Bait and Switch: How Apple Created Nintendo’s Best Console
When Shigeru Miyamoto stepped on stage at WWDC 2016, the world collectively gasped: Nintendo had finally relented to the mobile-first world. Little did everyone know that Apple was just a bullet point in Nintendo’s latest marketing strategy. The world’s most famous game character had turned the world’s biggest company into just another platform to jump from.
Indeed, Nintendo had already made as much clear a year earlier:
[O]ur primary objective is to encourage smart device users to be interested in and to play with our dedicated video game systems, and we are focused on this goal.
As you will see in this deep-dive, this merely touches on Apple’s inadvertent role in creating the Switch success story — unprecedented in Nintendo’s history — which has helped revive a company many thought was on death’s row.
Apple’s Game
Apple has always had a rocky relationship with gaming. They have historically paid little attention to gaming — most notably on the Mac. However, post-iPhone they demonstrated an apparent newfound commitment to games by seemingly devoting significant resources and attention to it each year.
2008
Initially, they stumbled into the gaming arena through the App Store. It soon became the most dominant category, taking the lion’s share of almost every metric. iOS became the premier mobile gaming platform, with many predicting consoles were on their death bed. Apple sought to capitalise on that by featuring games in their iPhone ads and, at one stage, even positioning the iPod touch as a handheld console.
2009
Next came their foray into the lounge room: the 2nd generation Apple TV with AirPlay Mirroring. Theoretically, users were supposed to be able to mirror dev-optimised iOS games to the TV, where you could then use the iOS device as a controller.
2010
Apple introduced Game Center in iOS 4. Until then, various third party frameworks filled the gap for online multiplayer (e.g. OpenFeint).
2011
iOS 5 saw enriched Game Center functionality including turn-based gaming, player photos, friend suggestions, and achievement points.
2012
Along with Game Center, Apple brought Game Center Challenges to Mac OS X, which helped further establish the possibility in people’s minds that they truly cared about games now.
2013
Apple revamped the Game Center app UI, and added new turn-based game modes and support for standardised, Made for iPhone (MFi) hardware game controllers.
2015
ReplayKit launched on iOS 9 — a framework enabling users to record gameplay footage, as well as audio from the app and microphone. Apple unveiled the fourth-generation Apple TV and touted its gaming capabilities.
They released the iPhone 6s, which featured 3D Touch + Taptic Engine. This unique feature set led many to believe (including me) that Apple had a literal game-changer under its belt — e.g:
- WIRED: Apple’s Biggest Gaming Innovation Isn’t TV, It’s 3D Touch
- TIME: Why Apple’s New iPhone Could Be Great for Games
- Finder: How 3D Touch Could Make iPhone the Dominant Mobile Gaming Device
- Forbes: Will Apple’s 3D Touch Revolutionize Mobile Gaming?
2016
For iOS 10 and macOS Sierra, Apple decided to remove the Game Center app from its platforms altogether. The only remaining hint of its existence is the occasional game banner or multiplayer iMessage invite.
2017
Apple redesigned the App Store in iOS 11 and created a distinct games section. One of the features proudly announced was the ability for in-app purchases to be highlighted on the storefront, in app pages, and in search results.
What Went Wrong?
On the surface, it seemed Apple was consistently improving the gaming experience on their platforms with these additions:
- App Store
- Apple TV
- Game Center and ReplayKit
- MFi Controllers
- 3D Touch + Taptic Engine
However, this would turn out to be a mirage, as they iterated very little and hardly encouraged developer adoption — instead taking the “Build it and they’ll come because we’re Apple” approach.
1. App Store
The App Store’s lack of iteration has hurt Apple in more ways than they can fathom. The introduction of in-app purchases helped one flavour of game to flourish: casual, freemium games. The problem was they didn’t provide the counterbalance for other game categories to thrive: app trials. This meant in-app purchases-based games rapidly took over the App Store, heavily tipping market dynamics in its favour. Serious games were unable to compete, as the economics were unfeasible — users expected games to be free, and if a developer had poured resources into creating an in-depth paid game, the user wanted to see where their money was going. Indeed, this issue extends beyond games to the long-term sustainability of the iPad and Apple TV platforms, as Ben Thompson noted back in 2015.
Another issue has been Apple’s content standards. They have stringent policies regarding acceptable app content, yet they are inconsistently applied. The most recent example being The Binding of Isaac — first rejected due to “violence against children”, but then accepted a year later with no changes. The associated uncertainty means indie developers are reluctant to invest in creating new titles for iOS. Meanwhile, Apple have never had any qualms about selling virtually every movie and TV show in iTunes — nudity, violence and all.
2. Apple TV
Apple’s first attempt to bring gaming to the living room — AirPlay Mirroring — sounded great in theory, but very few games implemented it, and those that did experienced significant lag.
The fourth-generation model attempted to remedy this by switching operating systems to an iOS fork and having a dedicated native App Store. I have outlined some of the issues with this approach in my previous piece:
Furthermore, Apple’s unrefined approach of simply sticking an entire App Store on it has resulted in a product no different from Android TV — blown-up smartphone games and all. Not every app category needs to be present on the Apple TV.
The result is a similar lack of focus on games, which Apple has demonstrated on iOS: games are just another app category; they killed Game Centre rather than ever iterating it; they instituted and then re-reversed their gaming-unfriendly controller policy; and they have crippled games by forcing them to be under 200MB, yet upsell a 64GB model just because they can (just last week, they decided to finally reverse this illogical policy — 16 months later). The strongest evidence that Apple has no cohesive understanding of games: they redesigned the entire box to incorporate a huge heatsink, which is totally under-utilised. This suggests that the product team’s original plan was for the Apple TV to be a serious console, but the marketing team hijacked it.
Indeed, months later, a report from Mark Gurman confirmed my suspicions:
The team debated bundling a gaming controller with the current model to better compete with Microsoft Corp.’s Xbox and Sony Corp.’s PlayStation. That didn’t happen either… To a certain extent, the Apple TV is handcuffed by its parent’s addiction to fat margins. Apple is constitutionally allergic to losing money on a product — even if it can make up the difference by selling content… Likewise, not bundling a gaming controller was partially a cost-driven decision.
Accordingly, rather than tailor-made, console-quality games appearing on Apple TV, we have UX disasters like this — which was one of Apple’s featured games for years:
3. Game Center and ReplayKit
Like Apple’s other cloud services, Game Center has always had a chequered history. It was introduced two years after the App Store launched, yet has always had performance problems — the prime example being the persistent performance issues thanks to one game, two years into Game Center’s life. Unfortunately, the same issues kept cropping up years later:
Indeed, Loren Brichter, the developer behind Letterpress has since expressed regret for using Game Center:
BRICHTER: Switching off Game Center was priority #1 for me… Game Center was rough. It was my mistake to use it. The game had always been cross-platform, but there were so many bugs in Game Center for Mac that if I had launched it I would have been crushed under the weight of tech support.
DREGER: In the past, you’ve not been shy about poking fun at Game Center. Indeed, even though Letterpress launched to critical acclaim, I think a good number of early players ran into the infamous
SILLY ERROR -1001, 23. Many speculated that it was Letterpress’s popularity that was highlighting the limitations of Game Center.BRICHTER: Yep. Nobody could play the game for a while after it launched. If I cared to track attrition rates I’m sure I would have crawled into a hole.
DREGER: Last week’s service outage notwithstanding, if you were developing Letterpress today, would Game Center still be a part of your original stack?
BRICHTER: Nope.
Another noteworthy example that comes to mind is Halfbrick removing Fruit Ninja’s Game Center multiplayer mode despite its immense popularity.
Rather than improve Game Center to match services like Xbox Live¹ or to enhance Apple Watch, Apple gave it a paint job and called it a day for three years… until they decided to simply kill it. Meanwhile, they launch ReplayKit — a feature that would suit Game Center perfectly — and the only destination is the vanilla Share Sheet. As usual, they skate to where the puck will be, but fail to hit it:
In case you thought Twitch was just another side-gig for Amazon, they have gone “all in on games” and formed a game studio.
Indeed, if Apple had launched a video platform for ReplayKit (“Apple Replay”, if you will), it would have benefited them beyond games: they could have used it to segue into a full-blown streaming video service, much like Twitch has been doing. They could have even used it for Apple Music Connect, rather than launch the lifeless, DOA service that it is. Instead, they’re devoting resources to shoehorn TV shows into a music app, just like they shoehorned App Stores everywhere else.
4. MFi Controllers
Apple created the MFi Controller standard because they recognised that console-calibre games required controllers to match. However, this was only one piece of the puzzle and, per usual, it remains an unfinished thought:
But the first crop of controllers have been met with much criticism from developers, reviewers and consumers alike. The consensus so far: flimsy buttons and joysticks, lack of support from developers, and a $99 price tag make them far overpriced compared to your standard Bluetooth game controller. The launch for the first few controllers to hit the market was rushed, developers are disappointed and still trying to catch up, and manufacturers are limited in pricing, features, and quality due to Apple’s MFi program requirements.
That critique was written in 2014, yet little has changed. With Apple TV, Apple had another chance at reviving the incredible opportunity presented — imagine the vibrancy of the MFi ecosystem extending to game controllers! — but they missed it. They could have been the first company to offer seamless app + appcessory purchase: think visiting Guitar Hero Live on the App Store and seeing a third button: “Buy Controller + App bundle”.
5. 3D Touch + Taptic Engine
As usual, Apple released a potentially major feature in 3D Touch, but expected developers to enthusiastically implement it simply by virtue of Apple building it. However, the lack of incentive can again be explained by the above factors: the App Store’s freemium economics demand only minimal effort, which creates a vicious cycle resulting in the saturation of un-innovative, casual games we currently witness.
Advantage, Nintendo
Last year, Nintendo finally seized upon Apple’s wasted unfair advantage. After co-opting the calendar’s biggest tech event for their own marketing purposes, they had Apple provide millions of dollars’ worth of cross-channel advertising for Super Mario Run, including a custom worldwide app release notification — something Apple has not even done for their own apps.
This, combined with the wildly popular NES Classic Edition, launched Nintendo back into the spotlight and on people’s minds. Accordingly, Nintendo Switch has sold 2.74 million units in less than a month, becoming the fastest selling console in Nintendo history; sold better than the Wii; and provided them with a 121% profit surge forecast. However, what adds salt to the wound is how Nintendo Switch encapsulates all of the pieces Apple neatly laid out for them:
1. App Store
2. Apple TV
3. Game Center
4. MFi Controllers
5. Taptic Engine
Apple v. Nintendo
Nintendo took cheap, off-the-shelf components and created a more innovative tech product than all its competitors combined — direct and indirect. Indeed, they’ve even battling Apple for components now. The battle doesn’t end there — as Miyamoto made clear, Nintendo is chasing Apple’s captive demographic: casual gamers.
Cleverly, Nintendo realised casual gamers required a different value proposition to the typical gamer: local multiplayer. Over the years, this home console mainstay has become increasingly rare, as the Big Two invested in their online multiplayer services with game studios following suit. This left a market gap, which Apple recognised, but did nothing about for almost a year until they finally released their Apple TV Remote app. Meanwhile, Nintendo made it one of the Switch’s hallmark features.
Nintendo also realised that casual gamers don’t want to double up on costs for home and mobile consoles, particularly since they already have smartphones. Apple targeted this paradigm years ago with AirPlay Mirroring. Since that failed, I predicted Apple would retry it with the fourth-gen Apple TV, long before the Switch was even rumoured:
The result was Universal Apps support in tvOS, as well as the Apple TV Remote app. Of course, the only problem is that many developers didn’t bother redesigning their games for the big screen, thanks to the lack of incentive. Nintendo, on the other hand, built the entire product around this concept.
Conclusion
You may question why Apple should concern themselves with focusing on games; after all, they take a decent cut from the fraction of users known as “whales” while doing practically nothing, and they have over one billion iPhone users, many of whom play at least one game occasionally. I would agree, if not for the fact that Apple set themselves up for success with all the right pieces, but they simply did not execute. Indeed, this is merely part of a concerning pattern of Apple’s content fumbles — see: podcasts, TV, movies, iBooks (and, arguably, even audiobooks).
Furthermore, Nintendo’s success — so close to Apple’s home in every respect — highlights the significant market they ceded. Apple’s foresight became their demise, much like Microsoft has often experienced:
Finally, their latest moves in the original TV series business further highlight how valuable becoming a serious player in the gaming industry could have been. Indeed, if Apple TV were a solid console, it could have even assisted their cable TV negotiations:
You can follow me on Twitter:
—
¹ Speaking of Xbox, their recent Play Anywhere service also takes Apple’s incomplete thoughts and improves on them. It offers the equivalent of Continuity (in the cloud), iCloud Sync, IAP Sync and Universal Apps, combining them into one service.
