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

Starcraft 2 Part Eins, Zwei and DreiStarcraft 2 Part Eins, Zwei and Drei

Nobody is perfect. When it comes to creating an epic story arc, awesome pre-rendered movies and a fully fleshed campaign Blizzard has done well. Now, Blizzard speaks of Starcraft 2 and the world shuts their mouth and listens to each and every word. What’s the word?

A Trilogy.

We’re not talking about the Lord of The Rings style trilogy, but three games with full stories which all end with the gamer being satisfied at the closure, not cliffhangers.

The three standalone games will be (says GameStooge):

  • Terrans – Wings of Liberty
  • Zerg – Heart of the Swarm
  • Protoss – Legacy of the Void

Gamers are probably thinking, “so, I can play multiplayer with only one race?” No! The campaign is split into three separete games, not the races and multiplayer features. Although, each title is sure to introduce something new to the game engine, Blizzard has said:

“Nothing changes for multiplayer or skirmish mode. All three races are fully implemented from the get go. Each campaign will feel like an epic story – not a cliffhanger into the next one. They will each have separate arcs that have a clear start, middle, end – and you will feel like you’ve really finished *something* at the end of each game. More content than we’d previously planned – many more Movies, Missions, etc.” (games.on.net)

From our perspective, it seems Blizzard is itching to release the multiplayer system to the world sooner than later, considering some countries use Starcraft as a professional league, but they don’t want to rush out fast to market campaigns just to satisfy this multiplayer desire.

Instead, they’re going to take their time, in usual Blizzard style, by releasing the game as they finish it… per races story. This should give us a less watered down storyline or having one or two races with a piss poor storyline while another has a kick ass storyline because it was done first.

End result? Multiplayer gamers will be happy in the end while those that play Starcraft for the story will need to wait for each game to be completed. We know Blizzards release schedule is “when it’s ready” so we can only imagine how long it will take to reach that third game in the trilogy.

Microsoft Says Blu-ray Holds No 360 ValueMicrosoft Says Blu-ray Holds No 360 Value

Rumors float around the Internet questioning when Microsoft will ship a Blu-ray enabled Xbox 360 or add-on device like they did with the, now failed, HD-DVD. At CES 09 Robbie Bach, president of Microsoft’s Entertainment & Devices division, says this request is “way down the list.”

Mr. Bach had some great selling points as to why a Blu-ray player has little value in the world of Xbox 360. The primary reason, of course, being the Xbox 360 developers cannot take advantage of Blu-ray as a development platform for games. This was the price Sony, or the consumer, paid to own a PlayStation 3 since all games are printed on the media and are, in effect, Blu-ray “capable.”

We say capable because not all (any?) PlayStation 3 games currently make full use of the Blu-ray media. Many games will reprint the game on the media for optimization purposes, fill the game with international voice overs for all countries or, otherwise, stuff the media with something that will serve a useful purpose. Sony has near-future-proofed their device by giving game developers years of growth in terms of utilizing the Blu-ray capacity.

Microsoft chose to take the smaller old-style DVD format for games and media. Adding the HD-DVD didn’t add a large deal of risk because, as we saw, they can discontinue the model and not change their core gaming demographic. We still laughed a bit at them, but that was where it ended. Bach also said that it’s not really a great economic time to push a new 360 SKU on potential customers with additional cost just for Blu-ray movies playback.

They could add Blu-ray game development support as well but that would just alienate the “28 million Xboxes” they have already shipped.

“OK, let me get this straight: I’m going to add something to the product that’s going to raise the cost, which means the price goes up, consumers aren’t asking for it, and by the way, my game developers can’t use it.” (gamespot)

Of course, the first thing that came to our mind was “well, you did it for HD-DVD, how is Blu-ray different?” The key areas we can think of really come down to Blu-ray is a Sony technology and they are a direct competitor and, to top it off, HD-DVD allowed them to fight against the PS3 at the media level of the industry. They minimized the risk by making the product a secondary add-on device and, if HD-DVD had won, they’d have the winning format already under production (still not for games).

It seems Microsoft has changed their battle plans a little. They started out talking up the media aspects of the 360, using Media Center, renting movies and TV shows and had the HD-DVD as a subproduct. Today, they’re investing in Netflix for media and everything else favors the games.

Which is fine, we like games.

Rock and a Hard Place: Sony’s Japanese DilemmaRock and a Hard Place: Sony’s Japanese Dilemma

What a dilemma it is, Sony’s PlayStation 3 isn’t as hot as the Nintendo Wii in Japan. Even the Xbox 360 has had some minor success stories in Japan while Sony sits back saying “wtf?”

President, SCE Worldwide Studios, Shuhei Yoshida is pointing the finger at the publishers saying, “What’s happening is that lack of support from the Japanese publishers – not necessarily from intentions but from development capabilities.” (kotaku) Why, though, would publishers push to produce games on the console that’s currently losing market share?

Sony’s position is very tough to deal with because they’re not market leader so publishers are looking for the biggest bang for their proverbial “buck” and that’s not the PS3 right now. You can produce an expensive game for an expensive console or a cheaper game for a cheaper console and make more money.

How, then, can Sony get out of this situation? They must find a way to promote an incentive for publishers to create Sony exclusives or, at least, a Sony “port” of a game to build up their library of must-have titles. Perhaps Sony’s punishment at the hands of Nintendo and Microsoft in the States has a bit to do with their global marketplace issues — they need to put a concerted effort into one of their regions and champion themselves in one realm before trying for all of them. Right now, they’re a watered down expensive console with very few exclusive titles.

Metal Gear Sold 4, Home and Little Big Planet are great reasons to own a PlayStation 3 if the price was a bit more reasonable. Looking at the future, we’ve got Resistance 2 and a few other titles that may make some waves in the industry, at least in the United States, but it’s going to be an uphill battle in which they are the second best this time.

It’s always easy when you’re on the top. PlayStation 3 is not on the top so it’s time to start struggling, cutting prices or enticing publishers to build good exclusive titles.