Pachter: Apple 2013 Console

[TheChefO]

How much longer is this going to be true, if gamers also buy mobile devices? If nothing else, the money they spent elsewhere may reduce the money they would spend on core gaming.

In a lot of ways, digital convergence has made the "good enough" principle true. Lossy compression for music is "good enough" for music playback as it allows people to carry a lot of music on tiny devices.

Cell phone cameras are "good enough" for a lot of people, especially those who share photos on Flickr and Facebook.

Can mobile gaming be "good enough" even for a lot of core gamers? If core gamers get into these little quirky games during the day, will they still have as much need for core games after work?

The functions which you list all make sense for a portable device.

Music you can listen to while doing multiple other tasks. It's the reason the walkman was so successful. Having the your entire music library to choose from is obviously an advantage over taking a bunch of discs with you (portability for the function while doing other tasks).

The ability to take a picture anywhere at anytime because you will always have your phone on you is again, added function which doesn't negate ones portability by forcing another device to tag along on the go.

Smartphone gaming also makes sense as a "good enough" experience to replace a portable console.


Suggesting portable gaming would supplant console gaming is akin to suggesting a portable exclusive version netflix will dethrone the netflix we know today. People want to watch movies on the bigscreen. This doesn't mean they DON'T want to watch them (or tv shows) on the go, but the primary usage of that entertainment medium is the livingroom bigscreen.

Different use cases.

Or suggesting smartphones will replace DSLR's for professionals.
(or movie studios replacing their cameras with iphones)

Different use case.

Or suggesting professional recording studios will record straight to 128k mp3s.

Different use.


The portability and functionality of smartphones and the like are nice, but they have their place. Including components which replicate other experiences is fine, until those components jeopardize the portability of the device which negates it's primary purpose.

Even assuming technology always progresses and things get better, there are things which will always be limited by the form and function of a portable device which itself is an advantage in keeping the device with you all the time.

It will never replace a professional class camera.

It will never be used to record professional class audio.

It will never be used to record professional class video.

It will never replace the movie watching experience at home.

and it will never replace a console/stb (stationary connected entertainment device).


The things which make it portable, also make it weak in specific areas.

Screen size
Optics
Energy available for processing
Size available for processing
Ergonomics

Those things will never change for a portable device. They will always be a disadvantage to DEDICATED devices.

 

[TheChefO]

maybe the portablility?

like in mgs hd transfarring feature. allowing game progress to be played on psp.

or maybe the tablet act like wiiu?

Yes as a subsidiary experience, there is no doubt portable devices will have a place there.

Big difference between replacing the core experience, and supplementing it.

 

[TheChefO]

Actually, some survey said a very high percentage of tablet use occurs with the TV on.

Yes they sell a lot and people use them in many places. But note it doesn't say people are selling their TV's or that TV sales are being replaced by ipad sales.

Supplemental experience != Replacement experience.

Nobody is arguing that the gaming experience is better on mobile devices. But it doesn't have to be, in order to have massive sales and by now, more people gaming on them than on consoles.

I don't think it's possible to argue it's a better on mobile.

Yes, IOS sales are amazing. We've even seen some pc/laptop/mac cannibalization. However, where is the cannibalization of console sales?

I only see one which correlates to IOS uptake.

Wii

Makes sense as the bread and butter of the platform was Casuals, Kids, Moms. People that don't value gaming very much, but interested enough to try it out.

How are PS3/xb360 sales doing these days in the face of such staggering IOS sales?

Console makers have to be wary that some console gamers will be content with playing games on mobile devices (along with the other entertainment options they offer) and at least hold off on buying next gen consoles right away.

With how many IOS devices they've sold, the effect it will have on the market is already here.

I don't think anyone that was seriously interested in buying a nextgen console is going to say "nah, I'll get an ipad3 instead!".

Now this is assuming of course that Sony/MS don't make the fatal mistake of undeserving the market and coming out with ps3.5 or xb360+. Doing so would only undermine the advantage a console has over portable devices and we may see a shift just as you suggest.

But then, we'd also have the issue of software library.

Most people don't buy consoles, they buy games and the console required to play them.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I don't think anyone would argue otherwise.

However, portable devices such as an iphone/pad will always have limitations which do not exist on consoles. This will lead to consoles always having the superior experience.

Different experience. As long as you can plug your tablet into a TV (or beam its picture across), it works exactly the same as a console. The difference will be that a console can have more power. The disadvantage of consoles is you won't be able to use your console on holiday to browse the web, or show off photos, or do the things tablets can do. Heck, you could even play some Unreal Engine shooter with controller on your tablet propped up on your knees in bed while away.

Here's the thing:

Assume you have the setup outlined above.

You have a ps4 and/or an xb720. You have the controllers for them obviously and you have your ipad/upad/wpad/spad.

Wrong scenario. I mean, in your scenario of course you'll buy the game for the better game experience becauase you've obviosuly bought the console for that purpose. But the real test is when looking to buy a console or a tablet, if both can be plugged in and give you the dual-stick play experience, but one also has expanded portable functionality that the other lacks, and you have a finite amount of income to spend, which do you buy? Especially when one's content is already portable with your other devices.

This ties in with your thoughts on XBox compatibilty. Games you buy on Live should run on your Live PC and Live mobile and Live tablet. Well if those games run on an XB tablet, what's the advantage of the XB proper. Better AAA games. What if the tablets can play those same games 'good enough'? We're not talking about the difference between PS3 and PS2, but as mobiles keep updating, 2 years after the next consoles release, the tablets will be producing something along the same lines, which not-so-fussy players will be happy with. And if the next consoles go conserative, all the less difference.

Now if the FIFA experience on console is the same as on tablet-console, only the tablet console has rougher poly models and less AA, is that really enough to swing it? It will for some, but not others, and the more people who are happy with 'good enough' and choose the flexibilty of a tablet-console over a normal console, the less there are buying into that console and the weaker its market becomes. This is the threat to consoles - not that tablets will take all gamers away, but that the value proposition along with diminshing gap in games between consoles and tablets will cut into the console market and undermine it. The consoles only work as a business with massive install bases, and if half of gamers are okay to stick to tablet shooters, that's going to hurt.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I don't think anyone that was seriously interested in buying a nextgen console is going to say "nah, I'll get an ipad3 instead!".

1) It won't be iPad 3, but iPad 4 or even 5. And various Droid tablets.
2) The early adopters of next-gen will still buy it, but two years in we'll be on iPad 6 and 7 etc. selling way faster than the consoles unless there's a tablet crash. And these iPad 6s and 7s will have better visuals than all our old consoles. So do I want to upgrade to XB3/PS4, or upgrade to iThing and use all my iTunes stuff etc.? That'll be the thinking of plenty of existing console gamers who also own iThings and iStuff.

 

[TheChefO]

The disadvantage of consoles is you won't be able to use your console on holiday to browse the web, or show off photos, or do the things tablets can do. Heck, you could even play some Unreal Engine shooter with controller on your tablet propped up on your knees in bed while away.

That's supplemental.

For gamers that also want to game on the go, they can download their cloud save, and continue to game on the go (miserable experience as it may be) or they can wait to play the game proper on the console.

No serious gamer is going to say "eh, I'm good with angry birds ... what's a new console good for?"

Wrong scenario. I mean, in your scenario of course you'll buy the game for the better game experience becauase you've obviosuly bought the console for that purpose. But the real test is when looking to buy a console or a tablet, if both can be plugged in and give you the dual-stick play experience, but one also has expanded portable functionality that the other lacks, and you have a finite amount of income to spend, which do you buy? Especially when one's content is already portable with your other devices.

If portability was all that important, we would have seen a mass exodus of console gamers gone portable (not supplemented with portable).

And this is with games of significantly higher quality than what is offered through IOS and with much better ergonomics.

Aside from Japan, people still value the rich livingroom console experience and even with the onslaught of IOS sales, HD consoles are still chugging along just fine.

This ties in with your thoughts on XBox compatibilty. Games you buy on Live should run on your Live PC and Live mobile and Live tablet. Well if those games run on an XB tablet, what's the advantage of the XB proper. Better AAA games. What if the tablets can play those same games 'good enough'? We're not talking about the difference between PS3 and PS2, but as mobiles keep updating, 2 years after the next consoles release, the tablets will be producing something along the same lines, which not-so-fussy players will be happy with. And if the next consoles go conserative, all the less difference.

The thoughts on BC were for digital content purchases to be sustained for future platforms. Not for pads to play console games. If they can work pad games compatibility into it as well, then fine, but I'm thinking that will severely limit the games we will see nextgen if they are forced to target weak ARM cpus.

Not to mention I'm not sure how people will manage 50gb BRD games on their pads.

Supplemental experiences will be the order of the day for portables. Not the same console game at lower res (with one caveat, xb arcade type games could work cross compat).

The consoles only work as a business with massive install bases, and if half of gamers are okay to stick to tablet shooters, that's going to hurt.

The thing to take away from IOS etc isn't "OMG their going to steal our lunch" ... It's that "free" games which are ad supported are a valuable addition to the gaming ecosystem.

Ad supported games which otherwise would cost more is another angle.

I started a thread on this a while ago.

That's the reason gaming is even a viable alternative on IOS.
It certainly isn't for a superior experience.

This business model can be replicated on consoles.

The other angle of the BC argument I made is that ps3/xb360 can coexist with new higher end consoles.

What this does is offer up a competitive cheap console experience (much cheaper than any game worthy pad) which could also adopt a gaming "app store" with cheap/free games that are ad supported.


But again, people don't buy consoles.
They buy games (or expected games *ahem*) and the console necessary to play them.

As is, IOS is sorely lacking and the angle for luring serious developers and publishers to make games that would cause gamers to switch to IOS is very limiting.

The only lure is a ton of people that like free things and may or may not be interested in your game ..."good luck".

Anything that would be ported to IOS could be ported/scaled to ps3/xb360 which offers a huge userbase and cheap entry point for new gamers and a history of selling $60 software ... oh and hardware which will still be superior to IOS anything for the next few years.


Getting back to your point.

How many gamer friend lists are going to switch to IOS?


The proposition for the IOS ecosystem replacing consoles is limited. I'd say it's more likely people will hook up a controller to their laptop and abandon console gaming than IOS.

Laptops/PC's sell $60 games
Laptops/PC's have top notch hardware
Laptops/PC's and laptops can hook up to TV's

 

[TheChefO]

1) It won't be iPad 3, but iPad 4 or even 5. And various Droid tablets.
2) The early adopters of next-gen will still buy it, but two years in we'll be on iPad 6 and 7 etc. selling way faster than the consoles unless there's a tablet crash. And these iPad 6s and 7s will have better visuals than all our old consoles. So do I want to upgrade to XB3/PS4, or upgrade to iThing and use all my iTunes stuff etc.? That'll be the thinking of plenty of existing console gamers who also own iThings and iStuff.

Just as there is a diminishing return on consoles, there is the same on ipads.

Ipads will still be replaced as they get old and break. But seriously what will be the big difference between ipad3 and ipad4 and ipad5 and 6, 7, 8 that will keep this growth curve going?

Diminishing returns will hit ipads as well.

Battery power will limit chip size growth.
Die process shrinks will limit the transistor density to about double every 1.5-2 years.

The power difference between ipads year on year will already be limited and I expect the refresh cycle will slow to represent this and with that, the power increase will be at most 2x the previous pad (assuming apple will want to keep the size and weight the same (battery stagnant) this will limit the transistor count and performance increase from pad to pad).


So with that said, yes ipads will still sell.

Will they get the same games that people want?
Will people spend enough on them ($60 retail) to balance the money publishers/devs get from HD consoles to lure the same games?
Will the hardware be able to store them and play them?

A better question: How many people are abandoning consoles/pc gaming for the "good enough" experience of onlive?

 

[wco81]

The other factor may be Windows 8 tablets. What if Steam games are a good experience on those and they come out at a competitive enough price.

Presumably, it would be the x86 W8 tablets which would have the potential to impact gaming, not the ARM ones. Of course the question for them would be price, weight, battery life, compared to ARM tablets.

 

[TheChefO]

The other factor may be Windows 8 tablets. What if Steam games are a good experience on those and they come out at a competitive enough price.

Presumably, it would be the x86 W8 tablets which would have the potential to impact gaming, not the ARM ones. Of course the question for them would be price, weight, battery life, compared to ARM tablets.

I think for Microsoft to make the arm/x86 thing work, they will have to design the OS to present a layer between the hardware and software that makes the software agnostic to what hardware is underneath.

This will suck for games, but I'm pretty sure it will be necessary for all other apps to work regardless of which "version" of pc/tablet a user has.

The last thing MS wants is users complaining that the win8 software they bought/downloaded doesn't work due to the wrong guts in the box/tablet.

But along those lines and the lines brought up of a "good enough" experience which is portable and convenient ... why aren't we seeing onlive selling like gangbusters?

You can use it in any web browser, use it on your tablet, use it it home, save games in the cloud and continue anywhere and it has a ton more to offer games-wise than IOS ...

Hows that venture going?

 

[Shifty Geezer]

For gamers that also want to game on the go, they can download their cloud save, and continue to game on the go (miserable experience as it may be) or they can wait to play the game proper on the console.

No serious gamer is going to say "eh, I'm good with angry birds ... what's a new console good for?"

Why are you obsessing over Angry Birds? That's not the be all and end all of gaming on portable devices. They will evolve. There's a reason Epic have ported Unreal Engine to iOS and it's not because Angry Birds 2 is going to use it.

If portability was all that important, we would have seen a mass exodus of console gamers gone portable (not supplemented with portable).

The portable experience doesn't offer the same as the console experience. When it does (in terms of providing the types of game experiences people want), then we'll see exodus.

Aside from Japan, people still value the rich livingroom console experience and even with the onslaught of IOS sales, HD consoles are still chugging along just fine.

You are missing my point by looking solely at the here and now. iPad now does not challenge the console experience. Tablets in the near future will. Apple can be part of that by shoring up their iOS platform with whatever is needed to get a better vector into the living room for people not yet buying iPads, or they can sit back and watch MS, Google, ASUS and Sony release tablets with all the fun of console gaming as added value.

 

[AlphaWolf]

Thread moving too fast so some generic responses.

There seems to be an expectation from some of you that gaming will converge at a common denominator. I think there's still 30 million COD players out there that want the next one to be a better version, not a gimped version for touch displays. I own a bicycle and a car just like a lot of people, one doesn't necessarily replace the other. It might for some, but in most cases people see and use them differently despite an overlap in their capability. I've even been known to put my bicycle in my car, that doesn't mean I intend to get rid of my bicycle or my car.

I've not said tablet gaming will die, it will probably grow but it will grow inside the limitation of a battery powered portable device with a touch interface. I've only said it won't replace the console experience. At least for a more hardcore gaming audience.

using a tablet in front of the TV != to gaming on the TV.

 

[TheChefO]

Why are you obsessing over Angry Birds? That's not the be all and end all of gaming on portable devices. They will evolve. There's a reason Epic have ported Unreal Engine to iOS and it's not because Angry Birds 2 is going to use it.

I suppose I'm confused over what the true AAA experience is on IOS ... is it Angry Birds, Plants vs Zombies, or Infinity Blade?

The portable experience doesn't offer the same as the console experience. When it does (in terms of providing the types of game experiences people want), then we'll see exodus.

That's my point, it never will.

Its like saying "when psp offers the same console experience" ... when did that exodus take place?

And that comparison is a lot closer than anything IOS to consoleHD these days ...

You are missing my point by looking solely at the here and now. iPad now does not challenge the console experience. Tablets in the near future will. Apple can be part of that by shoring up their iOS platform with whatever is needed to get a better vector into the living room for people not yet buying iPads, or they can sit back and watch MS, Google, ASUS and Sony release tablets with all the fun of console gaming as added value.

Regardless of what software platform fixes Apple may make to IOS, a tablet will never match a fixed console.

Screen size (ok, future can beam wireless to tv)
Optics (i suppose kinect like interface could work with having it propped up in front of the tv somehow?)
Energy available for processing (won't ever change, unless turbo mode after plugging in?)
Size available for processing (won't ever change - eh never-mind the turbo mode ... gotta keep that slim form factor)
Ergonomics (ok, future can connect a gamepad)

The best they could hope for is a portable set top box with gimped hardware and a touchscreen that can have a controller connect via bluetooth and wireless hdmi.

Expecting this $500 device to be comparable to a console is a false hope. It will never match it. It will always be years behind.

Having said all that ...

Again, how about Onlive? That works on ios and any other device with a browser ...

How's that "good enough" experience going vs consoles/pcs?

 

[TheChefO]

There seems to be an expectation from some of you that gaming will converge at a common denominator. I think there's still 30 million COD players out there that want the next one to be a better version, not a gimped version for touch displays. I own a bicycle and a car just like a lot of people, one doesn't necessarily replace the other. It might for some, but in most cases people see and use them differently despite an overlap in their capability. I've even been known to put my bicycle in my car, that doesn't mean I intend to get rid of my bicycle or my car.

I've not said tablet gaming will die, it will probably grow but it will grow inside the limitation of a battery powered portable device with a touch interface. I've only said it won't replace the console experience. At least for a more hardcore gaming audience.

using a tablet in front of the TV != to gaming on the TV.

Exactly.

 

[patsu]

You do realize plants vs zombies is available on HD consoles (and pc, mac, DS, android, etc) right?

The fact that it is considered to be the killer AAA IOS app (which isn't free), and yet the sales volume of this game on consoles is negligible, speaks volumes.

Fun game? Sure. Enough to move hardware? ehm no.

It doesn't work that way. If you want to compare their relative sales, you'll need to conduct normalized tests in a parallel release. Plants vs Zombies for PS3 was released a year later. And it's free for PS+ subscribers. It doesn't really prove anything since releasing Wii software on PS3 may not work too.

Again, mobile game experience is inherently lower priority than a console. Mobile gaming is there to fill time when one is between other events in their lives.

Console/livingroom gaming is a destination of entertainment.


While you may be happy investing all your time in your livingroom playing Plants vs Zombies, the vast majority of gamers clearly prefer a deeper and richer experience in the livingroom.

I didn't say they can't enjoy a deeper experience on console. I simply pointed out that iOS games can be played at home too. I see people doing it all the time, not just in my household. And yes, quality will improve if developers make money on them. The social aspect of iOS games can hook even core gamers just because their friends and families are into it.

 

[ERP]

There is a lot of debate inside the industry on what new formats are stealing from what existing formats traditional base.

The figures I've personally seen seem completely inconclusive.
I've seen no real conclusion, and about the only agreement is some expectation that tablets, and phones are impacting the traditional hand held market.
One interesting figure I saw recently was that iOS games are primarily bought at or near the time a person buys the device, and purchase rates tail off dramatically shortly afterwards, could imply many things. Personally I use my IPad to browse the web and read email/twitter, I own games on it, but I rarely play them, my GF uses hers as a replacement for the flash games she played on her computer, neither uses would impinge on the traditional console user base, but as I've said before anecdotes aren't useful for projecting to larger markets.

I'm not sure today that tablets are impacting the traditional console space, outside of possibly Wii's casual user base. I suspect by the time they do (if ever), that we'll be passed the traditional console hardware model anyway.

 

[patsu]

Actually, some survey said a very high percentage of tablet use occurs with the TV on.

Whether it's surfing or gaming while having some TV show on, it seems to be a common living room experience.

iPad and Kindle Fire combined may have sold about 20 million units last quarter. How long will it take for next gen consoles combined to reach that figure?

The point is, tablets and smart phones are attracting a lot of consumer spending dollars. If you figure iPad sold over 15 million units at a minimum of $500 each, that's $7.5 billion, which alone is close to what the whole console gaming industry was grossing in a good year, IIRC. iPhone gross revenues are even greater and then you add in the Android phones and tablets sales.

Apple and Samsung look down at the console business as a nice little business but they're looking to increase their volumes. Speaking of companies that get into everything, you'd think Samsung would be looking at consoles if they deem it lucrative enough.

Nobody is arguing that the gaming experience is better on mobile devices. But it doesn't have to be, in order to have massive sales and by now, more people gaming on them than on consoles. Console makers have to be wary that some console gamers will be content with playing games on mobile devices (along with the other entertainment options they offer) and at least hold off on buying next gen consoles right away.

Yes, if there is an unserved need on such a huge install base, core game developers will want to enter the market. As for what kind of game sells, they will have to figure it out. Even on the so called core gaming platforms, it used to be RPG or platformers, then it's shooter. Racing games seem out of favor. Price is an issue but it is not an insurmountable one. Price perception can be changed, and there are various business models that sidestep the perception.

 

[patsu]

I suppose I'm confused over what the true AAA experience is on IOS ... is it Angry Birds, Plants vs Zombies, or Infinity Blade?

It's because you're looking at the new platform with old platform perspective. It doesn't really matter what AAA means semantically. Developers will want to figure out what sells best, who their audience are, what core competencies they have, and then scale the quality and appeal up. ^_^

There is a lot of debate inside the industry on what new formats are stealing from what existing formats traditional base.

The figures I've personally seen seem completely inconclusive.
I've seen no real conclusion, and about the only agreement is some expectation that tablets, and phones are impacting the traditional hand held market.

I'm not sure today that tablets are impacting the traditional console space, outside of possibly Wii's casual user base. I suspect by the time they do (if ever), that we'll be passed the traditional console hardware model anyway.

Yes, as I mentioned, iOS/Android may increase the number of people playing games. They may also improve in quality. How it affects the core gaming platforms is inconclusive but the vendors will evolve to avoid the nasty outcomes (or ride the wave !). Either way, gaming on iOS/Android is here to stay and the games will keep improving. Core gamers or AAA don't really mean much. Their definitions may change too.

By the time it's reflected in the data, it may be a little too late/slow to react.

 

[TheChefO]

Core gamers or AAA don't really mean much. Their definitions may change too.

It does matter.

Hence the thread title.

If all they plan for is games of the type described above, they won't move hardware based on the available software to the gamer, thus they are not a threat.

 

[TheChefO]

One interesting figure I saw recently was that iOS games are primarily bought at or near the time a person buys the device, and purchase rates tail off dramatically shortly afterwards...

New toy, what to do with it? User wants to maximize purchase functionality so they browse app store, download free/cheap software that look interesting/have heard of ... and experience becomes clear for what it is.

Makes sense to me.

 

[patsu]

It does matter.

Hence the thread title.

If all they plan for is games of the type described above, they won't move hardware based on the available software to the gamer, thus they are not a threat.

If iOS/Android games improve, the top console games should be safe, but the other games (The majority) may look embarrassing at $60. I don't think talking about AAA games only will present the right perspective. Plus, as more kids play iOS games, they will get attached to the platform. The AAA game concept will change.

As for planning for games of the type described above...

Interview: Seamus Blackley's new team of Atari coin-op superstars aim for iPad
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/...m_of_Atari_coinop_superstars_aim_for_iPad.php

This is only one of the startups. You will find new and old developers looking for fortune on the new platform. There is no reason why other games can't make it to the platform over time.

You don't need to move iPad hardware because they are already selling well.

New toy, what to do with it? User wants to maximize purchase functionality so they browse app store, download free/cheap software that look interesting/have heard of ... and experience becomes clear for what it is.

Makes sense to me.

It may also be like the casual COD players. They only play COD and nothing else. These people exist but core gamers on iOS also exist.

The platform is flexible enough to do OnLive style gaming too.


EDIT: ERP, do you have a reference to that article you read ? Buying/trying a large number of apps in the first few days sounds correct, but it may apply to all app categories rather than just games only.