When Apple invited writers from several popular video-game sites to attend the recent unveiling of the iPad, it led many gaming enthusiasts to wonder what Apple had up their collective sleeves – were they intending to position the new device as a serious competitor in the handheld console market?
The games featured on stage at the media event didn’t leave a whole lot to be excited about. Both EA and Gameloft made it clear they had very little time with the iPad SDK, and subsequently, the titles featured were not polished experiences – mainly demo material.
Ultimately, the iPad reveal has split gamers down the middle – with some believing that, in terms of gaming, the iPad is little more than a bigger version of the iPod Touch, while others might maintain that, though we haven’t seen a great implementation of gaming on the iPad yet – the device itself is not lacking in game-related potential.
Make sure to check out both sides of the debate – then share your thoughts in the comments.
Jason Weissman – “The iPad is a bigger, less portable, iPhone that will continue to provide casual gamers with quick puzzle-like titles but won’t capture a meaningful chunk of the market space.”
After seeing Apple’s unfortunately-named iPad unveiled last week, I was unsure as to why this device was necessary in the marketplace. The iPad is simply a super-sized iPod Touch. Granted, the device has improved specs over the current iPhone/iPod Touch technologies, but who exactly was thinking, “if only the iPod Touch was bigger and less portable…that would be something!” Plus, netbooks, with all of their deficiencies, still seem to be a better overall value and appear to have much more functionality. In fairness, the iPad did appear to be a very cool e-book reader…albeit, a very expensive e-book reader. But besides Apple fanboys, I could not figure out to whom this device would appeal.
Since the iPad’s operating system is based upon the iPhone OS, I assumed that the iPad would have its share of time-killer, simplistic, casual games. However, Apple has gone one step further and has been touting the iPad as a new gaming platform that would appeal to hardcore gamers as well. I know Apple and gaming have always been synonymous (har-har), but I have my doubts that the iPad will ever claim a significant share of the hardcore gaming marketplace, whether it be mobile or otherwise.
To date, the games on the iPhone and iPod Touch have mostly targeted the casual-gamer crowd. As a business model, this has proven to be very successful, but no must-have title has been developed for the hardcore market. Sure, there have been poor facsimiles of Modern Warfare or Mass Effect games on the iPhone, but those were just cash tie-ins. The sci-fi shooter N.O.V.A. is a quality mobile title, but no one would argue that it is in competition with console first-person shooters or that it controls as well. The most successful games on the iPhone/iPod Touch platforms have been puzzle games, racers, and strategy titles. That’s great for those who do not normally play games, but for the hardcore crowd, these titles don’t provide the same experience that is available elsewhere.
In my opinion, the iPhone OS has been limited because of its primary interface. Touchscreen-control schemes tend to be overly simplistic, very unwieldy, and do not offer tactile feedback, which makes controlling the onscreen action very imprecise. The iPad has the same limitation and does not provide an option for a mouse or controller. There is an accelerometer that can be put to good use in racing games and some puzzle games, but it isn’t as useful when playing a shooter, RPG, or adventure game. Even with racers, gamers are going to tire quickly while holding a 1.5 pound device up in the air for extended sessions in order to steer a car.
Putting aside my hardcore gamer’s concerns, the iPad will not become a successful gaming platform because of one key reason: price. The cheapest model is $499 and it only offers 16 GB of memory. A gamer could buy a 120 GB Playstation 3 for $299. Granted, the PS3 is not a mobile device, but is the mainstream gamer going to spend $200 more for a device that is inferior? And remember when the Playstation 3 had a $499 price point? Gamers who were predisposed to wanting the PS3 stayed away in droves because the cost was too high. Are they going to pay that price for an untested device from a company that has a checkered gaming past?
For those who are truly seeking a mobile gaming experience, the Nintendo DS, which retails for only $169.99, is a vastly superior platform with an incredible library of software that the iPad will never match. If the DS doesn’t appeal to you, because of its limited graphics, then the Sony PSP is still a better option than the iPad. Plus, you can surf the internet on your PSP and, unlike the iPad, you’ll actually be able to access some flash websites.
If the iPad cannot quickly develop a large install base, the big-name developers will never take the platform seriously. Instead, you will continue to see causal gaming fare and dumbed-down versions of big titles. That’s likely why Nintendo President Satoru Iwata’s scoffed that the iPad “was a bigger iPod Touch” and he showed little concern about this new entry into the mobile-gaming world. Perhaps Apple will rethink the iPad 2.0 with these concerns in mind, or find a way to at least lower the price of the device. But for now, the iPad’s gaming potential seems very limited.
Ben Kendrick – “The iPad will offer some of the industry’s most innovative gameplay experiences and be a platform of choice for creative developers.”
My initial reaction to the iPad was similar to many other people’s: sure this thing is cool, and of course I want one, but it’s not a piece of hardware that can actually deliver something I haven’t seen before.
That said, I won’t simply dismiss the device as a larger version of the iPhone because it’s an unfair comparison – Apple has truly put together a third tier product. It has a number of uses that neither a laptop or smart-phone could adequately satisfy and whether you think it’s useless or not probably depends on your needs and interests.
Since you’re reading this, video-entertainment is likely one of those such interests. Admittedly, the stage-demos for Need for Speed: Shift as well as Nova left a lot to be desired.
More than anything else, the take-aways were simple:
- The games looked great on the 9.7 inch screen.
- The A4 processor can handle high-speed, motion controlled, titles without slow down.
- There is a world of game-related possibility in the iPad.
Gaming on the iPad is an entirely new market space (with a solid lead in from iPhone development) and whether it’s immediately apparent or not – the device has a well of game-related potential. It won’t compete with this generation of consoles for the hardcore market – for the same reasons the Wii, Sony Motion Controller, or Natal won’t take much of that market any time soon. But that doesn’t mean that hardcore gamers can’t appreciate the offerings on the iPad or that the device won’t be a successful gaming platform.
When the iPhone was first announced, many of us would have scoffed at the idea of artistic and immersive gameplay experiences on a handheld device that compact – especially without previous developer muscle. We were used to the smartphone staples: Solitaire and Brickles; but, over time, the structure of the iTunes App Store allowed inexperienced, yet passionate, developers to deliver beautiful, innovative, games to potential customers at a much lower cost.
Probably one of the best examples of gaming on the iPhone is Eliss. Developed by digital media designer, Stephane Thirion, Eliss is a multi-touch title that challenges the player to “keep up harmony in an odd universe made of blendable planets.” On the iPhone, the game is both terrific looking and highly addictive – and it could not have existed on any other video-game console.
Pocket God, takes advantage of the accelerometer and multi-touch tech, but the most significant achievement is Bolt Creative’s commitment to providing complimentary “updates” every few weeks. Pocket God, while a fun experience itself, shows how rewarding developer commitment can be, as the game has benefited from an aggressive delivery of new episodic content that has been going on for over a year and a half. Shocking, especially considering the title only sets players back $0.99.
Surely, these titles aren’t epic single player campaigns with Uncharted 2-like graphics, but that doesn’t mean they aren’t terrific experiences.
That said, if innovation and non-traditional gaming experiences aren’t enough to sell you on the possibilities hidden in the iPad – titles like the recently ported Grand Theft Auto: Chinatown Wars as well as the iPhone/iPod Touch exclusive Dexter: The Game, should also testify to the fact that even if gamers aren’t expecting to see lengthy single player campaigns on Apple’s platforms, developers don’t share in their cynicism.
Add to the mix the improved functionality of the iPad – a bigger screen for better “virtual stick” control, as well as larger surface to interact with. Also, the inclusion of the keyboard dock seems to hint at other possible accessories en route for the iPad. Maybe we’ll see a “controller” accessory (I’m thinking a thin frame that might clip onto the device) that could be implemented for players who want more tactile control options.
More than anything else, gaming on the iPad will live or die by the ideas and passions of the developers who would create software for the device. I’d be surprised if most developers are merely dismissing the iPad as a big iPhone, and would guess that there are a slew of innovative game ideas out there that had been hampered by the iPhone’s small form factor or less-powerful processor.
The controversy around the iPad as a gaming platform seems to be centered around our expectations of what makes a great game experience. I would argue that any platform that can provide innovative and engaging gameplay, even if it is non-traditional, deserves a second look. If anyone had been expecting Halo 4 on the iPad – they were kidding themselves. The iPad offers developers room to do what they’ve been doing so well on the iPhone – to show us something different.
I’m excited to see what developers can do with the iPad tech. The device is only in the first generation, and will undoubtedly see numerous improvements and additions over the next few years – but I’d be willing to guess it’ll have a much larger impact on gaming than we might think.
Do you think you’ll ever game on the iPad? What direction would you like to see gaming take on the device?
The Apple iPad is set to ship on April 1st.
Loading ...
Jason rules, Ben drools.
Or something like that.
I'm with Ben on this one. People complain about the iPhone OS's depth, I don't think it's been pushed to it's limits yet. Some of the games you can get on the iPhone are great, even if they are ported from larger consoles. With a bigger screen and stronger processor, we may not know the limits just yet.
This is a new technology we aren't used to, so opinions flare. I'm sure a lot of us have seen the old forum posts from 2001 when they first announced the iPod and how many people knocked it. Guaranteed they all own iPod's now. It's been said a lot lately, and it sounds cliche (even cliche sounds cliche) but we are living in the future. We just don't quite know how to embrace it.
Speaking of new technology, let's talk about the screen itself: yes, 9.7 inches. But the viewing dimension is 4:3 — this is an old, old display type, harkening back to 14″ CRT monitors, and even old TV sets. That is, the display is not widescreen. Some say this is because the iPad is a media reader — think nytimes.com, iBooks, ePub (digital versions of newspapers and magazines). Bottom line: imagine your fave 1st-person shooter with the sides cut off.
I believe the iPad would have shown way more promise if the touch screen incorporated a multi-touch system, instead of the same touch technology as the iTouch. As you said there are certain games that wouldn't exist if it wasn't for the iTouch technology. If they had taken that a step further it would have opened doors to weird tactile games that no one would have fathomed, and I think people would have been jumping at the iPad to get to experience “the future” first.
I think the iPad has won at what Apple wanted to do, kill e-readers. Who is going to buy a kindle when they can get all the other features of an iPad? But for what we wanted it for, changing the way we play hardcore games, it failed. It will continue to play to the casual gamer.
That was a fantastic review. It is 100% true. Why buy an iPad for $499 when you can get a ps3 for $299 and you get far more, minus the touch screen. Apple should look long and hard at their prices.
Apple isn't the only company that will tablet (or slate?) gaming possible. Console makers like Sony, Microsoft, Nintendo etc. might compete with Apple to come up with their own 'Pad gaming console. Question now is: Will the PS5 or Xbox1080 be a 'Pad?
Interesting point. A Google Tablet is rumored to be in the mix as well.
the itouch is a multi-touch device. So is the iPad.
Nice rant, I think compared to an eReader like the Kindle DX it is not expensive. Just $10 more, and you can play games, do video, read in off-light conditions and all that good stuff.
Yeah, but the $499 version is the “gimped” version of the iPad. Only 16 GB and no 3G coverage. While the Kindle DX has limited internet use, it does come with free 3G coverage. Plus, you can use the Kindle DX for up to a week on one charge with wireless enabled while the iPad has a battery life of up to 10 hours.
You also can download the Kindle software to your laptop or iPhone for free even if you do not own a Kindle device.
What does the Kindle DX's free 3G really matter when you can't do anything but download books with it? It doesn't, unless you're one of those people living without internet.
I guess we'll have to see, but $489, no web browsing whatsoever, no gaming, and no apps.. 499 and you get all of the above.
16GB is plenty for hundreds of apps, thousands of songs etc… the only people buying those $400ish iPod Touches with 64gb are fools.
@ madeup6 & Jason
I don't really see the PS3 and the iPad competing for hardcore gamers – it's obvious that if someone wants a console gaming experience that the PS3 is a great deal and that the iPad wouldn't come close to meeting the gamer's expectations. That said, the iPad is more than just an e-book reader that allows for casual games – i.e. document creation, mobility, etc; though not many of these features overlap into the current hardcore gaming market.
But just because a hardcore gamer would have better value in picking up a PS3 doesn't mean there isn't innovative and non-casual gaming opportunities on the device.
… and as far as the price goes – most analysts expected the device to cost close to $1,000 and Apple delivered at $499 (or $629 with 3G). Sure, it's no cheap, but as mentioned, it's a third market device – it's not going to appeal to everyone. My argument is centered around the idea that loads of people will buy an iPad for non-gaming reasons – developers will see the potential in the device, and like the iPhone, we'll see some really great, artistic, and innovative gaming experiences that can only be done on the iPad.
In just over a year Tabulous, the makers of Tap Tap Revenge on the iPhone, were on track to rack up over $12 million in annual revenue. It's cynical to dismiss those kinds of numbers – especially when the apps the company distributes are either free or cost under $2.99.
Thanks for replying. Really, iPad isn't or shouldn't be the only tablet in market. There will be clones glutting the tablet, of course, but there will also far better alternatives to the iPad in the near future. At least, the iPad will challenge other companies to step up and create their own tablets.
In terms of gaming, of course Apple won't concentrate much on that. For now. That should be in the hands of gaming console developers who see potential in making their own gaming tablet console.
What do you think Jason?
I think you are exactly right. In addition to the rumored Google tablet, Microsoft will be moving into the tablet market with software for “Slate PC's.” Say whatever you want about Microsoft, but they offer the platform of choice when it comes to gaming on a computer-like device. Developers already feel comfortable with Windows products and companies like Valve would likely support a Slate PC if the “tablet” market takes off.
As for console developers, Nintendo is already a player in the touchscreen-gaming arena, so I wouldn't be surprised if they release something that is similar to a tablet but is more gaming-oriented. Nintendo is also smart enough to make sure that the touchscreen isn't the only interface.
The Kindle does have a basic web browser that allows access to text-only versions of many websites. You can also read newspapers.
But you are right about the rest…no gaming and no apps. I think the existence of the Kindle and other e-readers will just eat into iPad's marketshare too much for developers to want to invest much time and money.
Plus, Apple is loved for many things. Their proprietary business model is not one of them. Many people would prefer to buy an e-reader from Amazon for this reason alone. The iPad just reminds me of Apple TV in that it is not necessary and there are better and cheaper alternatives.
Ben, I agree that app gaming, and the app business in general, for the iPhone is very lucrative. But lucrative doesn't necessarily mean good. Most of the games offered on the iPhone are very inexpensive and offer a rather shallow experience. This appeals to those with attention deficit disorder and non-gamers, but I want to see games that push the interactive experience to the next level. Recent game releases like Mass Effect 2, MAG, and Heavy Rain are all pushing the industry forward, even if the end result isn't always perfect. I have not seen the same progression with the iPhone-gaming market. I don't want to play a fancier version of Bejeweled on an iPad even if it does make a lot of money
And frankly, there are better games available on Xbox Live and PSN.
Lastly, I'm not convinced that non-gamers will buy this device in large enough quantities to make cutting-edge gaming developers interested.
Besides the companies you've mentioned, there will be others. Most likely:
Sony:
Sony might see their next Playstation not just as a new gaming tablet, but also a another form of multimedia player.
Asus:
Who's “credited” with starting the netbook trend, and may look to compete with Apple with their tablets
HP:
Well, they have done touchscreen PCs and smartphones, so tablets might be next.
Dell:
Possibly.
Samsung:
Can't think of any good reason, beyond that they've become Sony's big challenger, and anything Apple have done, Sony can, and Samsung will follow.
Nokia:
Their cell phones have fared well against iPhone.
LG:
They've done phones, TV, refrigerators and washing machines. Is there anything else they will conquer?
True about Apple's business model, but with books unless something changes their model is rather open. There already is a kindle app so you can view your Kindle books on the iPhone/iPad. Also coming is the Blio Reader which again is iPhone/iPad and that is phenomenal for reading with a beautiful 3D display along with displaying associated video and other content.
So the combination of iBooks/Kindle Reader/Blio Reader while the Kindle DX just has a basic reader.. well.
I also know several people who have Kindles and have issues reading on them on the bus/train etc because of lighting conditions, and that seems to be the typical use for it.
Anyways, I'm sure Amazon is happy they can sell Kindle books on the iPad.