Feature

Opinion: Why an official gamepad makes perfect sense for Apple

Opinion: Why an official gamepad makes perfect sense for Apple
When Jim Dalrymple said "nope" to the rumour that Apple is secretly working on a dedicated gaming joypad for iOS devices, many took that as a sure sign that it's not happening.

But given the clandestine nature of Apple's reported meetings at GDC, I wouldn't have been so quick to put the kibosh on the accuracy of the report.

It's evident that the Cupertino giant is - at the very least - gauging industry reaction to such an idea, and the resounding "yep" that it got in response to Jon Jordan's exclusive story will tell Apple everything it needs to know about the massive pent-up demand out there.

For as compelling as touch and tilt gaming may be for titles designed for that input method, there's no getting away from the unarguable fact that some games are vastly more enjoyable with physical controls.

Even the most myopic Apple executive must realise this. If they don't, there are no shortage of games that have tried and failed to approximate classic twin stick gamepad controls on a touch screen.

Game rage

You only have to pick up any first or third-person shooter, or any other game where simultaneous 3D movement and precision aiming is at the core of the gameplay.

On touch screen devices, they're routinely awful to play. Without exception, they make me want to toss my very expensive piece of hardware out of the nearest window in exasperation.

Not releasing a dedicated gaming controller makes about as much sense as discouraging headphone use on the basis that the device's speaker does the job.

But much like listening to music through headphones can improve the experience, the same principle applies to using a dedicated game controller. It's not like you'll need (or even want) to use them all the time, but it's just great in specific circumstances.

What those circumstances are will be down to the user. Some might go to the hassle of carting around a controller with them all the time. Others might only use them for certain games, or for games that work really well when hooked up to a big screen at home.

Of course, various third party controllers already exist - notably ion's excellent iCade range of bluetooth controllers. Unfortunately, the traction of such devices has been utterly hobbled by Apple's bizarre rule that expressly forbids the mere mention of iCade support on the App Store.


An iPad equipped iCade

If Apple had no designs on making its own controller, what possible reason would it have for cockblocking them unless it had plans of its own?

Realise the potential

A dedicated controller doesn't have to be a mandatory requirement, merely an optional extra for those who prefer it.

Apple should have the confidence to realise that releasing one doesn't mean the touch screen dream has 'failed'. It's just that without a controller, the full potential of the iOS as a gaming platform will never be fully realised.

On that note, what is the full potential of iOS as a gaming ecosystem? From where we stand in the spring of 2013, the device penetration and installed base is absolutely vast.

People no longer talk in terms of tens of millions, or even hundreds of millions. iOS devices can reach previously unimaginable audiences of over a billion, and are becoming so powerful that they're fully capable of rivalling and - very soon - usurping the standards of current gen HD consoles.

You only have to cast a cursory glance at standard bearers like Real Racing 3 to know that the latest models are already capable of.

By the time the next iPhone and iPad models hit later this year, people will - more or less - be carrying around fantastically specced hardware that's more than capable of handling blockbuster console games, but without any blockbuster games to call its won.


Real Racing 3

EA, Activision, Take Two and Ubisoft will continue tailoring their biggest brands for iOS regardless, but those more casually minded titles will likely remain like handheld spin-offs by comparison to the 'real deal', big ticket blockbusters that command full price.

It can't have escaped the attention of the bigger publishers, either, that it won't be long before iOS devices are fully capable of running their entire back catalogue without breaking sweat.

The main stumbling block? Controls, again. What they would give to be able to tap into that vast installed base without having to entirely repurpose their games every time.

TV times

The issue of Apple TV is, of course, another reason why Apple will be considering a dedicated gamepad.

If and when it does eventually get around to releasing a new Apple TV box (and/or fully integrated smart TV), it's highly likely games will feature as part of the content offering. Why? Because money talks and Apple makes vast fortunes out of selling games.

It knows it can command an even bigger slice of the pie, and it knows the hardware can handle it.



If Apple TV does turn out the way most people expect, then releasing a dedicated controller will help kill two birds with one stone. Not only will it ensure that Apple TV games can rival traditional console games, but it also means that all iOS devices can also benefit.

The beauty of such a device is that it doesn't rely on anything in particular to succeed. The iPad is already huge, as is the iPhone, as is the iPod touch, and the last few iterations already handle TV out and/or Airplay sharing.

Assuming Apple can fix the lag issues of current models, the potential is there for iOS devices to effectively become the dominant game 'consoles' of the next generation.

With so many consumers already locked into Apple's content ecosystem, and already buying games in great numbers, it wouldn't take much for Apple to take a bite out of Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo's lunch.

The games market is there for the taking if Apple wants it. It's that simple.

There's no such thing as 'not enough time' in Kristan's world. Despite the former Eurogamer editor claiming the world record for the most number of game reviews written before going insane, he manages to continue to squeeze in parallel obsessions with obscure bands, Norwich City FC, and moody episodic TV shows. He might even read a book if threatened by his girlfriend.

Comments

7 comments
View options
  • Order by latest to oldest
  • Order by oldest to latest
  • Show all replies
Fraser Ross MacInnes Product/Design Director at Danke Games
I think 'iOS version of the Gamestick' is pretty close to what we'll (hopefully) end up seeing from Apple on the game front. I hope so - the whole hardware paradign for consoles is 25 years old now and needs disrupting, badly.
Simon Edis Game Designer at Ezone.com
I hope the new AppleTV is an iOS version of the GameStick with an added bonus that you could also pair the controller to an iDevice.
Kristan Reed Consultant at Hit Detection
Totally agree Tim. Wii U proves you can do this lag-free, and Apple will know that. I really do think Apple will release a pad that does exactly what you're asking.

Timothy Polumbo
What we need are 2 things:

1. Bluetooth airplay for video games to alleviate the lag issue we all are seeing with the current Wifi airplay option.

2. A game pad controller that connects to the iPhone/iPad/ATV vai bluetooth as well for feedback while you game on your ATV -- because you can't watch the screen and the iPhone/iPad/iPod at the same time.

So what we would have is the iOS device acting as the console, the ATV acting as a wireless connector to the TV, and the gamepad acting as... well the gamepad.

I would actually buy a controller if both of the above points were implemented - but I will not settle for less. I don't want a gamepad to just control my iDevice, that is just stupid! Touch controls, contrary to what "some" people are saying, are perfect - there is no need to have a dedicated peripheral controller device to that only pairs to a handheld device - redundant? Yep!

Bluetooth + ATV + iDevice + gamepad = awesome

Take out any of those variables and its a complete waste.

tim

Phil M
@James Andrew

Apple doesn't need to do any of what you suggested. They merely need to set up the ecosystem to allow dev's to develop games for the TV and using a controller and the market will take care of the rest. But anyway even if it will be "under-powered" compared to any new consoles, how often does MS and Sony iterate their products compared to Apple? Any updated version of the Apple TV will probably be more powerful than a latest consoles within 2 years.

Who know's if Apple is going to upgrade Apple TV or release a controller, maybe they just don't want to move into that space, but the point is, is that it's there for the taking if they choose too.
Keith Andrew
"This is like the third time you've run a near-identical article."

Eh?
James Coote
This is like the third time you've run a near-identical article.

I think the problem is if Apple go for a less powerful machine at the same/similar price to a PS4 or xbox720, it'll inevitably compare poorly to the new gen consoles, whilst at the same time, if they go for a lower spec/lower price model, it doesn't really fit with Apple's aspirational image.

And if they go high spec, they won't be able to make the huge hardware margins they do on other devices unless they have a super-premium price point (like $1000+). That will put off hardcore gamers when they can just buy PS4 / xbox720 cheaper, whilst it'll appear way too expensive for average/casual consumers considering they just want to play farmville and watch netflix