...I just believe its a bad business move for Apple if they really are looking to move into the gaming industry.
The thing is, they already have... SURPRISE!!! Apple's here!
The App store is a distribution model that is leaps and bounds ahead of the "competitors" who rely on an older distribution of physical media along with associated costs to deliver their products to consumers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrpiddly
I was just thinking about how apple could support game development for the iPhone. What if apple were to buy a company like unity and "integrate" their game development tools/applications into the iPhone SDK?
The tools are already there take a look at what some of the bigger games developers ARE doing RIGHT NOW.
Here is some further reading including sites devoted to iPhone/Touch gaming.
I can tell you one thing, nothing wipes the smarmy grin off an <insert phone brand of choice here> owner's face as they babble on about how their phone is better because of X Megapixel camera, flash, MMS, bluetooth... blah blah blah, than firing up some of these games and showing them.
Stunned silence is an understatement of the reaction that usually follows, especially if you jump in and out of a few in quick succession, which shows off the speed of the OSX interface and it's memory management prowess.
Unlike Nintendo, Sony, or XBox gaming systems, the iPhone is fairly open to anyone.
EA, Sega and others are major developers who have made extremely successful games for the iPhone. With the app store expected to become a billion dollar operation you can believe the others are working on iPhone games.
The iPhone is not necessarily in direct competition with the DS. Because of the DS is a dedicated platform with exclusive games. The iPhone doesn't depend on games to be successful. Games are more an enhancement to what the iPhone can do.
Quote:
Originally Posted by guinness
I don't most of the posters get that, because they aren't gamers, or haven't grown up with them.
It would take the likes of the major developers on the iPhone, like Konami, Capcom, Sega, Valve, and so on, for people to really take notice.
The gaming market, and handhelds especially is area that Apple, just like most everyone that has tried to tackle Nintendo would get killed in. If Apple wanted to dip their toes, that's one thing, and that's all I see them really doing ATM, but if they think they can just waltz in and dominate the market, they'll likely get their asses handed to them.
Something like unity is not geared for bigger developers like EA who have the time and money to write their own complex and efficient engines for the iPhone.
(although that is not to say that big developers would have no use for unity.)
bollywood makes more movies than hollywood, but not better ones, perhaps the iphone/touch will make more money than the ds or psp but not be a better platform.
that's not a bad point. i think everybody seems to be forgetting that games on the iphone are always going to be an afterthought for the consumer. nobody buys their kids an iphone with the associated monthly costs as a gaming device. however - the casual gaming market, particularly the 40+ crowed somebody mentioned, that is now being targeted by the ds, will more likely buy a game for their iphone rather then going out and buy a ds just for gaming.
i don't see a point in getting into a pissing contest over which is better. it's a barely overlapping target audience. which makes the quoted statement sound more like marketing speak than actual strategy on apple's part. iphones and ipod touches will sell games, but i doubt a lot of gamers think that the choice is between the two.
lets also not forget why so many developers ditched the mac over the years: abysmal support from apple, due to steve's paranoia that the mac will be conceived as a 'toy' in the early days. so to look at the iphone's osx as a backdoor into the mac market sees dubious to me. in that case, bootcamp was the backdoor to gaming, and again not the serious ones that scream for faster/better/newer graphics cards.
apple will never get into the console market either. they abandoned the 'pippin' fairly early in its development, and i'm sure it hasn't escaped the folks in cupertino that microsoft spent huge amounts of money just to get a slice of the gaming market. maybe microsoft can afford to burn money for bragging rights, but that's not steve's way...
i don't think apple has a gaming strategy. sure, if their developers come up with cool games, they'll mention it in a 'oh yeah, it does games too' kind of way. are they happy games are selling for the iphone? sure! are they seriously going after the market? i doubt it.
I don't most of the posters get that, because they aren't gamers, or haven't grown up with them.
Game franchisees sell the systems, not the other way around. Nintendo has been selling the Game Boy and various incarnations for nearly 20 years, and in spite of the best efforts of Atari, Sega, SNK, Tiger, and even Sony, they buried them all, primarily due to Tetris, Mario, and Zelda.
Graphical potential and processing power mean absolutely jack all, without the games. I have a PSP, it's much more powerful than the DS, but the DS still kills it in sales. Also, it helps that the DS is cheaper than the PSP, which I don't see a lot of parents plunking down $229/300/400 for an iPod Touch, when they can get a DS for $129 or even a PSP for $169.
Marvin, the DS is not targeted to older gamers, most of it is targeted towards kids and the casual gamer, a cursory glance at it's library would tell you that. The PSP is, and looking at it's library, of games like GoW, NFS, GTA, etc would tell you that.
It would take the likes of the major developers on the iPhone, like Konami, Capcom, Sega, Valve, and so on, for people to really take notice.
The gaming market, and handhelds especially is area that Apple, just like most everyone that has tried to tackle Nintendo would get killed in. If Apple wanted to dip their toes, that's one thing, and that's all I see them really doing ATM, but if they think they can just waltz in and dominate the market, they'll likely get their asses handed to them.
i think you're right on the 'game franchises sell the systems' part, and that model makes sense for dedicated gaming machines. hardware design cost boatloads of money. sega saw the writing on the wall. i remember reading an interview with sega's then boss (don't remember the name, sorry) five years before they pulled out of the hardware market. in the interview he practically announced that they were going that route. why bother risking hundreds of millions of dollars in hardware development, when you can pick the platform (or two or three) that you develop for?
consoles are usually sold at a loss, particularly when they first appear. there is a reason why microsoft hides the revenue of the xbox by combining them with other divisions of the company. their shareholders would be screaming if they published the amount of money being spent to acquire a pice of the gaming pie. in the long run, they may actually make money, but it's a high risk game. sony's difficulties in selling the ps3 at a reasonably price without losing too much money in the process are also well documented. it helps that the ps3 is a decent bluray player.
in the case of the iphone/ipod touch, the game developers have to decide if the number of the available hardware units warrant the cost of spending money in making games. differences in hardware (lack of buttons and other 'restrictions' of the platform) will make it hard to port certain games. it's going to take a breakthrough game that really takes advantage of the hardware. right now this is probably a 'wait and see' game for the owners of any big game franchise. nintendo has no interest in supporting anybody elses devices. neither do microsoft (who went on a developer shopping spree to gain some street cred) or sony, which wants you to buy their systems.
apple is doing the right thing. provide the sales infrastructure through the app store, take a cut of any sales, and occasionally talk up the platform for gaming. i don't think apple is interested in 'waltzing in and taking over' the gaming market. with their current approach, they risk very little. are they going to spend massive amounts of resources in helping game development? probably not. but if somebody comes up with the 'next big thing', something that takes advantage of multitouch in a way that can't be done on other platforms, they'll be happy to feature it in an ad. and if not - what did they lose?
While it's nice Namco are on the platform they're hardly bringing their A game are they? The Katamari port is incredibly poor, and quite laughable compared to the PSP version.
The same can be said of SEGA, witness the mediocre port of Monkeyball, or the absolutely shockingly bad port of Columns/Puyo Puyo. And EA, with the terrible Spore mini game.
If one was to compare iPhone games, even the best of the sorry bunch, to the quality expected on the DS or PSP there wouldn't be a single game even worth picking up from a bargain bin.
The App store is a distribution model that is leaps and bounds ahead of the "competitors" who rely on an older distribution of physical media along with associated costs to deliver their products to consumers.
I'm not sure what you mean? If I go to the PSN Store on my PSP I can purchase and download games straight to my PSP. And associated cost to deliver the products to the consumer? That is built in to the price of the game, why do you think Apple takes a cut of games from the App store, to cover the associated costs, except the consumer can still be hit if they exceed their internet cap.
I'm not sure what you mean? If I go to the PSN Store on my PSP I can purchase and download games straight to my PSP. And associated cost to deliver the products to the consumer? That is built in to the price of the game, why do you think Apple takes a cut of games from the App store, to cover the associated costs, except the consumer can still be hit if they exceed their internet cap.
Do you always buy games that way or do you go to a store and buy physical media?
It's a bit hard to exceed your Internet Cap as the App store only allows the downloading of Apps larger than 10MB via WiFi.
If you had one you'd know that, you'd also be able to judge the quality of the games based on first hand experience rather than second hand reports.
I've got a few games on my iPod touch but I've yet to find anything with any real longevity.
If I was to compile a list of my top 20 handheld games, not a single iPod touch game would make the cut.
The kind of games we're seeing on the App Store at the moment are no-where near the likes of Mario, Zelda, Advance Wars, Phoenix Wright, Professor Layton et al. Perhaps the low price of apps on the App Store is holding back games with any depth?
I've got a few games on my iPod touch but I've yet to find anything with any real longevity.
If I was to compile a list of my top 20 handheld games, not a single iPod touch game would make the cut.
The kind of games we're seeing on the App Store at the moment are no-where near the likes of Mario, Zelda, Advance Wars, Phoenix Wright, Professor Layton et al. Perhaps the low price of apps on the App Store is holding back games with any depth?
Have you tried Brothers in Arms or Hero of Sparta yet?
Hero of Sparta takes a good 4 or 5 hours to get through.
They are getting there.
Maybe something episodic like what Valve has done with the Half Life 2 series would be more suitable.
I wonder if ID's working on anything.
Games are still a gamble you never know what the big hits will be, things like Pokemon and The Sims sound like rubbish to hard core gamers but are among the biggest sellers ever.
Do you always buy games that way or do you go to a store and buy physical media?
I buy the physical media, as then I have something that I can physical re-sell.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60
It's a bit hard to exceed your Internet Cap as the App store only allows the downloading of Apps larger than 10MB via WiFi.
That doesn't make any sense, you are saying that you can't break your internet cap, as Apples over 10MB have to go via w-fi? And that wi-fi is connected to what exactly?
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60
If you had one you'd know that, you'd also be able to judge the quality of the games based on first hand experience rather than second hand reports.
I didn't make any comment about the quality of the games, you just said that the other game manufactures didn't have a store you could buy games off. Also I don't want to purchase an iPhone, I was thinking of a touch, but all models are quite a lot more expensive than a PSP, or NDS
Have you tried Brothers in Arms or Hero of Sparta yet?.
I've played both the iPhone and DS versions of Brothers in Arms. Technically very good but the gameplay is pretty ropey. Developers trying to recreate home console games on handhelds really don't get what makes a great portable game. All of the best Nintendo DS games are either exclusives or based on older home console games.
Quote:
I wonder if ID's working on anything.
I believe that they are. Whatever it is, hopefully they'll license their engine to other developers.
I buy the physical media, as then I have something that I can physical re-sell.
So you pay a higher initial cost based on the distribution model.
Quote:
That doesn't make any sense, you are saying that you can't break your internet cap, as Apples over 10MB have to go via w-fi? And that wi-fi is connected to what exactly?
To my home Internet plan which is "shaped" to a lower speed yet costs a flat amount, no matter how much I download.
Quote:
I didn't make any comment about the quality of the games, you just said that the other game manufactures didn't have a store you could buy games off. Also I don't want to purchase an iPhone, I was thinking of a touch, but all models are quite a lot more expensive than a PSP, or NDS
Often three year old hardware does cost less, perhaps you could pick up an Atari Lynx for even less.
Perhaps I should clarify to pander to your pedantic nature.
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post
The App store is a distribution model that is leaps and bounds ahead of the "competitors" who rely on an older distribution of physical media along with associated costs to deliver their products to consumers.
As in Nintendo, Sony, etc derive their main profits from physical media.
Tacking on some direct delivery methods does not mean that producing and distributing physical media is not still factored into the cost, which is why for the most part these games cost more than purchasing a game for the iPhone/iPod Touch.
App store games can be sold for less because they don't have these additional costs.
So you pay a higher initial cost based on the distribution model.
Maybe, maybe not. With the physical model you have the advantage that there is a number of places selling it, each of which can discount the game. And with the PS3, and PSP, and the NDS you have the option of purchasing the game from any location in the world as the games are region free.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60
To my home Internet plan which is "shaped" to a lower speed yet costs a flat amount, no matter how much I download.
That tends to be the Aussie/NZ way of things, not like that everywhere
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60
Often three year old hardware does cost less, perhaps you could pick up an Atari Lynx for even less.
The PSP 3000 is not three years old.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60
Perhaps I should clarify to pander to your pedantic nature.
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post
The App store is a distribution model that is leaps and bounds ahead of the "competitors" who rely on an older distribution of physical media along with associated costs to deliver their products to consumers.
As in Nintendo, Sony, etc derive their main profits from physical media.
So? You have quoted yourself saying that the Apple App Store is a distribution model that is leaps and bounds ahead of the "competitors". The PSP has a online distribution method the same as the App Store, it doesn't matter that you can also purchase games via a physical media, you have the option.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60
Tacking on some direct delivery methods does not mean that producing and distributing physical media is not still factored into the cost, which is why for the most part these games cost more than purchasing a game for the iPhone/iPod Touch.
App store games can be sold for less because they don't have these additional costs.
So? How does that invalidate the fact that Sony has an online store for the purchasing of games from the PSP? Games that do not need physical media.
Maybe, maybe not. With the physical model you have the advantage that there is a number of places selling it, each of which can discount the game. And with the PS3, and PSP, and the NDS you have the option of purchasing the game from any location in the world as the games are region free.
Valve has been running a PC game app store for a number of years now. It's pretty neat and offers pretty much all of the functionality of the Apple app store.
And yet I still choose to buy games on physical media. Why? Because they're cheaper! A game on Steam is usually cheaper than the recommended retail price of the boxed version but it's more expensive than a lot of online retailers.
Physical media retailers have a lot more sales too.
I guess I'll continue my thoughts further with a few more points. I really don't see how it would be a wise move for Apple to start positioning the iPhone as a gaming device through loose-mouthed executives.
.....[lots of stuff deleted] ...I just believe its a bad business move for Apple if they really are looking to move into the gaming industry.
A lot of response to nonsense. Apple is not positioning iPhone AS a gaming device.
It is positioning the cocoa touch platform as just that, a platform, where there are a lot of possibilities on what can be done very well. Nothing said at the conference implied anything different, the article could have been written much better.
Comments
...I just believe its a bad business move for Apple if they really are looking to move into the gaming industry.
The thing is, they already have... SURPRISE!!! Apple's here!
The App store is a distribution model that is leaps and bounds ahead of the "competitors" who rely on an older distribution of physical media along with associated costs to deliver their products to consumers.
I was just thinking about how apple could support game development for the iPhone. What if apple were to buy a company like unity and "integrate" their game development tools/applications into the iPhone SDK?
The tools are already there take a look at what some of the bigger games developers ARE doing RIGHT NOW.
Here is some further reading including sites devoted to iPhone/Touch gaming.
http://www.ipwngames.com/
http://arstechnica.com/journals/appl...ndustry-giants
http://www.tiltgamer.com/
http://www.pocketgamer.biz/r/PG.Biz/...ws.asp?c=10333
http://www.iphonegameplay.com/
I can tell you one thing, nothing wipes the smarmy grin off an <insert phone brand of choice here> owner's face as they babble on about how their phone is better because of X Megapixel camera, flash, MMS, bluetooth... blah blah blah, than firing up some of these games and showing them.
Stunned silence is an understatement of the reaction that usually follows, especially if you jump in and out of a few in quick succession, which shows off the speed of the OSX interface and it's memory management prowess.
Edit:-
Look who just jumped in, ever heard of Namco?
http://www.iphonegameplay.com/2008/1...love-katamari/
I'm not sure if they are really competing for the same market. There is some overlap but there are some distinctions too.
EA, Sega and others are major developers who have made extremely successful games for the iPhone. With the app store expected to become a billion dollar operation you can believe the others are working on iPhone games.
The iPhone is not necessarily in direct competition with the DS. Because of the DS is a dedicated platform with exclusive games. The iPhone doesn't depend on games to be successful. Games are more an enhancement to what the iPhone can do.
I don't most of the posters get that, because they aren't gamers, or haven't grown up with them.
It would take the likes of the major developers on the iPhone, like Konami, Capcom, Sega, Valve, and so on, for people to really take notice.
The gaming market, and handhelds especially is area that Apple, just like most everyone that has tried to tackle Nintendo would get killed in. If Apple wanted to dip their toes, that's one thing, and that's all I see them really doing ATM, but if they think they can just waltz in and dominate the market, they'll likely get their asses handed to them.
The tools are already there take a look at what some of the bigger games developers ARE doing RIGHT NOW.
Here is some further reading including sites devoted to iPhone/Touch gaming.
http://www.ipwngames.com/
http://arstechnica.com/journals/appl...ndustry-giants
http://www.tiltgamer.com/
http://www.pocketgamer.biz/r/PG.Biz/...ws.asp?c=10333
http://www.iphonegameplay.com/
Something like unity is not geared for bigger developers like EA who have the time and money to write their own complex and efficient engines for the iPhone.
(although that is not to say that big developers would have no use for unity.)
bollywood makes more movies than hollywood, but not better ones, perhaps the iphone/touch will make more money than the ds or psp but not be a better platform.
that's not a bad point. i think everybody seems to be forgetting that games on the iphone are always going to be an afterthought for the consumer. nobody buys their kids an iphone with the associated monthly costs as a gaming device. however - the casual gaming market, particularly the 40+ crowed somebody mentioned, that is now being targeted by the ds, will more likely buy a game for their iphone rather then going out and buy a ds just for gaming.
i don't see a point in getting into a pissing contest over which is better. it's a barely overlapping target audience. which makes the quoted statement sound more like marketing speak than actual strategy on apple's part. iphones and ipod touches will sell games, but i doubt a lot of gamers think that the choice is between the two.
lets also not forget why so many developers ditched the mac over the years: abysmal support from apple, due to steve's paranoia that the mac will be conceived as a 'toy' in the early days. so to look at the iphone's osx as a backdoor into the mac market sees dubious to me. in that case, bootcamp was the backdoor to gaming, and again not the serious ones that scream for faster/better/newer graphics cards.
apple will never get into the console market either. they abandoned the 'pippin' fairly early in its development, and i'm sure it hasn't escaped the folks in cupertino that microsoft spent huge amounts of money just to get a slice of the gaming market. maybe microsoft can afford to burn money for bragging rights, but that's not steve's way...
i don't think apple has a gaming strategy. sure, if their developers come up with cool games, they'll mention it in a 'oh yeah, it does games too' kind of way. are they happy games are selling for the iphone? sure! are they seriously going after the market? i doubt it.
I don't most of the posters get that, because they aren't gamers, or haven't grown up with them.
Game franchisees sell the systems, not the other way around. Nintendo has been selling the Game Boy and various incarnations for nearly 20 years, and in spite of the best efforts of Atari, Sega, SNK, Tiger, and even Sony, they buried them all, primarily due to Tetris, Mario, and Zelda.
Graphical potential and processing power mean absolutely jack all, without the games. I have a PSP, it's much more powerful than the DS, but the DS still kills it in sales. Also, it helps that the DS is cheaper than the PSP, which I don't see a lot of parents plunking down $229/300/400 for an iPod Touch, when they can get a DS for $129 or even a PSP for $169.
Marvin, the DS is not targeted to older gamers, most of it is targeted towards kids and the casual gamer, a cursory glance at it's library would tell you that. The PSP is, and looking at it's library, of games like GoW, NFS, GTA, etc would tell you that.
It would take the likes of the major developers on the iPhone, like Konami, Capcom, Sega, Valve, and so on, for people to really take notice.
The gaming market, and handhelds especially is area that Apple, just like most everyone that has tried to tackle Nintendo would get killed in. If Apple wanted to dip their toes, that's one thing, and that's all I see them really doing ATM, but if they think they can just waltz in and dominate the market, they'll likely get their asses handed to them.
i think you're right on the 'game franchises sell the systems' part, and that model makes sense for dedicated gaming machines. hardware design cost boatloads of money. sega saw the writing on the wall. i remember reading an interview with sega's then boss (don't remember the name, sorry) five years before they pulled out of the hardware market. in the interview he practically announced that they were going that route. why bother risking hundreds of millions of dollars in hardware development, when you can pick the platform (or two or three) that you develop for?
consoles are usually sold at a loss, particularly when they first appear. there is a reason why microsoft hides the revenue of the xbox by combining them with other divisions of the company. their shareholders would be screaming if they published the amount of money being spent to acquire a pice of the gaming pie. in the long run, they may actually make money, but it's a high risk game. sony's difficulties in selling the ps3 at a reasonably price without losing too much money in the process are also well documented. it helps that the ps3 is a decent bluray player.
in the case of the iphone/ipod touch, the game developers have to decide if the number of the available hardware units warrant the cost of spending money in making games. differences in hardware (lack of buttons and other 'restrictions' of the platform) will make it hard to port certain games. it's going to take a breakthrough game that really takes advantage of the hardware. right now this is probably a 'wait and see' game for the owners of any big game franchise. nintendo has no interest in supporting anybody elses devices. neither do microsoft (who went on a developer shopping spree to gain some street cred) or sony, which wants you to buy their systems.
apple is doing the right thing. provide the sales infrastructure through the app store, take a cut of any sales, and occasionally talk up the platform for gaming. i don't think apple is interested in 'waltzing in and taking over' the gaming market. with their current approach, they risk very little. are they going to spend massive amounts of resources in helping game development? probably not. but if somebody comes up with the 'next big thing', something that takes advantage of multitouch in a way that can't be done on other platforms, they'll be happy to feature it in an ad. and if not - what did they lose?
Look who just jumped in, ever heard of Namco?
http://www.iphonegameplay.com/2008/1...love-katamari/
While it's nice Namco are on the platform they're hardly bringing their A game are they? The Katamari port is incredibly poor, and quite laughable compared to the PSP version.
The same can be said of SEGA, witness the mediocre port of Monkeyball, or the absolutely shockingly bad port of Columns/Puyo Puyo. And EA, with the terrible Spore mini game.
If one was to compare iPhone games, even the best of the sorry bunch, to the quality expected on the DS or PSP there wouldn't be a single game even worth picking up from a bargain bin.
And EA, with the terrible Spore mini game.
You obviously haven't seen the Java version available for other handsets.
Besides it is now more than just spore:-
http://www.eamobile.com/Web/ipod-games
Gameloft:-
http://www.gameloft.com/iphone-games/
Konami already released Frogger for the iPhone.
Atari:-
http://www.atari.com/us/platform/iphone
You are making the same mistake a lot of other manufacturers have made focussing on why they are better while underestimating what the iPhone can do.
The App store is a distribution model that is leaps and bounds ahead of the "competitors" who rely on an older distribution of physical media along with associated costs to deliver their products to consumers.
I'm not sure what you mean? If I go to the PSN Store on my PSP I can purchase and download games straight to my PSP. And associated cost to deliver the products to the consumer? That is built in to the price of the game, why do you think Apple takes a cut of games from the App store, to cover the associated costs, except the consumer can still be hit if they exceed their internet cap.
I'm not sure what you mean? If I go to the PSN Store on my PSP I can purchase and download games straight to my PSP. And associated cost to deliver the products to the consumer? That is built in to the price of the game, why do you think Apple takes a cut of games from the App store, to cover the associated costs, except the consumer can still be hit if they exceed their internet cap.
Do you always buy games that way or do you go to a store and buy physical media?
It's a bit hard to exceed your Internet Cap as the App store only allows the downloading of Apps larger than 10MB via WiFi.
If you had one you'd know that, you'd also be able to judge the quality of the games based on first hand experience rather than second hand reports.
If I was to compile a list of my top 20 handheld games, not a single iPod touch game would make the cut.
The kind of games we're seeing on the App Store at the moment are no-where near the likes of Mario, Zelda, Advance Wars, Phoenix Wright, Professor Layton et al. Perhaps the low price of apps on the App Store is holding back games with any depth?
I've got a few games on my iPod touch but I've yet to find anything with any real longevity.
If I was to compile a list of my top 20 handheld games, not a single iPod touch game would make the cut.
The kind of games we're seeing on the App Store at the moment are no-where near the likes of Mario, Zelda, Advance Wars, Phoenix Wright, Professor Layton et al. Perhaps the low price of apps on the App Store is holding back games with any depth?
Have you tried Brothers in Arms or Hero of Sparta yet?
Hero of Sparta takes a good 4 or 5 hours to get through.
They are getting there.
Maybe something episodic like what Valve has done with the Half Life 2 series would be more suitable.
I wonder if ID's working on anything.
Games are still a gamble you never know what the big hits will be, things like Pokemon and The Sims sound like rubbish to hard core gamers but are among the biggest sellers ever.
Do you always buy games that way or do you go to a store and buy physical media?
I buy the physical media, as then I have something that I can physical re-sell.
It's a bit hard to exceed your Internet Cap as the App store only allows the downloading of Apps larger than 10MB via WiFi.
That doesn't make any sense, you are saying that you can't break your internet cap, as Apples over 10MB have to go via w-fi? And that wi-fi is connected to what exactly?
If you had one you'd know that, you'd also be able to judge the quality of the games based on first hand experience rather than second hand reports.
I didn't make any comment about the quality of the games, you just said that the other game manufactures didn't have a store you could buy games off. Also I don't want to purchase an iPhone, I was thinking of a touch, but all models are quite a lot more expensive than a PSP, or NDS
Have you tried Brothers in Arms or Hero of Sparta yet?.
I've played both the iPhone and DS versions of Brothers in Arms. Technically very good but the gameplay is pretty ropey. Developers trying to recreate home console games on handhelds really don't get what makes a great portable game. All of the best Nintendo DS games are either exclusives or based on older home console games.
I wonder if ID's working on anything.
I believe that they are. Whatever it is, hopefully they'll license their engine to other developers.
I buy the physical media, as then I have something that I can physical re-sell.
So you pay a higher initial cost based on the distribution model.
That doesn't make any sense, you are saying that you can't break your internet cap, as Apples over 10MB have to go via w-fi? And that wi-fi is connected to what exactly?
To my home Internet plan which is "shaped" to a lower speed yet costs a flat amount, no matter how much I download.
I didn't make any comment about the quality of the games, you just said that the other game manufactures didn't have a store you could buy games off. Also I don't want to purchase an iPhone, I was thinking of a touch, but all models are quite a lot more expensive than a PSP, or NDS
Often three year old hardware does cost less, perhaps you could pick up an Atari Lynx for even less.
Perhaps I should clarify to pander to your pedantic nature.
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post
The App store is a distribution model that is leaps and bounds ahead of the "competitors" who rely on an older distribution of physical media along with associated costs to deliver their products to consumers.
As in Nintendo, Sony, etc derive their main profits from physical media.
Tacking on some direct delivery methods does not mean that producing and distributing physical media is not still factored into the cost, which is why for the most part these games cost more than purchasing a game for the iPhone/iPod Touch.
App store games can be sold for less because they don't have these additional costs.
So you pay a higher initial cost based on the distribution model.
Maybe, maybe not. With the physical model you have the advantage that there is a number of places selling it, each of which can discount the game. And with the PS3, and PSP, and the NDS you have the option of purchasing the game from any location in the world as the games are region free.
To my home Internet plan which is "shaped" to a lower speed yet costs a flat amount, no matter how much I download.
That tends to be the Aussie/NZ way of things, not like that everywhere
Often three year old hardware does cost less, perhaps you could pick up an Atari Lynx for even less.
The PSP 3000 is not three years old.
Perhaps I should clarify to pander to your pedantic nature.
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post
The App store is a distribution model that is leaps and bounds ahead of the "competitors" who rely on an older distribution of physical media along with associated costs to deliver their products to consumers.
As in Nintendo, Sony, etc derive their main profits from physical media.
So? You have quoted yourself saying that the Apple App Store is a distribution model that is leaps and bounds ahead of the "competitors". The PSP has a online distribution method the same as the App Store, it doesn't matter that you can also purchase games via a physical media, you have the option.
Tacking on some direct delivery methods does not mean that producing and distributing physical media is not still factored into the cost, which is why for the most part these games cost more than purchasing a game for the iPhone/iPod Touch.
App store games can be sold for less because they don't have these additional costs.
So? How does that invalidate the fact that Sony has an online store for the purchasing of games from the PSP? Games that do not need physical media.
Maybe, maybe not. With the physical model you have the advantage that there is a number of places selling it, each of which can discount the game. And with the PS3, and PSP, and the NDS you have the option of purchasing the game from any location in the world as the games are region free.
Valve has been running a PC game app store for a number of years now. It's pretty neat and offers pretty much all of the functionality of the Apple app store.
And yet I still choose to buy games on physical media. Why? Because they're cheaper! A game on Steam is usually cheaper than the recommended retail price of the boxed version but it's more expensive than a lot of online retailers.
Physical media retailers have a lot more sales too.
Zero, zip, none, all those other devices do.
You do not go into a retail store to buy games at all, you can't buy second hand copies on EBay.
This is the difference, which is not the same as "PSP owners can buy SOME titles directly".
The closest model to App store is N-Gage for Nokia, which has not been terribly successful.
I guess we'll have to wait and see how App store is going longer term, remember it hasn't even been in existence for 6 months yet.
I guess I'll continue my thoughts further with a few more points. I really don't see how it would be a wise move for Apple to start positioning the iPhone as a gaming device through loose-mouthed executives.
.....[lots of stuff deleted] ...I just believe its a bad business move for Apple if they really are looking to move into the gaming industry.
A lot of response to nonsense. Apple is not positioning iPhone AS a gaming device.
It is positioning the cocoa touch platform as just that, a platform, where there are a lot of possibilities on what can be done very well. Nothing said at the conference implied anything different, the article could have been written much better.