Kicked this idea in the IRC channel, could Apple computer join the console market? Either through acquisition, merging, or developing their own console.
epic
epic
Could Apple join the console market?
- Thread starter epicstruggle
- Start date
Having done a great deal of game development on and moderate amount for Apple system over the past 10-15 years or so - including a brief bit on a Pippin port I can say without hesitation that Apple is to gaming as Microsoft is to security. There just isn't a culture there competent in the area.
I've literally watched other game developers run screaming from meetings with Apple game people.
Take a look at Apple's joke of a game development page: http://developer.apple.com/games/
Apple can't even get stable, up to date OpenGL drivers for their systems. The only time Apple ever makes any progress in updating their drivers to try to match Linux/Windows is when some major port comes out for their systems and they are humiliated into action. Doom 3, WoW, etc.
And now that IBM has dumped them native Mac game development is dead outside of shareware titles on Intel based Macs and a few token titles like WoW.
Apple has no manufacturing capabilities which are vital to success in the console market.
And I can't think of anyone they could acquire that makes sense. I doubt IBM ever wants deal with Apple again as a customer. AMD and Intel have nothing remotely competitive to power a console. Developing their own console seems far fetched.
The only area of gaming I can see Apple having any luck in is iPod stuff.
I've literally watched other game developers run screaming from meetings with Apple game people.
Take a look at Apple's joke of a game development page: http://developer.apple.com/games/
Apple can't even get stable, up to date OpenGL drivers for their systems. The only time Apple ever makes any progress in updating their drivers to try to match Linux/Windows is when some major port comes out for their systems and they are humiliated into action. Doom 3, WoW, etc.
And now that IBM has dumped them native Mac game development is dead outside of shareware titles on Intel based Macs and a few token titles like WoW.
Apple has no manufacturing capabilities which are vital to success in the console market.
And I can't think of anyone they could acquire that makes sense. I doubt IBM ever wants deal with Apple again as a customer. AMD and Intel have nothing remotely competitive to power a console. Developing their own console seems far fetched.
The only area of gaming I can see Apple having any luck in is iPod stuff.
Vysez said:
Yeah, and they failed miserably just like the Phantom. If Apple wants to get into the console sector, they should try to get iTunes on the consoles, i.e. not only make it available but make it easy to use, integrate it into the console's user interface, etc. However, since MS and Sony are pushing for their own online music shops, that would leave only Nintendo.
...To release a console called 'Juice'.
There is only one company in the world, IMHO, with the resources - strength and breadth of expertise, financials, market channels - to enter the console market. It is a close competitor to Sony in many areas, so a Playstation alternative would probably be a decent addition to their (already huge) portfolio. Would it make financial sense for them, however, to sink 5-10 billions, like Microsoft did?
assen said:
You're talking about Matsushita (Panasonic), right? They're bigger than Sony and it's the only one on top of my head you could be referring to... But they've already tried, unsuccessfully too, and they just don't seem too interested anymore... Which is quite understandable for the reasons you gave: too risky an investment in the short term.
london-boy said:
Nope, try again
I'm referring to one of the top semiconductor manufacturers in the world, who make even their own microprocessors (under licensed IP, of course). I'm not sure where they are in terms of market cap vs. Matsushita, but I would guess they are bigger, and with more potential to grow.
assen said:Nope, try again
I'm referring to one of the top semiconductor manufacturers in the world, who make even their own microprocessors (under licensed IP, of course). I'm not sure where they are in terms of market cap vs. Matsushita, but I would guess they are bigger, and with more potential to grow.
:smile: Must be Samsung then... And to be honest, i think they're very happy the way they are, as they're making money out of everyone anyway out of memory and other chips, without mentioning the HUGE deal they made with Microsoft with their HDTVs used in the X360 pods.
Samsung is making a lot of money without risking anything (well that's not entirely true but u get my point), and i'm pretty sure they enjoy their position and have no intention of entering a market which basically dictates you have to lose billions before making an impact, if you make an impact at all!
Oh and if it wasn't Samsung, i just wasted all this time for nothing!!
Ingenu said:
Mmm he did say
And i can only think of Matsushita (which he said it wasn't) and Samsung which fit into that description, these days...
assen said:
You know, you don't have to lose billions of dollars on your first console. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the Xbox the only corporate gaming debut in history to lose billions and still get a sequel? IIRC, 2600, NES, SMS, and PSx all made their parent companies plenty of cash. There's no reason some future company can't pull another Sony. You've just got to:
a) Find a need and fill it
b) Wait for the right time--launch when there's kind of a lull in gaming and technology, so that developers and consumers will be interested in your product.
c) Build it smart so you don't lose your shirts in manufacturing
d) Learn from competitors' mistakes
Both Sony and Nintendo did all 4 with the PSx and NES, respectively. Microsoft didn't do (b) and (c)--rather than waiting for an opportune moment, they're brute-forcing their way into the console space by drowning every problem in money. If none of the three new consoles really wow the populace, or if Revo just tanks and lack of differentiation/high price stifle creativity on PS3 and X360 (like what if Too Human bombs at retail?), someone like Apple could swing by in 2008 or 2009 and make a killing by releasing the right console at the right time.
If you can't beat them, oin them
The pippen was their only try in the console market, but it dawned on them, you need developer support to make a succesful console. No one took them seriously at the time so they failed.
But it didn't end there, Connectix (an old macintosh developer) developed a PSX emulator called the Virtual Game Station (demoed at a Macworld Convention). It was pretty good for its time and allowed mac users to play most of the PSX games on their Mac (Metal Gear Solid and Gran Turismo worked flawlessly). Not only that but it played burnt discs as well, and provided a bit of anti aliasing to boot. Obviously Sony didn't like that and didn't give them any official support, Connectix that is.
I think that's it in terms of Apple's involvment. I don't think they care right now to make a game machine, they make too much money off of iPods, and people with Intel Macs can now play PC games easily with Boot Camp.
[edit]Ack! I can't edit my title...
epicstruggle said:
The pippen was their only try in the console market, but it dawned on them, you need developer support to make a succesful console. No one took them seriously at the time so they failed.
But it didn't end there, Connectix (an old macintosh developer) developed a PSX emulator called the Virtual Game Station (demoed at a Macworld Convention). It was pretty good for its time and allowed mac users to play most of the PSX games on their Mac (Metal Gear Solid and Gran Turismo worked flawlessly). Not only that but it played burnt discs as well, and provided a bit of anti aliasing to boot. Obviously Sony didn't like that and didn't give them any official support, Connectix that is.
I think that's it in terms of Apple's involvment. I don't think they care right now to make a game machine, they make too much money off of iPods, and people with Intel Macs can now play PC games easily with Boot Camp.
[edit]Ack! I can't edit my title...
I don't think that's the case any more. Way back when, development teams for software could be small and you could support a console on a low budget. Now games are expensive and will only become moreso. Someone trying to enter the market now is going to need to be able to convince developers to shell out $millions on an unproven console with zero installed base. Either you invest bucket loads of cash and force a place for yourself, as MS did, or you try and find some niche and developers happy to develop for that, of which I don't think there is any niche left. Of your examples, development on those machines was fairly cheap except PlayStation, and there Sony had the niche of 3D gaming that hadn't really been developed. It's also worth noting that of the many companies who have tried to release consoles, few survived for long. It's not an industry that can accomodate lots of players, and if the current players are strong, the chances of a new layer getting anyway are next to nothing.fearsomepirate said: