Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Apple Console Rumour Resurfaces

Posted by Zonk on Wed Dec 06, 2006 06:46 PM
from the super-dooper-ipod-express dept.
1up has commentary on speculation from an industry analyst, which GamesIndustry.biz has published. Prudential analyst Jesse Tortora gesticulates wildly in the direction of renewed interest by Apple in the games market. From the GI.biz article: "We think the videogame market represents a distinct possibility for Apple, especially considering that it recently announced the availability of videogames for its iPod through its iTunes store ... The game console device could be morphed out of some combination of the MacMini and iTV, while the handheld player could be developed as an enhancement for a future version of the widescreen iPod."
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] DarwiinRemote - A Wiimote Frontend for OSX 74 comments
jeckil writes "DarwiinRemote is a tiny piece of software which reads data from and sends data to Nintendo Wii Remote. It detects all 3 axis sensors, all buttons (except power). You can modify which controller LED indicator is on, and send force feedback. Right now it only supports a basic front row control scheme but they should be releasing a better version in a few days. All the source code is available and compatible with latest version of xcode. One can only wonder ... If the latest apple rumor turns out to be true, things could get very interesting for apple. Someone has already released a modified version of this app. It seems there have been some problems detecting the remote so an alternate version that uses the Wiimote's sync button has been released."
[+] Hardware: Theorizing a Big Apple Push Into Gaming 364 comments
Ian Lamont writes "Terrence Russell has outlined an interesting theory about what industry Apple intends to break into next. He points to games. Forget Pippin II, or an iMac gaming rig — he thinks the mobile realm is where Apple will make a big product push. It's not the first bit of speculation about Apple's renewed interest in gaming, but Russell's theory may have more legs, considering Apple's invitation to develop games on the iPhone SDK, its strong mobile product line, and a Apple trademark extension filed three months ago."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • by creimer (824291) on Wednesday December 06 2006, @06:50PM (#17139110) Homepage
    Buy Nintendo, slap an Apple logo on the Wii, call it Applicious and get sued by the Beatles (again)!
    • Considering how much the Wii and it's packaging look like an Apple product, it seems like they are already working together.

      In any case, it would make more sense for Apple to get into some sort of collaboration with Nintendo (iTMS Channel on your Wii maybe?) then to enter an already full gaming market. If Apple already had a games development studio, it might make more sense, but as it is, they're better off interfacing with the existing consoles instead.
    • Actually, I think it would be a Bad idea for Apple to produce a games system (regardless of whether they bought a company or not) but it could be a good idea for them to partner with a company.
      • by Dr. Spork (142693) on Wednesday December 06 2006, @07:43PM (#17139800)
        Apple wouldn't actually have to buy Nintendo. They could just partner up. Nintendo has nothing to lose and lots to gain. Just to get a bit of Apple's good vibes halo would really help them. Unfortunately, Apple have been too busy mending fences with Sony and this would more than undo all that.
  • It'll work great! (Score:5, Informative)

    by the_humeister (922869) on Wednesday December 06 2006, @06:51PM (#17139124)
    Just like their last one [wikipedia.org]. BTW, isn't the console market getting a little crowded already?
        • Of course you can call the NeoGeo successful. It made SNK loads of money and had new games made for it for well over a decade. Unfortunately, SNK couldn't follow up its success and with the death of the old-school arcade, there wasn't a whole lot of new money to be made from the system.

          The Turbografx 16 was also hugely successful, just not in the American or European markets. In Japan, where it was known as the PC Engine, it was more popular than the Sega Mega Drive (aka Genesis) and was a legitimate compe
          • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

            By your logic, the Genesis was a huge failure because Sega no longer makes consoles.

            No, by his logic, the Dreamcast was a failure, whereas the Saturn was a success. That's the "absurd" point you were aiming for.
  • by TheWoozle (984500) on Wednesday December 06 2006, @06:52PM (#17139136)
    The only way I see Apple getting into the console business is *after* they've taken the living room by storm with their other media offerings (iTV, etc.). Exactly the opposite of the way Microsoft and Sony are doing it.
    • The only way I see Apple getting into the console business is *after* they've taken the living room by storm with their other media offerings (iTV, etc.). Exactly the opposite of the way Microsoft and Sony are doing it.


      Fair view, unless you consider console games an essential foot in the living room door.
    • Exactly the opposite of the way Microsoft and Sony are doing it.

      What do you mean, exactly? My PS2 is the center of my entertainment now (games, movies, and music). The PS3 will do the same thing for me. What else is there?
      • I think he was saying, in the opposite direction. With the PS3 and XBox, Sony and Microsoft are leveraging what is essentially a game console to establish a foothold in general entertainment (movies and music). The poster was suggesting that Apple, on the other hand, could leverage what is supposed to be a general entertainment system (the iTV, which will play music and movies), in order to gain a foothold in the game-console market.

        I'm not sure it would work, but I'm pretty sure that's what he means by

    • by nine-times (778537) <nine.times@gmail.com> on Wednesday December 06 2006, @07:06PM (#17139324) Homepage

      On the other hand, they could put "casual" games on the iTV from the start. By "casual", I mean exactly the sort of games they're putting on the iPod right now: Tetris, Bejeweled, Pac-Man, etc. It would be a minor selling-point but be a sort of foot-in-the-door.

      Really, Apple is in a good position to do this gradually. The first thing would be establish the iTV with these casual games. Meanwhile, they should be trying to get game developers to port more of their games to OSX, with simultaneous launches with the other platforms. Then they could release a decent bluetooth gaming controller (or maybe license the technology from Nintendo for the Wii-mote?) Finally, they could release a specialized iTV to run connect to this controller and play these games.

      It wouldn't be so far different from what Microsoft has done. What's the Xbox, really? A computer running a modified version of Windows. It plays games which are not very different from Windows games (from what I've been lead to believe). There's no reason why Apple couldn't do the same thing-- release a specialized Mac that runs a specialized version of OSX, aimed at gaming. The difference might be that you could also take those games to your regular Macintosh and play them there, too (I wish Microsoft had done that, and made it so Xbox games could run on your PC).

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          Despite what you may have read in the popular press, the Xbox isn't just a modified PC running Windows.

          You're right, it's not a modified PC running Windows. It's a PC running a modified version of Windows.

          If Apple were to try this themselves, they'd need to throw out most of OS X and drop back to just running the Darwin kernel. They'd need to pick a GPU and stick with it for a few years, and give the developers complete access to it's internals.

          Oh, gosh, there's no way Apple could do that.

    • The only way I see Apple getting into the console business is *after* they've taken the living room by storm with their other media offerings (iTV, etc.). Exactly the opposite of the way Microsoft and Sony are doing it. Yes, because Sony is a relatively young upstart that sprung into prominence with the release of the Playstation. Never mind that whole Walkman thing, or VCRs, or televisions, or home stereos, or any of the other products that have been infiltrating American living rooms since the 1960's.
  • A stripped-down, customised OSX variant for the Wii.

    Hey, they're both white. It's an ideal match. You heard it here first...

    • The Wii has the lowest specifications of this console generation and it's already documented that the OS X kernel is slower than others such as Linux, which would be a better fit. Although a custom game-specific OS kernel would probably be even better.
  • iTV not released yet (Score:3, Interesting)

    by mkiwi (585287) on Wednesday December 06 2006, @07:33PM (#17139692)
    Seeing as the "iTV" has not even been released and gone through a few revisions, I can't possibly see this happening in even a year. It could happen, though, as many games are written with OpenGL (as opposed to DirectX)- and it could be totally cool, since if you have a broadband connection and a wireless card, you can play games in your 7.1 THX certified 45" LCD home theater setup wirelessly over the Internet (Read: CmdrTaco's ultimate WoW fantasy).

    Only problem is getting people in that particular age group and price point. But, one man told me, "Parents buy things. That's what they're for." [Insert inflamitory jokes about Paris Hilton here]

    $0.02

  • by Dr. Spork (142693) on Wednesday December 06 2006, @07:39PM (#17139762)
    Here's a concept that should be considered: Apple are clearly wanting to build a living-room device that displays content from the network and internet on the television. The hardware they will use will be better than the mere "just enough" to get the job done. So why not invest a couple of extra bucks and partner up with Nintendo so their living room device plays Gamecube and Revolution games? Surely future Apple hardware could hack it. Neither side has anything to lose: Apple's living room device becomes more versatile while the market for Nintendo games grows substantially. Plus, don't underestimate the the value of Steve Jobs and countless Apple ads saying the word "Nintendo" on multiple occasions. Nintendo need the added mindshare.
    • by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF (813746) on Wednesday December 06 2006, @09:07PM (#17140560)

      After the cell processor was more or less confirmed to win the battle for the console, but before Apple announced the switch to Intel this move seemed like a no-brainer. A virtual Nintendo console built into every mac would have been a real win. Now, however, the development for both the Wii and the Mac virtual console might be too hard. If Apple, Nintendo, and Sony were willing to shake hands in order to deliver a combined kick to Microsoft's groin they could to it as follows: build a single development platform on top of OpenGL and similar technologies that allow a game developer to target the Wii, Mac, Linux, Windows, and PS3 with minimal effort. Promote it like hell and hand it out to every college student everywhere. All the players are already behind OpenGL in one way or another. This would have a similar, but more widespread effect and threaten some of MS's lock-in with respect to their crown jewels (Windows). But then I've always been one of those "a strong offense..." types.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      So why not invest a couple of extra bucks and partner up with Nintendo so their living room device plays Gamecube and Revolution games?

      For the same reason that Nintendo don't release Nintendo franchise games to non-Nintendo consoles. Exclusivity drives people to buy Nintendo consoles, which they actually make money off as well as the games. In addition they also lose brand recognition as the Nintendo console is no longer seen as a magical wonderful box but as something easily emulated. And lastly, what

  • Microsoft uses DirectX [roughlydrafted.com] to tie game development to Windows and the Xbox. That presents a significant weakness for an Apple assault into serious PC gaming, on the level of Microsoft trying to displace the iPod with the Zune. Microsoft can spend billions for years and may still end up no better luck than five years of Janus/PlaysForSure [roughlydrafted.com].

    Apple's best bet may be to target competition with the Wii - leave Sony and Microsoft to fight over $500-700 game consoles (they are both the same price with HD optical media p [roughlydrafted.com]
  • About time! (Score:3, Funny)

    by The-Bus (138060) on Wednesday December 06 2006, @07:45PM (#17139818) Homepage
    We needed a Dreamcast for this generation and the original Microsoft Xbox team has been pretty nervous about "being the next Dreamcast" ever since the 360 debuted its weird circular logo and brought Peter Moore on to lead the whole thing.
  • "...especially considering that it recently announced the availability of videogames for its iPod through its iTunes store"

    I know I get all tingley when I think about playing 'Pong' & '2-D Centipede in My Pants' on my iPod...ohhhhhhhh....ahhhhhh! Start of a revolution, that! Look out PS3! U 'pwned!!
  • What would make me giddy like a schoolgirl is if Nintendo and Apple somehow got together and made it so I could play emulated NES/SuperNES games on my iPod, assuming it's even technically feasible given screen size, processing power, etc. Given those two, I imagine it would be possible to make a controller that plugs into the connector on an iPod. Would be awesome!
  • how many games do you play that can be made to work with just one button on the controller?

  • Steve Jobs has never embraced gamers as a legitimate target audience, regardless of the evidence that gaming is the number three reason people buy home computers, right behind the web and email. Even now, getting Apple to add decent video cards and support is like pulling teeth. Their implementation of OpenGL performs abysmally.

    Apple may join the gaming fray, but they'll fall flat on their face with that egotistical moron running the show. He's gone out of his way to impede game creation on MacOS for fear t
  • by Esc7 (996317) on Wednesday December 06 2006, @08:06PM (#17140018)
    There's a big problem that is brought up in the article: Console makers sell hardware at a loss. Yes, yes I know about the Wii and how it makes a "profit" but I doubt that is Nintendo's primary source of profit. It has been and always been the games. With Apple notorious for selling overvalued hardware in shiny plastic, this business model is something foreign to them. And then ponder this next point. So what GAMES is this iConsole going to have? If it just has ports of everything else no one in their right mind is going to buy it. It needs a killer app. Good luck Apple finding a developer to create a "must have game" on a new, possibly disastrous platform, for something you know absolutely nothing about. I detest companies trying to do everything for everyone. Do something and do it well dammit.
    • I concur. There's no way in hell Apple will survive in the console market. Gamers are not willing to pay the premiums that Apple users gladly shell out. Not when there are comparable products from proven producers out there. They'll re-Pippin.
    • by 7Prime (871679) on Wednesday December 06 2006, @10:07PM (#17141044) Homepage Journal

      Noone would buy a Mac if it simply had Windows installed on it. People buy Macs because they love OSX, and its integration with the hardware. OSX is to Apple what Zelda and Mario are to Nintendo. People wouldn't buy a Nintendo, anymore, if Nintendo stopped selling great games, and stop trying to create an inspired atmosphere for developers to do the same. People wouldn't buy Macs if Apple stopped making OSX and stopped pushing developers to be more consistant, interface friendly, and created a framework for them to create better software.

      It's all about infostructure, and both Nintendo and Apple have very similar philosophies when it comes to their developer frameworks.

      The only real difference is how they ACTUALLY get their money. In the gaming industry, hardware is sold at a loss or at only a small profit (even Nintendo wouldn't stay in the game if they ONLY had their hardware profits to live off of). In the computer world, hardware is sold at a huge profit, and software is used to promote the hardware (iTMS and the iPod being a good example).

      Simply because Apple, itself, doesn't "do games", per-say, has very little relivance. They don't do games because the Macintosh lost the gaming war LONG AGO, and it would be futile for them to put a lot of money into trying to win back that market. Also, Apple's plug-n-play, and hard-nosed infostructure is much better suited for the console market than the Computer Gaming market, which are very different.

      So, you're right, Apple doesn't have a snowballs chance in hell in the Computer Gaming market. They have about as much chance as Nintendo does in the PC gaming market. Both have an attitude very well suited to the console gaming market.

  • by tji (74570) on Wednesday December 06 2006, @08:15PM (#17140084)
    I think they're smarter than that. They wouldn't go after an entrenched market, where they have no particular skillset advantage, especially one that you need to throw tons of money at to get a foothold. Gaming has been done, by many more qualified competitors.

    I wouldn't be surprised if they offered a few simple games, for the casual gamer, on a device like the iTV. Similar to what they do for the iPod. But, I wouldn't call that going after the gaming market, any more than I would call the iPod a GameBoy/PSP competitor.
  • by Infonaut (96956) <infonaut@gmail.com> on Wednesday December 06 2006, @08:17PM (#17140100) Homepage Journal

    Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo are battling it out for console supremacy, devoting massive resources to winning this war.

    Hey, what a great time for Apple to jump in! Low barriers to entry. No entrenched competitors, and a vast unserved market with pent-up demand. It's *perfect*!!!

  • Just think about it. Nintendo tends to shoot for the family and low end market. They strive more for inovation of design. Their sales are not all that spectacular. It seems they are a worthwhile company for someone like apple to buy out. Further more it would open up the desktop gaming market to them as they could port all the nintendo games past, present, and future to OSX.
  • Marketshare is needed if they want to not waste billions like Microsoft and Sony did.

    Nintendo already uses powerpc chips and making another wii with macosx and frontrow would be great. They could use nintendo api's to backport alot of wii titles to teh mac if any developers want to target that market as well. Too bad Apple switched to x86.
    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      I think they just noticed how much the PS3s were going for on Ebay before they were release and thought "you mean we can get away with selling one for that". If they did release a game console:
      a.) it'd only play the games it wants to play, when it wants to play them
      b.) the retail price will match the PS3 pre-release ebay price. c.) no one will be lined up to get one
    • I agree, Apple isn't on the list when you think of gaming.

      As the article mentions, Apple makes it's money from hardware
      (unlike everyone else who IS actually in the gaming market).
      There would have to be some major changes there.

      "We think the videogame market represents a distinct possibility for Apple, especially considering that it recently announced the availability of videogames for its iPod through its iTunes store," - Yeah, cell phone quality video games bring forth a new age of gamming only made
      • by silentounce (1004459) on Wednesday December 06 2006, @07:42PM (#17139782) Homepage
        "As the article mentions, Apple makes it's money from hardware (unlike everyone else who IS actually in the gaming market)."

        Last I checked, Sony and Microsoft were making hardware, too. The profits do come from the games. The game developers receive those profits and the hardware developers get a large cut. How many games do you see out there that are developed solely by the hardware manufacturer?

        Apple has a brand, a very popular one right now. If they can tie their gaming platform to the iPod it will definitely get their foot in the door. If Apple enters gaming it most likely won't be to compete head on with the 360 or PS3, at least to start. As Nintendo has shown with the Wii, you don't need to have cutting edge graphics or processing speed, you need an innovative idea. And although a lot of us do not like to admit it. Apple has been an incredible innovator in the past few years and their products are highly desired in the areas that they focus on. I guarantee that Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo have already considered Apple in their gaming business strategies.
        • by poopdeville (841677) on Wednesday December 06 2006, @08:36PM (#17140302)

          As Nintendo has shown with the Wii, you don't need to have cutting edge graphics or processing speed, you need an innovative idea.

          This is certainly true, and your observation almost touches upon an interesting parallel.

          In some respects, Nintendo is the Apple of the console world. They produce quality hardware in an attractive package. They rely on interesting, well integrated features to sell their hardware. The Wii even looks like a MacMini on its side.

          I wouldn't suggest that Apple couldn't do as good a job as Nintendo. But is there really room for both in the market? Especially when on considers Nintendo's (and presumably Apple's) target audience? If Apple made a compelling feature, Nintendo would be forced to retaliate with another. Ideas are a scarce resource, and I doubt Nintendo or Apple has a large enough cache of them to avoid lame gimmicks. Kids might be fond of gimmicks, but grown ups usually aren't.

          In the end, this would erode both brands.

      • by Ucklak (755284) on Wednesday December 06 2006, @07:49PM (#17139868)
        Apple isn't on the list when you think of gaming.
        Pippin comes to mind and how that was a failure.

        2 things are different now and maybe that is what the impetus is.

        Apple's customer base knows how to use the internet.
        There are thousands of free computer games available that can be played on computers today and people know pretty much how to do it today.

        Their `iTV` or whatever will likely turn heads when it is released. I know I am interested. I do not own an iPod. I do like their interfaces.

        If their iTV thing does what I think it does, it will become a gateway for their content to be delivered to the living room and that means games.

        I bet that most people would like to play Bejewed or some other flash/java game outside of their computer.
        That being said, most people have a computer so the TV isn't really all that important anymore as it used to be.

        If the iTV will be a platform for specialized content (games) then maybe it will be worth looking into for casual gamers.
        I doubt it will be the graphic caliber of the uber expensive Xbox and PS systems but it may have some content worth looking into.

        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          You might want to brush up on your Pippin [wikipedia.org] knowledge. The Pippin was a very interesting product. I wrote a research paper on it back in the day.

          The Pippin was both ahead of its time and a late entry into the console market. Consoles were not a multi-purpose multimedia station back in the mid-nineties like they are (or can be) today. The Pippin was too much too soon and not enough of a console too late. By the time the Pippin-based products were on the market the market was already dominated the Big 3.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        I agree, Apple isn't on the list when you think of gaming.


        Just as Microsoft and Sony weren't really on the list when you think of gaming until they brought out their own consoles, and Apple weren't the first thing you thought of when you thought mp3 players a decade ago..
    • I think it could have huge potential for apple. Especially if they can get some deals with major producers to create games for whatever their system is. Especially if they make it easy to port games from their gaming systems to OSX. Somewhat like what Microsoft is trying to do with DirectX and Xbox360. Something like that could bring more games to the mac and possibly open even more developers eyes to the mac gaming market....
    • Actually, Mac gamers are a huge part of the game industry... they're called "Console Gamers".

      No, but seriously, we already have an Apple in the game industry: it's called Nintendo. They share almost identical business, interface, and design philosophies. If Apple were to have made the perfect handheld back in 2004, it would have been a DS. If Nintendo had made a digital media player back in 2000, it would have been an iPod. Sometimes I even start to forget which company is which, anymore, they've been so

    • by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF (813746) on Wednesday December 06 2006, @09:13PM (#17140598)

      Your comment does not really deserve a reply being a joke and redundant at the same time, but if you've seen Apple's recent mice I'd say they are of the same mentality as the Wiimote. That is to say, they are designed to be easy and accessible to everyone and to encourage developers to do the right thing. At the same time, they can easily enable power users to have the myriad buttons they need and want. In fact, Apple's "mighty mouse" is the only mouse I've ever seen where a shared computer can have one hardware mouse with one button for kids and novices and multiple buttons for expert users. I've seen firsthand what happens when novice users try to operate one of those four button designs favored by power users and I've cursed at trying to use the same mouse (as I'm accustomed to three or more). I find it sad that people still drag this old horse out of the closet, even if they're trying to be funny.