Apple vs. Nintendo

Let's have a serious discussion about Apple, and how they'll probably take over handheld gaming in 2018.

The Switch has been a huge success for Nintendo. No one can dispute that. But they've laid out a blueprint for Apple to take their place in the handheld market:

>release new iPad with Joy-Con ripoff
>get AAA developers to make exclusive games
>market it as a higher quality Switch alternative

No one thought a tablet with controllers could be a huge success. Now that Nintendo has proven them wrong, the market is ready for Apple to do it better. With thousands of games already on the App Store, the ability to use it as a normal tablet, and the Apple brand as a seal of quality, there's no reason anyone would buy a Switch over a gaming iPad.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/xuEmh3DFjEU
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

99% of the app store is flaming garbage though.

>Apple
>seal of """"""""quality""""""""

Apple would literally be a repeat of the Ouya

>99% of the app store is flaming garbage
It doesn't matter. Even if only 1% is great, there's still more good games on iOS than on Switch.

Also, consider the value. A good game on the App Store costs $2.99. On Switch, you pay $60. You get more fun for your money with an iPad.

I can't wait to pre-order Angry Birds!

Yeah as the pippin worked out great.
What a dumb thread.

In what way? Apple is a respected brand. And the Switch has proven you can have a great gaming experience on mobile hardware.

A gaming iPad would have better specs, be smaller and lighter, support apps and web browsing, and ship with thousands of games already playable. How would it not be a serious Switch competitor?

Here's my counter argument
Ouya

How's that Apple TV you have there?

>Yeah as the pippin worked out great.
Failing once in the past doesn't mean they'll fail again. Apple made a failed PDA once, so by your logic they shouldn't have made the iPhone.

Apple is the most desired brand in the world. People WANT a gaming device from them.

The major issue with mobile gaming is that even with the portable hardware, you have issues with ensuring that your user carries consistent controls that they will bother using and the fact that specs are far from uniform.

>Controller
Everything right now is bluetooth, which certainly is becoming easier to swallow, but you still have to keep it charged and that is a barrier to getting consumers to accept it, in addition to cost.

The switch allows them to charge attached to the system- a form factor the iPhone and iPad can't copy- and that's a big difference in ensuring people carry the things around. Also, your first set to play it portable is part of the cost of the actual system when you invest in, and that matters too.

>Hardware
Different iPhones have different specs, and various updates have drastic impacts on performance. You basically have to develop to the lowest denominator (read: weak) in order to make a game that everyone in the audience can play.

>Cost of Games
Most iPhone games are freemium. You have a tremendous difficulty in getting iOS players to hand over more than a few bucks, save a handful of whales. It's really a different market than the core that buys and plays dedicated systems.

Is there room for Apple to encroach? Sure. But the markets don't overlap as nearly as strongly as you suggest.

The iphone is not a pda device

Not the same thing. The Apple TV is meant to be a streaming device, and it's a successful one from that perspective.

This thread is stupid.

>a form factor the iPhone and iPad can't copy
Apple has the finest engineers in the industry. I'm sure they could figure something out.

>You basically have to develop to the lowest denominator (read: weak) in order to make a game that everyone in the audience can play.
Nintendo has proven that graphics don't matter. People loved the Wii and DS.

>Most iPhone games are freemium.
So what? Freemium games are the future of the games industry. The $60 game is a dying business model.

apple isn't a competator to the main 3.
if it wasn't for xbox microsoft wouldn't be either. muh halo you say? no, it hasn't been good in a while.

>A good game on the App Store costs $2.99
Meh, it really depends, most of the times good games cost around 9-10€ like xcom. at that point I prefer to play it on pc with less loading time.

I played a lot more fun games on my iPhone last year than my PS4. Sup Forums doesn't understand that mobile games are really good now.

Good fucking luck trying to get the masses to pay over 600 dollarydoos on a Switch bootleg with no phone plan

>sony isn't a competator to the main 3.
>if it wasn't for genesis sega wouldn't be either. muh sonic you say? no, it hasn't been good in a while.

This is what you sound like.

What games? For real, I won't immediately dismiss your list, I'm genuinely curious. (No sarcasm intended)

>Apple has the finest engineers in the industry. I'm sure they could figure something out.

Not that they can't, but that they won't.

Also, apple's design team has gotten complacent and incompetent in Job's absence. Look at the how the newer apple mice or the Apple Pencil charge and tell me that it's a competent design. Tell me that the fucking notch as a visually distinctive element is something that Steve Jobs would have tolerated.

>Nintendo has proven that graphics don't matter. People loved the Wii and DS.

It isn't just graphics. Memory, for one, would be a huge factor. All existing iOS products lack any interface to effectively contain the kinds of space a game can take up. Nintendo's great at optimizing and Mario Odyssey still takes up 5.7 gig. How do you tell a 32 gig iPhone 5 user to spare that kind of space for a single game?

You don't. Now you're talking a peripheral where you are able to insert cartridges, where you have to wirelessly transmit the data or use the lightning port, which is already used for both charging and headphones.

Of course, newer models going forward could be designed with gaming considerations, but then you're ostracizing all older systems and that murders your potential market.

Or you gimp the games to the current shitty situation where the iPhone and Switch occupy separate markets. Pick your poison.

>So what? Freemium games are the future of the games industry. The $60 game is a dying business model.

Even if you were right the current Switch Market, while dying, wants the $60 game clearly, or they wouldn't have bought it. Thus there isn't much for apple to gain by trying to steal it.

I've said this about comparisions to vita and I'll say it again with apple:
The reason why nintendo gimmicks work is because they force every developer to use it, and its success depends on whether or not the market & 3rd party plays along.
the switch is successful because its gimmick is surprisingly, a non-gimmick, at least on the developer side of things, as long as your game runs on it, it already fits in the entirely new ecosystem.
The app store, (and the vita), on the other hand, is gonna be forcing the new product to attach to their prexisting ecosystem, and expect everyone to follow. People aren't gonna do that. WiiU tried to do this and failed. An example from apple could be the Apple TV, did anyone buy that as a home console?
If you're trying to push something, you can't just suddenly tempt to nudge a thing into their lives, it's gotta make a huge impact in this case.

That's as likely as the Apple TV taking over the console market.

I wanted to know too actually

>Costs 2.99
People don't want to buy those garbage app games. People don't want to buy any app games. The most they can get are microtransactions. The proof is in the pudding, people want to buy quality. Which is why the 60 dollar games sell, and the app makers are desperately trying to milk the whales for money.

Little known fact:

The supply issues earlier this year for the Nintendo Switch were caused because the screens for the Switch were made at the same factory as the screens for Apple's new phones. Apple got priority over Nintendo, and the Switches got fucked.

And smart phones have been causing the prices of RAM to skyrocket too.

Because the only people paying for mobile games are not going to spend money to buy a piece of hardware to play them.

If they can’t play it on their phone then they won’t bother with it.


And besides, indie games on the Switch are leagues better than any game on the mobile app stores.

What are some legitmately FUN mobile games? Half of them are skinnerbox gacha garbage where you just watch numbers passivly increasing while rolling the dice occasionally, the other are poor attempts at action games played with a fucking touchscreen.

user I don't think that's really little known, I've seen people bring that up in countless console-war threads

Depends on what kind of game you are looking for, a grindy game or a linear and quite short game.

There's also a NAND shortage, and both Apple and Samsung have better access to NAND than Nintendo. Nintendo's production is pretty much entirely in the lull between production of the next iPhone/Galaxy.

>People actually think the switch design is the reason for its success
Ever heard of EXCLUSIVES buddy boy? It would have sold like shit if it did not have a couple of great games from well known franchises.

Any other company that sell premium mobile game other than Capcom? They recently ported MH stories and in HD
youtu.be/xuEmh3DFjEU

The Wii U had exclusives too. The form factor undoubtedly contributes to Nintendo's success.

>People don't want to buy those garbage app games.
On the contrary, successful mobile games can sell millions of copies.

_ ____ __ ____ ____ _____

it's mostly in the marketing, the switch has been really aggressive on marketing whilst the wii u's marketing (and branding) was garbage.

Mobile gaming is feast or famine. You can gamble it all and make it rich, or you might spend a ton and go broke.

It's an entirely different model for development than premium games, and there's a hell of a lot more risk involved.

The best gatcha mobile game is Fire Emblem Heroes in my opinion.
It gives you free shit all the time, and since its not heavily PVP focused, (but still has PVP as a bit of fun on the side), you can easily amass a bunch of 5*units and coast through the rest of the game's content which is constantly updated and cycled through.

On the other hand, the WiiU didn't have a traditional 3D Mario or a mainline Zelda.

Doesn't every paid game on mobile fail miserably?

>the "3D Land/World aren't traditional 3D Mario" meme

>a-apple will save us and take out nintendo for us bros!!
neck yourselves already this is painful to watch

I don't see what that has to do with anything, also, it did - 3D World may not have been traditional by 3D mario standards, but was faithful to traditional 2D mario platforming,
whilst botw is still on the system regardless of it not being exclusive

Galaxy isn't a traditional 3D Mario as well, but it's a lot better than 3D Land/World

Final Fantasy Record Keeper is pretty solid.

>separate levels, no going back for a different objective other than collecting stars or whatever

>gutted the moveset of the player

>locked camera

It's a 3d mario in the sense that it's 3d and a mario game. Otherwise it's just a 2d mario with a little more perspective.

Apple won't compete with Nintendo for the portable gaming market because they lack the software and the mindshare.

I think the biggest issue with the WiiU is that it had nothing uniquely marketable about it except for Off-TV play which people liked about it but Nintendo didn't effectively play up to because they knew the WiiU tablets range was only like 6ft from the console. Their Async multiplayer push backfired dramatically as people didnt' want new ways to play, they want new ways to play games. There is a significant difference there.

The Switch takes everything people actually liked about the WiiU and made it better, and they advertised that fact.
"Hey look at this console, its also a handheld, you can use it wherever and with whoever you like. But you can also plug it into your TV and get comfortable with it, and it works with the amiibos you lile to collect too".
It is no wonder its doing so well. Its the perfect console for travellers, and for party goers.
Its easy. Thats the best part about it. You and your friend got a Switch and a couple copies of a game? Boom .Now you can play together in the room but on your own device, or on one device with two controllers like a console. It's also like a 3DS but better since the 3DS often disconnected randomly like the DS did.

>mfw $800 handheld

That's just level design. 3D Land and World are literally just full games based off the "Bowser in.." and "Secret of..." levels.

it was a mistake to not market the gamepad like the DS but for your TV, with games having mapscreens and inventories conveniently on the gamepad screen - which imo was the best use of the gamepad, rather than the bizarre "asynchronous multiplayer" shit they tried that didn't work well at all. Off-TV play was also too inconvenient as each game had a different way to access it: sometimes you'd have to go into the settings of the game to toggle it, other times you press - to toggle; sometimes the gamepad mirrors the tv screen by default; the worst is when it has off-tv play but doesn't mention it anywhere (looking at you, sonic racing transformed; took me weeks before I realized you could swipe on the gamepad touchscreen to enter off-tv play). It's a shame the switch will never have both screens together for games like mario maker and splatoon, as I liked how the wii u did those - although I must admit, splatoon 2's solution to it is pretty elegant by how it uses the motion controls to quickly click on a character to superjump to instead.

Nobody would buy a 2000$ gaming tablet with shit games
>Good games in the all store...
There are no good games in the app store
>Implying anyone wants freemium games

I don't think actual gaming enthusiasts are going to go out their way to buy a shitty $800 handheld that gets re-released every year, and even if they did, which they won't, what does Apple have?

At worst the people behind Clash of Clans make a lot of money.

Comgrats, OP. You are the dumbest poster of 2018 so far.

The problem with that feature is that its a hard sell. They sort of tried to get gamers and developers excited about that too. You got some ubisoft and EA ports that used the tablet in that way, and you got stuff from Nintendo like Zelda remakes and Pikmin 3 utilising it, and they rereleased a bunch of DS games as Virtual Console to show of the independent nature of both screens.
But nobody was willing to rebuy old games for the sake of a few minor extra gameplay QOL features. Portability however IS a big rebuy feature.
Theres a market put there for console-style gaming on the go. The PSP proved that, but Sony failed to impress with the Vita. They could have made it work but they made it less appealing as time went on: Proprietary memory, less and less first party exclusives, a seperate Vita TV model that was cheaper but had poor compatibility with older software. Just lots of niggly little things that makes gaming on it harder.
That's why the Switch works its so damn easy to use and do whatever you like with. Its branding is amazing, you can get full carry cases and even backpacks with the logo on it.
As long as Nintendo maintain their momentum and release solid game after game for it, it will sell almost as well as the PS4, because it fufills an area of the market where there is no other big competitor.

I still say, as minor as its sounds, I feel the switch's strongest feature (besides the obvious portability), is how its sleep mode works. I don't think any other console has done that so well before, as putting switch in sleep mode keep you exactly where you left off in whatever game you were playing, regardless of what game it is; so when you turn it back on, you continue immediately within seconds back to what you were doing (by default it even puts you back into what you were last playing). This pairs excellently with the portability of the system, especially whilst travelling around a lot and you know you can't sit down for hours so you play just around an hour of a game then put it in sleep mode to play later. Any other console I can think of off the top of my head would take at least 10 seconds to boot into by comparison, usually without keeping your game running either.