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

Final Fantasy XIII – Xbox 360Final Fantasy XIII – Xbox 360

Yoichi Wada of Square Enix has let the cat out of the bag. The cat is Final Fantasy XIII for the Xbox 360 and it will be simultaneously released with the PlayStation 3 version. This may be an end to an exclusive era for Sony as all their big brands jump to non-exclusion.

This is probably a result of gamers slow adoption of the PlayStation 3 hardware for various issues, one being cost. Personally I think Sony’s move to say “no price cut” in our near future is a grand mistake. It is well understood that they want profitability over quantity but you’re losing your exclusives to a broader audience.

Each generation of consoles brings new industry trends and, for now, exclusive games from third party developers is too risky when you look at overall cost to produce a block buster title like Final Fantasy XIII. Consider the sales of GTA IV, although they were in the millions, imagine how low it would have been if they only released on the PS3. They’d might have actually lost money on the game.

Square Enix can see the writing on the wall, that writing says “ship on as many mediums as possible.” Gamers are split between consoles with a huge segment on Wii and Xbox 360, if you can at least ship on one of those consoles along with the PS3 you’ll do better financially.

(Thanks, Kotaku)

Sierra’s Franchise Titles Fade Into HistorySierra’s Franchise Titles Fade Into History

One of the great downfalls of an acquisition or merger, in the game industry, is the loss of great franchise titles. Sierra, or Sierra Online, once stood on its own as a company with great gaming titles but later fell into the depths of Hades under many different company names.

Sierra’s last stop on the acquisition highway was Vivendi, years after much of Sierra’s steam had slowed. Now, they’re part of Activision Blizzard so we had high hopes they’d find a great use for some of the old Sierra properties long since collecting dust. Space Quest, Kings Quest, Leisure Suit Larry and especially Gabrielle Knight were some of our favorites, but times have changed.

“We are retaining only those franchises that are a strong fit with our long-term strategy including Crash Bandicoot, Ice Age and Spyro, as well as Prototype and a second game that has not yet been announced. We will not publish any other titles that previously were part of the Vivendi Games portfolio and we are currently reviewing our options regarding those titles,” says Activision Blizzard (joystiq)

This is unfortunate news, Activision Blizzard now has a large set of franchises on their hands, many of which have collected dust for years. Those dust collecting franchises could rise from the dead and reinvigorate their old fan base… or be dropped to the earth as unwanted scrapes after a big hunt with the vultures awaiting their take (sorry, too much watching of Animal Planet)

A reworked Kings Quest or Gabriel Knight could have seriously awesome potential in this time and age, imagine a dark comedy version of Gabriel Knight or a huge scaled world in King Quest using todays graphic engines. Although, these titles could also go the way Atari has gone and taken a well remembered franchise and made mud of its great name (*cough* Alone in the Dark).

Unfortunately, we’ll probably never know the distance an old franchise could go in this new world. We’ll have to pull out an old copy of our prized posessions and remember just how great they once where.

End of 100 Million Dollar Games?End of 100 Million Dollar Games?

Gigaom had a great writeup about how Grand Theft Auto IV marks the end of “next generation” as we know it, stating, in more words or less, the game is a failure. GTA: San Andreas sold 21.5 million copies during its time on the shelf while GTA IV has sold roughly 9 million copies as of June 7th.

Granted, the game is still on the shelves and will still get sales, but the mass of “hardcore gamers” have had their fill and either purchased it or will not. The end result? A huge tapering of sales numbers for the graphically impressive game. Take-Two spent USD $100 million to develop the game which had great opening sales records but has gone down drastically since.

Imagine the title gains them USD $30.00 per sale in profit (considering distributors get the game for roughly USD $45 to $48.00 USD), taking into account shipping of the product, marketing and all the materials that go into producing a copy, they’d have to sell a large quanity of game titles to break even, which I think they have done.

Nobody is in this industry to break even. A block buster title should make block buster profits, right? Else, why bother to spend the 100-million when a Wii title can double or triple the profits with six months of development?

(more…)