Will the Apple TV Become a Gaming Platform?

An anonymous reader writes "New data strings uncovered in the recently released iOS 4.3 beta 3 suggest that Apple may have grand ambitions for its little hobby known as the Apple TV: the device may soon transform into a gaming platform."

Comments

More walled gardens anyone?

[cbope]

Do we really need yet another Apple-controlled walled garden? Don't we have enough of those already?

Re:More walled gardens anyone?

[Sockatume]

It's more about bringing their existing walled garden to a different space. That's probably how they expect to succeed where so very many others haven't: they can bring along the existing iOS developer support and public awareness from the iPhone and iPad.

(I recall Sega and Pace teaming up for a Dreamcast-based gaming satellite box to play casual games. It unsurprisingly floundered. That said there was a pretty decent lunar lander game on Sky Digital when it first appeared.)

Re:More walled gardens anyone?

[RogueyWon]

Well, on the basis that pretty much any gaming console these days is a walled garden (at best), the answer is a resounding "maybe"?

It wouldn't actually hurt to have another entrant into the games console business (even if this proposal doesn't look too much like a console). Sony and MS's current offerings are actually unbelievably similar - I don't think I've ever known a console generation where there was less to actually separate two competitors. At the same time, Nintendo look increasingly like a successful toy manufacturer, who have feet of clay when it comes to actually making interesting games - and in attracting decent third party developers.

A credible new entrant (sorry, Infinium Labs) could potentially give the industry a shot in the arm. Apple may or may not be the people to do it - there's a hell of a lot I don't like about the company and its principles. However, their recent approach to software pricing indicates that they might at least bring something interesting to the table.

Re:More walled gardens anyone?

[Unxmaal]

Do we really need yet another Apple-controlled walled garden? Don't we have enough of those already?

Yes. No.

Re:More walled gardens anyone?

[Anonymous Coward]

Do we really need yet another Apple-controlled walled garden? Don't we have enough of those already?

Yeah. Can't we leave gaming to open systems like the Xbox and PS3?

Re:More walled gardens anyone?

[Anonymous Coward]

speak for yourself. of course the truth is that thankfully there seems to be a rather limited number of folk that are prepared to get their laughing gear around jobs' withered pecker, even in America, the home of stupid, gullible and superficial people.

Re:More walled gardens anyone?

[sortius_nod]

Maybe this is what got Nintendo so worried yesterday

Re:More walled gardens anyone?

[drinkypoo]

Sony and MS's current offerings are actually unbelievably similar - I don't think I've ever known a console generation where there was less to actually separate two competitors.

Uh what? They are different in every way it is possible to be different while still offering the same basic features.

• The Xbox 360 is a 3-way SMP system. The PS3 is a CPU/GPU/Coprocessor system.
• The Xbox 360 has added features with each new major update. The PS3 has removed features with each new major update.
• The Xbox 360 has motion-detecting equipment (Kinect) which does not require a controller. Sony has motion-detecting equipment which does.
• Xbox Live costs money, PSN is free.
• The Xbox 360 is the first console that looks decent compared to the competition, mostly because the PS3 looks like a George Foreman grill.
• The PS3 uses Bluetooth for wireless controllers, while the 360 uses a proprietary protocol.

Now, preferring PS3 or Xbox 360 is a matter of personal preference, but it's not because the two platforms are identical.

The problem is that history has shown us that there is room in the market for three players. Further, the Mac is not where the games are. Microsoft entering the market made sense; Xbox is short for DirectX Box. Where are the Mac games? Where are the Mac game developers?

Re:More walled gardens anyone?

[C_amiga_fan]

Personally I'd enjoy a sub-$100 internet box that I could connect to my parents television, and they could view hulu.com. Then I wouldn't have to keep hearing them say, "I'm bored," all winter long. (Actually it's just mostly my dad; my mom reads books.) And of course they don't care if the Apple is walled - they don't even know how to turn-on a computer, so a simple device where you just "click to play" would be ideal for them. Apple is good at producing this type of software.

Re:More walled gardens anyone?

[somersault]

Where are the Mac games? Where are the Mac game developers?

Well, Bungie used to be Mac developers - probably the best Mac games developers.. and Microsoft sucked them up and repurposed Halo as an Xbox game instead of a Mac game (maybe it was originally intended to be for Windows too, can't remember).

Re:More walled gardens anyone?

[Anonymous Coward]

Then I wouldn't have to keep hearing them say, "I'm bored," all winter long.

Wow! I don't think I've ever heard my Dad say he's bored. Ever since basic training I had theorized that parents just naturally learned what soldiers are taught, "I'm Bored" is a direct summons to Murphy to enact his laws.

Re:More walled gardens anyone?

[PsychoSid]

http://store.steampowered.com/browse/mac/ Just for starters

Re:More walled gardens anyone?

[drinkypoo]

Not only was Halo supposed to be a Windows game too, but it was released as a Windows game. It was nice to play it with keyboard and mouse. I only wish the subsequent games were also released for Windows, but I assume they weren't to drive more customers to Xbox Live Gold.

Re:More walled gardens anyone?

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.ambrosiasw.com/

Re:More walled gardens anyone?

[RogueyWon]

I didn't mean in terms of the technology. To the average consumer, provided the technology is "good enough", it doesn't really matter. What I meant was in terms of the user experience.

The PS3 and the Xbox 360 have:

- a very similar games library with fewer exclusive games than in any previous cycle;
- exclusives which often tend to act as mirror images of each other (eg. Halo vs Killzone, Gran Turismo vs Forza);
- controllers with some variations in shape, but exactly the same number and arrangement of buttons;
- very similar online stores; and
- broadly similar graphical capabilities, as reflected in most games.

Compare with any previous console generation and it's hard to find two which ran so close to each other in these terms.

Re:More walled gardens anyone?

[Stenchwarrior]

Then I wouldn't have to keep hearing them say, "I'm bored," all winter long.

Wow! I don't think I've ever heard my Dad say he's bored. Ever since basic training I had theorized that parents just naturally learned what soldiers are taught, "I'm Bored" is a direct summons to Murphy to enact his laws.

Damn right. My drill sergeant used to say "if you're bored it's because you're not smart rnough to come up with something to do!". I hated that little brown fucker, but he's right.

Now, on the jubject at hand, I do agree with the above post that the platforms (Sony and Xbox, I don't really count Nintendo) offer very similar experiences. But wouldn't you blame that on the game developers and not the consoles? The developers have to turn a profit and if their games are only available on one system then that sort of limits the audience, no?

Re:More walled gardens anyone?

[intheshelter]

Do we really need another idiot using the phrase "walled garden" because they don't have the brains to figure out why Apple takes this approach? Don't we have enough of those already?

Re:More walled gardens anyone?

[C_amiga_fan]

Consoles used to have real differences. One would run on a Commodore 6502 chip, another on a Z-80, and another on an Intel 8088. Or one might be a self-spun design (Emotion Engine) while another used a Pentium and the third used a PowerPC. That led to different code being run and different results.

But now they ALL run on a powerPC, with virtually identical code. That's why they are all so close to one another in speed, sound, and graphics (except Nintendo which made the conscious decision to limit graphics to 480p but could handle 1080p just as easily as PS3 or X360).

Re:More walled gardens anyone?

[Paspanique]

Personally I would not use anything Apple related after my Itune/Ipod experience, their product is not meant for me, I know that now. But I would not mind having more competition in the gaming industry, whatever it takes to drive innovation and improvement. Any market is in danger if it has too few of choices. You can hate their products, as I do , but you can't minimize the probable positive impact they would bring.

Re:More walled gardens anyone?

[sortius_nod]

Actually, Halo was originally supposed to be a Mac RTS. Quick google will serve you well.

Re:More walled gardens anyone?

[C_amiga_fan]

My father is 70 going on 7. He never grew-up and is used to having everything his way (even the cereal has to be put in the cupboard facing the right way). I call it "spoiled brat" syndrome.

Now suddenly he's retired, with nothing to do, and is whining like a little boy. During the summer he rides his motorcycle around, but in winter he can't do that, so he mopes and complains and curses at the snow.

Re:More walled gardens anyone?

[jittles]

Sure there is a huge difference between Xbox and PS3 right now, from what I understand. I've heard (can't see for my self, but it is from a friend who does have Xbox + PS3), that people don't enjoy playing Call of Duty Black Ops all that much because the wide open PS3 is rampant with cheaters. Even with the Xbox being a little bit better controlled, you still run into people w/ aimbots and map mods and whatnot that they use to cheat, but its supposedly much worse on the PS3.

Re:More walled gardens anyone?

[sortius_nod]

I can see you're a 360 fanboy, I won't hate you for that, but I will say that you've cherry picked a few reasons that they are different.

There's almost nothing to separate the two, they are almost identical as far as releases, with the 360 just nudging the PS3 out for exclusives and first releases.

You've gone ahead and acted like a total tool to "prove" that they are different, but anyone who's been around gaming for any length of time can see the similarities.

Re:More walled gardens anyone?

[jittles]

If you can find an original apple TV you can crack that thing open and install the full blown Mac OS on it. Haven't done it to mine, but I did do a hardware mod to mine and it was quite simple to do.

I managed to get mine off Craigslist from an upset college student who wanted mommy and daddy to buy him a bluray player and not an apple tv. The kid was so spoiled, and stupid, that he sold it to me for less than the going price of a used 40GB apple TV and when I got home I discovered it was 120GB model. I would have thought it were stolen if not for the fact that he told me he was a student at a very expensive private U, and he had an $80k+ SUV in the driveway of the huge house his parents bought him...

Re:More walled gardens anyone?

[RogueyWon]

There are minor variations from game to game. Bayonetta looked better on the 360 than the PS3. Final Fantasy XIII looked better on the PS3 than the 360. There are some differences around the online services and the gaming experience. The Black Ops problems are almost certainly the result of coding differences between the two versions of that particular game than by anything specific to the hardware.

The essential similarities of the experience presented by the two consoles (I own both) tend to get lost in online discussions, because of the degree of emotional heat that the "console wars" tend to generate.

Re:More walled gardens anyone?

[gstoddart]

Do we really need yet another Apple-controlled walled garden? Don't we have enough of those already?

Then, don't buy it and get over it.

Re:More walled gardens anyone?

[somersault]

Halo was released for Windows a year or two after Xbox. It was never released for Mac despite that being the original intent. I expect they were making MS a little nervous.

Re:More walled gardens anyone?

[Custard Horse]

Sony and MS's current offerings are actually unbelievably similar - I don't think I've ever known a console generation where there was less to actually separate two competitors.

Uh what? They are different in every way it is possible to be different while still offering the same basic features.

• The Xbox 360 is a 3-way SMP system. The PS3 is a CPU/GPU/Coprocessor system.
• The Xbox 360 has added features with each new major update. The PS3 has removed features with each new major update.
• The Xbox 360 has motion-detecting equipment (Kinect) which does not require a controller. Sony has motion-detecting equipment which does.
• Xbox Live costs money, PSN is free.
• The Xbox 360 is the first console that looks decent compared to the competition, mostly because the PS3 looks like a George Foreman grill.
• The PS3 uses Bluetooth for wireless controllers, while the 360 uses a proprietary protocol.

• The Xbox 360 has a helicopter installed as part of the internal cooling - not one of those stealth ones - a LOUD one. The PS3 is much quieter.

Fixed that for you.

Re:More walled gardens anyone?

[Anonymous Coward]

The PS3 uses a cell processor, I might be wrong but I dont think it has much in common with a PowerPC chip.

Re:More walled gardens anyone?

[jedidiah]

We have enough brains to figure this out. Fanboy's like you just don't like the obvious result.

You don't need to make device crippled to make it easy or secure. Macs proved that.

If you insist on making a platform crippled then you clearly have some more sinister motivation in mind.

Furthermore, forcing novice end users to "jump through hoops" or "do without" is not user friendly.

Re:More walled gardens anyone?

[Anonymous Coward]

None of these have any real effect on the end user. Except point 3 and 4, but they're arguably negligible.

Re:More walled gardens anyone?

[anegg]

Do we really need yet another Apple-controlled walled garden? Don't we have enough of those already?

So vote with your wallet. I bought an AppleTV just before Christmas as a "santa gift" for the kids (hey - only $99!). My aim was to introduce Internet-based streaming media as a movie-delivery device in addition to RedBox DVDs (we don't have cable TV), and I was thinking only of NetFlix when I bought it. Before I set it up, I did the research I should have done before I bought it, and saw that although it worked with NetFlix, it didn't work with anything else except for Apple's media store. The day after Christmas, I saw a Sony BDP-S370 Blu-ray plus Internet streaming video player for $99 at the Sony store. It did NetFlix, plus some other services (Hulu Plus, Amazon, Crackle). Oh, yeah - it plays Blu-ray discs, too! It didn't play anything from Apple's media store, but that didn't seem such a big loss to me based on the prices I had seen ($1 for a freaking TV show *episode*?). No brainer. Returned the AppleTV, bought the Sony player. I'm happy.

I think that the streaming video market is so very different from the music distribution market that Apple's "walled garden" play will stumble. Here I am, a long-term Macintosh user (Mac Plus, SE30, PowerMac 7200, PowerMac G4 Digital Audio tower, and Intel-based 24" iMac) with a family of iPods (my wife and I have classics, my two kids have Nanos). I'm happy with iTunes and iPods - we still buy CDs which we then load into iTunes for playback on our SliMP3 player in the living room and our iPods everywhere else - but the movie world is a different beast altogether. I'm not going to rip DVDs/Blu-rays into a home library unless the technology gets a lot better (cheaper, faster, less seemingly illicit), so the whole local playback capability of the AppleTV is moot (as is the DLNA-based local playback of the Sony player - at least to me). What matters in both markets is choice, and while I could use iTunes/iPods and still maintain the power of choice (despite the moans some people make, iTunes/iPod users are *not* locked into the Apple media store), the same is not nearly as true with the AppleTV. Sure, I have some choice - I can choose NetFlix and/or Apple's media store. With any one of a host of other media players (Sony is just one of a plethora of choices now) I can't have the Apple media store, but I can have practically every other distribution option available on the Internet.

I have to leave the question of whether the video game market is more like the music distribution market or the audio/video movie/TV show distribution market up to those of you who play video games... I don't. In fact, it may be yet another paradigm, as my outside-looking-in view of video games is that they are all walled garden's in a way - each company's game console only plays games brought out on that console - yet video game companies often produce multiple versions of each game title, one for each game console - which means there isn't much of a wall. If Apple chooses to play in the games console environment, won't they be essentially like every other games console? A video game company will choose whether or not to port a title to the Apple console, the same way they choose to port to other consoles. At the same time, some number of "Apple-only" games will probably spring up, just as their are titles available on only Sony PlayStation and only Nintendo whatever and only Microsoft XBox.

If the lure of a game that is only available on the AppleTV game console causes you to buy the $99 AppleTV in order to be able to play it, isn't that what a free market economy is all about? Each of us is free to buy or not to buy, no one will force anyone to make that purchase to play that game.

Re:More walled gardens anyone?

[Goaway]

Where are the Mac games? Where are the Mac game developers?

Wrong question. What you should be asking is "Where are the iOS games?". Suddenly, the answer is "everywhere".

Re:More walled gardens anyone?

[Bemopolis]

Of course the original HALO was released for Mac OS X. Either that or I put the wrong kind of mushrooms on my pizza when I played it. As noted above, none of the versions resembled the original announcement video.

Before you spout off again maybe you should try Google instead of Bing. (Or Bing two weeks later.)

Re:More walled gardens anyone?

[FatLittleMonkey]

As everyone said, they're all walled gardens. So what we need is an open gaming platform.

I've previously suggested that open-source friendly-ish AMD and Google team up to develop a hardware spec and game-flavoured O/S (respectively) that any random hardware maker can develop, and any random game/App developer can write for, licence free.

Re:More walled gardens anyone?

[Anonymous Coward]

As opposed to the current free for all that the console market is right now?

Re:More walled gardens anyone?

[judo_badger]

The problem is that history has shown us that there is room in the market for three players. Further, the Mac is not where the games are. Microsoft entering the market made sense; Xbox is short for DirectX Box. Where are the Mac games? Where are the Mac game developers?

About 50 million angry birds and wave after wave of plant eating zombies disagree with you. There is a market for low-end casual games.

Re:More walled gardens anyone?

[somersault]

It appears you're right, however it was a whole 2 years after the Xbox version.. the iPod craze (iPod was released around the same time as the original Halo) made me stop being so interested in Apple and Macs for a while so I guess I missed it. I tried the Windows version, and it was crap. It was like stepping back to the days of the Unreal and Quake single player..

Re:More walled gardens anyone?

[somersault]

oh, and FYI I didn't use Google or Bing, I was going by memory. I was really excited when I first read about Halo in Mac Format, but lost interest after MS took over..

Re:More walled gardens anyone?

[Gilmoure]

I still like Marathon 1 over Halo, despite the game limitations (no 360 view). The atmospherics are great! Is what I'm going to introduce daughter to, for FPS games. Still have my Quadra 650 with Marathon installed.

Re:More walled gardens anyone?

[Gilmoure]

Hey, the guy said that the Xbox360's case looks better than the PS3. That means there's a totally different gaming experience there.

Re:More walled gardens anyone?

[Gilmoure]

How many birds can you fling across the screen?

Re:More walled gardens anyone?

[Gilmoure]

Heh. I learned real quick, once someone in basic said they were bored, what fun a drill sgt. could rain down on someone (and everyone else near by) when he heard those words.

Re:More walled gardens anyone?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm fairly certain most Blizzard games run on the Mac. Take your pick of any of the 'crafts.

Re:More walled gardens anyone?

[Half-pint HAL]

Now, on the jubject at hand, I do agree with the above post that the platforms (Sony and Xbox, I don't really count Nintendo) offer very similar experiences. But wouldn't you blame that on the game developers and not the consoles? The developers have to turn a profit and if their games are only available on one system then that sort of limits the audience, no?

It's not a question of blame. Whatever the prime motivator for the lack of difference between Xbox and PS, the design of the Apple TV means that the same duplication is impossible, so by necessity, the games for it will have to be different from PSxyz games.

HAL.

Re:More walled gardens anyone?

[Bemopolis]

Play it again, for the first time: http://marathon.sourceforge.net/

Which reminds me, I need to go find the Carnage Soccer map.

Re:More walled gardens anyone?

[StikyPad]

Actually, Halo was originally supposed to be a Mac RTS.

PC and Mac.

Quick google will serve you well.

Word.

Re:More walled gardens anyone?

[somersault]

Yeah, I rather dislike RTSes and RPGs so I forgot about them :p These days you'd have to say that they're the best Mac games developer, or at least the most profitable.

Re:More walled gardens anyone?

[tlhIngan]

Not only was Halo supposed to be a Windows game too, but it was released as a Windows game. It was nice to play it with keyboard and mouse. I only wish the subsequent games were also released for Windows, but I assume they weren't to drive more customers to Xbox Live Gold.

Uh, Halo 2 was released for PC (but not Mac), while Halo was PC then a Mac company ported it to Mac.

Halo 2 for PC was properly known in the community as "Halo 2 Vista" because it required ... Windows Vista! (I think it required DirectX 10, which only was on Vista at the time).

Now, Halo 3 and Halo Reach are not on PC (yet), but given Halo 2 Vista come out a good 3+ years after Halo 2, there's a chance a PC port of Halo 3 could come out within the next year or so.

Anyhow, as a console, Apple's AppleTV would probably be the least-restrictive console on the market these days. Microsoft/Sony/Nintendo have heavy requirements for devs to sell games on their console. You can complain all you want about Apple's approval process, but it's certainly less restrictive and heavy handed (the only console with a less heavy handed official area would be the Xbox360's Indie game area).

The only problem is the controller - I can't remember if there's Bluetooth and/or USB host - using a PS3 or (my personal preference) an Xbox360 controller would certainly be great. Points to Apple if they let you use the USB PC receiver so the Xbox controller can be wireless (drivers exist).

Re:More walled gardens anyone?

[jo_ham]

Halo was released for Windows a year or two after Xbox. It was never released for Mac despite that being the original intent. I expect they were making MS a little nervous.

I'm sorry what?

The PPC-binary (and later universal binary) of Halo that is running on top of OS X on my box *right now* begs to differ. I actually run the PPC binary via rosetta as it performs better than the universal one for some reason, even with the added overhead of Rosetta my machine is powerful enough that it doesn't affect the gameplay.

I played Halo 2 on Vista under bootcamp, and oh how disappointed I was - it was such a shitty console port with some laughably unforgivable issues like the UI elements in the menu being so unresponsive to mouse clicks (or just not responding to clicks at all) and the actual clickable areas of these elements being almost random between different screens. Then the gameplay itself is just... weaker than the first game, all in the name of ease for the console. :/

Halo 1 was pretty good though, even on the Mac.

Re:More walled gardens anyone?

[jo_ham]

The iTunes video content is quite expensive, and is the last vestige of DRM in the store too. That said, if you wait to buy "box sets" the per-episode costs come down. I believe it is set up this way to recoup as much as possible from people who are not watch the adverts on cable TV during currently-airing shows, so if you want to keep up with the latest stuff as it comes out, it costs you a fortune to not see ads.

Bundles of older TV shows, or past seasons, are much more akin to DVD costs.

Re:More walled gardens anyone?

[somersault]

Turns out it was released on Mac - a couple of years after the Xbox version, probably even after the Windows version. I tried the Windows version and thought it was crap. Reminded me of the Unreal single player, which in a post Half-Life world, isn't a good thing.

Re:More walled gardens anyone?

[Anonymous Coward]

Heh. I used to do tech support at a small private college. Was amazing what some of the students would be selling off cheap at the end of the year because they didn't want to deal with shipping anything home. All the tech support folks had mini-fridges, small tv's and speaker setups in our offices, as well as a decent collection of last year's laptops and such (this was back in the 90's where machine speed was changing quickly). And of course, they'd never, ever wipe their drives before getting rid of stuff. Ah, Momma's lil' angels. Are now all grown up and showing the world.

Re:More walled gardens anyone?

[Anonymous Coward]

Compared to Microsoft/Sony/Nintendo's offerings, the Apple "walled garden" looks like anarchy.

Re:More walled gardens anyone?

[Anonymous Coward]

Wish in one hand, crap in the other - see which gets filled first.

Re:More walled gardens anyone?

[Anonymous Coward]

The Apple TV probably wouldn't be running OS X, it would probably be running iOS. So the question isn't "Where are the Mac games?" but "Where are the iOS games?" Oh, in the iTunes App Store. Thousands of them, actually.

Re:More walled gardens anyone?

[KevCo]

Where are the Mac games? Where are the Mac game developers?

AppleTV runs iOS. It has more in common with the iPhone than the Mac. Last time I checked iOS had managed to generate some small interest from game developers.

Re:More walled gardens anyone?

[node 3]

Do we really need yet another Apple-controlled walled garden? Don't we have enough of those already?

Actually, yes. Consumers love them. This is because they create a system that is easy for them to understand and provides a certain level of trust. Geeks can understand technology far better, and can rely on themselves to keep their systems running well and safe, so sure, *you* don't want another walled garden. Here's a hint: you don't ever have to use it. Just stick with Android or whatever.

But for the other 99+%? Apple's "walled garden" is fantastic.

And it's an absurd complaint to begin with when talking about a gaming system. *ALL* major gaming systems are walled gardens. In fact, they are far more controlled than iOS.

Re:More walled gardens anyone?

[commodore6502]

Yeah you're wrong.

IBM used PPC technology in all three chips that they designed for Nintendo Wii, Sony PS3, and Xbox 360.

Re:More walled gardens anyone?

[rovolo]

The problem is that history has shown us that there is room in the market for three players. Further, the Mac is not where the games are. Microsoft entering the market made sense; Xbox is short for DirectX Box. Where are the iPhone games? Where are the iPhone game developers?

Everywhere

Re:More walled gardens anyone?

[Anonymous Coward]

Where are the Mac games? Where are the Mac game developers?

You have heard of the iPhone and iPad, yes?

Angry Birds? World of Goo (I know this was released on basically every platform, but it's sold the most copies on the iPad)? Cut the Rope? These games sell like hotcakes.

Re:More walled gardens anyone?

[ToasterMonkey]

Do we really need yet another Apple-controlled walled garden? Don't we have enough of those already?

Open gaming platforms that don't suck? Um, do you think?

Re:More walled gardens anyone?

[drinkypoo]

Am I overrated by a Mac fanboy who thinks I was trashing his beloved Apple, or by a Microsoft Entertainment shill who is tired of my deprecation of Live Gold?

Re:More walled gardens anyone?

[sortius_nod]

And funnily enough, it seems like the most lucrative market. Hell, even EA aren't sitting on their hands with this one.

I'm what most would call a hardcore gamer, but I've got full respect for what iOS has done for gaming. EVERYONE games now because of the insane combination of $0.99 apps on the app store and the market saturation of iOS devices. Having a hissy fit because it's not a hardcore platform is to cut off your nose to spite your face.

In some ways gamers need to grow up and realise there's room enough for both hardcore and casual games.

FYI: I love my casual games as much as I like raiding in any MMO, blowing people up in TF2, gatecamping in Eve, or doing X in any "hardcore" game you can name. It's not about the target audience, it's about what you enjoy and to keep doing it.

Re:More walled gardens anyone?

[drinkypoo]

I can see you're a 360 fanboy, I won't hate you for that, but I will say that you've cherry picked a few reasons that they are different.

I'm not so much a Microsoft lover as a Sony hater. I think both companies are evil in the usual corporate sense and even bad for gaming in general compared to prior market leaders.

I'm actually most impressed with the Wii, but only with motionplus. I have a Wii and hardly use it because I am so disappointed with the performance of the Wiimote, but I've played with motionplus a bit at a friend's house and the experience is different like night and day. Meanwhile I feel a bit grumpy at the many inducements to Xbox Live Gold (and to be fair, I did mention this point in my comparison and the point clearly belongs to Sony) which basically amount to withholding content which would have been free for a PC game from people who don't sign up for the monthly service. This is part of a general trend but I still find it offensive and it's one of the biggest reasons why I have no plans to purchase Xbox 360 +1. I still haven't become acquainted with a title which has even convinced me to get Kinect, although the hack value makes it a tremendously tempting, tasty treat.

There's almost nothing to separate the two, they are almost identical as far as releases, with the 360 just nudging the PS3 out for exclusives and first releases.

There have always been cross-platform game releases as long as there have been sufficiently similar platforms to run them on. And the consoles have always had their responses to each other's games. Name a game and someone, probably me, can name or shortly discover via google what game it is based on, or vice versa.

You've gone ahead and acted like a total tool to "prove" that they are different, but anyone who's been around gaming for any length of time can see the similarities.

You can say the same thing about the Intellivision, the Colecovision, and the Vectrex, even though each of these are vastly different pieces of hardware (and at one time, I was commonly using all three.) Depending on your criteria you can say they have more in common than apart, or vice versa. The Xbox, Gamecube, and the Dreamcast are similar and the PS2 is not. This generation all the consoles are different inside. So what if they all have optical drives, wireless controllers and networking, motion recognition, and online stores? Their approach to each of these things is significantly different, and each of these things is something that gamers expect to see on a modern game console. No console without all of these elements can be expected to make it into the next generation.

Re:More walled gardens anyone?

[exomondo]

The PS3 uses a cell processor, I might be wrong but I dont think it has much in common with a PowerPC chip.

It's still a PPC core, but you certainly aren't going to run the same code as you would on the XBox or Wii CPUs since the architecture is HUGELY different.

Re:More walled gardens anyone?

[hazydave]

The cell processor has one multi-threaded PowerPC chip (PPE) at 3.2GHz, very similar to the three cores in the X-Box 360, but a generation or two beyond the PPC in the Wii. And it's seven available SPEs (stream processors), which constitute much more processing power than the X-Box, but at higher cost in software complexity.

Didn't we already see this?

[ksd1337]

Apple already tried a gaming platform back in the day. It was called the Pippin.

Is this idea gonna fly?

Re:Didn't we already see this?

[Unxmaal]

Apple already tried a gaming platform back in the day. It was called the Pippin.

Is this idea gonna fly?

Yes.

Re:Didn't we already see this?

[MichaelSmith]

Apple already tried a gaming platform back in the day. It was called the Pippin.

I thought it was called the iPhone.

Re:Didn't we already see this?

[AccUser]

Yes, but given that AppleTV is an iOS device, there are already a plethora of games and lifestyle apps that can probably run today with little or no modification.

Re:Didn't we already see this?

[C0vardeAn0nim0]

saint steve wasn't at apple when the pippin was released and flopped, so it didn't come with a reality distortion field as factory standard.

now, hardcore gamers will probably shun this thing, but casual gamers (mostly mom and grandma) will probably buy it.

basicaly another gaming niche that currently belongs to nintendo that apple will tackle and probably be successfull.

Re:Didn't we already see this?

[igreaterthanu]

little or no modification.

Little modification? It has completely different input devices.

Re:Didn't we already see this?

[AccUser]

So what is the input device for AppleTV with games, because I am sure that it isn't available yet. My iPad controls AppleTV using the Apple Remote app, and that works well. Why can't the same be done for other apps? Imagine this: I launch a game from Apple Remote, and my iPad is now the controller, the AppleTV is the display. As far as the app is concerned, it is receiving the same input as it would expect when running on and iPad. This is the beauty of a well defined API. And Apple certainly has one.

Re:Didn't we already see this?

[mjwx]

basicaly another gaming niche that currently belongs to nintendo that apple will tackle and probably be successfull.

Right,

You do know that when facing competition that Apple, historically loses.

The only two companies really making money out of gaming machines at the moment are Nintendo and IBM.

Nintendo have a massive back catalogue of extremely popular games from over 20 years of released consoles and several extremely profitable 1st party IP's (Mario, Zelda). Apple has a bunch of Flash games written by 3rd parties. In this regard, Apple only competes with the Wii virtual console, not with actual Wii or DS games.

IBM, oh yes them. They make the chips for the PS3, Xbox360 and Wii.

Re:Didn't we already see this?

[Bigbutt]

Apple has a bunch of Flash games written by 3rd parties.

Wait. iDevices support Flash now? That's news to me, unless you're using the English definition of Flash of course.

[John]

Re:Didn't we already see this?

[somersault]

So instead of being a $99 gaming device, it's really only going to be for those who shelled out for an iPhone/iPad, both of which are more expensive than current consoles already? Good luck with that!

Also, don't a lot of iPad games often require you to coordinate your fingers with what's onscreen? You can't do that when you're looking at a TV. Angry Birds and Plants vs Zombies will not port over well to a system of the kind you suggest. I think they'd be much better getting a simple control pad so that at least people can play more traditional style games if they're going to go down the console route.

Re:Didn't we already see this?

[intheshelter]

You know, you're right. Apple also had a touchscreen device in the Newton. I guess that means the iPhone iPod touch and iPad won't be popular either. . . . .

Re:Didn't we already see this?

[Stenchwarrior]

If they're smart, they'll do what the other consoles do not and offer a keyboard and a mouse as an input option, as well as hand-held controllers. If I could use a mouse and kb with FPS games on a console I'd be unstoppable.

Re:Didn't we already see this?

[Loosifur]

When you say plethora of games, what exactly are you referring to? Honest question, not trying to be snarky. I ask because my experience has generally been that people who say, "Platform X has plenty of games," don't really care that much about games. Sort of like telling someone who drives a Bugatti Veyron that the Toyota Prius has plenty of horsepower. Also, that you refer to "lifestyle apps" implies to me that, when you mention games, you're talking about casual games rather than FPS or the like.

Re:Didn't we already see this?

[DarkXale]

Its a common phrase used to describe flash-like content in terms of appearance and behaviour. While its not technically powered by flash - almost all smartphone games have had an equivalent on various flash game websites for years; Angry Birds -not- an exception. The original games that Angry Birds is copied/based on was released almost a decade ago.

Re:Didn't we already see this?

[MistrBlank]

AppleTV + iPod touch can be had for $200. That's in line with today's consoles.... and guess what, you get a portable game system at that price point that you don't with the current consoles.

Re:Didn't we already see this?

[MistrBlank]

I really grow tired of these "if I had a mouse and keyboard" statements.

And while you're struggling with the controller on Halo, I'm smoking you left and right. You shouldn't get to chose your input device when the game is designed for a specific platform. I'm sorry you can't just point and click your way through a game while the rest of us adapted per game and system. Get better with the controller and get over it.

Re:Didn't we already see this?

[somersault]

Forgot about the Rouch, but it's still a crappy input system, and it misses the point of what actually makes mobile phone games so different to the other games we've had so far (I admit a couple of mobile games are mildly fun and vaguely addictive, but I've not liked any enough to actually buy one yet). If you want to move to big screen gaming, you're going to need a better device - and preferably one that has a strap and costs well under $100 if you're going to be swinging it around wii-mote style.

Re:Didn't we already see this?

[Stenchwarrior]

Jesus...here we go again.

Mouse and kb is the better combination for FPS. Period. That's why you don't see cross-platform servers where PC and console gamers are allowed to play against each other. Microsoft tested it with the best of the best console players against some mediocre PC players...sur-fucking-prise: The PC players dominated the Y-Axis-challeneged consoler players. You simply can't argue against and it if you do you'll look like a moron. I could easily dig up more examples but you have the same internet I do...look it up yourself.

Now, if I got on a console with a controller and played against you? I'd have my ass handed to me. But I've been playing PC games since '96 and I simply refuse to change. I'm too old to get good with a controller and frankly, just don't care. But if MS decided to allow a mouse/kb on some of their Xbox games, then I guranantee that I would start buying more console releases. There just arent enough people like me to make it worth MS while, plus that might take away sales of some PC's with Windows; why buy a PC when I can get a console with a mouse and kb?

BTW, I wouldn't play Halo even if I could use a mouse and kb. When it came out I was already 5 or 6 years into FPS games and it simply didn't have the wow-factor for me that it did for the younger generation. I played through the first one and quickly went back to Quake 3...a game that had been released 2 year prior but was a gajillion times better.

Re:Didn't we already see this?

[somersault]

Touch* wtf

Re:Didn't we already see this?

[Ster]

Add a Magic Trackpad? Or pair with an i(Phone|Pad|Pod Touch).

Re:Didn't we already see this?

[JoeCommodore]

So there are gonna be fingerprints on the TV now... and I can't wait to see videos of some small lady holding and tilting her 32" TV to play a game.. heh

What I'm saying is the user interface may not translate to the tv...

Re:Didn't we already see this?

[jo_ham]

So you'll have games like Scrabble that exist right now - the board is on the iPad, you keep your tiles on your iPhone or iPod Touch and swipe them onto the iPad board to lay them. It seems like a logical extension to bring the AppleTV into this, since it is also an iOS device.

You could control your Angry Bird catapult from your phone's screen and have the results show on your TV, etc etc.

Re:Didn't we already see this?

[Anonymous Coward]

AppleTV has bluetooth, it could support bluetooth gamepads.

Re:Didn't we already see this?

[Anonymous Coward]

Like this : game "The Incident", running from an iPad connected to a TV but it just as well be an AppleTV.

Re:Didn't we already see this?

[Americano]

There's already functionality built into iOS allowing ipads, ipod touches, and iPhones to be used as remotes for an Apple TV, all over a wireless network.

http://www.apple.com/itunes/remote/

You can't think of any way this type of technology could be easily used to create custom input devices for iOS apps running on an Apple TV? Because I sure can.

Re:Didn't we already see this?

[node 3]

Apple already tried a gaming platform back in the day. It was called the Pippin.

Is this idea gonna fly?

Are you kidding? Apple tried a PDA called the Newton, and since it was canceled, the iPhone/iPod touch/iPad are all doomed as well?

The Wii and all the current iOS handhelds have proven that casual gaming is a very lucrative market. It's entirely unfounded to think gaming on an Apple TV is destined to fail. That's not to say it's destined to succeed either. It really comes down to how well Apple executes this. The input device is going to be the deciding factor. Clearly using the current Apple remote won't cut it, and as interesting as it might seem, using an iPod touch or iPhone won't be enough (it will be really cool as an auxiliary i/o device, though). Just a clone of the Wii-mote will suffice.

Once they get that worked out, it seems like it's got quite a shot. It's only $99, iOS software is pretty cheap, it's really simple to use, and consumers love Apple products. It's actually hard to think of reasons why it *won't* succeed, without involving some monumental missteps.

Re:Didn't we already see this?

[Gilmoure]

Yeah, but the iOS games are all for losers and not real gamers. Only folks who aren't cool and have too much money play those games. Why would Apple want to release another way for folks to play those games?

Re:Didn't we already see this?

[Gilmoure]

Yup, iPod/iPhone/iPad are doomed, DOOMED I say! I mean, it's not like Apple's known for reinventing itself or taking a common process and re-imaging it so that folks go out and buy a million new Apple thingies.

Re:Didn't we already see this?

[mjwx]

Angry Birds -not- an exception. The original games that Angry Birds is copied/based on was released almost a decade ago.

A week late, I know.

The original Angry Birds concept was written several decades ago, it's almost as old as video gaming itself. in 1992 I had several games written in basic that used the exact same principal, Tank Wars is a famous example from 1990, almost everyone who had a DOS based computer had Tank Wars.

Would it make a difference?

[Moraelin]

I was going to say the same at first, but then it occurred to me that it's not like the other consoles and whatnot are exactly open, are they? Control freakery is the norm, call-home DRM and collecting information about your every move too, and let's not forget that Sony just removed an official feature in a firmware patch.

And then we have such historical cases as Nintendo in it's NES days. Good Lord! Not only they determined what you can publish for their console, but also how many units you're allowed to sell, how many cartridges must you buy from them (whether or not you actually sell that many copies of the game), _and_ you had to write off the right to make software for any other platform for two years for the privilege of publishing for the self-important Nintendo. Took a lawsuit to get that crap removed.

Frankly, I don't think Apple can be any worse than the rest of the gang even if they were to try to.

Re:Would it make a difference?

[Anonymous Coward]

And the thing is, developing for the AppStore is A LOT cheaper than the bigger consoles. In terms of licensing costs and development tools. So this would be a win for the indies.

Re:Would it make a difference?

[Anonymous Coward]

Is developing indie games for the xbox really that expensive? Seems to me like it's what... $99 a year or something?

Re:Would it make a difference?

[Anonymous Coward]

As far as I know, the indie games on XBLive are only available in the US. I haven't seen a single one in Finland (does any european country get them?).
So yes, it would still be a bigger thing for indies, than Xbox live.

Re:Would it make a difference?

[somersault]

I bought Limbo here in the UK. Surely that's one of the indie games.

Re:Would it make a difference?

[paedobear]

It's quite possible you just haven't noticed them (they're sort of hidden away) but afaik they're available world wide with the exception of Australia. Certainly when they were launched in Japan I think it was one of the last tranches of a worldwide roll out.

Re:Would it make a difference?

[MistrBlank]

YES!

What people don't see is the walled gardens have been there for quite awhile. Trying to blame this on Apple is ridiculous to say the least. At a minimum though, Apple's developer program costs are very light. We know as well that the door for 3rd party tools has been opened, it's only a matter of time before we have a copy of Eclipse or some development environment that is cheap and robust and available on multiple platforms for free. That will lower the entry costs to developing greatly.

Hopefully this will push console development costs down, or maybe Apple will make a beefy AppleTV gaming edition and rise to the top.

Re:Would it make a difference?

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple just uses gcc and there already is an open source toolchain you can use to develop for iOS.

apple tv

[perryizgr8]

apple tv is nothing but a failed, overpriced and unnecessary piece of low tech electronics. also, apple does not seem to be focusing its massive hype machine on it. so, don't expect much t happen.

Re:apple tv

[Melchett]

If Apple was giving up on Apple TV, it would have done it a long time ago. An Apple TV with apps and games makes perfect sense. I'm not convinced it will be successful outside the Apple fanbase, but they'll keep on trying because there's money to be made in selling films and TV programs on-demand.

Re:apple tv

[mjwx]

If Apple was giving up on Apple TV, it would have done it a long time ago

Apple is much like Microsoft these days in the fact their core business is making enough money that they can justify losses in other sectors.

iTV has been a complete and utter failure compared to other DVR systems. The market is already saturated with cheap DVR devices that can do more than the iTV can and this is obvious to the outside observer. Geeks are getting things like Boxee, normal people are getting Chinese made DVR's at walmart. Idiots are buying them from their Pay TV companies.

Hell, even setting up a Windows based media centre is a simple task for anyone with enough skill to install Windows 7. Apple lost out on this market with Apple TV yet they released another version. The only people with iTV's I know are the hopeless Apple fanboys who buy everything from Apple regardless (even the regular fanboys avoid iTV).

Re:apple tv

[Anonymous Coward]

$99? Half the price of any console is too much?

Re:apple tv

[Existential Wombat]

Overpriced? Best value XBMC hardware device on the planet.

Re:apple tv

[Anonymous Coward]

ahhh. You relize ALL DVR require a cable subscription right? AppleTV is about changing the way you consume media. Anyway, the product is selling really well. People are buying them, regardless if you think other products are better. That is why they continue to sell them.

Re:apple tv

[intheshelter]

Overpriced? Really? It's $99. Why don't you just post "I hate Apple" instead of trying to pretend to put reason behind your post. $99 is cheap and AppleTV works very well for what it does.

Re:apple tv

[uglyduckling]

Apple TV was never a DVR system. It's a video rental system for iTunes and a media extender for iPad/iPhone and iTunes on OSX.

Re:apple tv

[Dog-Cow]

In so far as the iTV can't record anything, it's not a DVR.

Re:apple tv

[Anonymous Coward]

I have an original apple tv as well as a new one. Apple has done a good job at improving the firmware over the years and it does stream well. There are bugs with the apple tv though.

Two days ago, my wife bought me a new apple tv. The built in wifi support has a bug where an SSID broadcast on two bands won't work with "autoscanning". I had to manually type it in to get it to connect. It just appeared not to take my password for an hour. This is a bug. I have an airport extreme! Interestingly, sony can't get it right either. The PS3 would only connect while autoscanning and not with a manually typed SSID. Go figure.

Re:apple tv

[jedidiah]

It might be "cheapest". However that doesn't necessarily make it the best value.

It's really funny how the same fanboys that used to screech about their computers being BMWs happily embrace this cheap and crappy approach that Apple has taken with it's newer devices.

I would rather run XBMC on hardware that can actually play all the stuff I own and all the stuff I am likely to acquire and won't force me to limit myself or limit myself to what Apple sells (or something that's degraded to the point where it might as well have been).

Re:apple tv

[RCGodward]

Steve? I thought you were on medical leave!

Re:apple tv

[P. Legba]

I'm really starting to think some of you have sentences like your first one on a macro, and it's easier to just claim that something Apple makes is failed and overpriced than to observe reality and comment upon it.

The AppleTV is $99 freaking dollars and makes an effective iOS device for your TV, streams your stuff from your home LAN and will, when Apple's cloud initiatives play out, provide a cheap, easy-to-use interface to the music, movies, shows, books and everything that Apple will be pushing through its store. As a casual gamer, I'm considering getting rid of my PS3 altogether, since 90 percent of what I use it for the AppleTV can do, and I don't have to worry about Sony suing me if I hold my mouth the wrong way while I play. Yes, it's unnecessary, but what isn't in this sector?

I'd say it's a little early yet to be calling the AppleTV a "failed" product...its potential hasn't even nearly been realized.

Re:apple tv

[P. Legba]

I can go ahead and guarantee you that it will play better with my Mac upstairs than my PS3 does when it comes to streaming media to my TV/surround setup. That alone justifies $99, so I don't have to climb up into my loft to restart the streaming server twice a day.

Apple's stuff just works, and just works together. That's what keeps people coming back.

Re:apple tv

[Half-pint HAL]

iTV has been a complete and utter failure compared to other DVR systems. The market is already saturated with cheap DVR devices that can do more than the iTV can and this is obvious to the outside observer.

And that is why they're adding stuff to the Apple TV that your average Far Eastern video box can't do.

Re:apple tv

[jo_ham]

It's $99, and one of the best XBMC devices out there right now. The old ones can even be upgraded to 1080p by swapping out the wifi card with an HD decoder (you are then limited to ethernet only). Hardly overpriced compared to the other stuff in the market that fills the same niche.

Re:apple tv

[Anonymous Coward]

he was referring to the inferior hardware in the apple tv and second we are talking about third party software here (xbmc). I'm guessing for streaming you are referring to either ps3 media server or tversity. I stream to my ps3 from mediatomb and it never crashes. btw some of the crashes in ps3 media server are caused by ffdshow which is also the core of xbmc so it just makes you look foolish to be repeating a mantra like "apple just works" while discussing a topic you know very little about

Re:apple tv

[Anonymous Coward]

I would argue the Mac Mini is better suited. No 720p limit, internal storage, less hacking required.

Re:apple tv

[perryizgr8]

i would argue that a fucking xbox 360 is better suited. you can access media on any of the pcs in your home network (in full hd) and there is no need to hack around. also, you can play awesome games. and its 200$.

Re:apple tv

[Existential Wombat]

IANAAFanboi, but my ATV2 runs XBMC and plays all the stuff I own. I never connect to the Apple store.

Re:apple tv

[node 3]

I have both an AppleTV (current iOS model) and PS3 connected via WiFi to an AirPort Extreme with dual-band (and even two networks (the guest network option) for a while) with absolutely no problem. I'd look into the settings on your base station, or perhaps the hardware itself has a problem. There's a log in the AirPort Utility you can use to troubleshoot.

Lastly, sometimes just changing the settings and saving them, then changing them right back, fixes odd WiFi router problems.

Re:apple tv

[jo_ham]

You can't run XBMC on an Xbox 360, which is what we're talking about here.

I am aware there are other media centre solutions on the software side, but we are talking XBMC hardware here.

Re:apple tv

[4phun]

Overpriced? Really? It's $99. Why don't you just post "I hate Apple" instead of trying to pretend to put reason behind your post. $99 is cheap and AppleTV works very well for what it does.

Apple TV is also found in enterprise too as a handy wireless connection for keynote (ppt) presentations.
It is so small you can easily pocket it.

I recommend ASL users to use it too for group meetings. BTW ASL users will be in high cotton when the iPad 3G has FaceTime like the iPhone.

When will Google TV become a gaming platform?

Re:apple tv

[perryizgr8]

you don't NEED to run xmbc on xbox. it already IS a media center.

Re:apple tv

[jo_ham]

I know that, but that's irrelevant. The discussion is about XBMC and the hardware it runs on.

If I'd wanted a large, noisily-fan-cooled, media centre then perhaps the Xbox 360 would be an option. Especially if I actually had any interest *at all* in console games, which I really don't.

So, I could spend $200 on getting a large, noisy Xbox 360 and only ever using it as a media centre, or I could spend $99 to get a small, fanless media centre that works well with the media centre I have upstairs because it's also XBMC. Alternatively I could spend a little more (edging towards the cost of an Xbox 360) to get something like a Revo, if your post is really just a thinly veiled "zomg anything but Apple". For that sort of money you get a hard drive (unlike the $200 360) and it's still much smaller.

If this is EVER true...

[Anonymous Coward]

This is going to sound awefully tangental... but does it ever seem to anyone else here that society as a whole is on a train to crapville and there's nothing the rest of us can do about it? I kind of relish the fact that growing up, everyone was buying general purpose computers made of roughly similar parts, which let me build many a personal computer throughout my life from parts made affoardable because of the economies of scale... so even if people mostly consumed, I could still create because the equipment was the same.

The Apple TV is all about consuming content. It's rather difficult to CREATE something using the Apple TV. Even worse, it's not even about consuming ALL content - my XBOX 360 can stream anything my computer can play (I admit not perfectly, but hey, from a basic beginning to end play of a file, it does a great job) - with the Apple TV (and most apple consumption products) one is so constricted by format specifications that not only is consumption the only thing you can do, you can't even consume EVERYTHING, we're talking limited consumption. But because of the hype, or the fact that people are OK with that or whatever, it becomes harder to find the stuff that isn't bound by those limitations.

If the Apple TV ever becomes a gaming platform, it won't be pushing any boundaries in terms of gaming, it'll be serving some sort of similar gaming content to the iPhone/iPad - though without a touch interface, you'll wind up with something less innovative. But because of the specs of Apple consumption devices, when the next generation of consoles eventually launches, how many homebrew games are going to take as much advantage of those consoles as they do today? I worry that you will see an ever greater rush to the bottom as authors vie for as large a slice of the ever more saturated pie as they can get. I don't blame the authors... because who could? Their needs to meet a market of some mass are understandable...

I guess I'm just not particularly looking forward to a world where instead of saying to a friend "Oh you want to create something like that? Well, let me help you get started, and best of all, you already have everything you need to get yourself started!" very few people will consume media that inspires them to create anything, and even should inspiration strike, the seperation of consumption vs. production machines might mean that fewer people in the future would have, by virtue of their consumption, the tools to create....

Of course, that's probably a worst case scenario...

Re:If this is EVER true...

[AccUser]

We're all consumers at some level, and whilst people consume, others will always create.

One of the things that has really surprised me about gaming on the iPad is the sheer variety of ideas. Whilst the platform hasn't pushed boundaries in terms of graphics, it has done so in other areas, and this has largely been driven by independent developers that are not afraid to try out new ideas. Have you played Papa Sangre yet?

Re:If this is EVER true...

[antifoidulus]

And how is that different from almost EVERY TV AND GAMES CONSOLE EVER SOLD IN THE HISTORY OF MANKIND? Sorry for the caps but you either do not remember the past correctly or seem to have an extremely selective memory. Maybe I'm totally off base here, but even after the introduction of the apple TV you can still build and piece together your own computer. And software. And games. And movies. And music. And drawings. And and and and and. By your definition books were incredibly evil because all a book really allows you to do is "consume content".

Re:If this is EVER true...

[Half-pint HAL]

Ah no, but I own a book and if I don't like a page I can tear it out, so I've got freedom.

(This is sarcasm)

Re:If this is EVER true...

[node 3]

What? The *TV* is all about consuming content, not creating it. The things you plug into a TV just help you consume more/different/better content. Your DVR, cable box, PS3/Xbox360/Wii, XBMC, AppleTV, etc., are all consumption devices, and *NONE* of them are creation devices. Not even your video or still camera are content creation devices while they're plugged into your TV.

If you want to create content, Apple (and others) have plenty of powerful machines for doing just that. Adding gaming to the AppleTV will not make the Mac vanish, nor will your PC suddenly find itself incapable of creating content.

At some point, this would make sense

[AccUser]

Given the success of gaming on the iPod Touch, iPhone and iPad, it makes sense that Apple could provide installable application support on the AppleTV, now that it too has joined the iOS platform family.

It is worth pointing out, though, that with the addition of AirPlay, there is no reason why developers can't use the AppleTV as a remote display for a game, whilst the device (iPod Touch, iPhone and iPad) acts as a controller. Similarly, why not use these devices to control applications running on AppleTV? The Apple Remote app already does this, and I have a pinball game running on my Mac that is controlled by the iPhone - it is a reasonably good controller.

Re:At some point, this would make sense

[emj]

That seems too complicated for things comming from Apple tech, pairing iPhone etc is bound to be troublesome. It's a wonderful idea technically but I'm not sure it would work in real life, I hope they choose another path if they do this.

Re:At some point, this would make sense

[AccUser]

Actually, it works really well. Pairing is already supported for the AppleTV with the Apple Remote app, and it works like a dream.

Re:At some point, this would make sense

[antifoidulus]

Other than games that use the accelerometer that probably wouldn't work out too well because you would have no physical feedback on the controls. Having to look at controls when they are on the same screen is enough of a pain in the ass, having to look totally away from the game screen to see the controller seems like a recipe for frustration.

Re:At some point, this would make sense

[AccUser]

Have you tried Papa Sangre? This game is best played in a dark room with your eyes closed. Whilst the core of the game is audio only, it does provide visual feedback by way of high-contrast indicators. Even with your eyes closed, you can tell that you have done the right thing.

Anyway, I am not suggesting that this is the way forward, but it is entirely possible. And what if you had a dedicated game controller app installed? This could provide a HUD-like information as well as control, and also provide audio and visual feedback. It makes sense to me...

Re:At some point, this would make sense

[Anonymous Coward]

They could adapt their hardware to do the job, but it would be in competition with companies that have more specific equipment and experience.
The only reason gaming does well on the iPhone is because its a popular phone. Its not a very good handheld gaming device.

Re:At some point, this would make sense

[uglyduckling]

That looks (sounds) awesome, I wish I could hear in stereo :(. Amazing concept, though.

Re:At some point, this would make sense

[das_io]

And what if you had a dedicated game controller app installed?

... or open up the API to make it possible to use the input from the Remote-App in other Apps on the AppleTV.

is it going to come with a gamepad?

[Anonymous Coward]

oh yeah this thing will be useful for games without a gamepad or a touchscreen

Re:is it going to come with a gamepad?

[AccUser]

I would suspect that the vast majority of AppleTV users already have a portable iOS device (iPod Touch, iPhone and iPad). These could be used as controllers, given that gaming controls have already been proven on these devices.

Re:is it going to come with a gamepad?

[intheshelter]

Thank G you were here to point out this gaping hole in their strategy. I'm sure Apple totally overlooked this and never would have thought of it without your brilliant insight.

Re:is it going to come with a gamepad?

[Hatta]

Gaming controls have already been proven to suck on those devices.

iPad turns into a controller

[Anonymous Coward]

and the game is on the TV. Easy. Everything is practically in place.

Not a gamer company

[sosume]

Apple is not a gamer company. iOS games are only used casually, and Apple hardware scores badly in the cost vs performance tradeoff. Gamers want to be able to tweak their hardware and Apple is not likely to allow this. So for casual games, Apple won't be able to compete with the Wii on the low end, and won't be willing or able to provide high end gaming gear to the hardcore gaming crowd. So this is like Rolls Royce selling bikes - won't work. Combined with the expected resignation of Apple's Glorious Leader Kim Il Steve, this will only improve odds for people going short on Apple.

Re:Not a gamer company

[AccUser]

Apple didn't think games would fly on the iPhone. They were wrong.

They are not a gamer company, but they have built a really solid platform, with very low entry requirements for development. Yes, there is an annual subscription fee for the developer program, and this is a requirement for submitting applications, but this cost is relatively small. Everything else you need is free (not counting 3rd-party toolsets and libraries).

Whilst PC gamers can tweak their hardware, what about PS3 and XBox360 gamers? How much tweaking can they seriously do?

And how many games are available for iOS compared to the Wii? I have and iPad and a Wii. I enjoy both, they are different experiences, but I only have about 20 games for the Wii. I have played many more times this on the iPad.

Re:Not a gamer company

[FyRE666]

If you read the article you'd see it's likely to use a streaming service like onLive - the device itself only needs enough horsepower to accept player input and display the video stream coming back from the gaming servers. Even openGL is pretty irrelevent.

Re:Not a gamer company

[xMrFishx]

Disagree.

Gamers, generally don't want to be able to tweak their hardware. I'm a PC gamer, always have been, but given the market share of console gamers, what's this tweaking we're talking about. Last I heard, 360s bant you if you tweaked them, and PS3s sue you if you look at them funny. Most consumers want plug and play hardware. PC gamers generally also fall into this category, those few of us that actually fiddle are a very very small minority of consumers.

If I was to say who was Apple's direct competitor in the gaming market as a newcomer, it's not Sony, it's not Microsoft, it's king of the casuals, Nintendo. The realms that Nintendo exists in in the eastern market, and the legacy that is Sega is nothing like what the Westerners see. The DS is criminally popular in the east. This is what the phone market of the West is entering into in a way that portable handhelds over here never quite made. It's the same region the Wii is sitting in, and where something like the (for want of a better word) iPlay would go.

If there was a company who had the capital, investors and technology backing to produce a low cost high impact technology, it's going to be someone like Apple. Most tech companies are followers, not innovators. They generally follow the herd and play it safe with product creation. Development for the big boys is expensive. Last I heard, it costs a small fortune to dev for the 360/ps3. Bedroom games makers can't hope to enter markets like this. It's just not worth the competition.

I don't know much about Nintendo's development accesibility, but seeing as they've always had alot simpler, lower cost products in their range, I'd think it was cheaper and easier to get into. What's the going rate for a Wii these days, $150? You've got an AppleTV at $99. I know it's weaker, a more specific product would no doubt have a few hardware tweaks to fit it's placement. But given the number of iDevices kicking around, you've got a potential controller in the users hands already. Who knows where something like this could go, but marketing money can make lead into gold. A little accidental developer support and coders will run wild. A $99 dev kit (aTV) is not really a big cost for most coders.

Don't count your chickens

Re:Not a gamer company

[intheshelter]

That is probably the stupidest post I've ever ready. Congratulations!

iOS games are used only casually? WTF does that mean? That they're not used "formally"? What a bullshit argument.

Gamers want to be able to tweak their hardware? Really? Maybe a low percentage of gamers do, but the vast number of people who want to play games are the same people who buy and play a LOT of games on iPhones, iPod touches and iPads. Wrong on this one too.

" for casual games, Apple won't be able to compete with the Wii on the low end" Yeah, because Wii is offering sooo many games for $.99 or FREE, there is NO WAY Apple could compete with them. Retard.

"this will only improve odds for people going short on Apple." Yeah, you go ahead and do that. Short a company that is hitting on all cylinders on the stupid assumption that Jobs hasn't surrounded himself with people who think like him. Did you even bother to think any of your arguments through?

Re:Not a gamer company

[Anonymous Coward]

How many PS3 and 360 gamers actually care about tweaking their hardware? For the majority of us, its all about playing the game. WHen you have all these system requirements, you can cut out people who might not be bale to get their hands on the required hardware.

Re:Not a gamer company

[sosume]

Let me start with congratulating you on your excellent communication skills. Bravo! I guess calling people retarded and their written words stupid is something you picked up from your manager at the local Wendy's.
Perhaps you have been hiding under a rock (or behind the grill) for the last decade or so, but you are apparently in need of explanation of the term 'casual gamer'. This is a gamer who plays every once in a while, on simple games like Bejeweled or Angry Birds. This is in contrast to the hardcode gamer, who playes mmos or fps like WoW or COD on a semi-daily basis. These people like to overclock, mod and what more. This is the group of people I think of when I refer to 'gamers', and the group who spends the largest part of their income on video games - this would traditionallty be a target group for Apple, were tey to enter the gaming market.. And apparently you have never owned a Wii, which definitely makes you a subject expert.
Now go get me that free refill you promised me.

Re:Not a gamer company

[Amarantine]

Apple is not a gamer company.

Neither was MS, before the first Xbox. Neither was Sony, before the first PlayStation.

Gamers want to be able to tweak their hardware and Apple is not likely to allow this.

Wot, and Nintendo, MS and Sony *do* allow this? Ask geohot about his experiences with that.

Re:Not a gamer company

[jo_ham]

Yeah, so many modified and tweaked Xbox 360s and PS3s.....

oh right.

The vast majority of "gamers" right now are using consoles, which are the very definition of a fixed data point in terms of hardware and non-tweaking.

The second really massive growth area in gaming has been in casual games, which have attracted an entirely new set of people into games, and these are wildly successful on small, portable devices. Casual games are huge.

Any future game setup on the AppleTV, and the current gaming market on iOS and Android as it exists right now really don't have "gamer" in the traditional definition of the word within a country proverbial of their target demographic. Those gamers are fine off on their own trying to get an extra 5fps out of Crysis by running liquid helium over their GPU. Meanwhile, iOS casual game developers are making hay while the sun shines. Apple is *already* "competing with the Wii on the low end" - casual games that cost a lot less than $50 each are proven to make enough money to attract developers large and small.

Re:Not a gamer company

[Anonymous Coward]

??? Microsoft had one of the longest running and best selling PC game of all time - MS Flight Simulator, not to mention various other titles. Apple has nothing like it.

Re:Not a gamer company

[ninjacheeseburger]

Microsoft was a lot more of a gaming company than apple is. DirectX, Age of Empires, Flight Sims etc.

Re:Not a gamer company

[Gilmoure]

Wii games are $30-$50. iOS games are $1-$10. Not sure about this low end argument.

Airplay: No; Like ‘The Incident’: Yes

[grebonoj]

AirPlay is a streaming protocol that buffers video before playback. Delay is unnoticeable when your sharing media, but would be unacceptable for gaming. However look at the (fantastic!) iOS game The Incident: when playing on iPad with iPad sending output to TV, you can use your iPhone/iPod Touch as a controller. Swap iPad for Apple TV and you get this rumor. Many other examples that use ios devices as controllers in intresting ways, for example Chopper 2 and Scrabble. As for "walled garden", isn't every existing game platform tightly managed? (ps3, xbox, wii)

Apple is already beating Nintendo at it's own game

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple TV costs 99USD, the Wii costs over 200USD. And console gamers never want to tweak their hardware.

Developing for the iOS costs 99USD/year and you can decide your price for sales, of which you get 70%. That's a better deal than you usually get with publishers/distributors. Developing for the Wii requires licencing deals with Nintendo and a lot of capital and most likely previous successes in game development (this is the case with the DS at least). It's very likely you won't get 40USD out of the 50USD sales price for the Wii game. In addition you need to buy a devkit for the Wii. The Wii is not a HD device. The AppleTV is.

Indies would jump at this, fast.

The real question...

[Anonymous Coward]

Can it run doom yet?

Apple Controller

[Anonymous Coward]

Perhaps the string "Controller" simply refers to Model-View-Controller which is a common term when developing for iOS. No need to take rumors so seriously.

Re:Not a [Hardcore] gamer company

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple is not a gamer company.

Uh... yeah. Neither is Facebook. Neither of them attract the existing gamer market much; but they are both like a factory that is just churning out new gamers that don't even identify themselves as such. Hell, my wife spends more time playing games than I do these days.

Bejewelled
Scrabulous
Farmville
vs
Bejewelled
Angry Birds
???
Profit

I'm sure someone more 'in the know' could expand that list a hell of a lot and put in numbers. Apple isn't a gamer company, they are also not not a gamer company. They're a platform company. That's actually closer to what nintendo, microsoft and sony all are anyways. If the games on the iPod/Phone are any indication, apple knows how to make a good platform. With their prices and terms of service, apple will be destroying the low end of the big three in 2... 1...

Sneak attack. Heh.

[Zelgadiss]

Apple has been launching a lot of "sneak attacks" lately. :P

The iPod was innocent enough, but through it they effectively (and quietly) ate up a chuck of the PDA market via the iPod Touch.

Via the iPhone, they are starting to threaten Sony's and Nintendo's handheld console market.

Gaming on the Apple TV seems to be the latest "salvo".

PS: I suppose most consider the Apple TV as a failure. While I don't own one, it doesn't seem that bad. It's a cheap "media" server that lets you rent videos and watch them on your HD TV, as well as display/playback media streamed from a computer network.

Re:Sneak attack. Heh.

[Gilmoure]

As a long time Apple TV and Mac user, yeah, am underwhelmed by both Apple TV's (but still use my first gen 1.). Due to size of my movie collection (+900 GB now), I'm using a Mac Mini as family media server and Apple TV just streams data from it, rather than holding data locally (even with 500GB drive upgrade). I did throw Boxee on ATV for a bit but didn't end up using it too much so back to regular Apple TV setup on next major upgrade. With my user practices, the current AppleTV, with no internal storage, would work out great for me. About the only downside of new ATV's is not being able to purchase directly on it. We do buy a couple movies a month from iTunes (mostly kid stuff) and it syncs the purchased copies back to Mac server. Would have to get used to VNC'ing in to Mac server, purchasing movie and then having it available for play on Apple TV. I may do this once we get family room built and have second TV.

For gaming, I'm still not sure how the Apple TV would work, except as a remote display for current iOS devices but then again, I'm not some billionaire out in CAL so that may explain my lack of vision.

Finally, I really wish Apple would release a family server /DVR system (Mac Mini Server, with current Apple TV front end, and cable input (with cable card reader for F*$#King Comcast) that would handle all of family's AV, document content and backup needs as well. For around/under $500. And for additional price, maybe include an auto backup to that huge server farm Apple's building as well. If they could make a single, affordable machine w/remote that plugs in to TV, and is easily configurable (elderly dad/mom level) and has option for full offsite backup, oh man, that'd be great.

I've gone and built such a beast but my offsites are swapping external 2 GB drives, keeping one stored at a friend's house down the road. And now that Comcast's encrypting their signal, my EyeTV no longer has access to most basic cable channels. Was nice when it worked as EyeTV could stream any channel it received (and recorded shows as well) to my iPhone and iPad over both wifi and 3GS. Am in process of making an antenna system for over-air broadcasts and we'll at least be able to cut back comcast to just internet service (only source out in country).

Short answer? No.

[Loosifur]

Angry Birds HD? Apple ceded the gaming field to Microsoft many moons ago, and hasn't done anything to position itself to compete in that environment since. Besides which, does Apple TV even have enough of a foothold for Apple to use it as a wedge into console gaming? Granted, this is anecdotal, but no one I know has Apple TV, and I have a couple of friends who would buy anything with a lower-case 'i' in the front. In fact, those same people use competing products which aren't handicapped by Apple's antagonism towards third-party developers.

I mean, I'm sure there are Apple fans who will buy anything Apple releases for gaming, and then tell everyone they know about how much better Apple TV is for gaming purposes than a PS3, Xbox360, or Wii, but I just don't see console gamers flocking to Apple TV. Nor do I believe that Apple TV will gain enough of a footprint as a media device to give Apple a foothold for gaming. Other multipurpose devices do what Apple TV does, only better, cheaper, and without the limitations. I don't own one, but I'm assuming that, like most Apple products, you only see the full functionality when you combine it with other Apple products.

Re:Short answer? No.

[pympdaddyc]

Setting aside Apple TV portion of this thread for a moment, I think you've missed some recent happenings in the Mac space. The last few revisions of the iMac hardware have definitely had a focus on gaming performance. And no, this doesn't mean they have a good price-to-performance ratio, but it does mean some people on the fence (like me) can now at least consider the trade-off when it was previously not a viable option.

In terms of general ecosystem, the increase of gaming performance is also echoed in Parallels' and Fusion's focus on gaming optimizations in their latest versions. I expect the hardware refocus also in part led to Steam's migration to the Mac platform. Finally, the Mac App store does have "real games" on it and they are selling; it's not just Angry Birds HD.

Circling back on the Apple TV, I think media/blogs are making a mountain out of a molehill, and we're all pointing to the mountain and saying "Oh Apple, you're so stupid, this isn't a mountain." I would be surprised if apps didn't appear on the Apple TV, and as we've seen in both the iPhone and iPad, apps directly lead to people making games. That doesn't suggest that it will compete directly with the PS3/XBox/Wii systems, or that Apple is even trying to. It's just the spread of the application eco-system.

Re:Short answer? No.

[jedidiah]

> The last few revisions of the iMac hardware have definitely had a focus on gaming performance.

Translation: unless you've bought your hardware recently, you're totally screwed.

I have a couple of Minis like that. It's terribly annoying.

The prospect of AppleTV gaming at this point still leaves more questions than answers.

Re:Short answer? No.

[Anonymous Coward]

Loosifur for the win!

Apple has no history at real full depth games, little fluff games, sure.

I am one of those folks that avoid purchasing any product that starts with a lowercase i or is promoted by Steve (Evil) Jobs.

Fanboi Sheeple would buy anything with lowercase i on it, even a bronzed Steve Jobs turd, good for them.

Apple becoming synonymous with gaming... [excuse me while I pick myself off the floor and stop laughing], I think not.

As the core becomes more rotten, the Apple will fall from the tree.

Re:Short answer? No.

[P. Legba]

There hasn't (yet) been a very compelling reason to purchase an AppleTV. There will be soon.

nope

[Anonymous Coward]

apple has never forfeited aesthetics, size, and quietness for the power required for a decent gaming platform. nor will they in the future.

One word -

[z3pp3h]

Or maybe only a sound... "Meh..."

Retro Apple (Mac) Games for Apple TV

[poena.dare]

Y'know I'd buy one if Apple resurrected some old Mac games:

The Ancient Art of War
Armor Alley
Balance of Power
The Fools Errand
Cap'n Magneto
Continuum
Core War
Dark Castle
Dungeon of Doom
and
Orlando Poon's Toxic Ravine Clean-Up and Rescue Service

Shoot me, I'm old.

Re:Retro Apple (Mac) Games for Apple TV

[Roogna]

Just a note on a couple of these:

Fool's Errand has a sequel that's been in the making for awhile, but supposedly is getting close to release: http://www.fools-errand.com/
and Dark Castle: http://www.superhappyfunfun.com/games/gam_returntodc.html

And I agree, I would LOVE to see Ancient Art of War resurrected.

Re:Retro Apple (Mac) Games for Apple TV

[poena.dare]

I played FE on my PC not six months ago and loved it. Did not know about Dark Castle, Heh heh heh. Thanks.

I agree AAoW and even, yes, AAoWaSea, were amazingly well balanced games that had great replayability. Why Evryware doesn't re-release it is beyond me. http://www.evryware.com/index.html

Re:Retro Apple (Mac) Games for Apple TV

[Gilmoure]

If they brought back Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri for iPad/AppleTV, that'd be cool.

How would this work?

[pokyo]

I'm a little confused by this. Is there a new Apple TV device coming out? Does the newest Apple TV device have any storage capacity? Do they expect people to own an iPhone so that there is a decent controller? Seems like an afterthought to me.

Viable..Only as Adjunct, Unfortunately

[StCredZero]

At the same time, Nintendo look increasingly like a successful toy manufacturer, who have feet of clay when it comes to actually making interesting games - and in attracting decent third party developers.

This will only be a success as a way of tying interactive content with TV shows. Unfortunately, established game makers have managed to accomplish a mathematical paradox: they've made tie-in into a 4 letter word.

Still, I see tremendous potential for folks like Zynga doing tie-ins with big media events. How about "Drinking Game"? People publish sets of rules before an event. (Academy Awards?) Then, you get to watch a set of virtual college students get sloshed playing the game. Viewers will vote up or vote down claims that rules were triggered. Drinking with the virtual students is entirely optional, of course.

The plan all along

[MistrBlank]

The current generation AppleTV has Bluetooth for input and 8GB of flash that are inaccessable currently.

What Apple didn't have was a large base of apps that don't require touch screen and many of the other hardware expectations of the current iOS devices.

Introduction of the Mac Appstore fixes that and readies the AppleTV to become a portal for those Apps to be put onto an iOS device. You have to look at it from a very high level looking down at the synergies between the computers and their iOS devices. The overarching plan is to make development for any of them just as easy as the next and make Applications readily available across all devices. I expect that to be a huge focus for LION and this year's WWDC.

Does the AppleTV have bluetooth?

[brokeninside]

If so, keyboards will work natively with it just like they do with the iPad, iPhone and iPod Touch.

I've never thought to try a bluetooth mouse with an iOS device but I suspect that it wouldn't work. The GUI doens't have a mouse pointer.

I for one welcome ...

[ThirdPrize]

our angry avian overlords.

downward pressure on game prices

[crafoo]

I don't think $60/game publishing houses are going to be too happy about competing directly with an iOS gaming device attached to living room T.V.'s. Nintendo was already crying in it's beer about the $1-$5 price points of iOS mobile games.

We have seen this before!

[beetle496]

Where are the Mac games? Where are the Mac game developers?

Have you not noticed the most popular use of the iPod Touch and iPad? Apple is about to do for living room game consoles what they did for MP3 players, smart phones, and tablet computers. I cannot wait!

MVC?

[underactive]

Saurik said it best: "Engadget seriously believes that "ATVGamesStandingsController" has to do with physical game controllers as opposed to model-view-controller."

seems to me...

[Anonymous Coward]

If they [and nintendo] were smart, they would smell a partnership amongst themselves....

We have seen this before

[beetle496]

Sony and MS's current offerings are actually unbelievably similar
Nintendo looks increasingly like a successful toy manufacturer

Excellent observations! MS and Sony do not grok family entertainment, they only seem to care about teenage males. The Wii is cute, but I am too much of snob to buy new tech that only supports 480p. Apple is about to do for living room game consoles what they did for MP3 players, smart phones, and tablet computers. I cannot wait!

A multi core ARM transformation of the entire line

[Super Dave Osbourne]

This would be a great way for Apple to introduce the notion I have believed would happen sooner than later. The entire line of Apple products will go to a multicore ARM hardware configuration, and what better way to do it than with a cheap introduction for lower power consumption and footprint than a gaming console for hard core graphics rendering and networking needs. I'm not a fanboy of Apple, at least for the past 4+ years since the introduction of Intel into the product lines. However, this may get me back into the fold if it were to happen.

Closed-Minded Much?

[Anonymous Coward]

Look beyond the "now". Complimented with a touch screen television (yes, a touch screen, voice activated Apple set-top television IS coming), and iPads serving as a unique controller for each user..... I think this might be something rather novel. It could bring a whole new meaning to "family game night" -- and as the previous commenters already pointed out, the apps already exist.

No -- "gamers" won't oblige. But this is a 99 dollar box, which might offer a neat way to play games and interact with other game-players.

Not just games..

[romanval]

I think there's an emerging market for active low wattage, always-on, local/internet connected home devices. It'll use less power then any PC/console and be easier to setup then a Linux wall plug computer. I can think of a few examples

• Home automation and security, using IP webcams and local network based sensors & switches.
• Whiteboard apps: scheduler/calendar/shopping lists that sync across all inhabitant's smartphones.
• Home to Home family webcam conferencing (as easy to use as a phone call- hence your grandma can do it instead of bothering with a computer).

Opening up the AppleTV to an apps market can really push its usefulness out when app developers think of it as a part of the household..

Yes

[Anonymous Coward]

Let me answer your upcoming article: "Will Google TV Become a Gaming Platform?"... yes.

We have seen this before!

[beetle496]

Apple is about to do for living room game consoles what they did for MP3 players, smart phones, and tablet computers. I cannot wait!

Apple is not a gamer company... Gamers want to be able to tweak their hardware and Apple is not likely to allow this... [Apple] won't be willing or able to provide high end gaming gear to the hardcore gaming crowd.

Agreed, but your are talking about a tiny slice of the potential market.

Apple hardware scores badly in the cost vs performance tradeoff.

Not for the bulk of consumers, not when usability is a factor in measuring performance (and value).

Apple won't be able to compete with the Wii on the low end.

Not at all! the AppleTV retails for less than the Wii!

no brainer...

[schlachter]

You've already got millions of peeps buying these Apple TVs, which are fairly capable computers attached to everyone's TVs. It's a no brainer for Apple to enable users to link their iPhones/iPods wirelessly to their Apple TVs to use them as accelerometer and gyroscope based control devices for games...and to let the 3rd party game development community do their thing

Re:Airplay: No; Like ‘The Incident’: Y

[Gilmoure]

This an Apple walled garden. Is much eviler than other walled gardens 'cause it's Apple. And Apple's teh gay.