Rumor: Alleged Apple tablet to be game console
by JC Fletcher 
{ Aug 4th 2009 at 10:04AM }
The analyst reports that the tablet, with a 10-inch touch screen, is designed to be used as a "home media hub," streaming content over Wi-Fi connections and connecting with other Apple devices in the house. It's also reportedly designed to play games. Whether that means stretching existing App Store products or running new games designed just for the device remains to be seen, as does, you know, whether this thing really exists.
If Apple really is making a game console, what an inopportune time for Apple to lose one of its game producers. Of course, every single day so far has been an inopportune time to be a game producer at Apple, so we understand.
[Via Engadget, Develop]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Ralnakor @ Aug 4th 2009 10:09AM
Why is it that seeing this, my first thought is of the computers from the book 'Ender's Game'?
snowleopard233 @ Aug 4th 2009 11:15AM
Kill the giant!
cory.mercer @ Aug 4th 2009 11:56AM
yah thats wat i was thinking to about the Ender's Game thing lol.... that'd be kind of a cool app (or game) though if apple could make this thing semi-cheap (obviously they won't >.>) and if they could add some useable controls to this.
Comtar @ Aug 4th 2009 12:35PM
My first thought was whatever the board Captain Kirk would get at around the beginning or end of any old Star Trek episode. I mean, even though it was plastic and looked like it was from the 60s. What he was supposed to have been given was a device that looked and operated just like this.
216 @ Aug 4th 2009 10:12AM
I was thinking it was a game console. I remember last year reading an article that said Apple would be venturing into a completely new product category this year, and it makes perfect sense that this tablet would be the device that launches them into the gaming category.
Tiptup300 @ Aug 4th 2009 12:17PM
I can't wait not to buy it, sit around all my friends laughing about how terrible of a device it would be, and then sarcastically joke about buying one.
WiredKnight @ Aug 4th 2009 3:27PM
If Apple wants to make a game platform, they need some real game developers behind them. Every time Apple has tried to say that they getting into gaming, they have failed miserably. They need to do more than just make a shiny new device and expect people to pay attention.
To their credit though, this has worked for most of their other products.
waves @ Aug 4th 2009 10:15AM
If this is true I can see it opening up a lot more game options, especially for Real Time Strategy games. Also with more screen area, it's less likely that your fingers will be blocking a significant portion of the screen while you play. They are still going to have to add some kind of button controls if they want to have any good 'action' games.
All that said, I don't see anyone buying this iPad (?) as a game machine. Assuming that it will cost more than an iPhone, you'd have to work hard to justify getting one instead of a netbook or a fully powered laptop.
Crazy-008 @ Aug 4th 2009 10:21AM
You'll buy this! You'll buy anything!!!! ARRGHHH (Satan pops out of Steve Job's chest and rips through his pretentious black turtlneck.)
MLS @ Aug 4th 2009 10:39AM
Looks more practical than Natal.
WREturns[FBI Sweatshop Investigation Task Force] @ Aug 4th 2009 10:22AM
So...what? It's a handheld that's as long as an Xbox? I love my Macbook. I love my iPod Touch. But this? Pass.
Marty @ Aug 4th 2009 2:04PM
Protip: Nobody cares if you love your MacBook or iPod.
acefondu @ Aug 4th 2009 10:23AM
Touch-pad gaming consoles are stupid. Don't get me wrong I love my DS, but not BECAUSE it has a touch screen. The touch screen makes it worse honestly. They break too easily and then what do you have? A paperweight excluding the good games that don't use the touch screen. What I ask is wrong with buttons and a D-pad? When did those options of controlling a video game become obsolete or not as good as other random things? I still haven't found anything wrong with it, but apparently game companies are tired of the precise control method of D-pads and Joysticks.
The Baron @ Aug 4th 2009 10:25AM
It's because touch-screen sounds cool on the back of box. Most people will never think about gaming implications such as lack of analog sticks or shoulder buttons. This won't sell as well as well as the iPhone, but that common unfamiliarity with gaming will help it get pretty big.
dsdshark @ Aug 4th 2009 11:07AM
People said the same sort of thing about the control scheme for the Wii. People still bought that in MASSIVE quantities. It's going to be different yes, but I'm looking forward to seeing what developers come up with.
squeehunter @ Aug 4th 2009 11:33AM
A touch screen with a stylus is fine but using your fingers ^ to control a touchscreen is just a bad idea. Fingers are fat and stupid.
Brazen @ Aug 4th 2009 12:29PM
"Fingers are fat and stupid."
Well, maybe yours are.
My experience with an iPhone has taught me that touch screens can be done very well.
acefondu @ Aug 4th 2009 1:13PM
Done very well, but not for gaming. Casual gaming, probably, actual games? Give me a controller.
Mr Khan @ Aug 4th 2009 1:32PM
That actual games argument is broken and sad, especially when it comes to any sort of point-and-click interface like this one. FPS is made better by it, RTS is way better, you could get a PC-esque interface for all your RPGs, it could serve well for aiming in third-person shooters
The only "real game" (and i quite loathe use of the term) genres that an interface like this wouldn't benefit are platformers and Fighting games
Marty @ Aug 4th 2009 2:11PM
"It's going to be different yes, but I'm looking forward to seeing what developers come up with."
You're assuming developers are going to jump on board in the first place.
acefondu @ Aug 4th 2009 2:24PM
So then Mr. Khan you prove my point. Why use a touchpad when it cripples some game genre's only to mildly improve others? The controller again makes them all work, except RTS games which have always been a PC genre anyway. Touchscreen controls are stupid, they do not improve gaming.
Chris D.(PSN: Aggie_CEO | XBL:The Aggie CEO | Steam: Aggie_CEO @ Aug 4th 2009 10:23AM
Great....aGIANT iPhone....if they make a racing game that needs to be tilted for the to turn its going to be ridiculous....oh and the Price of that thing is going to make a PS3 launch price look like chump change
Much rather just get a Windows Tablet or a scrap the tablet altogether and get a MacBook Pro.....
B @ Aug 4th 2009 10:26AM
Why anyone would want to use a monitor sized iPhone as their gaming console is beyond me.
B @ Aug 4th 2009 10:43AM
The app store is a completely jumbled mess of a marketplace. You think XBLA has sorting issues? The app store is 12x worse with about 50x the content.
Also, Apple is quite two faced when it comes to their approval process. That cool game you just got that allows you to shake babies? Yeah, they just took it off the store... you're kinda screwed outta a game.
rickjamess04 @ Aug 4th 2009 10:27AM
The thing that will probably suck (IMO) is that this thing (if a gaming machine) would be tied exclusively to the app store. Meaning that you're at Apple's mercy to load programs on it.
CGamble20 @ Aug 4th 2009 8:31PM
Until they jailbreak it.
deaftly @ Aug 4th 2009 10:28AM
Great, a bigger more expensive iphone with the same shitty touch screen controls. Im gonna order 2.
copa @ Aug 4th 2009 10:28AM
I believe this tablet will basically allow you to play App Store games on a 10-inch screen. However, Apple is slowly getting deeper and deeper into the games market, and eventually they will release a version of Apple TV that will be their entry into the games console market.
This generation of consoles is remarkable, because it is the first time that you have had three viable competitors making it through an entire lifecycle.
However, this whole process has been very expensive and painful for Sony. Their future profitability lies in the consumer electronics space, and possibly Blu-Ray. I think you will see them sit out the next generation, which will be a three-way competition between Apple, Nintendo, and Microsoft.
rickjamess04 @ Aug 4th 2009 10:36AM
HAhaAHahahaAH
Sony sit it out? I think the only way that will happen is if they completely end their computer division. Which isn't impossible given they are in the hole right now.
However, I think that the next PS console will be around since Sony has invested so much money in the Cell platform. I'm guessing the next PS will have multiple Cell processors.
dsdshark @ Aug 4th 2009 10:39AM
That would be epic. Though I think there's a strong overlap in the Apple/Nintendo userbase. Both of them would be vying for the same customers, and then microsoft would flourish on it own. Maybe there's room for 4? In all honesty, I think that having Apple TV compete against something like the Wii wouldn't even be close, as Apple TV is much better suited to do multiple things. I dunno, interesting idea though. :)
Mr Khan @ Aug 4th 2009 1:35PM
There's never been room four 4 in this industry, only three have been able to survive and thrive at any given time. Think about it, when there's been 4 or more in a generation, the consoles that came in 4th place or more were either incredibly pathetic, financially ruinous, or both. 2nd generation had the Fairchild, Odyssey 2, and Vectrex, 4th generation had Neo-Geo, 5th had 3DO and Jaguar, 6th had Dreamcast
CTC XBL-supapaypamawio PSN-ctclaw @ Aug 4th 2009 3:27PM
It's true that the 4th system has usually been screwed, but the audience for games has gone up a lot since then. I think another casual system might be good, maybe it'd keep out a lot of the crap.
manaman @ Aug 5th 2009 9:21AM
That would actually be pretty neat. Two operating system giants and Nintendo. It would actually be three companies doing three very different things. I'd be okay with that over the current three companies with two doing almost identical things. It's a nice idea but I don't know that I'd bet any money on it.
Iwa @ Aug 4th 2009 10:28AM
Well if it's a game centric PC, hopefully it'll do better than the Pippin did.
The Dark Wayne @ Aug 4th 2009 10:30AM
if it's a pc it wouldnt be a console would it?
Premature ejaculation man @ Aug 4th 2009 10:33AM
Tell that to the xbox 1 =p
Premature ejaculation man @ Aug 4th 2009 10:36AM
I can't see it happening. What I would like though is an RTS. RTS would work real nice on a multi touch screen like that or Microsoft Surface.
Iwa @ Aug 4th 2009 10:49AM
"if it's a pc it wouldnt be a console would it?"
The Pippin tried to be both and failed miserably at it. So now Apple is going to essentially try again with this tablet, with speculation that it's a tablet/netbook that plays games.
The Dark Wayne @ Aug 4th 2009 10:30AM
Dammit, there's enough divisions of exclusives, properties and whatnot as it is right now, i dont want another damn console
tmacairjordan87 @ Aug 4th 2009 10:30AM
Please no Apple consoles, we already have enough shovelware in this industry.
Devin @ Aug 4th 2009 10:32AM
Games on this would be bad ass no doubt. Though I hope they come up with a new control scheme, I never quite got used to doom.
What I do however think would be bad ass, is an updated kindle app, that has MY TEXTBOOKS on it. Then I wouldn't have to carry around a ton of shit. Or how bout a digital painting app a la Photoshop. The joys of being an art student in the modern age.
FAP FAP FAP @ Aug 4th 2009 10:33AM
oh god. Over $1000 (most likely) for a 10-inch 'gaming' tablet.
:|
dsdshark @ Aug 4th 2009 10:43AM
Actually... 700 or 800
http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/02/barrons-analyst-handled-apple-tablet-says-competitors-have-pa/
Marty @ Aug 4th 2009 1:55PM
There's no way that they could hit that price, man. The iPhone, without AT&T's plan attached, costs $599 - $699. That's a max of 16gb memory and a 3.5" touchscreen.
Do you *really* think they could cram in a better GPU, better CPU, more RAM / hdd, and include a 10" touch screen with only $100 price difference?
Maybe (and that's a big maybe) if you sign up for a cell phone carrier for wi-fi and they subsidize the cost. But who in the hell wants to sign up with a company like AT&T to use a tablet computer / gaming device?
Steve @ Aug 4th 2009 2:56PM
@Marty: Uh, the iPod Touch currently costs $399 for a 32Gb 3.5" touchscreen device and will probably end up being around that price for the newer model in September with double the storage and the new guts of the iPhone 3GS. So yes, it could be entirely feasible for a 10" tablet with wi-fi and a decent amount of storage to come in around the $700 - $800 mark.
Marty @ Aug 4th 2009 4:52PM
You've conveniently forgotten that everything made by Apple is always double the price it ought to be, especially in the arena of computers.
It's not going to happen.
Lakail @ Aug 4th 2009 10:34AM
I'm not sold on this as a gaming machine, but I am interested in it. I read somewhere that it might have Kindle-like abilities, which would be great for me as I'm a college student. If it can function as a mini-laptop, media center, digital book and a semi-gaming platform, then it's got potential.
rells009 @ Aug 4th 2009 11:22AM
So, a computer then?
oOWallaceOo @ Aug 4th 2009 10:36AM
Mmmmmm Apple Tablets, full of applety goodness
LegendaryRedass @ Aug 4th 2009 10:36AM
This could easily cost 1000$, and that's probably using the iPhone technology. MacBooks run around 2000$, so I doubt it'll be anywhere near as powerful as that. On the other side of the coin, if they want this to sell as well as the iPhone, it may be cheaper than that, and they can look to make a return on game sales.
Being optimistic, early adopters might get it for 700-800$. The 32 gig touch was 500$ at first.