5 ms·

> Developers are free to go to a huge number of competitor platforms. There are no other platforms on the devices. Saying I can buy another house if I could o

by croon 5y ago

> Developers are free to go to a huge number of competitor platforms. There are no other platforms on the devices. Saying I can buy another house if I could only choose one electricity provider or ISP isn't a good defense (in those cases either).

falcolas 5y ago
There are no other platforms on the Playstation, XBox, or Switch either (brought up, because those are the focus of TFA).
- thebean11 5y ago
  So the question is, does the size of the market and the scope of it (gaming vs general purpose computing) matter?
  - falcolas 5y ago
    If you're looking for the number of potential customers for purchasing games - it absolutely does. More customers, more game purchases, more game revenue - even if the absolute percentage of game players is less. Just look at how big ATVI's mobile gaming revenue is: it rivals (and sometimes beats) the revenue from their "core" products (a'la Call of Duty).
    - thebean11 5y ago
      But the size of potential customers for games is still much smaller than the market for a pocket sized computer (roughly everyone on earth). I was more talking about the size of the current install base of the platforms (iOS, Xbox etc) though.
      - falcolas 5y ago
        > But the size of potential customers for games is still much smaller than the market for a pocket sized computer (roughly everyone on earth). And if that second install base is 8B, and even if only 10% of them play a game, that's still an 800M user market - which is bloody huge. The actual percentage of game players is significantly higher - some online queries put it at of 50% of smartphone users. That's a potential market of over 4B if we use your assumptions. Additionally, if you own a phone, you have the potential to buy a game at any time. You just need to be converted (and Apple puts a lot of effort into that in their app store). It's also much lower friction to get a game on a phone than a standard computer (which is, admittedly, pretty low to begin with).
        thebean11 5y ago
        Sure, I agree with all that, but what's your point?
        falcolas 5y ago
        My point is that "the size of the market and the scope of it matter[s]". It's what allows Apple have more game-related revenue than Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo combined.
- belltaco 5y ago
  Interesting argument, I wonder if Apple fans would be okay if people started calling iOS devices limited capability consoles.
  - falcolas 5y ago
    The 'limited capability' label is becoming less and less relevant as times goes on - about all you can't do on one these days is take calls, at least when compared to an iPhone. Music, check. Videos (including streaming platforms), check. Games, triple-check. Browser, check. Apps to make games, check. Exploitative apps, check. No Kindle/Kobe readers though. Unfortunate, that.
    - croon 5y ago
      Which kind of gets to the point. The limited capability is only artificial, and only on things that would give users more freedom (and themselves less money). It's forced Internet Explorer on Windows, except 100 times worse because it permeates through the entire platform. You can't get any other storefronts because that wouldn't funnel money to them. You can't get any game streaming apps, because see first point. They're general purpose devices in anything that makes them money, and nothing else. It's not because they won't spend money to introduce that functionality, but that they specifically spend money on denying that functionality. AOL won a suit against Microsoft for integrating IE in Windows. How on Earth is Apple any better? Just to make an add-on point they even force every other browser on iOS to use webkit.
      - falcolas 5y ago
        My thoughts on using devices with "blessed" uses: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28921319 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28921319 Love it, hate it, they have their value.
        croon 5y ago
        If iOS devices were Switches, you would have a point. Phones are very commonly peoples only computing device, where they do everything from banking, identification, purchasing to socializing as well as gaming etc which people used computers for before, when the Windows debacle occured. Do you think the ruling in AOL v Microsoft was wrong? You completely dodged that aspect by linking to a comment about games consoles.
thehappypm 5y ago
How in the world is "I want to sell my game on this platform" at all similar to "I want to buy electricity from this electric provider"?

by croon 5y ago

falcolas 5y ago

There are no other platforms on the Playstation, XBox, or Switch either (brought up, because those are the focus of TFA).

thebean11 5y ago
So the question is, does the size of the market and the scope of it (gaming vs general purpose computing) matter?
- falcolas 5y ago
  If you're looking for the number of potential customers for purchasing games - it absolutely does. More customers, more game purchases, more game revenue - even if the absolute percentage of game players is less. Just look at how big ATVI's mobile gaming revenue is: it rivals (and sometimes beats) the revenue from their "core" products (a'la Call of Duty).
  - thebean11 5y ago
    But the size of potential customers for games is still much smaller than the market for a pocket sized computer (roughly everyone on earth). I was more talking about the size of the current install base of the platforms (iOS, Xbox etc) though.
    - falcolas 5y ago
      > But the size of potential customers for games is still much smaller than the market for a pocket sized computer (roughly everyone on earth). And if that second install base is 8B, and even if only 10% of them play a game, that's still an 800M user market - which is bloody huge. The actual percentage of game players is significantly higher - some online queries put it at of 50% of smartphone users. That's a potential market of over 4B if we use your assumptions. Additionally, if you own a phone, you have the potential to buy a game at any time. You just need to be converted (and Apple puts a lot of effort into that in their app store). It's also much lower friction to get a game on a phone than a standard computer (which is, admittedly, pretty low to begin with).
      - thebean11 5y ago
        Sure, I agree with all that, but what's your point?
        falcolas 5y ago
        My point is that "the size of the market and the scope of it matter[s]". It's what allows Apple have more game-related revenue than Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo combined.
belltaco 5y ago
Interesting argument, I wonder if Apple fans would be okay if people started calling iOS devices limited capability consoles.
- falcolas 5y ago
  The 'limited capability' label is becoming less and less relevant as times goes on - about all you can't do on one these days is take calls, at least when compared to an iPhone. Music, check. Videos (including streaming platforms), check. Games, triple-check. Browser, check. Apps to make games, check. Exploitative apps, check. No Kindle/Kobe readers though. Unfortunate, that.
  - croon 5y ago
    Which kind of gets to the point. The limited capability is only artificial, and only on things that would give users more freedom (and themselves less money). It's forced Internet Explorer on Windows, except 100 times worse because it permeates through the entire platform. You can't get any other storefronts because that wouldn't funnel money to them. You can't get any game streaming apps, because see first point. They're general purpose devices in anything that makes them money, and nothing else. It's not because they won't spend money to introduce that functionality, but that they specifically spend money on denying that functionality. AOL won a suit against Microsoft for integrating IE in Windows. How on Earth is Apple any better? Just to make an add-on point they even force every other browser on iOS to use webkit.
    - falcolas 5y ago
      My thoughts on using devices with "blessed" uses: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28921319 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28921319 Love it, hate it, they have their value.
      - croon 5y ago
        If iOS devices were Switches, you would have a point. Phones are very commonly peoples only computing device, where they do everything from banking, identification, purchasing to socializing as well as gaming etc which people used computers for before, when the Windows debacle occured. Do you think the ruling in AOL v Microsoft was wrong? You completely dodged that aspect by linking to a comment about games consoles.

thehappypm 5y ago

How in the world is "I want to sell my game on this platform" at all similar to "I want to buy electricity from this electric provider"?