'Halo' and other big Microsoft games were almost individual iPhone apps
Internal Microsoft emails show how the company was considering bringing Xbox-exclusive games to the iPhone as standalone apps in the Apple App Store for a while.
Apple's terms of service bans cloud gaming services from the App Store due to a requirement that "each game must be downloaded directly from the App Store."
This prevented Netflix-like cloud gaming services such as Google Stadia, Nvidia GeForce Now, and Microsoft xCloud from existing on Apple's App Store. If a developer wanted a game to exist on iPhone or iPad, the game would be required to have an individual App Store listing.
Apple even went as far as loosening gaming rules to allow developers to create catalog apps -- that is, apps that would direct users to individual App Store listings.
Microsoft had concerns about turning each game into an individual app. The company had sent emails to Apple, as seen by The Verge, that explained that it wouldn't be practical -- to Microsoft or App Store customers.
The concerns were many. Microsoft explained that Apple customers would receive Xbox titles significantly later to those on the streaming services. In addition, the company noted that Apple players would need to navigate to each title in the App Store and download it, rather than selecting from a list in a single app.
Microsoft also expressed concern over how it would make bug fixes and updates significantly more demanding on the app developers.
"We believe that the issues described here will create frustration and confusion for customers, resulting in a sub-par experience on Apple devices relative to the equivalent experience on all other platforms," Lori Wright, Microsoft's head of business development, wrote.
However, Microsoft wasn't entirely unwilling to bring Xbox-exclusive titles to the iPhone. Wright suggested that if Apple allowed the Xbox Game Pass library on the App Store, Microsoft would be willing to turn triple-A titles into standalone apps.
"This would be an incredibly exciting opportunity for iOS users to get access to these exclusive AAA titles in addition to the Game Pass games," she wrote.
However, because the apps would still require a single streaming tech app to work, it still violated App Store policies. Ultimately, Apple rejected the proposal. Microsoft would go on to launch Xbox Game Pass as a Safari-enabled service a month later.
Apple went on to clarify to The Verge that Microsoft had proposed a version of xCloud that was not compliant with the App Store, as well.
"Unfortunately, Microsoft proposed a version of xCloud that was not compliant with our App Store Review Guidelines, specifically the requirement to use in-app purchase to unlock additional features or functionality within an app," reads a statement via Apple spokesperson Adam Dema.
Microsoft's Xbox Cloud Gaming CVP Kareem Choudhry disagreed, telling The Verge, "The reasons for rejection were unrelated to in-app purchase capabilities; we currently provide Xbox Cloud Gaming through a singular Xbox Game Pass app in the Google Play Store without IAP enabled, for example, and we would do the same through the App Store if allowed."
Choudhry states that triple-A games aren't entirely off the table, either.
"In addition to Xbox Game Pass, we were also open to bringing select individual games to iOS as we do today with titles like Minecraft."
Read on AppleInsider
Apple's terms of service bans cloud gaming services from the App Store due to a requirement that "each game must be downloaded directly from the App Store."
This prevented Netflix-like cloud gaming services such as Google Stadia, Nvidia GeForce Now, and Microsoft xCloud from existing on Apple's App Store. If a developer wanted a game to exist on iPhone or iPad, the game would be required to have an individual App Store listing.
Apple even went as far as loosening gaming rules to allow developers to create catalog apps -- that is, apps that would direct users to individual App Store listings.
Microsoft had concerns about turning each game into an individual app. The company had sent emails to Apple, as seen by The Verge, that explained that it wouldn't be practical -- to Microsoft or App Store customers.
The concerns were many. Microsoft explained that Apple customers would receive Xbox titles significantly later to those on the streaming services. In addition, the company noted that Apple players would need to navigate to each title in the App Store and download it, rather than selecting from a list in a single app.
Microsoft also expressed concern over how it would make bug fixes and updates significantly more demanding on the app developers.
"We believe that the issues described here will create frustration and confusion for customers, resulting in a sub-par experience on Apple devices relative to the equivalent experience on all other platforms," Lori Wright, Microsoft's head of business development, wrote.
However, Microsoft wasn't entirely unwilling to bring Xbox-exclusive titles to the iPhone. Wright suggested that if Apple allowed the Xbox Game Pass library on the App Store, Microsoft would be willing to turn triple-A titles into standalone apps.
"This would be an incredibly exciting opportunity for iOS users to get access to these exclusive AAA titles in addition to the Game Pass games," she wrote.
However, because the apps would still require a single streaming tech app to work, it still violated App Store policies. Ultimately, Apple rejected the proposal. Microsoft would go on to launch Xbox Game Pass as a Safari-enabled service a month later.
Apple went on to clarify to The Verge that Microsoft had proposed a version of xCloud that was not compliant with the App Store, as well.
"Unfortunately, Microsoft proposed a version of xCloud that was not compliant with our App Store Review Guidelines, specifically the requirement to use in-app purchase to unlock additional features or functionality within an app," reads a statement via Apple spokesperson Adam Dema.
Microsoft's Xbox Cloud Gaming CVP Kareem Choudhry disagreed, telling The Verge, "The reasons for rejection were unrelated to in-app purchase capabilities; we currently provide Xbox Cloud Gaming through a singular Xbox Game Pass app in the Google Play Store without IAP enabled, for example, and we would do the same through the App Store if allowed."
Choudhry states that triple-A games aren't entirely off the table, either.
"In addition to Xbox Game Pass, we were also open to bringing select individual games to iOS as we do today with titles like Minecraft."
Read on AppleInsider
Comments
So, Halo would be running on a PC or Xbox in a data center, and streaming the display to client iOS devices. That's not native whatsoever. Native is a compiled app using Apple's ObjC/Swift/Metal frameworks.
Gaming is one of Apple's Achilles' heels. They see the value in video and music streaming services, and spend billions every year to develop them. Gaming is basically another vital consumer service, yet they are relying on 3rd parties to provide it. They need to put a lot more money into to make it a thriving service on all their platforms. Perhaps their real push for it will be for the VR/AR headset.
Or maybe that's just because Apple develops in private rather than in public. Perhaps the gaming push takes longer to bring to fruition, and video was seen as easy pickings while the hard work behind the scenes continues. It won't be about the money required; at this stage that is the least relevant bottleneck at Apple.
The VR/AR angle... maybe. We're probably five years away from commercial viability, so it would make sense to be building the gaming capability right now. And if it takes off, then it will possibly have been worth ignoring/snubbing the gaming community for so long - but it's going to take so long to overcome that negative sentiment that I can't understand why steps to that effect have not been taken already.
Or maybe that's all built into the Apple Arcade strategy: a bet that casual gaming is more important than dedicated gaming (removing complexity/hardware requirements to bring in a wider audience; very Apple), that can be monetised in a reasonable way across (eventually) hundreds of millions of subscribers, and that can be controlled by Apple being selective in who they partner with. And the dedicated gamers, like the specifications-obsessed computer nerds, can carry on bitching while Apple ignores them and profitably serves the customers who see the value in what is offered.
Reveal at Macworld 1999:
Microsoft bought Minecraft for $2b! Apple better be paranoid about it. Optimistic scenario is like Office: it will run and support 95% of the features on macOS, with Windows Office greatly optimized and supporting all the features. Pessimistic scenario: it's a sideshow for MS and suffers the typical vicious spiral on macOS.
/edit. And I guess MSFT buying Bungie could be up there as well, since Halo has clearly done pretty well for them as a franchise.
So, it isn't a "Trojan horse conspiracy" to harm Apple. It is more akin to how the rise of Netflix and similar streaming services WERE NOT in the interests of DVD and Blu-ray manufacturers. By the way, Apple totally helped this trend along. They removed CD/DVD/Blu-ray discs from Macs to "encourage" downloading media from iTunes instead. They also created servers and storage media to handle the massive media libraries that they wanted people to download, and the original purpose of the Apple TV was to facilitate people streaming their iTunes content (instead of playing music CDs and movie DVDs). Was it a conspiracy to harm Sony, Samsung and other electronics manufacturers? Nope. It was merely Apple - who didn't manufacture DVD and Blu-ray players or have retail operations to sell DVDs - pursuing their own commercial interests. Which is exactly what Nvidia, Microsoft and Google are doing here.
Perhaps that age brought more wisdom than shortsightedness.
All the big incumbents are in a constant state of competition, and increasing the power of one big incumbent with a nice deal may come back to haunt them later. For cloud gaming, almost anything cloud, it commoditizes the client hardware and further locks down software to the cloud streamers hardware. It's another cycle of the client vs server war. It is great for people to have access to games and other software, but all PC OEMs have to look pretty wearily at it. For all these companies competing against each other, it's life and death.
Why buy a $3000 gaming PC if a $1000 PC would do the same job playing a streamed game? Client PC OEMs relying on sales of their premium hardware probably don't like the sound of that. For Apple, it goes even further. Cloud services and cloud gaming puts them further into the hole they are already in. Games and apps are coded with CUDA and Direct3D, proprietary languages. It's basically a form of lock-in because it takes a lot of time and effort to code to another language or API on another platform. Developers don't just happen to re-code to a different platform just for kicks. Cloud gaming only will cement this lock-in further.
Nvidia and MS are at war with cloud gaming. Google thought they had a chance in this game too. The winner gets all the software optimized for their hardware using their platform. If that happens, it's basically a permanent win, or for at least a generation, where the winning company just does not have to worry about developers supporting their platform. That's a "printing money" prize for the winner. If Nvidia wins, it will get to the point that AMD will support CUDA on their GPUs, assuming Nvidia allows it.
For Apple, who doesn't have a gaming ecosystem, successful cloud gaming is a death knell for Metal, and it puts a good dent in their differentiation that sells their expensive hardware. They have to know cloud everything is inevitable, and they at least were going to allow it as an app on iOS on their terms, but yeah, big companies are considering their self interest in all these deals. MS chose not to do it on Apple's terms. They also chose not to rewrite their games, and I want Age of Empires, using Apple's APIs. MS choses not put the full Office on Apple platforms, or they chose not to put Office on Linux at all. Of Google chooses to not put the full Google apps on iOS. I will bet a lot that if Facebook is successful with their Quest platform, they are going to use it as a cudgel to get other platform companies to agree to their terms.
More than ever, Apple needs to become a game publisher and developer.
And you think there will be hundred of millions of Apple Arcade subscribers? Everything is possible, but I don't see hundred of millions of customers subscribing to Apple Arcade, considering the games I'm seeing today. But I could be wrong.
Maybe it will change in the future, but as it stands today, FPS gaming or controller gaming on macOS is effectively zero. You simply do not get a Mac if you want to play games let alone FPS games. That statement should really really hurt for Apple executives to hear. There aren't even smaller studios like a Bungie anymore who are developing FPS or RTS style games for macOS. Of the games, they are ports, not originating on macOS. If it wasn't for Java, the number of games running on macOS would be even smaller. Apple needs to sell cheaper Macs and become of game developer and publisher to get a foothold. Once there is a foothold, independent studios will start making games for macOS, but that foothold has to come from Apple now.
Like, they could sell an AppleTV with a A12Z at $250, and it would be a performant enough to play most games. A controller needs to be in the box and Apple themselves have to develop games for it. It would be a feature freebie coming along with the video and music features. Apple just doesn't see macOS games as a strategic necessity.
Also, when you look at how MS completely ignored iOS in the past per game ports etc. and then they suddenly switch to highly public complaints about not getting their game streaming app into the App Store, that represents a significant change in attitude per mobile.