Gaming on the iPad

The majority of premiere launch titles for the iPad were gaming focused. Partly because this shows off the device's additional processing power with the A4, but also because the majority are only marginally different from the iPhone version, instead offering native resolution.

First is N.O.V.A. HD, an FPS title that is largely unchanged from the iPhone version except for supporting higher resolution. It runs virtually flawlessly on the platform, despite the larger resolution. The only major annoyance here is that the title doesn't appear to work with any landscape orientation you choose, and Apple's iPad/Case accessory chose the complete opposite landscape view by default.


It's insanely hard to take action screenshots, I discovered

The title performs flawlessly performance wise, though playing an FPS title with look, movement, and fire controls all fighting for your two hands and 10 fingers is still challenging.

Next is Flight Control HD, which continues to do what the original title did well.


Bigger maps are "HD" - Old maps still linger around too

Namely, cast the player as an air traffic controller managing exponentially busier and busier airspace in a 2D world. It's the same that we've seen before, just bigger, more complicated, and scaled up. It's a high profile game for sure, but the approach is safe. While it'd be pointless to destroy what made the game good, there just isn't anything new that the iPad's form factor contributes other than a bigger screen.


It's easier on the bigger screen, until it throws even more at you

There's also Real Racing HD, which looks very high resolution on the platform, though it too is ultimately dependent on a control scheme that's at times difficult. Rotating the screen to drive makes an otherwise pretty normal arcade style racing game surprisingly difficult. There are plenty of driving assists, including automatic braking, and these ultimately save the game from being too complicated to play easily.


Tilt to drive - that's for steering and gas

Worms has long been ported to the iPhone platform, and although its control scheme is initially challenging, it's probably the one that best leverages the iPad. I found the title difficult for the first few plays, and it's got a steep control learning curve, but execution is fun and engaging. The title also looks very crisp on the iPad, though there was the occasional framerate stutter.


The holy hand grenade remains my weapon of choice

Probably next on the list of engaging titles that offer unique control schemes is Command and Conquer: Red Alert. The iPad's display is finally large enough to really allow developers to make titles that are rich and immerse, and not mere novelties. The game still has a bit of roughness around the edges - sounds are sometimes a bit low fidelity for my taste, and there's a lot of speech events that are very very redundant. But the title is strong when it comes to user interaction.


That selection box was made with multitouch

For example, selecting a group of users can be accomplished by either clicking a box, and then dragging a selection (this is a mouse convention), or by using a multitouch gesture (Yes! Finally!). Three points define a selection square, and units within the square are automatically selected. It's a gesture that's natural, super fast, and the exact kind of new use scenario I want to see more of on the platform. Developers need to re-think every bit of preconceived interaction notions from the desktop. Erase of all of it.


If you sucked at RTS, you'll still suck at iPad RTS

Is the iPad a gaming platform? Definitely. Even if you argue that it isn't a fully fledged, integrated one, iPhone games remain the platform's top grossing commodity. The iPad's larger screen and increased processing power will only further amplify that trend, but only if developers can create compelling UI leveraging the iPad's multitouch screen and lack of hardware buttons. Some titles are going to be challenging to pull off, others lend themselves entirely.

Reading Rainbow Final Words
Comments Locked

108 Comments

View All Comments

  • dagamer34 - Friday, April 9, 2010 - link

    Anyone who looks at the raw costs of materials and bases decisions of a product being "overpriced" has never taken Business 101.

    I'll limit myself to 4 things which that "50-60%" pays for:
    1) Running Apple stores and employees
    2) Running Apple itself in Cupertino (and worldwide) - employees, board, executives, etc.
    3) Apple product support for the first year (phone support, in-person support, etc.)
    4) Warranties (i.e. - your iPad breaks in the first year and you complain they should fix it on their dime)

    NEVER assume a company gets a "huge" profit when only looking at BOM. That's just idiotic. And it's almost impossible to know how much the points I listed above factor into a product's cost in any great detail without making huge assumptions or pure guesswork.
  • manicfreak - Friday, April 9, 2010 - link

    Doesn't change the fact the profit gained from the iPad is higher than the iPod from the last few years.

    Overpriced.
  • GTaudiophile - Thursday, April 8, 2010 - link

    That is indeed one of the best episodes of TOP GEAR ever.

    And then at the end, they all drive home to Sigur Ros playing in the background.
  • semo - Thursday, April 8, 2010 - link

    "There's also an optional VGA output, but I won't point out what issues I have with that."

    Why?
  • Anand Lal Shimpi - Thursday, April 8, 2010 - link

    I was poking fun at it, I thought it was obvious what my issues with a VGA dongle would be. Especially given that Apple's own products haven't supported VGA in years, and the input is definitely not common on modern HDTVs.

    It looks like the iPad is missing a TMDS as we don't get any options for digital out (HDMI, DVI, DP). I'll clarify in the article :)

    Take care,
    Anand
  • PhilipHa - Thursday, April 8, 2010 - link

    You may be interested in

    http://www.brightsideofnews.com/news/2010/4/7/the-...

    contains some interesting performance comparisons between x86 and ARM (but not IPAD)
  • pervisanathema - Thursday, April 8, 2010 - link

    You would be much wiser to wait for the inevitable widescreen version with a camera and faster CPU. I guarantee Apple has one in the works and they are simply waiting to screw the early adopters. The 4:3 aspect ratio was obviously picked solely so they would have a compelling reason to force people to buy the next revision.
  • dagamer34 - Friday, April 9, 2010 - link

    OR 4:3 works better with books and it's the same ratio as the iPhone?
  • Shadowmaster625 - Thursday, April 8, 2010 - link

    You pick a heck of a time to start complaining about apple's app pricing. Of course they are going to charge an arm and a leg for apps. That's what apple does. That's ALL apple does. This device, all told, requires an over $1500 investment for 2 years.

    iPad $500
    Bag $30
    10 Apps $120
    2 years of service $720
    Other accessories $50
    Taxes ~$100

    Total >$1500

    It is a ripoff of epic proportions. It's no faster than a penium III notebook I can buy on ebay for $68. This is outrageous. Are you out of your flippin mind? The real economy is in the middle of a depression. Real private GDP is down close to 20%. By and large, the only people who are going to be able to afford this overpriced garbage are people sucking off the government teat. (Like union trash collectors and station agents who make 6 figure salaries.) Nobody who actually works for a living in the private sector is going to spend $1500 on something like this, not if they wish to remain solvent anyway.
  • strikeback03 - Friday, April 9, 2010 - link

    Umm, your numbers are slightly off. There is no service fee for the WiFi-only $500 iPad. The 3G version starts at $630.

    Besides that though, I know plenty of people who have the disposable income to buy a toy like this of they wished. Sure it is overpriced, but just as there are consumers who pay $500 and up for video cards ther are some who pay $600-700 for expensive toys like this. It is arguably a better use of money than that $800 netbook Sony came out with last year.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now