Download Squad fails in the most hilarious way possible.
Can Apple really see themselves competing, with a minuscule desktop market share and 25% of the smartphone sector?
Desktop gaming? We’ll see. Obviously, Valve thinks that the Mac market is worth going after and they seem to know a thing or two about moving games. I’m glad that games have been returning to the Mac again for a few years.
Mobile gaming? The iPhone grosses the most games on any phone ever, including some that are by far the best mobile phone games ever. Nokia’s N-”Sidetalking”-Gage is the closest historical competitor and the only credible gaming phone predecessor and even it didn’t ever attract this level of attention, talent or quality. Windows Mobile has had forever to gain a stronghold, and while I have actually enjoyed playing Jawbreaker on a Windows Mobile device on occasion, I don’t see how this argument that you’re trying to make plays out. Regardless of their percentage of the smartphone or overall sector, I don’t see any other phone that competes with the iPhone with regards to gaming.
Steve Jobs has announced Apple’s intent to move into mobile gaming, but can you really see developers siding with the iPhone when Windows Phone 7 is just around the corner? The iPhone has an installed base of about 9 million users in the USA — would you like to guess at the combined figures of Windows and Xbox?
Wow. Do you even know yourself what you’re measuring? Did you switch the comparison halfway through when you realized that even Windows Mobile Classic is now behind iPhone OS in market share; slightly if you consider iPhone only, but by a mile if you also count iPod touch?
I won’t discount the possibility of Xbox and Windows making a difference. But the original Xbox hit the market eight years ago. If Microsoft wanted to parlay this onto the mobile games market, they’ve had five and a half years from the US launch of the Xbox to do so undisturbed, and yet another 18 months before the iPhone third-party apps market opened up. “Microsoft will crush Apple because Microsoft is huge” isn’t a convincing argument in the face of Microsoft having had that opportunity for the past decade, and in the face of Apple actually being huge in the market you’re flailing your arms around about.
Let’s wind down with a bit more level-headed analysis from Mr. Thurrott, in the light of today’s Steam announcement:
[quoting a Steam press release] “Steamworks for the Mac supports all of the Steamworks APIs, and we have added a new feature, called Steam Play, which allows customers who purchase the product for the Mac or Windows to play on the other platform free of charge. For example, Steam Play, in combination with the Steam Cloud, allows a gamer playing on their work PC to go home and pick up playing the same game at the same point on their home Mac. We expect most developers and publishers to take advantage of Steam Play.”
Pfft. See my previous comments about Microsoft trying this as well.
Here, Paul links to some earlier sane analysis. There’s only one problem: Paul correctly took Microsoft to task for attempting this across their own platforms — Windows, Windows Phone 7 and Xbox 360. Valve’s approach involves two gaming computers; Microsoft’s approach involves several different tier devices. I may agree that a good gaming PC and an Xbox 360 could perform on par, but if you’re going to play on a Windows Phone 7 phone, that game is going to have to be svelte enough to run well on a 1 GHz ARM processor, which means that the game will be restricted to the smarts of a smartphone-level device on Windows and on Xbox 360 if it really is going to be the same exact game. You will also have bought that lowest-common-denominator for multiple platforms. Right.
If this is directly comparable to just switching between two different gaming computers and getting a free download of the game for the other computer, I’d like to see how.
The biggest impediment to the success of Mac gaming is that Apple really doesn’t sell anything resembling a “gaming” machine.
The Mac Mini and iMac make a lot of performance tradeoffs to minimize heat output and power use, and even the Mac Pro wasn’t really designed to provide an ideal game machine for the price.
By Joel Bernstein · 2010.03.09 01:05
@Joel I don’t see what’s happening here as Valve hoping anyone switches from PC to Mac because Steam is on the Mac now. The target for Valve (Apple is not involved in this decision, mind you. It’s just a Valve software release, after all.) is attracting people who don’t want to install Bootcamp (or hadn’t even considered it), and making it easier for Mac gamers who MIGHT install Bootcamp anyway to play their games, both of which are not-insignifigant markets if my friends and I are any indication.
Granted, we’re a weird group, but we spend on this stuff, and I think Steam is just the right platform for it.
By Phil Nelson · 2010.03.09 03:57
At any rate, it’s personally one fewer reason I have to boot into Windows. Aside from games, I only need Windows around for testing websites. VMWare can handle that pretty well.
By Phil Nelson · 2010.03.09 03:59
While I find the prospect of agreeing with Paul Thurrott unnerving, at least it’s not Rob Enderle. I’m also skeptical about the potential for turning a crank and spitting out the “same” game for a handheld device, a game console, and a PC. I guess the people who would be satisfied with the compromised experience this would likely entail aren’t buying Macs or iPhones, though, so maybe I’m wrong.
If Sebastian Anthony really believes that one Microsoft demo means impending doom for Apple, he’s either being thick or deliberately trolling. [Clicking on his name, we see that after predicting the end of Apple gaming on March 7, he gushes about Valve bringing Steam to the Mac platform on March 8. Wait, what?]
Joel: “The biggest impediment to the success of Mac gaming is that Apple really doesn’t sell anything resembling a “gaming” machine.”
The market for gamers who will buy a high-end PC to run the latest envelope-pushing games is well-served. The market for Mac owners who want to play a decent game has historically been underserved. It’s good to see Valve join Blizzard in recognizing the potential.
By Russell Finn · 2010.03.09 04:06
Apple is more likely to leverage its takeover of the mobile device market into domination of the desktop market than Microsoft is to succeed with the opposite.
Call that a hunch if you like, because I am in no way a market expert, just a keen observer of human activities.
[Note: I have developed for Apple, Microsoft, Sega, Nintendo, and Sony systems. I love good hardware, not Steve Jobs.]
By Amagrammer · 2010.03.09 18:24
Amagrammer: that’s it exactly. Microsoft has been terrible at leveraging. It has a remarkable history with being anti-competitive and strong-arming (and is by no means the only company in the world to do these things) but it’s been pretty bad, in relation to the number of opportunities and sheer breadth of possible cross-pollination, at convincing people that if you liked Microsoft X, you’re going to love Microsoft Y.
By Jesper · 2010.03.09 19:44
Jesper: Whereas Apple has been pretty damn good at it.
iPod -> Nano/Shuffle -> Touch -> iPhone -> iPad -> ???
That’s not just a release sequence. A lot of people bought an iPod as their first Apple product and have just naturally fallen into buying the rest as they came out.
By Amagrammer · 2010.03.09 20:08
Amagrammer: The natural answer to your ??? is, of course, the Mac.
By Nic · 2010.03.11 01:27
Re #8: Ding ding ding.
By Amagrammer · 2010.03.11 09:03