 'had'".
You sound like you're just came out of an ESL class.
post #12 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by bettieblue View Post

Think of it this way. Let say there are 50 million Xbox's out there and maybe 50% of those play Halo. Vs 100 million iOS devices and 50% of them play Angry birds.

Halo cost $59
AB cost $.99

Which cost more to develop?

Which cost more to support?

In the end game makers want to make money. Making money is sales - cost = profit

Not sure I understand your argument.

25M Halo at 59$ = 1475M
50M Angry Birds at .99$ = 50M

Even if it cost 500M to develop and support Halo, based on your argument, if total profit is your goal, the Halo route is the road you want to take.
post #13 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by Svegard View Post

That is a bit strange since most games on pure touch devices are crap when it comes to the part of controls.

But...there are some very cool games for iPad/iOS too.

I'll never understand how gamers think that a handful of clunky buttons compares with the potential of a device that responds to tilt, orientation, touch, sound, global position, etc etc.
Then again, I think most are just punching buttons on a FPS.
But I don't spend my life playing games like a 4-year-old, so I'm hardly expert.
post #14 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jacksons View Post

Not sure I understand your argument.

25M Halo at 59$ = 1475M
50M Angry Birds at .99$ = 50M

Even if it cost 500M to develop and support Halo, based on your argument, if total profit is your goal, the Halo route is the road you want to take.

But, you have to also consider that it probably takes 100 times as many man hours creating Halo. So, if in that same time you could make 100 Angry Birds type games, then the equation becomes much different.
post #15 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikepro View Post

But, you have to also consider that it probably takes 100 times as many man hours creating Halo. So, if in that same time you could make 100 Angry Birds type games, then the equation becomes much different.

Your math won't add up at scale. We aren't sure if the market will even bare 100 Angry Birds type games.
post #16 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by GQB View Post

"Steve Jobs 'had'".
You sound like you're just came out of an ESL class.

Mocking someone tends to work best when you don't exhibit the trait being mocked.
post #17 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikepro View Post

But, you have to also consider that it probably takes 100 times as many man hours creating Halo. So, if in that same time you could make 100 Angry Birds type games, then the equation becomes much different.

Correct.

Now which ONE company has 100 game titles that are as popular as Angry birds?

I think the answer is if you want to make small base hits while putting limited capital at risk, you go the iOS route. If you have deeper pockets and want to hit grand slams, you go the gaming console route.
post #18 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by majjo View Post

from what I have read, this seems to be polling attendees of a conference focused on iOS and android gaming development, so its hardly surprising that SJ would score highly among these people.

most probably owe their careers to the man.

Of course we have had Reggie from Nintendo say that Apple was a bigger threat than MS was, so clearly Apple has been impacting the industry in gaming as well. How many reports have there been of Nintendo having vast amounts of mind and market share stolen by Apple?
post #19 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by GQB View Post

I'll never understand how gamers think that a handful of clunky buttons compares with the potential of a device that responds to tilt, orientation, touch, sound, global position, etc etc.
Then again, I think most are just punching buttons on a FPS.
But I don't spend my life playing games like a 4-year-old, so I'm hardly expert.

I think you'll find you've insulted many people with your stereotyped view of gamers. It's pretty much the same lazy one used by ignorant politicians. The games I hope to be playing this Christmas are either Dark Souls, Batman or Skyrim, which are all 18+ and not suitable for my two young kids.

Aside from music, for me most of them overshadow anything from any other form of entertainment, but each to their own. The input devices vary, but buttons are still the clear winner compared to motion / touch / tilt detection / voice.

As far as the thread is concerned Apple has created a great platform for distributing mostly casual games at a very competitive price. But in my opinion, their influence isn't nowhere near that of Nintendo.
post #20 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by Svegard View Post

Ok, I need to get this straight.

If I'm to belive things I read here and on macrumors. A lot of it does not corespond to the reality I see around me. Apple revolutionized...apple owns...apple most blabla...the "Apple sonn to dominate the worlds"- ish kind.

This game thing is one of them. I do not know a single gamer (and I knows lots, inkl myself) who considers iOS a serious gaming platform. Everyone around me plats PC, PS, Xbox and nintendo games. And funny enough...It is rare seeing anyone I know with a iPhone or other touchphone spending any time gaming at all.

What am I missing....

The survey was about people that work in the gaming industry, not necessarily consumers of the games. Apple changed the industry by opening it up to more developers. There used to be a high entry fee to make money in the gaming world. Apple changed that. You need only look at the size of the Appstore and Android market along with the fact that many developers are making real money. There are more developers for iOS and Android than there are for Nintendo DS and Sony PSP. Apple started the movement, both iOS and Android have benefitted. And of course, anything good coming out of Apple is attributed to SJ!
fwiw, i don't think touch screen games trump all others, though some are great. I still like physical buttons, but noone can deny that mobile gaming has significantly changed since the Appstore came along.
post #21 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikepro View Post

But, you have to also consider that it probably takes 100 times as many man hours creating Halo. So, if in that same time you could make 100 Angry Birds type games, then the equation becomes much different.

Also, as an additional thing to remember, I would say best case scenario that only half purchased Halo at full price (which I think was $49 at the time if I remember correctly). Also, another thing to remember if manufacturing costs, distribution costs, defect costs (bad disc, etc)…. All of that adds up against the Halo argument, whereas Angry Birds is still at 50M.

-- Mike Eggleston
-- Mac Fanatic since 1984.
-- Proud Member of PETA: People Eating Tasty Animals
-- Wii #: 8913 3004 4519 2027

Reply

-- Mike Eggleston
-- Mac Fanatic since 1984.
-- Proud Member of PETA: People Eating Tasty Animals
-- Wii #: 8913 3004 4519 2027

Reply
post #22 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by Svegard View Post

Ok, I need to get this straight.

If I'm to belive things I read here and on macrumors. A lot of it does not corespond to the reality I see around me. Apple revolutionized...apple owns...apple most blabla...the "Apple sonn to dominate the worlds"- ish kind.

This game thing is one of them. I do not know a single gamer (and I knows lots, inkl myself) who considers iOS a serious gaming platform. Everyone around me plats PC, PS, Xbox and nintendo games. And funny enough...It is rare seeing anyone I know or see in public places with a iPhone or other touchphone spending any time gaming at all.

What am I missing....

You're missing the fact that YOU don't get to determine what a gaming platform is or isn't.

Apple has sold billions of games for iOS. Obviously, lots of people are playing games on their iPhone, iPod Touch, or iPad. The fact that it doesn't meet YOUR standards for what constitutes a game is irrelevant.

You're like the car nuts who think that the only cars that count are those that have 600 HP and go 0 to 60 in under 3 seconds. By that standard, Ferrari has a 50% market share and Toyota and GM don't even exist.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #23 of 91
They also forgot the Onlive gaming streaming service. I use Onlive PC, TV, or mobile. I have seen alot of people on that.
post #24 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Eggleston View Post

Also, as an additional thing to remember, I would say best case scenario that only half purchased Halo at full price (which I think was $49 at the time if I remember correctly). Also, another thing to remember if manufacturing costs, distribution costs, defect costs (bad disc, etc). All of that adds up against the Halo argument, whereas Angry Birds is still at 50M.

Franchise games make a crap ton of money. That is why they are still such a big deal. Modern Warfare which will be release next week is predicted to make a over a billion in revenue during the first six months (http://www.psu.com/Modern-Warfare-3-...a013489-p0.php)
post #25 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

You're missing the fact that YOU don't get to determine what a gaming platform is or isn't.

Apple has sold billions of games for iOS. Obviously, lots of people are playing games on their iPhone, iPod Touch, or iPad. The fact that it doesn't meet YOUR standards for what constitutes a game is irrelevant.

You're like the car nuts who think that the only cars that count are those that have 600 HP and go 0 to 60 in under 3 seconds. By that standard, Ferrari has a 50% market share and Toyota and GM don't even exist.

GM has a production car with over 600 hp. And another that is pretty damn close. I think the Car/Apple analogies are getting a bit old.
post #26 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

I think that's the reason Apple didn't score higher. There's still a dichotomy in the market where a lot of 'l33t' people think that only their games matter. if it's not super high frame rates at high resolutions with bad guys approaching you from all directions and you shooting bazillions of weapons, it's no good. That's BS.

There are different kinds of games for different people. Not everyone wants to play "World of Halo Civilization Deathmatch Killer Zombieland" or whatever the 'cool' people are playing these days.

You're absolutely right. One of the things Nintendo found when they released the Wii (which was derided by "hardcore" gamers) was that less power, but with simpler games that were easy to pickup and play, expanded their market dramatically.

Not everyone wants to sit in a darkened room with a monster PC shooting similar people on the other side of the world.
post #27 of 91
Angry Birds exceeded 350 Million in games sold back in September. At $4.99 a sale you do the math.

http://www.videogamesblogger.com/201...50-million.htm


With sales like that it's clear that Halo won't compete.
post #28 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by SSquirrel View Post

...Except when he does compromise, like when he caved and allowed for apps on iOS. Sometimes it pays to listen to people

Do you have some support for such a silly comment? Do you really believe that they did not intend for apps to be developed for the iOS platform in the manner in which they actually developed? Did you really think that Apple woke up one morning, looked out the window, saw a big group of app developed camped on the front lawn and said, "well if we don't let them create apps, they won't go away?"

Cupidity at its finest!
If you are going to insist on being an ass, at least demonstrate the intelligence to be a smart one
Reply
If you are going to insist on being an ass, at least demonstrate the intelligence to be a smart one
Reply
post #29 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by Svegard View Post

Ok, I need to get this straight.

If I'm to belive things I read here and on macrumors. A lot of it does not corespond to the reality I see around me. Apple revolutionized...apple owns...apple most blabla...the "Apple sonn to dominate the worlds"- ish kind.

This game thing is one of them. I do not know a single gamer (and I knows lots, inkl myself) who considers iOS a serious gaming platform. Everyone around me plats PC, PS, Xbox and nintendo games. And funny enough...It is rare seeing anyone I know or see in public places with a iPhone or other touchphone spending any time gaming at all.

What am I missing....

The "hardcore" gamers are a small percentage of the population. That's what you're missing. I was a hardcore gamer myself, putting in years worth of playtime on various first person shooters and spent 10 years playing mmorpgs. My platform of choice has always been windows, but I also own a ps3 and wii. But like many others, I'm no longer a hardcore gamer. I rarely play a game if any at all and the games on ios are pretty impressive, especially when sitting on the toilet or while waiting somewhere.
post #30 of 91
First of I don't think Steve deserves the first slot, but I am old school and I remember what Nintendo did for the industry back in the 80s, but this is besides the point.

I think it's interesting that so many people think this is a pure money thing. Sure the money factor is a motivator for some, and they have their voice in the industry, but just remember you can have the most creative team in the world it does not mean you have the funds to make Halo. Sometimes you just have the money to make small games like the ones you see on Direct Download systems and mobile OSs.

The iOS really blew the doors open for a lot of small devs out there. There are some people out there who just want to make great games and would not be able to with out this market out there.
post #31 of 91
IMHO, if Apple offered the iphone and ipod touch in a gaming centric(tactile buttons) BTO(build to order), Nintendo's game boy and the psp and vita would be destroyed market wise.
post #32 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post

Angry Birds exceeded 350 Million in games sold back in September. At $4.99 a sale you do the math.

http://www.videogamesblogger.com/201...50-million.htm


With sales like that it's clear that Halo won't compete.

You are a little off there on price. The Angry Birds game was $2.99 when it started out and fell to $0.99 on the iOS app store. It is a FREE ad based game on Android which I am sure is included in those download totals.

Call of Duty Black Ops, last year sold over 7 million copies it's first weekend of release, worldwide. At $60.00 a copy I'd take that revenue any day of the week over a mobile game which took two years to reach 350 million downloads total.

For the sake of argument:
$2.99 x 350 million - 30% in 2 years = $314 million
$60.00 x 7 million in 2 days = $420 million

Of course the $420 million isn't pure profit but the $2.99 price is being very generous considering Angry Birds is now a $0.99 game and comes free through the Android marketplace.

This doesn't even include the overpriced limited edition sets of Call of Duty Black Ops or the DLC from Black Ops. Sorry but a mobile phone game might sell more over time on different platforms but the money they make is a drop in the bucket compared to console quality games and pricing.

EDIT: I should add the difference can be said that Angry Birds more than any other mobile game is a sort of juggernaut and not really the reality of mobile gaming. They are raking in the money from expanding the franchise to other areas (not just gaming). Plush dolls, game boards, movies will make that franchise. Not every mobile game sells that well or is that sticky in a consumer's eye. Console games sell in high numbers all the time for the popular franchises.
post #33 of 91
This poll was conducted at an iOS gaming conference soon after SJ died so I am sure in noway it is bias This same group of superstars gave Mark Zukerberg 3% of the vote.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/benzinga...of-complaints/
post #34 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post

Angry Birds exceeded 350 Million in games sold back in September. At $4.99 a sale you do the math.

http://www.videogamesblogger.com/201...50-million.htm


With sales like that it's clear that Halo won't compete.

WOW, way to skew the numbers. All angry bird versions are FREE on Android, and alot are FREE on the itouch. Even the ones you have to pay for are only 99 cents.
post #35 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by bryanl View Post

Franchise games make a crap ton of money. That is why they are still such a big deal. Modern Warfare which will be release next week is predicted to make a over a billion in revenue during the first six months (http://www.psu.com/Modern-Warfare-3-...a013489-p0.php)

They will have to sell nearly 17M copies at $60 each to make a billion, unless there is downloadable pay content being sold as well.

Quote:
Originally Posted by fecklesstechguy View Post

Do you have some support for such a silly comment? Do you really believe that they did not intend for apps to be developed for the iOS platform in the manner in which they actually developed? Did you really think that Apple woke up one morning, looked out the window, saw a big group of app developed camped on the front lawn and said, "well if we don't let them create apps, they won't go away?"

Cupidity at its finest!

Oh gee, you mean like reading Steve's biography? Here's an article that discusses it. It mentions that several executives petitioned him about calls out 2, but I've seen Forstall's name listed chiefly over the last several years whenever it's brought up. If you will recall, when the iPhone came out Steve said no to apps and that if people wanted apps they could design web apps. Eventually his viewpoint was changed and it's a good thing it was. Steve was not perfect or all-knowing.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology...bs-apps-iphone
post #36 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by bettieblue View Post

Think of it this way. Let say there are 50 million Xbox's out there and maybe 50% of those play Halo. Vs 100 million iOS devices and 50% of them play Angry birds.

Halo cost $59
AB cost $.99

Which cost more to develop?

Which cost more to support?

In the end game makers want to make money. Making money is sales - cost = profit

Maybe, but many AAA games these days are considered art. While the publishers like EA may dump AAA titles any moment they like for simpler and more profitable games, the studios themselves will always keep doing AAA titles.

And we could have some on the App Store... *if* someone proved touch controls can be reasonable (with proper software implementation) OR released an accessory with AT LEAST an analog stick (virtual or not) and two shoulder buttons. Every single studio is studying the iOS closely, and have only chosen not to act because they are still not sure they can get something big and good to the iOS platform, regardless of whether the graphics themselves are lagging behind the 2007 generation of consoles (for now...)

iPhone 4S 64GB, Black, soon to be sold in favor of a Nokia Lumia 920
Early 2010 MacBook Pro 2.4GHz, soon to be replaced with a Retina MacBook Pro, or an Asus U500

Reply

iPhone 4S 64GB, Black, soon to be sold in favor of a Nokia Lumia 920
Early 2010 MacBook Pro 2.4GHz, soon to be replaced with a Retina MacBook Pro, or an Asus U500

Reply
post #37 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by maccherry View Post

IMHO, if Apple offered the iphone and ipod touch in a gaming centric(tactile buttons) BTO(build to order), Nintendo's game boy and the psp and vita would be destroyed market wise.

They'd never, ever do that. That's completely un-Apple

Release an accessory with absurd price, however, effectively telling the industry "Here it is you bunch of idiots, now can you please make a bunch of them so our developers can start making some great games", is totally something Apple would do....

...If they were interested.

So, Apple.... are you interested?

iPhone 4S 64GB, Black, soon to be sold in favor of a Nokia Lumia 920
Early 2010 MacBook Pro 2.4GHz, soon to be replaced with a Retina MacBook Pro, or an Asus U500

Reply

iPhone 4S 64GB, Black, soon to be sold in favor of a Nokia Lumia 920
Early 2010 MacBook Pro 2.4GHz, soon to be replaced with a Retina MacBook Pro, or an Asus U500

Reply
post #38 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by neosum View Post

The "hardcore" gamers are a small percentage of the population. That's what you're missing. I was a hardcore gamer myself, putting in years worth of playtime on various first person shooters and spent 10 years playing mmorpgs.

See, that's your problem. You've only played games of the two most repetitive genres of all

Although I like shooting and all, I prefer combat when it's only part of the experience. Think Deus Ex, Uncharted...

... S K Y R I M

iPhone 4S 64GB, Black, soon to be sold in favor of a Nokia Lumia 920
Early 2010 MacBook Pro 2.4GHz, soon to be replaced with a Retina MacBook Pro, or an Asus U500

Reply

iPhone 4S 64GB, Black, soon to be sold in favor of a Nokia Lumia 920
Early 2010 MacBook Pro 2.4GHz, soon to be replaced with a Retina MacBook Pro, or an Asus U500

Reply
post #39 of 91
Initially, I disagreed with the idea that Steve was that influential to the game industry. It certainly wasn't his intention to build a game platform originally. But the platform turned out to be pretty awesome for games--and by platform I mean not only the hardware chips, touch screen, gyroscopes, and the App Store platform which gave game developers a way to skip publishers like Electronic Arts and sell straight to the gamer. Then I realized how big a difference Steve made to the industry. Before the iPhone and iPod Touch there were games on mobile phones, but the platforms were laughably awful: either Java BREW phones or something like the Nokia N-Gage. The games on the Palm Treo and BlackBerry were not much better.

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #40 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

You're missing the fact that YOU don't get to determine what a gaming platform is or isn't.

hey! I never claimed to do that! I only said what I observe in my daily life...

Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

You're like the car nuts who think that the only cars that count are those that have 600 HP and go 0 to 60 in under 3 seconds. By that standard, Ferrari has a 50% market share and Toyota and GM don't even exist.

not into cars...but when you mention that kind of thought pattern...I have a Mac Pro ;D
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Game makers say Apple, Steve Jobs have most influence on industry