Another week, and another technology giant has announced its plans to construct an enormous, impossible-to-avoid, pipeline, that's going to pump raw gaming slurry direct into our unwitting, slack-jawed faces.
This time it's Apple - a behemoth of unprecedented girth - whose traditional hardware-based origins are showing the first indications of decrepitude.
Thus, it is taking a sideways step away from hardware, and backing original, exclusive, content, announcing Apple TV+ (a content repackaging thing driven by human curators and algorithms, that's more Amazon Prime than Netflix), Apple News+ (doesn't matter what it is; everyone was too distracted by the man in the Clockwork Orange jumpsuit), and Apple Arcade (an ad-free, subscription service, that'll boast 100 exclusive games at launch).
Apple has been rumoured to be launching all of these things for a while, but the timing of Apple Arcade - a week after the unnecessarily controversial reveal of Google's Stadia - makes it significant.
Unlike Stadia, Apple's service will require you to download the games, and both are launching this autumn, albeit aimed seemingly at very different audiences.
This time it's Apple - a behemoth of unprecedented girth - whose traditional hardware-based origins are showing the first indications of decrepitude.
Thus, it is taking a sideways step away from hardware, and backing original, exclusive, content, announcing Apple TV+ (a content repackaging thing driven by human curators and algorithms, that's more Amazon Prime than Netflix), Apple News+ (doesn't matter what it is; everyone was too distracted by the man in the Clockwork Orange jumpsuit), and Apple Arcade (an ad-free, subscription service, that'll boast 100 exclusive games at launch).
Apple has been rumoured to be launching all of these things for a while, but the timing of Apple Arcade - a week after the unnecessarily controversial reveal of Google's Stadia - makes it significant.
Unlike Stadia, Apple's service will require you to download the games, and both are launching this autumn, albeit aimed seemingly at very different audiences.
NO COMPETITION
It needs no pointing out, but Apple Arcade is not a competitor to Stadia. Nor is it a competitor to existing PCs and consoles. This isn't so much a new format, as Apple finding a new way to squeeze more from the colossal user base of its existing platforms.
Furthermore, given that the games on offer will be playable across the entire family of Apple products (and, indeed, with up to six family members for a single subscription fee), there will be a limit to the scale of these games. While there are plenty of great, and gorgeous, titles already available on the App Store - far too many of them buried beneath the utter lack of quality control on there, unfortunately - don't expect Assassin's Creed Jamboree or Red Dead 3.
However, Apple is making some insanely big claims for Apple Arcade; "Games that redefine games" no less, "Where storytelling and design are pushed further than ever before"...
Heck, Apple has even unveiled some of the games that are going to appear when the service launches, including Where The Cards Fall ("A captivating narrative puzzle that’s also a compelling coming-of-age story..."), The Pathless (a "surreal and mythic adventure, a hunter and an eagle explore a vast forested island to dispel a curse that grips the world"), Lego Brawls (a Lego spin on Super Smash Bros, seemingly), Beyond A Steel Sky (a sequel to the classic 1994 point and click adventure), and Sonic Racing (needs no explanation).
In short: a mix of games from well-regarded indie developers (Monument Valley's Ken Wong), larger studios (Konami, Sega, Bossa Studios), and total randos (Hironobu Sakaguchi, creator of Final Fantasy, Sim City's Will Wright...).
Regrettably, it's hard to buy into Apple's claim that it'll make iOS "the premier gaming platform for players of all ages", given that most people play App Store games while on the train, ignoring their spouse (hello, dear; I know you're reading), or having a poo.
It needs no pointing out, but Apple Arcade is not a competitor to Stadia. Nor is it a competitor to existing PCs and consoles. This isn't so much a new format, as Apple finding a new way to squeeze more from the colossal user base of its existing platforms.
Furthermore, given that the games on offer will be playable across the entire family of Apple products (and, indeed, with up to six family members for a single subscription fee), there will be a limit to the scale of these games. While there are plenty of great, and gorgeous, titles already available on the App Store - far too many of them buried beneath the utter lack of quality control on there, unfortunately - don't expect Assassin's Creed Jamboree or Red Dead 3.
However, Apple is making some insanely big claims for Apple Arcade; "Games that redefine games" no less, "Where storytelling and design are pushed further than ever before"...
Heck, Apple has even unveiled some of the games that are going to appear when the service launches, including Where The Cards Fall ("A captivating narrative puzzle that’s also a compelling coming-of-age story..."), The Pathless (a "surreal and mythic adventure, a hunter and an eagle explore a vast forested island to dispel a curse that grips the world"), Lego Brawls (a Lego spin on Super Smash Bros, seemingly), Beyond A Steel Sky (a sequel to the classic 1994 point and click adventure), and Sonic Racing (needs no explanation).
In short: a mix of games from well-regarded indie developers (Monument Valley's Ken Wong), larger studios (Konami, Sega, Bossa Studios), and total randos (Hironobu Sakaguchi, creator of Final Fantasy, Sim City's Will Wright...).
Regrettably, it's hard to buy into Apple's claim that it'll make iOS "the premier gaming platform for players of all ages", given that most people play App Store games while on the train, ignoring their spouse (hello, dear; I know you're reading), or having a poo.
IMMERSIVE
What is interesting to me, is that Apple Arcade is going big on gameplay and "immersive stories", and -wisely - not trying to sell the raw, graphical power, of the games it intends to offer. Which, in some respects, is the antithesis of what most big, console/PC, triple-A games do.
This is, to a degree, music to my ears. Nonetheless, just as how its Apple TV+ unveiling - and its well-paid celebrity spokespeople - all reeked of trying to provoke an emotional response, without wishing to default to knee-jerk cynicism I'm not sure that I want to hear this from a corporate whale that pays less tax than I do. Even if their message is wrapped up in a load of touchy-feely language.
It's marketing, ultimately, and marketing that is pretending not to be marketing, by contemptuously attempting to do a number on our feelings. Most of us know you want to make loads of money; stop handing it to us bound in the skin of a Hallmark greetings card.
Nevertheless, Apple has already declared iOS the world's most successful gaming platform, and - indeed - it's the only way my wife and most of my kids ever play games (their current addictions include Mahjong City Tours and Helix Jump - the latter of which is also my go-to on-the-way-to-a-meeting game... though the in-game ads are getting a bit much).
The games available on iOS are limited by the hardware - and that's unlikely to change with Apple Arcade - but I like that some iOS games make a virtue of this. To my jaded eyes, something like Monument Valley is every bit as stunning as a graphically-rich console game. For many players, the lack of bells and whistles is irrelevant; it was Fortnite's release on mobile devices which really drove the game's ubiquity, with over 100 million iOS downloads in its first five months.
As rare as that sort of success is, if a few more games can get close to that sort of breakthrough, Apple Arcade really could be a contender, and finally be a gaming platform that isn't just for your mum and the village dunce.
What is interesting to me, is that Apple Arcade is going big on gameplay and "immersive stories", and -wisely - not trying to sell the raw, graphical power, of the games it intends to offer. Which, in some respects, is the antithesis of what most big, console/PC, triple-A games do.
This is, to a degree, music to my ears. Nonetheless, just as how its Apple TV+ unveiling - and its well-paid celebrity spokespeople - all reeked of trying to provoke an emotional response, without wishing to default to knee-jerk cynicism I'm not sure that I want to hear this from a corporate whale that pays less tax than I do. Even if their message is wrapped up in a load of touchy-feely language.
It's marketing, ultimately, and marketing that is pretending not to be marketing, by contemptuously attempting to do a number on our feelings. Most of us know you want to make loads of money; stop handing it to us bound in the skin of a Hallmark greetings card.
Nevertheless, Apple has already declared iOS the world's most successful gaming platform, and - indeed - it's the only way my wife and most of my kids ever play games (their current addictions include Mahjong City Tours and Helix Jump - the latter of which is also my go-to on-the-way-to-a-meeting game... though the in-game ads are getting a bit much).
The games available on iOS are limited by the hardware - and that's unlikely to change with Apple Arcade - but I like that some iOS games make a virtue of this. To my jaded eyes, something like Monument Valley is every bit as stunning as a graphically-rich console game. For many players, the lack of bells and whistles is irrelevant; it was Fortnite's release on mobile devices which really drove the game's ubiquity, with over 100 million iOS downloads in its first five months.
As rare as that sort of success is, if a few more games can get close to that sort of breakthrough, Apple Arcade really could be a contender, and finally be a gaming platform that isn't just for your mum and the village dunce.
PAUSE
The thing which really gives me pause about Apple Arcade is that it's launching with 100 exclusive games. For me, that devalues everything across the board, and presents those who sign up with a bewildering array of choice. There's a reason why the best restaurants limit the options on their menu, and why Hungry Horse is never going to win any Michelin stars (not helped by its name suggesting that you're going to be eating a load of reeking mulch out of a trough).
Sure, build that catalogue over time, but to launch with 100 games is just insane to me. Why would you do that? More to the point... why would you agree to put your games on it?
Admittedly, Apple is offering to help develop and fund creators' projects - essentially a step towards Apple becoming its own games studio - which is something, and I guess there's a certain argument to be had that there's no real viable alternative. I mean, at least this offers the backing of a major entity, and I guess if Apple can wave enough money at Oprah and Spielberg to sway them into posing as a corporate shill, then Little Johnny Indie developer would need far less convincing.
Ultimately, I cautiously welcome Apple's move, but it also highlights that there's just so much content available now. Frankly, unless you get very, very lucky, the game you've invested so much time, money, and love into is just going to disappear into the ether.
If Apple can make it financially worthwhile that'll take the edge off, to a degree, but most indie creators, I would assume, are making their games from a place of passion, and want them to be played by as many people as possible.
Is launching on a platform with 99 other games the best way of achieving that? Dunno. But is punting them out onto Steam any better? We shall see.
One way or another, with Apple, Google, and - let's face it - Amazon poised to invest in gaming, Sony and Microsoft are facing the first real challenge to their dominance of the industry. The next few years are going to see the sort of shake-up we've not witnessed since the original PlayStation.
The thing which really gives me pause about Apple Arcade is that it's launching with 100 exclusive games. For me, that devalues everything across the board, and presents those who sign up with a bewildering array of choice. There's a reason why the best restaurants limit the options on their menu, and why Hungry Horse is never going to win any Michelin stars (not helped by its name suggesting that you're going to be eating a load of reeking mulch out of a trough).
Sure, build that catalogue over time, but to launch with 100 games is just insane to me. Why would you do that? More to the point... why would you agree to put your games on it?
Admittedly, Apple is offering to help develop and fund creators' projects - essentially a step towards Apple becoming its own games studio - which is something, and I guess there's a certain argument to be had that there's no real viable alternative. I mean, at least this offers the backing of a major entity, and I guess if Apple can wave enough money at Oprah and Spielberg to sway them into posing as a corporate shill, then Little Johnny Indie developer would need far less convincing.
Ultimately, I cautiously welcome Apple's move, but it also highlights that there's just so much content available now. Frankly, unless you get very, very lucky, the game you've invested so much time, money, and love into is just going to disappear into the ether.
If Apple can make it financially worthwhile that'll take the edge off, to a degree, but most indie creators, I would assume, are making their games from a place of passion, and want them to be played by as many people as possible.
Is launching on a platform with 99 other games the best way of achieving that? Dunno. But is punting them out onto Steam any better? We shall see.
One way or another, with Apple, Google, and - let's face it - Amazon poised to invest in gaming, Sony and Microsoft are facing the first real challenge to their dominance of the industry. The next few years are going to see the sort of shake-up we've not witnessed since the original PlayStation.
RSS Feed
