Editorial: The new Services - How will Apple Arcade's exclusivity, privacy affect Android ...

2»

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 38
    k2kwk2kw Posts: 2,054member
    A better question: How will Google Stadia, its streaming video game service, affect Apple Arcade? When you compare the quality of games, Stadia will be the hands down winner. The only question is whether Google can crack the video quality and latency issues.
    No doubt impressive technology. But Stadia was designed by engineers thinking about themselves. How well does it work mobile? Does it load offline games? How do those play on $250 androids, you know the statistical middle ASP majority? 

    If it works well on premium phones, it will be yet another reason to buy a high end iPhone. If it doesn’t, it will be limited to the, say the nicer minority of  installed base of Chromebooks and $1000 Galaxy S. That’s not a platform worth targeting with anything but ads. 
    Arcade will be come the Netflix or the Disney+ of Games because it will be a fixed price.  It will be very popular with parents.    Of apples 4 services announced in March (News+, TV+, Arcade, and Credit Card) probably fee will get all of them but there will probably be many who get one of them and a few with get a 2-4.    I think Apple will be looking good in the financials even if the iPhone sales slow down to upgrading once every 4 years.  
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 22 of 38
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,301member
    k2kw said:
    A better question: How will Google Stadia, its streaming video game service, affect Apple Arcade? When you compare the quality of games, Stadia will be the hands down winner. The only question is whether Google can crack the video quality and latency issues.
    No doubt impressive technology. But Stadia was designed by engineers thinking about themselves. How well does it work mobile? Does it load offline games? How do those play on $250 androids, you know the statistical middle ASP majority? 

    If it works well on premium phones, it will be yet another reason to buy a high end iPhone. If it doesn’t, it will be limited to the, say the nicer minority of  installed base of Chromebooks and $1000 Galaxy S. That’s not a platform worth targeting with anything but ads. 
    Arcade will be come the Netflix or the Disney+ of Games because it will be a fixed price.  It will be very popular with parents.    Of apples 4 services announced in March (News+, TV+, Arcade, and Credit Card) probably fee will get all of them but there will probably be many who get one of them and a few with get a 2-4.    I think Apple will be looking good in the financials even if the iPhone sales slow down to upgrading once every 4 years.  
    I agree that Arcade will be financially successful and get lots of subscribers. 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 23 of 38
    gatorguy said:
    A better question: How will Google Stadia, its streaming video game service, affect Apple Arcade? When you compare the quality of games, Stadia will be the hands down winner. The only question is whether Google can crack the video quality and latency issues.
    No doubt impressive technology. But Stadia was designed by engineers thinking about themselves. How well does it work mobile? Does it load offline games? How do those play on $250 androids, you know the statistical middle ASP majority? 

    If it works well on premium phones, it will be yet another reason to buy a high end iPhone. If it doesn’t, it will be limited to the, say the nicer minority of  installed base of Chromebooks and $1000 Galaxy S. That’s not a platform worth targeting with anything but ads. 
    Dan, I don't think Stadia will need premium hardware to run on. A lowly $250 handset will manage. Read up on it a bit before making assumptions. 
    These mythical people that are willing to pay a monthly fee to play games, because they feel a high-quality gaming experience on mobile is worth a significant ongoing expense, but weren’t willing to spend more than $250 on their mobile device because (conversely) they do NOT think it’s worth a few extra bucks to have decent hardware.... must all be on equally mythical unlimited plans that never slow down, since this gaming service eats 3-6gb/hr.

    Find a bunch of these “unicorn” users & let Google know about them!!!

    I'm sure they’ll be excited, since the vast majority of their users currently won’t pay $.99 for a game... no matter what. 
    Dan_Dilgerwatto_cobra
  • Reply 24 of 38
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,301member
    gatorguy said:
    A better question: How will Google Stadia, its streaming video game service, affect Apple Arcade? When you compare the quality of games, Stadia will be the hands down winner. The only question is whether Google can crack the video quality and latency issues.
    No doubt impressive technology. But Stadia was designed by engineers thinking about themselves. How well does it work mobile? Does it load offline games? How do those play on $250 androids, you know the statistical middle ASP majority? 

    If it works well on premium phones, it will be yet another reason to buy a high end iPhone. If it doesn’t, it will be limited to the, say the nicer minority of  installed base of Chromebooks and $1000 Galaxy S. That’s not a platform worth targeting with anything but ads. 
    Dan, I don't think Stadia will need premium hardware to run on. A lowly $250 handset will manage. Read up on it a bit before making assumptions. 
    These mythical people that are willing to pay a monthly fee to play games, because they feel a high-quality gaming experience on mobile is worth a significant ongoing expense, but weren’t willing to spend more than $250 on their mobile device because (conversely) they do NOT think it’s worth a few extra bucks to have decent hardware.... must all be on equally mythical unlimited plans that never slow down, since this gaming service eats 3-6gb/hr.

    Find a bunch of these “unicorn” users & let Google know about them!!!

    I'm sure they’ll be excited, since the vast majority of their users currently won’t pay $.99 for a game... no matter what. 
    Desktops, laptops, Chromebooks, smart tv's, Chromecasts, eventually anything running the Chrome browser, and yes smartphones too likely including your iPhone via an app. It's definitely not intended for smartphones only. 
    edited May 2019
  • Reply 25 of 38
    FolioFolio Posts: 698member
    Enjoyable series (and appreciate dive into Samsung previously and today's use of Android blog excerpt). One apparent discordance with Services push and Apple touting nearly 1 billion iOS users I've yet to see addressed. Roughly how many families are we talking about? Family subscriptions to News+, Arcade, etc. shrink that pool, but obviously have long term benefits. But if say that reduces pool substantially, like to under 500,000, it might suggest allowing iPad (not just iphone) and future Glasses to be gateway to Watch and Airpods.
    Dan_Dilgerwatto_cobra
  • Reply 26 of 38
    FolioFolio Posts: 698member
    Never thought of that gay privacy angle with regard to ads and personal security. Privacy is probably more a visceral issue to Tim Cook because I imagine he was gay at a time when accidently coming out was probably dangerous in some spots of US. Anyway now that's a big plus for Apple and to me helps make his privacy statements more credible. Privacy is key issue not just for this, grappling w abortions, medical issues, but also for finances. Don't you think Russian or Chinese agents would love to know who has highest student debt in certain strategic industries in US, Europe, Japan, etc.? Privacy is even more than a personal issue. Finally more people are wising up.
    Dan_Dilgerwatto_cobra
  • Reply 27 of 38
    StrangeDaysStrangeDays Posts: 11,759member
    Notsofast said:
    One thing I'm always puzzled about is how Apple knows the correct amount to compensate its game publishers if they aren't tracking what users do. (Same for News, Music, etc.)
    It's because you assume that anyone needs to know what INDIVIDUALS are doing, versus the aggregate use. Apple clearly knows from it's servers how many people are clicking on a news article or magazine or game, etc., but they don't collect that Joe Blow read that article.
    I am sad to tell you that you are wrong. Here's the actual words from Apple during their introduction to Apple News+ "And that means we don't know what you read."  (scroll to 20:46). But people like you just assume how it works without actually knowing. You said "Apple clearly knows how many people are clicking on a news article or magazine or game" but that's contradicted by what Apple says. I remember when they went into further detail on how this works but I won't go into that here.
    No, what they meant meant was “you” personally, that they don’t know what *you* read. But of course they know collectively what was served, that’s just basic analytics. Every server collects content serving analytics. 
    edited May 2019 watto_cobra
  • Reply 28 of 38
    knowitallknowitall Posts: 1,648member
    When Apple says "we don't know what you read", they are almost certainly stating it literally - they do not know what I, personally, read because they are not tracking personally-identifiable data. In other words, they know someone clicked on an LA Times article (as an example), but they do not know that my AppleID was the one who did that even though I am logged in with said AppleID. If Apple literally did not track that an article was accessed, they could not pay the publisher for it. And Apple has said payments will be made based on the number of accesses. But all Apple is collecting is that the article was accessed and nothing else. They are not collecting data that would allow them to begin to form a "portfolio" of me based on the publications and articles I access.
    Apple did not say "we do not track", they said "we do not know". You are trying to interpret those words as "we do not track" but they actually explained why it's "we do not know". Listen to their explanation and then argue with that. Did you watch the video I cited? It's a few seconds earlier than 20:46. It seems that you ignored their explanation of how it works. You also made a totally unjustified statement that "Apple has said payments will be made based on the number of accesses." Is it possible for you to cite where they said that? Don't assume you know how it works - please cite your claims. Some days I feel like I am arguing against brick walls, am I the first person who ever felt that way? (Um, I stayed home today with back pain. I think that put me in a bad mood. Sorry.)
    And that makes you a woman according to Google.
  • Reply 29 of 38
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,301member
    Folio said:
    Never thought of that gay privacy angle with regard to ads and personal security. Privacy is probably more a visceral issue to Tim Cook because I imagine he was gay at a time when accidently coming out was probably dangerous in some spots of US. Anyway now that's a big plus for Apple and to me helps make his privacy statements more credible. Privacy is key issue not just for this, grappling w abortions, medical issues, but also for finances. Don't you think Russian or Chinese agents would love to know who has highest student debt in certain strategic industries in US, Europe, Japan, etc.? Privacy is even more than a personal issue. Finally more people are wising up.
    With regard to Google they prohibit the logging of any personal data identifying or related to sexual persuasion, including by companies using Google ad services. Other ad platforms (there are thousands) may not have the same restrictions of course. 
  • Reply 30 of 38
    Dan_DilgerDan_Dilger Posts: 1,583member
    gatorguy said:
    Rayz2016 said:
    gatorguy said:
    A better question: How will Google Stadia, its streaming video game service, affect Apple Arcade? When you compare the quality of games, Stadia will be the hands down winner. The only question is whether Google can crack the video quality and latency issues.
    No doubt impressive technology. But Stadia was designed by engineers thinking about themselves. How well does it work mobile? Does it load offline games? How do those play on $250 androids, you know the statistical middle ASP majority? 

    If it works well on premium phones, it will be yet another reason to buy a high end iPhone. If it doesn’t, it will be limited to the, say the nicer minority of  installed base of Chromebooks and $1000 Galaxy S. That’s not a platform worth targeting with anything but ads. 
    Dan, I don't think Stadia will need premium hardware to run on. A lowly $250 handset will manage. Read up on it a bit before making assumptions. 
    Well, on first blush, he appears to have done slightly more reading up than you.

    Google Stadia only works with Pixel Phones, Chromecast on TV

    Chances are that Google will severely limit the devices it can run on launch. This is common sense: there are relatively few Pixel phones out there, which means there is little chance of the servers crashing due to overloading. It'll also make it much easier to trace and fix problems if they're dealing with a limited hardware set. Once things are nice and stable, they will look at other devices.

    Your statement that 'a lowly $250 handset will manage' is, unsurprisingly unsubstantiated by any links to evidence or corroborating posts. Meanwhile, Corrections did not say that they wouldn't work, he simply posed the question how well they would work, and that is indeed a valid question. How will the service look if the games look like crap for the  vast majority who run them? Because even the vast majority of the game is being run on a server, at some point the client device will have to render the screen and play the sounds. If this leads to a poor experience then Google would certainly be better off limiting the service to devices that would show it at its best. As Corrections alluded to, we may even find that it runs best on an iPhone. You'll still be buying the subscription, or the game, or having all your data harvested for advertisers, so Google won't really care that much.

    How will the service fair in areas that don't have high-end broadband services? What happens when I'm stuck in in a tunnel on the Circle Line? How do I play during a nine-hour flight? Lots of unknowns, which is to be expected at this stage.




    My lowly $250 Pixel OG will manage, and a cheap Chromecast Ultra will put this on your big-screen. A Chrome browser (not Apple's version tho) on a normal laptop or desktop will also be compatible. As that's a pretty obscure link you are relying on here's a better and more informative one.
    https://www.techradar.com/news/google-stadia-may-be-the-first-good-use-for-5g-phones


    Dan was very clearly mistaken when he surmised that $1000 handsets with the latest processors would be required. So the limitation if any will be your internet speed/location not the hardware it's running on, at least once (if?) the initial rollout proves successful. 

    You're too quick to jump in and say "Dan is right". He's not. 
    The original Pixel was not $250 it was $650. If you want to start talking about the second hand / refurb market to stretch the definition of the average new Android selling price is, it can only be because you are being totally disingenuous.

    Also, ignoring their iPhone-like price, only about 10 million Pixel phones have sold in the last 3 years, and most of those were 3 generations to the same niche of fans / Google employees. So 3-4 million users is not really a base for launching a "AAA games" platform on mobile. Apple has a billion mobile users to market Arcade to. 

    And back to real pricing and the Android opportunity: the point is that new Androids are on average $250 basic phones. They barely have enough RAM to run Facebook and YouTube. If Google is initially limiting Stadia to its own premium Pixels, that tells you something about how much hardware you need to run the service, even if it is designed to be a cloud based service where the lifting is done on Google's end.

    Also, Google says "4K HDR at 60 FPS are dependent on your bandwidth," and importantly, "gameplay experience may vary based on quality of internet connection."

    The point of mobility is that game players on phones expect to be able to play them anywhere. Apple Arcade runs great looking, console-level games offline from anywhere. Stadia says it runs AAA titles requiring a strong data connection, and clearly needs low latency. Mobile users run into frustrations loading the web or checking email at times. If Stadia requires that you have exceptional WiFi like the Google engineers' offices, it's going to be hugely disappointing to real people.  
    danhwatto_cobra
  • Reply 31 of 38
    When Apple says "we don't know what you read", they are almost certainly stating it literally - they do not know what I, personally, read because they are not tracking personally-identifiable data. In other words, they know someone clicked on an LA Times article (as an example), but they do not know that my AppleID was the one who did that even though I am logged in with said AppleID. If Apple literally did not track that an article was accessed, they could not pay the publisher for it. And Apple has said payments will be made based on the number of accesses. But all Apple is collecting is that the article was accessed and nothing else. They are not collecting data that would allow them to begin to form a "portfolio" of me based on the publications and articles I access.
    Apple did not say "we do not track", they said "we do not know". You are trying to interpret those words as "we do not track" but they actually explained why it's "we do not know". Listen to their explanation and then argue with that. Did you watch the video I cited? It's a few seconds earlier than 20:46. It seems that you ignored their explanation of how it works. You also made a totally unjustified statement that "Apple has said payments will be made based on the number of accesses." Is it possible for you to cite where they said that? Don't assume you know how it works - please cite your claims. Some days I feel like I am arguing against brick walls, am I the first person who ever felt that way? (Um, I stayed home today with back pain. I think that put me in a bad mood. Sorry.)
    IMO, you are arguing semantics. If they don't track (via personally-identifiable methods), they don't know. They don't know because they don't track (via personally-identifiable methods).

    And with respect, are you familiar with how Apple will be paying the publishers their 50% cut of the revenue? They've said they will do so based on reader engagement with the publisher's content: https://9to5mac.com/2019/02/13/apple-news-service/

    How do you expect Apple to determine engagement if they literally don't know what articles are engaged with, which is a literal interpretation of the phrase "we don't know what you read".

    And are you aware that Apple's recommendation engine surface topics for personalized stories today in Apple News? How do you think the engine can do so if it literally has no idea of what you are reading or what publications you are following?

    Apple has to collect some data on what is being read in order to make the system work. But it doesn't need to know who, explicitly, is reading it. And Apple defines that lack of explicitness as "not knowing what you read".
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 32 of 38
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,301member
    gatorguy said:
    Rayz2016 said:
    gatorguy said:
    A better question: How will Google Stadia, its streaming video game service, affect Apple Arcade? When you compare the quality of games, Stadia will be the hands down winner. The only question is whether Google can crack the video quality and latency issues.
    No doubt impressive technology. But Stadia was designed by engineers thinking about themselves. How well does it work mobile? Does it load offline games? How do those play on $250 androids, you know the statistical middle ASP majority? 

    If it works well on premium phones, it will be yet another reason to buy a high end iPhone. If it doesn’t, it will be limited to the, say the nicer minority of  installed base of Chromebooks and $1000 Galaxy S. That’s not a platform worth targeting with anything but ads. 
    Dan, I don't think Stadia will need premium hardware to run on. A lowly $250 handset will manage. Read up on it a bit before making assumptions. 
    Well, on first blush, he appears to have done slightly more reading up than you.

    Google Stadia only works with Pixel Phones, Chromecast on TV

    Chances are that Google will severely limit the devices it can run on launch. This is common sense: there are relatively few Pixel phones out there, which means there is little chance of the servers crashing due to overloading. It'll also make it much easier to trace and fix problems if they're dealing with a limited hardware set. Once things are nice and stable, they will look at other devices.

    Your statement that 'a lowly $250 handset will manage' is, unsurprisingly unsubstantiated by any links to evidence or corroborating posts. Meanwhile, Corrections did not say that they wouldn't work, he simply posed the question how well they would work, and that is indeed a valid question. How will the service look if the games look like crap for the  vast majority who run them? Because even the vast majority of the game is being run on a server, at some point the client device will have to render the screen and play the sounds. If this leads to a poor experience then Google would certainly be better off limiting the service to devices that would show it at its best. As Corrections alluded to, we may even find that it runs best on an iPhone. You'll still be buying the subscription, or the game, or having all your data harvested for advertisers, so Google won't really care that much.

    How will the service fair in areas that don't have high-end broadband services? What happens when I'm stuck in in a tunnel on the Circle Line? How do I play during a nine-hour flight? Lots of unknowns, which is to be expected at this stage.




    My lowly $250 Pixel OG will manage, and a cheap Chromecast Ultra will put this on your big-screen. A Chrome browser (not Apple's version tho) on a normal laptop or desktop will also be compatible. As that's a pretty obscure link you are relying on here's a better and more informative one.
    https://www.techradar.com/news/google-stadia-may-be-the-first-good-use-for-5g-phones


    Dan was very clearly mistaken when he surmised that $1000 handsets with the latest processors would be required. So the limitation if any will be your internet speed/location not the hardware it's running on, at least once (if?) the initial rollout proves successful. 

    You're too quick to jump in and say "Dan is right". He's not. 
    The original Pixel was not $250 it was $650. If you want to start talking about the second hand / refurb market to stretch the definition of the average new Android selling price is, it can only be because you are being totally disingenuous.

    Also, ignoring their iPhone-like price, only about 10 million Pixel phones have sold in the last 3 years, and most of those were 3 generations to the same niche of fans / Google employees. So 3-4 million users is not really a base for launching a "AAA games" platform on mobile. Apple has a billion mobile users to market Arcade to. 

    And back to real pricing and the Android opportunity: the point is that new Androids are on average $250 basic phones. They barely have enough RAM to run Facebook and YouTube. If Google is initially limiting Stadia to its own premium Pixels, that tells you something about how much hardware you need to run the service, even if it is designed to be a cloud based service where the lifting is done on Google's end.

    Also, Google says "4K HDR at 60 FPS are dependent on your bandwidth," and importantly, "gameplay experience may vary based on quality of internet connection."

    The point of mobility is that game players on phones expect to be able to play them anywhere. Apple Arcade runs great looking, console-level games offline from anywhere. Stadia says it runs AAA titles requiring a strong data connection, and clearly needs low latency. Mobile users run into frustrations loading the web or checking email at times. If Stadia requires that you have exceptional WiFi like the Google engineers' offices, it's going to be hugely disappointing to real people.  
    Dan, disingenous is when YOU realize what you wrote might be misleading but intend to defend it anyway.
    Stadia will not be limited to Pixel phones according to "those who know". Even if you didn't (I think you do) common sense should be screaming at you otherwise. Smartphones from a couple hundred to a premium $1K model. Older computers, basic laptops, Chromebooks, smart tv's, Chromecasts, pretty much any device running Google Chrome.... All will be capable of running Stadia. 

    ...And yes my Pixel cost less than $250. If you want one you could get it at that price too, and then sometime in the next few months try Stadia for yourself on three year old hardware. Don't like used? later this month buy the latest Pixel at around $400. You can afford it.

    IF they limit Stadia to Pixels on initial release (You don't know that they are) it will only be for reasons of a soft roll-out before wider availability shortly thereafter IMO, not because using it requires premium hardware. It doesn't. And guess what? It targets a different gamer than Arcade does. Both can exist in harmony with each other and no one has to choose only one or the other! For one to be successful the other doesn't have to fail. How cool is that? 
    edited May 2019 muthuk_vanalingamctt_zhavon b7
  • Reply 33 of 38
    gatorguy said:
    gatorguy said:
    A better question: How will Google Stadia, its streaming video game service, affect Apple Arcade? When you compare the quality of games, Stadia will be the hands down winner. The only question is whether Google can crack the video quality and latency issues.
    No doubt impressive technology. But Stadia was designed by engineers thinking about themselves. How well does it work mobile? Does it load offline games? How do those play on $250 androids, you know the statistical middle ASP majority? 

    If it works well on premium phones, it will be yet another reason to buy a high end iPhone. If it doesn’t, it will be limited to the, say the nicer minority of  installed base of Chromebooks and $1000 Galaxy S. That’s not a platform worth targeting with anything but ads. 
    Dan, I don't think Stadia will need premium hardware to run on. A lowly $250 handset will manage. Read up on it a bit before making assumptions. 
    These mythical people that are willing to pay a monthly fee to play games, because they feel a high-quality gaming experience on mobile is worth a significant ongoing expense, but weren’t willing to spend more than $250 on their mobile device because (conversely) they do NOT think it’s worth a few extra bucks to have decent hardware.... must all be on equally mythical unlimited plans that never slow down, since this gaming service eats 3-6gb/hr.

    Find a bunch of these “unicorn” users & let Google know about them!!!

    I'm sure they’ll be excited, since the vast majority of their users currently won’t pay $.99 for a game... no matter what. 
    Desktops, laptops, Chromebooks, smart tv's, Chromecasts, eventually anything running the Chrome browser, and yes smartphones too likely including your iPhone via an app. It's definitely not intended for smartphones only. 
    Lol, & Apple wanted people to play mobile games on their TVs as well... dunno if you’re aware, but it was NOT a success.
    Turns out- people prefer to play mobile games on mobile devices.

    I don’t think this little Google Labs experiment will be nearly as popular as you think it will.

    In my opinion- the type of games you would want to be able to pick up & continue a few minutes here & a few minutes there, anywhere and on anything with Chrome browser, would be “casual” games & not necessarily need an extravagant off-device/server-based processing scheme whatsoever... whereas, high end 4K AAA style titles, a la’ PS4/XB1S, would be absolutely stunning & amazing to play on a modern TV sans video game system, but would not lend themselves to playing on the tube using your phone, or on the john, using your Chromebook, etc.

    Another issue is pricing... Apple is suggesting replacing the ten $.99 games, or one or two $5-10 iOS games one may purchase in a month w/ a $10 subscription instead.
    Hmmmm.... math checks out. Sounds like everyone will still make $.
    If Google is trying to replace the one to two $60 console games one might buy in a month & any casual games one may buy, and actually the entire cost of the console as well... ummmm, wouldn’t they have to charge like $100+/mo for developers to come out equal?
    Dan_Dilgerwatto_cobra
  • Reply 34 of 38
    gatorguy said:
    gatorguy said:
    A better question: How will Google Stadia, its streaming video game service, affect Apple Arcade? When you compare the quality of games, Stadia will be the hands down winner. The only question is whether Google can crack the video quality and latency issues.
    No doubt impressive technology. But Stadia was designed by engineers thinking about themselves. How well does it work mobile? Does it load offline games? How do those play on $250 androids, you know the statistical middle ASP majority? 

    If it works well on premium phones, it will be yet another reason to buy a high end iPhone. If it doesn’t, it will be limited to the, say the nicer minority of  installed base of Chromebooks and $1000 Galaxy S. That’s not a platform worth targeting with anything but ads. 
    Dan, I don't think Stadia will need premium hardware to run on. A lowly $250 handset will manage. Read up on it a bit before making assumptions. 
    These mythical people that are willing to pay a monthly fee to play games, because they feel a high-quality gaming experience on mobile is worth a significant ongoing expense, but weren’t willing to spend more than $250 on their mobile device because (conversely) they do NOT think it’s worth a few extra bucks to have decent hardware.... must all be on equally mythical unlimited plans that never slow down, since this gaming service eats 3-6gb/hr.

    Find a bunch of these “unicorn” users & let Google know about them!!!

    I'm sure they’ll be excited, since the vast majority of their users currently won’t pay $.99 for a game... no matter what. 
    Desktops, laptops, Chromebooks, smart tv's, Chromecasts, eventually anything running the Chrome browser, and yes smartphones too likely including your iPhone via an app. It's definitely not intended for smartphones only. 
    Lol, & Apple wanted people to play mobile games on their TVs as well... dunno if you’re aware, but it was NOT a success.
    Turns out- people prefer to play mobile games on mobile devices.

    I don’t think this little Google Labs experiment will be nearly as popular as you think it will.

    In my opinion- the type of games you would want to be able to pick up & continue a few minutes here & a few minutes there, anywhere and on anything with Chrome browser, would be “casual” games & not necessarily need an extravagant off-device/server-based processing scheme whatsoever... whereas, high end 4K AAA style titles, a la’ PS4/XB1S, would be absolutely stunning & amazing to play on a modern TV sans video game system, but would not lend themselves to playing on the tube using your phone, or on the john, using your Chromebook, etc.

    Another issue is pricing... Apple is suggesting replacing the ten $.99 games, or one or two $5-10 iOS games one may purchase in a month w/ a $10 subscription instead.
    Hmmmm.... math checks out. Sounds like everyone will still make $.
    If Google is trying to replace the one to two $60 console games one might buy in a month & any casual games one may buy, and actually the entire cost of the console as well... ummmm, wouldn’t they have to charge like $100+/mo for developers to come out equal?
  • Reply 35 of 38
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,301member
    gatorguy said:
    gatorguy said:
    A better question: How will Google Stadia, its streaming video game service, affect Apple Arcade? When you compare the quality of games, Stadia will be the hands down winner. The only question is whether Google can crack the video quality and latency issues.
    No doubt impressive technology. But Stadia was designed by engineers thinking about themselves. How well does it work mobile? Does it load offline games? How do those play on $250 androids, you know the statistical middle ASP majority? 

    If it works well on premium phones, it will be yet another reason to buy a high end iPhone. If it doesn’t, it will be limited to the, say the nicer minority of  installed base of Chromebooks and $1000 Galaxy S. That’s not a platform worth targeting with anything but ads. 
    Dan, I don't think Stadia will need premium hardware to run on. A lowly $250 handset will manage. Read up on it a bit before making assumptions. 
    These mythical people that are willing to pay a monthly fee to play games, because they feel a high-quality gaming experience on mobile is worth a significant ongoing expense, but weren’t willing to spend more than $250 on their mobile device because (conversely) they do NOT think it’s worth a few extra bucks to have decent hardware.... must all be on equally mythical unlimited plans that never slow down, since this gaming service eats 3-6gb/hr.

    Find a bunch of these “unicorn” users & let Google know about them!!!

    I'm sure they’ll be excited, since the vast majority of their users currently won’t pay $.99 for a game... no matter what. 
    Desktops, laptops, Chromebooks, smart tv's, Chromecasts, eventually anything running the Chrome browser, and yes smartphones too likely including your iPhone via an app. It's definitely not intended for smartphones only. 
    Lol, & Apple wanted people to play mobile games on their TVs as well... dunno if you’re aware, but it was NOT a success.
    Turns out- people prefer to play mobile games on mobile devices.

    I don’t think this little Google Labs experiment will be nearly as popular as you think it will.
    How popular do I think it will be?
    ctt_zh
  • Reply 36 of 38
    gatorguy said:
    gatorguy said:
    gatorguy said:
    A better question: How will Google Stadia, its streaming video game service, affect Apple Arcade? When you compare the quality of games, Stadia will be the hands down winner. The only question is whether Google can crack the video quality and latency issues.
    No doubt impressive technology. But Stadia was designed by engineers thinking about themselves. How well does it work mobile? Does it load offline games? How do those play on $250 androids, you know the statistical middle ASP majority? 

    If it works well on premium phones, it will be yet another reason to buy a high end iPhone. If it doesn’t, it will be limited to the, say the nicer minority of  installed base of Chromebooks and $1000 Galaxy S. That’s not a platform worth targeting with anything but ads. 
    Dan, I don't think Stadia will need premium hardware to run on. A lowly $250 handset will manage. Read up on it a bit before making assumptions. 
    These mythical people that are willing to pay a monthly fee to play games, because they feel a high-quality gaming experience on mobile is worth a significant ongoing expense, but weren’t willing to spend more than $250 on their mobile device because (conversely) they do NOT think it’s worth a few extra bucks to have decent hardware.... must all be on equally mythical unlimited plans that never slow down, since this gaming service eats 3-6gb/hr.

    Find a bunch of these “unicorn” users & let Google know about them!!!

    I'm sure they’ll be excited, since the vast majority of their users currently won’t pay $.99 for a game... no matter what. 
    Desktops, laptops, Chromebooks, smart tv's, Chromecasts, eventually anything running the Chrome browser, and yes smartphones too likely including your iPhone via an app. It's definitely not intended for smartphones only. 
    Lol, & Apple wanted people to play mobile games on their TVs as well... dunno if you’re aware, but it was NOT a success.
    Turns out- people prefer to play mobile games on mobile devices.

    I don’t think this little Google Labs experiment will be nearly as popular as you think it will.
    How popular do I think it will be?
    More popular than Google Wave. ;0)
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 37 of 38
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,301member
    gatorguy said:
    gatorguy said:
    gatorguy said:
    A better question: How will Google Stadia, its streaming video game service, affect Apple Arcade? When you compare the quality of games, Stadia will be the hands down winner. The only question is whether Google can crack the video quality and latency issues.
    No doubt impressive technology. But Stadia was designed by engineers thinking about themselves. How well does it work mobile? Does it load offline games? How do those play on $250 androids, you know the statistical middle ASP majority? 

    If it works well on premium phones, it will be yet another reason to buy a high end iPhone. If it doesn’t, it will be limited to the, say the nicer minority of  installed base of Chromebooks and $1000 Galaxy S. That’s not a platform worth targeting with anything but ads. 
    Dan, I don't think Stadia will need premium hardware to run on. A lowly $250 handset will manage. Read up on it a bit before making assumptions. 
    These mythical people that are willing to pay a monthly fee to play games, because they feel a high-quality gaming experience on mobile is worth a significant ongoing expense, but weren’t willing to spend more than $250 on their mobile device because (conversely) they do NOT think it’s worth a few extra bucks to have decent hardware.... must all be on equally mythical unlimited plans that never slow down, since this gaming service eats 3-6gb/hr.

    Find a bunch of these “unicorn” users & let Google know about them!!!

    I'm sure they’ll be excited, since the vast majority of their users currently won’t pay $.99 for a game... no matter what. 
    Desktops, laptops, Chromebooks, smart tv's, Chromecasts, eventually anything running the Chrome browser, and yes smartphones too likely including your iPhone via an app. It's definitely not intended for smartphones only. 
    Lol, & Apple wanted people to play mobile games on their TVs as well... dunno if you’re aware, but it was NOT a success.
    Turns out- people prefer to play mobile games on mobile devices.

    I don’t think this little Google Labs experiment will be nearly as popular as you think it will.
    How popular do I think it will be?
    More popular than Google Wave. ;0)
    I'm not familiar with Google Wave.Iso I  certainly didn't think it was going to be popular. But I can assume since you referenced it that whatever wave was wasn't popular. Okay then
    edited May 2019 tycho_macuser
  • Reply 38 of 38
    KidAKidBKidAKidB Posts: 19member
    Notsofast said:
    One thing I'm always puzzled about is how Apple knows the correct amount to compensate its game publishers if they aren't tracking what users do. (Same for News, Music, etc.)
    It's because you assume that anyone needs to know what INDIVIDUALS are doing, versus the aggregate use. Apple clearly knows from it's servers how many people are clicking on a news article or magazine or game, etc., but they don't collect that Joe Blow read that article.
    I am sad to tell you that you are wrong. Here's the actual words from Apple during their introduction to Apple News+ "And that means we don't know what you read."  (scroll to 20:46). But people like you just assume how it works without actually knowing. You said "Apple clearly knows how many people are clicking on a news article or magazine or game" but that's contradicted by what Apple says. I remember when they went into further detail on how this works but I won't go into that here.
    If you honestly think that Apple doesn't know how many times an article has been clicked or how much time is spent on an article, you're dead wrong. There'd be no way for Apple to properly run a service without usage data. The usage data might be anonymous, but you'd better bet they collect some.
Sign In or Register to comment.