Valve's Gabe Newell says Apple is biggest threat in future of living room gaming
Valve cofounder and software engineer Gabe Newell, who is attempting to create a new era of open-source gaming with the Steam Box project, sees the proliferation of the Apple TV as more of a threat than console giants Sony and Microsoft.
In a talk at the University of Texas covered by Polygon, Newell said Apple's growing presence in the living room has become a danger to the Steam Box, Valve's upcoming Linux-based gaming platform that will offer user-generated content at affordable prices.
The Apple TV remains somewhat of a dark horse in comparison to Sony's PlayStation and Microsoft's Xbox, but Newell said the market is about to change, trending toward cheaper hardware that can integrate with a user's PC.
"The biggest challenge, I don't think is from the consoles," Newell said. "I think the biggest challenge is that Apple moves on the living room before the PC industry sort of gets its act together."
Currently, the Apple TV does not officially support gaming apps and lacks the hardware necessary to run such software effectively, like a more capable processor and traditional controller. However, a refreshed version of the set-top streamer is expected to be released soon with a Broadcom wireless chip that supports both Wi-Fi and Bluetooth. Recent reports have also pointed to the inclusion of an A5X SoC that would dramatically boost performance.
"I think that there's a scenario where we see sort of a dumbed down living room platform emerging ? I think Apple rolls the console guys really easily," Newell said. "The question is can we make enough progress in the PC space to establish ourselves there, and also figure out better ways of addressing mobile before Apple takes over the living room?"
In a talk at the University of Texas covered by Polygon, Newell said Apple's growing presence in the living room has become a danger to the Steam Box, Valve's upcoming Linux-based gaming platform that will offer user-generated content at affordable prices.
The Apple TV remains somewhat of a dark horse in comparison to Sony's PlayStation and Microsoft's Xbox, but Newell said the market is about to change, trending toward cheaper hardware that can integrate with a user's PC.
"The biggest challenge, I don't think is from the consoles," Newell said. "I think the biggest challenge is that Apple moves on the living room before the PC industry sort of gets its act together."
Currently, the Apple TV does not officially support gaming apps and lacks the hardware necessary to run such software effectively, like a more capable processor and traditional controller. However, a refreshed version of the set-top streamer is expected to be released soon with a Broadcom wireless chip that supports both Wi-Fi and Bluetooth. Recent reports have also pointed to the inclusion of an A5X SoC that would dramatically boost performance.
"I think that there's a scenario where we see sort of a dumbed down living room platform emerging ? I think Apple rolls the console guys really easily," Newell said. "The question is can we make enough progress in the PC space to establish ourselves there, and also figure out better ways of addressing mobile before Apple takes over the living room?"
Comments
On the other hand, I have quite a few Steam games I can only play when connected to the Internet, so I choose to understand what he says exactly true to his word, as an analysis from his company's point of view, not from a FOSS guy's point of view. Steam is not a white knight in shining armor, and neither is Apple. Whichever baron takes control of the land will impact us, but we won't magically get a republic, to put things in "political-fantasy" terms.
Quote:
"The biggest challenge, I don't think is from the consoles," Newell said.
Well, sure. It is taking MS, Nintendo, and Sony 6 years to update their consoles with faster graphics and processors and newer technology. They are threat to themselves only.
What sort of simplistic games does Newell think people want to play?
Will the Apple TV run Crysis 3 at high resolution?
Quote:
Originally Posted by cnocbui
What sort of simplistic games does Newell think people want to play?
Will the Apple TV run Crysis 3 at high resolution?
I bet Angry birds has more players than crysis, so more people want angry birds.
If responsible parents start to tell kids to buy their own games, instead of paying 60 bucks for each one (or going to piratebay), or to go run outside/play football, you would realize how the number of crysis 3 players would aproach to 0 very quickly.
I mean, games should be for fun, playing with friends and family. Getting fat, full of acne, closed on a room all week, loosing the ability to have a decent conversation with someone else without using a mic and headphones, IS NOT fun. Sorry to burst your bubble, but this is the tipical "pc gamer", the tipical "crysis 3 HD" guy.
We are reaching a new era for gaming, and that's great. Gaming was so much fun when all the guys would go to lan houses together or a bar and play CS 1.6 for a one hour, than having a drink, talk, see a few girls... Look at what we have now.
Thank god for Wii. I hope Apple does the right thing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GadgetCanada
I think Gabe actually needs to go outside for a walk instead of designing amazing 3D worlds at his desk that you can walk around in. In fact, I think I need to go for a walk too.
I went outside once.
The graphics weren't that great.
So, Gabe thinks the Steam Box will only have a half...life with Apple in the picture, eh?
That's funny. I went outside once too and the graphics were just amazing. Nothing else comes close. Unfortunately, the story and gameplay sucked, so I had to go back inside.
As will be borne out on his continued obsessive-compulsive resistance in bringing neither "Half-Life" nor "Portal" to iPad
& not being at all forthcoming with "Half-Life 3" news.
But in this particular instance, he's a dope because that entire statement is multi-levelly FALSE.
Consider ....
1] Living room gaming involves SOTA hardware & hundreds of millions of dollars in R & D investment to make that SOTA hardware.
You think Apple's gonna do that?
Plus, that SOTA hardware has to sell in the tens of millions before developers will be interested in spending tens of millions of dollars in making games for it.
And in order for it to sell in the tens of millions, there must be AAA games ready to go at launch.
Get the picture?
2] Apple's only "interested", if you wanna use that word, in mobile casual gaming.
You know: the 99¢ "Angry Farts" & the like.
But they've already "conquered" that.
In fact, they invented "Mobile Casual Gaming" outright.
And you can't say: "What are you talking about?
Apple didn't conquer mobile casual gaming much less invent it.
What about Nintendo?"
You can't say that because Nintendo compacts are not casual gaming.
Nobody pays $40-50 for a "casual" game.
So you see, Gabe Newell's statement is a falsehood on so very many fronts.
In fact, you can file this one under: MASSIVE FAIL.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BoxMacCary
Gabe Newell is a fool.
As will be borne out on his continued obsessive-compulsive resistance in bringing neither "Half-Life" nor "Portal" to iPad
& not being at all forthcoming with "Half-Life 3" news.
But in this particular instance, he's a dope because that entire statement is multi-levelly FALSE.
Consider ....
1] Living room gaming involves SOTA hardware & hundreds of millions of dollars in R & D investment to make that SOTA hardware.
You think Apple's gonna do that?
Plus, that SOTA hardware has to sell in the tens of millions before developers will be interested in spending tens of millions of dollars in making games for it.
And in order for it to sell in the tens of millions, there must be AAA games ready to go at launch.
Get the picture?
2] Apple's only "interested", if you wanna use that word, in mobile casual gaming.
You know: the 99¢ "Angry Farts" & the like.
But they've already "conquered" that.
In fact, they invented "Mobile Casual Gaming" outright.
And you can't say: "What are you talking about?
Apple didn't conquer mobile casual gaming much less invent it.
What about Nintendo?"
You can't say that because Nintendo compacts are not casual gaming.
Nobody pays $40-50 for a "casual" game.
So you see, Gabe Newell's statement is a falsehood on so very many fronts.
In fact, you can file this one under: MASSIVE FAIL.
I agree. Apple is not going to try to break into the console gaming market. If they do try and add games to Apple TV, it will be small casual games like Angry Birds, not the big AAA type of games you see on Playstation, XBox, or Wii. I can see how Gabe is worried since SteamBox is a bit of a cross between big games and small indie games. If he's targeting casual gamers with his platform, it could be a problem.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NasserAE
Well, sure. It is taking MS, Nintendo, and Sony 6 years to update their consoles with faster graphics and processors and newer technology. They are threat to themselves only.
Nintendo got there in 6, assuming Sony & MS both release around the holidays this year, it'll have been 7 for Sony and 8.5 for MS
What's up with that? Processors and graphics for PCs are upgraded on a regular basis, but Sony, Nintendo, and MS take years to upgrade theirs?
You'd think they'd want to to it regularly - at least from a marketing perspective.
Maybe someday you'll figure out that the world is not made up entirely of people who play one type of game. The number of people playing games on their mobile phones probably exceeds the number playing games on consoles. I don't remember the numbers, but even without a major push into gaming, Apple had captured a fairly large percentage of the entire mobile gaming market.
For some people, games are about entertainment, not about creating highly detailed, graphically rich environments. Think about some of the most widely played games ever: poker, chess, checkers, Monopoly, Scrabble, and so on. Not to mention the millions who play Angry Birds, Words with Friends, etc.
A large part of it is accessibility. I have my phone with me all the time. In order to use the Wii, I have to be at home on the couch.
Mobile games will never replace ALL console games (or, at least, not any time soon). But that doesn't mean that they can't be successful enough to have an impact. You might even find that they have a positive impact on your console games with a growing effort toward playability and less emphasis on how many terrapixels you can push per second.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrey
Apple has own huge gaming market - for tablets. If you go out with family for dinner you no longer see kids with Nintendo or PS. All have some kind of tablet - iPads, Kindles, Nexuses. I doubt Apple will into consoles. Everything has to be build from scratch and a bit late into the game.
There is a crossover though. If you sit on the couch with your iPad and it beams screen images to the AppleTV which puts them up on the TV, and you just swipe on the iPad like it was a pure controller, then suddenly all those mobile games become TV games. And this already works ("AirPlay").
The TV has historically been about having a shared experience (the whole family getting together to watch the evening news, or a comedy everyone likes). That is the main use of a big screen, when there's multiple people want to watch the same thing, otherwise everyone just use their individual device screen. So the main purpose of the Apple TV will be to multiplex iPads and iPhones in to some kind of shared experience (e.g. multiplayer game).
Tim Cook keeps saying the Apple TV is just a hobby and they're not really sure where to go with it - just pulling at the threads and seeing what plays out. I think the central concept they're looking for to hang everything off is "multiplexing."
Quote:
Originally Posted by cnocbui
What sort of simplistic games does Newell think people want to play?
Will the Apple TV run Crysis 3 at high resolution?
And you think crazy, high end gamers make up the majority of this market because...?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
What's up with that? Processors and graphics for PCs are upgraded on a regular basis, but Sony, Nintendo, and MS take years to upgrade theirs?
You'd think they'd want to to it regularly - at least from a marketing perspective.
I don't think you understand the process of producing a new game console. They spend millions in R&D costs and (most of the time) their new systems are not compatible with the old ones. Console games are, by and large, written with hard coded expectations of system power to get the most out of the system. Most home consoles are sold at a loss* and it takes years before they are making a profit from the console sales thru process shrinks and lower component costs. Prior to that point, generally they are only making money from licensing feed related to game sales and accessories.
If they would release a new console every couple of years, they would go out of business unless they drastically re-thought the whole process. Which it appears they will probably have to do, but I wonder if home consoles as we have known them will last beyond this decade. Sega died last decade and Atari, TurboGrafx and a number of others before that. The traditional timeframe between new console releases was every 5 years before this generation.
* Most Nintendo consoles are not sold at a loss, so they make money from day 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by SSquirrel
I don't think you understand the process of producing a new game console. They spend millions in R&D costs and (most of the time) their new systems are not compatible with the old ones. Console games are, by and large, written with hard coded expectations of system power to get the most out of the system. Most home consoles are sold at a loss* and it takes years before they are making a profit from the console sales thru process shrinks and lower component costs. Prior to that point, generally they are only making money from licensing feed related to game sales and accessories.
If they would release a new console every couple of years, they would go out of business unless they drastically re-thought the whole process. Which it appears they will probably have to do, but I wonder if home consoles as we have known them will last beyond this decade. Sega died last decade and Atari, TurboGrafx and a number of others before that. The traditional timeframe between new console releases was every 5 years before this generation.
* Most Nintendo consoles are not sold at a loss, so they make money from day 1
Thats something most people who dont follow the game industry dont understand, Sony and Microsoft lost billions of dollars on their consoles initially and started recouping those costs a few years ago, so they aren't going to be in a rush to burn through their own money not when CONTENT is the reason people buy consoles. With games like GTA V, MGS5, GoW Judgement, The Last of Us, and Beyond two souls there is no massive need for a new console other than to prep for the new wave of next gen games. As far as i'm concerned the consoles can launch at the end of this year.
I wouldn't be concerned about home consoles disappearing, not when there is 15+ Billion dollars in sales a year in just the US market.
Also just an FYI most consoles have a 5-7 year life span before a new console is introduced (NES to SNES was 7 years) with the shortest being the Xbox to 360 which was 4 years, which in turn made MS burn through billions of dollars to support the thing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrey
Apple has own huge gaming market - for tablets. If you go out with family for dinner you no longer see kids with Nintendo or PS. All have some kind of tablet - iPads, Kindles, Nexuses. I doubt Apple will into consoles. Everything has to be build from scratch and a bit late into the game.
/me replaces all game related occurrences with phone-related occurrences. Or MP3 players occurrences.
Come on...
" I doubt Apple will into" ... "bit late into the game".
Really. Don't you feel they've already been there, done that?