Game makers say Apple, Steve Jobs have most influence on industry
A new survey of people working in the gaming world has found that Steve Jobs is the most influential person in the industry, and that insiders believe the iPhone is shaping the future of videogames.
The survey of 1,000 people working in the industry was conducted ahead of the London Games Conference 2011, set to kick off on Nov. 10. The poll found that 26 percent of respondents said Jobs is the No. 1 most influential person in the industry, while 46 percent of respondents included Jobs in their top five.
The late Apple co-founder beat Gabe Newell, co-founder and managing director of Valve, who took second place with 16 percent of first-place votes. In third place was Nintendo's Shigeru Miyamoto, who earned 7 percent of first-place votes.
Coming in fourth place was Tim Berners-Lee, inventor of the World Wide Web, who took the top spot with 4 percent of respondents. And in fifth was Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg with 3 percent.
Apple's influence in the industry extends beyond Jobs, however. When asked to name the most influential product in the industry, 17 percent of respondents said that Apple's iPhone took the top spot, while 53 percent of respondents included the iPhone in their top five devices.
Taking second place among the 1,000 polled was the Nintendo Wii console, with 7 percent saying it was the most influential. Microsoft's Xbox Live service took third with 3 percent, the original Sony Playstation was fourth with 3 percent, and Steam, Valve's online digital distribution storefront, took fifth with 2 percent.
"In just over three years the iPhone and the App Store have transformed what consumers expect of games, and how the industry makes and sells them -- today, download games have come to the fore," said Michael French, editor in chief of gaming magazine MCV.
"Steve Jobs, the iPhone?s driving force, was the ultimate independent developer -- uncompromising in his vision, with unquestionable influence, and hugely artistic and commercial results. Apple thrived by linking ultra-desirable mobile devices to compelling online services."
Games have become a very important part of the iOS platform, and such titles routinely dominate the top sales charts on the App Store for iPhone, iPad and iPod touch. Other portable game makers, such as Nintendo, have seen their profits sharply decline as Apple's success in the market has grown.
Last year Apple began to make a stronger push for gamers with the launch of Game Center, its own social network for iOS, allowing gamers to compare high scores and challenge each other to online match-ups. The service is similar to Sony's PlayStation Network or Microsoft's Xbox Live.
Apple has even begun to encroach on the console gaming market dominated by Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft. The new AirPlay Mirroring feature in iOS 5 allows iOS devices to wirelessly stream to an Apple TV, and titles like Real Racing 2 HD have utilized it to create a living room multiplayer experience.
The survey of 1,000 people working in the industry was conducted ahead of the London Games Conference 2011, set to kick off on Nov. 10. The poll found that 26 percent of respondents said Jobs is the No. 1 most influential person in the industry, while 46 percent of respondents included Jobs in their top five.
The late Apple co-founder beat Gabe Newell, co-founder and managing director of Valve, who took second place with 16 percent of first-place votes. In third place was Nintendo's Shigeru Miyamoto, who earned 7 percent of first-place votes.
Coming in fourth place was Tim Berners-Lee, inventor of the World Wide Web, who took the top spot with 4 percent of respondents. And in fifth was Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg with 3 percent.
Apple's influence in the industry extends beyond Jobs, however. When asked to name the most influential product in the industry, 17 percent of respondents said that Apple's iPhone took the top spot, while 53 percent of respondents included the iPhone in their top five devices.
Taking second place among the 1,000 polled was the Nintendo Wii console, with 7 percent saying it was the most influential. Microsoft's Xbox Live service took third with 3 percent, the original Sony Playstation was fourth with 3 percent, and Steam, Valve's online digital distribution storefront, took fifth with 2 percent.
"In just over three years the iPhone and the App Store have transformed what consumers expect of games, and how the industry makes and sells them -- today, download games have come to the fore," said Michael French, editor in chief of gaming magazine MCV.
"Steve Jobs, the iPhone?s driving force, was the ultimate independent developer -- uncompromising in his vision, with unquestionable influence, and hugely artistic and commercial results. Apple thrived by linking ultra-desirable mobile devices to compelling online services."
Games have become a very important part of the iOS platform, and such titles routinely dominate the top sales charts on the App Store for iPhone, iPad and iPod touch. Other portable game makers, such as Nintendo, have seen their profits sharply decline as Apple's success in the market has grown.
Last year Apple began to make a stronger push for gamers with the launch of Game Center, its own social network for iOS, allowing gamers to compare high scores and challenge each other to online match-ups. The service is similar to Sony's PlayStation Network or Microsoft's Xbox Live.
Apple has even begun to encroach on the console gaming market dominated by Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft. The new AirPlay Mirroring feature in iOS 5 allows iOS devices to wirelessly stream to an Apple TV, and titles like Real Racing 2 HD have utilized it to create a living room multiplayer experience.
Comments
A new survey of people working in the gaming world has found that Steve Jobs is the most influential person in the industry...
"is" proves SJ is immortal
btw, I'm first batches. What...what. That's what I thought. If you have anything to say about it, I'll meet you in the playground at 3:30.
Except when he does compromise, like when he caved and allowed for apps on iOS. Sometimes it pays to listen to people
But...there are some very cool games for iPad/iOS too.
That is a bit strange since most games on pure touch devices are crap when it comes to the part of controls.
But...there are some very cool games for iPad/iOS too.
You are correct, the real reason.....greed.
A simple iPhone game, probably costs one tenth of a game like Battlefield 3 that is on consoles and PC's. However with as many iphones/ipads that simple game might just make as much as Battlefield 3 in the end (if its good).
The consumer ends up with a bunch nice, simple games but could end up not getting the higher end games in the long run.
?not do Mac versions of any further games in a very successful series.
You can always build a Cider port of Halo 2 like I did.
I've never read about anybody connected with game development saying Apple consistently supported the gaming industry or made gaming a priority. I've read the opposite. When I think of games I don't think of Steve Jobs. Gaming was limited on the Mac because the market share was small and it's big on iOS because market share is large. Steve Jobs probably knew there wasn't a lot he could do besides focus on making Apple successful and hope that would raise all boats. He certainly knew his power in games was limited after the humiliation of having Bungie announce the first Halo game during one of his Macworld keynotes only to see Microsoft buy Bungie and grudgingly release a Mac version of Halo years later and then not do Mac versions of any further games in a very successful series.
Think of it this way. Let say there are 50 million Xbox's out there and maybe 50% of those play Halo. Vs 100 million iOS devices and 50% of them play Angry birds.
Halo cost $59
AB cost $.99
Which cost more to develop?
Which cost more to support?
In the end game makers want to make money. Making money is sales - cost = profit
That is a bit strange since most games on pure touch devices are crap when it comes to the part of controls.
I think that's the reason Apple didn't score higher. There's still a dichotomy in the market where a lot of 'l33t' people think that only their games matter. if it's not super high frame rates at high resolutions with bad guys approaching you from all directions and you shooting bazillions of weapons, it's no good. That's BS.
There are different kinds of games for different people. Not everyone wants to play "World of Halo Civilization Deathmatch Killer Zombieland" or whatever the 'cool' people are playing these days.
If I'm to belive things I read here and on macrumors. A lot of it does not corespond to the reality I see around me. Apple revolutionized...apple owns...apple most blabla...the "Apple sonn to dominate the worlds"- ish kind.
This game thing is one of them. I do not know a single gamer (and I knows lots, inkl myself) who considers iOS a serious gaming platform. Everyone around me plats PC, PS, Xbox and nintendo games. And funny enough...It is rare seeing anyone I know or see in public places with a iPhone or other touchphone spending any time gaming at all.
What am I missing....
You sound like you're just came out of an ESL class.
Think of it this way. Let say there are 50 million Xbox's out there and maybe 50% of those play Halo. Vs 100 million iOS devices and 50% of them play Angry birds.
Halo cost $59
AB cost $.99
Which cost more to develop?
Which cost more to support?
In the end game makers want to make money. Making money is sales - cost = profit
Not sure I understand your argument.
25M Halo at 59$ = 1475M
50M Angry Birds at .99$ = 50M
Even if it cost 500M to develop and support Halo, based on your argument, if total profit is your goal, the Halo route is the road you want to take.
That is a bit strange since most games on pure touch devices are crap when it comes to the part of controls.
But...there are some very cool games for iPad/iOS too.
I'll never understand how gamers think that a handful of clunky buttons compares with the potential of a device that responds to tilt, orientation, touch, sound, global position, etc etc.
Then again, I think most are just punching buttons on a FPS.
But I don't spend my life playing games like a 4-year-old, so I'm hardly expert.
Not sure I understand your argument.
25M Halo at 59$ = 1475M
50M Angry Birds at .99$ = 50M
Even if it cost 500M to develop and support Halo, based on your argument, if total profit is your goal, the Halo route is the road you want to take.
But, you have to also consider that it probably takes 100 times as many man hours creating Halo. So, if in that same time you could make 100 Angry Birds type games, then the equation becomes much different.
most probably owe their careers to the man.
But, you have to also consider that it probably takes 100 times as many man hours creating Halo. So, if in that same time you could make 100 Angry Birds type games, then the equation becomes much different.
Your math won't add up at scale. We aren't sure if the market will even bare 100 Angry Birds type games.
"Steve Jobs 'had'".
You sound like you're just came out of an ESL class.
Mocking someone tends to work best when you don't exhibit the trait being mocked.
But, you have to also consider that it probably takes 100 times as many man hours creating Halo. So, if in that same time you could make 100 Angry Birds type games, then the equation becomes much different.
Correct.
Now which ONE company has 100 game titles that are as popular as Angry birds?
I think the answer is if you want to make small base hits while putting limited capital at risk, you go the iOS route. If you have deeper pockets and want to hit grand slams, you go the gaming console route.
from what I have read, this seems to be polling attendees of a conference focused on iOS and android gaming development, so its hardly surprising that SJ would score highly among these people.
most probably owe their careers to the man.
Of course we have had Reggie from Nintendo say that Apple was a bigger threat than MS was, so clearly Apple has been impacting the industry in gaming as well. How many reports have there been of Nintendo having vast amounts of mind and market share stolen by Apple?
I'll never understand how gamers think that a handful of clunky buttons compares with the potential of a device that responds to tilt, orientation, touch, sound, global position, etc etc.
Then again, I think most are just punching buttons on a FPS.
But I don't spend my life playing games like a 4-year-old, so I'm hardly expert.
I think you'll find you've insulted many people with your stereotyped view of gamers. It's pretty much the same lazy one used by ignorant politicians. The games I hope to be playing this Christmas are either Dark Souls, Batman or Skyrim, which are all 18+ and not suitable for my two young kids.
Aside from music, for me most of them overshadow anything from any other form of entertainment, but each to their own. The input devices vary, but buttons are still the clear winner compared to motion / touch / tilt detection / voice.
As far as the thread is concerned Apple has created a great platform for distributing mostly casual games at a very competitive price. But in my opinion, their influence isn't nowhere near that of Nintendo.
Ok, I need to get this straight.
If I'm to belive things I read here and on macrumors. A lot of it does not corespond to the reality I see around me. Apple revolutionized...apple owns...apple most blabla...the "Apple sonn to dominate the worlds"- ish kind.
This game thing is one of them. I do not know a single gamer (and I knows lots, inkl myself) who considers iOS a serious gaming platform. Everyone around me plats PC, PS, Xbox and nintendo games. And funny enough...It is rare seeing anyone I know with a iPhone or other touchphone spending any time gaming at all.
What am I missing....
The survey was about people that work in the gaming industry, not necessarily consumers of the games. Apple changed the industry by opening it up to more developers. There used to be a high entry fee to make money in the gaming world. Apple changed that. You need only look at the size of the Appstore and Android market along with the fact that many developers are making real money. There are more developers for iOS and Android than there are for Nintendo DS and Sony PSP. Apple started the movement, both iOS and Android have benefitted. And of course, anything good coming out of Apple is attributed to SJ!
fwiw, i don't think touch screen games trump all others, though some are great. I still like physical buttons, but noone can deny that mobile gaming has significantly changed since the Appstore came along.