Slashdot Mirror
TuxBox: Rising from Indrema's ashes
NoSony writes: "Kind of funny that LinuxToday gets a lot of the best NewsForge stories before Slashdot, considering I thought you guys had the same owners, but you ought to check out this one about TuxBox, which is a new project trying to do what Indrema failed to do - make a true open source console gaming system. I sure hope they succeed." Well, good luck.
With the slogan: TuxBox, The Ultimate X-Box? I can see busy Microsoft lawyers already.
IMHO, the only way this would make sense is if the box were underpowered. It simply wouldn't be feasible for a hobbiest, or open-source game to be developed to take full advantage of, say, the X-Box or PS2's capabilities; that costs millions of dollars in code and asset production. Instead, something like the PS1 or even a NES would be nice. Plus... the gameplay would be better ;)
Uh, profit isn't exactly the point. It's like this. People want to build the TuxBox because they like development and shared resources. People enjoy the fact that they can see how a gome works. Edit the game, or even write their own games. This isn't really a business like thing. They don't really intend to make a lot of money.
T-shirt sales?
Off the shelf components and prices:
:)
120 Athlon 900Mhz AXIA (runs at 1.3-1.5V)
100 256MB PC133 SDRAM
80 FIC SocketA Mobo w/Savage4 int video
60 DVD drive
30 Cheapo-case+250Watt PS
25 SB Live Value Soundcard
40 NIC, Keyboard, mouse and Floppy.
5 Box of floppies to save your games.
0 Diskless Linux Boot CD
---
$455
Mass produced it would probably cost about $350, or $400 with a Geforce 2 card.
The problem is games. Not emulator roms or WINE playable games but native linux ones. There are few "commercial" quality ones. The mass market likes its FMV clips, however they detract from gameplay. I'll be making some in the next six months. Hopefully after the source is worth releasing people will use it for their own , adding models etc.
Prepare for OpenGGL. The Open Source, free as in free Gnu Games Library. Textures, Models, Sounds and engines. Side scroller engine/devkit will be out first, then RTS type, then FPS. Make your models now. Make maps. GIVE them away. Hide obscene comments in the code to mark it yours
Add a TV capture card and a 40GB+ HD (and maybe a CD burner) and you would have something that could give Tivo/Replay a run for their money. Play games, watch DVD movies, surf, do email and record programs, all with one box. That would be usefull. Just another game console, open source or not, wouldn't make it. This type of box is my next project. I still haven't found a good source of black desk top cases yet, though. Cpt_Kirks
The funny part is - that if MS was choosing AMD as it's processor for the XBox - then Intel would have been developed a game console with Linux! Ask Intel employees who where envolved with this and they'll tell you about it.
Now, regarding this console thing - it might be succseed - if they can find a partner who will create the motherboard, chipsets, and all the stuff that it's needed. Of course - any manufacturer will tell you that they will manufacture it for you - by the thousands - only if you put some cold hard cash money up-front.
And I'm not mentioning stuff like DVD playing which will need special license to fully playback DVD's with all the navigational stuff (IFO parsing etc..), writing special drivers for the various joysticks which aren't supported yet (force feedback stuff, etc), and convincing some commercial companies to write games for it...
But if they'll pull this off - I'll be another person to buy it.
Hetz (Heunique)
I can supply an example, as well. Here's the deal- a lot of the skills needed are specialised. Computer geeks don't necessarily know squat about how to (for instance) make sound that is really, seriously impressive. But _other_ types of geeks, like sound engineering geeks *bows* do have that technology and the knowledge base to know what to do. And you'll find that some of them (like me) resonate with the computer geek Free Software GNU-oriented approach.
My 'Mastering Tools' software is Free- it's GPLed. It's not C- in fact it only understands a certain type of AIFF file because I'm not programmer enough (yet) to really have the file handling routines down, seeing as I'm making sense out of the very expandable AIFF format byte-by-byte, and trying to do everything with just two file streams and no buffers.
But although it's weak from a programming standpoint, it's got two serious dither algorithms and various sonic enhancers and all of it could be put together to make a sort of SDK for a Free game console- and since this is my scene, I am certain that it could kick the butt of X-Box or whatever else is coming out there. Sure, it's only audio, but it's _there_ to be used- but you've gotta be open source to use it. And I've done enough work with digital mastering, and have enough contacts with pro mastering engineers, to inspire and produce a sound infrastructure that would _really_ kick, hurt, stomp and maim generic sound routines such as we're likely to see in X-Box et al, or even PS2 etc.
The trick is to do all the sound mixing on a high resolution mix buss like 32-bit floating point- and then reduce it to 16 bit to feed to affordable DACs using professional techniques, not the lame truncation or TPDF dither that the commercial consoles are likely to use (if that- I would not be at all surprised to learn they did everything on a 16 bit buss). This is so totally do-able, and I'd be delighted to work with anyone who's doing Free software and wishes to do things like this. It's about knowing what to do, who to ask. For instance, who here has ever heard of sidechain compression (the _audio_ compression)? Turns out that's not only an old mastering engineer trick to add lushness and detail, but it is also very easily doable realtime with just a few extra variables. I've got a 'primitive root residue' dither that sounds very deep and more importantly is fast as hell to compute- not that this matters so terribly much with today's processors! Picture something like Quake 3's sounds, only instead of being roughly mixed by a tinny 3D sound card, you'd have them coming through four channels of high-end surround sound with subtle compression and loads of soundstage depth from even non-optimal speakers- fully immersive sound _textures_ that really brought you into the game. A lot of that could be done just through proper design of the system audio busses... and the code's GPL and ready to be taken and adapted...
Mind you- this work is still going to be done whether Linux game people pick up on it or not. It's not being done _for_ 'TuxBox'. It's being done for pro quality digital mastering. But the Linux movement has started to affect people outside the arena of just raw coding- I'm not sure anyone on Slashdot would know this, but mastering engineers _and_ radio station technical people are being boxed into a corner by corporate brainlessness, overcompression and an industry-driven, listener-hostile 'arms race' of CD and radio loudness. There's a huge amount of dissatisfaction with this- and understandably, some people (like me, obviously) react to this dissatisfation by rebelling, doing stuff that makes no concessions to corporate fashion, and sacrificing mass media access- and the GNU camp just sits there, looking appealing, saying 'You can put your stuff out and share with people who will share with you, and bring whatever you have to offer to the table- do it the best you can and see where it takes you!'
I have to wonder what people are out there working in visual imaging, AI, 3D API writing, game concepts etc. who are also being frustrated and turning to the principles of Free software. I see things like this from time to time, and then I ignore them, because that's not my field. I'm the one who's doing Free work in high end digital audio. They probably have no idea who I am, either.
But add enough of these non-communicating, marginalized people together, and you'll really have something. Aren't there people working on Free _hardware_? That blows my mind. But I suppose it would blow theirs if they knew they could spec out a severely competitive audio subsystem for cheap using regular 16-bit DACs just by knowing what parts had to be overbuilt (coupling caps, DAC or DAC buffer power supply caps), and applying software to 'master' the output busses of the system.
I agree with jfunk- "For just about anything creative, you'll find people not only willing, but enthusiastic.". But do you know how far it extends? Neither do I, because I'm not competent to spot which 3D coders or board designers are really hot. I just know that there's some overlap between the Free stuff _I_ do, and the Free game console being talked about. And I'm not going to chase it, I've got a _lot_ else to do- but I write GPLed code for a reason, and will do absolutely everything I can to help anyone who _wants_ help that I can provide. We all benefit by cooperation. That's too easily forgotten.
Chris Johnson
Mind you, if nothing ever comes together, I'll keep doing that work: I do it for my studio and digital mastering needs. It just _happens_ to be totally applicable to a Free console. Maybe not everyone feels you need to have the equivalent of 24-bit audio and professional mastering-quality onboard dynamics processing on a game console- but seriously, why not?
Aim for the stars, indeed.
I never said you should do things just the same way the previous guys did. THAT would probably be pretty dumb.
It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
Yeah, whenever someone fails at something, we should just give up on that thing forever. People don't seem to understand this.
It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
I can't believe you people, I really can't.
What if Linus had heard this crap 10 years ago when he decided he wanted to write his own OS? "You have no hope of ever succeeding. You'd be going up against two massive companies, Microsoft and Apple. Between the two of them they've got the OS world locked up tight!" Would we be here today? Would we have a website like Slashdot to bemoan the fact that we have choices and that everyone can do their own thing?
Bah! Fsck that!
An open game console has the same potential an open OS does. Linux made us (Those of us who aren't old enough to remember the good old/bad old days of UNIX on the mainframe in the '70's) realize that the world doesn't belong to huge mega corporations to carve up and dole out as they see fit.
An Open console has the potential to be anything. Hell with the right hardware, it can be a game machine, security system, sound system, mp3 player, dvd player (Though we'll probably have to fight The Man for those two), thin client... My imagination fails me.
For all those who see the potential, aim for the stars. For those who don't, have fun playing your Poke Mon, Mortal Kombat, and Mario Brothers retreads.
Improvise, adapt, and overcome.
True. But all the GPL'd game code in the world isn't going to mean squat to your graphics and music anyway. Quake1 is GPL but their graphics and music aren't. Doom is freeeware, but their graphics and music are still copyrighted.
Open Source doesn't mean no one gets paid.
Improvise, adapt, and overcome.
Actually, having someone selling PCs configured to be good for playing Linux games is essentially trivial (once you've worked out the system specs once-- and many people have already for their own purposes). Then all you do is buy parts, build the machines, test them, and ship them out. If you can skip some hardware (doesn't need that big a hard drive, doesn't need a monitor if it does TV out), you have a box at about normal console prices.
Will it succeed? Not any time soon. Will it fail? Probably not. Sega got out of the business because they're a business and have to do well. If this works like most open source projects, they'll probably not be depending on it having a lot of income to pay the workers. They could just put it together, sell it for cost of parts + time, and do fine because the people have day jobs (or whatever they do in their non-spare time). At a minimum, they could exist as a hardware suggestion list, a simple Linux distribution, and a list of open source games.
If nothing else, this could end up as a linux gaming site that doesn't assume you've already got the hardware, but tells you what's the best buy as far as support (with the exact system configuration, so you don't run into compatibility problems with similar hardware) and price, etc. Even that would be useful, as a direct way to make it more worthwhile to support Linux well.
If they get a reasonable number of orders, they could actually assemble the systems themselves, and make it even more straightforward to get such a machine set up.
In any case, it would give developers an idea of what system configuration would be good for them to have when trying to port games to Linux. If they already want to support Linux desktop boxes, they might as well support this, too, since it should be a no-op.
I can't believe that you of all people would fall for this argument (or that you'd use Microsoft's Moronic HTML, but that's another matter :-).
Sure, I believe the TuxBox will fail, for most of
the same reasons that Indrema did, but quality
control won't come into it. Official submission
may increase the quality of the end product,
but if it does so, it's not by much. Does the
vast quantities of useless apps currently
available for Windows (or for that matter,
Linux)
make the quality apps any worse? No? So why
do you think it would do the same for TuxBox?
Yes, the gaming market is very competetive, and
obsoletes products and technology even quicker
than the mainstream software market, so there is
a certain amount to pressure to release before
the product is fully ready, but I doubt that'll
be sufficient to cause a significant drop in quality.
The key to the long term success of any platform
is an unrestricted third party development market.
Sadly, it's just not economically feasible to do
this in the console market now, so we're stuck
with the current situation. Even MS backed away
from their initial stance of not requiring
approval for Xbox games.
"The invisible and the non-existent look very much alike." -- Delos B. McKown
Because there are plenty of cool games for it.
Of course, for there to be plenty of cool games for it, you'll need lots of mainstream developers excited about the system and wanting to develop for it.
What would excite a developer? How about little to no licensing fees? Right now, developing a console title means you give big bucks to console manufacter for the initial development kit and licensing rights for every copy you produce. You're kissing a healthy chunk of potential profit goodbye. In fact, if your game only does modestly well, the console manufacterer can get rich off of your licensing fees while you make nothing.
How about never waiting for the console manufacturer to help you. Development teams often beat their heads against bugs black box libraries from the console manufacturer. Open source means you have freedom to solve your own problems.
Will this work? I have no idea. But I think it's possible.
Search 2010 Gen Con events
The big problem with this is that they *have* a system to tinker with right now that's free, and almost nobody takes advantage of it! Lots of people play games on PCs, but try and find many games as complex as Mechwarrior 4 or Black and White that are Open Source that someone decided to just kick around. Hell, try and find many games as complex as Mechwarrior I!
Moreover, these open source consoles seem to rely on PC hardware. Why not just make games for the PC? It's cheaper to distribute your stuff, most people that care about Open Source at all have one, and you don't even need to go out and buy anything fancy.
I wish that were so. Damn, the only time /. was more than half non-suck was when it was just Taco and Hemos. Once they started getting all these other jackasses (Roblimo is my personal favorite) it started to go downhill.
The enemies of Democracy are
The point isn't to land EA right off the bat. It's just to have the open console in the first place.
:)
I think the key thing here is them doing it as a hobby, on-the-side thing. It doesn't sound like they're planning on making much money. Which means not making money won't kill them. They don't need to take off, they can stand to slowly build up over time.
Kind like Linux.
The enemies of Democracy are
it will be very difficult to market this. Domination by Nintendo and Sony in the marketplace is going to cause it to utimately fail...
:)
Don't make the same mistake and look like vaporware, oh wait...
Dreamcast is currently the best gaming system. Where else can you get near PS2 performance for $150 ($99 for system and a bunch of games from half.com). I love the analog buttons on the bottom, they are great for proportional gas and brake.
Heck, even die-hard geeks get annoyed with libc upgrades and the like, and who knows whether you can get a high-performance game running on a Linux system that's been geeked out on for more than a year. The library mish-mash could be frightening.
Along with the constraints of not being able to upgrade the console easily, you get the freedom of not worrying about installs, and not worrying about incompatibilities. That clears two of the major hurdles Linux has, leaving you with mostly pros on the balance of things.
Is that enticing enough? I doubt it. The whole gaming thing seems to run on huge piles of money and that's one thing open source is not good at. (Could be a blessing in disguise, actually...). However, I think its fun to watch, and apparently others do too, as the Indrema popularity has shown.
0.02
Indrema is the Amiga of the 21st century!
This thing will never die!
If tits were wings it'd be flying around.
The advantage a console has over a PC is that it is a fixed platform. A Dreamcast (200Mhz CPU, 16Mb RAM, 8Mb VRAM, & graphics card roughly equivalent to a TNT...) will have games that look pretty much as good as a much more powerful PC (Let's say... 500Mhz, 64Mb Ram + TNT 2 Ultra...), . It is easier to optimise a game if you know exactly what hardware it will run on.
...learn from others mistakes?
;)) that although people see other people fail over and over again, they still seem to think that they are going to get it right.
No, actually they don't. Or rather; many people don't learn from others mistakes. It seems to me (through empirical data, i.e. experience
This is very strange, but it probably has something to do with peoples strong faith in themselves and their abilities.
Do they learn when they eventually fail, you may ask? Well, some people do, and become smarter. Others don't, continue to use the same methods as they've always used, and continue to fail.
People are strange.
Umm, it's Linux. Last I checked, there's already drivers for Nvidia hardware under Linux, right? Granted it's binary only, but that's neither here nor there. Seeing as this Indrema replacement is being called a TuxBox, I think it's fairly obvious what it will be running.
Raptor
Raptor
"Procrastination is great. It gives me a lot more time to do things that I'm never going to do."
Because it's what *I* want. Fair enough? If not, then look at it this way. If we're talking about an open spec box, so that you can make your PC "TuxBox compliant," which are you going to pick?
Granted, I was off on the main chip. The math still states that this machine is going to break $300, not accounting for OEM discounts, since I'm not an OEM.
Raptor
Raptor
"Procrastination is great. It gives me a lot more time to do things that I'm never going to do."
Consoles are always loss leaders, and this can't be an exception if they still plan on using an Nvidia chip. That alone will cost $300 and up for a GeForce 2 class video card.
If they're going to open it up, they might as well go for completely off the shelf parts, and tell gamers to build it for themselves.
How? Pick a motherboard, a specific network card, hard disk, video card, sound card, etc. What you end up with is a PC, yes, but it's a PC with very specific expected design considerations.
What they also get from this is a new standard for PC games to develop for. Since each game would have to have its own boot code, you suddenly get a game that will play on most PCs out there as well, depending on the specs you pick. Most sound cards are the same. Pick the right network card (or don't, and just rely on module loading for that), and only target Nvidia cards, are how much are you really losing in terms of a market?
I wouldn't expect it to be immensely profitable, but you'd gain *some* users from this without having to sell a console at all.
Raptor
Raptor
"Procrastination is great. It gives me a lot more time to do things that I'm never going to do."
They claim that they can put together a console for $350.
They'd better not be planning to do it with PC parts. Heck, even console makers that can use custom chips and boards to minimize parts count end up selling the hardware below cost.
How do the TuxBox people intend to build their console for the price they claim?
(I can think of a couple of approaches, but they involve using sub-optimal hardware or else having a large amount of development and fab funding.)
But if you've had three sports stores in the same location close down, what makes you think that yours will actually succeed?
When you see other soldiers run over the hill and get shot up, normal people would learn not to run over the same hill.
Alternatively, look at the Quake3 engine games. FAKK2, Alice, and Elite Force, to name a few. Sure, Elite Force is just your standard FPS with a Star Trek theme, but FAKK2 is more like "Tomb Raider meets a nice engine with great gameplay and control". And Alice is just freakin' weird. Or what about the LithTech engine? Lots of different stuff going on with that. Sure, it can do the standard FPS (Shogo, Blood2, No One Lives Forever), but it can do a whole lot more as well (Sanity, for instance).
In today's game market, where everybody's expected to up the ante from what's come before, licensing an engine (including good support from the engine developers, and the source code to add your own features) is a great way to get a game up and running quickly without spending massive amounts of time and money on Yet Another Game Engine, so you can focus more on gameplay, art, and advanced engine features.
Half-Life is in a weird situation, when it comes to game engines, as it's based on an amalgamation of the Quake 1 and Quake 2 engines. Valve can't legally license out that engine for other developers to use. What they can do, however, is hire teams of mod developers to modify the game (Counter-Strike, Gunman), and then publish that themselves (TFC and Op-For don't count, since they're in-house works by Valve).
The Unreal engine has absolutely nothing to do with Java, at all. Perhaps you're thinking about UnrealScript, the scripting language used by the Unreal engine (and thus, all Unreal-based games, like Unreal, UT, Deus Ex, Wheel of Time, Rune, etc). Uscript is java-ish, but it's still a whole different beast, with a lot of neat concepts (like the inclusion of "states", which few (no?) other languages have, but make game scripting very easy).
That said, there's not been a whole lot of unique games written with the Unreal technology. Sure, Deus Ex and Wheel of Time have some unique concepts, but at the core, they're still FPS games (though with more strategy than something like UT. On top of that, Deus Ex is just a poor copy of System Shock 2 with nicer graphics). Show me an innovative 3rd-person game using the Unreal engine (well, there's that DS9 game, but I rarely consider Star Trek stuff to be "innovative", and there's Rune, but that's just your standard hack&slash game with great graphics). Epic has a whole lot of potential in their Unreal technology, but they don't have any truly innovative licensees yet. Let's hope they get some, eh?
The problem here is that the TuxBox isn't going to be locked-down. From the TuxBox FAQ page:
In other words, it looks like this is just going to be a small form-factor PC that connects to your TV, with none of a console's traditional benefits (uniform architecture across *all* units).
You've apparently been out of the console scene for way too long. The point of a console is that you can write games specific to the hardware in the box, because
Oddly enough, these TuxBox guys don't seem to "get it", either, since their FAQ page explicitly says that anybody can change out the hardware of the console. Console developers develop for consoles because they like having a stable hardware platform. No console developer worth anything will target a "console" that has the same compatibility issues as a PC.
It's strange how the PX2 seems to be going down the same road as the Saturn, and I woudn't be surprised if Microsoft's XBox usurps the market with their developer friendly hardware and unified memory architecture.
"come off crisp and play up to the cynic
clean and schooled right down to the minute"
SEO Copywriter. Just Say ON
I'm sure there's enough of us geeks willing to support it.
Consoles live and die by third-party support (or lack thereof). Just ask Atari, Sega and 3DO.
"come off crisp and play up to the cynic
clean and schooled right down to the minute"
SEO Copywriter. Just Say ON
If TuxBox doesn't plan lots of in-house game development, where do they think the profits will come from? They can't license third-party developers, because an open-sourced development platform will be wide open to any developers.
I'm sure they're looking at RedHat and licking their chops. RedHat doesn't necessarily make the apps - they just put a little dev time into the platform itself and package it. However, RedHat had the edge in that their boxed product had next to zero cost! You can't say that about a game console, costs are huge.
What's your damage, Heather?
A soccer mom would look at the box and go, hey I can get this one with 30 games or an Xbox or PS2 with maybe 1 if your lucky
Oh, yeah, right, soccer moms make video game purchases based on cost. They pay no attention to their screaming kids that demand Brand X because it's so heavily marketed on TV. Riiiight. If that was the case, we'd be seeing huge sales numbers on Atari 2600's that go for $25 on Ebay with tons of games, and the Sony Playstation never would have sold a single copy. All school kids would be wearing generic clothes from Wal-Mart and cheap shoes from Payless.
Don't kid yourself, this is a very brand-conscious market. Advertising makes a world of difference in consoles. That's precisely why MS is boosting the hype now, long before their console will even see the light of day.
What's your damage, Heather?
Slightly bad move, what they should do is make cheap games say uner $10.00 US. Lets face it the thought of free my sound inspiring, but it won't you you far, however it will make you broke really fast. Create a pay pal account and have users of their games give what they can under $10.00 (US)
Reread their site - they're not planning on doing game development, so the revenue stream wouldn't actually help them. Your business model would require game developers to charge $10, something more akin to shareware. While id Games may have started that way, I don't think it's a model that most of us aspire to. I can make more money at my day job.
why not approach some of the game developers with an idea of porting all games to their box, and a small price
That was the tack Sega took: the Dreamcast was based on CE, so it was actually really easy to port Windows DirectX games over. That project was a beautiful failure, but a failure nonetheless.
Think about it Zelda X on this machine would rock, and everyone would enjoy it
And it wouldn't rock on the Xbox or PS2 or Nintendo cube? This box is going to cost $350, so why would I invest in it over a platform that has tons of games?
What's your damage, Heather?
Linux games pretty well lack the development effort thrown into Windows games, and my (lame) business sense tells me that it's because there just aren't enough Linux boxes out there.
Now, bear with me here, but wouldn't the same logic hold through if a Linux console ever made it to the shelves? The game support would be close to nonexistent, compared with even the few games available for PS2 at its release. Nobody would buy it, and nobody would develop for it because of the missing audience.
Sega, a company with a lot more than a foothold in the console business, is smart enough to get out before Microsoft and Nintendo both jump back in with full force. Sega had huge resources (well, not compared to Microsoft, but certainly compared to any open source console project) and couldn't make it work. Any new open source console could only dream (no pun intended) of the market penetration that Dreamcast got, but it still wasn't enough to ensure success. Why would it work for someone else without funding?
What am I missing here? Why would anyone think yet another console would succeed? Even worse, why do we get excited at the thought of it?
Pretend for just a minute that Sega was going to open-source the Dreamcast platform tomorrow. Would you start working on developing games for it? Are you more qualified than the leading developers? Do you think you could save it? Do you think anyone could? Then why start a whole new project from scratch without funding?
What's your damage, Heather?
I've seen this before.
l
A project fails and someone with absolutely no clue jumps to capture the publicity of the project.
but Riley and Isley pledge to provide daily updates to TuxBox project members. The project also has regular IRC channel [irc.openprojects.net #tuxboxproject] where developers discuss their issues.
They are expecting volunteers on the net to magically build a console for them because they maintain a news page and IRC channel. It's not gonna happen. Consoles take a lot of $$$ to finish and manufacture, not just skills. I worked with Sony to help create the PlayStation 2 and I can say with 100% confidence that such a product could never have been created without a serious budget, even if you delude yourself into believing you are
saving development time by using the Linux kernel. There is a reason Indrema failed and it's all about money.
Open consoles sound great, but really they suck. The cost of consoles is subsidized by the profits of a software titles. If the console is open then:
a) there is no money recouped from software, and thus the hardware will be much more expensive.
b) More expensive hardware means less sales of hardware - which means no one will want to sink development money into making new games for this thing. A port of a top ten game cost on the order of $300k-$1m to do. There aren't going to be enough units out there to make that money back.
c) There will be no quality control, 99% of the games for this thing will be crap. Who wants to pay $600 to play crap when they can get a DreamCast/PS2 for half that with good games? A big job of Sony/Nintendo, etc is do quality control on titles (though developers hate it, its good for consumers).
d) Marketing budgets? If your hardware is not subsidized, then you have to mark your price up further to cover marketing budgets. This further gets into the problem of lower hardware sales leading to fewer software titles etc.
No, I don't believe the pair listed in the news article have any intention of getting out a product - merely trying to grab attention. They don't appear to have any experience in this industry, programming or business-wise. A true sign of someone who couldn't finish this project is someone who starts IRC channels.
I think these people have read one to many stories about how Linux was created by "a lose band of volunteers" There is no parallel between how Linux was created and how a game console is created. The "kernel" is one of the least important parts of a console.
From the Indrema mailing list:
> From: Owen Swerkstrom
> It will
> > be a miracle for Microsoft to get their Xbox out
> by fall, let alone a
> group
> > of open-source idealists (indremists?) to somehow
> build up and
> mass-produce a
> > console from scratch.
http://idn.indrema.com/www-discuss/msg03398.htm
I think that hits the nail on the head.
-- Virtual Windows Project
Both the Indrema and the X-Box are nothing but PCs stuck in funky boxes. Therefore you aren't going to get any extra performance or added features that aren't already available in a standard PC. Whoever makes them is also going to be forced to sell them below cost just to get people to buy them. There are some people who will spend four or five hundred dollars on a gaming console, but they are not the average gamer. The average gamer might spend a couple hundred dollars on a common console and as much as three hundred for a hot off the press, state of the art, kick ass, newfangled console. Of course a PC in a pretty box with a TV hookup is none of these things. Selling the console below cost means that you'll be forced to make up your profits by charging more for the games themselves. This works for Sony and Nintendo, where the company directly or indirectly controls what titles are available and gets a cut of the profits from any title sold. It won't work for a company that is encouraging others to create the games independently.
A Linux platform for gaming already exists, its called a standard PC with a supported 3d accelerator. I'm using one right now as I write this.
The best thing these guys could do is work to make better tools for creating games under Linux. If they're hot-shot game programmers maybe they should be contributing to a game engine like CrystalSpace. Maybe they should be working to expand the range of 3d accelerators that Linux supports. There are all sorts of effective and useful things they could be doing. Trying to create a Linux based X-Box isn't one of them. Don't be fooled into thinking that the X-Box is a great idea just because Microsoft is the one doing it. Remember Microsoft Bob? I think that the X-Box is going to be a flop in the short run. Whether it is a success in the long run I can't say, but I doubt it.
Muslim community leaders warn of backlash from tomorrow morning's terrorist attack.
Hmmm, tell that to all of the artists who worked on the GIMP. What about all those guys that do backgrounds, rendered images, videos, and Flash animations for the sheer joy of it?
Actually, replace "artist" with "developer" in your post, then look at Freshmeat and Sourceforge.
As for musicians, look at MP3.com and all of those MOD musicians in the days of yore.
For just about anything creative, you'll find people not only willing, but enthusiastic.
Two weeks before I heard the news, I read a big review feauture in NexGen, the one console gaming magazine not written for 12 year-olds. It was an excellent article which I recommend getting if it's still on the news shelves.
Sad to see that the box itself will never come out, it was one beautiful piece of silver sheen. I liked the placement of USB ports in both the front as controllers and the two in the back for other things, presumably USB modems and such.
I hope Indrema's successors take a look at this box and come up with something as beautiful as this baby.
kill two birds with one stone?
I gots ta ding a ding dang my dang a long ling long
Jaav???????? What's Java got to do with Unreal Tournament??
"I'll take the red pill, no, blue. AAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH........"
"I'll take the red pill. No! Blue! AAAaaaahhhhhhhhh"
- Monty Python meets the Matrix
Yes, tuxbox is not, and will not be a company. They are a project (much like open hardware) that will be designing an open console. They will design the hardware and such, and then try to find a company to build and sell them (even if it ends up not being a game console). So, funding is not an issue for them. I really think designing the hardware and getting someone to buy it before this or next fall is really unrealistic (one could say this about the whole idea). But, in the end, if we get a nice hardware design (and no hardware), at least you get the design. Come by #tuxbox on irc.openprojects.net to talk to the tuxbox people (they used to be in my channel, #indrema...but then you know what happened).
-------------
HAL 7000, fewer features than the HAL 9000, but just as homicidal!
Tux Racer is probably the most high-profile open source title out there. As fun as it is, it simply doesn't compare graphics-wise to any commercial title. If Tux Racer can't draw the talent, what chance does dozens or hundreds of titles for this spurious new console?
All the GPL'd game code in the world isn't going to mean squat if you can't get artists and musicians. If AAA-game quality people can be convinced that working without payment is a Good Thing, then right on. Personally, I don't see it happening. I can imagine the conversation now.
Wannabe Game Developer: So you see, you should spend months creating content for my l33t game. It'll have lens flares and stuff.
Artist: Okay, lets talk rates.
Wannabe Game Developer: Oh, it's open source. You don't get paid, but people can take your art and use it in their games. Cool, eh?
Artist: Riiight...
Finally, I'll have a cheap machine I can give to the girlfriend.
After I purge Linux and install Win2K, of course.
Which brings to mind the question: is it possible to install Win2K on vapor? That'd be some amazing hardware compatibility.
Easy does it!
This comment has been submitted already, 276865 hours , 59 minutes ago. No need to try again.
What, it wasn't obvious enough from the beginning that the Indrema team didn't have anything? Now we have a couple of high school students claiming they'll have a $350 prototype available in the fall that's as far along as Indrema was? Well yeah, I guess that's true if you consider that Indrema never actually produced anything.
I love Linux: I've run it for years, I've hacked it for years, I evangelize it to everyone I can, and use it to solve problems many and sundry. However, making high-profile vaporware announcements hoping to capitalize on Linux hype only hurts everyone when it doesn't work out. (Witness Indrema.) I implore the TuxBox guys: It's *already* gone far enough. Let everyone down easy, and save us all months of bullshit. Concentrate on porting Linux to an existing console.
1. the big guys like Sony and Nintendo have huge economies of scale in their own manufacturing opportunities. But for the little guys, it's not so easy. The per-unit cost of manufacturing alone would probably be more than the market price of existing consoles. In my opinion, this is something that was one of the primary causes of Indrema's death.
2. And without a large number of potential buyers, commercial software companies won't develop for it. It's your classic chicken and egg situation. I could see this occupying a small niche market -- basically the people that already Linux in the first place.
3. Ultimately, without games or buyers, no one will invest money to fund the startup costs for hardware production. That's what makes getting into the hardware business significantly more challenging than the software business!
The lack of investors was what killed Indrema, when they were still a single prototype... cause you MUST have $$$ to advance beyond that.
There's 10 types of people in this world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
Oh sure, they'd have an army of lawyers banging on their doors the day after they shipped their first units, but seriously, wouldn't you pay $300 or more for a console that emulate all those systems? Out of the box?
// TODO: fix sig
If TuxBox doesn't plan lots of in-house game development, where do they think the profits will come from? They can't license third-party developers, because an open-sourced development platform will be wide open to any developers.
-- Support Ometz le-Serev.
...learn from others mistakes?
"I don't need a compass to tell me which way the wind shines." - Mr. Furious, Mystery Men
"One World, one Web, one Program" - Microsoft promotional ad
The Anti-Blog
Oh, really?
When most people are considering buying software, they want to know that it will actually run on their computer. Most people have an easier time recognizing the "MPC" logo on a box, than going down the list and saying "yes, my CD-ROM is at least 2x; yes, my sound card has wave table synthesis; yes, I have at least 16-bit color on my desktop..."
If you want to find out if a game will run on a Linux computer, there is this huge list of libraries you need to check. A guy from id Software said that one reason it was hard to sell Quake 3 Arena for Linux is that it is so hard for customers to get it working or even to know whether their Linux computer is set up to run it.
The TUXBOX certification would mean that any TUXBOX game would, if you boot it up, just plain work. There is value to the customer there.
P.S. I'm fond of Debian. If you use apt-get to download a game, apt-get will make sure that everything the game needs is in place.
steveha
lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely
"This computer is TUXBOX Level 1 compatible" If you see a sticker like that, you know that any TUXBOX Level 1 game will just run on that computer.
Here is a possible spec for TUXBOX:
128 MB of RAM or more
CPU chip of 600 MHz or over
Sound Blaster Live (any version: Value, Platinum, whatever)
any video card from a (very short) TUXBOX-compatible list
CD-ROM drive or DVD drive
Then a TUXBOX CD will load a Linux kernel, X, and anything else needed for the game. Then it will run the game. So, you can boot from the game, or boot from a generic TUXBOX boot floppy, and just play.
They should then make a TUXBOX CD disk that has about 30 games. This disk would boot to a loader that lets you choose which game. You should be able to play multiple games without rebooting. Any save game info can be saved on a floppy disk.
And, if you are already running Linux, you know you can just pop in any TUXBOX CD and play, without having to reboot.
If this were to happen, lots of small computer shops would burn TUXBOX CDs and give them away with the computers they sell. The computers would not even need to have Linux installed.
If the TUXBOX spec got some momentum going, they would have a small but nice revenue stream certifying computers as TUXBOX compatible. At that point, maybe someone would actually fund a company to make consoles.
steveha
lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely
Console prices fall far slower than the manufacturing costs. Yes, often times boxes lose when they are introduced, but that situation generally reverses itself rather quickly.
The only "intuitive" interface is the nipple. After that, it's all learned.
"The question of whether a computer can think is no more interesting than that of whether a submarine can swim" -EWD
The important question is, how big do they expect this to be? If they're staffed on a volunteer basis, and make a profit on each box sale, then who cares how many they sell? Whether they make 5 or 5 billion, they'll still keep their heads above water.
The only "intuitive" interface is the nipple. After that, it's all learned.
"The question of whether a computer can think is no more interesting than that of whether a submarine can swim" -EWD
Sure, Free linux games are fairly primitive right now, but the advantage of the GPL is that we never have to reinvent the wheel. Now that we have TuxRacer, anybody can go ahead and use the engine for a new racing game. If B&W gets open sourced, we'll have another great engine.
Okay, this is a long shot, but just because Free games haven't worked so far doesn't mean there couldn't be some potential advantages.
The only "intuitive" interface is the nipple. After that, it's all learned.
"The question of whether a computer can think is no more interesting than that of whether a submarine can swim" -EWD
Probably not - the whole set of things needed to make this system run, and run by Fall (!) is probably an impossible task.
But... they have the potential to truly create something new and interesting - I thought the part about "He sees developing a freeware game for TuxBox as good resume fodder for those who want to work in the industry; developers will pay just a small certification fee as insurance that the games work properly with TuxBox." an interesting idea. I mean, how many wanna-be developers can get their hands on development kits for a Playstation 2, just to kick it around and see if they can get it to work? But if this Tux Box is truly open, anyone can tinker around and figure it out. It might - just might - lead to an interesting wave of independant console developers. Imagine having your cheap-ass game out for the Tux Box (you meaning your garage game making friends) that sells for around $10 - the "fame factor" alone might make it workwhile. And you wouldn't have the whole DirectX/weird graphic card drivers crap to worry about.
If nothing else, it could be an exercise in how Open Source development can actually make a better product, and I wish them the best. Heck, if it does everything they hope it will (without the MPAA and RIAA breathing down their necks...) I might even buy one.
Of course, I could be wrong.
John "Dark Paladin" Hummel
52 Weeks, 52 Religions with John Hummel
I've been considering building up a second box to use as an entertainment system, but this sounds like it would do most of what I'd be looking for and a lot cheaper. If it's got ethernet (so I can access my ripped DVDs and MP3s) I'm there.
Under capitalism man exploits man. Under communism it's the other way around.
hey I can get this one with 30 games or an Xbox or PS2 with maybe 1 if your lucky or pay an extra $1000 for that many games. Such a system might not need as much marketing...
Then the soccer mom comes to her senses: "Thirty games, but none of them is Pokemon. My kids want Pokemon. They love the TV show (even though it doesn't follow the games at all) and the toys (which match the TV show rather than the games). Which system has Pokemon?" and eventually walks out with a Game Boy Advance and a GAMECUBE console. That's how Nintendo takes your POcKEt MONey.
Yes, I know they're not out yet, but GBA and GC will definitely beat (Tu)xBox to the shelf.
Will I retire or break 10K?
porting linux to the X-Box
Is not viable. The Xbox will have anti-piracy measures. Anti-piracy in the console sense means anti-third-party-software, with copyrighted boot loaders that must match a copy in ROM bit-for-bit or "no boot for you." Would-be Linux developers would need to buy expen$$$ive SDKs in order to develop for the beast. And the console model is incompatible with the GPL, as there is no way to load end-user-compiled software onto the machine.
Will I retire or break 10K?
Success is largely dependent on how successful their marketing strategy is. Is the PS2 really the best games platform, or is it so because Sony's marketing blitz convinces enough punters that it is?
Just look at Microsoft, how good your software/product is, isn't nearly as important has how well it is marketed.
I wish I could think of a witty Sig. Sigh!
Is anyone here aware of the fact that the average PC game costs $5-10 million to produce?
PIII/800+GeForce2+DiskOnChip=Cheap console.
Feed The Need[goatse.cx]
Put a tivo-style tv control app on top of this and you've got a killer app on your hands. Something that can be made AT HOME, runs games well, AND timeshifts my shows for me? And the best part is it is hackable/upgradable. Sounds like more fun than should be allowed by law.
All right, in an attempt to not say what everyone else has been saying, here are my thoughts.
According to this page this box will have a 750 Mhz duron processor with 64 MB of RAM. I run a 700 Mhz duron with 196 MB of RAM, and they aren't very expensive. My motherboard (an Abit designed for overclocking, if I feel like it) was by far the most expensive component, but my processor was only $55. 64 MB of RAM is only $30. These are consumer prices, not mass wholesale prices. I'd imagine they could probably get a motherboard custom made for about $50-75 without any expansion slots in mass. Then of course they need their custom cases, which I have no idea how much they cost. Last but not least are the hard drive and video card, and dvd drive (I'm assuming networking and USB is built onto motherboard).
With that said, I think they could manage to mass produce these for the $350 sale price selling them at cost. However, there is no way they'll be done by fall. Pessimistic, yes, but it's already mid-April and they don't even have a prototype unit built, so the stages of development and testing cannot possibly be started.
Moving along, I think it's a wonderful project, and it could very likely be my first console I will buy since the original NES (yes, it was computer games after that for me). On the other hand, I wouldn't mind a sort of emulator that would be able to read TuxBox games and play them on my (almost exact TuxBox equivalent) PC. The only sticky point here is how dependent they get on a particular graphics chip, but if they're smart they'll go through the OS to access the video card and not put too many vendor-specific calls to it (so I can have an NVidia instead of an ATI chip, for instance).
Last, about making money, everyone has been saying how they can't make money with those prices and that target date. Here's the thing - it's a volunteer effort, with no apparent desire to make loads of money off of it (though it isn't exactly nonprofit). That means the only real overhead is the hardware and marketing, which apparently are being supported by the members of the TuxBox community, which is growing. This is the point where I see the TuxBox project failing, due to lack of funding, but we'll see.
If you like the concepts behind this project, I think we could all find a way to support it. Perhaps they should turn the project officially non-profit and set up a page for donations to buy prototype hardware and support marketing expense. Think, the first open-source and non-profit console ever created.
Oh, one more thing. I doubt a first-generation open-source device will reasonably compete with the major consoles. Microsoft has the XBox in development for a few years now, and they're having a hard time coming up with the release by fall, so you know it's a complicated and difficult project. PS 2 has the market with the PS 1, being solid fun platforms well supported by developers. Nintendo will probably release its GameCube early next year. I think it will take a second-generation device to truly have the polish that consoles need - stability, playability, and developer support.
"The universe seems neither benign nor hostile, merely indifferent." --Carl Sagan
...would not be in the mass market.
Game consoles gain popularity and longevity from their excusive titles. The odds of a small (in comparison) company who's just entering the game market getting a exclusive licence to the next killer app, is slim to none.
But that's OK, because I see the real use of a console such as this as a platform for hobbiests and other bored programmers (heh) to write for and distribute. IMHO, it would basiclly become a cult thing (but hey, RPGs were at one time as well, and look where they are now) with a small but dedicated fan base. While this is not particularly good for the company (as they will probably just break even on hardware sales), it would still be nice to have. And I would buy one because of this.
But then again, it'll probably just go the way of the Indremia (or however you spell it).
--
--
#nohup cat
Considering that sega stopped selling their consoles because they were losing so much money on them, i don't know how this is going to work out. Not only is it going to be a new machine in a crowded market, but it's also going to be a new company. The last new company that is still competing today is sony and that was around 4 or 5 years ago that they entered the market. Remember the Apple pippin? That was supposed to be a big machine but the reason it failed was because there wasn't a lot of software support and not enough pre-sale hype. It's going to be hard to hype a machine that's running linux because most people don't have a clue what linux is. Good luck getting support on the system as many companies are weary of other systems as they have deals with certain manufacturs already. I would like to see this work out but i'm not sure if it will be possible with the current marketing conditions. A killer app would have to be made that wouldn't be on any other system for it to even be remotely possible to win over the finnicy video game users. Sure macs have games on them now, but the reason no pc gamers switch over to mac is because there is no 'killer app'. I sure wouldn't want to pluck down a few bills on a system just because it's running linux and only able to run games with a system i already have, IMHO.
Why waste time and money on developing the hardware to become the next Amiga
Just ship a "TU" sticker and install linux on an XBox.
134340: I am not a number. I am a free planet!
I would defer commenting on this, and would rather check in at www.slashdot.org one year from now to see what good has come out of this.
And nope, I Am not scared to say so!
Rapid Nirvana
Then you start getting back to the "Dreamcast Ethernet" problem. As it was explained to me, only Dreamcast games that were explicitly written to use the ethernet card can support it. End-users are SOL if the game developer only included modem support. By keeping some parts of the OS away from each game, you can better support the hardware. That way, the machine itself can provide a simple "connect to ISP" command for the game to call and then it doesn't matter if you've got a modem, DSL, PPP-over-serial to another Linux box, or a set of tin cans. All the game needs to worry about is that a connection exists, that it has an approximate speed of (foo) bps, and (maybe) there'd be some proxy settings.
ad infinitum on /., the console business is based on the idea of losing money (or only breaking even) on the console
If emachines can sell a $399 computer - why cant TuxBox (or indrema) build a $299-$350 console? Consoles save a few bits, but require higher end pcs in other cases... it may be possible.
Im sure the 'sold at a loss' idea serves the console makers well when helping to convince people their "new consoles are the latest high-tech-turbo-extra-super-dooper gaming rig' possible - its so terrific; we sell it at a loss!" With the economies of scale, the specialized fabs and controlled/single-purpose manufacturing systems - why does the PS2 have to cost more than $299? I can understand when they are running them out at $129 (even then every box sold has less fixed costs...) but why isnt anyone willing to challenge this dogma?
Leaving at 5:30 in morning... wish me luck!
This is a great idea that I would like to see take off. It would be really good for the open source community to put a consule like this together without the funding that PS2 or XBox had.
I personally think games would be a secondary use for this box. It would be great to have tuxracer and Loki's games available, but that's not the point for me. How great would it be to have a $350 set-top box that you could plug into your stereo for mp3s (or Ogg!) or into your TV for DVD and Tivo-like recording? I would pay much more than that for an open box that anyone could design applications for. Think about open source application distribution for this thing: just make an .iso, and anyone with a CD-R can get it and burn it. Or an application that would create your own iso, for example a CD with an mp3 player/server application plus 650 MB of mp3s of your choosing. A lot of people are putting it down saying it can't compete with Sega/Nintendo/Microsoft, but I don't think it's designed to do that.
If it ain't broke, you need more software.
From what I saw Indrema was pretty much using off the shelf parts in a pretty box. What is to stop someone from defining a 'standard' games platform using purely open source software components and off the shelf hardware and allowing anyone to produce a box that meets that specifications?
If these people are making money from selling it then demand a 2 to 5% royalty per sale to fund the community involved in developing games (and the basic OS/graphics libraries required to support it as a standard) otherwise let anyone who has the money (or the existing hardware required) to build it themselves.
I've been looking at a similar scenario (focusing on 2D games though - no requirement for 3D excelleration) and putting together a bootable CD ROM that allows you to boot Linux (as long as you have a card that supports 800x600x16 framebuffer support and an audio card that supports at least 16 bit stereo output and a supported Linux audio driver) to play the game. Saved games would be saved to a floppy (using standard FAT16 so it's portable across most platforms). My biggest problems are deciding what net-card to suppport (DHCP would be a must even if you had a LAN rather than a PPP connection).
If someone could come up with a minimum list of hardware and supply a minimal distro that supported that (including the tools to make bootable CD's which was a real pain in the proverbial) it would make it so much easier. The hardware manufacturers could sell this with whatever value-added features they felt they needed to make an impact in the marketplace (ie: TIVO capabilities plus we support Linux Game Engine Spec 0.2 etc) and it would make it a lot easier for me (and many others) as game providers to say 'you require a machine that meets the Linux Game Engine Specification 0.2 - see http://url for more details'.
At this point in time it is far easier for me to say 'You need Windows 95 or better, supporting DirectX 3.x or better' and know that my software is going to work on Win95, Win98, WinMe, Win2K and WinXP. The difference? Better software? Not necessarily (although I am quite fond of DirectX now) but a known standard (and easily verifiable from the setup program). Perhaps this is all the difference that is required in the Open Source worldview - allows room for people to make money but is open enough to allow development without commercial restrictions.
Has anyone asked purveyors of Linux games (ie: Loki) what they would like to see? Given that these are the people that are likely to port the most popular games to the platform I'm sure they would appreciate some sort of input.
-static
Which is generally how most Linux game developers solve the problem of library inconsistencies - statically linking them into the executable.
^]:wq!^M
I hate to be negative, but I don't think we've seen a console system take off in this country without a ton of money behind it. What you have with TuxBox is a great console idea, but with little or no money behind it. Don't think that developers like EA don't look directly at the advertising revenue of a new console platform before deciding to develop for it. That's why you still hear so much more about Windows, Photoshop, and such. Free tools will get the small developers, but they can't afford to make Need For Speed, nor can they afford the cobranded primetime TV commercials that promote the box. The big development firms consider the tools the least expensive part... They may spend more on coffee and stocking the bathrooms than on development tools in one year.
The tuxbox team sez: "What do you mean "open source"?
The TuxBox, like many other open source projects, will be customizable. If you wanted to upgrade a certain piece of hardware, that would be possible on the Tuxbox.
Well, so much for the "sameness" of the TuxBox. This is the fundamental mistake they're making and this will drive TuxBox to failure.
TuxBox sounds dangerously close to XBox. Methinks these guys may be getting a call from Redmond soon.
That's because all the /. writers are lazy and depend on us for news.
*sheesh*
I am currently not obliged to divulge that information as it might compromise the agents in the field
Instead of trying to market a box (which no retail store will ever put on the shelves), I think they should devise a set of hardware specs so that anyone can go to the computer store and buy the parts to put together their own TuxBox. After all, an Xbox is essentially a PC game box.
You know, this wouldn't be so hard. Kernel, C and SDL libraries, a few binaries... You could probably squeeze enough Linux and drivers to support a nice 3D-enabled game into 20 megabytes or less on a game disc.
Not a bad idea.
STOP . AMERICA . NOW
Has there been ANY opensource game of a modern design that has actually gotten anywhere?
Golgotha Forever is FOREVER in development and by the time it gets anywhere near a 1.0 level of development, commercial games will leave it in the dust of graphics development.
New commercial games use the latest super-duper capabilities of the newest graphics cards. Soon, games will be wowing people by taking advantage of the Geforce 3. Golgotha? It will continue to be developed and developed, always 3 generations behind the newest and best commercial game as far as AI and graphics tech. Why? Because open source sucks? NO. It is because a commercial game developer does just that, GAMES. It is the sole job of the coders to make great games. With open source projects, it is a hobby, a night-time sideline that the coders are doing on their spare time after finishing a day at their real job.
It is too slow...and games are THE leading edge, cutthroat, fast-paced development arena. It is not a very good place for hobbyists to hope in any way, shape, or form to make a MODERN, graphics-intensive game that compares with the products of full-time commercial game companies.
Good luck (I exclusively use linux, afterall, so I am not some M$ hack/apologist/cheerleader), but I really don't see it having a chance against M$ or Sony. If they consider it a resume filler, then it has a value there, as you may well get snatched up by a game software development company, but beyond that? It may be a "game console" in theory, but it wont really be a game console.
If they prove me wrong, I'll make tea out of my dirty underware right here on slashdot.
In Bushworld, they struggle to keep church and state separate in Iraq as they increasingly merge the two in America.
Right now the only thing I reboot to windows for is to play games. I'm guessing the xbox will run 99% of windows DirectX games. So hell... I might just buy an xbox (shock horror... supporting the evil empire) and kill that windows partition on my desktop machine once and for all. Its a toy operating system...so it may as well be used that way. ....yes this post isn't all that relevant. Get over it.
anti-flame note: will probably get Tux Box anyway for all the other cool stuff like MAME etc
How does making a Linux "gaming console" make Linux game development any more exciting or profitable than it already is (or isn't) on Linux desktop machines? Because have you ever tried to give somebody tech support for their linux system? Every distro has its own little quirks and every install has certain libraries and packages that don't always cooperate well with what you are trying to do. The wrong version of X here, update glibc there, and voila, developer's nightmare. With windows, get yourself DirectX Version Z (which comes packaged with the game) and have some compatible hardware and you are ALL SET. This just isn't as easy to do with linux. But with a console, everybody has a standard set of hardware and software configurations, so developing becomes MUCH more consistent. Mary's TuxBox will work the same as Johnny's and vice versa. You have both Stability AND compatibility. With windows, you just have decent compatibility. THAT is why consoles are such great gaming platforms.
The question, then, is whether or not the upgraded equiptment is proprietary and supported by the TuxBox team. If it is part of a "standard" tested set of equiptment, then there should be no problem. Much like the expansion pack for the N64. Many games wont run without it.
What could really help is if EVERY game came with its own custom tailored version of linux to work with the hardware. That way, there would be NO confusion of libraries or out of date software. Every game is its own OS.
I don't see why everybody's so bent on these guys
(indreama or the tuxbox) turning a profit. As far as I know the open source movement was never about making a profit. It was about providing an open platform for developers to polish there skills and 'code for the greater good'. Who says they have to make a profit? They're doing this because they want to, right? Apple did the same thing when they started out, they didn't focus on making the slickest box on the market, they wanted to provide an alternate solution to the mainframe/teletype model right? Why is it different now? Let's support their community ideal and use the slashdot community to back them up. My user number is in the 200,000s, imagine if half of the slashdot users bought a tuxbox (or pc setup capable of replicating the setup), these guys would shit their pants in joy! ENOUGH OF THIS NEGATIVE SHIT! This is about community right? Let's support them and see what they do. I don't want to see a bunch of talented developers go to propriatary technology just because everyone says they can't make it in the open source world! GET YOUR HEADS OUT OF YOUR ASSES!
This message was enhanced by BEER!
This post was enhanced by BEER technology! 'Karaoke' is Japanese for drunken loser. -Craig Kilborne
It seems to me that most of the posters in this thread thus far have missed the important distinction between the two devices.
The Indrema was conceived as part of a commercial venture to break into the console market, in the same vein as the XBox, only with much less financial backing.
The TuxBox, on the other hand, is a hobby to those working on it. Let's not forget that Linux was Linus' hobby ten years ago. Are they going to compete directly with Sony/MS/Nintendo? No.
If it works, it should start to pop up in geeks' homes, a few at a time. If it works well, it will gain momentum, and game coders, being geeks themselves, will port or cross-develop for the TuxBox and drop the finished product on their bosses' desks right next to the Sony/MS/Nintendo variant when they're done. When there are many such quality games, the masses will follow.
It's already happened once, keep the faith.
--blob
All sweeping generalizations suck.
...and then go on to hardware. If the the linux community could make a developement kit that BEGED to be used and someone wrote an awsome book on how to use "the linux imaginary tool kit", it would only be a matter of time before games became popular on linux.
This is where Loki and open source game engine developers come in. If there is a future in games on Linux, it will probably be in some way due to to some hardworking people who do the ground breaking first few SERIOUS open source games. All this talk of a Linux game consoles just seems premature. Lets start with the software!
I miss the Karma Whores.
Take a look at what goes on and is said on most game forums. Big name games, support from mainstream developers, and games that take advantage are the latest technology is it. Money isn't just the answer, opensource or no opensource isn't either. Free versus a cost for consoles or games. No sorry. Microsoft with all there money isn't having the smoothest of times getting XBox pushed. They still lack the software support that Sony has and as such the only have a fanactical fan base currently til it is actually shipped. They're hoping that by the next set of games is due to be released after it is shipped that they have more support from the companies like SQUARE for example whom they don't have currently.
Gamers and PC users are not the same. Being based on Linux or being opensource means nothing to the gamers that companies like Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo depend on to be there.
This will just be a specialized system for enthusiaists to have. The questions that came to my mind with it being opensource is what if someone develops a game that uses a library of a later build or modified build of the one I have. How will this be updated? Will it involve recompiling the kernel? Will games have to be compiled to run on my machine?
If it's seen as a challenge to get Linux to the corporate desktop, then it's nearly impossible to get it to gamers. All they want is to play games. They don't want to look at code, they don't want to be able to modify the consoles kernel, or recode the game. (Maybe have options to customize portions but certainly not by recoding it.) Everything that is the boon to why Linux is good is the dearth as to it's survival as an opensource console.
For this to succeed maybe these guys can take at least on lesson from Microsoft. And that is to seriously analyze gamers and see how they think and act and what they want.
As has been noted ad infinitum on /., the console business is based on the idea of losing money (or only breaking even) on the console to make money on the games (primarily through SDK's). Having a free SDK makes this difficult.
When the average gamer is shown the TuxBox, which in order to be competitive feature-wise with the Xbox, Cube, and PS2 will probably cost $300 plus, versus the $200 competition, he'll not be likely to buy a Tux Box.
About the only way that the TuxBox can survive is if a slew of good games are released for it that are significantly cheaper than their competition on other consoles. But commercial titles are unlikely to be significantly cheaper: the game makers will simply accept the higher margins. This could cause them to push the TuxBox version more, but that's anything but a given.
As to legions of developers around the world contributing free games for it, I say that the games are not likely to be competitive with their commercial brethren. With the possible exception of Tux Racer, there has not been a modern-style game released as free software. The reason is this: all you need are hackers to write a kernel, or a GUI, or even most apps. But games (especially modern ones) require the investment of artists (which are possible under free software), and legions of support people (motion-capture, sound effects, etc.) who aren't likely to get any benefit out of working on a free game unless they're paid (and they're not necessarily cheap).
So, why would linux-as-console excite developers more than linux-as-desktop? There are already open development libraries for making games on Linux (OpenGL, SDL, etc.). How does making a Linux "gaming console" make Linux game development any more exciting or profitable than it already is (or isn't) on Linux desktop machines?
I wish them the best of luck.
An open source gaming console would make a system that independent developers can create games for without having to pay the high licensing fees that price them out of most other systems. It would also do the same for the accessory hardware and services market for the console. Basically, this would create a freer market for high powered game consoles.
Shameless Plug For my web site:
Wireless LAN hardware and systems
Network over 15 Miles radius!
www.techsplanet.com/wlan/
First is hardware. They probably need some custom ASIC's to glue it together, plus case, controllers, etc.. Sure, they can get away with mostly PC hardware, but if that was all, it would just be a standardized PC platform, and no more a gaming console than my PC. Anyway, this is expensive, because you have to manufacture and distribute it. Downloading the designs won't help, because few people will have the ability to compile them to real silicon.
Second is the system software. Sure, Linux is wonderful and all, but it's not optimized for multimedia. It's slow compared to Windows, and likely much slower still compared to a highly optimized console platform. Further, to make a good multipurpose device they need something like DVD playback, video recording, etc.. DVD at least requires some expensive licenses to implement, and the IP issues would probably mean giving up on the totally free goal. Other media would probably require some sort of rights management system, and I don't know how open content providers would be to an open protection mechanism.
Third is for application software. A console is nothing without it. And without consoles, the market is nothing. Sure, Joe. E. Linux will write some game as a hobby or to make his resume flashy, but how will that compare to Metroid 4. Think sales (or distribution if it's free), because TuxTroid will be tiny in comparison, even in the unlikely event it is just as playable.
So where does that leave us? A high priced system, with very limited availability, that appeals mainly to Linux zealots and budding developers. It doesn't sound like a good bet to me. It didn't to Indrema, and the main difference was that they were willing to cater to the corporate crowd to get some acceptance.
This effort is doomed to failure just as surely as Indrema, except that instead of going out all at once, it will fade away as the vapour slowly dissipates to reveal that there never was anything at all.
Even Slashdot wants to hide some things
Acutally, the developers didn't use the words "better gaming console," the writer of the story (that's me) did.
"Sigh... Going up against a heavy hitter such as Playstation is way far fetched. Even mentioning them when your first project wen to shit makes the whole project laughable. They need to focus on their own product, get it up and running. Talk is cheap."
Again, same issue. You're putting words in the developers' mouths. I used Playstation as an example of their big competition, they didn't actually mention Playstation.
Grant Gross, Washington reporter, IDG News Service
Why else? They'll be garunteed about 100k sales if they make it penguin shaped like that April Fools joke Transmeta ran with a while ago.
This has been another useless post from....
Killfile(TGK)
No trees were killed in the creation of this post. However, many electrons were inconvenienced.
What they should do is approach some of the gaming companies for assistance on the project. One of the failures I saw on Indrema (why it lost funding or hopes of funding) fell into expecting some VC to back them, which we know from stats, won't happen for some time.
The company's founders should have approached a game developer with their idea along with the statistics (or expected analysis) of what they forsaw in terms of users. (which in turn create revenue)
Even a game company no matter which platform they created for would have had to take a look at the marketability for the product, unless MS bullied them
Thats a lousy way for the developers to put it "better gaming console", since their underlying job is to bring out a gaming console, and when you have little by way of revenue, going up against heavy hitting marketing teams like that of MS' xbox is a killer in itself.Instead of being arrogant about it, the company should just do whatever it takes, then brag later.
Again, I hope these guys get it right this time around, and pull together from managing the entire project, from the upper level teamwork to actually getting the code right. (not that it was wrong the first time) Slightly bad move, what they should do is make cheap games say uner $10.00 US. Lets face it the thought of free my sound inspiring, but it won't you you far, however it will make you broke really fast. Create a pay pal account and have users of their games give what they can under $10.00 (US) this way they have some form of revenue to keep their business afloat, and away from dying as fast as Indrema did. Sigh... Going up against a heavy hitter such as Playstation is way far fetched. Even mentioning them when your first project wen to shit makes the whole project laughable. They need to focus on their own product, get it up and running. Talk is cheap. This does little for this who are keen to playing games they're familiar with. Again why not approach some of the game developers with an idea of porting all games to their box, and a small price. Everyone makes money, and everyone can look forward to playing games with familiarity as well as propietary games.Think about it Zelda X on this machine would rock, and everyone would enjoy it, money would be made, the company wouldn't end up on fuckedcompany.com before it even launched.
who is deran9ed?
360 degrees of Karma
TIVO style personal tv capability was one of the things that made indrema interesting. But there's no mention of it with Tuxbox. I hope that's not gone and if so, I hope they bring it back. TIVO, replay, and ultimate TV boxes cost way too much individually and their subscription fees are ridiculous and unnecessary.
cryptochrome
---If you can't trust a nerd, who can you trust?
This is the sole reason I would not recommend this to anyone. Let's say Joe Schmoe 8year old buys one of these and "oops" his new game doesn't work because it was compiled with new features of a new kernel, and he has to upgrade his kernel? How will he know what to do? I've messed up kernel upgrades more often than I care to say, now what will happen when the non-Linux user of all ages attempts to upgrade?
Because closed-architecture game boxes (and computers and appliances) are headed towards being information gathering consumer monitoring devices.
- First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then ???, then profit.
If open source games get going, on PC's or on a custom box, they could end up doing very well as people reuse, improve, and tune them. Polish is a key to making great games, and open source helps lots with that. However, the trick is to get a user base. How TuxBox can get that competeing with Nintendo and Sony I don't know. And good games are hard to make. They may look easy, but they are not. So I think they are right about how well it could work if it works, but getting it to work at all will be very hard indeed. I hope they make it.
--
There are 2 problems which we have already seen: high cost of entry and economy of scale. In order to get a market that will buy your product in this arena you have to have promotions, marketing, polish and rub, horse and pony shows. Sony and Nintendo amongst others employ economies of scale in order to sell their products at prices that the consumer will pay. A lot of studies showed that the Playstation could not sell in an acceptable number if it cost more than they are selling it at, which is, by some accounts, a loss for Sony or at least very slim margins. They make their money on lucrative licensing and less so from accesories, etc. They are able to get by with this scheme b/c their huge size allows them to buy components at extremely discounted prices in bulk and they can leverage their facilities, talent, and marketing hordes for this project or that as needed. A new, open source project has extreme hurdles to face, but maybe just maybe they can do it.
Disclaimer: There is no guarantee that the content has been read or understood
if it was free.
In the article it mentions that this platform can play DVDs. If it's open source and can play DVD's wouldn't it have the much maligned DeCSS code incorporated in its code?
Wouldn't this make selling (or even advertising) this thing illegal
I can already feel the MPAA legal teams warming up
I used to have a cool sig, back when I cared
The problem with these consoles is that they never really think much past making it open source.
Sure, it's great and all that it's running on linux, but why ELSE would I wanna buy your machine over someone else's?
It's quite simple really. Budget is one major factor. Games are becoming more and more expensive to produce. As technology gets more advanced, more time is spent on developing for it and staying ahead of the curve. And as all game developers know, time is money. Also, why would anyone spend the massive amounts of time that game developers spend to develop a game if they are not going to benefit from it financially. Think about it. That's like producing a multi-million dollar movie without paying the cast or crew. Another factor is promotion. A large portion of the money spent on a game is not just on development. It is spent on ads, box art, public relations (press), and various other methods of getting a product sold. Who is going to promote a game if they are not going to get paid for it? We wouldn't see any ads in game magazines, television, nor the internet. Okay, I understand that open source developers wouldn't actually "sell" the product. But who's going to play a game if they don't even know that it exists? Another thing to think about when considering a "console" based on an operating system (both free and commercial... not mentioning any names here :P) is that consoles are static. They are never-changing machines that last for about 5 or so years before requiring replacement due to general technological advances. When you have a machine (e.g. a PC) that can be upgraded every couple of years that runs such operating systems, why even buy the cheapie version that can't be upgraded?
I was at E3 last year and I looked around at the Linux development booth. I must say, I was none too impressed. Let's face it. Anything that is entertainment related, whether it be software, film, television, recorded music, theater, etc requires a sizeable chunk of change if it is going to be of decent quality and be seen by the largest amount of people.
(Btw, I'm not saying that all games made commercially are wonderful. There are too many examples of this for me to list here. :P)