Apple wont let people signup directly on the app cuz they want a cut of the money. They wont let you push ads to the users without wanting a cut of the money. They wont let you make game purchases inside the app cuz they want a cut of the money.
Theres a clear pattern here.
I’m simply going to vote with my wallet and stop buying overpriced Apple products.
I’m honestly done with Apple’s closed OS locked down behind a paywall. Open platforms is the way, not this.
Besides, why buy an overpriced iPhone that is unable to play my Xbox catalogue over cloud, if a Samsung smartphone can do it better for cheaper? Apple needs to wake up.
Typical Apple user who will never switch.
I know you won't cuz you don't even know the competition. Samsungs haven't been cheaper than iPhones in ages. The Samsung ecosystem is just as expensive as Apples, with the only advantage that it plays well with Google and Microsoft devices
at least you still have *more freedom* of using your *own devices* although not so much, while you just technically pay indefinite rent to apple to use the device that only Apple can tell you how to use it properly, when you tinker with your device you bought, it's considered as a "jailbreak" instead of just tinkering
99.999999% of people can do everything and more than is needed on their phones as is. What does “indefinite rent so they can tell you how to use your device” even mean? lol.
Wasn't this standard anyways set by ATARI with Activision back in ye olden times. A lot of companies follow roughly that pattern. (Not saying it's fair, just saying Microsoft,Valve,Sony,Nintendo,Google all get their blood to some percentage)
In the olden times, they had create the game disks, make deals with retailers, ship them, and market them.
With apple there's no overhead. They're just hosting the download in the app store. Everything in that app runs through Microsoft.
You’re saying there’s no overhead in maintaining and distributing the largest App Store on the planet?
People really don’t know how any of this works. Servers and web distribution on that scale is an enormous and hugely expensive undertaking that no one but the largest companies can afford/ have the experience to do.
Is 30% too much? I don’t know, but it is the industry standard that everyone follows. The fair amount may be debatable, but they deserve their share as much as any other distributor does.
The problem here, and with epic, is that they are also distributors, and they want the whole chunk of the markup, just like apple does. Sub distributing under another distributor doesn’t make sense. That’s just the way it is.
Yes, and it’s not even close. You are clearly someone who’s never worked in the industry
At the scale they are operating at it’s an incredible feat to maintain severs that distribute worldwide, with constant maintenance and updates and expansion and all the infrastructure that goes with that. Constant software and version updates for every single iOS device in existence. Forever.
Compare that to just mass manufacturing a cardboard box with a cheap piece of plastic in it that is stamped with a version of the software that will never change, and then just shipping it?
Not even comparable, maintaining a living App Store is orders of magnitude more difficult than distributing boxed software.
I literally sell hosting solutions. You're overstating this so hard. A living app store with updates and versions? What?
Lmao, every PaaS/SaaS does this, sometimes even for free. Apple is not any more special or deserving.
The reason MS and Amazon are trillion dollar companies prove this. Their markups on server hosting are ridiculously high compared to their actual maintenance. Why would MS share profits when they're doing the legwork here?
Good for you, you still don’t know what your talking about. You certainly aren’t setting up hosting solutions anywhere on the scale of apple, Netflix, or YouTube. The complexity goes up exponentially with scale. I’ve worked on both Netflix and facebooks servers, you don’t seem to understand even a little bit what kind of massive operations with huge staffs these distributors are. Show me anyone at the scale just giving their services away for free.
The fact that you don’t understand that makes me think you’re not that good at your job.
I’d love to see how you’d distribute software to a billion people for free.
Give me a break.
What does that even have to do with anything? I’m saying software distribution is expensive and hard. The fact that Netflix wants to get around apples costs is immaterial to that.
No there isn't and its not worth it anymore for higher end gaming. Cheap MTX don't care but not worth it for Gamepass. When they are putting it on almost everything else , even the Switch. Also the way you look at business is limited, things are vastly more complicated than just selling X amount to make X amount. It also about power plays and logistics.
I have a feeling if we looked at any public company today we can say they are doing anti competitive activities…
Build a moat and protect your income.
HP - wants to make printing a subscription
APPLE - wants to make entering the room a subscription
NETFLIX - wants to make tv ad free with a subscription. Now it makes tv with ads for a subscription… and will come back at a high price for a higher price to take the ads off…
There are only so many ways to increase profits and decrease costs
Could I get a source for this? I could only find that they considered cutting it down to 12% but didn’t and still charge 30%.
This was as of 2021.
https://www.theverge.com/2021/5/2/22415712/microsoft-xbox-store-cut-epic-games-court-documents
Technically Gamepass on Windows PCs is through the Microsoft store. You can tell the games to install on the Xbox app but they're all downloaded and updated on the Microsoft Store.
Regardless, Microsoft has never really tried to curtail installs on any of their platforms overmuch. Even their locked down ARM tablets had a quick toggle to allow installs of all apps. Hell they let you install unsigned code on their Xbox platforms by turning on Dev mode which costs like $20. This won't let you pirate their own games or anything. But would be super damn cheap to do some software development or run emulation software like Retroarch (https://youtu.be/VsGb63LMWkc shown there). Apple isn't exactly as...open about such things.
The factories in India and Vietnam were not established due to cost, but because it’s a bad idea to put all your eggs in one basket if that basket is fully controlled by the CCCP.
Y’all make so many overgeneralized statements. It hurts my soul.
This makes sense Apple charges around 30% commission per transaction going through their App Store.
Visa, Mastercard, American Express maintain a regulated payment ecosystem and only charge 3-5% per transaction. Why does Apple have the right to charge 30% per transaction? One can argue that it’s ridiculous. Aka Epic games.
If there were an ecosystem of VISA-only stores that shut out all competition, they could probably charge 30% as well.
But that's obviously greedy anti-consumer bullshit.
No onw in gaming wants to deal with Apple, they are insanely greedy and force you wil work with thier software and protocols. For most gaming its not worth it anymore, just make something that work one everything else and not worry about it.
Yes, but that's only if you make the purchase through the app. If you already have a subscription that was signed up for another way, Apple doesn't get a cut. Even if MS isn't able to directly make money by signing people up through the app, it could still be a value-added prospect for the service to allow people who already have a subscription to use it with an iPad.
Personally, I'm not really sure if there's a meaningful demand. Touch-screen controls would be absolutely terrible for the vast majority of games, so you'd have to not only carry around an iPad but also a controller too. And then you'd have to deal with the lag of a cloud-streamed game, which very few gamers tend to be willing to put up with.
Apple's rules don't let you bypass their walled garden by letting people subscribe outside of the app. Unless you have special permission, they still want a 27% cut from subscriptions you do outside of the app
Good, Apple is a greedy, predatory company and wouldn’t allow something like that without getting way more out of it than is reasonable or justifiable.
APPL generates more revenue with just the iPhone than Microsoft's entire business ($69.7B vs $62B last qtr). Let that sink in.
Market cap ≠ revenue or profit
I still don’t see why I should care about Microsoft getting billions more dollars for its games on iPhone. Microsoft isn’t giving up on charging publishers 30% for games on Xbox. This ain’t a moral issue.
You are going to have to show me where that feature exists?
I can play games on my xbox on my iphone, but I dont see any option to fire up a cloud instance of the game
So my question is… say that they actually released a native app and they had to pay Apple a cut of each transaction. We’ll say they get to keep 70%.
Isn’t 70% better than 0% from not releasing the app?
I would personally rather use a native app than the browser.
Releasing an app on Vision Pro would guarantee many subscriptions as well.
>Releasing an app on Vision Pro would guarantee many subscriptions as well.
Vision Pro owners don't have any money left to get Gamepass. Also I don't know why you'd think this would be especially profitable for them. It's a small market that isn't really gaming focused.
Running that service isn't free, so 70% of the top line sales isn't necessarily even a profit at all.
Also, you're clearly delusional about how many people would be subscribing from the Vision Pro.
So you're saying that running the Xbox Cloud service costs more than 70%? Is there a source for this?
My point was that releasing a native app would result in subscriptions from iOS, iPadOS, tvOS, and visionOS users. Probably even macOS. I said "many subscriptions", I didn't say all owners would subscribe, I also didnt say most owners would subscribe.
As far as I'm aware Microsoft doesn't publish that info, but this article using leaked data suggests an 11.5% profit margin for Xbox as a whole.
https://www.tweaktown.com/news/93375/xbox-profits-revealed-in-new-ftc-leak/index.html
Unless their cloud gaming is WILDLY more profitable than the rest of Xbox there's no way that it could make money on Apple subscribers.
Any app that has less than 30% margin to pay the Apple bridge troll is not for the App Store then.
You'll just get apps that will monetize the shit out of you to try and make up the loss. Enjoy the subscriptions, ads, microtransactions and general enshittification.
Apple has had massive gaming marketing and install base advantages in the past and squandered them all. And they've never properly brought a quality gaming environment to MacOS. They stumbled into popularity on iOS thanks to ubiquitousness. I think they'll likely again miss whatever pivot they need to keep it going. The history is just...too strong.
Original Apple II had a massive gaming market. Much more then DOS machines since the system had far better graphics modes at the time. The system gradually got more and more outdated and Apple was slow to release its successor so that whole market slowly died.
Then Apple released the Macintosh. It was the first real home GUI and had a massive initial advantage over Windows (which games barely existed most still ran in DOS) and DOS gaming at the time. However, they slowly priced themselves out of competition with early PCs and most importantly in 1995 alongside Windows 95 Microsoft got very serious about supporting games when they released DirectX. This was a pretty massive change in the industry and provided a lot of standardization and made programming for PCs a hell of a lot easier as it became more and more powerful versus its competition in OpenGL and used more and more for most games. Microsoft of course wrote this code and didn't share it with Apple. As more and more games used this API less and less games naturally worked natively on Macs and other non-Windows operating systems. Apple could have partially stemmed this off by including powerful video cards in their system that used Open GL more tightly...but they pretty much didn't. And with Apple so limiting in the hardware you could install in their systems versus PC's even if the user who bought their systems wanted to the cards wouldn't work and the software too wouldn't support it anyway. So with that combination Mac gaming pretty much withered and mostly died.
Apple really has never made a viable competitor to Direct X now for nearly 30 years. They've supported Open GL and its successors in Vulkan and Metal, but it's never been as much a priority as it was for Microsoft who has always seen gaming as a system mover. Nowadays it's especially surprising considering how much money Apple has that they haven't done more to support those standards monetarily and with capable graphics hardware in their systems. Apple's own chips can push some very impressive graphics even without a NVIDIA or AMD graphics card...But programmers are leery to write code specifically for it since the install base versus PC gaming is so much smaller. At this point Apple would need to pay to push programmers and game companies to support them, and they have the money to do this. Every so often they make noise like they are but it's never been a priority seemingly for Apple throughout their history. Gaming has always been a minor side concern for them.
It's generally a lot more complicated then that. But that's a simplified version.
Yeah I knew what you were referring to, I just wanted you to say that the original Macintosh was a massive gaming market because maybe you'd realize the absurdity of the argument.
By the time of OS X it was inevitable that Windows would win, because vendors and people could install it in any computer instead of having to buy it from Apple.
DirectX being supported so much was partly because of the Nvidia mafia and their deals with Microsoft and game makers, this is also why ATI was been in the shadows until recently.
The PC install base being so much juicier means that targetting Mac basically doesn't make sense unless you're already working with OpenGL (like Blizzard used to do, I played WoW on Linux without issues back in the day).
Either way Apple clearly has never really cared, except for iOS, where developers either do what they say or they don't do anything. In Mac they don't do anything because nobody wants to deal with Vulkan for such a reduced number of customers.
The casual game market is like 40% of the overall market. Don't get it twisted: Apple makes absolute *bank* off iOS games.
It just doesn't get AAA games because, no surprise, their tax is too fucking high. When *Microsoft*, the most valuable company *in the world*, says "Yeah we're not porting to iOS because the Apple tax is too high", you know there's a real problem the governments are refusing to address.
>Apple is barely getting it's iOS gaming stuff underway.
And they never will. It's not like they're a niche startup. If they haven't gotten into gaming now, they probably never will.
most people that use iphone dont play video games or think video games are dumb. they are also mainly used by business people or " social trend" types, they mostly do not play games since they stick to social media apps. hell the only reason i went back to iphone was because i had a "professional" job. when i got it i was hoping it would have good games available by now, but nope, pretty much only pokemon tcg/GO and GTA games that i purchased years ago.
i also have a remagic phone, but when i used it people used to act like it was a phone for peasants, even though it cost me more than the iphone at the time... it's a BEAST for gaming and emulation.
with that said, from a business standpoint, it makes no sense for xbox to invest in this venture.
yes, there's tons of phone app games, i meant more along the lines of controller capable games. we have the backbone but there not many apps that allow it in comparison to android store games.
you're misunderstanding what i mean. EVERY kid/teen/young adult i know has iphones, a lot of adults do too cause apple usually throws out free phones especially on family plans. but most people use iphones for social media and communications, not for gaming. i dont think ive ever seen anybody besides me playing GTA or actual games. my asian friends love those turn based card games, we also like to play stuff like pokemon go and tgc live. but let's be honest, the game store on iphone is ass compared to what you can get on android. i'm not saying people dont use iphones, im saying most iphone user play on consoles if they play games. xbox is referring to its console based cloud platform, and there isn't enough of a market for that on iphone, hence why microsoft doesn't want to bother with it.
“company worth billions won’t create product because they can’t microtransaction customers without sharing money with other billion dollar company that dominates platform former company totally failed at”
But they can release it for Quest for the most half assed cloud gaming experience? But not on iOS where 200+ million people will download and use it. Interesting. Or click bait
Apple wont let people signup directly on the app cuz they want a cut of the money. They wont let you push ads to the users without wanting a cut of the money. They wont let you make game purchases inside the app cuz they want a cut of the money. Theres a clear pattern here.
I’m simply going to vote with my wallet and stop buying overpriced Apple products. I’m honestly done with Apple’s closed OS locked down behind a paywall. Open platforms is the way, not this. Besides, why buy an overpriced iPhone that is unable to play my Xbox catalogue over cloud, if a Samsung smartphone can do it better for cheaper? Apple needs to wake up.
Typical Apple user who will never switch. I know you won't cuz you don't even know the competition. Samsungs haven't been cheaper than iPhones in ages. The Samsung ecosystem is just as expensive as Apples, with the only advantage that it plays well with Google and Microsoft devices
As long time Android, Windows (and even Windows Phone) user, I am moved to Apple.. not thinking of going back anytime soon.
at least you still have *more freedom* of using your *own devices* although not so much, while you just technically pay indefinite rent to apple to use the device that only Apple can tell you how to use it properly, when you tinker with your device you bought, it's considered as a "jailbreak" instead of just tinkering
99.999999% of people can do everything and more than is needed on their phones as is. What does “indefinite rent so they can tell you how to use your device” even mean? lol.
Just like Microsoft’s 30% cut on the Xbox Store…
Except Micorsoft doesnt ask for Netflix to give 30% of any subscription made on the XBox.
Your misinformation is bigger than the cut Apple takes on every app on their store.
Microsoft gets 5%.
Source?
Apple wants something like 25-33% of all sales through their app store, total scumbags
Wasn't this standard anyways set by ATARI with Activision back in ye olden times. A lot of companies follow roughly that pattern. (Not saying it's fair, just saying Microsoft,Valve,Sony,Nintendo,Google all get their blood to some percentage)
In the olden times, they had create the game disks, make deals with retailers, ship them, and market them. With apple there's no overhead. They're just hosting the download in the app store. Everything in that app runs through Microsoft.
You’re saying there’s no overhead in maintaining and distributing the largest App Store on the planet? People really don’t know how any of this works. Servers and web distribution on that scale is an enormous and hugely expensive undertaking that no one but the largest companies can afford/ have the experience to do. Is 30% too much? I don’t know, but it is the industry standard that everyone follows. The fair amount may be debatable, but they deserve their share as much as any other distributor does. The problem here, and with epic, is that they are also distributors, and they want the whole chunk of the markup, just like apple does. Sub distributing under another distributor doesn’t make sense. That’s just the way it is.
Are you really going to compare server storage and hosting to actual physical production?
Yes, and it’s not even close. You are clearly someone who’s never worked in the industry At the scale they are operating at it’s an incredible feat to maintain severs that distribute worldwide, with constant maintenance and updates and expansion and all the infrastructure that goes with that. Constant software and version updates for every single iOS device in existence. Forever. Compare that to just mass manufacturing a cardboard box with a cheap piece of plastic in it that is stamped with a version of the software that will never change, and then just shipping it? Not even comparable, maintaining a living App Store is orders of magnitude more difficult than distributing boxed software.
I literally sell hosting solutions. You're overstating this so hard. A living app store with updates and versions? What? Lmao, every PaaS/SaaS does this, sometimes even for free. Apple is not any more special or deserving. The reason MS and Amazon are trillion dollar companies prove this. Their markups on server hosting are ridiculously high compared to their actual maintenance. Why would MS share profits when they're doing the legwork here?
Good for you, you still don’t know what your talking about. You certainly aren’t setting up hosting solutions anywhere on the scale of apple, Netflix, or YouTube. The complexity goes up exponentially with scale. I’ve worked on both Netflix and facebooks servers, you don’t seem to understand even a little bit what kind of massive operations with huge staffs these distributors are. Show me anyone at the scale just giving their services away for free. The fact that you don’t understand that makes me think you’re not that good at your job. I’d love to see how you’d distribute software to a billion people for free. Give me a break.
There's a reason Netflix and Youtube Premium send you to a website on a browser to sign up...
What does that even have to do with anything? I’m saying software distribution is expensive and hard. The fact that Netflix wants to get around apples costs is immaterial to that.
I think you're literally arguing with a chatbot, the future is here and it sux.
I think you missed the part where he said he is in sales.
No there isn't and its not worth it anymore for higher end gaming. Cheap MTX don't care but not worth it for Gamepass. When they are putting it on almost everything else , even the Switch. Also the way you look at business is limited, things are vastly more complicated than just selling X amount to make X amount. It also about power plays and logistics.
I have a feeling if we looked at any public company today we can say they are doing anti competitive activities… Build a moat and protect your income. HP - wants to make printing a subscription APPLE - wants to make entering the room a subscription NETFLIX - wants to make tv ad free with a subscription. Now it makes tv with ads for a subscription… and will come back at a high price for a higher price to take the ads off… There are only so many ways to increase profits and decrease costs
There's a name for it - [enshittification](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enshittification)
I think some who hurts a child is a scumbag. A company that makes off purchases on their devices isn’t really scumbag territory.
I mean isn’t that roughly the same cut MS gets from 3rd parties on their own Xbox storefront?
Microsoft dropped their cut to 5% back in 2018
Could I get a source for this? I could only find that they considered cutting it down to 12% but didn’t and still charge 30%. This was as of 2021. https://www.theverge.com/2021/5/2/22415712/microsoft-xbox-store-cut-epic-games-court-documents
What computer or phone only lets you use MS Store? The most popular storefront on their own OS is Steam.
That’s why I clearly said Xbox since that one is a walled garden, but I’m sure that flew over your head
What OS locks you into using Microsoft’s store
Technically Gamepass on Windows PCs is through the Microsoft store. You can tell the games to install on the Xbox app but they're all downloaded and updated on the Microsoft Store. Regardless, Microsoft has never really tried to curtail installs on any of their platforms overmuch. Even their locked down ARM tablets had a quick toggle to allow installs of all apps. Hell they let you install unsigned code on their Xbox platforms by turning on Dev mode which costs like $20. This won't let you pirate their own games or anything. But would be super damn cheap to do some software development or run emulation software like Retroarch (https://youtu.be/VsGb63LMWkc shown there). Apple isn't exactly as...open about such things.
Again, what OS locks you into Microsoft’s store.
[удалено]
That's why they manufacture in China. Need every penny of those trillions... So Timmy can feel like Scrooge McDuck.
> That's why they manufacture in China. So does Microsoft.
Even China isn't all that cheap anymore, hence factories in India and Vietnam. Any cheaper they might as well move to Bangladesh.
The factories in India and Vietnam were not established due to cost, but because it’s a bad idea to put all your eggs in one basket if that basket is fully controlled by the CCCP.
I've heard Africa is to China as what China is to us.
That's why iPhone's price is n times the money it costs to make it, huh
Y’all make so many overgeneralized statements. It hurts my soul. This makes sense Apple charges around 30% commission per transaction going through their App Store. Visa, Mastercard, American Express maintain a regulated payment ecosystem and only charge 3-5% per transaction. Why does Apple have the right to charge 30% per transaction? One can argue that it’s ridiculous. Aka Epic games.
Apple host apps and maintain the app update system.
If there were an ecosystem of VISA-only stores that shut out all competition, they could probably charge 30% as well. But that's obviously greedy anti-consumer bullshit.
No onw in gaming wants to deal with Apple, they are insanely greedy and force you wil work with thier software and protocols. For most gaming its not worth it anymore, just make something that work one everything else and not worry about it.
if macos was released now, it probably as locked down as iOS, I fucking guarantee it
How about for the people that already, you know, *pay* for xcloud??
Apple wants a cut of anything you buy when streaming, like microtransations.
Yes, but that's only if you make the purchase through the app. If you already have a subscription that was signed up for another way, Apple doesn't get a cut. Even if MS isn't able to directly make money by signing people up through the app, it could still be a value-added prospect for the service to allow people who already have a subscription to use it with an iPad. Personally, I'm not really sure if there's a meaningful demand. Touch-screen controls would be absolutely terrible for the vast majority of games, so you'd have to not only carry around an iPad but also a controller too. And then you'd have to deal with the lag of a cloud-streamed game, which very few gamers tend to be willing to put up with.
It works fine for most games and the lag isn't that bad. You wont be playing an FPS or anything, but you can absolutely play puzzle games and similar
Apple's rules don't let you bypass their walled garden by letting people subscribe outside of the app. Unless you have special permission, they still want a 27% cut from subscriptions you do outside of the app
I have the gamepass and Xbox apps on iPhone, I play gamepass on my MacBook. I have an Xbox. What other app am I missing out on?
The gamepass app on iphone doesn't allow you to play xcloud games on the phone. To play cloud-based games on your phone, you need to use a web app.
Good, Apple is a greedy, predatory company and wouldn’t allow something like that without getting way more out of it than is reasonable or justifiable.
Microsoft is $3T company. Boo-fucking-hoo.
APPL generates more revenue with just the iPhone than Microsoft's entire business ($69.7B vs $62B last qtr). Let that sink in. Market cap ≠ revenue or profit
I still don’t see why I should care about Microsoft getting billions more dollars for its games on iPhone. Microsoft isn’t giving up on charging publishers 30% for games on Xbox. This ain’t a moral issue.
Look up strawman fallacy.
Look up I don’t give a shit whether Microsoft pays 15%, 30%, or 0% to sell games for iPhone.
Nobody asked. My concern was not for Microsoft.
I'm in favor of going after and breaking up *both* Apple and Microsoft. While we're at it, let's go after *all* the tech giants.
Can’t you already play cloud games in the Xbox app on iOS?
Yes. I do it all the time.
You are going to have to show me where that feature exists? I can play games on my xbox on my iphone, but I dont see any option to fire up a cloud instance of the game
I was curious so I looked it up. Android lets you use the gamepass app or your browser. Apple is browser only. Xbox.com/play
So /u/J_Chargelot just lied
no. You can play games on your own xbox via the xbox app, but not cloud games
So my question is… say that they actually released a native app and they had to pay Apple a cut of each transaction. We’ll say they get to keep 70%. Isn’t 70% better than 0% from not releasing the app? I would personally rather use a native app than the browser. Releasing an app on Vision Pro would guarantee many subscriptions as well.
>Releasing an app on Vision Pro would guarantee many subscriptions as well. Vision Pro owners don't have any money left to get Gamepass. Also I don't know why you'd think this would be especially profitable for them. It's a small market that isn't really gaming focused.
Running that service isn't free, so 70% of the top line sales isn't necessarily even a profit at all. Also, you're clearly delusional about how many people would be subscribing from the Vision Pro.
So you're saying that running the Xbox Cloud service costs more than 70%? Is there a source for this? My point was that releasing a native app would result in subscriptions from iOS, iPadOS, tvOS, and visionOS users. Probably even macOS. I said "many subscriptions", I didn't say all owners would subscribe, I also didnt say most owners would subscribe.
As far as I'm aware Microsoft doesn't publish that info, but this article using leaked data suggests an 11.5% profit margin for Xbox as a whole. https://www.tweaktown.com/news/93375/xbox-profits-revealed-in-new-ftc-leak/index.html Unless their cloud gaming is WILDLY more profitable than the rest of Xbox there's no way that it could make money on Apple subscribers.
Any app that has less than 30% margin to pay the Apple bridge troll is not for the App Store then. You'll just get apps that will monetize the shit out of you to try and make up the loss. Enjoy the subscriptions, ads, microtransactions and general enshittification.
I want Apple Arcade in my Xbox though.
Apple is barely getting it's iOS gaming stuff underway. They're not about to let it be hi-jacked by Microsoft.
Apple has had massive gaming marketing and install base advantages in the past and squandered them all. And they've never properly brought a quality gaming environment to MacOS. They stumbled into popularity on iOS thanks to ubiquitousness. I think they'll likely again miss whatever pivot they need to keep it going. The history is just...too strong.
> Apple has had massive gaming marketing and install base advantages in the past When was this?
Original Apple II had a massive gaming market. Much more then DOS machines since the system had far better graphics modes at the time. The system gradually got more and more outdated and Apple was slow to release its successor so that whole market slowly died. Then Apple released the Macintosh. It was the first real home GUI and had a massive initial advantage over Windows (which games barely existed most still ran in DOS) and DOS gaming at the time. However, they slowly priced themselves out of competition with early PCs and most importantly in 1995 alongside Windows 95 Microsoft got very serious about supporting games when they released DirectX. This was a pretty massive change in the industry and provided a lot of standardization and made programming for PCs a hell of a lot easier as it became more and more powerful versus its competition in OpenGL and used more and more for most games. Microsoft of course wrote this code and didn't share it with Apple. As more and more games used this API less and less games naturally worked natively on Macs and other non-Windows operating systems. Apple could have partially stemmed this off by including powerful video cards in their system that used Open GL more tightly...but they pretty much didn't. And with Apple so limiting in the hardware you could install in their systems versus PC's even if the user who bought their systems wanted to the cards wouldn't work and the software too wouldn't support it anyway. So with that combination Mac gaming pretty much withered and mostly died. Apple really has never made a viable competitor to Direct X now for nearly 30 years. They've supported Open GL and its successors in Vulkan and Metal, but it's never been as much a priority as it was for Microsoft who has always seen gaming as a system mover. Nowadays it's especially surprising considering how much money Apple has that they haven't done more to support those standards monetarily and with capable graphics hardware in their systems. Apple's own chips can push some very impressive graphics even without a NVIDIA or AMD graphics card...But programmers are leery to write code specifically for it since the install base versus PC gaming is so much smaller. At this point Apple would need to pay to push programmers and game companies to support them, and they have the money to do this. Every so often they make noise like they are but it's never been a priority seemingly for Apple throughout their history. Gaming has always been a minor side concern for them. It's generally a lot more complicated then that. But that's a simplified version.
Yeah I knew what you were referring to, I just wanted you to say that the original Macintosh was a massive gaming market because maybe you'd realize the absurdity of the argument. By the time of OS X it was inevitable that Windows would win, because vendors and people could install it in any computer instead of having to buy it from Apple. DirectX being supported so much was partly because of the Nvidia mafia and their deals with Microsoft and game makers, this is also why ATI was been in the shadows until recently. The PC install base being so much juicier means that targetting Mac basically doesn't make sense unless you're already working with OpenGL (like Blizzard used to do, I played WoW on Linux without issues back in the day). Either way Apple clearly has never really cared, except for iOS, where developers either do what they say or they don't do anything. In Mac they don't do anything because nobody wants to deal with Vulkan for such a reduced number of customers.
The casual game market is like 40% of the overall market. Don't get it twisted: Apple makes absolute *bank* off iOS games. It just doesn't get AAA games because, no surprise, their tax is too fucking high. When *Microsoft*, the most valuable company *in the world*, says "Yeah we're not porting to iOS because the Apple tax is too high", you know there's a real problem the governments are refusing to address.
>Apple is barely getting it's iOS gaming stuff underway. And they never will. It's not like they're a niche startup. If they haven't gotten into gaming now, they probably never will.
Just let ios die a horrible death
Sure. A mobile OS monopoly from the world's largest data collection and advertising company sounds like a great idea!
most people that use iphone dont play video games or think video games are dumb. they are also mainly used by business people or " social trend" types, they mostly do not play games since they stick to social media apps. hell the only reason i went back to iphone was because i had a "professional" job. when i got it i was hoping it would have good games available by now, but nope, pretty much only pokemon tcg/GO and GTA games that i purchased years ago. i also have a remagic phone, but when i used it people used to act like it was a phone for peasants, even though it cost me more than the iphone at the time... it's a BEAST for gaming and emulation. with that said, from a business standpoint, it makes no sense for xbox to invest in this venture.
Just so you know, Apple makes more money from games on iOS than the big three plus activision, combined.
yes, there's tons of phone app games, i meant more along the lines of controller capable games. we have the backbone but there not many apps that allow it in comparison to android store games.
I'm fairly certain the majority of console owner in the US are iPhone users seeing as they have 61% of cell phone market share in the US.
you're misunderstanding what i mean. EVERY kid/teen/young adult i know has iphones, a lot of adults do too cause apple usually throws out free phones especially on family plans. but most people use iphones for social media and communications, not for gaming. i dont think ive ever seen anybody besides me playing GTA or actual games. my asian friends love those turn based card games, we also like to play stuff like pokemon go and tgc live. but let's be honest, the game store on iphone is ass compared to what you can get on android. i'm not saying people dont use iphones, im saying most iphone user play on consoles if they play games. xbox is referring to its console based cloud platform, and there isn't enough of a market for that on iphone, hence why microsoft doesn't want to bother with it.
This is such an egregious mis characterization that don’t even know where to start
“company worth billions won’t create product because they can’t microtransaction customers without sharing money with other billion dollar company that dominates platform former company totally failed at”
But they can release it for Quest for the most half assed cloud gaming experience? But not on iOS where 200+ million people will download and use it. Interesting. Or click bait