http://www.gamenikki.com/g3/inTheNews/Josh.php?id=142
If you haven't heard by now, Sony's cancelled a 2006 launch for the Playstation3 in Europe. 80% of the existing console allocation will go to the US, with only 20% of the existing allocation to Japan.
Right now the allocation estimate is at 400,000 Playstation3 units for 2 continents.
Now, I don't know about you, but this is hardly a launch. This is more like a "What the hell are you thinking"
Once again, another reason to pull out my stock. My God, Sony, what the **** are you thinking? No one is buying this crazy **** you are pulling, no one is going to buy this crapass machine until you finally get the **** to lowball it.
And this is why I never trusted the ps3, because I knew Sony would just mess it up over and over
It's Sony. What did you expect?
I said a long time ago the PS3 launch would be abysmal. Looks like I'm going to be correct in that assumption. ;)
The Wii is all I'll be needing, as far as next-gen goes. :3
didn't microsoft do this with the 360? well, not quite that bad, but...
yep. Wii's my next-gen console. I just wish they'd... well, release the release date.
Microsoft met their initial shipment predictions but fell a little short on the shipments just after that - but they still had way more units out there than the PS3 will have at launch. What's funny is that people complained about MS sticking with DVD instead of using HD-DVD in the XBox 360. HD-DVD uses those same blue diodes that are in shortage and are causing this Blu-Ray delay! Looks like they were smart to stick with DVDs.
You also gotta think that Microsoft and Nintendo are elated at this news. They'll both have many millions of units shipped and ready to sell at Christmas while PS3 will probably wind up having less than 1M units available! The 360's manufacturing issues have been dealt with (they signed on another manufacturer) and the Wii's hardware isn't very powerful, so it'll be easy as pie to mass-produce. At the end of January MS may have up to 10M units out versus Sony's 1M. That's a HUGE advantage.
Hehehehe... now if this happens to Vista as well, I shall be a happy man. Not that I have a problem with the PS3, I don't really care. But it's been amusing to watch it fall apart.
Vista is making real progress. I know, I've been beta-testing it for the last few months. It's good enough now to serve as my main platform. I still encounter frequent application and Windows Explorer crashes, but the OS actually does a good job recovering itself. Usually within 10 seconds or so whatever failed has restarted and the core OS's stability isn't affected.
I don't know if it'll make its October RTM date, but if it doesn't it shouldn't be delayed massively again. Maybe a few months' push, but that's probably going to be about it.
Microsoft seem to be very good at succeeding when there is no possible reason for them to do anything but fail. I think they may have a contract with Satan.
Quote from: BillBuckner on September 06, 2006, 06:30:09 PM
Microsoft seem to be very good at succeeding when there is no possible reason for them to do anything but fail. I think they may have a contract with Satan.
Microsoft Bob. Windows ME. Doublespace. MSDOS 4. Cairo. WinFS. A.C.E. Windows NT on MIPS, Alpha and PowerPC. TabletPC.
Actually the Tablet PC is a very neat, useful idea, but they haven't gotten the execution quite right yet. If they ever get it right (and if I have money) I'd get one.
Quote from: Tapewolf on September 06, 2006, 06:47:28 PM
Quote from: BillBuckner on September 06, 2006, 06:30:09 PM
Microsoft seem to be very good at succeeding when there is no possible reason for them to do anything but fail. I think they may have a contract with Satan.
Microsoft Bob. Windows ME. Doublespace. MSDOS 4. Cairo. WinFS. A.C.E. Windows NT on MIPS, Alpha and PowerPC. TabletPC.
And despite these, their marketshare in consumer PCs is...
I trust nintendo more than sony. Never bought any of their stuff yet . . .
...so much for my country getting any either. Though that's to be expected seeing as Australia hardly raises so much as a beep on the gaming world's radar. :<
Quote from: RJ on September 06, 2006, 09:58:25 PM
...so much for my country getting any either. Though that's to be expected seeing as Australia hardly raises so much as a beep on the gaming world's radar. :<
Despite making a fair chunk of the newest games over the last few years...
Hopefully the price for a PS3 will have gone down by the time it becomes available, but they better have the bugs worked out as well. As for 360, the ones they're shipping now aren't even finished. Supposedly they're still working to make it backwards compatable with more games, and hopefully work out that overheating problem they've been having.
As for Wii, as long as they make the emulations cheap and easy to get, I'll be happy. I want my Secret of Mana back dammit!
Im still in my "wait and see" mode. Theres still not enough games for me to pass judgement.
I dont want to buy another dreamcast [metaphorically speaking] 2008 will be the earliest that i buy a next gen console.
Quote from: Manawolf on September 07, 2006, 12:41:33 AM
Hopefully the price for a PS3 will have gone down by the time it becomes available, but they better have the bugs worked out as well. As for 360, the ones they're shipping now aren't even finished. Supposedly they're still working to make it backwards compatable with more games, and hopefully work out that overheating problem they've been having.
As for Wii, as long as they make the emulations cheap and easy to get, I'll be happy. I want my Secret of Mana back dammit!
It was always known it wouldn't be 100% backwards compatible. The emulation for the old machine is DIFFICULT. You're going to a completely different different CPU class (Intel x86 to IBM PowerPC), and going from an nVIDIA GPU to an ATI GPU. And it's not like you're talking about emulating an NES. It's way more complicated than that - the old Xbox had not-insignificant power.
Physical defects have been on par for the industry average thus far. (Since I work at a video game store, I can kinda judge this on the number of returns we see, which has been relatively low.)
Quote from: Cvstos on September 07, 2006, 01:01:00 AM
Quote from: Manawolf on September 07, 2006, 12:41:33 AM
Hopefully the price for a PS3 will have gone down by the time it becomes available, but they better have the bugs worked out as well. As for 360, the ones they're shipping now aren't even finished. Supposedly they're still working to make it backwards compatable with more games, and hopefully work out that overheating problem they've been having.
As for Wii, as long as they make the emulations cheap and easy to get, I'll be happy. I want my Secret of Mana back dammit!
It was always known it wouldn't be 100% backwards compatible. The emulation for the old machine is DIFFICULT. You're going to a completely different different CPU class (Intel x86 to IBM PowerPC), and going from an nVIDIA GPU to an ATI GPU. And it's not like you're talking about emulating an NES. It's way more complicated than that - the old Xbox had not-insignificant power.
Physical defects have been on par for the industry average thus far. (Since I work at a video game store, I can kinda judge this on the number of returns we see, which has been relatively low.)
It's also noticable in the games that are "supported" that draw distance, load times, texture detail, and other items might be significantly different than on the original Xbox.
The heating problem was/is easily solved with a die shrink, although there is the possibility that Microsoft may use a similar liquid cooling system to the Apple PowerMac G5 that hasn't been completely discarded.
As far as the Wii goes, there are several key differences, and I'm going to contrast it with Sony and Microsoft.
With Microsoft they went with a completely new architecture, PPC from x86, and a completely new Graphics design. Because of their architecture choices their only real option for running games from the Original Console is a combination of Brute force (instruction call for instruction call translation) and High-Level Emulation (calls mapped to their native targets) The downside is that this method is slow and requires a lot of power as there are not a lot of native targets used.
With Sony, they as well jumped to a new architecture, a scalable PPC design from 128 bit MIPS, as well as a dedicated GPU from the soft-GPU design of the Playstation2. While it is theoretically possible to emulate the Playstation2 with Brute Force or High-Level Emulation, Sony went with a different method and is doing the same thing they did with the Original Playstation on Playstation2. There is a hardware chip inside the console that actually handles the emulation process. Rather, it's not emulation at all, the Playstation3 does contain Playstation2 hardware, or at least it did during E3 and at Leipzig. That means that the Playstation3 will be able to offer full compatibility... at an increased cost.
Nintendo, therefor, has the advantage. They had already moved to PowerPC with the Gamecube, coming off of MIPS from the N64. In paraphrazement of Nintendo, the Wii was built on top of the Gamecube. The result is that the system is binary compatible with Gamecube games, or at least very close. There are many (I'm one of them) that presumes that the Gamecube games are native to the Wii system.
It's also not like the Wii is short on power either, a Sega representative during E3 commented that the system could easily run Dreamcast games without an issue. Whether or not it will... well, couldn't answer.
As far as pricing goes, we'll find out more on the 14th of this month.
Nintendo also has a very different strategy from Microsoft and Sony. MS and Sony are trying to wow their prospective customers with more graphical whizbang and more processing power.
Nintendo is (once again) revolutionising the way people interact with games.
Nintendo's lower price-point, combined with the virtual console, and the lure of Zelda, Metroid and Mario at launch make it a perfect "second console" for people who already have / will buy an xbox 360 / PS3.
The Wii's lack of uber-graphics will make ports difficult or impossible, but that doesn't need to be much of a hindrance. Nintendo isn't really trying to compete with Sony and MS in this round. Instead, Nintendo is bringing something actually new.
I will buy a Wii, because I like Zelda, and Metroid, and Mario, an d I'm hoping there will be a good star wars game in the Wii. Imagine light-saber action with the wii-mote (light-saber sounds coming from the wii-mote itself, and the light-saber on screen doing what you do with the wii-mote, etc), and force-powers with the nunchuck-attachment. (gesture it towards you for force-pull, towards the screen for force-push, etc.)
Not to mention appealing to the tons of Nintendo fans by having a legal emulator for their old games, and also those who got tired of trying to ply their action games with a computer keyboard. It appeals to gamers both new and old.
i'd say sony is digging the playstation's grave itself. if there were some problems with defective PS2 consoles, and a big load of problems with defective PSPs, the odds is that PS3 may have even bigger problems are big. but this time, if they are having a hard time trying to fullfill the need for the first units, replacing them will be a big issue.
I think this time it's Nintendo vs. Microsoft. sorry sony, but if this were the 16-bit war, PS3 would be the turbografx
Oh, and let's not forget how every PSP commercial ever (at least, I THINK I'm aware of them all) sucked the most amount of ass anything's ever sucked, and that some of them were even racist, covered up poorly. I think they WANT to drop out.
X-BOX, PS2, Gamecube: Gamecube was my favorite. They had a lot more games my style, and more unique ones as opposed to mainly just sports and shooters. Although PS2 wasn't without it's charm. Gotta love RE Outbreak 1 and 2 and Monster Hunter. But Nintendo really just has most of my love because they like multiplayer. A lot. As for X-BOX... I really don't care for their games.
DS, PSP: DS has a fun way of doing things, Zelda, Mario, Metroid, and lots of good games. PSP has it beat in features, but for crying out loud, I buy a gaming system to play games. And from what I've heard, most people play NES and SNES roms on the PSP. It really doesn't have a good selection of games at all. And the UMDs? ....PUHLEASE! Why buy a second version of a movie you already have, JUST to be able to play it on one little tiny screen.
X-BOX 360, PS3, Wii: Still don't care for the X-BOX selections, so it's out. I wanted to get a PS3 once upon a time ago, but after hearing about having to download games and the price.... there's a slim chance of that. Wii... ah, the Wii. 21 years of gaming love from the year of my birth till now. Zelda, Mario, Metroid, Smash Bros, and oh so many more awesome games coming out for launch or soon after.... under $250, which is half the price of the other two... Yeah, still sticking with Nintendo. So it doesn't have as much graphical power, oh well. Graphics aren't everything and I'd rather have awesome gameply over that any day. Magazines were all saying how out of the PS2, X-Box, and Gamecube, PS2 games usually had the worse graphics of the three for multiplatform games... I never saw much of a difference, if any. Either graphics just mean that little to me, or people put more ino graphical difference that what is really there.
Quote from: Jack McSlay on September 07, 2006, 12:27:27 PM
i'd say sony is digging the playstation's grave itself. if there were some problems with defective PS2 consoles, and a big load of problems with defective PSPs, the odds is that PS3 may have even bigger problems are big. but this time, if they are having a hard time trying to fullfill the need for the first units, replacing them will be a big issue.
I think this time it's Nintendo vs. Microsoft. sorry sony, but if this were the 16-bit war, PS3 would be the turbografx
I don't even know if it'll be that. A large number of people I talk to in the store say they're going to get an Xbox 360 AND a Wii, since that's roughly the same price as a PS3! Microsoft's head people are thinking the same way, with some of the top Xbox guys suggesting that as a way to go. Sony could well find themselves in third place, and neither MS nor Nintendo need to dominate in order to be successful this time around. The market is big enough for three consoles to survive, but Sony will need to sell PS2-like numbers for the PS3 to recover the costs of designing and making the system.
Quote from: Vidar on September 07, 2006, 05:46:39 AM
Nintendo also has a very different strategy from Microsoft and Sony. MS and Sony are trying to wow their prospective customers with more graphical whizbang and more processing power.
Nintendo is (once again) revolutionising the way people interact with games.
Nintendo's lower price-point, combined with the virtual console, and the lure of Zelda, Metroid and Mario at launch make it a perfect "second console" for people who already have / will buy an xbox 360 / PS3.
The Wii's lack of uber-graphics will make ports difficult or impossible, but that doesn't need to be much of a hindrance. Nintendo isn't really trying to compete with Sony and MS in this round. Instead, Nintendo is bringing something actually new.
Couple of things here.
First, a comment on second console.
Lets say that Kroger is selling Apples, Oranges, and Pears. Pears are at half the cost of an Apple, and 1/3 the cost of an Orange.
You have 10 customers that come in that each get an Apple. 8 of these customers also get a Pear with the Apple.
You have 5 customers come in that get an Orange, but 4 of them also get Pears with the Oranges.
Which fruit sold more?
8+4 = 12 : The Pear sold more.
Now go back, replace the Apple with the Xbox 360, the Orange with the Playstation3, and the Pear with the Wii System and you'll have a pretty good idea of what sales experts are expecting to have happen with the Wii. It isn't the second console, far from it. Rather, this go around, it's becoming clear that the Xbox 360 and the Playstation3 are the "Second Consoles"
As far as the graphics go, from a development standpoint, it's actually not that hard to port games considering one item, resolution.
Thing about City of Heroe's for a Second. If you want to run this game in say, 1920 × 1080 (1080p), 1680*1050, 1440*900, or 1280*720 (720p) graphics modes, you'll need a pretty hefty graphics card. But, if you don't mind running in say, 1024*768, 720*480 (480p), or lower resolutions, you can get away with a graphics card from several years ago, like the Radeon 8500, a Geforce3, or a Geforce4. You can also keep about the same level of detail the lower the resolution goes.
The same applies to the Wii versus Xbox 360 versus Playstation3. Nintendo's Target Resolution is only 480p, while the Xbox 360 targets 720p with AA, and the Playstation3 targets 1080p. Developers who are willing to drop the resolution aren't having any problems fitting titles onto the Wii. In the case of the Xbox360, most games are built with a 480p mode simply because there, whether or not anybody likes it, a strikingly small number of TV's in use that are capable of anything above 480progressive.
But, It's fine by me if a developer says they can't put a title onto the Wii platform. It allows me to laugh at them and ask who's paying them to say that :mowtongue
Quote from: Cvstos on September 07, 2006, 01:41:43 PMI don't even know if it'll be that. A large number of people I talk to in the store say they're going to get an Xbox 360 AND a Wii, since that's roughly the same price as a PS3! Microsoft's head people are thinking the same way, with some of the top Xbox guys suggesting that as a way to go. Sony could well find themselves in third place, and neither MS nor Nintendo need to dominate in order to be successful this time around. The market is big enough for three consoles to survive, but Sony will need to sell PS2-like numbers for the PS3 to recover the costs of designing and making the system.
I still think Turbografx is a good example. While Nintendo and Sega were strong with their systems, NEC was trying to keep Turbografx alive and managed to keep a good fanbase for a while. I think PS3 will follow the same route but will die faster for the exact reasons you've mentioned.
not only the system is expensive, but also developing games and the games themselves, therefore developers will need a very good reason to choose PS3. PS2 is not considered easy to develop either (great processor, but poor GPU and little RAM).
but they managed to make up for it by having a headstart of over 1 1/2 years over XB and GCN. But now, being the late one in the race, and also having several problems on its production they're going to have a tough time trying to catch up with the already-stablished X360 and the cheap, fast-production, Wii, that is, if the task is even possible for a console that has a high place in the rank os most expensive consoles yet doesn't offer as much.
I think it's higly likely that PS3 will be the console of the late half-assed ports, because I doubt developers will optimize the games for PS3 and then have to dumb its graphics down to run it on Wii or X360. sony managed to cripple the graphics of GCN/XB games with PS2 because developers wanted the game to run on multiple consoles and now they've put themselves on the othed end
Jack: Yeah, and think about this. The street cost of a dual-layer blank, burnable Blu-Ray disc is a whopping $40. $40 for the medium alone. I could see PS3 games costing $70-$80 because of that.
saist: It's actually a lot more complicated than that. There's branding, marketing, perceived quality issues, etc. to factor in. The reality is way more complicated than a simple "it's cheaper so it'll sell more" argument. The Cube was cheaper than the PS2 and Xbox but it got beat in the US market.
That having been said, I do think that there is a chance that the Wii could wind up in the top spot. Not a big one, again in my opinion, but a chance nonetheless. I do think there is a very good chance it'll do very well overall. In fact I'm quite confident that it has a bright future.
As for resolution, the Xbox 360 is more than capable of running fantastic-looking games in 720p. We've already seen that and there's only a couple games out that make use of more than one processor core. In fact I'd say that the 360 is going to have better looking games than the Wii, and resolution does play into that. Playing games on an HDTV looks phenominal. Trust me on this, I've got a 30" Samsung 720p tube and Burnout Revenge 360 looks unbelievable on it.
HDTVs are going to become more and more common during the lifespan of these systems. I got my HDTV for a mere $500. That sounds like a lot, but remember that a few years ago a similar set would have been $1500. It won't be long before CRT HDTVs hit the $300-$400 mark, and we'll see a lot more people buying them.
*reads the thread*
:mwaha
This thread has certainly proved interesting. I echo the sentiment of Seraline that the Wii is going to be about all I'm going to need of the next generation of consoles. Aside from Nintendo's little bundle of joy, it seems like most of the games I'm drooling over currently will either be PC native or multiformat (with due PC consideration) anyway. Then again, my game tastes are strange and I must play Secret Files: Tunguska, I must!
Mana brings up a very interesting point with the emulator though, I can't help but wonder how they're going about it. It interests me, to be honest. I've never been quite sure about the way Microsoft is handling things due to the high price point. I would ask you to excuse me if my attitude is a little blunt here but $10 for a subpar Street Fighter II remake or an average arcade game seems a little much. The price-point to quality seems off.
However, Nintendo have proved in the past that they're good at this kind of thing, redistributing old games, both in their original format and updated. If they can achieve a very low price point for original games with a somewhat higher price point for revamped games (say, $2 to $5 for old console games and X-Box Live standard prices for revamped stuff) then they could achieve a position as the 'iTunes' of the legal emulation industry.
That said, I'm enjoying the innovation and even their emulation aspect seems to be backed up by it. I'm loving the controllers, not only do we have the Wii-mote (which could be used with trackball and arcade shooting games, should Nintendo so desire) but we also have a redone SNES pad for the 'Virtual Console' service. Has anyone seen that thing? It just looks like they took a slightly bigger (Gravis original -- Jazz Jackrabbit era -- sized, I'd think) version of the SNES pad and slapped analogue sticks on it.
That could be the design for either one of the best or worst pads in existance and I'm truly eager to find out which it will be.
Anyway, whatever happens ... it'll be interesting times and I like interesting times.
As I'm sure I've said, I'll be sticking with Wii both because Nintendo has consitently provided me with games I love, and the price >>
But, one specific game has now caught my eye. A game that, granted, not alot is out about yet.
Pokemon Stadium. For Wii. We haven't had a Pokemon Stadium since Nintendo 64!
Quote from: insanekaosx on September 07, 2006, 11:09:03 PM
Pokemon Stadium. For Wii. We haven't had a Pokemon Stadium since Nintendo 64!
Wait, Pokemon Coliseum didn't count?
Or Gale of Darkness?
I think he means a game with the exact name in it.
To make a long story short on what I have heard about this: I believe they are saying that the wii will sell the most of any other gaming consul.
Colleseum and Gale of Darkness weren't Pokemon Stadium, they were 3d Pokemon RPGs. The combat system was the same as in Stadium, but there was also the whole adventure portion you had to go through.
And what's wrong with that? Damn, to actually get a full RPG out of Pokemon for a change was a breath of fresh air. You're asking Nintendo to take a step back now?
Maybe if some of em were wild instead of just being lame shadow pokemon. Oh, that and perhaps if they didn't use the ame old models, just slightly redone, from the N64 games. ^-^ Oh, and a better character designer couldn't hurt. :3
Not that they weren't fun. But I'd just be happy if any of the DS/GBA games had a mode to walk around with 3 other people ala Animal Crossing Wild World or Zelda: 4 Swords.
Quote from: Tapewolf on September 06, 2006, 05:00:37 PM
Hehehehe... now if this happens to Vista as well, I shall be a happy man. Not that I have a problem with the PS3, I don't really care. But it's been amusing to watch it fall apart.
Yee-haa! http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/5325690.stm
Quote from: Tapewolf on September 08, 2006, 12:43:32 PM
Quote from: Tapewolf on September 06, 2006, 05:00:37 PM
Hehehehe... now if this happens to Vista as well, I shall be a happy man. Not that I have a problem with the PS3, I don't really care. But it's been amusing to watch it fall apart.
Yee-haa! http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/5325690.stm
Hurrah :mowmeep Vista is somewhere I've been directing my anti-DRM malice, so this makes me happy for that reason. Plus, it's nice seeing the EC hold fast.
Quote from: Rowne on September 07, 2006, 10:42:20 PM
This thread has certainly proved interesting. I echo the sentiment of Seraline that the Wii is going to be about all I'm going to need of the next generation of consoles. Aside from Nintendo's little bundle of joy, it seems like most of the games I'm drooling over currently will either be PC native or multiformat (with due PC consideration) anyway. Then again, my game tastes are strange and I must play Secret Files: Tunguska, I must!
Mana brings up a very interesting point with the emulator though, I can't help but wonder how they're going about it. It interests me, to be honest. I've never been quite sure about the way Microsoft is handling things due to the high price point. I would ask you to excuse me if my attitude is a little blunt here but $10 for a subpar Street Fighter II remake or an average arcade game seems a little much. The price-point to quality seems off.
However, Nintendo have proved in the past that they're good at this kind of thing, redistributing old games, both in their original format and updated. If they can achieve a very low price point for original games with a somewhat higher price point for revamped games (say, $2 to $5 for old console games and X-Box Live standard prices for revamped stuff) then they could achieve a position as the 'iTunes' of the legal emulation industry.
lesse...
unless another blog post hits the front page soon, this link will probably take you to a reprint of what Gamesindustry.biz had to say about Zanthus's Marketing report from 2005
http://www.gamenikki.com/g3/blogs/Jason.php?page=2&firstIndexItem=32&lastIndexItem=40
Back in June Famitsu reported Satoru Iwata talking about Virtual Console pricing here: http://www.famitsu.com/game/news/2006/06/07/103,1149672727,54492,0,0.html
Kotaku gave a translation here : http://www.kotaku.com/gaming/top/wii-ship-date-coming-this-sept-178969.php
The speech indicated that pricing would be set at about 500 yen - 1000yen, or about $4-$8 (US). Right now it is believed that NES games will sell for a flat $4, SNES for a flat $6, and N64 for a flat $8, in reference to the Zanthus model.
The reason for this is that Nintendo has historically tried to match Japan and US prices. Europeans though will probably get charged about a Euro Dollar or more per title.
As far as I have seen, Nintendo has not commented specifically on pricing new and revamped content available through Virtual Console. All Wii really know at this point is that it will have aspects similar to Steam. It is quiet possible that Nintendo may merely link to purchasable content that is hosted elsewhere, which saves on their cost and helps keep development prices down. Or, Nintendo could go the Microsoft way and simply host everything, though that really doesn't sound like Nintendo's style. It might be wise to keep in mind that Nintendo is being much more developer-centric this go around than they were with the Gamecube, and they see the Virtual Console as a way to get more gamers developing games.
However, Nintendo has talked about WiiMakes, or rather, turning Gamecube games into Wii games in a recent issue of Nintendo Dream magazine. The Wiire reports on that here : http://www.thewiire.com/news/410/1/Nintendo_Considering_Wiimakes
Miyamoto specifically mentioned that he saw Wiimakes retailing at default lower prices than their Gamecube originals, mainly because the bulk of development work had already been accomplished. For some of the more popular Gamecube games, this has brought to mind the idea of $20 and $30 Wii versions, and hey, lets be honest. Most of us would probably drop down $20 for a copy of Mario Sunshine, and most of us would drop down $30 for a Wii version of Resident Evil 4.
Definitely sounds like Nintendo's onto a marketing winner and even if they don't win as much as they expect to on the innovation front, I think that the draw of casual gaming, especially with virtual console and the possibility of returning to armchair computing and archaic home computer prices (something I hadn't considered ... and such a golden age it was too) would pull in a number of people.
If the SDK is easy to use, it might mean that Nintendo could seize up a sizable chunk of the Indie and more liberal in distribution Asian developers. I notice they already have Ntreev under their wing, remaking Pangya for the Wii. If Pangya also plays online then I'll be a very happy man.
I recently read an article in Games™ about how the Wii might not be embraced due to the niche nature of it. I can't help but feel that that article was a tad short sighted and whilst it did cite one or two niche titles that weren't overly popular, it blatantly ignored titles like Katamari Damacy which were. I think that Nintendo is going to take up the niche market that Sega held with the Dreamcast as their first strike on the market, which is something they started doing with the Gamecube but with all the support they're getting, it can go so far beyond that.
I can honestly see that fans of Indie gaming (such as myself) would buy a Wii simply for the Indie support, if that's going to be a big thing. As you said, the system they're employing sounds to be Steam-like, in which case that makes it easy for a developer to digitally distribute their wares and mark the kind of price that they would find acceptable. With all the evidence, the Wii could see the birth of a new market for Indie games and a new launch platform for them to gain a new audience. Live Arcade has done this to an extent but again, the price point has made it not as successful as it could've been. The Wii might do right what MS has done wrong in all counts and we might see a platform that isn't the PC/Mac experiencing an Indie software boom. And I salivate at that thought, I really do.
Of course, I realize that not all of these little hopes of mine might be realized but Nintendo are closer to achieving them than any other company has been thus far. And considering the intermix of the Wii-mote and the underground point'n click movement, we might finally see a true rebirth of the adventure gaming genré.
Flights of fancy, sure. But I can hope.
Quote from: Manawolf on September 08, 2006, 11:41:11 AM
And what's wrong with that? Damn, to actually get a full RPG out of Pokemon for a change was a breath of fresh air. You're asking Nintendo to take a step back now?
No, see, I love the RPG, its great. But sometimes, I just want to battle. Why have to go through all the rpg bits of the game, find a trainer, etc etc, when I can just pull out STadium and just start kicking ass?
Quote from: Rowne on September 08, 2006, 03:16:55 PMI can honestly see that fans of Indie gaming (such as myself) would buy a Wii simply for the Indie support, if that's going to be a big thing. As you said, the system they're employing sounds to be Steam-like, in which case that makes it easy for a developer to digitally distribute their wares and mark the kind of price that they would find acceptable. With all the evidence, the Wii could see the birth of a new market for Indie games and a new launch platform for them to gain a new audience. Live Arcade has done this to an extent but again, the price point has made it not as successful as it could've been. The Wii might do right what MS has done wrong in all counts and we might see a platform that isn't the PC/Mac experiencing an Indie software boom. And I salivate at that thought, I really do.
I hope so too. I really look forward to Wii's software development features, as well.
As far as I know all the independent developers will get is SDKs for creating only games based on the Virtual Console consoles, but I hope they will also add Wiimote functionality, it will be a big loss if we're still stuck to the SNES-like controller.
My guess is that mos people will use the N64 sdk, simply Z80 sounds evil. I think only people who want to show their programming skills will develop for older consoles.
And if the rumors that the Wii will run Dreamcast games come true then I don't think we'll need anything else. Nintendo should do so, it's a wise choice since DC is currently the most popular console among independent developers.
Indeed, couldn't have said it better myself.
The current attitude really seems to be to map the PC's distribution hierarchy that's working so well for startup developers these days to a console. Personally I'm looking forward to seeing the likes of Head Over Heels with N64 level graphics for $8 and all. I already said that this could pull on board a good chunk of the Indie scene but it hadn't occurred to me that the freeware scene might find this intriguing too ... and being a deployer across countries, this could even pull on board a number of Japanese freeware developers.
We could see a true rebirth of the humble shmup and the 2D beat 'em up. Gareeku should be doing backflips about now. Well he should, I know I am.
We all know what the flat, fixed rate is for the consumer (and those are pretty prices) but I hope that Nintendo will be good to the seller aswell, not taking most of the money in the transaction, as that would really put off developers. In every attempt to do this in the past, it's always been royalties and hefty fees that has turned off the indie developer. I realize of course that Nintendo isn't the same company as it was when it was operating under the vision of Yamauchi so this might just be a pointless worry.
Anyway, just tossing in my current, random thoughts on this again.
Yay, Head Over Heels 3D. I want Sabre Wulf 3D too!
Quote from: Rowne on September 09, 2006, 03:29:12 PM
Yay, Head Over Heels 3D. I want Sabre Wulf 3D too!
Have you ever seen the Linux version of HoH?
I dunno about the next gen console stuff, but I must be defective in some way because I've never managed to get the hang of the Gamecube controller. :erk It's the only system I've run into to give me so many problems. Am I alone in this? Also, on a related note, will the Wii let you use other controllers than that odd looking one that comes with it?
Pardon my derailment.
dunno about 3d on indy games, with the current situation of graphics, N64-esque graphics may not be hot for most people. 2d on the other hand, the N64 SDK has enough horsepower to do so, anyone who's witnesses the beauty of games such as paper mario, Wonder Project j2 or Neon Genesis Evangelion should be able to confirm that.
obviously there will be good 3d games as well, but I have a feeling 2d ones will end up being most popular
Quote from: The Lurking Dragon on September 09, 2006, 04:30:48 PM
I dunno about the next gen console stuff, but I must be defective in some way because I've never managed to get the hang of the Gamecube controller. :erk It's the only system I've run into to give me so many problems. Am I alone in this? Also, on a related note, will the Wii let you use other controllers than that odd looking one that comes with it?
Pardon my derailment.
don't worry, the Wii controller comes on 3 flavors: the most widely known remote, the classic controller which looks like a SNES controller with 2 extra analogs and the option to use gamecube controllers
well, I know I'm not getting one...I mean 600 (Censored) dollars? I could buy a 360 or Wii and have money left to buy games with that amount of cash! and another thing...Ol' Kenny saying that the price is too cheap?! What the Heck?!!
Jack: It was more shameless promotion of old Spectrum games (I did love them dearly) as opposed to really wanting to see them in 3D. Though 3D with a fixed perspective would be nice for the Spectrum isometric titles. But no, I was more thinking of just graphical spitshines for those old wonders, enough so that the kids of today might get into them. Then everything will finally come full circle.
Tape: Of course I have! At least, if you're refering to this (http://retrospec.sgn.net/games/hoh/). It's very pretty.
Quote from: Rowne on September 09, 2006, 05:18:24 PM
Jack: It was more shameless promotion of old Spectrum games (I did love them dearly) as opposed to really wanting to see them in 3D. Though 3D with a fixed perspective would be nice for the Spectrum isometric titles.
Tape: Of course I have! At least, if you're refering to this (http://retrospec.sgn.net/games/hoh/). It's very pretty.
Yep, that's the one. I was pondering that for the 'what game' thread, but I said I wouldn't use anything I'd done myself. (Although technically I didn't write it - it was mostly a recompile with a few tweaks)
I'm not really sure there's much you could do to improve on HoH - a 3D view would kind of kill it. Sabrewulf might work, although it would perhaps make it feel even more dated than it does already.
Yeah, that's why I mentioned a locked 3D view though. 3D environment and models with real-time lighting and shadows but a locked camera position. Think Klonoa.
----
But I do have to give props once again to that remake, it was really wonderful. It'd be grand to see more like that.
I'm going to end up getting Wii on launch, and then Xbox360 for Christmas. I already save up a good sum of money from my pay, and my birthday comes around in October, so I'm pretty much set. All that remains now is getting the reservations.
I'm going to comment a bit on the development side of it.
The first is that the Wii Development kit is only $2000. That's it. The requirement to get a development kit is also pretty light. All you need is a licensed business with at least 3 employee's.
Now, there are some caveats to actually being the lowest class indie developer, such as you have to produce a certain amount of content by a certain amount of time, and that you may not retain full rights to the game. E.g., you create something that takes off like wildfire, Nintendo could reserve full rights to make a sequel or use your content how they want to.
Anyways, it's cheap to develop for the Wii, and Nintendo is aggressively courting independant developers to come to their developer relations with ideas.
An off the record conversation with a developer from Geist (N-space) also revealed another interesting tidbit. Licensing fees to produce a Nintendo published game, and get Nintendo to manufacture a WiiMote attachment are so low, that you could develop a full length game (10-12 hours of content), advertise it, box it, have it in retail (WalMart, Gamestop), sell for $40 (US), and generate a profit... with under 300,000 units... total.
If developers choose to limit themselves and just pursue Virtual Console distrobution only, another source reckoned that a 3 person team could probably generate a profit with a price tag of $15 and probably 50,000 units.
Now, keep in mind for a second here, exactly how high the budgets run from the likes of EA, Activision, Take2, and other developers. They are budgeting several million dollars per game, and need to sell several million units to make a profit.
With the Wii, Nintendo is making Garage development a reality again.
Now, I do need to clarify Profit. When I saw Profit, I mean enough money left over for your own team to completely develop another game with no other outside funding.
Damned. :B
Well, but I kinda bought X0 for the meanwhile anyways. :mowcookie
QuoteI would ask you to excuse me if my attitude is a little blunt here but $10 for a subpar Street Fighter II remake or an average arcade game seems a little much.
Subpar? Hyper SFII with online multiplayer, subpar?
I doubt any of the Wii ROMs will even be redesigned for multiplayer.
QuoteThe first is that the Wii Development kit is only $2000. That's it.
Dude, the PS3 dev kit is free and the X0 dev kit is 99USD per year.
And the X0 has the marketplace to distribute games whilst the majority of their customers own a HD. Wii has 500Mb inner memory.
-_-
QuoteDude, the PS3 dev kit is free and the X0 dev kit is 99USD per year.
And the X0 has the marketplace to distribute games whilst the majority of their customers own a HD. Wii has 500Mb inner memory.
-_-
um.
No.
The PS3 dev kit is not free. The PS3 used Operating System, Linux, is free, but the development kit itself is far from free. Rather, the Playstation3 development kit costs over $30,000, with some reports placing the Development Kit alone at $50,000
http://digitalbattle.com/2006/06/21/wii-development-kit-to-cost-1700/
And, really, what's with this X0 thing? Sorry, using AOL speak is not appreciated, and again, you are wrong.
http://www.downloadsquad.com/2006/03/22/microsoft-to-offer-xbox-360-dev-kit-for-100/
Now, have you actually bothered going to Microsoft's site? Say, here : http://www.xbox.com/en-us/dev/default.htm
And, maybe the forums? say, this thread : http://forums.xbox.com/2320902/ShowPost.aspx
And maybe, this thread: http://forums.xbox.com/6271057/ShowPost.aspx I'm going to quote the relevant part since by this time, I'm fairly certain that you wish to remain ignorant
QuoteA bit further info.. 30th August they release the XNA assemblies - which are to be used inside Visual C# Express.
So yes you will have to know how to code in C#.
The inital release is just for PC/Windows development - but after holidays '06 they are releasing a version which will allow you to develop games on your 360.
If you then pay a fee of $99 you can share your games with other people who HAVE ALSO paid this $99.
This particular point is clarified in this page : http://msdn.microsoft.com/directx/xna/faq/
To make sure that you can't remain ignorant, I am going to again, quote the relevant part:
QuoteQ: How much will XNA Game Studio Express/XNA Framework cost?
A: The XNA Game Studio Express tools and runtime environment for Windows is completely free. To develop, debug and/or play games on the Xbox 360 you will be required to purchase a XNA "Creator's Club" subscription on the Xbox 360 through Xbox Live Marketplace. The subscription is available in 2 options, $99 a year or $49 for 4 months.
The thing is, the Official Microsoft Xbox 360 development kit costs over $10,000 dollars. That's the kit that major developers use, and those who want to optimize their games for the platform.
The problem with software development kits like XNA ( http://msdn.microsoft.com/directx/XNA/default.aspx ), is that you don't get hands on with the hardware. When you purchase the Official Development Kit, you get the Actual console, and the libraries and toolkits that were designed for the console.
So, $30,000 to $50,000 for Playstation3.
$10,000+ For Xbox 360
-$2000 for Nintendo Wii.
Which is cheaper?
Now, to address your next blunder, after correcting your abbreviation.
Quote
And the Xbox 360 has the marketplace to distribute games whilst the majority of their customers own a HD. Wii has 500Mb inner memory.
Sadly, neither point is true. The first is that the majority of Xbox customers do have a harddrive, because it came in the system. The Xbox 360 though, according to Microsoft at Leipizig, is under probably 40% on the harddrive, the reason being that the Core Bundle, the bundle without the harddrive, sold more units than the Premium bundle. The sale of add-on harddrives after that hasn't been enough to make up the difference between the sales of the Core bundles and the Premium bundles.
You can get the harddrive here though : http://www.gamestop.com/product.asp?product%5Fid=802117
The other point where you are wrong is that the Wii is stuck at 512 memory. Keep in mind, the Wii will have an SD card drive built into the unit, so unlike the Gamecube memory card adapter, this time around that functionality will be useful. In the case of WiiConnect24, many of the discussed offtime loading plans count on users having SD memory cards to save to. Then you have to consider the USB 2.0 ports, which according to a SquareEnix developer (talking about the next "Crystal Chronicles" can accept USB memory sticks and probably USB hard-drives.
So, passing Nintendo off as though they haven't thought about the external, or internal storage, or how you can use that storage... Like your abbreviation for Xbox 360, it doesn't work.
Now, the final point I'm going to make is over this particullar line:
QuoteI doubt any of the Wii ROMs will even be redesigned for multiplayer.
You seem to have missed the point here. Nintendo, Sega, NEC, Atari, Midway, Tecmo, and all the other publishers and developers behind NES, SNES, N64, Dreamcast, Saturn, SegaCD, Genesis, Sega32X, TurboGraphix 16, and other consoles are not promising to remix or remake their games. They are simply making those games available, un-modified, for the general public.
I am very confused as to how you would confuse the aim of the Virtual Console with the remix games available on Xbox Live.
As to using Multiplayer on there, it's not exactly very hard. ZSNES has offered NetPlay for SNES games for several years now ( http://www.zsnes.com/index.php?page=features ).
Accomplishing Netplay isn't very hard. All you do is map the second player controls to another console over a TCP/IP connection. That was already being done with the Sega Genesis and the Super Nintendo back in 1992 by a 3rd party who offered a phone modem connection for both consoles. Back then they were able to get netplay working on 4baud phone modems. Nintendo's Wii is a broadband device.
When you actually stop and take a look at the history of taking Cart games multiplayer, yes, Hyper SFII is subpar, whether or not you like to admit that.
No. Unreliable sources & quotage.
Try again, but next time write a longer post. :laugh
Quote from: Paavo on September 10, 2006, 01:08:59 PM
No. Unreliable sources & quotage.
Try again, but next time write a longer post. :laugh
wow. You just called Microsoft's own site unreliable?
You are an idiot. Reporting your post to the mods.
*alright, I just dropped a line that Paavo is trolling. Going to make the advisement from this point that we don't feed this troll*
Quote from: je.saist on September 10, 2006, 01:10:06 PM
Quote from: Paavo on September 10, 2006, 01:08:59 PM
No. Unreliable sources & quotage.
Try again, but next time write a longer post. :laugh
wow. You just called Microsoft's own site unreliable?
You are an idiot. Reporting your post to the mods.
Official forums are as reliable as any nonoffial forum out there, aka bullshittery.
And please don't go tell the teacher on me! I REPRT U! REPORTING; REPORTING!
What a fag, lolz. :mwaha
Edit: FEED ME! FEED THE TROLL NOW! :evar It's funny, everytime some random idiot like isn't hearing what he want's to hear, they use the troll card. :laugh
Quote from: je.saist on September 10, 2006, 02:38:33 AMNow, there are some caveats to actually being the lowest class indie developer, such as you have to produce a certain amount of content by a certain amount of time, and that you may not retain full rights to the game. E.g., you create something that takes off like wildfire, Nintendo could reserve full rights to make a sequel or use your content how they want to.
dunno... http://www.warioworld.com/ still doesn't show up any word about what is the license for the independent developer, so this concept, even if it has been said by an inportant nintendo imployee, may not be final or official.
depending on the details, something on these roots might scare independent developers instead of attracting them
Quote from: Jack McSlay on September 10, 2006, 01:27:35 PM
Quote from: je.saist on September 10, 2006, 02:38:33 AMNow, there are some caveats to actually being the lowest class indie developer, such as you have to produce a certain amount of content by a certain amount of time, and that you may not retain full rights to the game. E.g., you create something that takes off like wildfire, Nintendo could reserve full rights to make a sequel or use your content how they want to.
dunno... http://www.warioworld.com/ still doesn't show up any word about what is the license for the independent developer, so this concept, even if it has been said by an inportant nintendo imployee, may not be final or official.
depending on the details, something on these roots might scare independent developers instead of attracting them
well, all I really know once it gets to that level is from what leaked about the Q funding agreement (The agreement that got Brownie Brown started up and brought Squaresoft back to publishing games for Nintendo systems)
I'm not sure what all the details are on the indie side right now, although given the relatively low barrier of entry, I'm halfway tempted to find out... problem being that I code like a drunk monkey.
I don't doubt the Q funding may have a license of that sort, if nintendo is helping the developer monetarily it's pretty fair to get a slice of the pie, but forcing independent developers to agree that nintendo will claim a good amount of rights over the games they make while nintendo didn't really have anything to do with its development sounds really tyrannical. deviantART lost several artists that way.
so I'm just on standby to see what is the final official word on the Wii's independent developer agreement.
saist:
Actually, I think the percentage of people with HDDs is higher than that. I've sold maybe 2 Core systems since the machine came in with regular supply. Everyone else has bought the premium system, and I have sold maybe 2 memory cards, ever. Plus, the Xbox Live market penetration is upwards of 60%, and most people online would have the HDD, I'd imagine. All the best features of Xbox Live require it.
Granted, I haven't seen official numbers, but our store sells a LOT of Xbox stuff so I can usually get a feel for the Xbox community and market pretty easily.
As for the dev kit, $2000k and a business license is still too much for me to swing. I'd rather get the free or $99/year XNA kit, especially considering that you can use XNA to make Windows XP and Vista titles as well (and Windows has a WAY bigger available market than any game system). Hell, if I wanted to make a 360 game I might just make a Windows game using non-hardware-specific coding and port the thing to 360 real quick. Not that I could make a complicated game, mind you. Maybe in a few years, but not now. It'd be easy enough on hardware to run on either just fine.
Now, it is nice that the Wii has a relatively low barrier to entry, but right now I think Microsoft is beating them a bit there. Although both are doing way better than Sony, who may wind up seeing their own hubris as their downfall (how appropriate).
Quote from: Cvstos on September 10, 2006, 01:57:18 PM
saist:
Actually, I think the percentage of people with HDDs is higher than that. I've sold maybe 2 Core systems since the machine came in with regular supply. Everyone else has bought the premium system, and I have sold maybe 2 memory cards, ever. Plus, the Xbox Live market penetration is upwards of 60%, and most people online would have the HDD, I'd imagine. All the best features of Xbox Live require it.
I can only go on the numbers Microsoft announces, and I have to keep in mind that when it comes to Xbox Live, that is a pure worldwide thing. Now, if Microsoft wants to step back and say "hey, we were joking at Leizpig, we actually have higher than 50% rate on harddrive adoption" fine, Microsoft can do that.
QuoteNow, it is nice that the Wii has a relatively low barrier to entry, but right now I think Microsoft is beating them a bit there. Although both are doing way better than Sony, who may wind up seeing their own hubris as their downfall (how appropriate).
This got me actually looking through the XNA documentation and the Games Express beta development Kit : http://msdn.microsoft.com/directx/xna/gse/
What I'm having to keep in mind is that the free kits leave out many of the tools and libraries that the official kits get. Now, I'm more familar with the PS2 LDK (Linux Dev Kit) in this reguard, and the dev kits for the original Xbox than the Xbox 360.
In the case of the PS2 LDK kit you had most of the tools that Official Developers got, but you were missing things like the lightweight stripped MIPS Linux Kernel, and access to the I/O and some of the Audio handling systems. The free XNA kit appears to be under similar restrictions here ( http://msdn.microsoft.com/directx/XNA/gse/readme/default.aspx ). While there isn't anything major missing from Microsoft's XNA package, this isn't the same set of tools that you get with the official development kit.
In the case of the original Xbox, again, while you could develop code that would run on both the Xbox and a standard Windows PC, it wasn't that easy. The official Xbox development kit had a stripped NT5 kernel and some custom libraries that were not made available for the "normal" Windows platform.
The same is still true with XNA.
The point I'm trying to make here, and this is the point I tried to make early to Paavo, is that these comparisons are invalid. This situation is like comparing Apples and Oranges.
I am not comparing the Nintendo Development Kit to the free XNA development Kit. I am not comparing the Nintendo development kit to the Linux Operating System and the IBM provided Cell and PPC development tools.
I am comparing the Nintendo Development Kit to it's Direct Equivelents from Microsoft and Sony.
Sony's Official Playstation3 development kit is anywhere from $30,000 to $50,000
Microsoft's Official Development kit is over $10,000
Nintendo's development kit is under $2000
It's not even a comparison. It's not even a contest from a developers point of view.
Now, if you do want to talk about XNA, and if you do want to talk about Linux and the IBM Tools, then no, Nintendo doesn't have anything to offer there, or to those groups who would use those tools.
Quote from: Cvstos on September 10, 2006, 01:57:18 PMsaist:
As for the dev kit, $2000k and a business license is still too much for me to swing. I'd rather get the free or $99/year XNA kit, especially considering that you can use XNA to make Windows XP and Vista titles as well (and Windows has a WAY bigger available market than any game system). Hell, if I wanted to make a 360 game I might just make a Windows game using non-hardware-specific coding and port the thing to 360 real quick. Not that I could make a complicated game, mind you. Maybe in a few years, but not now. It'd be easy enough on hardware to run on either just fine.
the $2000 kit + business license is for people who want to start kicking in full-featured games for mass distribution in disc copies.
as for what will be distributed via virtual console using the SDKs of older consoles, it's still unclear if the developers will need the same dev kits and therefore comply with the same requirements as big developers or there will be a simpler license which will appeal for a much wider amount of developers.
according to this - http://www.warioworld.com/apply/wii.html it seems that the requirements are mostly to ensure the company will be able to mantain confidential information. and I don't see why they would need to keep confidential information about consoles they don't even support themselves anymore, and several of such info has already leaked.
Quote from: Cvstos on September 10, 2006, 01:57:18 PM
Hell, if I wanted to make a 360 game I might just make a Windows game using non-hardware-specific coding and port the thing to 360 real quick.
I have no idea what OS is running on the '360, but since it's supposed to have an ARM or PPC core I kind of doubt it's your normal Windows NT base. If MS have managed to keep the PPC-specific parts free of bit-rot since they abandoned it about 10 years ago, I'll be impressed.
You might get lucky with a recompile like that, you might not. I for one am still trying to understand why the same code works on WM2003 and proper Win32, but not on CE.NET even though WM2003 is CE.NET with a different shell.
Unfortunately, from the sounds of it, all the crappy half-assed titles are going to be jumping onto the Wii for a quick buck, if Nintendo allows it.
Quote from: Manawolf on September 10, 2006, 02:25:55 PM
Unfortunately, from the sounds of it, all the crappy half-assed titles are going to be jumping onto the Wii for a quick buck, if Nintendo allows it.
Nintendo is giving the program to make games for those people who want to make games but can't afford to produce them or get a publisher.
Basically, the Virtual Console games will cost money, and the created games can be placed there as well. I'm not sure if the newly created games will cost money, but I'm assuming they cost much of anything unless they become famous, if at all.
Quote from: FireKatKid on September 10, 2006, 03:36:30 PM
Nintendo is giving the program to make games for those people who want to make games but can't afford to produce them or get a publisher.
Basically, the Virtual Console games will cost money, and the created games can be placed there as well. I'm not sure if the newly created games will cost money, but I'm assuming they cost much of anything unless they become famous, if at all.
From what I understand, Nintendo's approach is more Steam like than Microsoft Xbox live like.
In other words, if you want to host the project yourself, but make it accessable through Virtual Console you can, similar to how you can get to Half-Life and Half-Life 2 mods from the Steam program. For example, lets say you make a custom map for Metroid Prime 3: Corruption. Your map, while free, could be accessed through Virtual Console. A more specific example givin was Animal Crossing. Lets say somebody makes a new wall texture, or a special item for the next Animal Crossing. They can put their item up on Virtual Console for others to download.
If you are selling a game directly, then you can also sell it through Virtual Console, for example "Red Orchestra" or "The Ship" which can be purchased through Steam, but can be purchased elsewhere.
Then there is the full blown option, as if you are part of Nintendo. Again, in comparison to Steam, this would be like Half-Life2, which as those of us who have Steam, you can't possibly avoid seeing it or reading about it.
Basically the point is that if you are using Virtual Console as a distrobution for your game, people are going to have to pay. If you are counting on people paying for your game...
QuoteUnfortunately, from the sounds of it, all the crappy half-assed titles are going to be jumping onto the Wii for a quick buck, if Nintendo allows it.
That won't be a problem. If you make a crappy half-assed title, nobodies going to buy it, and Nintendo probably is going to write you off as unprofitable (and you probably remember what happened to the last unprofitable write-off, RareWare which went on to cost Microsoft several million dollars that is probably never going to be recouped)
Woah, this guy has it all figured out and the Wii isn't even out yet.
Congratulations Wii, you truly were the only hope for indie game development!!!
Pssth, what a bunch O' bullshit. :B
The best way to ensure & make room for indie development, would be to cut all the costs like producing gaming boxes/DVDs/manuals etc. and have people design their games for free/minimum fee, and distribute trough an internet marketplace like e.g. the Live. This way the indie developers actually might get paid.
Now if Nintendo is trying something similar, like it no doubt will, it will need to make sure their customers are willing to purchase more additional storage space.
Quote from: je.saist on September 10, 2006, 01:10:06 PM
Reporting your post to the mods.
Contrary to popular belief, everything does NOT belong in the DMFA subforum. Aka being a 5 yrs old isn't exactly the mentality inside these woods. Aka check your mannerism when inside these other areas. Newbie.
Quote from: je.saist on September 10, 2006, 04:02:37 PMQuoteUnfortunately, from the sounds of it, all the crappy half-assed titles are going to be jumping onto the Wii for a quick buck, if Nintendo allows it.
That won't be a problem. If you make a crappy half-assed title, nobodies going to buy it, and Nintendo probably is going to write you off as unprofitable (and you probably remember what happened to the last unprofitable write-off, RareWare which went on to cost Microsoft several million dollars that is probably never going to be recouped)
it someone does a half-assed game that nobody sells... its likely nintendo won't do anything, because the person may not be giving profit, but is not giving expenses either. if nintendo did nothing against Titus for creating a game that became popular due to being no-assed (Superman 64) they're likely not going to do anything about bad indie developers either.
Rare is different because nintendo was paying them, since they were first-perty developers.
Quote from: Jack McSlay on September 10, 2006, 04:52:07 PM
Quote from: je.saist on September 10, 2006, 04:02:37 PMQuoteUnfortunately, from the sounds of it, all the crappy half-assed titles are going to be jumping onto the Wii for a quick buck, if Nintendo allows it.
That won't be a problem. If you make a crappy half-assed title, nobodies going to buy it, and Nintendo probably is going to write you off as unprofitable (and you probably remember what happened to the last unprofitable write-off, RareWare which went on to cost Microsoft several million dollars that is probably never going to be recouped)
it someone does a half-assed game that nobody sells... its likely nintendo won't do anything, because the person may not be giving profit, but is not giving expenses either. if nintendo did nothing against Titus for creating a game that became popular due to being no-assed (Superman 64) they're likely not going to do anything about bad indie developers either.
Rare is different because nintendo was paying them, since they were first-perty developers.
The problem with that is that you assume that the Nintendo of today is the same Nintendo of the N64.
They are not, and have proven so on a regular basis over the past couple of years.
This is not 1995. This is not 1996. This is not 1997, 98, 99, 2000, 2001, or whatever. This is 2006 and applying behavioral concepts that have not been demonstrated in a relative decade, doesn't work.
Quote from: je.saist on September 10, 2006, 04:56:13 PM
The problem with that is that you assume that the Nintendo of today is the same Nintendo of the N64.
Yup, this is the Nintendo of the Game Cube era. That totally was the biggest hit in home console gaming & an era of right choices by Nintendo!
All you Nintendoholics have speculated endlessly on how Nintendo will now "win", and now you are beginning to see these speculations as the truth. Nothing but time will reveal what will actually happen.
Thus far the X0 has handled their shit pretty decently, even in making room for indie development, and we can only wait & see what will happen with Nintendo & Sony.
Paavo. Drugs. Off of them. Now.
Especially for this random load of shit you decided to smear around:
Quote from: PaavoContrary to popular belief, everything does NOT belong in the DMFA subforum. Aka being a 5 yrs old isn't exactly the mentality inside these woods. Aka check your mannerism when inside these other areas. Newbie.
Quote from: je.saist on September 10, 2006, 04:56:13 PMThe problem with that is that you assume that the Nintendo of today is the same Nintendo of the N64.
They are not, and have proven so on a regular basis over the past couple of years.
This is not 1995. This is not 1996. This is not 1997, 98, 99, 2000, 2001, or whatever. This is 2006 and applying behavioral concepts that have not been demonstrated in a relative decade, doesn't work.
basically you're saying that nintendo will turn down games that doesn't seem good to them? that was the nintendo of Pre-N64 era, which did retarted mistakes such as taking off all blood from Mortal Kombat and caused Sony to eat the console gaming market
no console company these days will turn down games that appear to be half (http://gameboy.ign.com/index/reviews.html?constraint.floor.article.overall_rating=3&constraint.return_all=is_true&sort.attribute=article.overall_rating&sort.order=desc) - assed (http://cube.ign.com/index/reviews.html?constraint.floor.article.overall_rating=3&constraint.return_all=is_true&sort.attribute=article.overall_rating&sort.order=desc) unless they're the ones the company is financing. whatever game that sells means profit for nintendo when they're not the ones developing nor publishing them, not matter how bad it is.
getting games for a console is like mining, you can just take what's obviously valuable form the surface, or you can get big chunks of land and bring a lot more valuable except you're bringing a lot of crap along as well
Quote from: Paavo on September 10, 2006, 04:38:26 PM
Contrary to popular belief, everything does NOT belong in the DMFA subforum. Aka being a 5 yrs old isn't exactly the mentality inside these woods. Aka check your mannerism when inside these other areas. Newbie.
Paavo is the proud winner of a one day ban for violated Rule #1- No Racial Slurs! Congratulations, Paavo!
When you do get to read this, just so you are aware: this is not ICVD, so you might want to check YOUR mannerisms when you drop by next.
Quote from: Jack McSlay on September 10, 2006, 05:26:36 PM
Quote from: je.saist on September 10, 2006, 04:56:13 PMThe problem with that is that you assume that the Nintendo of today is the same Nintendo of the N64.
They are not, and have proven so on a regular basis over the past couple of years.
This is not 1995. This is not 1996. This is not 1997, 98, 99, 2000, 2001, or whatever. This is 2006 and applying behavioral concepts that have not been demonstrated in a relative decade, doesn't work.
basically you're saying that nintendo will turn down games that doesn't seem good to them? that was the nintendo of Pre-N64 era, which did retarted mistakes such as taking off all blood from Mortal Kombat and caused Sony to eat the console gaming market
no console company these days will turn down games that appear to be half (http://gameboy.ign.com/index/reviews.html?constraint.floor.article.overall_rating=3&constraint.return_all=is_true&sort.attribute=article.overall_rating&sort.order=desc) - assed (http://cube.ign.com/index/reviews.html?constraint.floor.article.overall_rating=3&constraint.return_all=is_true&sort.attribute=article.overall_rating&sort.order=desc) unless they're the ones the company is financing. whatever game that sells means profit for nintendo when they're not the ones developing nor publishing them, not matter how bad it is.
getting games for a console is like mining, you can just take what's obviously valuable form the surface, or you can get big chunks of land and bring a lot more valuable except you're bringing a lot of crap along as well
And that assumes that Nintendo is the same as the Nintendo before the N64.
Quit living in the past and please join the present. I'm sure you have heard of the saying that past performance is no indication of future performance. Have you heard of it?
Quit trying to apply about what you think about Nintendo, and start trying to apply what we KNOW about Nintendo, and how the Nintendo of today operates.
And for dear lord, quoting IGN? That's like quoting Wikipedia. (and for reference in case the comparison is lost on some people, Wikipedia has a reputation for being about as accurate as a StarWars Clone Trooper Circa Episode4 original release).
Anyways, the point that I'm making is that Nintendo is giving people a chance with the Virtual console to make games at the same level, and on the same developer relations, that major 3rd party publishers get. Nintendo is giving independant and Garage developers a path to retail sales that they certainly aren't going to get from Sony, and may or may not get from Microsoft.
But, if you can't produce, or you don't produce, that probably means a termination of your license to create any future content.
Now, earlier you wanted to make the statement that Nintendo didn't punish Titus. Excuse me for bursting your bubble, but how exactly was it Nintendo's job to punish Titus? That's like saying the President of the USA is in charge of Gas Prices. Sorry, no. Doesn't work that way. Reality is not there.
The free market punished Titus. They took a soaking on expenses for the license to make Superman content. They took a soaking on consumer goodwill. All Nintendo did was give Titus a platform to make a game on. It's not Nintendo's responsibility to ensure that all that content is good. If the content isn't good, then consumers don't buy that content, plain and simple. End of Story. Many would claim that Titus still hasn't recovered from that bomb, and I for one would agree with that.
In reguards to the Virtual Console, if you do decide to go full bore and work as a Nintendo developer, then you are expected to produce. If you don't, that doesn't mean Nintendo has to support you or take responsibility for your actions or your product.
Quote from: je.saist on September 10, 2006, 05:39:02 PMNow, earlier you wanted to make the statement that Nintendo didn't punish Titus. Excuse me for bursting your bubble, but how exactly was it Nintendo's job to punish Titus? That's like saying the President of the USA is in charge of Gas Prices. Sorry, no. Doesn't work that way. Reality is not there.
The free market punished Titus. They took a soaking on expenses for the license to make Superman content. They took a soaking on consumer goodwill. All Nintendo did was give Titus a platform to make a game on. It's not Nintendo's responsibility to ensure that all that content is good. If the content isn't good, then consumers don't buy that content, plain and simple. End of Story. Many would claim that Titus still hasn't recovered from that bomb, and I for one would agree with that.
In reguards to the Virtual Console, if you do decide to go full bore and work as a Nintendo developer, then you are expected to produce. If you don't, that doesn't mean Nintendo has to support you or take responsibility for your actions or your product.
that's exactly my point.it costs little to no money for nintendo when a crap of a game makes no sells, and for a VC game that makes no sells, it will cost only a small portion of HD space. Nintendo didn't do anything to Titus's license because they were giving nintendo money. Nintendo kicked Rare because they were taking away money. That's the philosophy sony taught them
and I have no idea why it doesn't apply to VC as well, therefore there I see no reason why nintendo should turn down people who don't stay up to standards.
There's no such thing as taking away a license because the developer isn't producing. That kind of thing is dealt between financier and developer, not console maker and developer, and the financier is not necessarily (and not often) the console manufacturer. After granting a license for a developer, Nintendo doesn't really care if the developer will actually make games for it. If a company gets licensed and then they are unable to make Wii games, that's the developer's problem, not Nintendo's.
The thing is, Rare used to be a kickass game developer. They made the DK series, Goldeneye, Perfect Dark, Star Fox, tons of great games and series. They just went to hell when they signed onto Microsoft.
Quote from: Manawolf on September 10, 2006, 06:33:14 PM
The thing is, Rare used to be a kickass game developer. They made the DK series, Goldeneye, Perfect Dark, Star Fox, tons of great games and series. They just went to hell when they signed onto Microsoft.
Well, they only made one Starfox, which everyone seems to like the least of them all. And everyone seemed to give DK64 a bad review. I liked em both, myself.
Of course, my Rare love lies in Goldeneye, Perfect Dark, Diddy Kong Racing, the SNES and 64 DK games, Banjo-Kazooie and Tooie and Grunty's Revenge, Conker's Bad Fur Day, and a few others I can't recall. was Turok by Rare? I forget.
But yeah, it was funny seeing the money Microsoft put into Rare flop horribly. :3 Though I was saddened to hear that they made the Conker sequel bad...
It wasn't even a sequel. Conker for Xbox was a fricken' port of Bad Fur Day. I played it, it was bad. I needed cheats just to beat the first, and now they've removed them? Okay, forget this.
I did like DK64 though, I thought that was a good game. Maybe people kept getting stuck on the part where you had to play the original Donkey Kong. I even got the Soundtrack and lipsynced the DK Rap for my acting class in college.
Turok was Acclaim.
Quote from: Manawolf on September 10, 2006, 06:33:14 PM
The thing is, Rare used to be a kickass game developer. They made the DK series, Goldeneye, Perfect Dark, Star Fox, tons of great games and series. They just went to hell when they signed onto Microsoft.
eh, might as well finish driving this thread off topic :(
Rare didn't go to hell when they signed to Microsoft. Basically, all Microsoft bought was the name Rare and several of the IP items (Conker, Perfect Dark, Kameo)
The problem was that many of the RareWare developers had already moved on. The team behind GoldenEye, for example, had already moved onto Free Radical and were working on Time Splitters. Other development teams, like those behind Jet Force Gemini, Donky Kong, Diddy Kong, and Blast Corps had also moved onto third parties. Some went to teams like Naughty Dog, Insomniac, or joined Free Radical witht the GoldenEye team.
By the time Nintendo started with the Gamecube, around 2000-2001, Rare had already been effectively gutted. The only entire team left from the N64 years was working on Dinosaur Planet / Star Fox Adventures, and that was the development team headed by the Stamper Brothers, the founders of Rare. The development team behind Kameo: Elements of Power, never were able to get their titles up to the expectations the Stamper brothers had for the "normal" released titles. It was during this time that the Stamper Brothers announced their intention to retire. Star Fox: Adventures would be their last title, then they were gone.
That put Nintendo in a difficult position. While Rare had been a driving force behind the N64, there was only going to be one completed Rare game by the time the Stamper Brothers left. Kameo was in no condition to be a title. The result was that for the first 8 fiscal quarters of the life of the Gamecube, RareWare contributed nothing to Nintendo's bottom line, and looking ahead, wasn't going to be capable of producing content that they considered worthy of buying.
I was one of those that presumed that anybody who bought RareWare had to be a flipping idiot. It would have been better to have bought the properties, and just dissolve the development team. That Microsoft purchased the properties, and the Kameo development team, was a shocking development, pun intended. And it showed. During the past... I want to say 3 years, Rare's most profitable content was Gameboy Advance titles, either remakes of SNES titles, or 3rd party developed content like the GBA Banjo title.
I for one, still hold, that Microsoft screwed up big time by letting the remaining RareWare developers handle titles like Conker and Perfect Dark Zero, and the average review rating for both I think bears that out.
/me now contemplates changing the topic title to something else... it's been a few posts since the PS3 launch disaster was discussed...
I wouldn't. You'd just confuse everyone who was looking for the thread. ;)
Tapewolf: As I said, right now any attempt by me to make a game would likely be one that's coded to be platform-agnostic with high-level coding. Something simple. That's a lot easier to port.
Quote from: Cvstos on September 10, 2006, 08:05:24 PM
Tapewolf: As I said, right now any attempt by me to make a game would likely be one that's coded to be platform-agnostic with high-level coding. Something simple. That's a lot easier to port.
Good - I wish more people would do that. The Head over Heels remake was done using Allegro to abstract most of the system away - SDL is another good choice. I don't know how much cleaning up the OSX and BeOS people did, but it was nearly a straight recompile for Linux by the time I got the source code.
Quote from: Damaris on September 10, 2006, 05:36:03 PM
Paavo is the proud winner of a one day ban for violated Rule #1- No Racial Slurs! Congratulations, Paavo!
Thanks! OT: what was the racial slur BTW? Just so I could avoid it in the future.
And no, I wasn't lesb*an enough to PM or "report" you, since I know how much a bitch it is to read all the billion whinings by some random forum users.
/end O' ot :zombiekun2
"Fag" was the winning entry. Coupled with an earlier warning to behave.
And who was the second part directed to? I'm not sure what you meant.
Quote from: Damaris on September 11, 2006, 06:24:39 PM
I'm not sure what you meant.
In short: I could've sent you a PM conserning my question, but since I know how irritating it sometimes gets to have ka-billion stupid user-whine PM's on an admin inbox, I deicided to distract this public thread even if that is not that kosher.
F*g is a race now? j/k I guess I didn't get you either. But if I did, plz explain, since I confuzzl'd now. :<
Ah, nevermind. :evar
/end of OT period
We lumped many degrading terms under racial slurs. So conventionally, no, it is not a race, but for ease of reference, we lump all of it together.
However, I would prefer that you ask your questions here, rather than at other forums. Makes things easier.
Would anyone mind if I replied to some of the more fun topics raised here?
With indie development, the reason I'm not too fond of the Microsoft system is because it's too organized. I'm probably going to get slapped upside the head for saying this but indie and organization goes together like salted fries and a sugary chocolate milkshake. And it gives one about the same level of indigestion, too.
The reason I considered the Street Fighter II remake to be subpar is because it simply isn't as good as the old console or arcade ROMs which do, indeed, use Kaillera or other forms of netplay. I figured that the best approach is the Nintendo approach, retain the original games and encourage innovation from the indie developers. Give them an even standing ground for development.
With the Microsoft Live and points system, it's a case of X sells for Y and so on. It would be kind of like telling indie developers that it would be favourable if they developed X certain type of game and that their games would slotted in at a Y price margin bracket. This is just how it seems to me, so forgive me if I'm talking out of my arse here but I'm only going on information that I've read in publications.
What I'm hoping the Wii system will be like is as je.saist explained, a Steam-like system wherein the developers can create their own games, to whatever level of professionalism they want and then charge appropriately for it. The reason I'd want to see this is because companies would then rise and fall by the same rules and tenets as the PC aesthetic. The PC indie scene has worked without any level or organization for a long time now and some real gems have been developed.
Man!festo Games and Game Tunnel go a long way towards illustrating this.
I've always felt iffy about Microsoft Live Arcade because it always smelled like Microsoft desired something from it, they were willing it to be something. They wanted it to take up a particular market niche, to mould it into something that they thought would aid their console. Which is why they encouraged items like the Street Fighter II remake (again, as I've read in Games™).
As far as I'm concerned, indie developers simply haven't had a launch platform like the PC for consoles yet. Live doesn't seem to be that. The Wii system looks like it just might and just like with the PC, that lack of force is going to be a breeding ground for innovation. I'd be very happy to see titles like Eets, Kudos and Aveyond popping up on the Wii. I enjoy them as much as I do commercial titles.
I'm not entirely sure whether what I've just said will make sense to everyone but I'm hoping that some wisdom can be gleaned from it as to why I personally prefer the Wii approach.
Finally, I agree with you, Tapewolf. I'd also love to see people developing more entertainment software with a cross-platform archetecture in both mind and practice. To be honest, I'm not exactly looking forward to Vista so I'm even more staunch about that stance than I ever was (and I've always been very supportive of it).
I can't cease to agree with rowne..
the tendency of a team making creative games is inversely proportionate to its size.
see, one must fall, one of the most fun fighting games around, probably the best fighting game for PC, it was done by 4 people.
the old Doom series had a team of about 15 people I think, and is much better than the stuff id makes nowadays
when rockstar started and showed up GTA they weren't big at all.
like Reggie mentioned, big companies tend to do a lot of similar games in order to get more guaranteed profits, they're afraid of spending millions on a game they're not sure it's gonna sell. indie devs, on the other hand, don't rely on the games for a living, so what really matters is having fun by making a fun game.
seriously, I'm sick of all clichés of these days. the ridiculous amount of WWII games each claiming to have it's own touch of originality is really disgusting.
I think nintendo may cause a big turn of the table on the realm of game development with this. if the indie games gain space, it's a possibility many of the players will turn their heads to the more creative games done by smaller developers instead. of course, PC indie development has been on the scene for long, but never had a good way to showcase their works, let a lone sell them. if nintendo does it right, the VC marketplace may become the CafePress of games.
and I agree that many people will buy a Wii primarily for VC games and indie games.
as for X360 independent development, it's like living tuna. everyone knows it exists, but very few people has ever seen it.
It's true!
In fact, I can't think how it wouldn't be. After all, thinking about some of the things I'm looking forward to currently, a lot of them are indie titles. Some of which most people wouldn't have heard of. I'll name a couple of big names though, such as Portal and Team Fortress 2. According to what I've read in both cases, they're both being worked on by small teams.
In fact, the Portal team is fresh out of college, having recently completed something called Narbacular Drop or other, VALVe saw that and snapped them up and set them to work on their mindbending project. They're not a team of a hundred or so, it's just seven or eight guys.
And I'm more excited about Portal than I am about a lot of the stuff that's on the horizon. In fact, the only things I seem to get excited about anymore that do have anything to do with big production are MMOs or certain kinds of multiplayer games (such as NWN2 or Hellgate: London) simply because I'll get to socialize with people in weird locales but for little more than that.
Other than that, I'm not exactly excited by anything lately. It's all become so grey and paste-like, there's barely any palette to corporate development anymore.
I don't know, Rowne. There are a number of big-name titles I'm looking forward to.
Command & Conquer 3
Battlefield 2142
Half-Life 2: Episode 2
F.E.A.R. Extraction Point
Neverwinter Nights 2
Star Trek: Legacy
BioShock
Assassin's Creed
Not to say there aren't any indie titles I want (there are), but there are still a fair host of games from larger companies that are on my list.
I admit that I was more eager to play commercial games until late. It's just that I've been bludgeoned over the head lately so often with how bad commercial games are, I can barely even bring myself to be excited.
For example, between the demos and the full games I've played lately, I've had it continually beaten into my head that the game is either going to become boring after ten minutes play (F.E.A.R), it's not going to live up to any expectations (Dark Messiah of Might and Magic) or it's just not going to expand at all past its own demo (Prey). I just feel that these recent examples of 'top industry gaming' (so sayeth the review publications and sites) are just examples of the tepid and decidedly half-arsed efforts we're going to see from now on.
I was excited about some of those games but I just look at the hype and I can't bring myself to do it anymore. Perhaps if they industry surprises me, just once or twice with something genuinely inventive, that stays good for more than a few minutes (or the length of a demo even) and introduces a few innovative ideas without ripping everything off then I can get that excitement back.
Perhaps the reason indie works is because it has no hype, there is no marketing guff really, not much about indie games is revealed so one forgets about them mostly until they pop up on the radar, they're cheap and one has a good amount of fun with them, a lot more fun than the commercial efforts these days. It's like when I discovered Aveyond, I played that for a lot longer and I was drawn into it much more than other commercial games of late.
It just seems most of the games that I want to play are either those I randomly come across or indie titles mentioned at relatively unknown sites such as AdventureGamers. I found The Secret Files: Tunguska to do much more for my enjoyment and excitement than a great many large, corporate games. That's the problem, really. Back in the day of say, Ultima VII, there were big games being released all the time that really were meaty and had lots of innovation and content. I miss that. Compare something like Ultima Underworld or the Pandora Directive with most of the tripe that's out today and you'll see basically where I'm coming from.
I might get excited about commercial efforts again but I'm just waiting for them to surprise me first. So far, the corporate games industry hasn't managed to do that. Every time I have become excited I find that the truth of how bad it's becoming is just beaten into me a little more. If I see one really, really good game from a large company then maybe it'll do something to rekindle a little of that trust but so far, it just hasn't happened.
Sure, a lot of these games sound fantastic in theory but in practice, I'm not sure they'll be any good at all. Most of them will probably be technical demos with samey levels slapped together as an excuse for content, like FEAR and Prey. Impressive ideas will be shown but those ideas will be the only ideas in the game, they'll be used over and over throughout the game until the idea is so dead that one just wouldn't want to see it again.
That's the problem today, games companies ride a game on one idea and games can't just be ridden like that. They need a number of clever ideas, good content, a great story and fantastic level design. This is why I'm excited about Portal though, it seems that even though it perscribes to the 'one idea' thing, it actually has more to it than that. It's a first-person puzzle game, it's also got action elements to it and there's even something of a story with a mad AI there, it has the chance to be really memorable.
I admit, of that list, Bioshock is the only one I'm really holding up quiet hopes for but ... I'm prepared to be let down.
----
I admit, part of my problem might be that I'm expecting clever/intricate level design and a half-decent plot, it seems that genrés these days have less of that now than they did six-to-ten years or more ago (and that feels really odd to say). Just a comparison between the Longest Journey and its successor Dreamfall is proof enough of that though, as weird as it is.
Strangely, I find more entertainment in indie for two reasons. When they do story, they do it better than commercial teams (at least when they're not trying to be philosophical or theological, Force Majeure was bad in this respect, so very bad), just a look at the latest adventure title (big companies dropped that genré long ago), Aveyond or anything similar proves this. The other reason is that they develop games which don't actually need a strong story, titles such as Gibbage which exist just to be fun. That's a lot of the problem lately, to be honest. Developers create titles which seem to yearn for the grandiose story they'll never have. Instead they should build games without story and not even pretend that they have one, it'll allow them to be more creative instead of them trying to hold themselves to some imaginary plotline.
So perhaps that'll offer some insight into my disappointment. Or maybe not, I don't know.
An interesting new selling point for the PS3
I got this off CNN while looking for data on intels new super fast cheep chips
QuotePlayStation's serious side: Fighting disease
POSTED: 12:01 p.m. EDT, September 18, 2006
By David E. Williams
CNN
(CNN) -- Kids aiming to persuade their parents to buy the PlayStation 3 have some new ammunition -- donating their PS3's down time to researchers could help cure Alzheimer's, Parkinson's or mad cow disease.
This November, Sony's PS3, with a price tag from $499 to $599, will challenge Microsoft's XBox 360 and Nintendo's Wii in a battle royale for holiday dollars when it hits stores in the United States and Japan.
The PS3 uses a powerful new processor called the Cell Broadband Engine to run highly realistic games like "Tiger Woods PGA Tour 07," "Metal Gear Solid 4" and "Full Auto 2." It also has a 20GB or 60GB hard drive (depending on the model) and can connect to the Internet either wirelessly, or with an Ethernet hookup so gamers can download new programs and take each other on.
The PS3's chip is the same one IBM is using in a supercomputer it's building for the Department of Energy. That computer is expected to reach speeds of one petaflop, or 1,000 trillion calculations per second. (Full story)
"It has so much horsepower and, of course, when you're playing a game all that horsepower will be used for the game. But there are a lot of times during the day when somebody's not playing the game," said Sony's Richard Marks. "It seemed like a good idea to be able to use that horsepower for something else that is, in this case, good for mankind."
Sony worked with Stanford University's Folding@home project to harness the PS3's technology to help study how proteins are formed in the human body and how they sometimes form incorrectly.
Improperly formed proteins are linked to a number of diseases, including Parkinson's, Alzheimer's, cystic fibrosis, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, also known as Lou Gherig's disease, and bovine spongiform encephalopathy, better known as mad-cow disease.
"What you can imagine is that if a machine was assembled incorrectly, it can do damaging things," said Vijay Pande, who runs the Stanford project. "You can imagine a car that's screwed up and someone tries to drive it, then maybe it crashes into things and causing problems."
Proteins start out in the body as long strings of amino acids and have to assemble themselves into complex shapes -- a process scientists call folding -- before they can do anything. The challenge for scientists is that folding is difficult to observe because proteins are so small and the process is so fast -- about 10 one-millionths of a second.
Scientists are using computer simulations instead, but that has its own limitations. It takes about a day for a computer to simulate a nanosecond (one-billionth of a second) so it would take about 30 years for that computer to complete one simulation.
Folding@home uses a network of about 200,000 personal computers to simulate how proteins assemble themselves. Dividing the complicated calculations into smaller packets enables the computers to do jobs that would strain the most powerful supercomputers.
"These calculations that we have to do are very challenging. Even if we were given all of the supercomputer resources in the country we still would not be able to do the types of things that we can do with folding@home," said Vijay Pande, who runs the Stanford project.
A network of PS3s would run even faster. Pande said that a network of 10,000 PlayStations would increase speeds by a factor of five, and 100,000 would be 50 times faster than what they can do today.
"It turns two years into one month, and that's a huge thing for us," he said. "It's more than us just being impatient, there are calculations that we don't run right now because any calculation that would take more than two or three years, we don't even start it."
To participate, users will just download a program into the PS3's hard drive. Then they just need to leave the machine on when they're not playing. The Folding@home team will divide their complex calculations into manageable chunks and then send it to the participating machines. The program and data will take up 10 to 20 megabytes - or about the size of a handful of MP3 files, Pande said.
When the PS3 is done processing its chunk it will send the data back.
Makers say the program won't run when someone is using the PS3, because it might bog down the game.
Sony says it plans to sell about 2 million PS3s in the United States and Japan before the end of the year, and 6 million worldwide by next March.
Since all of those units are pretty much the same, developers did not have to make compromises that would slow the Folding@home program down.
"You don't really know what you're getting on any given PC, so you have to write the program in a general way so that it will run on weaker machines and stronger systems, Marks said. "They have to write programs sort of to the lowest common denominator, whereas on our system it can be finely tuned to completely leverage what we have."
The PS3 also has a graphic chip that lets users watch the protein as it folds and from different angles, said Klaus Hofrichter, another Sony developer.
"These interfaces are very nice looking, very scientific in a certain way. ... You can use the controller and navigate around," Hofrichter said.
That might make people more likely to download and run the program, Pande said.
All PS3s connect to the Internet, and Sony plans to make it easy for gamers to get the program when they go online, Marks said.
"What we want is for people just to have to make the decision to contribute electricity and benefit mankind," Marks said.
The question is: Will we still have to pay the electric bill for those guys leeching off the consoles? Just playing last gens systems took a lot of power, how much juice will it take (and cost) to leave your PS3 on all the time. Oh, nevermind, no one's going to be getting one anyway, cause now they're asking us to spend even MORE money for this glorified calculator.
Don't underestimate the consumer's ability to throw their life-savings away on something with very little to no return in value.
Despite the obvious fact that there are people who're too intelligent to throw away that much money on a console (and the smart folks that do want one will wait a year or so and get one for a tenth of the official price in a second hand or pawn shop somewhere), I strongly suspect that with the right marketing campaign, Sony will sell their entire stock.
Though the electricity thing won't be a worry in the UK for that much longer. The Gubbermint over here has actually done something right, they're creating a law in which electronics can no longer be produced with standby functions. It's on ... and off and that's it. That's Kyoto for you.
Sell their entire stock? Yeah, maybe after 5 years and not producing a single PS3 after the initial supplies. I'm sorry, they've messed up far to much to have that kind of faith in them.
Quote from: Rowne on September 18, 2006, 01:13:37 PMDespite the obvious fact that there are people who're too intelligent to throw away that much money on a console (and the smart folks that do want one will wait a year or so and get one for a tenth of the official price in a second hand or pawn shop somewhere), I strongly suspect that with the right marketing campaign, Sony will sell their entire stock.
yeah, but with a stock consisting of merely 500k units, selling the whole stock isn't all that amazing
If I'm going to buy a PS3, it has to drop in price a lot, and there will have to be a boat-load of games on it that I really want to play, and that don't appear on any other system.
Until then, Nintendo Wii FTW.
PS3 isn't coming until March in Australia so it seems... I'm... well, I'm not surprised I suppose. It's just another slap to the face for us. I think we're getting used to it. Though I'm wondering about all those people who have already pre-ordered one in "time for Christmas", which quite a few stores were promising.
Wii covets the Nintendo, yes Wii do.
Don't worry RJ, the same is true for the stalwart gamers of old Blighty, too (http://www.play.com/Games/PlayStation3/4-/1032615/-/Product.html?searchstring=playstation+3&searchsource=0). It's just Sony's way and it's infectious as far as companies that develop and publish for them are concerned. This, for me, is a good reason to love Nintendo over Sony.
o The Nintendo attitude.
Let's try and get our games to as many people as possible, our console too! In fact, let's try and synchronise our release dates around the World, too. Let's do our best to be egalitarian. Gamers around the globe are important to us and we respect you all.
o The Sony attitude.
What's a Britain? Do they even have televisions? Australia you say? Isn't that place still peopled by aboriginal tribes or something? They have electricity?! Holy crap! I suppose we should try and market there or something ... let's concentrate on getting a few consoles out there eventually, nowhere near as much as America of course because America rules the World. Yeah, just a few and leave it for a few months ... or longer, does it really matter?
Oh hey, I've got another great idea! Let's encourage that third-party publishers also follow this way of thinking too, only to release games months, even years after they've been released in America.
----
And now we begin to see one of the reasons why I have such a deep-rooted hatred of Sony. <.<
(Cleaned up the post a bit.)
Sony is a japanese company, so sony's attitude should be more like "let's see how much money we can squeeze from those crazy yanks with our overpriced box of utter uselessness".
Nintendo's Wii release date isn't completely at the exact same date. I won't get a Wii until 8 december, while some other parts of this space-rock will get it somewhere in november. Still, they don't make me wait an extra 6 months or so.
Exactly. The delays are pretty much in shipping the consoles and getting the stock to where it needs to be rather than any intentional and premeditated delays, I just don't see real preferential treatment with Nintendo.
Though I do agree that they're all out for money and what they can squeeze out of a person. First law of capitalism, really. Of course, the World would likely be better off if people were motivated by things other than money but I don't see that happening for a long time.
:/ Well, it's not like Sony was going to make much money in Australia anyway... not that we just don't have such a big demographic of gamers, but we're just not going to buy it anyway with the price. AU$700 for the basic package? When the Wii is going to be around AU$400?
Duh.
Until nintendo showed them otherwise, Sony (and MS) thought that shiny graphics == everything, doesn't matter how expensive. Nintendo knows that fun == everything, and that graphics can help, but are not everything. Besides, do we really need graphics that are better then, say, Metroid Prime? (Is that even possible?)
I agree Vidar, wholeheartedly.
In fact, I have the same view of Beyond Good & Evil, to be honest. As far as I'm concerned, there are two types of graphics and they rely on two different types of method.
Style and technology.
It's true that one can brute force tech to get a game to look good, Oblivion proves this because it's rather pretty but how often do the graphics in games really impress you or make you smile? I ask the reader this individually. I find that graphics that have been created via the brute-force method are pretty, yes but they're also rather soulless.
Whereas Metroid Prime was impressive because it was moulded, it had style, they made sure that every nook and cranny had something to stare at and poke. The World felt weirdly alive. Beyond Good & Evil had the same thing going for it, you could crawl into a cave and the walls would be alive, there would be all these creatures you could take photographs of. One could literally swing the camera around in awe at how delicately put together everything was.
Now in my opinion, that's impressive, it's inspiring.
Graphics via technology will always get better but it doesn't really inspire me, it'll be technically impressive on a very clinnical level but there's no heart to it. To be honest, I think graphics reached their pinnacle at stuff like Metroid Prime and Beyond Good & Evil. All the bloom and high-poly action in the World can't do better than that.
At least, not that I've seen.
as for the graphics question, the development of them is getting redundant. We haven't had any significant improvement on grahics since Halo shown up. Fighting games haven't shown up barely any graphical improvement at all since the Dreamcast. It all looks the same, except with higher polycounts, which are barely noticed until you take a close look.
Quote from: RJ on September 22, 2006, 01:58:04 AM:/ Well, it's not like Sony was going to make much money in Australia anyway... not that we just don't have such a big demographic of gamers, but we're just not going to buy it anyway with the price. AU$700 for the basic package? When the Wii is going to be around AU$400?
Duh.
dunno how many the australian currency worths compared to dollars, but if you take the U$ price and multiply it by at least 3, you get about the equivalent to the brazilian price :<
The irony of that Jack is that it's true.
After the release of Oblivion, what did modders spend months doing? Creating better models that use less polygons, lower polygon rocks, lower poly faces, lower poly areas, lower poly grass, lower poly stuff in general. Did it affect how pretty the game looked? Not even. In fact it made the game infinitely better for a lot of people who were running on older machines and those older machines could look the same as the top-of-the-range stuff running vanilla Oblivion.
http://psp.ign.com/articles/734/734850p1.html
POSTY.
The best part of that entire page was:
IGN: "And other people have passed by here for two days now without questioning this?"
Booth Babe: "Hai!"
Why is that I'm not surprised by this? Hey, everyone ... remember when I told you that most consumers are idiots? Well I hate to be smug but ...
Seriously though, one has to wonder just how mentally unbalanced Sony, as a company, is.