Wait, how could you miss the next gen iPad Pro? There are ample rumours about them. The iPad Air is nipping at their heels so the Pro needs to be updated. There’s talk of MiniLED. You even mentioned in the article about how there is a history of iPads coming in March. Seems like a near slam dunk to me.
AirPods Studio could be a $800 pair for the most professional of studios. If they can reduce headphone bleed that would be nice. And make them more durable, artists have a habit of tossing headphones.
Then the non pros who buy skullcandy earbuds will complain that they're "too expensive" lol.
Apple TV needs a MAJOR update. Give it an M1 chip and maybe some exclusive PS5-level games!!
Hey man, I had a pair of skullcandy buds once. Those were nice little earbuds for the 3 weeks that they actually worked, lol.
I totally agree on the Apple TV. They need to swing for the fences with it this time around. No more fucking around, playing it safe. It needs to support console quality games, come with a controller, have videoconferencing capability, U1, an updated remote with Qi and a mute button, and support console quality games. Did I say that one twice? Hopefully the rumors of two models is true, with one being a simple dongle comparable to the current generation, and the other being the upgraded “Pro” model that would destroy the competition.
In gaming circles people never mention Apple TV for a reason. Apple needs to at the LEAST port multiplatform games (Call of Duty, GTA, Resident Evil etc.). What would be ideal is to have an in-house studio pumping out exclusives or acquire a studio like Capcom.
An M1 chip with metal and other Apple tech could potentially destroy the competition. And with these wild price tags for consoles Apple could most likely be at a competitive price even though non gamers will complain that "It's too expensive."
Ok - the name 'AirPods" made sense for the originals, but how does 'pod' apply with AirPods max? Maybe the battery is a pod? nothing else is!
I'm looking to replace the old AppleTV 2 (3?) we have in our family room but now it looks like I should wait for version 6 to come out.. dang it! I hate waiting!
The "Pod" branding is for Apple's audio related product and harkens back to the iPod. iPod touch, AirPods, AirPods Pro, AirPods Max, HomePod and HomePod mini = Audio
This is where "Podcast" came from too. People get triggered when I mention that for some reason because it gives Apple credit for inventing this category.
Ok - the name 'AirPods" made sense for the originals, but how does 'pod' apply with AirPods max? Maybe the battery is a pod? nothing else is!
I'm looking to replace the old AppleTV 2 (3?) we have in our family room but now it looks like I should wait for version 6 to come out.. dang it! I hate waiting!
The "Pod" branding is for Apple's audio related product and harkens back to the iPod. iPod touch, AirPods, AirPods Pro, AirPods Max, HomePod and HomePod mini = Audio
This is where "Podcast" came from too. People get triggered when I mention that for some reason because it gives Apple credit for inventing this category.
Still wrong dude. Yes the pod is derived from iPod, but that doesn't mean Apple invented it.
AirPods Studio could be a $800 pair for the most professional of studios. If they can reduce headphone bleed that would be nice. And make them more durable, artists have a habit of tossing headphones.
With the AirPods Max already announced at a fairly high price, I don't see an AirPods Studio product with an even higher price coming out. Doesn't seam plausible to me.
Apple TV needs a MAJOR update. Give it an M1 chip and maybe some exclusive PS5-level games!!
That would be awesome! Watching Apple continue to miss this opportunity of making actual quality games for Apple Arcade and missing the opportunity of gaming on the Apple TV has been beyond frustrating. I really wish someone at Apple understood or even remotely cared about gaming. Apple's success in gaming to date seems to be entirely accidental. The Apple TV is fine for a streaming box, but it has been severely neglected as a potential console.
(High end) Apple Arcade games for the AppleTV?
That would involve gamers developing games strictly for the AppleTV -- which is a very limited market.
Better if they would enable AppleTV to PC, XBox and PS high end games -- but that would involve hardware issues now that Apple escaped from the x86 market.
I think it more likely that we'll only see iOS games running on AppleTV for at least the near future.
I didn't say "Apple Arcade games" just high end games that can be exclusive to Apple TV. I was thinking more first-party games for purchase or at least multi-platform games like Call of Duty or Destiny.
With that said Apple eventually has to abandon iPhone 6s.....
Ok - the name 'AirPods" made sense for the originals, but how does 'pod' apply with AirPods max? Maybe the battery is a pod? nothing else is!
I'm looking to replace the old AppleTV 2 (3?) we have in our family room but now it looks like I should wait for version 6 to come out.. dang it! I hate waiting!
The "Pod" branding is for Apple's audio related product and harkens back to the iPod. iPod touch, AirPods, AirPods Pro, AirPods Max, HomePod and HomePod mini = Audio
This is where "Podcast" came from too. People get triggered when I mention that for some reason because it gives Apple credit for inventing this category.
Still wrong dude. Yes the pod is derived from iPod, but that doesn't mean Apple invented it.
AirPods Studio could be a $800 pair for the most professional of studios. If they can reduce headphone bleed that would be nice. And make them more durable, artists have a habit of tossing headphones.
Then the non pros who buy skullcandy earbuds will complain that they're "too expensive" lol.
Apple TV needs a MAJOR update. Give it an M1 chip and maybe some exclusive PS5-level games!!
Hey man, I had a pair of skullcandy buds once. Those were nice little earbuds for the 3 weeks that they actually worked, lol.
I totally agree on the Apple TV. They need to swing for the fences with it this time around. No more fucking around, playing it safe. It needs to support console quality games, come with a controller, have videoconferencing capability, U1, an updated remote with Qi and a mute button, and support console quality games. Did I say that one twice? Hopefully the rumors of two models is true, with one being a simple dongle comparable to the current generation, and the other being the upgraded “Pro” model that would destroy the competition.
In gaming circles people never mention Apple TV for a reason. Apple needs to at the LEAST port multiplatform games (Call of Duty, GTA, Resident Evil etc.). What would be ideal is to have an in-house studio pumping out exclusives or acquire a studio like Capcom.
An M1 chip with metal and other Apple tech could potentially destroy the competition. And with these wild price tags for consoles Apple could most likely be at a competitive price even though non gamers will complain that "It's too expensive."
Ok - the name 'AirPods" made sense for the originals, but how does 'pod' apply with AirPods max? Maybe the battery is a pod? nothing else is!
I'm looking to replace the old AppleTV 2 (3?) we have in our family room but now it looks like I should wait for version 6 to come out.. dang it! I hate waiting!
The "Pod" branding is for Apple's audio related product and harkens back to the iPod. iPod touch, AirPods, AirPods Pro, AirPods Max, HomePod and HomePod mini = Audio
This is where "Podcast" came from too. People get triggered when I mention that for some reason because it gives Apple credit for inventing this category.
Even a base model Apple Mini costs more than the latest, most powerful XBox.
AirPods Studio could be a $800 pair for the most professional of studios. If they can reduce headphone bleed that would be nice. And make them more durable, artists have a habit of tossing headphones.
Then the non pros who buy skullcandy earbuds will complain that they're "too expensive" lol.
Apple TV needs a MAJOR update. Give it an M1 chip and maybe some exclusive PS5-level games!!
Hey man, I had a pair of skullcandy buds once. Those were nice little earbuds for the 3 weeks that they actually worked, lol.
I totally agree on the Apple TV. They need to swing for the fences with it this time around. No more fucking around, playing it safe. It needs to support console quality games, come with a controller, have videoconferencing capability, U1, an updated remote with Qi and a mute button, and support console quality games. Did I say that one twice? Hopefully the rumors of two models is true, with one being a simple dongle comparable to the current generation, and the other being the upgraded “Pro” model that would destroy the competition.
In gaming circles people never mention Apple TV for a reason. Apple needs to at the LEAST port multiplatform games (Call of Duty, GTA, Resident Evil etc.). What would be ideal is to have an in-house studio pumping out exclusives or acquire a studio like Capcom.
An M1 chip with metal and other Apple tech could potentially destroy the competition. And with these wild price tags for consoles Apple could most likely be at a competitive price even though non gamers will complain that "It's too expensive."
It takes a long time to develop good games. With the recent Cyberpunk game, they showed a teaser for that 7 years ago and have had 400 people working on it. It has managed to pay off its development costs in the first week of sales (8 million units x $60 = $480m revenue, $121m cost - https://gamerant.com/cyberpunk-2077-budget-investment-cd-projekt-red/ .) but for a gaming platform to be widely used, it needs to have a regular flow of good games, I'd say at least one every 2 months, which would need 18 studios working in parallel (3 years per game, 100 employees per studio).
Easily manageable by Apple though: $50k per employee x 100 employees x 18 studios = $90m per year for the entire operation, which is pocket change for them. They wouldn't all have to be in-house studios, they can commission projects from established studios.
Hopefully the ARM chips will give Apple platforms a boost in support. It will mean that Apple ships around 20 million PS4 Pro level machines every year whereas previous to that, 70% would be PS3 level and pretty much not targetable for modern games. If the hardware platform is large enough, developers can make money from it.
A challenge with iOS devices is getting people to pay $40+ per game when they are accustomed to free with IAPs. AAA games are $60 at launch plus DLC. On Macs it's easier.
With a big enough audience, regular stream of games, users accustomed to paying a sustainable amount to cover the development cost, it can work as a gaming platform. When the games are on the TV, it doesn't really matter much which platform is running them:
If Apple made a push for in-house game development today, the effects wouldn't be seen until 3 years from now. Although M1 chips are looking great now, they only just started selling. It will take 12 months to have a sizeable userbase. For now getting native game ports would help, just a significant amount of the 200 or so most popular games would be enough:
Apple could even do something like sell M1 chips to Nintendo for their Switch (60 million units at $50-100 per chip). They'd be faster than Nvidia, about 4x faster than current Switch. They'd run their own OS. In exchange, Nintendo could bring some of their exclusive IP to Apple platforms. Zelda Breath of the Wild will reach peak sales on Nintendo platforms and they can sell it on Apple platforms.
There are lots of options for Apple, it just needs the motivation and strategy. It seems like they prefer to take a back seat and just be the platform but it leads to a very uncertain and high risk environment for game devs. It would be more reliable for them to invest in it like they do with Apple TV+ and there have been reports that suggest they are but game development times are easily 3x what they are for movies so the effects of it won't be seen until later on.
Top of my list: 1. New design small bezel iMac with M series chips 2. New AppleTV with redesigned remote, faster proc and more memory Both long overdue for a refresh (I believe COVID delayed both launches in 2020)
AirPods Studio could be a $800 pair for the most professional of studios. If they can reduce headphone bleed that would be nice. And make them more durable, artists have a habit of tossing headphones.
Then the non pros who buy skullcandy earbuds will complain that they're "too expensive" lol.
Apple TV needs a MAJOR update. Give it an M1 chip and maybe some exclusive PS5-level games!!
Hey man, I had a pair of skullcandy buds once. Those were nice little earbuds for the 3 weeks that they actually worked, lol.
I totally agree on the Apple TV. They need to swing for the fences with it this time around. No more fucking around, playing it safe. It needs to support console quality games, come with a controller, have videoconferencing capability, U1, an updated remote with Qi and a mute button, and support console quality games. Did I say that one twice? Hopefully the rumors of two models is true, with one being a simple dongle comparable to the current generation, and the other being the upgraded “Pro” model that would destroy the competition.
In gaming circles people never mention Apple TV for a reason. Apple needs to at the LEAST port multiplatform games (Call of Duty, GTA, Resident Evil etc.). What would be ideal is to have an in-house studio pumping out exclusives or acquire a studio like Capcom.
An M1 chip with metal and other Apple tech could potentially destroy the competition. And with these wild price tags for consoles Apple could most likely be at a competitive price even though non gamers will complain that "It's too expensive."
It takes a long time to develop good games. With the recent Cyberpunk game, they showed a teaser for that 7 years ago and have had 400 people working on it. It has managed to pay off its development costs in the first week of sales (8 million units x $60 = $480m revenue, $121m cost - https://gamerant.com/cyberpunk-2077-budget-investment-cd-projekt-red/ .) but for a gaming platform to be widely used, it needs to have a regular flow of good games, I'd say at least one every 2 months, which would need 18 studios working in parallel (3 years per game, 100 employees per studio).
Easily manageable by Apple though: $50k per employee x 100 employees x 18 studios = $90m per year for the entire operation, which is pocket change for them. They wouldn't all have to be in-house studios, they can commission projects from established studios.
Hopefully the ARM chips will give Apple platforms a boost in support. It will mean that Apple ships around 20 million PS4 Pro level machines every year whereas previous to that, 70% would be PS3 level and pretty much not targetable for modern games. If the hardware platform is large enough, developers can make money from it.
A challenge with iOS devices is getting people to pay $40+ per game when they are accustomed to free with IAPs. AAA games are $60 at launch plus DLC. On Macs it's easier.
With a big enough audience, regular stream of games, users accustomed to paying a sustainable amount to cover the development cost, it can work as a gaming platform. When the games are on the TV, it doesn't really matter much which platform is running them:
If Apple made a push for in-house game development today, the effects wouldn't be seen until 3 years from now. Although M1 chips are looking great now, they only just started selling. It will take 12 months to have a sizeable userbase. For now getting native game ports would help, just a significant amount of the 200 or so most popular games would be enough:
Apple could even do something like sell M1 chips to Nintendo for their Switch (60 million units at $50-100 per chip). They'd be faster than Nvidia, about 4x faster than current Switch. They'd run their own OS. In exchange, Nintendo could bring some of their exclusive IP to Apple platforms. Zelda Breath of the Wild will reach peak sales on Nintendo platforms and they can sell it on Apple platforms.
There are lots of options for Apple, it just needs the motivation and strategy. It seems like they prefer to take a back seat and just be the platform but it leads to a very uncertain and high risk environment for game devs. It would be more reliable for them to invest in it like they do with Apple TV+ and there have been reports that suggest they are but game development times are easily 3x what they are for movies so the effects of it won't be seen until later on.
Apple's relationship with Epic -- and the back and forth attacks -- comes to mind when thinking of "uncertain" environments.
Would Apple be able & willing to open up their platforms to let anybody use them anyway they wanted? Physically, yes they could. But it would go against their culture and reputation.
There are lots of options for Apple, it just needs the motivation and strategy. It seems like they prefer to take a back seat and just be the platform but it leads to a very uncertain and high risk environment for game devs. It would be more reliable for them to invest in it like they do with Apple TV+ and there have been reports that suggest they are but game development times are easily 3x what they are for movies so the effects of it won't be seen until later on.
Apple's relationship with Epic -- and the back and forth attacks -- comes to mind when thinking of "uncertain" environments.
Would Apple be able & willing to open up their platforms to let anybody use them anyway they wanted? Physically, yes they could. But it would go against their culture and reputation.
Most of the uncertainty in game development is the risk/return. As long as a company acts respectfully, they should have little reason to worry about Apple's control over the platform any more than Microsoft/Sony/Nintendo. Epic's case is about money and greed and not wanting to pay commission on sales to Apple - they have no problem on other platforms where they feel the platform owner deserves the commission. Apple has made some strange decisions before like banning games for stupid reasons like Papers Please and Binding of Isaac but it's rare that happens.
Games only make money when they are in the market and to make good games takes a lot of upfront investment. Few companies have the ability to sustain 3 years burning capital, especially at the cost of millions per year. Then on top of that having the difficulty of figuring out how to monetize games to a mobile audience.
Nintendo is one of the biggest game companies in the world and some of their mobile titles performed below expectations.
Having multiple studios working in parallel allows for a steady stream of new titles and having a big company backing them gives them a safety net that they can make it to market. The trouble Apple would have with this is finding good studios that haven't already been bought up by the console manufacturers but I think they could persuade high quality Indie developers to get on board and would be cheaper with faster turnaround times.
They don't necessarily have to own the studios, they can commission projects that are either wholly exclusive to Apple or timed exclusives. They could get remasters of the earlier Tomb Raider and Legacy of Kain games from Crystal Dynamics, the early Bond games ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Bond_in_video_games ).
There's a lot of options and routes that Apple can go. They just need the motivation to do it and make the right strategic moves. It comes with some risk like with the Apple TV content because all content is subjective and some won't be commercially successful but the successes are well worth the investment (GTA V made over $3b) and for Apple, the investment cost is low.
I'd be very happy if Apple would make iOS the most friendly environment for indie developers that it can be: low rates, simple rules, easy approval, good tools. Big budget games can blow one, if Apple could get Lucas Pope, Edmund McMillen and others like them on board and let them do whatever they want then they'd be on to something special.
There are lots of options for Apple, it just needs the motivation and strategy. It seems like they prefer to take a back seat and just be the platform but it leads to a very uncertain and high risk environment for game devs. It would be more reliable for them to invest in it like they do with Apple TV+ and there have been reports that suggest they are but game development times are easily 3x what they are for movies so the effects of it won't be seen until later on.
Apple's relationship with Epic -- and the back and forth attacks -- comes to mind when thinking of "uncertain" environments.
Would Apple be able & willing to open up their platforms to let anybody use them anyway they wanted? Physically, yes they could. But it would go against their culture and reputation.
Most of the uncertainty in game development is the risk/return. As long as a company acts respectfully, they should have little reason to worry about Apple's control over the platform any more than Microsoft/Sony/Nintendo. Epic's case is about money and greed and not wanting to pay commission on sales to Apple - they have no problem on other platforms where they feel the platform owner deserves the commission. Apple has made some strange decisions before like banning games for stupid reasons like Papers Please and Binding of Isaac but it's rare that happens.
Games only make money when they are in the market and to make good games takes a lot of upfront investment. Few companies have the ability to sustain 3 years burning capital, especially at the cost of millions per year. Then on top of that having the difficulty of figuring out how to monetize games to a mobile audience.
Nintendo is one of the biggest game companies in the world and some of their mobile titles performed below expectations.
Having multiple studios working in parallel allows for a steady stream of new titles and having a big company backing them gives them a safety net that they can make it to market. The trouble Apple would have with this is finding good studios that haven't already been bought up by the console manufacturers but I think they could persuade high quality Indie developers to get on board and would be cheaper with faster turnaround times.
They don't necessarily have to own the studios, they can commission projects that are either wholly exclusive to Apple or timed exclusives. They could get remasters of the earlier Tomb Raider and Legacy of Kain games from Crystal Dynamics, the early Bond games ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Bond_in_video_games ).
There's a lot of options and routes that Apple can go. They just need the motivation to do it and make the right strategic moves. It comes with some risk like with the Apple TV content because all content is subjective and some won't be commercially successful but the successes are well worth the investment (GTA V made over $3b) and for Apple, the investment cost is low.
Ok - the name 'AirPods" made sense for the originals, but how does 'pod' apply with AirPods max? Maybe the battery is a pod? nothing else is!
The pods in Invasion of the Body Snatchers were human sized. And since a pod contains other items (normally seeds, but speakers, microphones, etc., in this case), sure it could be a pod.
Apple TV needs a complete overhaul—software, hardware, and branding.
First off, it’s really not a TV—it’s a barebones streaming console. If anything it’s the software and service that should be called Apple TV, not the box. TV is just too limiting a concept, when it can and should be much more than that.
So what do we call the box? How about Apple Play. It is much more descriptive of what the box should be. Play the programming, but also play the games. Why this is being resisted / avoided be Cupertino is anyone’s guess, but it’s time Apple TV became more than a corporate “hobby.”
so what about the hardware? Well, I’d argue that it should be its own SoC design, but economically speaking that just not going to happen. A14 would provide more than enough cpu/ML capability, but would need a vastly expanded GPU. If Apple develops an add-on card (or package) that would work for me, cost depending of course.
which brings us to software. Hard to be a gaming platform without games, and NO, iOS games do not count (at least not at this stage). So Apple really should start courting big name game developers into their ecosystem. Buy a porting house, buy a developer, underwrite development for specific titles, create a game development subsidiary—all these are possible avenues to explore. Get it done Hamilton!
As an aside, wondering if Apple Arcade needs to be a game streaming service?
AirPods Studio could be a $800 pair for the most professional of studios. If they can reduce headphone bleed that would be nice. And make them more durable, artists have a habit of tossing headphones.
Then the non pros who buy skullcandy earbuds will complain that they're "too expensive" lol.
Apple TV needs a MAJOR update. Give it an M1 chip and maybe some exclusive PS5-level games!!
Hey man, I had a pair of skullcandy buds once. Those were nice little earbuds for the 3 weeks that they actually worked, lol.
I totally agree on the Apple TV. They need to swing for the fences with it this time around. No more fucking around, playing it safe. It needs to support console quality games, come with a controller, have videoconferencing capability, U1, an updated remote with Qi and a mute button, and support console quality games. Did I say that one twice? Hopefully the rumors of two models is true, with one being a simple dongle comparable to the current generation, and the other being the upgraded “Pro” model that would destroy the competition.
So Apple TV Console for $499 + Game Subscription of AAA Console games that are solely, and the for the long for seeable future AMD Zen2/RDNA 2.0 SoC optimized x86 based? Just buy a PS 5/XBox X.
24" iMAC will be runaway success. Apple don't do without solid strategy but when most TVs(and Roku) are equipped with AirPlay 2 and Apple TV+ App; what is the long term Apple's strategy for Apple TV box ? I like my 4K Apple TV box due to good UI and my TV don't have AirPlay2 builtin.
Apple TV needs a complete overhaul—software, hardware, and branding.
First off, it’s really not a TV—it’s a barebones streaming console. If anything it’s the software and service that should be called Apple TV, not the box. TV is just too limiting a concept, when it can and should be much more than that.
So what do we call the box? How about Apple Play. It is much more descriptive of what the box should be. Play the programming, but also play the games. Why this is being resisted / avoided be Cupertino is anyone’s guess, but it’s time Apple TV became more than a corporate “hobby.”
so what about the hardware? Well, I’d argue that it should be its own SoC design, but economically speaking that just not going to happen. A14 would provide more than enough cpu/ML capability, but would need a vastly expanded GPU. If Apple develops an add-on card (or package) that would work for me, cost depending of course.
which brings us to software. Hard to be a gaming platform without games, and NO, iOS games do not count (at least not at this stage). So Apple really should start courting big name game developers into their ecosystem. Buy a porting house, buy a developer, underwrite development for specific titles, create a game development subsidiary—all these are possible avenues to explore. Get it done Hamilton!
As an aside, wondering if Apple Arcade needs to be a game streaming service?
Apple may well have a bunch of 6 Core M1's lying around - Call it Pippin.
They could do a low end M1 based Apple TV sound bar with a conference camera (with plastic shutter) and structure sensor.
Sure would be an interesting that it could be a cross-over home / office product that could allow all sort of apps and games.
I'd love to see them make an iMac with a surface studio style lay-flat pen input display. Right now macs are great for video editing, 2D design and photography, but there are loads of creatives in concept art, 3D animation and sculpture, etc. who tend to avoid Apple. There are exceptions I know but film and TV, 3D and even concept art are dominated by windows. My time in conceptart we never even considered macs.
I'm hoping we see the M1 and Big Sur attract more devs. The Blender foundation seem to be on the ball along with Adobe so that covers my personal workflow software wise, but I'd rather buy a lay-flat-with-pencil iMac than spend insane cash on a surface studio. Sidecar isn't the same.
Another one here waiting for an improved Apple TV. Hopefully with a real remote and not that finicky touch based POS. In the meantime the Function button remote for Apple TV is a great replacement (function101.com).
Followed by an updated iMac for my mom and an M based laptop that can take at lease 32 GB of RAM for me
Comments
In gaming circles people never mention Apple TV for a reason. Apple needs to at the LEAST port multiplatform games (Call of Duty, GTA, Resident Evil etc.). What would be ideal is to have an in-house studio pumping out exclusives or acquire a studio like Capcom.
An M1 chip with metal and other Apple tech could potentially destroy the competition. And with these wild price tags for consoles Apple could most likely be at a competitive price even though non gamers will complain that "It's too expensive."
This is where "Podcast" came from too. People get triggered when I mention that for some reason because it gives Apple credit for inventing this category.
I didn't say "Apple Arcade games" just high end games that can be exclusive to Apple TV. I was thinking more first-party games for purchase or at least multi-platform games like Call of Duty or Destiny.
With that said Apple eventually has to abandon iPhone 6s.....
Told ya!
Easily manageable by Apple though: $50k per employee x 100 employees x 18 studios = $90m per year for the entire operation, which is pocket change for them. They wouldn't all have to be in-house studios, they can commission projects from established studios.
Hopefully the ARM chips will give Apple platforms a boost in support. It will mean that Apple ships around 20 million PS4 Pro level machines every year whereas previous to that, 70% would be PS3 level and pretty much not targetable for modern games. If the hardware platform is large enough, developers can make money from it.
A challenge with iOS devices is getting people to pay $40+ per game when they are accustomed to free with IAPs. AAA games are $60 at launch plus DLC. On Macs it's easier.
With a big enough audience, regular stream of games, users accustomed to paying a sustainable amount to cover the development cost, it can work as a gaming platform. When the games are on the TV, it doesn't really matter much which platform is running them:
If Apple made a push for in-house game development today, the effects wouldn't be seen until 3 years from now. Although M1 chips are looking great now, they only just started selling. It will take 12 months to have a sizeable userbase. For now getting native game ports would help, just a significant amount of the 200 or so most popular games would be enough:
https://www.metacritic.com/browse/games/score/metascore/all/pc/filtered
Apple could even do something like sell M1 chips to Nintendo for their Switch (60 million units at $50-100 per chip). They'd be faster than Nvidia, about 4x faster than current Switch. They'd run their own OS. In exchange, Nintendo could bring some of their exclusive IP to Apple platforms. Zelda Breath of the Wild will reach peak sales on Nintendo platforms and they can sell it on Apple platforms.
There are lots of options for Apple, it just needs the motivation and strategy. It seems like they prefer to take a back seat and just be the platform but it leads to a very uncertain and high risk environment for game devs. It would be more reliable for them to invest in it like they do with Apple TV+ and there have been reports that suggest they are but game development times are easily 3x what they are for movies so the effects of it won't be seen until later on.
1. New design small bezel iMac with M series chips
2. New AppleTV with redesigned remote, faster proc and more memory
Both long overdue for a refresh (I believe COVID delayed both launches in 2020)
Games only make money when they are in the market and to make good games takes a lot of upfront investment. Few companies have the ability to sustain 3 years burning capital, especially at the cost of millions per year. Then on top of that having the difficulty of figuring out how to monetize games to a mobile audience.
Nintendo is one of the biggest game companies in the world and some of their mobile titles performed below expectations.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-06-21/nintendo-chills-mobile-ambitions-after-animal-crossing-success
The company that made Candy Crush is a huge success today but only survived with some lucky breaks:
https://www.cnbc.com/riccardo-zacconi-hitting-the-sweet-spot/
Most businesses don't get those lucky breaks and fold before they get a chance to recoup their investment and continue with new products. That's why game studios need investment from big companies. Microsoft owns at least 18 studios now (listed here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xbox_Game_Studios#Subsidiaries_and_divisions ), Sony at least 14 ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SIE_Worldwide_Studios#Studios ). Nintendo at least 5 ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Nintendo_development_teams#Subsidiaries ).
Having multiple studios working in parallel allows for a steady stream of new titles and having a big company backing them gives them a safety net that they can make it to market. The trouble Apple would have with this is finding good studios that haven't already been bought up by the console manufacturers but I think they could persuade high quality Indie developers to get on board and would be cheaper with faster turnaround times.
https://www.blooberteam.com, https://playdead.com, https://www.microids.com, https://www.crytek.com, https://frogwares.com, http://bigfishgames.com, https://cigames.com/en/
They don't necessarily have to own the studios, they can commission projects that are either wholly exclusive to Apple or timed exclusives. They could get remasters of the earlier Tomb Raider and Legacy of Kain games from Crystal Dynamics, the early Bond games ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Bond_in_video_games ).
There's a lot of options and routes that Apple can go. They just need the motivation to do it and make the right strategic moves. It comes with some risk like with the Apple TV content because all content is subjective and some won't be commercially successful but the successes are well worth the investment (GTA V made over $3b) and for Apple, the investment cost is low.
Good points!
So what do we call the box? How about Apple Play. It is much more descriptive of what the box should be. Play the programming, but also play the games. Why this is being resisted / avoided be Cupertino is anyone’s guess, but it’s time Apple TV became more than a corporate “hobby.”
so what about the hardware? Well, I’d argue that it should be its own SoC design, but economically speaking that just not going to happen. A14 would provide more than enough cpu/ML capability, but would need a vastly expanded GPU. If Apple develops an add-on card (or package) that would work for me, cost depending of course.
which brings us to software. Hard to be a gaming platform without games, and NO, iOS games do not count (at least not at this stage). So Apple really should start courting big name game developers into their ecosystem. Buy a porting house, buy a developer, underwrite development for specific titles, create a game development subsidiary—all these are possible avenues to explore. Get it done Hamilton!
I'm hoping we see the M1 and Big Sur attract more devs. The Blender foundation seem to be on the ball along with Adobe so that covers my personal workflow software wise, but I'd rather buy a lay-flat-with-pencil iMac than spend insane cash on a surface studio. Sidecar isn't the same.
Followed by an updated iMac for my mom and an M based laptop that can take at lease 32 GB of RAM for me