Apple Working On "Revolutionary" Game Console!!!

Posted:
in Future Apple Hardware edited January 2014
Y'know that meeting Tim had with Gabe Newell over at Valve recently?



Well, "Cult Of Mac" -- a usually unfrivolous source -- is reporting they got a scoop that they talked about making a gamedeck together!



Read about it here > "Why Apple CEO Met With Valve [EXCLUSIVE]"



Now, before my head explodes, just let me say this ....



If this is even remotely true, this is, for me, the GREATEST intertainment news I have ever heard ....



Think about it: the world's best tech company -- known for thier absolutely unflinching comittment to ultra high-quality -- teaming with

who many consider to be the world's best game company -- also known for

thier absolutely unflinching committment to ultra high- quality -- to make a console?!?



Who won't fall all over themselves to buy it?



Who?!?



Add to that, tne world's most highly anticipated game -- "Half-Life 3" -- being exclusive to this console for, let's say, 6 months ....



Jesus ....



I didn't think Apple could blast ahead further any more than they already have, and then they pull something like this outta thier hat ....



LONG LIVE APPLE!



And Valve.



Long live them, too.

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 16
    Nope.



    I just don't see it happening.



    Apple already has a wildly popular and best-selling game device (3 iterations of it, in fact ... iPod Touch, iPhone, iPad.)
  • Reply 2 of 16
    You honestly don't see the difference between a handheld & a console?!?



    SONY & Nintendo do.
  • Reply 3 of 16
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,388member
    No. Pippin. And 20 years of not caring squat about gaming or GPUs.
  • Reply 4 of 16
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


    No. Pippin. And 20 years of not caring squat about gaming or GPUs.



    IOS is just the it's for such a platform.
  • Reply 5 of 16
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,388member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post


    IOS is just the it's for such a platform.



    I don't deny the Apple TV+iDevice combo as a valid entry into this world. I think that's exactly what they'll be doing going forward.



    I do deny a dedicated device for gaming, be it a television with "apps", a gaming touchpad, or (snort) a "controller" with physical buttons.
  • Reply 6 of 16
    hobbithobbit Posts: 532member
    At this point is it not more likely that this 'console' is the new iTV, iPanel, or whatever the Apple TV device will be called?



    Valve merely gets a headstart to develop for this device.





    If you combine all recent rumors then this Apple iTV will could have:

    - an A6 processor

    - support similar high-densities as the current iPad 3, if not higher, octo-core GPU anyone?

    - perhaps use the new Sharp IGZO 32-inch 3840 x 2160 screen at 140 ppi

    - use the wireless game controller Apple is rumored to work on





    Makes total sense to me.

    More than any actual new console.
  • Reply 7 of 16
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 15,323moderator
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by BoxMacCary View Post


    Well, "Cult Of Mac" -- a usually unfrivolous source -- is reporting they got a scoop that they talked about making a gamedeck together!



    Their scoop was the following:



    "We don’t know the exact details of why Tim Cook met with Valve recently, but the two companies are obviously talking to one another."



    When they mention things like undisclosed sources and unconfirmed reports, you can interpret that to mean they are sharing some made up stuff. Standard journalistic integrity for the present era.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil


    I do deny a dedicated device for gaming, be it a television with "apps", a gaming touchpad, or (snort) a "controller" with physical buttons.



    Gaming has a social side to it. If you invite a group of friends over, you can't give them all a $400 iPad for multiplayer. There has to be a central box with inexpensive controllers for this.



    Apple needs to add value to the ATV for growth. Next year's Rogue GPU is supposed to be 10x faster than the current iPad 3. With 350M polygons/s, 210GFLOPs compute and 13 billion pixels/s fill rate, it is in league with a PS3 and 360.



    While the quality of games would be the same, there are a number of advantages. Apple can sell this device for $200 at a profit from day 1, which undercuts the 360 and PS3. Because it's so low-powered, they can make it passively cooled or even just convection-cooled (no fan). It would be tiny, ATV-sized. It would not allow used-game purchases, all games are delivered online so publishers make far more profit, so they can make them cheaper. They can make the box compatible with a lot of the existing 500,000 apps/games.



    The Rogue chip supports OpenCL so developers can take advantage of the shared memory and do the physics and shader compute in OpenCL to get the most out of the box.



    Nintendo is doing a similar thing this year with their new console. Sony won't have another console out until 2015. Rumours suggest Microsoft may have one in 2013 but it would start out at $400 or something, double the Apple/Steam console.



    In terms of the controller, it can be entirely touch-based. It would have to be in order for it to be compatible with some iOS apps. Think of it like the original NES controller but like a Magic Trackpad ($30-40 each with one bundled using flat Li-Ion batteries, no bulge, charged with Apple power adaptor and can be used while connected to the power plug). Some shoulder buttons perhaps but mostly gestures. It can easily have a web browser too so that if you get stuck in a game, just multi-task out of the game and check a walkthrough.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by hobBIT


    perhaps use the new Sharp IGZO 32-inch 3840 x 2160 screen at 140 ppi



    It will not be a television set. People will not upgrade their panel every time a new console comes out because no one will buy the old one.
  • Reply 8 of 16
    hobbithobbit Posts: 532member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Marvin View Post


    It will not be a television set. People will not upgrade their panel every time a new console comes out because no one will buy the old one.



    It certainly seems to make more sense to keep gaming device and panel separate.



    Yet the 'keep them combined' model works alright for MacBooks and iMacs. Every time the user wants a faster notebook or iMac he has to throw out the panel too...

    That model might work for a super-high-res TV too.



    Imagine Apple offering a TV at Quad-HD resolution, let's say that Sharp IGZO display.



    They have the ability to provide games for it, but also TV content.

    With that massive data center, who knows Apple might have struck a few deals with some content companies to actually offer movies at QHD (almost) 4K resolution... Not all movies obviously, but a few might do?



    That could be a reason why people might want to upgrade their console and panel.





    p.s.

    Apple also dabbled a bit in auto-sereoscopic 3D displays.

    So who knows, that panel might also be an HD 3D display not requiring glasses.
  • Reply 9 of 16
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 15,323moderator
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by hobBIT View Post


    Yet the 'keep them combined' model works alright for MacBooks and iMacs. Every time the user wants a faster notebook or iMac he has to throw out the panel too...

    That model might work for a super-high-res TV too.



    The problem you have there though is you are making the content distribution model dependent on the sale of an expensive product. You also can't, for example, move the console from the main room to a bedroom easily. Say you have a big 60" TV in the main room and your kid has a 32" in his bedroom, you can't move the content from one to the other if it's stuck to one of the TVs.



    The TV panel market is not high margin. If you consider Apple competing with Microsoft, say you own a 60" TV and a 32" TV and Microsoft comes out with a $400 next-gen console. Then Apple comes out with a $600 32" TV ($400 panel + integrated $200 current-gen console). Which one would you buy?



    Alternatively, they come out with a $200 mini console that connects to either TV. I think that's the only way they can do this. If they feel the need to build a TV box, fine but are they going to machine a 32"+ box out of aluminium? It would weigh a ton and certainly not easily wall-mounted. No way it would be plastic because they'd effectively be buying panels from LG or Samsung, putting them in a plastic box and competing with Sony, LG, Samsung etc for sales.



    No games publisher would ever want to be part of an eco-system where the distribution depended on sales of fixed panel size TVs. There is a chance that it could be a component for 3rd parties to integrate into their TVs like a decoder unit and then people get it bundled with their TV but all a competitor has to do is leave it out and undercut the price.
  • Reply 10 of 16
    hobbithobbit Posts: 532member
    Marvin, totally agree with all you are saying, please don't misunderstand.





    Yet I don't think Apple thinks like this.



    For example to me it still seems rather odd for Apple to offer 2 sizes of iMacs (or 3 earlier) and each then in different sub-specifications.



    Wouldn't it make much more sense to offer screens separately and develop some kind of larger MacMini style device that can fit into the monitor base in 3 configurations so people could mix and match easily?



    Or if you absolutely detest cables and must have an all-in-one design then develop some kind of housing that allows swapping iMac main boards like MacPro main boards and sell these boards separately (upgraded by authorized resellers) so people do not have to throw away the screen every time they want a faster, more modern CPU. That to me makes sense. And it makes sense environmentally too.

    But not to Apple.





    Apple always favored individualized products, sold to ideally just one user.

    Therefore I also don't think they want to compete in the 60" home TV market. They'd rather want to sell each kid an individual 32" device for their rooms - and one for the kitchen.



    Apple also loves upselling you to a higher-end model, therefore I do not think this device will be a completely new kind of device. It more likely will fit perfectly into the iPod/iPhone/iPad/AppleTV group to have one line of devices they can you upsell along.



    So I expect this device to run any of the iOS games currently available for iPods/iPhones even. But it will have its own new features that make it unique and compelling for users to invest into new apps specifically for this device. What features could this be?



    - Super-highres QuadHD graphics could be one such feature.

    - 1080p glasses-free 3D could be another such feature, including 3D FaceTime.



    With either of these two you will not be able to get these by merely plugging an AppleTV style console device into your existing 60" TV. You will have to buy that Apple device for it. And it will be an AIO combining the A6 CPU device with that screen.

    There won't be anything like moving this 'console' to your bedroom TV. You will have to buy another one to get that effect in your bedroom too.



    That is, how I think, Apple's logic works.
  • Reply 11 of 16
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 15,323moderator
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by hobBIT View Post


    I don't think Apple thinks like this.



    For example to me it still seems rather odd for Apple to offer 2 sizes of iMacs (or 3 earlier) and each then in different sub-specifications.



    Wouldn't it make much more sense to offer screens separately and develop some kind of larger MacMini style device that can fit into the monitor base in 3 configurations so people could mix and match easily?



    I think their computer line is vastly different. It's a high-price, low volume market. Apple sells 4 million iMacs per year at most and the machines have a good enough resale value that it is worthwhile upgrading. TVs have next to no resale value and are long term investments.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by hobBIT View Post


    Therefore I also don't think they want to compete in the 60" home TV market. They'd rather want to sell each kid an individual 32" device for their rooms - and one for the kitchen.



    Would they upgrade as often as every 3 years though? I think Apple would want to upgrade the game box at least every other year. This is something Microsoft and Sony can't do because they make a loss on each device to begin with so they have 7-10 year product cycles.



    The current TV share is something like this:







    Samsung has 40 million units. This means about 200 million TV purchases in 2011. What would be better for Apple: try and come close to the best selling TV manufacturer and still have a lower game audience than Microsoft or sell a unit that all 200 million+ TV buyers can use?



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by hobBIT View Post


    - Super-highres QuadHD graphics could be one such feature.

    - 1080p glasses-free 3D could be another such feature, including 3D FaceTime.



    With either of these two you will not be able to get these by merely plugging an AppleTV style console device into your existing 60" TV.



    There's no point in QFHD just now as there's no content (streaming 4K won't go mainstream for ages) and games certainly won't be running at 4K any time soon - there's no point as you need the textures to make it worthwhile, otherwise all that horsepower is spent on anti-aliasing.



    I know what you're saying that only the integrated approach guarantees certain features but none of the TV features are really compelling. I reckon we are going to be sticking with 2D 1080p for quite some time.



    For me, I see the innovation being in the controls and distribution, not the panel e.g:







    * controller has flat Li-ion battery with a full day's usage, charges via mini-USB. Also has shoulder buttons, even if it's just corner bumpers of some sort and can be held upside down.



    Gesture controls with voice and accelerometer. Multi-purpose controller, can be used as a remote. Small, inexpensive gaming box that is profitable from day 1 and allows yearly upgrades. Online-only store so it's profitable for publishers. Unlimited market as it connects to anyone's display technology.



    Price and spec:



    Quad-core ARM CPU @ 1GHz

    PowerVR Rogue with 350MPolys/s, 210GFLOPs etc = PS3/360 performance i.e current-gen

    32GB Flash memory (allows 3-4 AAA games at once + smaller Indie games)

    1GB shared memory (PS3 and 360 have 512MB)

    1 controller included, extra controllers $29 each

    Connects exclusively to iPlay (Valve) for games and purchases transfer to the iPhone/iPad like SteamPlay



    $199
  • Reply 12 of 16
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,388member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by hobBIT View Post


    - Super-highres QuadHD graphics could be one such feature.



    4k's pointless in the face of Super Hi-Vision. And both are pointless until HEVC is finalized.



    Quote:

    - 1080p glasses-free 3D could be another such feature, including 3D FaceTime.



    Autostereoscopic 3D is a gimmick UNTIL the viewable range increases to an acceptable amount.



    Have you seen the 3DS? It's pretty dang great. The only problem is really the range of vision.
  • Reply 13 of 16
    hobbithobbit Posts: 532member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


    Have you seen the 3DS? It's pretty dang great. The only problem is really the range of vision.



    I have seen the very latest Toshiba ones.

    In my opinion the auto-stereoscopic effect works great all the way to about 20-24" displays, then it falls apart. At least on the Toshiba sets.

    Might be another argument for personal displays rather than family large TV devices.



    Apple has a range of 3D patents too, yet it seems most of the patents, with head-tracking etc. would not really work in a non-personal device.



    If you search Patently Apple for '3D' there is a myriad of Apple patents, including a couple of gaming related items, 3D camera and 3D iOS items. Which is where Valve might come in...

    http://www.patentlyapple.com/patentl...t-stunner.html



    With all these 3D patents, maybe Apple did crack the 3D TV panel/software combo in a way that makes 3D really viable and useful.



    I understand 4K movies on QuadHD displays don't make much sense yet,

    But the main point is that such a display can deliver 3D 1080 pictures as well by splitting the horizontal resolution in half rather than flickering separate images alternately.
  • Reply 14 of 16
    Tim visiting Value should not be under estimated.



    Nor should an iPad (4) with quad cpu/'Rogue' class GPU next year?



    With all the AT '4' rumours something is clearly up.



    The next 365 days should reveal all.



    If you're an Apple fan it's going to be a fun ride.



    Lemon Bon Bon.
  • Reply 15 of 16
    relicrelic Posts: 4,735member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Lemon Bon Bon. View Post


    Tim visiting Value should not be under estimated.



    Nor should an iPad (4) with quad cpu/'Rogue' class GPU next year?



    With all the AT '4' rumours something is clearly up.



    The next 365 days should reveal all.



    If you're an Apple fan it's going to be a fun ride.



    Lemon Bon Bon.



    There is nothing revolutionary that Sony, Microsoft or Nintendo hasn't already done or going to do. At the most we'll see a controller for Apple TV to play the current crop of games already available on iOS. Which are already replacing consoles for casual gamers.
  • Reply 16 of 16
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,388member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Relic View Post


    There is nothing revolutionary that Sony, Microsoft or Nintendo can't. At the most we'll see a controller for Apple TV to play the current crop of games already available on iOS. Which are already replacing consoles for casual gamers.



    And we already have a controller: iDevices.



    So you're right; we're not going to see anything at all.
Sign In or Register to comment.