Would You Buy An Apple-Based Console?

Does the console market need any more competitors? We’ve seen record sales in the game industry for titles like Halo 3 and Grand Theft Auto IV along with huge expectations for Resistance 2 and some new Sony PlayStation 3 projects. Yet, the tiny little Wii product holds best sales records around the world as the heavy hitter, Microsoft and Sony, compete for the most awesome spectacle show of graphics.

Competition is a great way to drive down costs, drive up expectations and give consumers new innovative products with better quality. Imagine if Apple got into console development and produced a new highly sexy product with the hype and consumer desire of the iPhone or iPod.

“Apple has the infrastructure in place through iTunes to create a real value proposition for those that want to extend the capability of their console beyond gaming and has the cash — about $20 billion — to not only invest in the best components on the market, but in an online gaming experience that could rival Xbox Live.” (kotaku)

Apple’s showing a huge surge in recognition and sales thanks to the iPod and growing desire for Apple hardware competing against Microsoft’s Vista operating system. As more consumers turn to Apple for their music and mobile gaming needs, Apple must see windows of exploiting the gaming market further.

More importantly, nobody can pull off digital rights management (DRM) and locking consumers into a product line like Apple all while they beg for more. Consoles are little boxes of DRM waiting for happy consumers to buy into the concept all while avoiding the hacking and bittorrenting like you’ve been seeing on Spore in the last few weeks. Had Spore been released on a console this DRM fiasco would have been avoided because gamers don’t even realize (or care) that a console locks them into playing and, more importantly, buying the game for the hardware.

Apple knows the in’s and the out’s to producing software to work with their hardware as a primary means of making fast money. While Microsoft has built the jack-of-all operating systems and struggles to make every printer, modem and mouse work perfectly with their platform, Apple only has to support a small handful of accessories for their sleek little desktop and laptop boxes (complete with OS).

Realistically, Apple could produce a game console with very little change to how they do business; a large investment, for sure, but the company has already been wiggling their way into mobile gaming on the iPod and iPhone product lines. What’s another step into greatness than jumping into a growing industry and out playing and out selling your competitors?

Apple would have to invest cash into the hardware and, most importantly, into buying game companies to produce high quality game titles like Microsoft Game Studios has done, Sony has done and Nintendo has mastered. A console produced by Apple wouldn’t have to be the best in the industry (we all know Wii has several shortcomings), they just have to build the hype and consumer loyalty as they have done with their current mobile products.

Apple’s iPod isn’t the best audio player on the market, iTunes isn’t the most robust form of music distribution and sales but both have tied together nicely and have market share in an industry with many players (including Microsoft).

Would Apple be able to pull off a console system? Although nobody is saying they will, there are always possibilities in the future.

0 thoughts on “Would You Buy An Apple-Based Console?”

  1. It would seem like Apple would be a natural choice, since they’re very familiar with the whole standardized hardware and proprietary titles scenario. But at the same time that could be their very detriment, because there is that “Mac Curtain”, dividing the devout Apple devotees from the naysayers, with very little ambivalence in between. (In some circles, PC/Mac is a more heated argument than topics religious, political, or sports-oriented.) Of course, this also means they have an instant loyalty factor, in that they’ve already proven themselves to a portion of the population. The question is, is it the same portion that wants to buy a video game console? I don’t know. Anyway, I probably wouldn’t buy it, but I’ve just barely got my foot in the console waters (with my Wii, which I bought not due to any Nintendo loyalty, but because I liked the implementation and design. Plus it’s fun to say “I Gotta Wii!”)

  2. Sure, what the hell.. they might be the first to get the control ergonomics right. I would be particularly interested if they loaded the thing with memory and let your games reside in itunes or something like it, so you could d/l the 5 or 6 games you felt like playing that week, then carry the whole mess in a pocket without loads of damned game cartridges and suchlike.. They just need to bring in outside developers who can develop beyond the limits of things like Dark Castle..

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related Post

Episode 457: For HonorEpisode 457: For Honor

This week’s episode has T.J. raving about the new hotness, the multi-cultural action-MOBA game For Honor, while Jonah complains about the lack of attention paid to Plants vs. Zombies: Garden Warfare 2. Scott, meanwhile, is playing Pillars of Eternity in preparation for the sequel.

This week’s news includes:

  • Nintendo announces DLC Pass for Zelda: Breath of the Wild
  • Bard’s Tale remastered trilogy will be finished, promises developer
  • Sony axes PS Now for PS3, Vita
  • Microsoft teases Project Scorpio in E3 2017 press event

Let us know what you think.

ID Software, Not Just One Game AnymoreID Software, Not Just One Game Anymore

As Bob Dylan once wrote, “The times they are a-changin'” and id Software may be ready to change with these times. They’re talking at Quake Con about both DOOM 4 and their next title Rage (a first person shooter car driving game) both utilizing the same engine, the Tech 5 engine, and being developed simultaneously.

Now, this doesn’t mean you’ll have dual release games but it shows that id Software is ready to work on more than a single project at the same time, a big step for them. Although they’re usually working a big engine while finishing up a title to run on such an engine, they’ve got two titles in the works. This is very unlike the little FPS company but it shows they’re ready to meet the challenge of a larger industry.

When the original DOOM arrived there was nothing to compete against them and through the years and into Quake their competition was light years behind. Developers like Epic Games, Bungie and other first-person-shooter genre developers have proven themselves in the industry with many titles and sequels while id releases, seemingly, one game every five years.

For a company with only one or two franchise titles they do take a long time to release another game. This may be due to their engine licensing, no longer under the “Quake” engine name and sticking with its own independant naming convention like ID Tech 4 and ID Tech 5, they’re showing us the company is about engine design seperate from any demos or game prototypes they provide to show off the engine.

To many gamers DOOM 3 was more of a prototype to show people how far graphics have advanced in the last twenty years. Many folks were excited to play but grew bored when they realized it was very much like DOOM 2 but with a graphic revamp. Nostalgia only goes so far before you realize the story and depth behind games like Half-Life, Unreal and Halo have far exceeded a extreme graphical FPS gaming.

It’s time for id to grow from their roots and expand into many game genre’s and build out new independent properties (like Rage) to show the industry they’re not just a one-hit wonder with a huge fan base.

But, you can’t argue with a huge fan base. They’ve got a full conference to show off their stuff, not even Electronic Arts has that!

(Thanks, 1up)

Activision Blizzard Trying To Scare Off Competition?Activision Blizzard Trying To Scare Off Competition?

A few months ago, Activision Blizzard CEO Bobby Kotick said investing $500 million to a billion still wouldn’t be enough to compete with an MMORPG like World of Warcraft. The MMORPG space is a costly investment and you’d need to really burn a lot of money to start competing against the mega-giant, but Mythic VP and Warhammer Online lead designer Mark Jacobs disagrees with that quote.

Jacobs says $100-million dollars would be needed to start competing against the giant subscription generator that is World of Warcraft. Although few developers are sitting on $100-million USD, it’s a bit more realistic an investment for a studio to scrape up compared to a billion bucks! A billion dollars is a scary number when you consider that’s the start of an investment that may, or may not, pay off in the end.

Kotick may not be using complete scare tactics, he may be working off experience when dealing with MMORPG’s. A startup MMO isn’t a cookie cutter system, there is a lot of development efforts, $100-million dollars worth, but MMO developers slip dates many times. When you start slipping your dates you’ll start burning more money and, before you know it, you’re a billion in the hole. Jacobs thinks $100-million will cover development costs and messing up, so a billion is still way over budget.

Perhaps this is a bit of a scare tactic, assuming a developer will fail and slip their dates isn’t really a great way to start quoting prices. However, shooting too low isn’t always the best method of building your development assessments. The end result, scream ONE BILLION and you may scare off any potential startup MMO developers.

Warhammer Online lead designer did mention one big barrier to entry: the need for “at least half a million subscribers to be successful.”

(Thanks, 1up)