yeah i don't think carmack is really right here. as i recall some of the first iphone keynotes dealing with the app store included game demos. they were showing how it only took 2 weeks to complete super monkey ball on the iphone.
along with the gaming ads for the ipod touch, i'm not sure what he's talking about. i think carmack is just trying to figure out why he's such an outsider to apple.
People over play the notion that most apps in the App Store is worthless. Yes I do agree most of the Apps are undesirable, but that has always been the case, it didn't just begin with the App Store.
I do agree though that Android appears to be well on its way. That's a good thing for Apple and for the smartphone market.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
He has a point, but I don?t think he stated it well. Of course most apps are worthless to most people, the point is that it shows that developers are there and that people are relatively secure in knowing an app they want likely exists.
I do agree though that Android appears to be well on its way. That's a good thing for Apple and for the smartphone market.
Pogue did a Twitter poll to see what a new term for these super-smartphones could be. Comparing them to smartphones of the past doesn?t do them justice. The answer he chose was App Phone. I quite like it.It
has yet to defined to more specific criteria. I think an SDK for a compiled language (not just interpreted), at least 1000 apps in the App Store, and having HW that is at least ARM11 or better would be the 3 things I would choose off the top of my head.
It's logical for Apple to shy away from the 'game platform' designation. Microsoft's ad agency could have fun with that. Ditto for RIM, Nokia, Palm, Motorola and other smart phone competitors. They'd like nothing more than to see the iPhone categorized as 'just a game platform' in the public's perception.
I use an iPhone constantly and run a ton of apps. Games are missing entirely from my iPhone and my computers. I've long considered computer games to be a huge time waster and a prime source of additional disk space (via deletion).
I can understand someone enjoying a game like computerized chess or Mah Jong but action/arcade games just leave me shaking my head and rolling my eyes. Carmack has created nothing that I would find even mildly interesting.
Most of what you're saying here is complete BS. You are doing the same thing Carmack is doing in that you're just sitting back and "imagining" what might be going on in Steve Jobs' head based on really nothing at all.
Games are by definition a sort of time-wasting activity. Steve Jobs is a serious person and like most serious people, if he has time for games it's minimal.
I've worked in the business since the beginning and I can tell you without equivocation that the vast majority of the "serious" computer users, the techs, the developers, the scientists, the artists, and those that create all the stuff that you use, do not play a lot of games.
If you are a hard-core XBox or PSP gamer you are way more likely to be on the inconsequential fringes of the tech scene than you are to be a mover and shaker. Most of the really smart capable people I know in the computer field play a few games now and then, have one or two they may like (especially for nostalgia reasons), but basically haven't played much since they you know ... grew up.
In other words, games *are* toys, and mostly for "kids," or for brief relaxation.
The whole idea that the Mac platform should bend over backwards for games is a fantasy propagated by a lot of XBox boys that is essentially unreasonable. Most of the people actually using the Mac platform are using it for more serious things and couldn't give a damn about games except when they can't run one that they might want to.
Games are just not the big deal that all the teenagers and twenty-somethings think they are and so-called "casual" gaming is far more important and far more popular than all the copies of Halo put together because smart people have better things to do.
I take issue with many thing you are saying. Games are a big deal in that they are not going away and that the are in fact growing in popularity with no sign of slowing down. Microsoft in fact if it knew what it was doing would have tied a ZUNE PLAYER much more tightly to the Xbox 360, created a music store, download games, download movies, applications, whatever. Or ties in the new windows consumer smartphone OS with the 360. There is a 30+ million audiance that could be tapped into there. Microsoft just does not have the vision it needs to truly pull this stuff off.
To say games are toys and are for kids yes you are correct. And that it why Steve Jobs and company have never fully supported game developers from the beginning. I am going back to 1984 and the intro of the Mac. Remember the Alice game that came out with the intro of the mac? It was to be marketed by Apple to show of how unique the mac was but it was pushed aside because it was thought to make the mac look like a game toy.
John Carmack is a smart individual. It would not surprise me if he said those comments just to ignite some interest and have Apple notice this. Carmack is an extrodinary game designer and programmer. Apple and Carmack have met in the past and he has stated publicly that Apple is not consistent with supporting game developers.
Apple markets the iphone/touch as a general purpose do everything device. Which to their credit it is. I am surprised to see so many people bust on Carmack as if he has no idea what he is talking about. Carmack is in some eyes a programming genius. I think he creates envy by doing what he does.
But apparently Apple does not think its a waste of time to market the iPod touch as a gaming device, even though they are serious people, and might be less enthusiastic about this perception. This would make sense. Why would a serious computer maker make a game machine? IBM?
Apple bending over backwards for developers is not common. In fact Apple has a reputation of not being upfront with developers in the first place. So to say that, is just not factual. It would be nice to see Apple work better with developers regarding the iphone/touch, make development a free market by putting ESRB's before purchasing, and stop pulling or disaproving apps and let the app store market sort itself out.
John Carmack is "smart" in the exceedingly narrow sense of "is good at coding." That doesn't mean he has any particular insight into what motivates his fellow human beings.
In fact, of what I've seen of the guy, I would guess he has full blown Asperger's Syndrome and is entirely clueless when as to what might "embarrass" Apple, Steve Jobs, or anyone.
Most of what you're saying here is complete BS. You are doing the same thing Carmack is doing in that you're just sitting back and "imagining" what might be going on in Steve Jobs' head based on really nothing at all.
Games are by definition a sort of time-wasting activity. Steve Jobs is a serious person and like most serious people, if he has time for games it's minimal.
I've worked in the business since the beginning and I can tell you without equivocation that the vast majority of the "serious" computer users, the techs, the developers, the scientists, the artists, and those that create all the stuff that you use, do not play a lot of games.
If you are a hard-core XBox or PSP gamer you are way more likely to be on the inconsequential fringes of the tech scene than you are to be a mover and shaker. Most of the really smart capable people I know in the computer field play a few games now and then, have one or two they may like (especially for nostalgia reasons), but basically haven't played much since they you know ... grew up.
In other words, games *are* toys, and mostly for "kids," or for brief relaxation.
The whole idea that the Mac platform should bend over backwards for games is a fantasy propagated by a lot of XBox boys that is essentially unreasonable. Most of the people actually using the Mac platform are using it for more serious things and couldn't give a damn about games except when they can't run one that they might want to.
Games are just not the big deal that all the teenagers and twenty-somethings think they are and so-called "casual" gaming is far more important and far more popular than all the copies of Halo put together because smart people have better things to do.
You know it is possible some people, even some people at Apple might think that gaming is holding back [insert your favorite platform here] from business adoption. But I don't think that is the case for Apple or any company, and here's why:
Taking a look at Microsoft, we see that (unfortunately) Windows has become the largest, most powerful gaming platform in the industry, but that certainly has not deterred Windows from being adopted by businesses.
Actually it wasn't that simple and requires a short history lesson.
IBM (International Business Machine) had a well deserved reputation in the business world going back to 1937 when they created the first computer (as we would understand it) using their punch card tabulator technology dating back to the 1880s. IBM's mainframes became nearly iconic during the 1950s and a business staple in the 1960s.
Person computers by contrast were kits like the Altair 8800 (1975) or little more than gaming consoles (Apple ii, Commodore 64, Tandy, etc) with (in their eyes) little business application. It wasn't until IBM itself got into the Personal Computer market in 1981 that businesses started taking the PC seriously as an alternative to mainframes. Then Microsoft came along with DOS and because it ran on IBM compatible machines became the defaco OS of choice.
Graphics and icons were so viewed as "gaming computers" that even Windows 1.0 (Nov 1985) went over like a lead balloon in the business community. The Laserwriter (1986) was the one thing that keep the Mac from being totally dismissed by businesses as WYSIWYG printing for DOS in those days was a joke. It wasn't Windows 3.1 (1992) that Microsoft came out with an OS that the business community ignore boot straight into DOS.
"they're not proud of the iPhone being a game machine, they wish it was something else."
Games. What a glorious waste of time. The more and cheaper the better. Pretty good fit for the App Store so far.
I don't blame Apple for being ashamed of that.
But even though that's a major result so far, the platform can certainly accommodate far more useful, practical, educational, etc. applications.
Perhaps the attraction for developers has been the market for games. And then there's the market for gambling. And then there's the market for drugs. . .
Your question infers all, while I think the answer to your question is included in his qualified statement: "...if he has time for games it's minimal", "the vast majority ... do not play a lot of games", "most of the really smart capable people I know in the computer field play a few games now and then", "for brief relaxation", "...so-called casual gaming is far more important and far more popular."
And how many sales are there for each handheld or console compared to the number of games available? The point is that the ecosystem is very healhty and that there is plenty of room for growth, especially for the longterm development of a great game to hit the platform.
I don't know, but I do know there has been a number of multi-million selling games for the PSP, which means the ecosystem for it must be healthy as well
John Carmack is "smart" in the exceedingly narrow sense of "is good at coding." That doesn't mean he has any particular insight into what motivates his fellow human beings.
In fact, of what I've seen of the guy, I would guess he has full blown Asperger's Syndrome and is entirely clueless when as to what might "embarrass" Apple, Steve Jobs, or anyone.
Carmack has changed the face of video gaming forever. He deserves the credit. Its not just being smart at coding. Its transforming his ideas into industry wide use. ID maybe known for games like DOOM and QUAKE, but its the fact that his company's 3d game engines are used by other developers and spawning 25 other games. He may be exceedingly smart at coding, but I don't think he should put down for just being that.
I have a friend who has a Verizon HTC Pro Touch, tried to play Hulu videos on it, it didn't work.
What does gaming, Exchange, and GPS have to do with each other?
Just a few different tangents, thats all, LOL!
Gaming = more sales than music and video combined, Apple fails to see this, in fact, see's midrange products as threat to PRO line when in fact opposite.
GPS on other phones much more accurate, an HTC for example will tell you traffic trouble in :45 seconds, the iPhone won't do that, in fact, it's slow and sometimes you can miss your street. The GPS is weak.
Apple seeing it as a gaming device means no penetration to the business side of users of large enterprising solutions.
Gaming is different to music or video through. Gaming gives you the illusion that you're achieving something. Makes it more evil in a way.
For very young children, they are achieving something, if the game is educational. And for fully grown adults, they are in no danger of really thinking a game is worth anything. Except to the extent that you can't work all the time, so part of working is play, that is: part of enabling further work is taking a break.
But for a certain age - teenagers mostly - it's a very convincing kind of illusion that you're achieving something when you're not. In that sense gaming sucks.
They'll make the iPhone more business friendly. I think they've made great inroads so far with Mac Mini Server, Exchange in Snow Leopard, 'Push' etc.
100,000 apps. In many different categories. Must be easy to develop for. Naturally, game makers want a piece of the action (50 million units and counting...)
And Apple have reflected this app store success in their advertising for iPhone. And the gaming 'success' in their latest iPod 'funnest' Touch advertising.
So, Apple anti-gaming? Apple embarrassed or didn't foresee the iPhone being a great gaming success? Doesn't it matter?
It is. So, naturally they'll capitalise on that along with all the other genre of apps. And that is reflected on their website and on T.V.
Apple isn't going after the PC gaming tower market. Sorry, John. Not going to happen so let it go. (I may not entirely agree with Apple not producing a cheaper mid-tower but who cares? It doesn't look like it's going to happen. The iMac is 'good' enough to run most PC games at some reasonable setting.) Apple have their own 'mid-tower'. It's called the iPhone. And it's towering above the mobile phone/gadget opposition.
If I was Johnny boy, I'd quit my yappin' and make some games. Money's being made hand over fist at the app store. The old 'PC tower' model of Id Games being M$'s bitch (despite the faint McCarmack protestations about Direct X...) are fading real fast.
Mainstream, casual gaming is set to dwarf McCarmack and his 'Doom' 3D/FPShooter gaming niche.
So Apple don't see things his way. They don't have to. They heading towards selling 100 million iPhones/Touches within the next year or so. They've made their market without Carmack and havee 20 thousand plus games minus his carping.
Put up or shut up John. Kinda had enough of your faint praise is damning on teh Mac subject. Try handling some of the PC to Mac ports yourself...or help the profile of Mac gaming or actually make an iPhone game.
Gaming is different to music or video through. Gaming gives you the illusion that you're achieving something. Makes it more evil in a way.
For very young children, they are achieving something, if the game is educational. And for fully grown adults, they are in no danger of really thinking a game is worth anything. Except to the extent that you can't work all the time, so part of working is play, that is: part of enabling further work is taking a break.
But for a certain age - teenagers mostly - it's a very convincing kind of illusion that you're achieving something when you're not. In that sense gaming sucks.
If Apple wants to get into the gaming arena then they need to get serious about creating hardware that is powerful enough to run todays technology. The fact that the iPhone or iPod Touch can run game that are 1990 technology isn't being in the gaming market.
While its fine for very casual gaming the games for the most part aren't that great which is why they cost less then 2.00. Even Doom Classic is 1993 technology.
Even the GPU power on the new iMac isn't great for gaming. Try to run one of the lastest games on on a 27" highdef screen using their current GPU, its not possible unless your playing a 10 year old game.
This post, plus "extreme" in your user name tell us all we need to know. Yeah, Apple needs to catch up to 15 years of PC gaming. Keep dreaming.
Comments
along with the gaming ads for the ipod touch, i'm not sure what he's talking about. i think carmack is just trying to figure out why he's such an outsider to apple.
I do agree though that Android appears to be well on its way. That's a good thing for Apple and for the smartphone market.
He has a point, but I don?t think he stated it well. Of course most apps are worthless to most people, the point is that it shows that developers are there and that people are relatively secure in knowing an app they want likely exists.
I do agree though that Android appears to be well on its way. That's a good thing for Apple and for the smartphone market.
Pogue did a Twitter poll to see what a new term for these super-smartphones could be. Comparing them to smartphones of the past doesn?t do them justice. The answer he chose was App Phone. I quite like it.It
has yet to defined to more specific criteria. I think an SDK for a compiled language (not just interpreted), at least 1000 apps in the App Store, and having HW that is at least ARM11 or better would be the 3 things I would choose off the top of my head.
I use an iPhone constantly and run a ton of apps. Games are missing entirely from my iPhone and my computers. I've long considered computer games to be a huge time waster and a prime source of additional disk space (via deletion).
I can understand someone enjoying a game like computerized chess or Mah Jong but action/arcade games just leave me shaking my head and rolling my eyes. Carmack has created nothing that I would find even mildly interesting.
Most of what you're saying here is complete BS. You are doing the same thing Carmack is doing in that you're just sitting back and "imagining" what might be going on in Steve Jobs' head based on really nothing at all.
Games are by definition a sort of time-wasting activity. Steve Jobs is a serious person and like most serious people, if he has time for games it's minimal.
I've worked in the business since the beginning and I can tell you without equivocation that the vast majority of the "serious" computer users, the techs, the developers, the scientists, the artists, and those that create all the stuff that you use, do not play a lot of games.
If you are a hard-core XBox or PSP gamer you are way more likely to be on the inconsequential fringes of the tech scene than you are to be a mover and shaker. Most of the really smart capable people I know in the computer field play a few games now and then, have one or two they may like (especially for nostalgia reasons), but basically haven't played much since they you know ... grew up.
In other words, games *are* toys, and mostly for "kids," or for brief relaxation.
The whole idea that the Mac platform should bend over backwards for games is a fantasy propagated by a lot of XBox boys that is essentially unreasonable. Most of the people actually using the Mac platform are using it for more serious things and couldn't give a damn about games except when they can't run one that they might want to.
Games are just not the big deal that all the teenagers and twenty-somethings think they are and so-called "casual" gaming is far more important and far more popular than all the copies of Halo put together because smart people have better things to do.
I take issue with many thing you are saying. Games are a big deal in that they are not going away and that the are in fact growing in popularity with no sign of slowing down. Microsoft in fact if it knew what it was doing would have tied a ZUNE PLAYER much more tightly to the Xbox 360, created a music store, download games, download movies, applications, whatever. Or ties in the new windows consumer smartphone OS with the 360. There is a 30+ million audiance that could be tapped into there. Microsoft just does not have the vision it needs to truly pull this stuff off.
To say games are toys and are for kids yes you are correct. And that it why Steve Jobs and company have never fully supported game developers from the beginning. I am going back to 1984 and the intro of the Mac. Remember the Alice game that came out with the intro of the mac? It was to be marketed by Apple to show of how unique the mac was but it was pushed aside because it was thought to make the mac look like a game toy.
John Carmack is a smart individual. It would not surprise me if he said those comments just to ignite some interest and have Apple notice this. Carmack is an extrodinary game designer and programmer. Apple and Carmack have met in the past and he has stated publicly that Apple is not consistent with supporting game developers.
Apple markets the iphone/touch as a general purpose do everything device. Which to their credit it is. I am surprised to see so many people bust on Carmack as if he has no idea what he is talking about. Carmack is in some eyes a programming genius. I think he creates envy by doing what he does.
But apparently Apple does not think its a waste of time to market the iPod touch as a gaming device, even though they are serious people, and might be less enthusiastic about this perception. This would make sense. Why would a serious computer maker make a game machine? IBM?
Apple bending over backwards for developers is not common. In fact Apple has a reputation of not being upfront with developers in the first place. So to say that, is just not factual. It would be nice to see Apple work better with developers regarding the iphone/touch, make development a free market by putting ESRB's before purchasing, and stop pulling or disaproving apps and let the app store market sort itself out.
In fact, of what I've seen of the guy, I would guess he has full blown Asperger's Syndrome and is entirely clueless when as to what might "embarrass" Apple, Steve Jobs, or anyone.
Most of what you're saying here is complete BS. You are doing the same thing Carmack is doing in that you're just sitting back and "imagining" what might be going on in Steve Jobs' head based on really nothing at all.
Games are by definition a sort of time-wasting activity. Steve Jobs is a serious person and like most serious people, if he has time for games it's minimal.
I've worked in the business since the beginning and I can tell you without equivocation that the vast majority of the "serious" computer users, the techs, the developers, the scientists, the artists, and those that create all the stuff that you use, do not play a lot of games.
If you are a hard-core XBox or PSP gamer you are way more likely to be on the inconsequential fringes of the tech scene than you are to be a mover and shaker. Most of the really smart capable people I know in the computer field play a few games now and then, have one or two they may like (especially for nostalgia reasons), but basically haven't played much since they you know ... grew up.
In other words, games *are* toys, and mostly for "kids," or for brief relaxation.
The whole idea that the Mac platform should bend over backwards for games is a fantasy propagated by a lot of XBox boys that is essentially unreasonable. Most of the people actually using the Mac platform are using it for more serious things and couldn't give a damn about games except when they can't run one that they might want to.
Games are just not the big deal that all the teenagers and twenty-somethings think they are and so-called "casual" gaming is far more important and far more popular than all the copies of Halo put together because smart people have better things to do.
So smart mature people don't play games?
Take care.......
You know it is possible some people, even some people at Apple might think that gaming is holding back [insert your favorite platform here] from business adoption. But I don't think that is the case for Apple or any company, and here's why:
Taking a look at Microsoft, we see that (unfortunately) Windows has become the largest, most powerful gaming platform in the industry, but that certainly has not deterred Windows from being adopted by businesses.
Actually it wasn't that simple and requires a short history lesson.
IBM (International Business Machine) had a well deserved reputation in the business world going back to 1937 when they created the first computer (as we would understand it) using their punch card tabulator technology dating back to the 1880s. IBM's mainframes became nearly iconic during the 1950s and a business staple in the 1960s.
Person computers by contrast were kits like the Altair 8800 (1975) or little more than gaming consoles (Apple ii, Commodore 64, Tandy, etc) with (in their eyes) little business application. It wasn't until IBM itself got into the Personal Computer market in 1981 that businesses started taking the PC seriously as an alternative to mainframes. Then Microsoft came along with DOS and because it ran on IBM compatible machines became the defaco OS of choice.
Graphics and icons were so viewed as "gaming computers" that even Windows 1.0 (Nov 1985) went over like a lead balloon in the business community. The Laserwriter (1986) was the one thing that keep the Mac from being totally dismissed by businesses as WYSIWYG printing for DOS in those days was a joke. It wasn't Windows 3.1 (1992) that Microsoft came out with an OS that the business community ignore boot straight into DOS.
Games. What a glorious waste of time. The more and cheaper the better. Pretty good fit for the App Store so far.
I don't blame Apple for being ashamed of that.
But even though that's a major result so far, the platform can certainly accommodate far more useful, practical, educational, etc. applications.
Perhaps the attraction for developers has been the market for games. And then there's the market for gambling. And then there's the market for drugs. . .
Something missing here?
So smart mature people don't play games?
Take care.......
Your question infers all, while I think the answer to your question is included in his qualified statement: "...if he has time for games it's minimal", "the vast majority ... do not play a lot of games", "most of the really smart capable people I know in the computer field play a few games now and then", "for brief relaxation", "...so-called casual gaming is far more important and far more popular."
And how many sales are there for each handheld or console compared to the number of games available? The point is that the ecosystem is very healhty and that there is plenty of room for growth, especially for the longterm development of a great game to hit the platform.
I don't know, but I do know there has been a number of multi-million selling games for the PSP, which means the ecosystem for it must be healthy as well
John Carmack is "smart" in the exceedingly narrow sense of "is good at coding." That doesn't mean he has any particular insight into what motivates his fellow human beings.
In fact, of what I've seen of the guy, I would guess he has full blown Asperger's Syndrome and is entirely clueless when as to what might "embarrass" Apple, Steve Jobs, or anyone.
Carmack has changed the face of video gaming forever. He deserves the credit. Its not just being smart at coding. Its transforming his ideas into industry wide use. ID maybe known for games like DOOM and QUAKE, but its the fact that his company's 3d game engines are used by other developers and spawning 25 other games. He may be exceedingly smart at coding, but I don't think he should put down for just being that.
I have a friend who has a Verizon HTC Pro Touch, tried to play Hulu videos on it, it didn't work.
What does gaming, Exchange, and GPS have to do with each other?
Just a few different tangents, thats all, LOL!
Gaming = more sales than music and video combined, Apple fails to see this, in fact, see's midrange products as threat to PRO line when in fact opposite.
GPS on other phones much more accurate, an HTC for example will tell you traffic trouble in :45 seconds, the iPhone won't do that, in fact, it's slow and sometimes you can miss your street. The GPS is weak.
Apple seeing it as a gaming device means no penetration to the business side of users of large enterprising solutions.
That's all.
Peace.
-
For very young children, they are achieving something, if the game is educational. And for fully grown adults, they are in no danger of really thinking a game is worth anything. Except to the extent that you can't work all the time, so part of working is play, that is: part of enabling further work is taking a break.
But for a certain age - teenagers mostly - it's a very convincing kind of illusion that you're achieving something when you're not. In that sense gaming sucks.
Apple is a quick study.
They'll make the iPhone more business friendly. I think they've made great inroads so far with Mac Mini Server, Exchange in Snow Leopard, 'Push' etc.
100,000 apps. In many different categories. Must be easy to develop for. Naturally, game makers want a piece of the action (50 million units and counting...)
And Apple have reflected this app store success in their advertising for iPhone. And the gaming 'success' in their latest iPod 'funnest' Touch advertising.
So, Apple anti-gaming? Apple embarrassed or didn't foresee the iPhone being a great gaming success? Doesn't it matter?
It is. So, naturally they'll capitalise on that along with all the other genre of apps. And that is reflected on their website and on T.V.
Apple isn't going after the PC gaming tower market. Sorry, John. Not going to happen so let it go. (I may not entirely agree with Apple not producing a cheaper mid-tower but who cares? It doesn't look like it's going to happen. The iMac is 'good' enough to run most PC games at some reasonable setting.) Apple have their own 'mid-tower'. It's called the iPhone. And it's towering above the mobile phone/gadget opposition.
If I was Johnny boy, I'd quit my yappin' and make some games. Money's being made hand over fist at the app store. The old 'PC tower' model of Id Games being M$'s bitch (despite the faint McCarmack protestations about Direct X...) are fading real fast.
Mainstream, casual gaming is set to dwarf McCarmack and his 'Doom' 3D/FPShooter gaming niche.
So Apple don't see things his way. They don't have to. They heading towards selling 100 million iPhones/Touches within the next year or so. They've made their market without Carmack and havee 20 thousand plus games minus his carping.
Put up or shut up John. Kinda had enough of your faint praise is damning on teh Mac subject. Try handling some of the PC to Mac ports yourself...or help the profile of Mac gaming or actually make an iPhone game.
Quit yer flappin'.
Lemon Bon Bon
Gaming is different to music or video through. Gaming gives you the illusion that you're achieving something. Makes it more evil in a way.
For very young children, they are achieving something, if the game is educational. And for fully grown adults, they are in no danger of really thinking a game is worth anything. Except to the extent that you can't work all the time, so part of working is play, that is: part of enabling further work is taking a break.
But for a certain age - teenagers mostly - it's a very convincing kind of illusion that you're achieving something when you're not. In that sense gaming sucks.
A clever post. Well done, Sir.
Lemon Bon Bon.
A clever post. Well done, Sir.
Lemon Bon Bon.
Thanks. I also agree with your point that casual gaming will ultimately dwarf the kind of hard core games that ID sells.
IT departments aren't stupid. You think business owners don't realize how many of the apps are GAMES and Widgets?
lol since when? wtf are you talking about
If Apple wants to get into the gaming arena then they need to get serious about creating hardware that is powerful enough to run todays technology. The fact that the iPhone or iPod Touch can run game that are 1990 technology isn't being in the gaming market.
While its fine for very casual gaming the games for the most part aren't that great which is why they cost less then 2.00. Even Doom Classic is 1993 technology.
Even the GPU power on the new iMac isn't great for gaming. Try to run one of the lastest games on on a 27" highdef screen using their current GPU, its not possible unless your playing a 10 year old game.
This post, plus "extreme" in your user name tell us all we need to know. Yeah, Apple needs to catch up to 15 years of PC gaming. Keep dreaming.