For instance, the pixel fillrate for Wii's Hollywood GPU is 972 MPixels/s, while the original iPad's is 1000. iPad 2's is 2x1000 MPixels. For comparison, Xbox 360's Xenos is 4000 Mpixels/s, or double the iPad 2's.
Hollywood is clocked at 243MHz, while Xenos is at 500MHz and PS3's RSX is 550MHz. iPad 1's PowerVR 535 has one core at 200MHz, and iPad 2's 543 MP2 has two 200MHz cores.
The Wii has 88Mb of total memory, 64Mb of those are GDDR3 graphics memory. It's unknown how many the 543 MP2 has, but it also shares 512Mb with the super-fast system memory, like the Xbox 360 does: it has 512Mb of GDDR3 memory that are also the RAM.
I bought my Apple ][ in July 1978. In December of 1978, with 2 partners I opened the 5th computer store in Siicon Valley -- 7/10 of a mile from Bandley 1 (Apple Headquarters).
Being close to Apple, and the Best Apple retailer in Silicon Valley -- we had a constant stream of Apple employees in our store -- from the 2 Steves, Wiggington, Andy, Chris, Bill, Wil, Wendell, Scottie... yadda, yadda, yadda.
These guys would drop by to tell us some questions (about what was coming) and do impromptu demos for several hours. Woz, in particular, usually had a coterie of camp followers: Cap'n Crunch (when out on parole), Tog, etc. -- lot's of people who were being recruited by Apple.
We sold mainly Apple ][ computers in the early days (a few NorthStars, and Altairs).
I certainly know about the GR and HGR modes on the Apple ][.
I used the low-res example so as not to confuse the issue with too much data.
I bought mine in 1980.
Quote:
Apple "Breakout" was single player -- so in that way, it was a bad implementation of Pong.
Apple breakout was single player because the popular atari breakout was single player. The Apple ][ certainly wasn't constrained to single player. There were many great multi-player games for the Apple ][, including Dr. J vs Larry Bird One on One released for the hardware a couple of years later. A game far more advanced than Pong.
And I'll give you that Apple TV was released pretty much to get something else. That's why they called it a hobby. It was an unusual move for Apple to release something before they really figured out what it was supposed to be.
Um? no. Look, AI. It?s sort of cute when you, Gruber, and other pro-Apple outlets try to claim that Apple is somehow chewing into the console games market, but? the fact is, they aren?t. The iPod Touch (and iPhone to a lesser extent) are certainly excelling at the entry-level, casual games market. After all, for people who just want to play something simple on the subway ride to work or while waiting in line somewhere, why spend $250 on a 3DS? Apple?s done a great job of getting into that market.
But there are very few people out there who are going to spend $500+ on an iPad and $40 on an HDMI adapter when they can get an Xbox 360 or PlayStation 3 for half that. Just isn?t going to happen. If anything, the iPad will slightly cannibalize the gaming segment of the iPod Touch user base.
I love AI, Daring Fireball, and my Apple products, but Apple-oriented sites really have to rethink how they look at the gaming market. Angry Birds and Real Racing HD are not the ruin of, or even legitimate competition for, Assassin?s Creed, Final Fantasy, Call of Duty, Battlefield, anything named Mario, Gran Turismo, Forza Motorsport, or any other long-running console franchise I can list here. Just is not. There?s a huge blind spot among Apple punditry when it comes to gaming.
I will only add that new Nintendo 3Ds is pre-ordering, and numbers are 2x the numbers of Nintendo Wii. In UK, it is the best selling gadget on Amazon ever. and it sold 400,000 units in Japan in 2 days.
And we're talking about 3Ds, which is closest match to iOS portable gaming. It really doesn't seem to be hurting at all with abundance of mobile games, be it iOS or Android.
I fear that Facebook Farmville-sort-of-games on Flash enabled tablets (if they ever get fully functional) will pose bigger threat to PC/Console gaming than iOS/Android dedicated games.
I agree with you about the titles but not so much on the cost. The cheapest, latest model PS3 and 360 are $300 on Amazon. Games for the platform are $40-60. Even if you say $40 and you get 5 games, your cost is $500. iPad games are about $10 each so it would be $550. Another game or two and the iPad is better value.
The games are quite poor just now but the selection is much higher and console games aren't all that great either. There are only a few games on each platform that stand out.
While there's no making up for those titles not being available, this has the potential to change casual gaming in a big way. Imagine a family playing a board game like Monopoly or Clue hooked up to the big TV. No more need to have a cupboard full of boxed games. You can even play pictionary without having sheets of paper everywhere and pens that run out of ink. Music games, rockband-type games and so on.
Plus as people have mentioned, you also get a tablet device to use for browsing, books and other apps.
It can't replace the console role until it has the big titles but that can easily come in time. The iPad 2 has only just reached the required graphics performance bar to make this happen.
Couples of problems there:
Price: iPad games are $10 today, but if they ever get close to Tier A of console games, they will get close with price as well. You can't develop that sort of game and sell it for $10 and survive. It is like expecting someone to make MBPro type of laptop for an Acer netbook price.
Storage: even with 64GB of flash disk you cannot have too many big games in your device's memory. Games like Final Fantasy XIII are getting close to dual-layer BR disk. Most Tier A games today will take at least DL DVD, close to 9GB... and your iPad will have other data on it, so it is not like whole 32/64GB will be available for games. The pain of transferring big games from computer to tablet, for those who like to play more games at the same time, would be too much of annoyance.
Controls: type of games you can successfully play on touch-screen is very limited. That being said, I agree some games are actually perfect for touch screen, but not too many.
All in all, I don't know a single PS2/PS3/Xbox gamer who gave up on his/hers console and went iOS gaming; or Android. I realize a lot of people do and will game on iOS/Android, but I think they would not game on dedicated consoles anyway; that means that iOS/Android platforms have a lot of space to grow their gaming market (into non-gamers numbers), but I don't think they are eating consoles' share while doing that.
Price: iPad games are $10 today, but if they ever get close to Tier A of console games, they will get close with price as well. You can't develop that sort of game and sell it for $10 and survive. It is like expecting someone to make MBPro type of laptop for an Acer netbook price.
Storage: even with 64GB of flash disk you cannot have too many big games in your device's memory. Games like Final Fantasy XIII are getting close to dual-layer BR disk. Most Tier A games today will take at least DL DVD, close to 9GB... and your iPad will have other data on it, so it is not like whole 32/64GB will be available for games. The pain of transferring big games from computer to tablet, for those who like to play more games at the same time, would be too much of annoyance.
Controls: type of games you can successfully play on touch-screen is very limited. That being said, I agree some games are actually perfect for touch screen, but not too many.
All in all, I don't know a single PS2/PS3/Xbox gamer who gave up on his/hers console and went iOS gaming; or Android. I realize a lot of people do and will game on iOS/Android, but I think they would not game on dedicated consoles anyway; that means that iOS/Android platforms have a lot of space to grow their gaming market (into non-gamers numbers), but I don't think they are eating consoles' share while doing that.
Price: I have no idea what you mean by ?Tier A [?] console games? but unless you mean that there is a excessive, up-front developer cost simply for getting access to a console?s SDK (to which there is no evidence Apple will ever initiate) then I don?t see how games will be that over priced. Not to mention the increased testing costs for making a game that cannot be updated after it?s been committed to physical media.
Storage: Games have increased in size because they can. You mention a DL-DVD close to 9GB. So what? Why does the enjoyment of a game not occur until you?ve used un an entire DL-DVD worth of content? What logic is there in such a statement?
Controls: Some games are designed for a touchscreen and some are designed for a large display, like a TV, etc. Why does this exclude the iOS-based AppleTV with an iOS-based iDevice from ever being an enjoyable platform to play games on?
I really don?t get this idea that you have to do everything everything else has already done or it?s simply not going to be good. We heard the same things about a the iPad a year ago regarding the OS they used and yet now tailoring an OS for a tablet?s primary I/O is the only viable way to proceed. So, again, why does an iPad and AppleTV have to be everything a 360 and PS3 is for people to enjoy playing games on the system?
Price: I have no idea what you mean by ?Tier A [?] console games? but unless you mean that there is a excessive, up-front developer cost simply for getting access to a console?s SDK (to which there is no evidence Apple will ever initiate) then I don?t see how games will be that over priced. Not to mention the increased testing costs for making a game that cannot be updated after it?s been committed to physical media.
Tier A, as in full priced games (because you can get budget games for consoles and PC as well). If iOS developers ever come out with something like Forza or GT5, price of that game will also be comparable to Forza and GT5. I don't think it is only because of SDK. GT5 was in development for more than 5 years and came out with 1000 cars and huge amount of info regarding all those cars, their manufacturers etc.
And speaking of updates, GT5 already had 3 or 4 updates. Part of the game is being installed on console's HDD and can be updated. Part that doesn't is likely just "passive" data - textures etc. Developer is also releasing content updates - seasonal events (available only between specific dates)etc.
Thinking of it, most of PS3 games I have played so far had at least one update. If your PS3 is permanently on-line, updates don't even ask for your permission - as long as they are available, they will automatically DL and install when you run the game.
Quote:
Storage: Games have increased in size because they can. You mention a DL-DVD close to 9GB. So what? Why does the enjoyment of a game not occur until you?ve used un an entire DL-DVD worth of content? What logic is there in such a statement?
How many modern PC/console games have you played recently..? \
Of course you can enjoy small simple games. I still have some ZX Spectrum and Commodore Amiga emulators on my PC... but honestly, my expectations have gone so far that I run those only for nostalgia and am amused how I could enjoy them much as I remember I was.
While it can be fun pulling the string and launching birds on pigs, it is completely different type of enjoyment as the one provided by game that envelopes you in a story told by couple of hours of HD CGI movie (like FFXIII). Visuals, music, voice acting... can completely suck you in believable phantasy world to a experience no birds will give you, no matter how angry they are. And you can't get that kind of experience with couple of MBs of data. Such spellbound effect requires details, and details require data, production perfection, planning, writing, testing. Hence storage, and price.
Quote:
Controls: Some games are designed for a touchscreen and some are designed for a large display, like a TV, etc. Why does this exclude the iOS-based AppleTV with an iOS-based iDevice from ever being an enjoyable platform to play games on?
I really don?t get this idea that you have to do everything everything else has already done or it?s simply not going to be good. We heard the same things about a the iPad a year ago regarding the OS they used and yet now tailoring an OS for a tablet?s primary I/O is the only viable way to proceed. So, again, why does an iPad and AppleTV have to be everything a 360 and PS3 is for people to enjoy playing games on the system?
They don't have to. Like I said, there will be huge number of gamers playing - and tremendously enjoying iOS games - but they will not come from console/PC gaming crowd. It is just too different, name "game" being in some cases the only similarity.
Regarding controls - I can see games with pull-and-release mechanics being perfect for touch devices, but there's only number of them one can enjoy. Strategies might benefit as well, but not as much - while touching screen can emulate mouse, you are missing mouse pixel precision, right-click, and keyboard for inputs. You can have on-screen keyboard, but then you are loosing too much of screen estate for controls. And then, back to the previous part - have you seen new Starcraft? Even if it is typical point&click strategy, huge part of game's immersion is due to a story told in high quality CG... hence again, problem with available storage. And no, I don't think the game would be even remotely that good without CG video. Modern games are so much more than just playing through it, they are in some cases really amazing multimedia experiences.
I sat down, couple of days ago, to play through couple of GT5 races while my wife was watching some TV shows... I ended up spending most of the evening reading about Kuebelwagen, Schwimmwagen, and exploring history of Ferdinand Porsche, Volkswagen... and I enjoyed even more when I eventually sat to race in those horrible things.
No offense intended, but it sounds to me like you're asking Henry Ford to build you a faster horse.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nikon133
Price: iPad games are $10 today, but if they ever get close to Tier A of console games, they will get close with price as well. You can't develop that sort of game and sell it for $10 and survive. It is like expecting someone to make MBPro type of laptop for an Acer netbook price.
A major change between then and now is the "impulse buy". Back in the good ol' days, if you wanted a game, you'd have to get in your car, drive down to the store (with cash or credit card in hand), select the game you want, pick it up, take it to the counter, and buy it. Many, many opportunities there to change your mind. More recently, you could order online--but you're still ordering a physical product--and then wait, a day or two or more, to receive it. Still you have an opportunity to change your mind: if you decided you don't want it, you can return the package, unopened, and get your refund. $40-80 is not cheap (or maybe I'm just poor... but I digress).
With the App Store, the customer is much more likely to click on "Buy" if the game is $1 or $5 or $10, simply because it looks intriguing, the reviews look good, the graphics look awesome and so on. Besides, if the game sucks, then you're only out a few bucks. Buyer's remorse is minimized, which makes the customer less hesitant in regard to future purchases.
The developer wins as well, because, even if the "unit revenue" is reduced, so is their production/marketing cost. No distribution channels to hassle with, no manufacturing costs, etc. Part of the reason "Tier A" games cost so much is because they got caught in a kind of positive feedback loop: They put a lot of time and energy--and money into development of the game (cost 1), so now they have to market it--TV ads, print ads, posters, cross-merchandising, etc. (cost 2). They have to charge more per unit because of costs 1 & 2, so that they can make a profit. But this means promoting it more, so that they can sell more units (cost 2+).
With online distribution, marketing becomes viral, via word of mouth, user reviews, "popularity", etc.--assuming your game doesn't suck. That greatly reduces your marketing costs (cost 2-). So, minus the cut that Apple takes (in the case of iOS), all the rest of the money is yours.
So, it would be much more difficult to sell, say, 10 million units [of your game] in a physical media format at $40 a pop, than to get 40 million impulse-motivated "Buy" clicks at $10 each. In fact, you could potentially make more money with 40 million $5 App Store sales than 10 million $40 DVD sales, because of how much less you're paying for marketing and distribution.
Quote:
Storage: even with 64GB of flash disk you cannot have too many big games in your device's memory. Games like Final Fantasy XIII are getting close to dual-layer BR disk. Most Tier A games today will take at least DL DVD, close to 9GB... and your iPad will have other data on it, so it is not like whole 32/64GB will be available for games. The pain of transferring big games from computer to tablet, for those who like to play more games at the same time, would be too much of annoyance.
These are technological technicalities. I'm sure there are some pretty bright minds already working on solutions (more flash storage, higher bandwidth, etc.).
Quote:
Controls: type of games you can successfully play on touch-screen is very limited. That being said, I agree some games are actually perfect for touch screen, but not too many.
This is where I got the feeling that you're asking for Henry Ford to build you a faster horse.
We don't yet fully understand where this new tech could take us. But smart, innovative developers will come up with ideas that were never before imagined. Ideas that will push the limits of this new tech or use it in unforeseen ways and cause others to say, "That's madness!!! You can't do that!! It'll never work!" Until it does work, and sells.
All in all, I don't know a single PS2/PS3/Xbox gamer who gave up on his/hers console and went iOS gaming; or Android. I realize a lot of people do and will game on iOS/Android, but I think they would not game on dedicated consoles anyway; that means that iOS/Android platforms have a lot of space to grow their gaming market (into non-gamers numbers), but I don't think they are eating consoles' share while doing that.[/QUOTE]
I didn't read anything in the article that suggested that iOS was going to replace the game console. Just that iOS devices are becoming sophisticated and robust enough to become a serious gaming platform, inching its way to console-quality gaming.
More than that however, the interoperability of the devices (ATV, iPad/iPhone/iPod touch) allows for an entirely new gaming experience.
I was gonna say "not possible in the console environment", but that assumes that the console makers are standing still, which, presumably they are not. If they're smart, they'll see what Apple and iOS game developers are doing, and develop their own "new" gaming ideas, in order to stay relevant and competitive.
You seem to be a perfect example of an education system promoting a "student" before they're ready. You read .... but you don't "see". That's so pathetic it has to be "on purpose" on your part .... so I'm calling Troll .... because to think otherwise would just be too sad. \
Actually if you had bothered to read, you would have seen that I replied to a poster, not the article, but of course you pulled the "troll" bomb, the standard AI reponse to anyone that disagrees with you.
BTW the console gamers here do realise that their "Tier A super duper exclusive" whatevers are increasingly dumbed-down for the common "hardcore" gamer, right?
Resident Evil 5, Call of Duty 4, 5, 6, 7, even Dead Space 2 (which is pretty damn bloody scary and has a good atmosphere and concept), has all become quite formulaic nowadays, particularly the boss appearances and battles. COD:MW2 was okay but I had no idea what was going on most of the time. It was shoot, shoot, crouch, shoot, shoot shoot, run, jump, shoot... The end. No idea what the storyline was even about. With millions of console copies sold, obviously most people didn't care.
You do realise that Angry Birds works my brain harder, right? I play the "Tier A" titles for the cinematic experience, not the stellar gameplay. For that I have StarCraft2, TeamFortress2, etc.
If playing the "Tier A" console titles makes you feel superior being a "real" gamer, enjoy...!
Did anyone actually manage to figure out Riven? I mean, Myst was fantastic and I managed to finish it, with maybe just a bit of cheating the big maze part ... Riven was absolutely beautiful but I had no idea what the heck was going on, I probably only covered one or two out of what, five dics? Years later, tried again with Uru and again, totally lost.
Unfortunately, WiFi cannot accommodate anywhere near enough bandwidth to transmit a 1080p signal to a separate device. AirPlay works by buffering the file to another device, not by sending the decoded a/v signal to the device. I don't think any wireless protocol is available to the consumer that can accommodate what an HDMI cable can do, but in any case, it would be impossible over AirPlay.
Brite-view offers products that claim to do just that - 1080p wireless HDMI w/ very low latency good enough for gaming. Check them out:
Oh no you didn't! Cut The Rope (particularly the iPad version) is a benchmark in modern game design. Have you even finished all the levels? It is truly remarkable, hats off to the team that came up with that. As for the others you mentioned, carry on, we're listening. Just leave Cut The Rope out of it!
Seriously, you use more brain power completing just ONE of the harder levels of Cut The Rope than playing the ENTIRETY of COD:MW2. Mass Effect 2 though, agreed, absolutely superb. Once I finished the storyline I explored every single remaining planet, not wanting it to end.
What we should encourage is excellence in different areas such as Cut The Rope AND Mass Effect 2.
BTW Angry Birds ... Not as inane as you think. Quite a number of people have probably spent equal time on Angry Birds (especially with all the updates and the Eagle as well as Angry Birds Seasons),
when compared to MOST STANDARD LENGTH CONSOLE SHOOTERS.
The "video game" industry is actually in its best shape ever and has the best opportunities ever presented.
Now it's just a matter of when, not if, Apple takes on the consoles at the HDTV level completing their ecosystem of gaming from pocket device to tablet to HDTV.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Superbass
Comparing $10 Need for Speed iPad vs $40 Need for Speed PS3, or $5 Angry Birds vs $50 Call of Duty is really pointless. Most modern "big-ticket" console and PC games aim for between 30-50 hours of content for RPGs/Adventure Titles and 10 hours offline content + unlimited hours of online content for shooters, etc. Most iPhone/Pad titles get repetitive within very few minutes/seconds and are in comparison "impulse buys"/time killers. Just compare Chaos Rings or Zenonia with Dragon Age 4 or Final Fantasy XXVIV, and the $12 vs $50 doesn't seem like such a good deal. Even $1 Talking Larry vs $30 Nintendogs isn't a very good deal unless your only requirement is shutting up the kids for a 6 minute car ride.
Honestly, I find most iPhone and iPad games very similar to the Flash popup advertisement "Games" that are all over the internet, Facebook, etc. Yes there are hundreds of thousands of people out there that can sit for millions of hours and play Facebook gardening games, try and sink baskets on Orbitz.com popup advertisements, play Cut the Rope, etc. These same people probably would have also been more than happy to play the Solitaire game that came bundled with Windows'95 for hours every week.
The fact of the matter is, this market, and its revenue has little to do with people who play Mass Effect, Final Fantasy LVXIII, Super Mario 14, Call of Duty, etc.
It IS, however, a big slab of revenue that all games developers would like to get their hands on, hence the flash-popup-like iPad versions of all sorts of Electronics Arts projects, etc.
Please, just stop circulating the absolute bullcrap that Angry Birds' success is the death knell for the Call of Duty and Dragon Age franchises, and the iPad plugged in with an HDMI dongle/cable somehow is going to make the Wii obsolete.
Remember that millions of people spent millions of hours playing windows Solitaire in 1994, but ID Software and Electronic Arts somehow managed to survive anyways!
You do realise that Angry Birds works my brain harder, right? I play the "Tier A" titles for the cinematic experience, not the stellar gameplay. For that I have StarCraft2, TeamFortress2, etc.
If playing the "Tier A" console titles makes you feel superior being a "real" gamer, enjoy...!
I am by no means a "hard core gamer", but I love StarCraft 2. Sadly, my little 13" MacBook doesn't have the juice to play the way the makers intended. I have to have all my game settings set to "medium" or less in order for it to play smoothly. I wonder if Blizzard has assigned a team to optimize their games for iOS. I hope so!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum
What will happen when someone releases a killer game that can only be run on a Tablet -- with it's portability, touchscreen, cameras, accelerometers, gyroscope, etc.?
...
What/When will be the first game experience for which people will buy a Tablet?
It would be super cool if Blizzard created an iOS division: create entirely new games that take full advantage of iOS (hardware and software) tech.
?iPad 2 sneaks closer to console gaming with 1080p Real Racing 2 HDTV output? makes about as much sense as ?iPad 2 sneaks closer to television set top box with 1080p HDTV output?.
heh, that's exactly how I use it though. i don't subscribe to a TV Subscription service. I use the iPad to watch Hulu, netflix, ABC, TED....
Actually if you had bothered to read, you would have seen that I replied to a poster, not the article, but of course you pulled the "troll" bomb, the standard AI reponse to anyone that disagrees with you.
Yes, and I was the poster that you replied to .... but you would know that ...... if you had bothered to read ..... of course, if you're still 'reading without seeing' it doesn't matter who you're repling to ... it will still be nonsense.
Did anyone actually manage to figure out Riven? I mean, Myst was fantastic and I managed to finish it, with maybe just a bit of cheating the big maze part ... Riven was absolutely beautiful but I had no idea what the heck was going on, I probably only covered one or two out of what, five dics? Years later, tried again with Uru and again, totally lost.
Not me either. In an earlier post I mentioned Myst as the game I played years ago but when I checked out the link that someone gave me, I realized my mistake .... it was Riven that I had (Myst was mentioned on the dvd cover, I believe) .... Anyway, that 'girl behind the door' still startled me half to death .... and I'm still pissed I never found out what disc 3, 4 and 5 contained. Great memories.
With online distribution, marketing becomes viral, via word of mouth, user reviews, "popularity", etc.--assuming your game doesn't suck. That greatly reduces your marketing costs (cost 2-). So, minus the cut that Apple takes (in the case of iOS), all the rest of the money is yours.
How is marketing any different between a game distributed online only versus one distributed on physical media? Both formats can and DO use viral internet marketing, and both formats can benefit from print and TV ads. And people learn about both formats via word of mouth, game review sites, random Facebook messages and tweets. I'd almost wager you've got wider exposure with a physical product since you're going to get free advertisement for a new release via the flyers for various stores, emails from game stores announcing the week's new releases, Amazon's upcoming games list, etc.
PC games aim for between 30-50 hours of content for RPGs/Adventure Titles and 10 hours offline content + unlimited hours of online content for shooters, etc. Most iPhone/Pad titles get repetitive within very few minutes/seconds and are in comparison "impulse buys"/time killers.
In general yes but I think games like Left 4 Dead get quite repetitive after a short time whereas NFS games on iOS offer decent gameplay. Broken Sword for iOS has a few hours of gameplay. GTA Chinatown Wars, Tomb Raider Guardian of Light etc. For the most part I agree entirely that games on consoles have a greater depth to them but the selection of really good titles is quite small and pretty expensive.
What I can see happening is not a move away from the franchises based on quality but the value of the casual gamer increasing to the games industry and persuading developers to look more at casual gaming. I do think there will always be developers who aim to push the boundaries of technology but it's getting less and less profitable to do it.
Despite the fact there are clear benefits in high-end gaming from the consumer experience, if most of the studios go bust pursuing it, where do we end up? We'll end up with a handful of the biggest franchises like CoD, GTA etc and no room for innovative companies. Companies now are having to sell 3-5 million copies to break even after development and marketing.
There is a change in how and where people are playing games and it's not that big franchises will disappear, they'll just move and successful companies will be the ones who prepare for it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LukeSkyMac
For instance, the pixel fillrate for Wii's Hollywood GPU is 972 MPixels/s, while the original iPad's is 1000. iPad 2's is 2x1000 MPixels.
It certainly has more RAM at 512MB vs 88MB, which makes a big difference in the texture quality but in terms of raw performance (FPS, geometry density), it's likely to be closer to the Wii. Here are videos of the iPad 2, Wii and 360 running Dead Space:
The Wii and iPad have lower tessellated geometry and lower quality shaders.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nikon133
All in all, I don't know a single PS2/PS3/Xbox gamer who gave up on his/hers console and went iOS gaming; or Android.
Sure but I'd reword it to say not yet. Transitions rarely happen overnight and I think these are like baby steps that need to be noticed.
Look at the two eco-systems going on right now, you have consoles that sell 50 million units in their 5 year lifespan and you sometimes lose all backwards compatibility with a new model like the PS3. iPhones are at 50 million units per year now. When the quality bar reaches a certain point, why wouldn't someone put Call of Duty on the iPhone?
Console marketing is much harder than the App Store - all a publisher needs to do is send it to Apple for approval and then it's live to everyone, no shipping, no printing and no problems with resale losing you money.
Comments
Hollywood is clocked at 243MHz, while Xenos is at 500MHz and PS3's RSX is 550MHz. iPad 1's PowerVR 535 has one core at 200MHz, and iPad 2's 543 MP2 has two 200MHz cores.
The Wii has 88Mb of total memory, 64Mb of those are GDDR3 graphics memory. It's unknown how many the 543 MP2 has, but it also shares 512Mb with the super-fast system memory, like the Xbox 360 does: it has 512Mb of GDDR3 memory that are also the RAM.
So the iPad 2 is much closer to a 360 than a Wii
I bought my Apple ][ in July 1978. In December of 1978, with 2 partners I opened the 5th computer store in Siicon Valley -- 7/10 of a mile from Bandley 1 (Apple Headquarters).
Being close to Apple, and the Best Apple retailer in Silicon Valley -- we had a constant stream of Apple employees in our store -- from the 2 Steves, Wiggington, Andy, Chris, Bill, Wil, Wendell, Scottie... yadda, yadda, yadda.
These guys would drop by to tell us some questions (about what was coming) and do impromptu demos for several hours. Woz, in particular, usually had a coterie of camp followers: Cap'n Crunch (when out on parole), Tog, etc. -- lot's of people who were being recruited by Apple.
We sold mainly Apple ][ computers in the early days (a few NorthStars, and Altairs).
I certainly know about the GR and HGR modes on the Apple ][.
I used the low-res example so as not to confuse the issue with too much data.
I bought mine in 1980.
Apple "Breakout" was single player -- so in that way, it was a bad implementation of Pong.
Apple breakout was single player because the popular atari breakout was single player. The Apple ][ certainly wasn't constrained to single player. There were many great multi-player games for the Apple ][, including Dr. J vs Larry Bird One on One released for the hardware a couple of years later. A game far more advanced than Pong.
And I'll give you that Apple TV was released pretty much to get something else. That's why they called it a hobby. It was an unusual move for Apple to release something before they really figured out what it was supposed to be.
Um? no. Look, AI. It?s sort of cute when you, Gruber, and other pro-Apple outlets try to claim that Apple is somehow chewing into the console games market, but? the fact is, they aren?t. The iPod Touch (and iPhone to a lesser extent) are certainly excelling at the entry-level, casual games market. After all, for people who just want to play something simple on the subway ride to work or while waiting in line somewhere, why spend $250 on a 3DS? Apple?s done a great job of getting into that market.
But there are very few people out there who are going to spend $500+ on an iPad and $40 on an HDMI adapter when they can get an Xbox 360 or PlayStation 3 for half that. Just isn?t going to happen. If anything, the iPad will slightly cannibalize the gaming segment of the iPod Touch user base.
I love AI, Daring Fireball, and my Apple products, but Apple-oriented sites really have to rethink how they look at the gaming market. Angry Birds and Real Racing HD are not the ruin of, or even legitimate competition for, Assassin?s Creed, Final Fantasy, Call of Duty, Battlefield, anything named Mario, Gran Turismo, Forza Motorsport, or any other long-running console franchise I can list here. Just is not. There?s a huge blind spot among Apple punditry when it comes to gaming.
I will only add that new Nintendo 3Ds is pre-ordering, and numbers are 2x the numbers of Nintendo Wii. In UK, it is the best selling gadget on Amazon ever. and it sold 400,000 units in Japan in 2 days.
And we're talking about 3Ds, which is closest match to iOS portable gaming. It really doesn't seem to be hurting at all with abundance of mobile games, be it iOS or Android.
I fear that Facebook Farmville-sort-of-games on Flash enabled tablets (if they ever get fully functional) will pose bigger threat to PC/Console gaming than iOS/Android dedicated games.
I agree with you about the titles but not so much on the cost. The cheapest, latest model PS3 and 360 are $300 on Amazon. Games for the platform are $40-60. Even if you say $40 and you get 5 games, your cost is $500. iPad games are about $10 each so it would be $550. Another game or two and the iPad is better value.
The games are quite poor just now but the selection is much higher and console games aren't all that great either. There are only a few games on each platform that stand out.
While there's no making up for those titles not being available, this has the potential to change casual gaming in a big way. Imagine a family playing a board game like Monopoly or Clue hooked up to the big TV. No more need to have a cupboard full of boxed games. You can even play pictionary without having sheets of paper everywhere and pens that run out of ink. Music games, rockband-type games and so on.
Plus as people have mentioned, you also get a tablet device to use for browsing, books and other apps.
It can't replace the console role until it has the big titles but that can easily come in time. The iPad 2 has only just reached the required graphics performance bar to make this happen.
Couples of problems there:
Price: iPad games are $10 today, but if they ever get close to Tier A of console games, they will get close with price as well. You can't develop that sort of game and sell it for $10 and survive. It is like expecting someone to make MBPro type of laptop for an Acer netbook price.
Storage: even with 64GB of flash disk you cannot have too many big games in your device's memory. Games like Final Fantasy XIII are getting close to dual-layer BR disk. Most Tier A games today will take at least DL DVD, close to 9GB... and your iPad will have other data on it, so it is not like whole 32/64GB will be available for games. The pain of transferring big games from computer to tablet, for those who like to play more games at the same time, would be too much of annoyance.
Controls: type of games you can successfully play on touch-screen is very limited. That being said, I agree some games are actually perfect for touch screen, but not too many.
All in all, I don't know a single PS2/PS3/Xbox gamer who gave up on his/hers console and went iOS gaming; or Android. I realize a lot of people do and will game on iOS/Android, but I think they would not game on dedicated consoles anyway; that means that iOS/Android platforms have a lot of space to grow their gaming market (into non-gamers numbers), but I don't think they are eating consoles' share while doing that.
Couples of problems there:
Price: iPad games are $10 today, but if they ever get close to Tier A of console games, they will get close with price as well. You can't develop that sort of game and sell it for $10 and survive. It is like expecting someone to make MBPro type of laptop for an Acer netbook price.
Storage: even with 64GB of flash disk you cannot have too many big games in your device's memory. Games like Final Fantasy XIII are getting close to dual-layer BR disk. Most Tier A games today will take at least DL DVD, close to 9GB... and your iPad will have other data on it, so it is not like whole 32/64GB will be available for games. The pain of transferring big games from computer to tablet, for those who like to play more games at the same time, would be too much of annoyance.
Controls: type of games you can successfully play on touch-screen is very limited. That being said, I agree some games are actually perfect for touch screen, but not too many.
All in all, I don't know a single PS2/PS3/Xbox gamer who gave up on his/hers console and went iOS gaming; or Android. I realize a lot of people do and will game on iOS/Android, but I think they would not game on dedicated consoles anyway; that means that iOS/Android platforms have a lot of space to grow their gaming market (into non-gamers numbers), but I don't think they are eating consoles' share while doing that.
Price: I have no idea what you mean by ?Tier A [?] console games? but unless you mean that there is a excessive, up-front developer cost simply for getting access to a console?s SDK (to which there is no evidence Apple will ever initiate) then I don?t see how games will be that over priced. Not to mention the increased testing costs for making a game that cannot be updated after it?s been committed to physical media.
Storage: Games have increased in size because they can. You mention a DL-DVD close to 9GB. So what? Why does the enjoyment of a game not occur until you?ve used un an entire DL-DVD worth of content? What logic is there in such a statement?
Controls: Some games are designed for a touchscreen and some are designed for a large display, like a TV, etc. Why does this exclude the iOS-based AppleTV with an iOS-based iDevice from ever being an enjoyable platform to play games on?
I really don?t get this idea that you have to do everything everything else has already done or it?s simply not going to be good. We heard the same things about a the iPad a year ago regarding the OS they used and yet now tailoring an OS for a tablet?s primary I/O is the only viable way to proceed. So, again, why does an iPad and AppleTV have to be everything a 360 and PS3 is for people to enjoy playing games on the system?
Price: I have no idea what you mean by ?Tier A [?] console games? but unless you mean that there is a excessive, up-front developer cost simply for getting access to a console?s SDK (to which there is no evidence Apple will ever initiate) then I don?t see how games will be that over priced. Not to mention the increased testing costs for making a game that cannot be updated after it?s been committed to physical media.
Tier A, as in full priced games (because you can get budget games for consoles and PC as well). If iOS developers ever come out with something like Forza or GT5, price of that game will also be comparable to Forza and GT5. I don't think it is only because of SDK. GT5 was in development for more than 5 years and came out with 1000 cars and huge amount of info regarding all those cars, their manufacturers etc.
And speaking of updates, GT5 already had 3 or 4 updates. Part of the game is being installed on console's HDD and can be updated. Part that doesn't is likely just "passive" data - textures etc. Developer is also releasing content updates - seasonal events (available only between specific dates)etc.
Thinking of it, most of PS3 games I have played so far had at least one update. If your PS3 is permanently on-line, updates don't even ask for your permission - as long as they are available, they will automatically DL and install when you run the game.
Storage: Games have increased in size because they can. You mention a DL-DVD close to 9GB. So what? Why does the enjoyment of a game not occur until you?ve used un an entire DL-DVD worth of content? What logic is there in such a statement?
How many modern PC/console games have you played recently..?
Of course you can enjoy small simple games. I still have some ZX Spectrum and Commodore Amiga emulators on my PC... but honestly, my expectations have gone so far that I run those only for nostalgia and am amused how I could enjoy them much as I remember I was.
While it can be fun pulling the string and launching birds on pigs, it is completely different type of enjoyment as the one provided by game that envelopes you in a story told by couple of hours of HD CGI movie (like FFXIII). Visuals, music, voice acting... can completely suck you in believable phantasy world to a experience no birds will give you, no matter how angry they are. And you can't get that kind of experience with couple of MBs of data. Such spellbound effect requires details, and details require data, production perfection, planning, writing, testing. Hence storage, and price.
Controls: Some games are designed for a touchscreen and some are designed for a large display, like a TV, etc. Why does this exclude the iOS-based AppleTV with an iOS-based iDevice from ever being an enjoyable platform to play games on?
I really don?t get this idea that you have to do everything everything else has already done or it?s simply not going to be good. We heard the same things about a the iPad a year ago regarding the OS they used and yet now tailoring an OS for a tablet?s primary I/O is the only viable way to proceed. So, again, why does an iPad and AppleTV have to be everything a 360 and PS3 is for people to enjoy playing games on the system?
They don't have to. Like I said, there will be huge number of gamers playing - and tremendously enjoying iOS games - but they will not come from console/PC gaming crowd. It is just too different, name "game" being in some cases the only similarity.
Regarding controls - I can see games with pull-and-release mechanics being perfect for touch devices, but there's only number of them one can enjoy. Strategies might benefit as well, but not as much - while touching screen can emulate mouse, you are missing mouse pixel precision, right-click, and keyboard for inputs. You can have on-screen keyboard, but then you are loosing too much of screen estate for controls. And then, back to the previous part - have you seen new Starcraft? Even if it is typical point&click strategy, huge part of game's immersion is due to a story told in high quality CG... hence again, problem with available storage. And no, I don't think the game would be even remotely that good without CG video. Modern games are so much more than just playing through it, they are in some cases really amazing multimedia experiences.
I sat down, couple of days ago, to play through couple of GT5 races while my wife was watching some TV shows... I ended up spending most of the evening reading about Kuebelwagen, Schwimmwagen, and exploring history of Ferdinand Porsche, Volkswagen... and I enjoyed even more when I eventually sat to race in those horrible things.
Price: iPad games are $10 today, but if they ever get close to Tier A of console games, they will get close with price as well. You can't develop that sort of game and sell it for $10 and survive. It is like expecting someone to make MBPro type of laptop for an Acer netbook price.
A major change between then and now is the "impulse buy". Back in the good ol' days, if you wanted a game, you'd have to get in your car, drive down to the store (with cash or credit card in hand), select the game you want, pick it up, take it to the counter, and buy it. Many, many opportunities there to change your mind. More recently, you could order online--but you're still ordering a physical product--and then wait, a day or two or more, to receive it. Still you have an opportunity to change your mind: if you decided you don't want it, you can return the package, unopened, and get your refund. $40-80 is not cheap (or maybe I'm just poor... but I digress).
With the App Store, the customer is much more likely to click on "Buy" if the game is $1 or $5 or $10, simply because it looks intriguing, the reviews look good, the graphics look awesome and so on. Besides, if the game sucks, then you're only out a few bucks. Buyer's remorse is minimized, which makes the customer less hesitant in regard to future purchases.
The developer wins as well, because, even if the "unit revenue" is reduced, so is their production/marketing cost. No distribution channels to hassle with, no manufacturing costs, etc. Part of the reason "Tier A" games cost so much is because they got caught in a kind of positive feedback loop: They put a lot of time and energy--and money into development of the game (cost 1), so now they have to market it--TV ads, print ads, posters, cross-merchandising, etc. (cost 2). They have to charge more per unit because of costs 1 & 2, so that they can make a profit. But this means promoting it more, so that they can sell more units (cost 2+).
With online distribution, marketing becomes viral, via word of mouth, user reviews, "popularity", etc.--assuming your game doesn't suck. That greatly reduces your marketing costs (cost 2-). So, minus the cut that Apple takes (in the case of iOS), all the rest of the money is yours.
So, it would be much more difficult to sell, say, 10 million units [of your game] in a physical media format at $40 a pop, than to get 40 million impulse-motivated "Buy" clicks at $10 each. In fact, you could potentially make more money with 40 million $5 App Store sales than 10 million $40 DVD sales, because of how much less you're paying for marketing and distribution.
Storage: even with 64GB of flash disk you cannot have too many big games in your device's memory. Games like Final Fantasy XIII are getting close to dual-layer BR disk. Most Tier A games today will take at least DL DVD, close to 9GB... and your iPad will have other data on it, so it is not like whole 32/64GB will be available for games. The pain of transferring big games from computer to tablet, for those who like to play more games at the same time, would be too much of annoyance.
These are technological technicalities. I'm sure there are some pretty bright minds already working on solutions (more flash storage, higher bandwidth, etc.).
Controls: type of games you can successfully play on touch-screen is very limited. That being said, I agree some games are actually perfect for touch screen, but not too many.
This is where I got the feeling that you're asking for Henry Ford to build you a faster horse.
We don't yet fully understand where this new tech could take us. But smart, innovative developers will come up with ideas that were never before imagined. Ideas that will push the limits of this new tech or use it in unforeseen ways and cause others to say, "That's madness!!! You can't do that!! It'll never work!" Until it does work, and sells.
All in all, I don't know a single PS2/PS3/Xbox gamer who gave up on his/hers console and went iOS gaming; or Android. I realize a lot of people do and will game on iOS/Android, but I think they would not game on dedicated consoles anyway; that means that iOS/Android platforms have a lot of space to grow their gaming market (into non-gamers numbers), but I don't think they are eating consoles' share while doing that.[/QUOTE]
I didn't read anything in the article that suggested that iOS was going to replace the game console. Just that iOS devices are becoming sophisticated and robust enough to become a serious gaming platform, inching its way to console-quality gaming.
More than that however, the interoperability of the devices (ATV, iPad/iPhone/iPod touch) allows for an entirely new gaming experience.
I was gonna say "not possible in the console environment", but that assumes that the console makers are standing still, which, presumably they are not. If they're smart, they'll see what Apple and iOS game developers are doing, and develop their own "new" gaming ideas, in order to stay relevant and competitive.
You seem to be a perfect example of an education system promoting a "student" before they're ready. You read .... but you don't "see". That's so pathetic it has to be "on purpose" on your part .... so I'm calling Troll .... because to think otherwise would just be too sad.
Actually if you had bothered to read, you would have seen that I replied to a poster, not the article, but of course you pulled the "troll" bomb, the standard AI reponse to anyone that disagrees with you.
Go play with your toy console REAL GAMERS use a keyboard and mouse.
Nice one...
Resident Evil 5, Call of Duty 4, 5, 6, 7, even Dead Space 2 (which is pretty damn bloody scary and has a good atmosphere and concept), has all become quite formulaic nowadays, particularly the boss appearances and battles. COD:MW2 was okay but I had no idea what was going on most of the time. It was shoot, shoot, crouch, shoot, shoot shoot, run, jump, shoot... The end. No idea what the storyline was even about. With millions of console copies sold, obviously most people didn't care.
You do realise that Angry Birds works my brain harder, right? I play the "Tier A" titles for the cinematic experience, not the stellar gameplay. For that I have StarCraft2, TeamFortress2, etc.
If playing the "Tier A" console titles makes you feel superior being a "real" gamer, enjoy...!
FYI, Myst is on iOS http://itunes.apple.com/app/myst/id311941991?mt=8
Did anyone actually manage to figure out Riven? I mean, Myst was fantastic and I managed to finish it, with maybe just a bit of cheating the big maze part
Unfortunately, WiFi cannot accommodate anywhere near enough bandwidth to transmit a 1080p signal to a separate device. AirPlay works by buffering the file to another device, not by sending the decoded a/v signal to the device. I don't think any wireless protocol is available to the consumer that can accommodate what an HDMI cable can do, but in any case, it would be impossible over AirPlay.
Brite-view offers products that claim to do just that - 1080p wireless HDMI w/ very low latency good enough for gaming. Check them out:
http://www.brite-view.com/hdelight.php
This tech combined with the iPad2 would be killer....iPad3 perhaps?
Seriously, you use more brain power completing just ONE of the harder levels of Cut The Rope than playing the ENTIRETY of COD:MW2. Mass Effect 2 though, agreed, absolutely superb. Once I finished the storyline I explored every single remaining planet, not wanting it to end.
What we should encourage is excellence in different areas such as Cut The Rope AND Mass Effect 2.
BTW Angry Birds ... Not as inane as you think. Quite a number of people have probably spent equal time on Angry Birds (especially with all the updates and the Eagle as well as Angry Birds Seasons),
when compared to MOST STANDARD LENGTH CONSOLE SHOOTERS.
The "video game" industry is actually in its best shape ever and has the best opportunities ever presented.
Now it's just a matter of when, not if, Apple takes on the consoles at the HDTV level completing their ecosystem of gaming from pocket device to tablet to HDTV.
Comparing $10 Need for Speed iPad vs $40 Need for Speed PS3, or $5 Angry Birds vs $50 Call of Duty is really pointless. Most modern "big-ticket" console and PC games aim for between 30-50 hours of content for RPGs/Adventure Titles and 10 hours offline content + unlimited hours of online content for shooters, etc. Most iPhone/Pad titles get repetitive within very few minutes/seconds and are in comparison "impulse buys"/time killers. Just compare Chaos Rings or Zenonia with Dragon Age 4 or Final Fantasy XXVIV, and the $12 vs $50 doesn't seem like such a good deal. Even $1 Talking Larry vs $30 Nintendogs isn't a very good deal unless your only requirement is shutting up the kids for a 6 minute car ride.
Honestly, I find most iPhone and iPad games very similar to the Flash popup advertisement "Games" that are all over the internet, Facebook, etc. Yes there are hundreds of thousands of people out there that can sit for millions of hours and play Facebook gardening games, try and sink baskets on Orbitz.com popup advertisements, play Cut the Rope, etc. These same people probably would have also been more than happy to play the Solitaire game that came bundled with Windows'95 for hours every week.
The fact of the matter is, this market, and its revenue has little to do with people who play Mass Effect, Final Fantasy LVXIII, Super Mario 14, Call of Duty, etc.
It IS, however, a big slab of revenue that all games developers would like to get their hands on, hence the flash-popup-like iPad versions of all sorts of Electronics Arts projects, etc.
Please, just stop circulating the absolute bullcrap that Angry Birds' success is the death knell for the Call of Duty and Dragon Age franchises, and the iPad plugged in with an HDMI dongle/cable somehow is going to make the Wii obsolete.
Remember that millions of people spent millions of hours playing windows Solitaire in 1994, but ID Software and Electronic Arts somehow managed to survive anyways!
You do realise that Angry Birds works my brain harder, right? I play the "Tier A" titles for the cinematic experience, not the stellar gameplay. For that I have StarCraft2, TeamFortress2, etc.
If playing the "Tier A" console titles makes you feel superior being a "real" gamer, enjoy...!
I am by no means a "hard core gamer", but I love StarCraft 2. Sadly, my little 13" MacBook doesn't have the juice to play the way the makers intended. I have to have all my game settings set to "medium" or less in order for it to play smoothly. I wonder if Blizzard has assigned a team to optimize their games for iOS. I hope so!
What will happen when someone releases a killer game that can only be run on a Tablet -- with it's portability, touchscreen, cameras, accelerometers, gyroscope, etc.?
...
What/When will be the first game experience for which people will buy a Tablet?
It would be super cool if Blizzard created an iOS division: create entirely new games that take full advantage of iOS (hardware and software) tech.
?iPad 2 sneaks closer to console gaming with 1080p Real Racing 2 HDTV output? makes about as much sense as ?iPad 2 sneaks closer to television set top box with 1080p HDTV output?.
heh, that's exactly how I use it though. i don't subscribe to a TV Subscription service. I use the iPad to watch Hulu, netflix, ABC, TED....
FYI, Myst is on iOS http://itunes.apple.com/app/myst/id311941991?mt=8
Thanks for the info, I appreciate it.
Actually if you had bothered to read, you would have seen that I replied to a poster, not the article, but of course you pulled the "troll" bomb, the standard AI reponse to anyone that disagrees with you.
Yes, and I was the poster that you replied to .... but you would know that ...... if you had bothered to read ..... of course, if you're still 'reading without seeing' it doesn't matter who you're repling to ... it will still be nonsense.
Did anyone actually manage to figure out Riven? I mean, Myst was fantastic and I managed to finish it, with maybe just a bit of cheating the big maze part
Not me either. In an earlier post I mentioned Myst as the game I played years ago but when I checked out the link that someone gave me, I realized my mistake .... it was Riven that I had (Myst was mentioned on the dvd cover, I believe) .... Anyway, that 'girl behind the door' still startled me half to death .... and I'm still pissed I never found out what disc 3, 4 and 5 contained. Great memories.
With online distribution, marketing becomes viral, via word of mouth, user reviews, "popularity", etc.--assuming your game doesn't suck. That greatly reduces your marketing costs (cost 2-). So, minus the cut that Apple takes (in the case of iOS), all the rest of the money is yours.
How is marketing any different between a game distributed online only versus one distributed on physical media? Both formats can and DO use viral internet marketing, and both formats can benefit from print and TV ads. And people learn about both formats via word of mouth, game review sites, random Facebook messages and tweets. I'd almost wager you've got wider exposure with a physical product since you're going to get free advertisement for a new release via the flyers for various stores, emails from game stores announcing the week's new releases, Amazon's upcoming games list, etc.
PC games aim for between 30-50 hours of content for RPGs/Adventure Titles and 10 hours offline content + unlimited hours of online content for shooters, etc. Most iPhone/Pad titles get repetitive within very few minutes/seconds and are in comparison "impulse buys"/time killers.
In general yes but I think games like Left 4 Dead get quite repetitive after a short time whereas NFS games on iOS offer decent gameplay. Broken Sword for iOS has a few hours of gameplay. GTA Chinatown Wars, Tomb Raider Guardian of Light etc. For the most part I agree entirely that games on consoles have a greater depth to them but the selection of really good titles is quite small and pretty expensive.
What I can see happening is not a move away from the franchises based on quality but the value of the casual gamer increasing to the games industry and persuading developers to look more at casual gaming. I do think there will always be developers who aim to push the boundaries of technology but it's getting less and less profitable to do it.
Despite the fact there are clear benefits in high-end gaming from the consumer experience, if most of the studios go bust pursuing it, where do we end up? We'll end up with a handful of the biggest franchises like CoD, GTA etc and no room for innovative companies. Companies now are having to sell 3-5 million copies to break even after development and marketing.
There is a change in how and where people are playing games and it's not that big franchises will disappear, they'll just move and successful companies will be the ones who prepare for it.
For instance, the pixel fillrate for Wii's Hollywood GPU is 972 MPixels/s, while the original iPad's is 1000. iPad 2's is 2x1000 MPixels.
Textured fillrate benchmarks are noted here:
http://crave.cnet.co.uk/laptops/ipad...bath-50003236/
iPad 1 is listed as 228 MTexels/s.
So the iPad 2 is much closer to a 360 than a Wii
It certainly has more RAM at 512MB vs 88MB, which makes a big difference in the texture quality but in terms of raw performance (FPS, geometry density), it's likely to be closer to the Wii. Here are videos of the iPad 2, Wii and 360 running Dead Space:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ep5k5c31FDo (iPad 2 skip to 6:38)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJLvFtooT9E (Wii)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4wxfjozXUJQ (360)
The Wii and iPad have lower tessellated geometry and lower quality shaders.
All in all, I don't know a single PS2/PS3/Xbox gamer who gave up on his/hers console and went iOS gaming; or Android.
Sure but I'd reword it to say not yet. Transitions rarely happen overnight and I think these are like baby steps that need to be noticed.
Look at the two eco-systems going on right now, you have consoles that sell 50 million units in their 5 year lifespan and you sometimes lose all backwards compatibility with a new model like the PS3. iPhones are at 50 million units per year now. When the quality bar reaches a certain point, why wouldn't someone put Call of Duty on the iPhone?
Console marketing is much harder than the App Store - all a publisher needs to do is send it to Apple for approval and then it's live to everyone, no shipping, no printing and no problems with resale losing you money.