Apple Arcade is a fantastic idea. But it doesn’t have games beyond mobile quality outside of a couple old titles.
Mobile gaming now generates more revenue than console and PC gaming combined. From a market perspective, you can make an argument that Apple is currently in a better position per gaming than Microsoft. Yes, Apple doesn't do AAA games, but that's actually the niche in the gaming market now.
Apple likes low volume, high margin, high quality. That is what AAA games are, versus the high volume, low margin, low quality mobile games that Apple Arcade mostly consists of right now. AAA games align more to Apple's business philosophy than mobile games. Bringing AAA games to the masses beyond those with consoles would be a huge bonus for Apple, and would compete hard with dedicated gaming hardware in many cases. Who is going to buy a dedicated console when their AppleTV, iPhone or Mac can already do graphics that're 80% as good as a console, and has great first-party AAA games?
However, due to Apple's lack of Vulkan support, existing game studios would need to rewrite big chunks of their engines since most homegrown engines are Vulkan-only, and Apple decided to roll its own Metal API. Vulkan is supported on Windows, Linux and Android. Apple is conspicuously absent. MoltenVK translates from Vulkan to Metal, but that's a performance hit (though less so than the ancient OpenGL version Apple has had since 10.13) and yet again leaves Macs and iOS as second class citizens. Apple's stubbornness in not supporting Vulkan really doesn't help matters, especially since owners of M1 Macs can't just reboot to Windows to play games. From a coding perspective, Metal is Objective-C with a Swift interface bodged on. Only Apple uses Objective-C. Vulkan is C++, which is very much cross platform.
Apple gamers have slated the proprietary DirectX for years, then when an open-source alternative comes along, Apple decides to follow the Microsoft route with Metal. Great.
Apple has never liked gaming, and they're missing a big market. I'm sure it's because the very grey VPs at Apple don't play AAA games, so they don't see why anyone else would either, nor do they understand the market.
Another issue with Apple Arcade is games have to target the 6s at a minimum, and are supposed to scale with hardware power. But small indie studios don't have the money to create textures etc for each CPU generation, so they just target the 6s to get as wide an audience as possible. Therefore people with super impressive A13+ CPUs end up with 6s graphics.
danvm said: Now they have a platform where they can reach those mobile users, and Apple make rules to reject them. IMO, those public complaints are reasonable.
The complaints aren't reasonable for a specific reason: gaming subscription services, like Game Club, already existed on the App Store and submitted every game for review by the App Store. The difference isn't Apple's rules, but rather that Microsoft wanted to offer non-mobile games that would be more expensive and time consuming to port to iOS. That's the reason they were offering to substitute iOS exclusives in attempt to get an exemption from needing to submit every title for review. Game Club was a service that was using games already developed for mobile, so the time/expense factor wasn't as high. Netflix' new game service also uses that mobile oriented approach and submits every game for review.
danvm said: Now they have a platform where they can reach those mobile users, and Apple make rules to reject them. IMO, those public complaints are reasonable.
The complaints aren't reasonable for a specific reason: gaming subscription services, like Game Club, already existed on the App Store and submitted every game for review by the App Store. The difference isn't Apple's rules, but rather that Microsoft wanted to offer non-mobile games that would be more expensive and time consuming to port to iOS. That's the reason they were offering to substitute iOS exclusives in attempt to get an exemption from needing to submit every title for review. Game Club was a service that was using games already developed for mobile, so the time/expense factor wasn't as high. Netflix' new game service also uses that mobile oriented approach and submits every game for review.
What Game Club did is different from what MS does, one is a game subscription while the other is cloud gaming. Again, Apple rules don't allow cloud gaming as MS does. I don't think MS was looking forward to develop games for iOS, specially when you consider that most customers are casual gamers. I see Xbox Cloud Gaming as an extension of what you play in your console and PC, and not necessarily your main gaming experience, although that could change as internet connectivity improves.
danvm said: What Game Club did is different from what MS does, one is a game subscription while the other is cloud gaming. Again, Apple rules don't allow cloud gaming as MS does.
It doesn't matter that it's cloud based. What matters is that the App Store requires applications made available through the App Store to be reviewed by the App Store. Game Club submits all of their game applications for review. Netflix submits all of their game applications for review. In order to pass review, the games need to be iOS native. Could Microsoft and other 3rd party software developers participating in the cloud service port console and PC games to iOS? Technically, yes, but it would be more time consuming and expensive than simply launching the service through the internet/browser approach.
Nutshell:
Option A- spend additional time/money on iOS ports for App Store version Option B- save time/money by launching through internet/browser on iOS
So Microsoft is complaining about their own choice to save time/money. It's like Spotify complaining about paying a commission when only 1% of their iOS subscribers are even subject to a commission. It's mostly nonsense.
danvm said: What Game Club did is different from what MS does, one is a game subscription while the other is cloud gaming. Again, Apple rules don't allow cloud gaming as MS does.
It doesn't matter that it's cloud based. What matters is that the App Store requires applications made available through the App Store to be reviewed by the App Store. Game Club submits all of their game applications for review. Netflix submits all of their game applications for review. In order to pass review, the games need to be iOS native. Could Microsoft and other 3rd party software developers participating in the cloud service port console and PC games to iOS? Technically, yes, but it would be more time consuming and expensive than simply launching the service through the internet/browser approach.
Nutshell:
Option A- spend additional time/money on iOS ports for App Store version Option B- save time/money by launching through internet/browser on iOS
So Microsoft is complaining about their own choice to save time/money. It's like Spotify complaining about paying a commission when only 1% of their iOS subscribers are even subject to a commission. It's mostly nonsense.
Again, it matters because Apple rules won't allow a native app for the service MS and Sony have. And Apple decide to keep the rules the leave out these type of services from their App Store. Could MS and Sony develop games for iOS? But that's not their business. Their business is creating games for their consoles and PC's. Still, they created a service that would allow iOS customers to enjoy their games, but again, Apple decided to reject it from their App Store. At the end, Apple is the reason there are not native apps for cloud gaming, and the only option we have is via Safari.
And I don't see any similarities with Spotify. A few years ago MS said that they had no issues paying Apple App Store fees.
Apple Arcade is a fantastic idea. But it doesn’t have games beyond mobile quality outside of a couple old titles.
Mobile gaming now generates more revenue than console and PC gaming combined. From a market perspective, you can make an argument that Apple is currently in a better position per gaming than Microsoft. Yes, Apple doesn't do AAA games, but that's actually the niche in the gaming market now.
Mobile gaming is just that. Something that makes money. But it’s not a particularly great experience. And Apple has always been about providing the best products and services for the best experiences.
You have epic (no pun intended) experiences on game consoles and somewhat on pc. But no one is talking up or waiting with baited breath for the Apple Arcade drop. It’s a cheap commodity. But not a good one.
Apple is usually the best at whatever arena they enter. But they have seriously lagged at the gaming arena.
Apple could have bought Bethesda, EA, square enix, etc. and scored a big time coup.
They could have done apps that stream content beyond what some of the more humble devices can provide.
But instead we get glorified candy crush. It sucks.
Apple Arcade was an opportunity utterly wasted. At least it launch strong for the limited thing it was. But even that gave way to “meh” all day long.
If Apple thinks they are making money for developers and themselves doing this lollygag, imagine what it would be if they lined up AAA studios And had multiple premiere level hits every quarter. It would blow the doors off the industry.
They can still do it. But with some of the old guard stuck in some old thinking, they quite simply just don’t.
Apple Arcade is a fantastic idea. But it doesn’t have games beyond mobile quality outside of a couple old titles.
Mobile gaming now generates more revenue than console and PC gaming combined. From a market perspective, you can make an argument that Apple is currently in a better position per gaming than Microsoft. Yes, Apple doesn't do AAA games, but that's actually the niche in the gaming market now.
Apple likes low volume, high margin, high quality. That is what AAA games are, versus the high volume, low margin, low quality mobile games that Apple Arcade mostly consists of right now. AAA games align more to Apple's business philosophy than mobile games. Bringing AAA games to the masses beyond those with consoles would be a huge bonus for Apple, and would compete hard with dedicated gaming hardware in many cases. Who is going to buy a dedicated console when their AppleTV, iPhone or Mac can already do graphics that're 80% as good as a console, and has great first-party AAA games?
However, due to Apple's lack of Vulkan support, existing game studios would need to rewrite big chunks of their engines since most homegrown engines are Vulkan-only, and Apple decided to roll its own Metal API. Vulkan is supported on Windows, Linux and Android. Apple is conspicuously absent. MoltenVK translates from Vulkan to Metal, but that's a performance hit (though less so than the ancient OpenGL version Apple has had since 10.13) and yet again leaves Macs and iOS as second class citizens. Apple's stubbornness in not supporting Vulkan really doesn't help matters, especially since owners of M1 Macs can't just reboot to Windows to play games. From a coding perspective, Metal is Objective-C with a Swift interface bodged on. Only Apple uses Objective-C. Vulkan is C++, which is very much cross platform.
Apple gamers have slated the proprietary DirectX for years, then when an open-source alternative comes along, Apple decides to follow the Microsoft route with Metal. Great.
Apple has never liked gaming, and they're missing a big market. I'm sure it's because the very grey VPs at Apple don't play AAA games, so they don't see why anyone else would either, nor do they understand the market.
Another issue with Apple Arcade is games have to target the 6s at a minimum, and are supposed to scale with hardware power. But small indie studios don't have the money to create textures etc for each CPU generation, so they just target the 6s to get as wide an audience as possible. Therefore people with super impressive A13+ CPUs end up with 6s graphics.
danvm said: Again, it matters because Apple rules won't allow a native app for the service MS and Sony have.
Incorrect. Microsoft could have a streaming game service on the App Store if they individually submitted the titles for review. That would require each individual title to be ported to iOS. The fact that porting hundreds of Xbox/Windows games to iOS would require a lot more time/money than launching the service through the web browser is not Apple's problem. Other game subscription services DO submit every game for App Store review. Apple wants the App Store to have native iOS apps.
danvm said: Again, it matters because Apple rules won't allow a native app for the service MS and Sony have.
Incorrect. Microsoft could have a streaming game service on the App Store if they individually submitted the titles for review. That would require each individual title to be ported to iOS.
That's what he said: "Apple rules won't allow a native app for the service"
danvm said: Again, it matters because Apple rules won't allow a native app for the service MS and Sony have.
Incorrect. Microsoft could have a streaming game service on the App Store if they individually submitted the titles for review. That would require each individual title to be ported to iOS.
That's what he said: "Apple rules won't allow a native app for the service"
No, he's claiming that Apple wouldn't allow a streaming service that used iOS native apps. Apple specifically said to MS that if they wanted to have a streaming game service on the App Store, the games needed to be submitted individually for review...meaning native iOS apps. So Apple WOULD allow the Microsoft streaming service if all the games offered on it were native to iOS and had passed App Store review.
danvm said: Again, it matters because Apple rules won't allow a native app for the service MS and Sony have.
Incorrect. Microsoft could have a streaming game service on the App Store if they individually submitted the titles for review. That would require each individual title to be ported to iOS.
That's what he said: "Apple rules won't allow a native app for the service"
No, he's claiming that Apple wouldn't allow a streaming service that used iOS native apps. Apple specifically said to MS that if they wanted to have a streaming game service on the App Store, the games needed to be submitted individually for review...meaning native iOS apps. So Apple WOULD allow the Microsoft streaming service if all the games offered on it were native to iOS and had passed App Store review.
You're right. I didn't read his original post. Apologies.
danvm said: Again, it matters because Apple rules won't allow a native app for the service MS and Sony have.
Incorrect. Microsoft could have a streaming game service on the App Store if they individually submitted the titles for review. That would require each individual title to be ported to iOS.
That's what he said: "Apple rules won't allow a native app for the service"
No, he's claiming that Apple wouldn't allow a streaming service that used iOS native apps. Apple specifically said to MS that if they wanted to have a streaming game service on the App Store, the games needed to be submitted individually for review...meaning native iOS apps. So Apple WOULD allow the Microsoft streaming service if all the games offered on it were native to iOS and had passed App Store review.
Again, the way Xbox Cloud Gaming and PS Now works is not allowed by Apple. Even you explain clearly that they would have to change the way the service works and submit each game individually for approval. And as today, both services work as a catalog inside an app, same as Netflix, Amazon Prime and Disney+. Don't you think would be nice to see those two services, in addition to GeForce Now with their native apps in iOS?
Apple Arcade is a fantastic idea. But it doesn’t have games beyond mobile quality outside of a couple old titles.
Mobile gaming now generates more revenue than console and PC gaming combined. From a market perspective, you can make an argument that Apple is currently in a better position per gaming than Microsoft. Yes, Apple doesn't do AAA games, but that's actually the niche in the gaming market now.
This is just a population trend. Touchscreen gaming is what "mobile gaming" is, correct? That's billions of phones versus tens to hundreds of millions of game consoles and PCs, iow, controller games. There isn't much overlap in the types of games people are playing between the two classes of devices. [In the Epic trial, Apple estimating that they have ~25% revenue share of the gaming market, all classes of games included. Didn't see numbers for Android. So perhaps if you include Apple, Android, and Nintendo Switch as "mobile" that would be greater than 50% revenue share, but who knows.]
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.
I'm not sure Apple would succeed in the console market with the type of games we are seeing today in Apple Arcade. Apple gaming business is mostly casual gaming, and based in the most popular games I'm seeing in the App Store, I don't think customers will run to purchase a console to play those games. Apple would have to do far more than they are doing today, specially when you consider the competition they'll have in MS, Sony and Nintendo.
Yup. You should have noticed the people on these threads saying Apple needs to be a game publisher and game developer. That's doing a lot more than they are doing today. They are putting single digit billions into Apple TV+ content per year. A similar push needs to be done for games. It spans more than just game content though.
Apple's current lineup of Mac hardware just isn't amenable for mass market consumption of games. Apple TV is too underpowered. Mac mini is too expensive, or too underpowered for the price. Laptops and other desktops too expensive. So AppleTV with A12Z, Mac mini with M1 at $500, and Mac mini M1 Pro at $600, something like this. They have all the chips already available. They just need to price it right. They need to ship it with a controller too. Then, they need to pay for game engines to get Metal ports, and probably develop Metal conversion tools.
Gaming is one of those things that is impeding further penetration into consumer markets for Macs. They really should be horrified that the definitive answer to people asking about gaming on Macs is to get a PC or a game console.
danvm said: Again, it matters because Apple rules won't allow a native app for the service MS and Sony have.
Incorrect. Microsoft could have a streaming game service on the App Store if they individually submitted the titles for review. That would require each individual title to be ported to iOS.
That's what he said: "Apple rules won't allow a native app for the service"
No, he's claiming that Apple wouldn't allow a streaming service that used iOS native apps. Apple specifically said to MS that if they wanted to have a streaming game service on the App Store, the games needed to be submitted individually for review...meaning native iOS apps. So Apple WOULD allow the Microsoft streaming service if all the games offered on it were native to iOS and had passed App Store review.
Again, the way Xbox Cloud Gaming and PS Now works is not allowed by Apple. Even you explain clearly that they would have to change the way the service works and submit each game individually for approval. And as today, both services work as a catalog inside an app, same as Netflix, Amazon Prime and Disney+. Don't you think would be nice to see those two services, in addition to GeForce Now with their native apps in iOS?
A. Port game to iOS B. Submit iOS native game for approval by App Store C. Use App Store approved game in App Store approved streaming app
It doesn't change how the service works. Users could still download the streaming app and stream games. It just requires the games offered within the streaming service app to be iOS native and approved by the App Store. Games are applications, so they have to be submitted/approved by the App Store. That is different from media files for streaming services like Disney+. Media files do not have to be approved because they're not applications.
danvm said: Again, it matters because Apple rules won't allow a native app for the service MS and Sony have.
Incorrect. Microsoft could have a streaming game service on the App Store if they individually submitted the titles for review. That would require each individual title to be ported to iOS.
That's what he said: "Apple rules won't allow a native app for the service"
No, he's claiming that Apple wouldn't allow a streaming service that used iOS native apps. Apple specifically said to MS that if they wanted to have a streaming game service on the App Store, the games needed to be submitted individually for review...meaning native iOS apps. So Apple WOULD allow the Microsoft streaming service if all the games offered on it were native to iOS and had passed App Store review.
Again, the way Xbox Cloud Gaming and PS Now works is not allowed by Apple. Even you explain clearly that they would have to change the way the service works and submit each game individually for approval. And as today, both services work as a catalog inside an app, same as Netflix, Amazon Prime and Disney+. Don't you think would be nice to see those two services, in addition to GeForce Now with their native apps in iOS?
A. Port game to iOS B. Submit iOS native game for approval by App Store C. Use App Store approved game in App Store approved streaming app
It doesn't change how the service works. Users could still download the streaming app and stream games. It just requires the games offered within the streaming service app to be iOS native and approved by the App Store. Games are applications, so they have to be submitted/approved by the App Store. That is different from media files for streaming services like Disney+. Media files do not have to be approved because they're not applications.
Did you noticed that the 3 options you gave requires changes on how Xbox Cloud Gaming and PS Now works? Also Apple Guidelines have other requirements that are not available in the MS and Sony apps,
From what I know, neither MS or Sony services have what Apple is asking, so they have to change how their service work. Both services are more similar with apps like Netflix, HBO Max and Disney+.
Yes, games are applications, and I have no issues with Apple making different rules compared to media. But it's non sense to make rules that breaks the experience of MS and Sony apps.
danvm said: Again, it matters because Apple rules won't allow a native app for the service MS and Sony have.
Incorrect. Microsoft could have a streaming game service on the App Store if they individually submitted the titles for review. That would require each individual title to be ported to iOS.
That's what he said: "Apple rules won't allow a native app for the service"
No, he's claiming that Apple wouldn't allow a streaming service that used iOS native apps. Apple specifically said to MS that if they wanted to have a streaming game service on the App Store, the games needed to be submitted individually for review...meaning native iOS apps. So Apple WOULD allow the Microsoft streaming service if all the games offered on it were native to iOS and had passed App Store review.
Again, the way Xbox Cloud Gaming and PS Now works is not allowed by Apple. Even you explain clearly that they would have to change the way the service works and submit each game individually for approval. And as today, both services work as a catalog inside an app, same as Netflix, Amazon Prime and Disney+. Don't you think would be nice to see those two services, in addition to GeForce Now with their native apps in iOS?
A. Port game to iOS B. Submit iOS native game for approval by App Store C. Use App Store approved game in App Store approved streaming app
It doesn't change how the service works. Users could still download the streaming app and stream games. It just requires the games offered within the streaming service app to be iOS native and approved by the App Store. Games are applications, so they have to be submitted/approved by the App Store. That is different from media files for streaming services like Disney+. Media files do not have to be approved because they're not applications.
Did you noticed that the 3 options you gave requires changes on how Xbox Cloud Gaming and PS Now works?
Porting doesn't change how something works. It changes the platform that it works on.
Comments
However, due to Apple's lack of Vulkan support, existing game studios would need to rewrite big chunks of their engines since most homegrown engines are Vulkan-only, and Apple decided to roll its own Metal API. Vulkan is supported on Windows, Linux and Android. Apple is conspicuously absent. MoltenVK translates from Vulkan to Metal, but that's a performance hit (though less so than the ancient OpenGL version Apple has had since 10.13) and yet again leaves Macs and iOS as second class citizens. Apple's stubbornness in not supporting Vulkan really doesn't help matters, especially since owners of M1 Macs can't just reboot to Windows to play games. From a coding perspective, Metal is Objective-C with a Swift interface bodged on. Only Apple uses Objective-C. Vulkan is C++, which is very much cross platform.
Apple gamers have slated the proprietary DirectX for years, then when an open-source alternative comes along, Apple decides to follow the Microsoft route with Metal. Great.
Apple has never liked gaming, and they're missing a big market. I'm sure it's because the very grey VPs at Apple don't play AAA games, so they don't see why anyone else would either, nor do they understand the market.
Another issue with Apple Arcade is games have to target the 6s at a minimum, and are supposed to scale with hardware power. But small indie studios don't have the money to create textures etc for each CPU generation, so they just target the 6s to get as wide an audience as possible. Therefore people with super impressive A13+ CPUs end up with 6s graphics.
Nutshell:
Option A- spend additional time/money on iOS ports for App Store version
Option B- save time/money by launching through internet/browser on iOS
So Microsoft is complaining about their own choice to save time/money. It's like Spotify complaining about paying a commission when only 1% of their iOS subscribers are even subject to a commission. It's mostly nonsense.
And I don't see any similarities with Spotify. A few years ago MS said that they had no issues paying Apple App Store fees.
Apple's current lineup of Mac hardware just isn't amenable for mass market consumption of games. Apple TV is too underpowered. Mac mini is too expensive, or too underpowered for the price. Laptops and other desktops too expensive. So AppleTV with A12Z, Mac mini with M1 at $500, and Mac mini M1 Pro at $600, something like this. They have all the chips already available. They just need to price it right. They need to ship it with a controller too. Then, they need to pay for game engines to get Metal ports, and probably develop Metal conversion tools.
Gaming is one of those things that is impeding further penetration into consumer markets for Macs. They really should be horrified that the definitive answer to people asking about gaming on Macs is to get a PC or a game console.
B. Submit iOS native game for approval by App Store
C. Use App Store approved game in App Store approved streaming app
It doesn't change how the service works. Users could still download the streaming app and stream games. It just requires the games offered within the streaming service app to be iOS native and approved by the App Store. Games are applications, so they have to be submitted/approved by the App Store. That is different from media files for streaming services like Disney+. Media files do not have to be approved because they're not applications.
App Store Review Guidelines - Apple Developer
From what I know, neither MS or Sony services have what Apple is asking, so they have to change how their service work. Both services are more similar with apps like Netflix, HBO Max and Disney+.
Yes, games are applications, and I have no issues with Apple making different rules compared to media. But it's non sense to make rules that breaks the experience of MS and Sony apps.