Valve Boss Expects Apple To Challenge Game Consoles

Speaking at a panel during the WTIA TechNW conference, Valve CEO Gabe Newell had some interesting things to say about his expectations for the console business. Quoting: "The living room is the domain of the consoles, and its ability to exist independently from the other platforms is gone, Newell said. Newell expects Apple to disrupt the living room platform with a new product that will challenge consoles, although he doesn't have any particular knowledge of that new product. 'I suspect Apple will launch a living room product that redefines people's expectations really strongly and the notion of a separate console platform will disappear,' he said. Newell reiterated his concerns about a closed model being the 'wrong philosophical approach' but one that people will emulate because of the success of Apple and Xbox Live."

Comments

Why don't Valve innovate then?

[Arab]

Valve have the distribution mechanism and the software library in Steam, why don't they release a reference Valve Box then?

Hide windows with a pretty dedicated UI and sell it cheap. It's Amazon's business model for the Kindle and it seems to be working quite well for them.

Re:Why don't Valve innovate then?

[Anonymous Coward]

Because I think he's expecting Apple to use its brand to get into people's front room, and the lack of a separate platform coming about because the iConsole would run iOS.

Re:Why don't Valve innovate then?

[Anonymous Coward]

Valve have the distribution mechanism and the software library in Steam, why don't they release a reference Valve Box then?

The software/game development business probably provides better margins. Valve doesn't necessarily have the resources to throw around at console-type hardware like Microsoft and Apple do, as well. Many, from Atari and Coleco to Sega, have tried and failed. As it is for Valve, they can update software and re-deploy through Steam. A "Valve Box" would probably also require special made-to-order hardware to control manufacturing costs. Software just keeps running.

If you're doing something that works in the current hardware and software ecosystem, someone might call you crazy for diving into an uncertain and risky venture that is outside of your expertise. You can hire expertise, but it doesn't change that you're attaching your brand to something you aren't quite sure is going to succeed like the business you are in now.

Re:Why don't Valve innovate then?

[Kjella]

They may have the software library but all those windows games depend on windows. Valve would have to do something profoundly do to more than be a kiosk application on top of that and Microsoft would likely be highly uncooperative since it'd be a direct competitor with their xbox. Apple on the other hand has the whole stack and experience with hardware production and distribution. Basically it'd be repurposing something like the Mac Mini into an entertainment center, maybe with beefier graphics.

Re:Why don't Valve innovate then?

[Luckyo]

On the other hand, apple would likely find most game makers highly uncooperative, as they are directly challenging their business models. So it's not that easy for apple either.

Re:Why don't Valve innovate then?

[dintech]

All they need to do is draw together something combination of Mac Mini / Apple TV / App Store / Game Controller and it's job done. They already have the big publishers on the app store.

Re:Why don't Valve innovate then?

[SausageOfDoom]

Because you can't use a keyboard and mouse while sitting on the sofa. And if you're not going to use a keyboard and mouse, why not just get an xbox or a ps3, who already have online distribution and large software libraries?

Because you couldn't build a gaming device and sell it cheap. Amazon's business model for the Kindle is to push themselves to the front of the ebook market, so they build cheap devices with no margins which could even make a loss, and they'd make all their money back selling ebooks. Valve would essentially have to build a gaming PC with Windows, which would be expensive. If they accepted a loss on the box and increased their prices to those of consoles to make it back afterwards, they'd lose their advantage.

Because Valve would have to make a massive amount of effort to just get to the point where the xbox/ps3 already are, and that's before they can start to innovate. The only way a new console could succeed is if it does something really different. I despise Apple and what their walled gardens are doing to the world of computing, but right now they do seem like the only people who could break into the console market, selling to their massive iphone/ipad user base who could re-use their devices as controllers for games, media etc.

Re:Why don't Valve innovate then?

[Anonymous Coward]

What the fuck are you talking about? Game makers don't like to have channels to sell their games on now? Who knew?! This explains why there are no games on iPhone.

Re:Why don't Valve innovate then?

[BasilBrush]

I don't think they'd start with a Mac Mini. That's a $599 item.

Starting from an Apple TV makes more sense. That's a $99 item.

But I'd think the most likely is to make a whole new iOS derivative. The iPhone 4S has a 1GHz dual core processor, and Apple made the graphics speed 7 times faster than the iPhone 4. They did this by making it a dual core GPU. That seems like a lot of effort on games for a phone! It makes a lot more sense if that's the platform they are intending to make a console with.

Furthermore they made a comment at the launch of the iPhone 4S that the graphics were now console level. Whether you accept that or not, it again reveals their ambitions. And it's easy to believe the next iteration of Apple SoC will be.

The iPhone platform already has supports composite and HGMI video out.

But the bigger reasons for iOS are software. iOS is already a very successful games platform, OS X isn't. iOS is also more robust - every App gets installed into its own sandbox. OS X can go wrong, and needs technical support. iOS just works. iOS is designed to run one app at a time, just like a console. The iOS App Store and installation system is more robust than the Mac App Store. SpringBoard would make a perfectly reasonable console UI, Finder wouldn't, and Front Row seems almost abandoned.

I imagine a new generation Apple TV with next gen A5 CPU (A6?) and iOS. Already capable of running all the games in the App Store.

Re:Why don't Valve innovate then?

[BasilBrush]

There's plenty of highly cooperative games makers already. iOS is the biggest handheld games platform.

What business model is being challenged (other than Steam)? When a developer sells a game on physical media through publishers, distributors, and shops they are making maybe 5 cents on the dollar. Through the Apple Store they get 70 cents on the dollar.

Games makers aren't challenged by Apple's model - other games distributors and stores (such as Steam) are.

Re:Why don't Valve innovate then?

[Anonymous Coward]

That's simple thinking.

As we've seen from Google's attempts, and Android, GP32X and so forth, developers don't like toy boxes.

The next generation of consoles might very well be the last one if Apple can get iOS into the living room proper. The current AppleTV device is just a toy. Up until the most recent MacMini, they were still toys (Though the previous GeForce equipped model was a good try.) A console has to have a target price of 99 to 199 for people to buy it future uncertain. The 800$ price of the iPhone and iPad are a long way from this. And Google's bungling of Android to date has let to come out with a non-toy device.

What I reasonably expect is Apple to release a next generation AppleTV that acts as a pass-thru to any HDMI/Displayport/Thunderbolt equipped television. This next generation device will have all the exact same parts the iPhone/iPad model in the same year, but utilize network storage (iCloud) along with storage on other Apple devices to bring down costs. If your game is downloaded and installed to the mac or iPhone/iPad, it streams it to the television. That just leaves the controller which should be some kind of standardized PS3/Xbox360 style twin analog design.

Re:Why don't Valve innovate then?

[gl4ss]

because they got lucky with counter strike.

that's why. when did valve really innovate? I ask you, because they never innovated with engines, with faked promo vid material sure, yeah, they did.

a dedicated ui.. well. isn't fullscreening steam just that? just make the fonts bigger. but why they wouldn't tip their toes into making a valve box is that it's fucking expensive and risky to do a phantom for reals.

Re:Why don't Valve innovate then?

[Prehensile Interacti]

I imagine a new generation Apple TV with next gen A5 CPU (A6?) and iOS. Already capable of running all the games in the App Store.

I think you're bob on there. Updating the Apple TV Bill of Materials. With the iPhone 4s estimates

• Apple A5 - $26
• Memory 32GB NAND / 512MB SDRAM - $38

Would make a total BoM today of $97.40 (presuming they can't cost reduce the rest) - with a launch in 2012 some time, they ought to pull this off for their more typical margins.

Re:Why don't Valve innovate then?

[tepples]

Because you can't use a keyboard and mouse while sitting on the sofa.

Nor can you eat a TV dinner while sitting on a sofa. Oh wait, they make tray tables for that, and the same tray tables work with a keyboard and mouse.

And if you're not going to use a keyboard and mouse, why not just get an xbox or a ps3, who already have online distribution and large software libraries?

Because Apple caters best to indie developers. Anybody can buy a devkit for $1250 ($650 for a Mac mini, $200 for an iPod touch, $100 for each of four years of a subscription to the iOS developer program). You can't even buy a devkit for Xbox 360 or PS3 unless Microsoft or Sony invites you, and not all developers even qualify to apply for an invitation.

Valve would essentially have to build a gaming PC with Windows, which would be expensive.

A gaming PC, even one with a Windows operating system, isn't too much more expensive than a PlayStation 3 console.

Re:Why don't Valve innovate then?

[delinear]

The business model with consoles seems to be that you have to accept short term pain (in terms of near zero or even negative profit margins) in order to put out a console that's good enough that people will still be buying it years down the line, when tech advances are such that you can finally leverage the cost savings. Nintendo tried the other route - put out a much simpler console and make profit from day one, but now they're suffering as their console can't handle the games people want today, they've milked the casual gamer market dry and they've been too slow to follow up.

Apple don't seem like the kind of company to bet the farm on releasing a beefed up console and taking two years of losses, even though they have more than enough cash to make that model work. They could go down the causal game system in the living room route, but they're already owning that market on mobiles, is it really a big enough market that they could sell a dedicated console (after all, part of Nintendo's problem is that people who want casual games want them on devices they already own, like phones, and don't want to buy extra hardware).

If Apple are going to get into this market it would have to be on the back of something like Apple TV. Some kind of device that people buy for some other primary purpose, not specifically for the games (on that note, I notice I can buy games and apps on my Samsung Smart TV now, so it looks like everyone is jumping on that bandwagon).

Re:Why don't Valve innovate then?

[dintech]

Siri, is that you?

Re:Why don't Valve innovate then?

[CapnStank]

Its simpler than that I think. Apple TV tied into an iPad or iPhone works pretty fluently with the provided apps (not 3rd party). The example I can think of witnessing is the MLB app where you watch the game(s) but your iDevice shows stats that you can browse and interact with relating to the game.

Extend that idea to an "app" being a game and your iDevice being the controller and Apple TV being this "Mystery Box" and you suddenly have a game console.

The hardware would need improvement to be a true gaming experience but that's not to say it is a stretch.

Re:Why don't Valve innovate then?

[billcopc]

That's real cute, but IOS is a touch-based platform. How are you going to replicate that on a TV ? If Apple launches a console based on iPhone/iPad hardware, it won't be able to tap into their huge catalog of craptastic touch games, which means this hypothesized platform would be starting over from scratch.

Re:Why don't Valve innovate then?

[Pinky's Brain]

Exactly right ... Microsoft tried to do some of this when they still were pushing PCs, but before it could get off the ground the XBOX came in. Valve is in the perfect position to launch PC reference designs and certification services, maybe offer a QA service and some kind of quality brand to "guarantee" the software runs well on the reference design and meets some basic PC development standards (ie. no hard coded aspect ratios, all buttons can be remapped, mouse AND gamepad support etc) which so often get fucked up by console ports.

Instead Gabe keeps getting in bed with more enemies only interested in embracing them to extinguish them ...

Re:Why don't Valve innovate then?

[Pinky's Brain]

They don't have to develop console style hardware, they just need to hammer down specifications for a PC reference design ... by having some reference designs with all driver updates being handled by Steam developers could target those platforms for QA and people who want as trouble free gaming as possible on the PC could just stick to a PC complying to Valve's specifications.

Re:Why don't Valve innovate then?

[spire3661]

No need for a next gen AppleTV, its all gonna be done via iDevices. The AppleTV is and will remain a streaming device, with the iDevices feeding it via wireless/wired screen mirroring.

Re:Why don't Valve innovate then?

[spire3661]

As I said above, these guys are right in principle, but wrong on the details. The way Apple is positioned on this, all the grunt horsepower is going ot be on your iDevice, feeding your AppleTV.

Re:Why don't Valve innovate then?

[Luckyo]

Game makers don't like it when you try to change their business model from selling games for 50ish USD to 5USD.

Re:Why don't Valve innovate then?

[Luckyo]

Very few of them are capable of making actually good games though. Look at what's most popular in mobile gaming: small games that you can play for 5 minutes at a time. It's the world of angry birds and solitaire.

Desktop and living room games are starkly different. They are meant to be immersive, to be played for hours at a time, and to generally be of significantly higher quality awarded by a much higher budget. What mobile games try to actively do is to draw entertainment budget from such games toward small ones. Publishers by far and large do NOT like this, and many of them have been very vocal about it.

Re:Why don't Valve innovate then?

[Opportunist]

You are aware that there are people buy a PC rather than a console because they can upgrade ad lib and swap out the crappy graphics card for a better mode, yes?

If Valve issued something like a "required" or even just "recommended" specs sheet, they'd shoot their own foot. Because so far, it's the software maker's fault if the game doesn't run well. Then it will be Valve's. Because Valve dictated that MY rig can't handle that new game even though my PC meets the minimum specs easily. What's that you say? That's not minimum specs but REQUIRED specs? Hell, next time I'll check whether the game fits my PC and if it doesn't... what you say? ALL games on Steam now require that configuration.

Hmm.... go out and drop a lot of dough to buy a machine that appeases Valve or say "screw you" and buy my games elsewhere... decisions, decisions... Oh looky there, a new online distribution platform just emerged!

Re:Why don't Valve innovate then?

[MrSmith0011000100110]

Anybody can buy a devkit for $1250? Anybody can also laugh at someone who paid $1250 to Apple for the privilege to develop for their platform(yes I do know a lot of that was hardware but it all still goes to Apple).

Re:Why don't Valve innovate then?

[Talderas]

You can build a gaming PC for $300 that plays games at decent settings?

Re:Why don't Valve innovate then?

[interkin3tic]

Too busy making Half Life: Episode three maybe?

...

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! (cries)

Re:Why don't Valve innovate then?

[tlhIngan]

On the other hand, apple would likely find most game makers highly uncooperative, as they are directly challenging their business models. So it's not that easy for apple either.

Eh? Apple's iOS app store guidelines are more lenient than what game makers are used to. If you want to develop for Xbox360/PS3/Wii officially (and not via Xbox Live Indie Arcade), there's a pile of requirements that just don't exist for the App Store. (separate work facilities wit locking doors - the closest would be the iPad pre-launch is a big one, no, you cannot work out of your bedroom or garage).

Apple's app store approval mechanism? Peanuts compared to what the console manufacturers demand.

They may have the software library but all those windows games depend on windows. Valve would have to do something profoundly do to more than be a kiosk application on top of that and Microsoft would likely be highly uncooperative since it'd be a direct competitor with their xbox. Apple on the other hand has the whole stack and experience with hardware production and distribution. Basically it'd be repurposing something like the Mac Mini into an entertainment center, maybe with beefier graphics.

Why would Microsoft refuse to sell Windows licenses to Valve? At the absolute worst, Valve would have to run down to their local computer store and pick up a bunch of OEM Windows licenses. Or they could just license Embedded Windows XP or Windows Embedded 7 Standard.

Even if Microsoft is uncooperative, they can't prevent Valve from buying Windows licenses. Or they can work with Dell or something to make the boxes and use Dell's Windows licensing.

The main problem would be the controller. As in, a living room console, handling 4x mice+keyboards is a lot harder than 4x gamepads. Hell, they can use Microsoft's xbox360 controllers and build in the receiver.

Re:Why don't Valve innovate then?

[iinlane]

Valve is like no other big company in this business. A good reason for them is that they don't want to, just as plain as that. Valve is owned by Valve employees, they do what they like.

Re:Why don't Valve innovate then?

[SausageOfDoom]

Keyboard and mouse on a tray table? You are obviously not an FPS player.

And Apple may cater best to indie developers, but I wasn't talking about Apple - I was replying to the gp about how Valve would be stupid to try to launch their own console. Most of valve's catalogue is either mouse-oriented and wouldn't be playable on a TV, or is available on the xbox/ps3 anyway.

Come to that though, I seriously doubt Apple would go for a keyboard and mouse either. Can you imagine their shiny adverts with a guy slouched on a sofa playing WoW on a tv tray? Not exactly their style.

And you try building a decent gaming PC that can do the latest games at 1080p for the price of a PS3. It's going to cost three times the price, at least.

Re:Why don't Valve innovate then?

[iluvcapra]

Very few of them are capable of making actually good games though. Look at what's most popular in mobile gaming: small games that you can play for 5 minutes at a time. It's the world of angry birds and solitaire.

Yes, the living room is reserved for such highfalutin experiences as Madden NFL '12 and Mortal Kombat vs. the DC Universe.

I work in the movie business, and I've noticed how the console games manufacturers have, in about 1/5th the time Hollywood used, turned themselves into everything that sucks about the modern entertainment industry. They either just remake a game franchise that's been proven for the last 20 years, or they just reskin the Unreal engine with 20% more zombie, and let the engineers just crank up the photorealism (see Gears of War) -- there's your immersive experience. Granted, occasionally you get something like Bioshock which has something to say, but it's still just an FPS with a storyline from a college sophomore's Ayn Rand essay.

I would take any attempt to recognize the natural success of the incumbent console developer with a large grain of NaCl. Anything that disrupts their cozy relationship with content licensors and established distribution channels would be welcome.

Re:Why don't Valve innovate then?

[iluvcapra]

They're going to have to fix the delay issues if it works in the standard AirPlay way; I've noticed delays in the hundreds of milliseconds range, which for a videogame is not practical.

This doesn't exclude the possibility that Apple could build some way of offloading the rendering to the AppleTV and just use the wireless link for control, but that's not something they offer now.

Re:Why don't Valve innovate then?

[BasilBrush]

Desktop and living room games are starkly different.

Yes, but that's not a limitation of iOS. If Apple release an iOS console, then the mobile type games will be available day one. The more immersive games will arrive later.

And note that Wii was pretty successful with "small games that you can play for 5 minutes at a time".

Re:Why don't Valve innovate then?

[scot4875]

Just as you said, they've turned themselves into everything that sucks about the modern entertainment industry. Which means that 90% is going to be uninspired garbage that you have to sift through to find the good stuff. Which means if you're just playing reskinned Unreal engine games with 20% more zombies, you're doin' it wrong.

I realized that the games industry was no longer had me as their target demographic years ago. It takes a period of adjustment, but once you realize that following blockbuster titles is about the *worst* way to find original, interesting stuff, your life will be a lot easier.

--Jeremy

Re:Why don't Valve innovate then?

[scot4875]

Furthermore they made a comment at the launch of the iPhone 4S that the graphics were now console level. Whether you accept that or not, it again reveals their ambitions.

Wait, they actually made that claim? I never saw that. <quick Google search> Holy shit, you're correct. Did people actually buy that garbage? I mean, it definitely looks good, but it's not even *close* to the graphical power of the 360 or PS3.

--Jeremy

Re:Why don't Valve innovate then?

[BasilBrush]

That's real cute, but IOS is a touch-based platform. How are you going to replicate that on a TV ?

Same way Wii does. Note how they both have large buttons to hit because of the lack of precision of both pointing devices (finger and Wii Remote).

OK scrolling by flick would be awkward with a wii-remote and multi-touch not possible (well, one touch per player is, but no pinch to zoom gestures.) But that just means that teh developers will need to release updates to their games, with alternate controls.

Alternatively, use iOS devices as the controllers, and do your touch UI stuff there, whilst having the uncluttered world view displayed on the TV.

Or something else. What you mention is just a matter of design choices. It's not a showstopper. And it's far from starting from scratch.

Re:Why don't Valve innovate then?

[BasilBrush]

How do you know? iPhone 4S isn't out in the wild yet. So unless you have a review unit, or were at the launch... How do you know?

Remember that the current gen consoles are 5-6 years old now.

I'm not saying the graphics are console level. I just don't know. But it's certainly not impossible.

Re:Why don't Valve innovate then?

[tepples]

Anybody can buy a devkit for $1250?

It's a lot better than having to start a corporation, lease office space, and get a title published on another platform, which is what a developer has to do just to qualify to develop for a Nintendo platform.

Re:Why don't Valve innovate then?

[Anonymous Coward]

That comment really doesn't mean anything.

"NES" would be console level, but wouldn't be anything to be proud of nowdays.

Re:Why don't Valve innovate then?

[spire3661]

This is pretty much the setup Wii U is promising, so id imagine we are going to live with the lag. Keep in mind we are probably not Apple's target gaming audience.

Re:Why don't Valve innovate then?

[Shrike82]

I work in the movie business, and I've noticed how the console games manufacturers have, in about 1/5th the time Hollywood used, turned themselves into everything that sucks about the modern entertainment industry.

While I totally agree with the sentiment, I feel compelled to point out that what you and I might view as a never-ending torrent of crap from both Hollywood and most of the gaming industry, others view as a wonderful rainbow tinged cascade of entertainment.

Of course they're wrong and we're right. Right?

Re:Why don't Valve innovate then?

[Anonymous Coward]

Because Valve doesn't design all the games on it service. Without installing windows or OSX nothing they have in their library will work currently.

Re:Why don't Valve innovate then?

[iluvcapra]

I'm not saying videogames are bad in any sort of absolute way, but the GP seemed to imply that an App Store model didn't seem to produce "good games" relative to what console game developers produce, which, given what you buy on conoles now, doesn't strike me as a sustainable argument. If anything the EAs and Activisions of the world have become gatekeepers to distribution channles, and iPhones and Android phones have done a lot to disintermediate and bring better content, or at least more experimentation in form, to end users.

Re:Why don't Valve innovate then?

[geekoid]

You use your iPhone/iPAd/touch as input devices.

OR more likely the real stylish 600 dollar controller they will 'invent'

Re:Why don't Valve innovate then?

[geekoid]

If only they post the specs some where...

Re:Why don't Valve innovate then?

[geekoid]

A) just ebcasue Nintendo sucks, doesn't mean Aple doesn't.

Corporation 59 dollars.
Office space. My spare bedroom 250 dollars.
Alternatively 100 dollars of a hobby shack
publishing on the PC: Free

Re:Why don't Valve innovate then?

[geekoid]

Yes.

However most gaming PCs are upgraded a piece at a time.

Re:Why don't Valve innovate then?

[geekoid]

900 hundred dollars? haha, you must be a sucker.

Re:Why don't Valve innovate then?

[geekoid]

Except for when the did, they didn't innovate. THATS your argument. It doesn't help that you don't know what the word innovate means.

Re:Why don't Valve innovate then?

[Pinky's Brain]

People buy a PC for a lot of reasons ...

Why would Valve bother requiring the specification? That's fucking not even close to what I suggested. All the the specifications do is create a couple of fixed QA targets for developers (in addition to the normal PC range) and the ability for users to use those targets. The PCs would be branded as Valve Certified, the games QA'd for them would be Tested On Valve Certified PCs ... and that would be the end of it.

Re:Why don't Valve innovate then?

[tepples]

just ebcasue Nintendo sucks, doesn't mean Aple doesn't.

There is a concept of lesser of two evils.

Office space. My spare bedroom 250 dollars.

Quoting from the qualifications document: "The office space is not located within a personal residence."

Alternatively 100 dollars of a hobby shack

What is a hobby shack? Google didn't come up with a definition in the first results.

publishing on the PC: Free

Feeding oneself while developing a throwaway PC game in order to demonstrate "relevant game industry experience": not free.

Re:Why don't Valve innovate then?

[BasilBrush]

Specs we've got. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_A5

Good luck comparing that to the completely different and 5-6 year old tech in the Wii, PS3 and Xbox.

Common benchmarks would be useful, but I haven't seen any. Likewise comparison stills.

But specs? Good luck with that comparison.

Re:Why don't Valve innovate then?

[Luckyo]

I think you two missed my point. It's not necessary a "good" game from any single point of view, but a "good enough to pay 60USD retail price" from point of view of average consumer.

Same is not true for small mobile games, and it's been argued even here on slashdot countless times that people would NOT buy a 60USD AAA title on mobile platform.

Re:Why don't Valve innovate then?

[Anonymous Coward]

How does the WiiU stream output to the control pad screen? I wasn't aware that the details of that had been released. The concept may be the same, but that doesn't mean the implementation is, I would have expected Nintendo to have found a way to minimize the lag.

"Concerns about a closed model"..

[Anonymous Coward]

Isn't Steam basically the iTunes of PC games though?

Re:"Concerns about a closed model"..

[FrostDust]

If I'm understanding the article's quote correctly, Gabe is talking about how the iOS devices and the XBox 360 only give you the choice of only one digital distribution service, shutting out potential competitors.
On computers, Steam competes with other digital gaming services, such as Direct2Drive, Desura, GoG, and so on. Later on he goes on to say how a hypothetical Valve-produced console would be "open" so that users could use Steam's competitors alongside Steam.

Re:"Concerns about a closed model"..

[Tukz]

There is a reason for that closed distribution service.

The console makers (Sony, MS, etc) doesn't make money on the consoles themselves for a long period of time doing their life-cycle, they get the bulk of the income from software sold on their distributions service and psychical game sales.

If they spend a huge amount of money developing the console hardware, it doesn't make sense to allow third party distribution services on their consoles.
Which is also why they are locked down so tight, unauthorized third party distributions is even worse.

I, however, do appreciate the sentiment from Valve, I'm just afraid it isn't realistic.

The only alternative I see, is if they started to licence third party distribution services, but that kinda defeats the entire "open" point.

Maybe Valve comes up with a cheap way to produce the hardware and also keep it compatible with regular PC games. I'm not just talking architecture, like the Xbox360 (x86), I'm talking direct compatibility with PC Games, with a specific controller scheme attached.
That way, it's pretty much a PC-in-a-box (using a term to make the point, I know a console is already a PC-in-a-box, strictly speaking), where the only requirement to the game is that is has some sort of compatible controller scheme for the console controllers.
And of course, the minimum requirements with whatever hardware is in it.

My post is getting rather lengthy, and I could go on, but I suppose I've included enough to get my point across.

Re:"Concerns about a closed model"..

[Lanteran]

Xbox360 is PowerPC, not x86.

Re:"Concerns about a closed model"..

[Tukz]

Fair enough, my mistake.

Re:"Concerns about a closed model"..

[Inda]

I'm not so sure people want yet another set top box, with all the wires, the extra remotes and all the hassle.

I helped a friend install his new TV last month. An LG, nothing special.

Not being a big follower of TVs, I was amazed at the two USB ports, ethernet port, built in You Tube, Twitter, Facebook...

It's almost like the TV is a "PC in a box" with a huge monitor attached. If this is the way forward, people will lap it up. Maybe stick an "Apple gaming dongle" in the TV's USB port and off you go.

Re:"Concerns about a closed model"..

[bdcrazy]

Apple iTheater. Its a imac, but with a 50" widescreen panel. No wires, no ports, all wireless. Done.

Re:"Concerns about a closed model"..

[Talderas]

There is a reason for that closed distribution service.

The console makers (Sony, MS, etc) doesn't make money on the consoles themselves for a long period of time doing their life-cycle, they get the bulk of the income from software sold on their distributions service and psychical game sales.

If they spend a huge amount of money developing the console hardware, it doesn't make sense to allow third party distribution services on their consoles.
Which is also why they are locked down so tight, unauthorized third party distributions is even worse.

Sony, however, has been more open to other methods of distribution with their console. They allowed Valve to implement a steam client for the PS3 for Portal 2. They're allowing CCP a method of distribution for Dust 514 that Microsoft simply would not allow. Sony at least seems open to the possibility of other methods of getting games on their system.

Re:"Concerns about a closed model"..

[PwnzerDragoon]

So are the Wii and PS3. Well, the PS3 uses the Cell processor, but the instruction set is still PowerPC.

Re:"Concerns about a closed model"..

[Lanteran]

Yes. And?

Re:"Concerns about a closed model"..

[PwnzerDragoon]

And nothing, really. Just pointing out the other consoles are PowerPC-based as well. Re-reading Tukz's post it seems less relevant now, but it seemed like a good idea at the time.

Re:"Concerns about a closed model"..

[Tukz]

You can't BUY anything from those implementation.
The Portal 2 for PS3 links your PSN account to your Steam account, that's pretty much it.

You can't download a steam client for PS3 and buy Portal 2, the Steam functionality comes when you buy the game.

Re:"Concerns about a closed model"..

[Lanteran]

Ok..

Finally!

[Rik Sweeney]

Pippin 2 here we come!

Re:Finally!

[Jerom]

Their "Newton 2" seems to be doing pretty well...

Re:Finally!

[dfghjk]

When did Apple reenter the PDA market?

Re:Finally!

[Anguirel]

Did you miss the iPhone and iPad somehow?

Re:Finally!

[PwnzerDragoon]

For those of you just joining us from the twentieth century, the next phase of the reorientation tour: Apple. A hybrid of their earlier MP3 players with phone hardware, Apple's "I-phone" is among the top-selling smartphones on the market. Some of you may be familiar with "PDAs" from your millennium; modern "smartphones" are essentially PDAs merged with cell hardware built in.

Next on the tour: Paris Hilton. Who was she, and why the hell did anyone care?

Re:Finally!

[geekoid]

Apple's "I-phone" is among the top-selling smartphones on the market.

no, it isn't. It's 5% of world wide smart phone sales. Don't listen to Tim Cook.

It is the number 1 sales at Verizon and AT&T.

I Can See the Future Now...

[mentil]

I'm playing Dark Souls 3 on my iPad 4, and after dying 25 times against a boss I finally win. Before I can save, the battery dies.
I chuck it against the wall in rage and it shatters into more pieces than my dream of ever beating that game, and it sings Daisy Bell in a synthesized Steve Jobs' voice.

Re:I Can See the Future Now...

[Rik Sweeney]

and after dying 25 times against a boss I finally win

If you think it only takes 25 attempts to kill a boss then you've clearly never played Dark Souls :)

Re:I Can See the Future Now...

[Alamais]

And then the atomized LSD that was stored in a tiny little capsule inside the iPad kicks in, and you get one hell of a light show.

Re:I Can See the Future Now...

[Anonymous Coward]

If you think it only takes 25 attempts to kill a boss then you've clearly never played Dark Souls :)

It's dark souls 3 for the ipad, they turned down the difficulty to appeal to a wider audience.

Re:I Can See the Future Now...

[Anonymous Coward]

Sure, only you're iPad 4 will be called WiiU.

Re:I Can See the Future Now...

[Anonymous Coward]

It was dumbed down.

Not without my mouse they aren't.

[MRe_nl]

Free the Mouse!
Three buttons and a mechanical scroll button!
And where can I plug in a keyboard while we're at it.

Re:Not without my mouse they aren't.

[mikael_j]

Mechanical scroll wheels are old-fashioned. I have an Apple Magic Mouse (and a Wacom tablet) and while at first it was a bit hard to get used to and the high sensitivity of its touchpad is an issue with some games it does have its advantages, it just takes a while getting used to. On a related note I used to swear by my previous Wacom tablet + mouse, I loved how movement was relative to the tablet and not the mouse, the only problem was getting to work on monday morning and trying to move the mouse pointer up on the screen with the mouse turned 30 degrees to the left only to have it go up and right...

Re:Not without my mouse they aren't.

[Serpents]

I have an Apple Magic Mouse (and a Wacom tablet) and while at first it was a bit hard to get used to and the high sensitivity of its touchpad is an issue with some games it does have its advantages, it just takes a while getting used to.

You don't play games more complicated than solitaire, do you? Otherwise you wouldn't have mentioned a touchpad in context of gaming...

Re:Not without my mouse they aren't.

[Alamais]

Magic mouse. Still a mouse for mousey things, but the top surface is a 'touchpad' that replaces scroll functions, but allows swiping in any direction.

Re:Not without my mouse they aren't.

[imakemusic]

You realise he's talking about the touchpad-like top surface of an Apple Magic Mouse, right? It's not the same as a laptop's touchpad.

Re:Not without my mouse they aren't.

[MRe_nl]

Page Up /Down, Next/Previous Weapon work better for me with a fixed (but adjustable) click "distance". For PvP Quake III Arena /Enemy Territory like first person shooters I personally need reload/ zoom/ next weapon on my mouse as a minimum. I've played on my neighbours Wacom tablet, and it's not big enough for my mouse sensitivity settings ( granted I need about 40 cm lateral ). Another point is that I don't want my cursor moving even 1 mm when I pick up my mouse and replace it elsewhere on the mouse pad, although optic mice and touch pads are getting better at this.

Re:Not without my mouse they aren't.

[Serpents]

blah, for some reason I wrote "touchpad" in stead of "tablet"... i need more caffeine

Re:Not without my mouse they aren't.

[duguk]

I have an Apple Magic Mouse (and a Wacom tablet) and while at first it was a bit hard to get used to and the high sensitivity of its touchpad is an issue with some games it does have its advantages, it just takes a while getting used to.

You don't play games more complicated than solitaire, do you? Otherwise you wouldn't have mentioned a touchpad in context of gaming...

What about Dawn of War, Command & Conquer, etc... hell, even I've played Battlefield on a trackpad (when desperate), and it's surprisingly not that bad; if you put up with the weirdness of it for a few minutes.

Re:Not without my mouse they aren't.

[artor3]

Still terrible for any game that uses the scroll wheel, for example to cycle through weapons. A real mousewheel clicks into each position. A touchpad can't do that.

Re:Not without my mouse they aren't.

[geekoid]

Scrollwheel to move through weapons? jeez, what an amateur. Unless you have only two weapons, it's slow.

Re:Not without my mouse they aren't.

[cowscows]

Do you play a lot of console games with a mouse?

closed model

[Anonymous Coward]

Newell reiterated his concerns about a closed model being the 'wrong philosophical approach' but one that people will emulate because of the success of Apple and Xbox Live.

And, um, Steam?

Re:closed model

[Issarlk]

Steam doesn't prevent you from installing software on your PC. It even let you add your non steam game in it's library. I'm sure a "Steam console" wouln't be locked down like a PS3 or XBox as I doubt people at Valve would enjoy playing cat and mouse with tinkerer trying to break their boxes to install homebrewed software.

Newells remarks

[polyp2000]

Newell reiterated his concerns about a closed model being the 'wrong philosophical approach' --- I guess that means he doesnt like the idea of this happening any more than i do then ...

Re:Newells remarks

[Kjella]

Newell reiterated his concerns about a closed model being the 'wrong philosophical approach' --- I guess that means he doesnt like the idea of this happening any more than i do then ...

Also called "a market Steam doesn't have access to". So far consoles have been mostly for AAA games, while Apple has been letting almost everyone and their dog sell through the app store. If Apple makes a console that attracts a lot of smaller, independent developers who need a distribution method and steal them from the PC market then Steam will lose a lot of business. So I'm not sure his interests are so philosophical.

Re:Newells remarks

[BasilBrush]

It's a pretty stupid complaint from Newell. iOS might be closed, but it's not as closed as the existing consoles are.

Anyone can buy a Mac, a developer license from Apple for $99 and start developing and release their stuff on the App Store - subject to obeying the App Store rules.

For the consoles - you have to pay thousands to get a developer license, and then the console company decides whether to accept you. If you're a company without a track record in games, they'll reject you. Then you need to pay thousands more for the developer kit.

Re:Newells remarks

[Xest]

Yes, Newell also said he hated DRM yet his company is the peddler of some of the worst DRM on the planet.

What Gabe says, and what his company does, are often completely different. Anything he says is largely meaningless.

Re:Newells remarks

[tepples]

You claim that Steam DRM is worse than other DRM schemes X, Y, and Z. What are the X, Y, and Z you're thinking of, and how is Steam worse than them? For example, how is Steam worse than the DRM on Wii Shop Channel, Xbox Live Marketplace, or PlayStation Store?

Re:Newells remarks

[paedobear]

the 360 also has the Indie store, and while most of the games make fuck-all money the same is true of the iOS App Store.

Re:Newells remarks

[VGPowerlord]

For the consoles - you have to pay thousands to get a developer license, and then the console company decides whether to accept you. If you're a company without a track record in games, they'll reject you. Then you need to pay thousands more for the developer kit.

Except for the Xbox 360, where anyone can buy a Windows PC, a developer license from Microsoft for $99 and start developing and release their stuff on the Xbox Live Arcade Indie channel.

Re:Newells remarks

[Tharsman]

If you dont compare just to digital sales, Steam's DRM is way more restrictive than the DRM in any XBox/PS3/Wii Disk game, since all of those still allow you to lend and transfer ownership.

Re:Newells remarks

[Blue Stone]

>his company is the peddler of some of the worst DRM on the planet.

Worst? No.

DRM may screw the customer in terms of freedom - portability, re-saleability, etc, but whilst all the other forms of DRM tear you a new one, Steam uses plenty of lube and whispers just the right amount of sweet nothings into your ear, that you're satisfied and come back for more.

Re:Newells remarks

[tepples]

Steam's DRM is way more restrictive than the DRM in any XBox/PS3/Wii Disk game

Steam allows the user to close Steam and run a game downloaded other than from Steam. The Xbox/PS3/Wii DRM does not allow the user to close the official launcher and run a game downloaded other than from the official download service. And I've read that the DRM on major-label PC disc games that don't use Steam is just as bad as Steam.

Re:Newells remarks

[BasilBrush]

Yes, but the mainstream games channel is as closed as I described. iOS doesn't have any section that is closed in that way.

I hear that it's true for ALL games channels that most games make fuck-all money. Most of those titles in a games shop will not be hits, and if they aren't hits they make a loss. It's the few that are hits that make the money for the industry.

Re:Newells remarks

[Tharsman]

The Xbox/PS3/Wii DRM does not allow the user to close the official launcher and run a game downloaded other than from the official download service.

Thats not what DRM does. DRM attempts to prevent copying content, it is intended to prevent piracy. What you are complaining is a separate topic and has nothing to do with steam either. Of course you can quit steam and run other games, thats not a "Steam" feature, its a "Microsoft Windows" feature (same guys that make the xbox, funny.)

Can I run a game I buy from steam without having Steam running? Can I lend such a game? Can i resell it or give it away after I'm done with it?

And I've read that the DRM on major-label PC disc games that don't use Steam is just as bad as Steam.

Not in the consoles. But good thing you bring up pc discs that "dont use steam" because I got DeusEx 3 for PC and I was forced to tie it up to my Steam Account to play. Now I cant even lend or give away the physical copy. Thanks Steam!!! You have improved my quality of life!

I used to buy certain games in disc form precisely because I was able to share them legally when I was not using them. This is one of the things that is slowly choking the PC gaming market.

Re:Newells remarks

[artor3]

Are you twelve? If you were older, I'd expect you to remember the days of Starforce, and of having to look up secret phrases in your manual (written in yellow ink on white pages to defeat photocopying). And of course, there's Ubisoft's DRM that requires a constant internet connection, with Blizzard now planning to do the same in Diablo 3.

Steam has some of the least obtrusive DRM on the planet. Only GOG and the Humble Bundles are really better.

Re:Newells remarks

[geekoid]

Except steam does have access to them. So, wrong.

Consoles are a bad platform for gaming. At least, at this time. They don't make tight circles, they don't communicate with each other well, they are slower, and more expensive.

I have been hearing speculation about Apple build a console for decades. Now this is the point where I use that 'logic' to claim the never will. But I learned better then Apple release a Tablet.

*Not saying people don't enjoy it.

Re:Newells remarks

[geekoid]

a) He does hate it; but he ahs to offer something to get titles.

"worst DRM on the planet."
WTF do you base that on? nevermind, you don't base it on anything other then the boner you get from being 'anti-popular'.

AS far as DRM goes, it's the best.
Valve could disappear tomorrow and I could still use all the games I have.

As a side note, the data steam gets is showing more and more publishing house that they don't really need DRM.

Re:Newells remarks

[geekoid]

worse then steam. for the most part they sue a hell of a lot of resources, and don't go away when you stop lpaying the game. They also often have driver issues.

The poster does bring up a valid point - resale. Now this doesn't bother me because I almost always get games that are under 20 bucks. And the few I paid more for are games I have no desire to resell. SO I don't miss the 5 bucks I would get.

Also, some game don't allow fro a transfer of ownership.

By biggest gripe is that they don't have a hone server version of steam. SO while I am playing TF2, my Son or daughter can play portal 2.

Re:Newells remarks

[iluvcapra]

"Indie" is marketing speak for "ghetto." There's a reason they keep these products on a segregated channel: they don't want them coming up in an ad banner or search result presentment alongside games that are paying hundreds of thousands of dollars for their development chain, licensing, and market placement.

Re:Newells remarks

[geekoid]

You can thank the publishers of DeusEx 3 for choosing that option.Steam didn't make them use their service.

" I was able to share them legally"
you would be hard pressed to find any major game made in the last 15+ years where that is true. I all likely hood you are breaking the EULA.

Re:Newells remarks

[Tharsman]

Deus Ex likely picked Steam DRM because of the lack of how willing players seem to be to use it and defend even defend it.

As for EULAs, no EULA can override my constitutional rights (in the US) and unless I actually break a law (like the DMCA to bypass DRMs) I can legally lend and give away my old games.

Re:Newells remarks

[Xest]

The fact that Steam's DRM wholesale prevents you selling a game on second hand?

The fact that Steam's DRM requires you to activate games to be able to play them?

Even console marketplaces don't do this - if the content is there to buy you can play it, none of this receiving a game, finding you have to install Steam to use it, being forced through a marketplace, and being forced to wait for Valve to give you permission to use your purchase if they haven't got their arse into gear by release day.

Re:Newells remarks

[Xest]

"Are you twelve? If you were older, I'd expect you to remember the days of Starforce, and of having to look up secret phrases in your manual (written in yellow ink on white pages to defeat photocopying)."

Do you understand what the D in DRM actually is?

But regardless, no, I'm plenty old enough to remember that I could just slap my Quake CD in my drive, install it, take it out, and play it as, when, and how I wanted.

"Steam has some of the least obtrusive DRM on the planet."

Yes, if you think having to get Valve's permission to play a game you bought on a CD in a shop is unobtrusive, and having to install their software on your system, and having your ability to lend or resell your copy removed from you is unobtrusive too.

What the fuck is wrong with people on Slashdot now? 10 years ago you'd have been laughed off the site for defending such restrictive DRM, but now Valve has it's little fanboy army people like you actually get modded up. It really has become a bastion of dumb sheep who'd gladly give up their rights to their fanboy messiahs.

Re:Newells remarks

[Xest]

"AS far as DRM goes, it's the best.
Valve could disappear tomorrow and I could still use all the games I have."

Yeah, if you never need to reinstall them from the original media. Try buying something like Dawn of War II in a shop as an actual physical disc only to find out you need Valve's permission to be able to actually play it. Try carrying out your right to sell your games second hand individually.

Besides, even what you said isn't true. Defcon, bought and installed from Steam doesn't even recognise through Steam's DRM that it's legit copy half the time for me anyway and that's whilst Valve are a live company, god knows there'd be any hope of playing it if they went bust.

Really, if that's the best DRM there is then we live in a pretty fucking sad world nowadays.

"As a side note, the data steam gets is showing more and more publishing house that they don't really need DRM."

Great. Now all we need is for companies to act on it, shame they aren't.

A robot head falling in love with you is fine

[Nursie]

So long as you're called Zev, or Xev. But when it finds a cyborg body, goes crazy and starts chasing after you shouting "You're not pretty, Stanley H. Tweedle, but you're my kind of not pretty", that's when you have problems.

Re:A robot head falling in love with you is fine

[Anonymous Coward]

I approve of this seemingly random Lexx reference

Re:A robot head falling in love with you is fine

[geminidomino]

I think that post was meant for the "Anime robot girl head" story from a few hours ago...

That, or someone got his dosage wrong. :)

Re:A robot head falling in love with you is fine

[neuroklinik]

Omg, a Lexx reference?! You just made my day.

Re:A robot head falling in love with you is fine

[Nursie]

You are absolutely correct sir!

And bugger me it's Friday, I usually get two pink pills and one orange on friday... The pink ones make me sleepy.

Apple is good at markets

[rolfwind]

Where the current manufacturers, frankly, suck. Especially at marrying hardware and software. Like the phone market before iPhone. (Notice that the one competing OS was made by a software-ish company, and not any manufacturers). I don't see this problem in the console market. If anything, I don't see what apple could bring to the table there.

If there is one line of attack, perhaps it would be via Apple TV for the very casual market. You could give them their own lightweight controllers that double as remotes, and also make iPhones the controllers using their accelerometers like iPad does and an app.

It certainly won't be for the hardcore gamers, but that wouldn't really be something economical for Apple to crack nor their forte. On the upside, you could bring all the iPad games over to the TV.

Re:Apple is good at markets

[Anonymous Coward]

What Apple can bring to the table is fix the clutter mess in the living room. The hardcore gamer does not mind having X devices with Y remotes and controllers connected to their TV, some people do. A playstation 3 is a reasonable media player (it does DVD, blue-ray, and DNLA), but is really bad for light internet things (web browsing, skype, light e-mail) for all those tasks, mobile phones are now better. I doubt Apple's goal would ever be to please the hardcore gamers, but rather to offer a device that is better than current gaming consoles for light computing tasks (the stuff you do on a phone/tablet), has cheap and fun games, is an easy to use media-player and helps getting rid of all cables/boxes/remotes in the living room.
That device would never really be a gaming console as much as a smart-TV (in the same way we now have smart-phones).

Re:Apple is good at markets

[jimicus]

I was trying to figure out what was wrong with this piece of speculation and I think you've nailed it.

Look at the iPhone versus what the competition was doing - particularly at the time of release. Yeah, OK, it didn't do anything too special but compared to most of the competition, it showed real potential which Apple built upon with the App store.

Ditto the Apple TV. I must confess I've not used many set-top boxes but the ones I've seen reviewed - dear me. It's a choice between "doesn't really do anything much" or "does everything but make the tea. Provided you don't mind an arcane menu system, at least 4 different options for every setting (3 of which you need to be a TV engineer to understand, only 1 of which is optimal) and firmware that crashes occasionally." Beating that isn't exactly a high bar to set.

Re:Apple is good at markets

[Anonymous Coward]

Except before iPhone we had blackberries.
We had Palm and the Newton.

The iPhone isn't a great leap forward, it's just the latest in a long series of attempts.

Re:Apple is good at markets

[jedidiah]

Nonsense. AppleTV doesn't have anything over the competition. They all pretty much have the same sort of interface and the same kinds of limitations.

There is nothing particularly "magical" about the Apple product here.

There are some other older products that one might describe in the terms you are using. They're hardly relevant to this discussion.

The entire market has evolved.

Being able to "just work" with whatever you happen to have doesn't require "arcane menus". It simply requires format support that's not crap.

Re:Apple is good at markets

[spire3661]

Show me ONE other product from a single vendor that does Screen mirroring like Ipad/AppleTV. WiDi is a joke because intel is too fucking lazy to make a receiver puck for it, relying on third parties. ANd as far as format support goes, give it up, no one device besides a PC is going ot ever do every format people will want. Try to hit the largest targets (i.e. just encode to mp4/H.264) and be done with it. Its far easier to standardize your video type then to try and hope every future device supports your Ogg collection.

Apple TV

[Captain Hook]

Surely Apple TV is Apple's Living Room device, Apple have never really seemed to care about gaming beyond casual easy to pick up/put down type games.

Re:Apple TV

[Hadlock]

I think the Apple TV project got seriously de-funded. It's now just a shadow of it's former glory. Old models were thin client PCs, new Apple TVs are just a cable box with wifi and eithernet built in. That's not to say they aren't great devices; I bought one for my mom and she loves it - but at this juncture the Apple TV is just a placeholder product.

Re:Apple TV

[MemoryDragon]

Actually I like the new model ( I could get one for cheap) it is more or less a nice push box where you can push movies etc.. from any idevice or mac to the box.
If you hack it open or use itunes, you even can make it a upnp pull/streaming device.
It is not a full featured mini pc but it is a nice device nevertheless and while I dont think apple has any plans it could be a great gaming console for small to casual games. All which it lacks is a decent controller for games.

Re:Apple TV

[BasilBrush]

Chicken and the egg. Apple TV lost focus because sales were always disappointing.

Re:Apple TV

[CronoCloud]

The problem with the AppleTV is that it doesn't do all that much that the PS3/Xbox 360 don't already do. There are standalone Blu-Ray players that can do some or all of what the AppleTV can do.

And Besides their usual brown shooter of the week/action game of the week titles the PS3 and 360 also have your usual iFoo device style games like Angry Birds.

Re:Apple TV

[jedidiah]

The fact remains that the new AppleTV is a far less compelling machine for hackers. The old AppleTV was a nice way to get a cheap low profile box that was generally useful. It eventually became outdated but it was very respectable for it's time. The new AppleTV is just cheap and limited and more of a bother to deal with if you are choosing to hijack the hardware for your own purposes.

It's a real step backwards.

It's nicer from a purely superficial standpoint.

Even the lack of internal storage poses a problem for it's primary intended use case. Even just as a v2 version of a product it's badly hobbled.

Re:Apple TV

[MemoryDragon]

Apples main audience are not really hackers, while I agree with your sentiments i cannot see how apple really has any interest into serving that public.

Dennis Ritchie has died.

[icebraining]

Seriously Slashdot? An extremely influential man in our community dies and you post stuff like this instead of accepting one of the firehose submissions?

RIP Ritchie and /.

Re:Dennis Ritchie has died.

[5hoom]

Agreed. If there was ever cause to hijack a thread, this is it. Dennis Ritchie was the R in K&R for pity sake. He helped create Unix & C. _This_ is news for nerds.

Re:Dennis Ritchie has died.

[maxwell demon]

Indeed, it's more news for nerds than the death of Steve Jobs which was reported here.
I doubt there are many popular programs written in a language which was not influenced in any way by C (and be it only by using the syntax). And the same is true for operating systems and Unix.

Oooh, Angry Birds on the big screen

[Shivetya]

Wait, I can already do that and its not exactly going to threaten a game console. If anything most of the games on the iPad feel as if I am dealing with a Readers Digest Condensed "Game". There are some involved games, one of them imported from DOS days named Ascendancy, but for most part the market is saturated with games which spam you with pay upgrades. I certainly don't want to see that model become prevalent in consoles.

Then comes hardware, Apple hasn't shown any urge to provide real gaming hardware at any level. Graphics has always been an afterthought, even the latest and greatest iMacs are far behind what the PC world has. While they may/may not be ahead of current consoles most of those are five years old and are due replacements.

So what does Valve expect? A jacked up Mini with a real graphics controller? What will the interface be? Surely not touch screen, it won't translate well at all to the big screen.

What I do see is probably a misguided attempt to sell TVs with built in Apple TV components and touch screen remotes sized between phone and iPad. But a game console?

Re:Oooh, Angry Birds on the big screen

[BasilBrush]

Then comes hardware, Apple hasn't shown any urge to provide real gaming hardware at any level.

iPhone 4S upped the GPS to dual core, and is 7 times faster than the iPhone 4 GPU. It's debatable whether it already competes with current gen consoles (they're 5-6 years old) - Apple seems to think it does. But it does reveal Apple has ambition in the games area if it's putting that much effort into the GPU on a phone. One can certainly expect the next gen iOS chip (A6?) to be better than current gen consoles.

iOS is already the biggest handheld games system by a large margin. It's easy to imagine them being successful in the TV console market too.

Re:Oooh, Angry Birds on the big screen

[BasilBrush]

iOS games are mostly of the casual variety because they are targeted primarily at the iPhone. And for sure casual is what you want on a phone. Same to a lesser extent on the iPad.

Then again, Nintendo Wii didn't do too badly out of casual games...

But if the world wants more in-depth games when Apple has a TV console based on iOS, then the market will supply it. The graphics are up to it - see Infinity Blade II http://infinitybladegame.com/

Re:Oooh, Angry Birds on the big screen

[ErikZ]

Set up a box with a nice graphics card in it.
Enough other components to get it to boot up.

Then have your iPhone be the HD where the games rest upon and primary CPU.

By using half of the components from your phone, they'll be able to build a cutting edge console *much* cheaper. And since they were already envisioning this sort of setup as "The computer of the future" it will give them invaluable experience towards that goal.

Re:Oooh, Angry Birds on the big screen

[Anonymous Coward]

Fuck yeah, finally a dual core GPS system!

You go apple!

Apple in good position

[Anonymous Coward]

They are so hyped up at the moment, that anything thay release will catch up. If Apple they reinvented the wheel, it would be a huge success.

IMHO, touch based devices are worse for gaming than those with dedicated keys, but that doesn't matter.

App store matters - and games for a few dollars (compared to beefy prices for games elsewhere).
What Jobs got right is that sofware is overpriced and having it offered in the same bucket with cheap stuff makes software retailers rethink their prices.

Game hardware ain't cheap

[SmallFurryCreature]

We can see this with the consoles, none of them can play proper PC games. Why do you think Half-Life 2 for the xbox looked far worse? And that is an OLD game.

While for most geeks the difference between a PC and a gaming PC ain't all that big, for the average consumer there is a HUGE difference. Their PC is a P4. People still use non flatscreens for screens!

A reference PC that can play games for half a decade will need to be a cutting edge machine to survive for that long. You can't just use a 200 dollar machine because not only will it already be crap, it will be even crappier by the time it has any adoption at all.

The reference gaming PC has been thought up before and it never works. Either it is to expensive to get adopted or so cheap it ain't any good.

Re:Game hardware ain't cheap

[Anonymous Coward]

While for most geeks the difference between a PC and a gaming PC ain't all that big, for the average consumer there is a HUGE difference. Their PC is a P4. People still use non flatscreens for screens!

Actually, interestingly, gamers were the people hanging onto CRTs long after the average consumer switched to buying TFT screens, because the lag in TFT at the time was far worse than CRT.

Re:Game hardware ain't cheap

[jpapon]

Unless they're targeting a new market, ie the people who wouldn't buy a console or gaming rig, but to whom an all-in-one device like an Apple TV with beefed up gaming capabilities appeals. It doesn't need to be as fast as a gaming rig, or even old consoles. It just needs to be fast enough to run angry birds.

The point is, they don't have to beat gaming rigs or consoles, since they're targeting a different market that they already have managed to ensnare via iOS.

They just did?

[Anonymous Coward]

Airplay mirroring on your iWhatever + apple TV = your TV is now (almost) a computer. It can play games. Go play them.

Re:They just did?

[delinear]

And that challenges games consoles how, exactly? I hate to break it to you, but the average Gears of War player isn't just biding their time until they can get Angry Birds on the big screen. I don't know if Apple devices are capable of competing with the current gen of consoles - bearing in mind they're half a decade old, maybe so, but the bigger step is convincing developers to start producing AAA titles for the devices. Ignoring the lack of a proper gaming controller, the bigger issue here is that either App store customers need to get used to paying £40 for a game instead of 99p or Apple need to convince the likes of EA to start selling their AAA titles for under a quid. That to me seems like a huge hurdle in replacing existing consoles with Apple devices.

Re:They just did?

[spire3661]

Apple has Epic in their pocket already. That is not something to dismiss lightly.

Apple is closed.

[wisnoskij]

"Apple will launch a living room product that redefines people's expectations really strongly and the notion of a separate console platform will disappear"

I am not sure what this guy is smoking but I guaranty you that anything Apple releases will not integrate into your existing Wii, Xbox 360, or anything other then products owned by Apple.

The biggest concession Apple has ever made was allowing Ipods/pad/phones to plug into PCs and i suspect that this will continue to be their biggest concession for the foreseeable future.

Re:Apple is closed.

[thetoadwarrior]

Most things for the living room are closed down. Consoles are more closed than any iMac. You can't even surf the net on the 360 just so MS can ensure you don't get anything for free. Apple would have to struggle to be more closed than consoles. I can only see then releasing something more open even if it's not as open as a traditional PC.

Re:Apple is closed.

[bloodhawk]

consoles are locked down for a reason, the cost of the hardware is deeply subsidised with the expectation on making profit from the software. For Apple To create a more open platform they couldn't really afford to subsidise the hardware as you no longer have the guarenteed software sales and would therefore need to compete with a significant price disadvantage, current gen consoles retail for under $300 and when they were initially released both the ps3 and the xbox were selling at a loss. What sort of alternative system could anyone realistically create from scratch at this point that could compete in the already crowded market at a price that would allow it to take off without taking an absolute hammering from the losses to enter the market.

Re:Apple is closed.

[Anonymous Coward]

They're the same amount of closed.

Apple lets you have a web browser app but they both require permission from the maker to run it.

Re:Apple is closed.

[thetoadwarrior]

That's not strictly true. Nintendo makes a profit on their hardware. The only time that wasn't the case is I believe after the price cut on the 3DS. They initially took a loss but I believe I've read they've got around that even.

The idea of selling hardware at a loss is a flawed model. It will be more so as software moves to digital. Keeping in mind retailers make little to nothing on hardware too who would want to sell the next iteration of the xbox of software only came through Live? So think consoles are going to have to change their model and probably become more expensive as a result.

Either way I don't think Apple will get away with selling the hardware at a loss or will even want to consider that so I think they're not going to be as cheap or there will have to be a cut somewhere. My hope at least is they're not that fussed about locking the thing down (assuming it's even a reality). I'm sure they'll want to push people to use itunes and something like the mac app store but so far the mac app store has been better than the iOS app store (I suspect the difference in hardware has to do it that) and you can find much more variety there and there's not nazi-like control over whether your app is GPL'ed or not.

Next patent war

[skyraker]

So, I can only assume that once Apple does this that Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo will start suing for patent infringement. Apple will somehow win despite it being obvious they are violating patents. Then after Apple sells a $700 console that for some strange reason millions of people buy despite not being any better than anything else, Apple will sue those three for having violated patents it has that really are the same as patents everyone else has and win.

All consoles are a closed model

[thetoadwarrior]

If Apple is releasing a competitor to consoles then I can't see how he can complain about it being closed.It certainly can't be any more closed than the xbox which you have to go through Microsoft for everything.

You can't surf the net with a browser because you might find a free game to play on your xbox and Microsoft wants to charge you to access free services like Facebook and Twitter. You can't even buy your own hard drive. You have to buy a proprietary xbox 360 hard drive.

If Apple were to release something half way between a console and a PC then it will probably be more open than the existing consoles. If it comes with a browser it's already more open than the 360.

Re:All consoles are a closed model

[delinear]

He didn't say Apple is closed, XBOX is open. He specifically said closed systems like Apple AND XBOX Live. How you could read that and interpret it as him saying Apple are somehow the worst, I don't know. All he's saying is that yet another closed system in the living room is a bad thing, it doesn'tnecessarily matter who makes it, he just chose Apple as they're the most likely candidate at this point (it takes a lot of money, developer backing and know-how to enter the console market - the only other big player who could probably do this would be Google, but their theoratical device probably wouldn't support his anti-closed box rant).

Has anyone even heard of a rumor about this?

[bryan1945]

From TFA
"Newell expects Apple to disrupt the living room platform with a new product that will challenge consoles, although he doesn't have any particular knowledge of that new product."

So, "Hey, Apple may do something that may or may not be awesome and stuff." Then he goes off about Apple being a closed platform (XBox, PS3, & Wii aren't?), but doesn't even touch on the points that Apple has no creative partners or real console experience. Apple has no gaming leverage.

I don't see what his point it is, where he's driving at, or if he may actually know something that hasn't been rumored/leaked widestream yet. Let me start a rumor- Valve will soon be working with Apple to make something "that is awesome and stuff."

Dear Gabe,

[Anonymous Coward]

This is the perfect avenue for Valve to become the next Nintendo. I can help. Let's talk.

I've been wondering...

[smash]

...why apple hasn't already made inroads into the console space.

The second gen apple TV is powerful enough for basic games (and this is what is selling bulk, at the moment), has bluetooth, and is super cheap.

I predict a new generation apple TV with iPhone 4-S hardware. Selling for around 100-150 bucks, and enabling people to purchase IOS games from the app store and play them in full high-def in the living room, possibly using i-devices as a controller, or with additional blue-tooth controllers available.

The hardware is good enough, it is cheap, and as been shown so many times as of late, all the hardware in the world doesn't matter a shit because most modern big budget games are crap - they're far too conservative and just follow the same tired old formula, and no one is willing to take a risk. The app store os a breath of fresh air n that respect.

If people could buy games to play on their home cinema for anywhere between free hand typical game RRP, with an average cost under 10 bucks (and ability to play the same content on an iPhone), they will likely sell like hot cakes. Sony and microsoft should be concerned.

Re:I've been wondering...

[ErikZ]

Apple doesn't do "Cheap".

And the last time an expensive, but high quality console hit the market, it flopped. I'm thinking of the 3DO.

One of the big reasons the Nintendo Wii did so well is that it was cheap in comparison to the other consoles.

So yes, if Apple can make a platform that's easy to make games for, high quality, AND cheaper than the alternatives, they'll clean up.

Re:I've been wondering...

[DigiShaman]

Actually, Apple can afford to be a loss-leader in this market. They already have the iOS platform combined with iTune, iCloud, and the App Store. All the ground work for successfully launching a game console and tie it all together with all their other products is already there. It's quite possible that the AppleTV3 or TV4 may have enough hardware to compete against the current generation of consoles now. But honestly, they don't need that kind of hardware because they wouldn't be going up against that market anyways currently dominate by Microsoft and Sony. If anything, Apple has Nintendo in its cross-hairs. They want to be in the same low-cost family oriented kid friendly market. They can do this and win without question. Many years later, it will be Nintendo pulling a "Sega" and coding games for Apple's platform. Not to be flippant about it, but it's so obvious as to what market Apple will go after and the methods by which to approach. If I was Nintendo, I would be running scared!

Re:I've been wondering...

[Slider451]

I would love to see game developers leverage iOS devices and the Apple TV to come up with new types of games. A board game with each player on an iOS device showing their unique player screen, linked to an Apple TV showing the board/world, player stats, standing, etc.

Re:I've been wondering...

[smash]

Thing is, the appleTV is cheap enough already and capable enough already. All that is holding it back is software. Add the ability to install IOS games on it and some drivers for seperate peripherals / i-device and they could have one out with todays hardware...

Re:I've been wondering...

[smash]

The other thing is, its one less device. It would not surprise me if they get onboard with a panel manufacturer and get them embedded into TVs, as well. When you're talking about a panel worth a couple of grand, an extra 100-150 bucks to give it internet movie streaming and the ability to play games is a pretty attractive option. One less HDMI cable, no seperate remote, etc.

Re:I've been wondering...

[DigiShaman]

Something along the likes of paying extra for that THX certification. Instead, it would be badged as having AppleTV. But unlike TVs and media players, interactive devices such as computers and game systems are constantly being upgraded. Unless they make an AppleTV cartridge (same guts found in the standalone units) specifically designed for TV set upgrades (think cable card concept), I'm not sure it's marketable.

So?

[Moraelin]

So it seems to me like he has all the reasons to want people locked in his walled garden, not in Microsoft's or Apple's.

Sorry Value, but you are Wrong

[Nyder]

Why is it suddenly everything thinks anything apple with touch will turn to gold? Since when has the corporations ever done that?

Yes, apple got lucky with their ipods, iphones & ipads. Lucky, that is all. Some maybe call it smart, visionairy, or some stupid shit like that, but it was lucky. They made products that was easy to use, looked nice, and people loved it.

Now we are talking gaming, consoles and the living room. This isn't a new market, this is an old market that has been fought in the trenches for quite awhile.

Let's look at the options.

Having a game console that uses Ipads as the controller. oh, nm, that is being done by the next Nintendo console.
How about streaming games from servers so they end users don't need expensive consoles to run it? Oh, nm, that is done by Onlive.
Let's see, how about they make a console that connects to the tv, but connects to Itunes, so you can buy/play your movies/tv/whatever from that? Oh, they already make that and it sucks? And they aren't the only one. Damn.

Are they coming up with some holographic machine that lets us see everything in real 3D Or how about a VR sim that lets us experience the gaming world.

No, apple ain't doing shit in the console market.

This is pure speculation and probably a religous hope that Apple is somehow the Holy Grail of Modern Computing devices. I'm going to guess Gabe probably need to take some insulin before he made those statements.

 

Re:Sorry Value, but you are Wrong

[mamas]

No, they're just going to push forward on:

  http://osxdaily.com/2011/06/19/ipad-2-ios-5-airplay-video-mirroring-become-a-tv-gaming-console/

Tablet (with good processing power) + Airplay (or some other video/audio transport good enough for HD with acceptable latency over a local wifi network).
Which is, connecting the dots you already have, and realizing the console in the living room can become irrelevant or not necessary.

It looks to me that the experience isn't far off from Nintendo's new Wii U controller. But, with the big difference that you'll see thousands of tittles cheap or free on the app market.

Re:Sorry Value, but you are Wrong

[pev]

Yes, apple got lucky with their ipods, iphones & ipads. Lucky, that is all. Some maybe call it smart, visionairy, or some stupid shit like that, but it was lucky. They made products that was easy to use, looked nice, and people loved it.

Have you ever noticed that people (or companies) who design good looking products that work well and are easy to use are consistently a LOT more lucky than their competitors?

BTW, is "Vision-airy" a clever reference to the Dyson Airblade or the Air Multiplier perhaps? I was just wondering as that's another splendid example of a company that got lucky but also co-incidentally designed products that are beautiful, functional and technically better than the competition and found a solid user base despite being more expensive...

~Pev

Re:Sorry Value, but you are Wrong

[ceoyoyo]

Yup Apple got lucky. With the iPod, iPhone, iPad, Air.... Wow. They sure are lucky. Over and over and over again.

Re:Sorry Value, but you are Wrong

[Voyager529]

You're missing a few things.

None of their most successful products were the first to the market. Being relatively late to market hasn't been a factor in Apple's success, because ultimately their formula tends to revolve around releasing technical products where the goal is releasing them sporting both physical dimensions and UIs that resonate with the majority, non-technical, non-Slashdot crowd with money in the bank. Luck played a part in it, but so did planning, engineering, and multiple trips back to the drawing board. I'm not an Apple fan by most metrics, but I do respect the fact that everyone I know either has an apple product, or wants one. You don't see that kind of pining for...basically anything else that plugs into a wall socket or USB port.

Game consoles might be an established 30 year old industry, but that doesn't mean that they can't bring something new to the table. For one, Apple can do what it's always done - leverage what people already have. Among the greatest selling points of the original iPhone that people forget was that it was essentially the first iPod Touch, which leveraged all the iTunes media people already had. The iPad leveraged all the iTunes media *and* all the apps people already had. If an iConsole can play iOS games, it's got years of purchased apps to work with. Additionally, Apple could make some sort of standardized controller mode, which would not only turn all the presently active iPhones/iPod Touches/iPads into control surfaces, it could breathe new life into the older models sitting in drawers collecting dust. All of that would, in turn, yield plenty of new game sales, which would open the door for more in-depth, $10 multiplayer games that would coexist with Angry Birds and Cut the Rope for use on the grocery line.

Apple sells a platform and an ecosystem, and I wouldn't put it past them to have a device with a screen that doesn't have the capacity to leverage iOS.

Re:Sorry Value, but you are Wrong

[Nyder]

No, they're just going to push forward on:

  http://osxdaily.com/2011/06/19/ipad-2-ios-5-airplay-video-mirroring-become-a-tv-gaming-console/

Tablet (with good processing power) + Airplay (or some other video/audio transport good enough for HD with acceptable latency over a local wifi network).
Which is, connecting the dots you already have, and realizing the console in the living room can become irrelevant or not necessary.

It looks to me that the experience isn't far off from Nintendo's new Wii U controller. But, with the big difference that you'll see thousands of tittles cheap or free on the app market.

yes, that is what I said, they won't be doing anything that someone else hasn't done before them. But I think the people that like gaming on ipads, aren't the type to buy a home console. They are the lowest of the low gamers. They are basicly the people who play solitare on windows. You don't need horsepower for the games they play.

Re:Sorry Value, but you are Wrong

[Nyder]

You're missing a few things.

None of their most successful products were the first to the market.....

No, they weren't (except the Ipad, really).

But what they gave was useability at a time when other companies weren't really doing that.

I own a 6th generation ipod. Why? Because it's 120gb of music space (don't care taht it plays video), in a small decent case. No one else touches that market much, 'cept like the crappy zune that always sucked.

Ipod's success is luck, because all the other companies gave up on making good mp3 players. No one even bothers to try anymore.

Iphone, well, honestly, most the smart phones before it sucked dog shit. Apple got lucky with a design that people liked, and suddenly, eveyone and their grandma started copying it. And guess what? Apple either doesn't hold the lead anymore, or is close to losing it. Was it strategic insight on their part? Probably not, but then this is the only thing I'd give on the luck part.

Ipads? While techincally they aren't the first on the scene, they are the first with a useable OS on them, unlike the other companies that tried. And yes, Apple holds the lead currently, but the market is new, and the time has been short. As soon as these other companies stop trying to make overpriced tablets to compete with the Ipad and instead make good decent tablets, you'll find the ipad will lose it's place just like the iphones. So yes, they are lucky on the ipads, which won't hold out for long, unless they change how they do stuff, and seeing as they like to overcharge for hardware, and put new hardware out every year, if not less, I don't think they are going to be doing themselves any favors.

Re:Sorry Value, but you are Wrong

[Nyder]

Yup Apple got lucky. With the iPod, iPhone, iPad, Air.... Wow. They sure are lucky. Over and over and over again.

Considering apple has been in business for 40+ years and only products that they've put out in the last 5 years are considered popular and whatnot, yes, they got lucky.

If I'm wrong, they will continue on this streak, and I'll personally apologize to the world.

So, do we wait another 40 years and see how popular their stuff is, or what? Because it's not like they've been this great since they stupidly stopped making and selling the Apple II.

Re:Sorry Value, but you are Wrong

[Nyder]

Yes, apple got lucky with their ipods, iphones & ipads. Lucky, that is all. Some maybe call it smart, visionairy, or some stupid shit like that, but it was lucky. They made products that was easy to use, looked nice, and people loved it.

Have you ever noticed that people (or companies) who design good looking products that work well and are easy to use are consistently a LOT more lucky than their competitors?

BTW, is "Vision-airy" a clever reference to the Dyson Airblade or the Air Multiplier perhaps? I was just wondering as that's another splendid example of a company that got lucky but also co-incidentally designed products that are beautiful, functional and technically better than the competition and found a solid user base despite being more expensive...

~Pev

lol, no i didn't do that on purpose, over even know about them, but that is pretty funny. =)

It was just a stupid spelling mistake on my part.

Re:Sorry Value, but you are Wrong

[mamas]

yes, that is what I said, they won't be doing anything that someone else hasn't done before them. But I think the people that like gaming on ipads, aren't the type to buy a home console. They are the lowest of the low gamers. They are basicly the people who play solitare on windows. You don't need horsepower for the games they play.

I disagree, and predicting ahead, I think you're just plain wrong. For example, I quite enjoy playing 3d racing games on my galaxy tab 10.1. Time will tell.

Re:Sorry Value, but you are Wrong

[ceoyoyo]

Perhaps you're too young to remember how popular the Apple II series and the first Macs were. You've also apparently missed that little iPod thing (introduced 10 years ago) and the iTunes Music Store (almost nine years ago) and the iMac.

Rather than wait forty years I suppose we could just do some simple statistics to figure out how likely it is that Apple's success is due purely to luck. Or just use common sense to come to the conclusion that a fifteen year rise from the verge of bankruptcy to the most valuable company in the world on a string of successes in at least three different markets isn't just luck, no matter what the strange Slashdot anti-fanboy insists.

Translation

[Anonymous Coward]

What he is really saying is that valve wants to make iOS games for AppleTV.

From My Perspective it is Done

[4pins]

The latest Mac Mini (top of the line):

• Can handle some serious gaming.
• Can stream anything.
• Has steam (limited selection of games in OSX).
• Has an HDMI port.
• Has the App Store (for even more games).
• Has Bluetooth (for wireless/remote control).
• Boots readily into Windows for even more gaming.

It is what I want connected to my TV.

Re:From My Perspective it is Done

[jedidiah]

You must be joking.

The latest Mac Mini doesn't even have a respectable GPU anymore.

Plus it's expensive. It can't even thrive as a desktop PC in a market where people are used to spending more than they would for a console. How is a Mini going to compete in a market where something like a PS3 is considered an overpriced option?

The Mini is the perfect example of why people would choose a console over PCs for gaming. Consoles represent a cheap, well understood, and STABLE platform that does doesn't do musical chairs with 3 different GPU vendors in short order.

Just getting a real game to install on a random Mini poses a problem.

Today may or may not be fine. Tomorrow, who knows?

Didn't they try the living room with Apple TV?

[Agent0013]

Didn't they try and fail to gain traction in the living room with the Apple TV product? I'm not sure what this guy is smoking, but I don't think there is too much worry about Apple challenging anything right now. Last time Steve Jobs left Apple they floundered until he came back. Now they can't get him back. They make cool products, but I think he gave direction and style to the company. Apple is more like a cult, with people wanting to be as cool as Steve is, rather than an innovative company that can make great gadgets on their own. We will see what they do over the next few years, but if I was a betting man I would short their stock after the iPhone 5 release has finished.

iPad?

[Anonymous Coward]

This is what the iPad is already doing. Apple don't care about console gamers like Uncharted or Gears of War in particular, but these kinds of games are already just about technically possible on the iPad - just without the console button controls. The iPad is already a device that is well suited to being used by people sitting or lying on a couch in their living room, it's just that people using it can read books, listen to music, watch movies, browse the web and use non-gaming apps besides just playing games. It's not *directly* challenging Nintendo, Sony or MS, but it's an example of a sort of convergence device that is simultaneously competing with multiple different types of devices at once for people's time and attention. Because of the power of the device, quickly escalating market share, incredible mind-share Apple are creating with their slick image and focus on user experience, and availability of (cheap!) software, I hope MS, Sony and Nintendo are shitting their pants and thinking hard about what their next move will be.

By the way, there are many great games for iPad and iPhone. There aren't so many of the big games that you see on consoles that are developed by large teams at games companies like Valve etc. but I'm sure it's just a matter of time before there are more big mainstream games on devices like the iPad than on XBox.

iOS5 Additions.

[PerfectionLost]

Didn't they recently add the ability to use an ios device as a remote for AppleTV? That would seemingly be the initial play on the console market by setting up the console and having people buy the components before they were even aware they were...

That and charging 400 bucks for a control without a 2 year contract (or however much with a contract) seems like a ridiculously profitable business model.

Apple, be wary about your console price point

[swan5566]

Sony made a very wrong assumption with the ps3 and how "gamers will pay it"-type attitude. There have been other, even more atrocious failures in the past as well with expensive consoles (Neo-Geo). Now, Apple has shown that the high-price tech niche market exists in other arenas, but history seems to predict that trying the Apple "business-as-usual" style here would be a humbling experience for Apple.

Apple computers are already basically consoles

[Vektuz]

They're not challenging consoles. They're becoming consoles. Locked-down hardware, closed internals, gatekeeper needing to sign software, set-top equipment... that's a console. Its not LIKE a console, it IS one.

Re:Apple computers are already basically consoles

[Mex]

Not only that, you can now mirror the display from your iPad to a HDTV (via AppleTV), so yeah, they're pretty much there already.

Nintendo is probably freaking out right now, considering their next Wii U peripheral looks like a gimped iPad, and popular DS games like Scribblenauts are being released on an Apple platform now.

Moar liek 720p

[tepples]

Keyboard and mouse on a tray table? You are obviously not an FPS player.

And you would be correct in your assumption that first-person shooters happen not to be my favorite genre.

And you try building a decent gaming PC that can do the latest games at 1080p for the price of a PS3.

Can one do the latest PS3 games at 1080p for the price of a PS3? I was under the impression that Xbox 360 games at least were running at 576p to 720p. Is the PS3's RSX GPU really that much stronger than the Xbox 360's Xenos GPU?

Re:Moar liek 720p

[SausageOfDoom]

So keyboard and mouse in front of a TV may be possible, but it's not practical and it wouldn't add anything to the experience. Unless you want to dance around in front of a camera looking like a twat, the only realistic option is something hand-held, like an xbox/ps3 controller, or a touch-screen device like an iphone or ipad. Like I said originally, this means Apple are about the only company in a position to break into the console market with any major innovation.

I doubt you can do the latest PS3 games at 1080p for the price of a PS3, but that was my point. It's not about what the PS3 or Xbox 360 are capable of at the moment. If you're Valve and launch a console now to compete with those you've already lost - you need to be launching a significantly better product, because its lifespan will overlap with whatever they come out with next, and it will need to remain competitive against those products.

So to answer the original question, Valve has an excellent catalogue and distribution mechanism for PC games, but those games are poorly suited for gaming from your couch. Given their background, their main option for innovation would be marketing themselves as an open platform, but that may not be enough - with much of their back catalogue knocked out because it's unplayable in a living room, facing an uncertain future for new mainstream releases, and carrying a price tag that would at least match that of the Xbox/PS3, it would be difficult for any gamer to justify buying such a device. I suspect that is why Valve doesn't release a Valve box - at least not in this market with such strong, entrenched competition.

If Apple do release a console, I'd expect them to play to their strengths - a pimped up apple tv running ios, locked down, tied into itunes, linked with your iphone/ipad which you could use as a controller for games which still sell for pocket change. That certainly would change the living room market, and give Valve the opportunity to release an open platform to compete with Apple rather than MS and Sony - but as it is at the moment, they simple don't have the brand awareness amongst the public to change the market themselves.

Ha, go ask the developers

[unassimilatible]

who made part of the $3B from programming for Apple. How much as the open source crowd made?

What of XBLA?

[jmikelittle]

I haven't seen any posts about the Xbox arcade or w/e it's called. The 360s and PS3s are not just about AAA titles, there is, afaik, quite a lot of smaller indie games available for both platforms and for PCs. While a lot of Apple's gaming success has come from these micro indie games, they're not the only platform for inexpensive casual games. I think it would be a lot harder than many of the commenters seem to think to claim dominence in the console market, focussed on a niche market that already exists and, from what I can gather, is thriving

Humble Couch Bundle

[tepples]

Valve has an excellent catalogue and distribution mechanism for PC games, but those games are poorly suited for gaming from your couch.

Say a developer does want to make a game suitable for the living room, but the developer isn't a big enough company to qualify under typical console developer guidelines. Would a Humble Couch Bundle be viable?

a pimped up apple tv running ios, locked down

Would it be locked down even further than iOS? It costs $1250 to get started on iOS development. It costs much more to get started developing for any Nintendo product.

Re:Humble Couch Bundle

[SausageOfDoom]

Like I said, I doubt it would be viable for Valve to release a box before Apple did something to bring that sort of game to the living room. Valve simply wouldn't have the brand, back catalogue or guarantee of future products to make their product a good enough buy to make a dent in the market. Once Apple have launched and people have got their heads around paying pennies for reasonable indie games, Valve would have a chance with a cheaper open product.

Like I said, I would imagine an apple console would be running iOS, with all that implies. Some people like walled gardens, others don't. However, once Apple's brand has cracked the market open to cheap games, Valve could step through and hoover up those who don't want to buy into Apple's locked-down ecosystem.

And of course, it's free to get started on Steam development.

Apple won't win

[onezeta]

Apple will try to dominate all of computer related things but they won't be the best. Unless they buy out some company which they or some are really good at playing.