183 replies to this topic

[Frigidman]

You would all be surprised just how many people are on 10.5 and 10.4 who purchase mac games these days. Two OSX versions that will NOT have the (cr)App Store ability.

Also, there will be a need for outside sites like Mac Game Store that isn't afraid to sell the good stuff, and all of the good stuff that apple is trying to censor out. Granted Mac Game Store won't sell adult rated pr0n games... but what self respecting company out there does? So, basically MGS will be where you go to find all the games for sale... and apples thing will be where you go to find kiddie games that passed the PTA's inspection for appropriateness.

[Tacohead]

I have a feeling that the large majority of people who purchase games from the Mac Game Store are savvy enough to where they wouldn't need the overly ridiculous simplicity of the Mac App Store to get what they want. These same people are most likely going to go wherever they can get the best price regardless of the method of delivery. So from a games perspective as long as the Mac Game Store keeps their prices slightly less than that of the Mac App Store then I don't think there's much to worry about.

And of course this is only for games that are available in both outlets. Based on the guidelines we've seen so far there may not be too many of those situations.

Frigidman, on 24 October 2010 - 09:50 AM, said:

You would all be surprised just how many people are on 10.5 and 10.4 who purchase mac games these days. Two OSX versions that will NOT have the (cr)App Store ability.

Also, there will be a need for outside sites like Mac Game Store that isn't afraid to sell the good stuff, and all of the good stuff that apple is trying to censor out. Granted Mac Game Store won't sell adult rated pr0n games... but what self respecting company out there does? So, basically MGS will be where you go to find all the games for sale... and apples thing will be where you go to find kiddie games that passed the PTA's inspection for appropriateness.

Grand Theft Auto and Assassin's Creed 2 anybody? (among many others)

-PN

[Eric5h5]

Tacohead, on 24 October 2010 - 09:56 AM, said:

Grand Theft Auto and Assassin's Creed 2 anybody? (among many others)

Note that Grand Theft Auto and Assassin's Creed 2 are on the App Store (albeit AC2 is not the console version).  Once again, I have to say that this notion that the guidelines only results in "kiddie games" is totally baseless.  The intention is to prevent X-rated games and hate games (e.g., a game where the point is to kill Jews or something), that's all.

There are legitimate things to criticize, such as not allowing demos.  I don't understand why Apple is so against them, especially for Mac apps where the average price will be significantly higher.  (Note that the iPad market seems to have successfully resisted the 99¢ mentality.)  But if these omissions allow MGS to continue, then that's something.  However, the idea that only "kiddie games" would be allowed on the Apple Store is just wrong.

--Eric

[Cougar]

Smoke_Tetsu, on 20 October 2010 - 01:47 PM, said:

$#^&$^#&*$ once again they are messing with the location of the titlebar buttons take a look at the screenshot of the mac app store window at the Lion page. Basically on that app the titlebar buttons are a part of the toolbar.... someone tell me how this is better? It's change for changes sake once again.

It's better because it saves some pixels. A title bar serves no purpose for one-window applications. I agree that it looks terrible, though. Hopefully the UI is not done yet. (BTW, did anyone notice the iOS scrollbars, complete with the "rubber band" scrolling effect? Not sure if I'd like that in the entire OS, though.

the Battle Cat, on 20 October 2010 - 06:21 PM, said:

The Mac App Store doesn't mean anything to me.  As always I'll search for a bargain and Apple almost never offers those.

Huh? Apple doesn't control developer's prices. There are plenty of bargains on the iOS App Store.

Regarding Lion...for me, the preview was largely a disappointment, though mission control does look slick. I was sure 10.7 was going to be the release where Aqua elements would finally disappear. Maybe they are waiting to reveal the new UI for a later date, but it's discouraging. Fullscreen mode in preview is awesome, but re-appropriating the green button for fullscreen is bad, bad, bad. Still no Tabs and dropstack in the finder, which means I can't say goodbye to Path Finder yet. No built-in clipboard history, or any word on a new file system. And Mail and iCal still retain their non-iPadlike appearance. The Launchpad looks useless--so much easier to use the dock + spotlight.

[Janichsan]

Eric5h5, on 24 October 2010 - 10:56 AM, said:

Note that Grand Theft Auto and Assassin's Creed 2 are on the App Store (albeit AC2 is not the console version).

AC2 would be precluded for its DRM.

[Thain Esh Kelch]

Cougar, on 24 October 2010 - 03:48 PM, said:

Huh? Apple doesn't control developer's prices. There are plenty of bargains on the iOS App Store.

Indeed. I personally use Appshopper to find bargains, as you can filter by popularity - Games that went free or got a lower price for a short periode, shoots to the top of the list quite quickly.

[ikir]

I don't understand this negativity about Mac App Store. Since devs gets lot of money considering Apple hosts files and give devs a bigger audience. I think devs will make a lot of $ with Mac App Store. You are free to use normal installation procedures for software that "touch" os components or are not allowed.
It will be an easy way to install software especially for novice users.

People still on tiger? No sense to me, Snow Leopard is awesome.

[Matt Diamond]

Perhaps Apple's App Store restrictions telegraph some of their intent, here.

There are many, many programs that simply aren't suitable for selling through their App Store, because they need demos, or user experience, to motivate the buy. The kinds of users who will buy _only_ from the App Store are the kind who aren't buying those programs anyway. So the App Store hasn't really hurt those developers.

As for games: if it's a AAA game, they probably don't need a demo anyway for all users. (Believe it or not, some people do buy games off the shelf, sight unseen. Though it would help if the developer had the ability to refund and deactivate the purchased copy if it didn't run.) The kinds of users who demand a demo will go find one the same way they do today, and they will therefore find and buy the game wherever they do today.

Certain game types will be effected more than others. If I put out yet-another match 3 game, I'm going to have a hard time selling it for anything other than the same low price of competitors on the App Store. But does that mean Aspyr or Freeverse are going to have to charge bottom dollar for something more unique? Maybe not, because again, it's their choice whether to sell on the App Store at all. They can risk a high price because their existing user base will still buy, on or off the store.

So I don't think it's all gloom and doom. The App Store will take a bite out of existing markets, some worse than others. But I think it won't be crippling to most developers. The target audience seems to be users like the current iOS App buyers, many of whom weren't buying software anyway.

[DaveyJJ]

Matt Diamond, on 25 October 2010 - 03:32 PM, said:

Perhaps Apple's App Store restrictions telegraph some of their intent, here.

There are many, many programs that simply aren't suitable for selling through their App Store, because they need demos, or user experience, to motivate the buy. The kinds of users who will buy _only_ from the App Store are the kind who aren't buying those programs anyway. So the App Store hasn't really hurt those developers.

As for games: if it's a AAA game, they probably don't need a demo anyway for all users. (Believe it or not, some people do buy games off the shelf, sight unseen. Though it would help if the developer had the ability to refund and deactivate the purchased copy if it didn't run.) The kinds of users who demand a demo will go find one the same way they do today, and they will therefore find and buy the game wherever they do today.

Certain game types will be effected more than others. If I put out yet-another match 3 game, I'm going to have a hard time selling it for anything other than the same low price of competitors on the App Store. But does that mean Aspyr or Freeverse are going to have to charge bottom dollar for something more unique? Maybe not, because again, it's their choice whether to sell on the App Store at all. They can risk a high price because their existing user base will still buy, on or off the store.

So I don't think it's all gloom and doom. The App Store will take a bite out of existing markets, some worse than others. But I think it won't be crippling to most developers. The target audience seems to be users like the current iOS App buyers, many of whom weren't buying software anyway.

Still not convinced the benefits outweigh the negatives. Today, for example, the brilliant folks behind Pixelmator announced they'll be hitting the App Store with their superb $59 image editor. Good for them, I know they'll sell lots. How they'll handle trials/demo for a piece of software that is that "expensive" (and it is a steal at that price) and the upgrade pricing for owners when the app hits 2.0? Not on the Apple store they won't.

Again, this isn't about $2.99 or $34.99 or even $9.99 apps ... it's about $30-50 (or more) applications that rely on a trial version to ensure you're getting what you want for your money. Devs could obviously maintain their own store online or a website with their demo versions but that's a hacky solution at best.

I would be happy to see Apple offer a 7-day refund period for those devs that want to let people try their apps. Apple's gonna know exactly what apps you have installed on your machine that were bought through the App Store, remember, and if you download and delete an app say, within a few days, you get you money back. Simple as that. Android offers this, Amazon offers it. Apple could too. But I don't believe they want to ... they want tight control.

But I want upgrade pricing as well. So I lose.

Indie dev websites like Panic's etc won't go away overnight. But it won't take too many years before Apple becomes the defacto standard.

[Matt Diamond]

I hear what you are saying, but people seem to be arguing that a) the Mac App Store's limitations suck and won't serve many parts of the market well, and b) they are going to be the defacto standard and crowd all the alternatives out.

I don't think both can be true. This isn't the iOS App Store, where alternative sale mechanisms are virtually non-existent. If (a) is true then people will continue to sell, and buy, software elsewhere.

I think Apple's target here is the consumers who buy little or no digitally distributed software. Apple is uniquely positioned to reach those people, but experienced buyers can and will go elsewhere, just as they do when buying music. Some people still buy CDs, still buy Amazon MP3's.

I also want to remind people that for many years the Mac market (and Mac games, to keep this relevant) was seriously squeezed by traditional retail. There was almost no shelf-space for Mac software, and it was expensive to place products there. This meant fewer games being made for Mac, and made it harder for Apple to sell Macs in general.

For that reason it's smart of Apple to help redefine the market when they can. It will help them sell more Macs. And yet their terms are currently so strict that I don't think they will (or intend to) take over the whole market. It's more like they are signalling, "these are the kinds of products our store can best serve- cheap, black box, non-technical, limited upgrades, no manual, inoffensive, etc. Anything more involved is best sold elsewhere."

[Smoke_Tetsu]

Well, even the PC has shrinking shelf space at retail for software at least for games and even Microsoft has their own online distribution store. I wouldn't be surprised if they made a Microsoft app store for windows in the future. I do think Apple needs this more than Microsoft though as the PC still does have software more generally available at retail and many people aren't even aware of what is available on the Mac especially when it comes to games.

But I agree that people would probably still go for alternatives especially the more technically savvy people just like people go for alternatives to the iTunes store for media.

[icemac]

devSin, on 20 October 2010 - 03:59 PM, said:

Can you reduce your cut somewhere less than 30%? I think the terms are the same (?) as with iOS, so there's zero chance of seeing AAA titles (good luck getting the fat cats to fork over that much dough), and you probably have a friendlier approvals process than Apple likely will.

It would be pretty hard to convince me that you still rely on moving physical product for your income, so I'm assuming you're referring to digital sales...

Uhm 30% is pretty much the normal markup of all resellers be they digital or not i mean take the avarage game 59.90 $ is most likely sold by the producer EA or other to gamestop or whatever for 40$ who then add a 19.90 markup as their cut.
The reason it seams so much when it comes to itunes is that they don't really have any retail store costs to cover on that service but neither do any of the other online stores like steam i'm not sure thou what valves cut is.

[The Liberator]

teflon, on 20 October 2010 - 07:42 PM, said:

...So aside from the name being stupid, I think it sounds fairly good.

I completely agree with you there.

PeopleLikeFrank, on 21 October 2010 - 07:31 AM, said:

Doubleplus ungood.

Hmm, yeah.

teflon, on 21 October 2010 - 07:57 AM, said:

I don't think it will be system wide, though. I can't see that being even vaguely a good idea for Safari, Mail, iTunes, Finder, or many other apps that come out of Apple. Some, yes, but all, definitely not. Also, fingers crossed that it won't be an enforced change to third parties for the app store. Why on earth would you want a twitter client that goes full screen on a 24" display?  

...As I said in my first post, it's ironic to an extreme that iTunes would, if submitted by a third party, be rejected from the app store. Lunacy.

Sometimes Apple just do my head in with their changes for changes sake...

I agree, some full screen apps would not make a lick of sense. I also agree about changes for changes sake. Why do they even need to be making Lion? Snow Leopard seems like it is easily good enough for at least another year or two. THEN Apple can start looking at making an update. I think it would be great news if Apple freeze production and research of Lion for at least a year to two. I do not think we need it right now. I for one would not even want it, unless Jobs could lay a golden egg, I wil NOT care.

Janichsan, on 24 October 2010 - 05:35 AM, said:

I'm still convinced that's far too pessimistic (or optimistic, depending on your point of view). I only have to look at the stuff that is installed on my Macs to see that this won't work out. There's simply too much software that's violating one App Store rule or the other.

Among my currently installed programs, the following would not be allowed on the App Store:
...
Even without the freeware, that's still the majority of apps on my computers.


I think that those users getting their software from the Mac App Store only, would be the ones not savvy enough to get software from other outlets in the first place. Primarily those people who are using their computer only for email, internet, maybe some online shopping, but not the target audience for slightly more sophisticated software.

That is a very good point that there are many apps that will not be going through the store, but I still believe it will do more harm than good, and it will also slowy snowball into something bigger, when a year or two has gone by.

Eric5h5, on 24 October 2010 - 10:56 AM, said:

Note that Grand Theft Auto and Assassin's Creed 2 are on the App Store (albeit AC2 is not the console version).  Once again, I have to say that this notion that the guidelines only results in "kiddie games" is totally baseless.  The intention is to prevent X-rated games and hate games (e.g., a game where the point is to kill Jews or something), that's all.

There are legitimate things to criticize, such as not allowing demos.  I don't understand why Apple is so against them, especially for Mac apps where the average price will be significantly higher.  (Note that the iPad market seems to have successfully resisted the 99¢ mentality.)  But if these omissions allow MGS to continue, then that's something.  However, the idea that only "kiddie games" would be allowed on the Apple Store is just wrong.

--Eric

AAA games might eventually go onto the Store, but not in any time soon, I think.

Liberator.

[dimmer10]

I guess one other thing to keep in mind is how the software section of Apple's retail stores has shrunk, and shrunk, and shrunk. This was not a good thing, and of course didn't make the developers / publishers happy. I'm thinking Apple believe that there will be more Mac applications coming, and that stocking, displaying etc. of this new volume just wouldn't be practical. The App Store is a shot at fixing this.

And it is in keeping with what appears to be Apple's view of the future, where optical drives are forgotten and everything is a electronic download.

If nothing else, it'll be interesting to see how well / badly the store works.

[Janichsan]

The Liberator, on 24 November 2010 - 09:44 PM, said:

Why do they even need to be making Lion? Snow Leopard seems like it is easily good enough for at least another year or two. THEN Apple can start looking at making an update. I think it would be great news if Apple freeze production and research of Lion for at least a year to two. I do not think we need it right now. I for one would not even want it, unless Jobs could lay a golden egg, I wil NOT care.

Aw, please, no. Development of the Mac and Mac OS has been stagnant for long enough. If there were yet another year with nothing but "amazing" new iDevices and iOS features, I'd run amok. It's about time there are some new innovative features for the Mac. That's why I hope that Lion has a little bit more in store than just this bloody iPad app launcher.

[Smoke_Tetsu]

They probably only showed what they where ready to show as we still have until summer 2011 before it comes out.

[The Liberator]

Hmmm, if there was essentially nothing of large improvement, ie only things like Mission Control and launch pad, I am sure not to be wasting money on it. If there is somethig of actual interest, then I would consider it. I am not opposed to an update to the OS, but a crappy update, which Lion currently looks like it is.

Liberator.

[edddeduck]

Frigidman, on 24 October 2010 - 09:50 AM, said:

(cr)App Store ability.

Don't know why it's called the crapple store, from what I can see before the store launches it will be a win/win for devs and Mac users. Then again the proof of the pudding is in the eating.

[Frost]

edddeduck, on 26 November 2010 - 11:17 AM, said:

Don't know why it's called the crapple store, from what I can see before the store launches it will be a win/win for devs and Mac users. Then again the proof of the pudding is in the eating.

Well, to be fair, he DID call it the CrApp Store, not the Crapple Store.  

Frigidman, on 24 October 2010 - 09:50 AM, said:

You would all be surprised just how many people are on 10.5 and 10.4 who purchase mac games these days. Two OSX versions that will NOT have the (cr)App Store ability.

Yeah, one of them moderates for IMG. ::Wave::

Still on a Quad G5, and I run both 10.4 and 10.5 on its two hard drives. And I still purchase the odd Mac game that's available for the userbase I'm in, as those Feral guys can attest from the RTW purchases!  

[Mister Mumbles]

Looks like the Mac App Store will hit on January 6. I'm curious to see what will be on offer and how well that'll all go.