Jimquisition: Steve Jobs and iOS -- Videogame Related
- Thread starter Jimothy Sterling
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Does iOS/Android have support for creating and playing games? Yes, and these are valid games, as one will discover once one is willing to allow their mind expand beyond the narrow definition of a game needing a mouse, keyboard, or pad controller or games only being those of the mainstream AAA title variety. The interface is different, but that does not detract from the ability of games on these platforms to be deep and involving experiences. That is more a function of the developer's skill and creativity in designing and implementing a game(why are there so many console and PC games that just out-right suck when there is all that power and capability available and the "right" kind of interface, i.e. mouse, keyboard, or pad controller?)
Is there a substantial market of games and a substantial audience of gamers that use the platform for the purpose of engaging and enjoying a game? Yes. Like it or not, there are people who actual prefer gaming on their iPhone or Android. These people are not necessarily any less a gamer than anyone else. They have simply chosen to game on a different platform. They are not mindless sheep, morons, or idiots. They have simply made a different choice for different reasons that are known primarily to them. To assume otherwise would be conceit.
Is there a growing consideration and efforts by larger game development publishers and studio to produce games for iOS/Android platforms in order to tap and even grow the market potential of these platforms for gaming? Yes. Companies are very much aware that there is a substantial amount of money that can be made by producing and marketing games for these platforms.
As best as I can see these platforms are quite relevant to gaming, and any changes to these platforms can potentially have implications on their ability to support games and the large market of gamers that use these platforms. Attempts to discredit these platforms on the basis of them not sporting "real" games or the games just being time wasters in nothing more than disingenuous conceit and hypocrisy in a vain attempt to rationalize one's own unfounded superiority over another. Most games(and particularly the mainstream "hardcore" contingent of games) do nothing but waste time; they are not educational, informative, productive, or creative in any way. Whether any particular set of games are "real" games versus any other set is debatable considering that we do not have a well-founded definition of what it means to be a "real" game. Instead, we have "real" games being only whatever select vocal minority(the so-called "hardcore" crowd) claim to be so(this is akin to religious dogma being dictated by an elitie clergy).
EDIT: minor edit for argument self-consistency.
Is there a substantial market of games and a substantial audience of gamers that use the platform for the purpose of engaging and enjoying a game? Yes. Like it or not, there are people who actual prefer gaming on their iPhone or Android. These people are not necessarily any less a gamer than anyone else. They have simply chosen to game on a different platform. They are not mindless sheep, morons, or idiots. They have simply made a different choice for different reasons that are known primarily to them. To assume otherwise would be conceit.
Is there a growing consideration and efforts by larger game development publishers and studio to produce games for iOS/Android platforms in order to tap and even grow the market potential of these platforms for gaming? Yes. Companies are very much aware that there is a substantial amount of money that can be made by producing and marketing games for these platforms.
As best as I can see these platforms are quite relevant to gaming, and any changes to these platforms can potentially have implications on their ability to support games and the large market of gamers that use these platforms. Attempts to discredit these platforms on the basis of them not sporting "real" games or the games just being time wasters in nothing more than disingenuous conceit and hypocrisy in a vain attempt to rationalize one's own unfounded superiority over another. Most games(and particularly the mainstream "hardcore" contingent of games) do nothing but waste time; they are not educational, informative, productive, or creative in any way. Whether any particular set of games are "real" games versus any other set is debatable considering that we do not have a well-founded definition of what it means to be a "real" game. Instead, we have "real" games being only whatever select vocal minority(the so-called "hardcore" crowd) claim to be so(this is akin to religious dogma being dictated by an elitie clergy).
EDIT: minor edit for argument self-consistency.
The problem is that these App games are a de-evolution of gaming rather than an evolution of it. Saying that because these are no worse than games from the 8 bit or 16 bit era and thus should be considered worthy games, neglects the evolution of gaming since that point. What's more the fact that games of this sort can make money off of the casual market hurts the gaming industry by causing game developers to neglect real, serious, evolved gaming experiences in favor of the quick cash grabs. Granted there ARE exceptions to this rule like the aforementioned "Infinity Blade", and perhaps some of those simple games are pretty good, but how many of those apps are utter and complete crap? How much garbage has been produced because of those few games that can be defended?
Basically these games are the equivilent of the cut-rate software at a Best Buy or Wal-Mart going by names like "Alien Disco Safari" or something totally deritivive. The problem is that we're seeing a market of undemanding casual gamers who will consume garbage like this and aren't being cultivated to want more, and a situation developing where this is rapidly getting to the point where this is all that game developers are going to want to produce.
Right now we're looking at an era where we have game developers saying they couldn't create the equivilent of games like "Final Fantasy VII" today because it wouldn't be cost effective with the current technology (or more correctly what people on the development side having decided they should be paid for their work). Things like app games contribute to this because if someone can make more money by producing fifty app games than one really big game for a similar investment, that is what they are going to do.
Ideally gamers of all sorts should be able to co-exist. The problem is that the arguement that the casuals, and "app gamers" aren't hurting anyone carries increasingly less weight. Few, if any, developers are creating the huge game experiences that serious gamers demand, and those few that do appear are not enough to fill the demand. Even companies like "Bioware" are moving towards flashy shooters (their have interactive cinematics as their selling point), shooters being a form of casual gaming especially nowadays (Farmville for a differant audience). As things go on we're largely seeing a situation where most of the big plans are for shooters, sports games, social networking games, and bite-sized apps, because that is where the money is. There really isn't much in the way of massive budget, deeply statistical, turn-based RPGs for that crowd (and whether you like it or not, it is a substantial crowd) under development... not because such games won't make money, but because they won't make ENOUGH money compared to churning out garbage that is also easier to produce.
As far as Steve Jobs goes, I think the issue isn't so much that he isn't game related, but rather than the coverage of him and his influance on current gaming isn't negative, and it should be a lot more negative than it is. Largely because a lot of these guys on the internet are proably being paid by Apple to do reviews and such and promote those same apps and the platforms that support them that are an industry wide blight. Some blogger can either be honest in criticizing Jobs and the platforms he helped promote, or he can make money from Apple... the choice most make is painfully obvious, with people who love games but come into positions of influance and deciding to be more pragmatic and self interested than maintaining an attitude that is good for the games themselves, no matter what their initial intent was. Some, like the guys at "Penny Arcade" even seem to convince themselves that they haven't changed or sold out.
That said, saying that Steve had an influance on gaming outside of this is wrong. After all anyone who grew up playing games on the old "Apple II" probably knows better. As far as hardcore gaming goes, that's the platform that had overlooked cult classics like "Deathlord".
Basically these games are the equivilent of the cut-rate software at a Best Buy or Wal-Mart going by names like "Alien Disco Safari" or something totally deritivive. The problem is that we're seeing a market of undemanding casual gamers who will consume garbage like this and aren't being cultivated to want more, and a situation developing where this is rapidly getting to the point where this is all that game developers are going to want to produce.
Right now we're looking at an era where we have game developers saying they couldn't create the equivilent of games like "Final Fantasy VII" today because it wouldn't be cost effective with the current technology (or more correctly what people on the development side having decided they should be paid for their work). Things like app games contribute to this because if someone can make more money by producing fifty app games than one really big game for a similar investment, that is what they are going to do.
Ideally gamers of all sorts should be able to co-exist. The problem is that the arguement that the casuals, and "app gamers" aren't hurting anyone carries increasingly less weight. Few, if any, developers are creating the huge game experiences that serious gamers demand, and those few that do appear are not enough to fill the demand. Even companies like "Bioware" are moving towards flashy shooters (their have interactive cinematics as their selling point), shooters being a form of casual gaming especially nowadays (Farmville for a differant audience). As things go on we're largely seeing a situation where most of the big plans are for shooters, sports games, social networking games, and bite-sized apps, because that is where the money is. There really isn't much in the way of massive budget, deeply statistical, turn-based RPGs for that crowd (and whether you like it or not, it is a substantial crowd) under development... not because such games won't make money, but because they won't make ENOUGH money compared to churning out garbage that is also easier to produce.
As far as Steve Jobs goes, I think the issue isn't so much that he isn't game related, but rather than the coverage of him and his influance on current gaming isn't negative, and it should be a lot more negative than it is. Largely because a lot of these guys on the internet are proably being paid by Apple to do reviews and such and promote those same apps and the platforms that support them that are an industry wide blight. Some blogger can either be honest in criticizing Jobs and the platforms he helped promote, or he can make money from Apple... the choice most make is painfully obvious, with people who love games but come into positions of influance and deciding to be more pragmatic and self interested than maintaining an attitude that is good for the games themselves, no matter what their initial intent was. Some, like the guys at "Penny Arcade" even seem to convince themselves that they haven't changed or sold out.
That said, saying that Steve had an influance on gaming outside of this is wrong. After all anyone who grew up playing games on the old "Apple II" probably knows better. As far as hardcore gaming goes, that's the platform that had overlooked cult classics like "Deathlord".
Steve Jobs was a marketing man.
Woz was the cool one.
Anyhow. How to make a successful ios game.
Step one. Rip off some flash game that has been around forever.
Step two. ?????
Step three. Profit!
Woz was the cool one.
Anyhow. How to make a successful ios game.
Step one. Rip off some flash game that has been around forever.
Step two. ?????
Step three. Profit!
Sorry to disagree with you but Steve Jobs was much more then a Marketing guy. Marketing guys only know how to sell something, they don't have vision for what people need or will want. A good example of a Marketing guy is Steve Ballmer, clueless about what people need but knows how to sell products that Microsoft already makes. Steve Jobs did know how to sell things but not because he was a marketer but because he had vision and passion for the products he helped create. He knew what things needed to be created not just how to sell a product.Skjutentrast said:
An example of Steve's vision; he knew that people would want to use a mouse and a GUI, no one else knew that. Even Xerox thought it was a failure. Thats one of the reasons they didn't mind showing it off to Apple once Apple paid them for the privilege. Steve's vision told him to press ahead and develop the product from the bare bones concept that Xerox had, into a full fledged product that people would want. This is more then being a marketer this is called being a visionary.
Bravo. I can't believe people who say Steve Jobs and Apple are unrelated to gaming. Computers? Videogaming? Kinda a connection there. Weirdos.
I remember back in the day when console games weren't that big of a deal and PC games were all the rage. Back then I could play the newest and best games on a PC while on an Apple, they didn't even have freaking Solitaire.
Obviously I'm not the only one who remembers those times because it was back then that Apple got the reputation of having nothing to do with gaming. A reputation it still has, even though (as Jim pointed out) Apple has been relevant in gaming for almost a decade now.
...though you still can't really play games on the computers Apple makes.
(yes, I know they have steam for Mac, a good first effort)
Obviously I'm not the only one who remembers those times because it was back then that Apple got the reputation of having nothing to do with gaming. A reputation it still has, even though (as Jim pointed out) Apple has been relevant in gaming for almost a decade now.
...though you still can't really play games on the computers Apple makes.
(yes, I know they have steam for Mac, a good first effort)
yes, but Apple doesn't really deserve their success in the gaming arena. purely coming from the fact that they have stumbled upon it by complete accident.
as a professional games developer, I can tell you that even now, they are still light years behind Sony, Nintendo, and Microsoft (thought weirdly, not Windows Phone 7. that thing is a piece of S**t for games, from a technical standpoint. at least they got the xbox live integration in there).
Apple's general model for APPS is second to none, it just so happens that most of these apps have been games, because that's what the market wanted. what I'm saying is, it is clear as a developer, that Apple IN NO WAY set out to make a good gaming platform.
having said this, you would assume that Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft - with their still superior expertise in the realm of gaming - could easily come in, make a "PSP/Gameboy phone", and be back at the top, just adopt the $1 App model, and they are good to go.
but Sony have failed to do this with the Xperia play, and Microsoft are FAR from succeeding with Windows Phone...
having said that, I still don't think Apple are really interested in games... I think they are missing an opportunity. to me, it seems like Microsoft vs the Internet all over again... Apple are not giving gaming the attention it clearly deserves. they are leaving it up to their market and 3rd party app developers. even Game center was just a half hearted ripoff of already existent 3rd party systems that did the exact same thing on iOS already.
3rd party app developers may be games companies. Apples customers may all be gamers. but Apple is not a games company. and that is stupid.
as a professional games developer, I can tell you that even now, they are still light years behind Sony, Nintendo, and Microsoft (thought weirdly, not Windows Phone 7. that thing is a piece of S**t for games, from a technical standpoint. at least they got the xbox live integration in there).
Apple's general model for APPS is second to none, it just so happens that most of these apps have been games, because that's what the market wanted. what I'm saying is, it is clear as a developer, that Apple IN NO WAY set out to make a good gaming platform.
having said this, you would assume that Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft - with their still superior expertise in the realm of gaming - could easily come in, make a "PSP/Gameboy phone", and be back at the top, just adopt the $1 App model, and they are good to go.
but Sony have failed to do this with the Xperia play, and Microsoft are FAR from succeeding with Windows Phone...
having said that, I still don't think Apple are really interested in games... I think they are missing an opportunity. to me, it seems like Microsoft vs the Internet all over again... Apple are not giving gaming the attention it clearly deserves. they are leaving it up to their market and 3rd party app developers. even Game center was just a half hearted ripoff of already existent 3rd party systems that did the exact same thing on iOS already.
3rd party app developers may be games companies. Apples customers may all be gamers. but Apple is not a games company. and that is stupid.
I don't think mobile games are going anywhere anytime soon but this idea that its going to replace consoles, hand held portable gaming machines and the like is complete lunacy.
I think that's the heart of what drives people in the industry bloody crazy, specially in the case of the slow to adapt Ios platform which is seeing heavy competition from android related mobile devices and tablets that are not only offering more but are being built for different purposes in mind.
I've played some of these games Jim mention and I think he is completely banana's about games on these devices being anywhere close to their console brethren. no where is that more apparent then games like N.o.v.a 2 and the marathon remake or even games like Metal storm where the controls, like a 700 pound gorilla are hard to ignore because they are in your way.
You can differently say that developers are trying hard to work around the limitations but that's the real trick isn't it? it's a limitation. adapting something to a platform is not the same as being crafted with the platform in mind. that's what made the DS so dominant, we saw the same thing happen then to the DS that is happening now for the Ios devices in which company's are embracing the system and its capability's.
That's a good thing, however touch screens are not the future of all games. it IS the future of some games, and thank god for them.
There is a giant dog pile of games for mobile devices, with a very low amount of quality versus quantity. this mentality of well it sucked but i only spent a dollar is not helping matters, I've downloaded software that barely works, if not for reviews listed sometimes it would probably be more often but even then the reviews can be out right lies.
No quality control and the fact that the mobile gaming market is changing so rapidly all the time makes it a very hard platform to work on along with its limits in game input pose serious problems for them being a dominant force.
It could be argued that they are already there, by statistics alone. being that there are like 5 billion cell phones made. but just because you put pac-man on it doesn't really make it a game device...it makes it a phone with a video game. like the clock radio this is a good thing to do, its simply not putting clocks or radio's out of business.
If anything with mobile devices getting more and more powerful with more and more features we are starting to see the age of the micro computer emerge.
What that will be like, no one can tell right now. Even still, while I download games to my Ios devices I still get much more enjoyment out of other platforms. This is a personal preference of course but i'm certainly not alone in this, I hope to see more great games for mobile platform yes. but I wouldn't expect EA to stop making madden for consoles because of it.
I think that's the heart of what drives people in the industry bloody crazy, specially in the case of the slow to adapt Ios platform which is seeing heavy competition from android related mobile devices and tablets that are not only offering more but are being built for different purposes in mind.
I've played some of these games Jim mention and I think he is completely banana's about games on these devices being anywhere close to their console brethren. no where is that more apparent then games like N.o.v.a 2 and the marathon remake or even games like Metal storm where the controls, like a 700 pound gorilla are hard to ignore because they are in your way.
You can differently say that developers are trying hard to work around the limitations but that's the real trick isn't it? it's a limitation. adapting something to a platform is not the same as being crafted with the platform in mind. that's what made the DS so dominant, we saw the same thing happen then to the DS that is happening now for the Ios devices in which company's are embracing the system and its capability's.
That's a good thing, however touch screens are not the future of all games. it IS the future of some games, and thank god for them.
There is a giant dog pile of games for mobile devices, with a very low amount of quality versus quantity. this mentality of well it sucked but i only spent a dollar is not helping matters, I've downloaded software that barely works, if not for reviews listed sometimes it would probably be more often but even then the reviews can be out right lies.
No quality control and the fact that the mobile gaming market is changing so rapidly all the time makes it a very hard platform to work on along with its limits in game input pose serious problems for them being a dominant force.
It could be argued that they are already there, by statistics alone. being that there are like 5 billion cell phones made. but just because you put pac-man on it doesn't really make it a game device...it makes it a phone with a video game. like the clock radio this is a good thing to do, its simply not putting clocks or radio's out of business.
If anything with mobile devices getting more and more powerful with more and more features we are starting to see the age of the micro computer emerge.
What that will be like, no one can tell right now. Even still, while I download games to my Ios devices I still get much more enjoyment out of other platforms. This is a personal preference of course but i'm certainly not alone in this, I hope to see more great games for mobile platform yes. but I wouldn't expect EA to stop making madden for consoles because of it.
I agree for the most part. But it was Woz who made it a reality. Don't think he get enough credit for it.praus said:
Since ten years ago apple has not been about anything other then marketing.
That's why the ipod initially sold well, and developed into a solid product.
Same with the iphone. It was useless early on, but thanks to their very solid marketing and image people bought it anyways.
And don't get me started on macs. They are solid computers, but sell thanks to excellent marketing.
So. Jobs was mostly a marketing genius, at least in my opinion.
Not trying to start a flame war, just my two cents.
Nope doesn't seem like flaming, just a difference of opinion. Thats a good thing.Skjutentrast said:
The Woz is awesome, very smart guy but not super driven and doesnt have a ton of vision . The Woz would probably never have made something like the Apple computer on his own because he would be content to just play around with cool tech and have no purpose or end goal. Steve had an idea, a computer for the everyday person and he got Woz to help him make it.
I would say that you gave good examples of vison though. The iPhone and the iPod didn't come fully formed from heaven or get built by elves or something. No one handed these products fully formed to Steve and told him to market them. He had the vision that these products needed to be made. Steve saw the crappy excuses for MP3 players and decided an easy to use one that held far far more then the standard 128, 256 or the very rare 512 mb, needed to be made. Steve saw the sorry state of so called smart phones and decided to make a hand held computer instead.
I owned that first iPhone and it was light years better then any other smartphone at the time. I'd buy it again if I could go back and do it over.
I think you may have misunderstood his point, what he was getting at was that not every game needs complex mechanics or a complex story to be good, sometimes simplicity is everything.Exterminas said:
OT: Not a bad video, and the iOS, as a platform, has merit, now if Apple was less tight fisted with the capabilities of their devices it could reach a much higher potential.
Well said Mr. "Quisition", well said.
I have used my handheld for games constantly since almost a year ago, and I still have not finished all the cornucopia of great games I have downloaded. Specially "Infinity Blade" that does kick all sorts of ass, indeed.
I do thank god for you (although I must say that I do not believe in god, so I'm unsure of the consequences).
I have used my handheld for games constantly since almost a year ago, and I still have not finished all the cornucopia of great games I have downloaded. Specially "Infinity Blade" that does kick all sorts of ass, indeed.
I do thank god for you (although I must say that I do not believe in god, so I'm unsure of the consequences).
Anything that can expand the available market for games, and give the big studios a run for their money, has to be a good thing. I may not agree with Apple's incessant hardware restrictions or the elitist attitude it wants to instill in its customers, but I certainly wouldn't ask for it to go away.
Thank you God for making Steve Jobs. And Jim Sterling, of course.
Thank you God for making Steve Jobs. And Jim Sterling, of course.