Slashdot Mirror
SDK's for Wireless Games - Will They Succeed?
Memetic asks: "There is a software
development kit for wireless games, downloadable from
TTPCom, a wireless devices IP
vendor. It's described as: 'an open API delivering access to all the
mobile phone's features in order to develop a new generation of
on-line and multi-user games...it is possible to take advantage of
the GSM, GPRS or 3GPP networks by downloading these games over the
air, sending SMS messages between players, and creating multi-user
content and games. Technologies such as Bluetooth or GPS are also
made available' My question, does anyone see independent developers
emerging for donloadable gaming or will this market be driven by the
network operators / handset manufacturers?" While using this
technology to build games on cell phones doesn't intrigue me,
adapting this for our current and future crop of handheld computing
devices does. What kind of future do you think there is for games
development on such platforms like the Visor, the PalmPilot, and the
next-generation-Gameboy that may come down the pipe in the
next couple of years?
I think those OSes will need to undergo a large leap in evolution to allow for a truly interesting gaming experience. Currently, they are underpowered in both hardware and OS.
Also, a color screen would be helpful, but not necessary.
The main problem, Cliff, is that people who want to do this kind of thing with their handheld devices typically buy the PocketPC. Palm-freaks (a term of endearment, not a slight) are usually more interested in the smooth operation of their device and the ease of use stemming from its minimalist design.
Aand helds are computers that are designed to be as small and cheap as possible while still useful for simple tasks like word processing, spreadsheets, etc ... nothing too numbercrunching or exciting.
;) Only then do you have enough computing power left around accidentally by the engineering team that designed the hand held to accomdate enough gaming power for the platform to become a viable enough selling point to the average consumer.
Gaming platforms are super-efficient customized hardware solutions with well thought out ergonomics and a psysical interface that is designed, from the ground up, for gaming.
I think the engineering requirements of either platforms are so at odds with each other that gaming on handhelds will never really catch on. Or at least until such a time that handhelds are far closer in terms of performance/price as desktop systems; or, to put it another way, low-end desktop systems become the size of handhelds.
"Old man yells at systemd"
I think what we've seen again and again is that, unless you're a huge juggernaut (like Microsoft), your proprietary "open" standards never win. Even Microsoft can only pull it off, sometimes.
What gets independent game developers going is truly open standards, like TCP/IP. When is my handspring going to be able to play a game with your Gameboy, wirelessly? When both of them have wireless IP adresses. Until then, these things will remain insular, only allowing my brand to play with my brand.
Wireless spam, that's the wave of the future.
sulli
RTFJ.
You know, I hate to give him credit for anything, but Xenos over at Dreammachineonline.com made a rather interesting point about Anarchy Online. The graphics were amazing, but he said "Because you couldn't see player names or know who was standing around you, there was no community."
Even if you COULD see little pixel figures of people, the games would ultimately fail because the community would be nil - and this is what matters in the online gaming world. As people what they play MMORPGs for, most people say Friends or Other Players.
It's harsh to admit, but really, there isn't much chance in anyone playing a game where a) the graphics are terrible, b) the connection is slow, and c) the community doesn't exist, simply because you can't talk/type fast enough on those things, and you can't see the words/phrases/playernames anyway.
HUGE.
There are (reportedly) over 20 million of these devices in Japan alone. The handheld/cellphone/PDA game market will be great for small and independent developers, and the economics are favorable as well (market size vs. cost of entry).
Now, what kinds of games to play on small devices is the next question...
For anyone worried that no handheld device could possibly play games, don't worry. The current generation (and I mean ones selling for over 12 months now) of Pocket PC's have had 200mhz processors, 16-32 meg of ram, sound and 320x240 color screens.
I have seen gameboy emulators, full speed Apple II emulators and Commodor 64 emulators.. right there you have tons of playable games.
Sim City 2000 is a best seller on the Pocket PC. My company is porting one of our best sellers to it as well. Not as powerfull as a desktop by far.. but better than the computer on your desk 5 years ago!
The problem with wireless games that makes them suck is content. It's HARD to come up with a game that people want to play while at the corner store buying a newspaper. Regardless of how good handhelds get, the public just doesn't *see* handhelds as the next gaming platform.
Wait for some bright person to write "The Killer Wireless Game" and in a month the market will explode.
Whether or not independent development of games for wireless devices/platforms will succeed is a very good question...one that I have actually pondered in the past. However, I believe that SDK's and development tools of this sort are putting the 'cart before the horse' in many respects...
Anyone who has ever attempted to engage in an interactive game via their GSM-enabled cell phone, for example, can attest to the many deficiencies beyond simply a lack of game titles. Poor ergonomics, slow response/performance, and intolerable graphics are but a few of the physical/hardware issues that will require much further attention prior to us concerning ourselves with the lack of a Quake port!!!
Even in the burgeoning marketplace of the slightly larger integrated devices that marry gadgets such as PDA's, cell phones, and GPS's into single units, these same issues remain valid. You can only do so much with so little before the device's size becomes to large and cumbersome for it to be practical to carry around on your belt!!!
IMHO, this may be a hot topic in a couple of years, but for the time being is before its time and will fail as a result!!!
Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy. -- Benjamin Franklin
Games on portables with 3.5"x5" screens just don't seem that appealing to me. I mean sure, tetris rocks, but I don't need a 600$ platform to play tetris.
..
The idea of wireless games for the PDA seems interesting, but you could already do that. MUD's are still out there, and playable by text interface (of course), but quite frankly, they don't catch my attention any more (no offense intended to loyal devotees).
Also, in most of the situations where a PDA is carried, gaming is not really the focus. In any case, the PDA doesn't allow for an immersive enough expierince for my gaming desires. I suppose online chess or something would be cool, but I want to be able to KILL
so I guess I'll wait untill a (relatively)cheap wearable comes out for truly portable connected gaming.
Let's face it. A cell phone is not a gaming console. At the moment most cell phones have a very limited screen - low resolution, small size, limited amount of colors (usually monochromatic). And no sounds, or very primitive ones *bleep*. And the controls suck. Why? Because it's a phone device, not a gaming device.
Entertainment techies should reconsider their model of wireless gaming. Perhaps a cell phone should be a phone, not a Nintendo Gameboy. Make games that use the phone just as it is, a phone. If you succeed in doing this, tell me how.
I know a Finnish company that develops a geographical GSM phone location service by triangulating the phones in networks. Using this kind of technology it could be possible to switch the game from the phone's screen into a real life experience, placing the player physically in the game, where his movements could be tracked on a predefined "game area". I'm sure countless of gaming applications are inbound after this technology spreads around..
__
Zarathustra.fi
Modern man has no goal, no aim, no ideals.
Bah, this will just turn in to another way for my girlfriend to find me won't it?
Maybe, but what'd be way cooler is if it allowed geeks to find girlfriends.
WWJD.... for a Klondike bar?
Someone already mentioned Amiga's take on the mobile gaming platform. But I predict it won't succeed. This, however, I think will: Fathammer Ltd.'s X-Forge gaming engine. Take a look at those iPaq screen shots on their page.
:)
I heard, that when Fathammer's boys went over to Intel and demonstrated what their engine can do with a "simple" 206 MHz processor, the Intel guys' jaws dropped on the table! They just couldn't believe that this was possible! After the initial shock, I believe dollar signs were seen rolling by these guys' eyes..
Always told you, ex-democoders are good when it comes to optimizing and cheating in graphical routines..
__
Zarathustra.fi
Modern man has no goal, no aim, no ideals.
The lack of a market for games on wireless is less a result of people inherent "unwillingness" to play games on mobile devices as the impossibility of collective reasonable revenues through them in the American system.
Wireless gaming is doing reasonably well on DoCoMo, probably because of centralized billing.
My thought is it's easier to put a cell phone on a game boy rather than game boy on a cell phone.
The problem before the masses adopt such a gaming system, as I see it, will stay as long as the architectures and protocols used remain proprietary.
On top of that the (gaming) network should be open between all providers. Imagine if you couldn't play a multiplayer game with your friend because you have a Verizon DSL and he has Cox cable.
Try going to a major city and living the commuter life. Taking 1 (or more) hr train rides to work every day. eg. Tokyo. Thats why the wireless market in Tokyo is so huge. Everyone's got "down" time while they're riding on or waiting for their train.
Now that I've returned back into the fold of Americanism and the NOW NOW NOW mentality, flying down the freeway, I don't get to use my cell phone or PDA as much... but I can still imagine where this would be quite useful.
I ate my sig.
When most slashdotter's think of games, they think first person shoot'em up, etc. Those will be a huge utter failure on handheld devices, like cellphones. Remember back when online multi-player games had A) limited bandwidth, and B) limited display (text based)? This is what we have to back to.
Remember the old BBS games? I am sure many people here were addicted to games like L.O.R.D. in the old BBS days. Remember MUDS? That is the niche I see these games flurishing in. People have said there is no community. No community? You just have to think differently about what a community is.
Remember the old card board and plastic pieces type games? Chess, Risk, etc. Someone could play 5 chess games on an ongoing bases with people they know in REAL LIFE! Now that's community! Make your moves back and forth every now and then during the day. People probably won't be playing non-stop for 3 hours, but 5 minutes here, two minutes there. Just have to consider games which work in such a time schedule.
Multi-player games worked well in the BBS days, and in many ways, today's cellphones has better display ability than 80x24 ANSI.
-Pete
Soccer Goal Plans
My question, does anyone see independent developers emerging for donloadable gaming or will this market be driven by the network operators / handset manufacturers?
My friend's company, :)Smilie, are an already existing independant developer for whom this kind of this is just their cup of tea. They are the kind of people who probably would download such an SDK. Their browser-based games site (warning: this site has Flash on nearly every page, and the games are Java - it's not meant to work in Lynx! ;o) is full of the kind of simple games that people still like playing - and it's games of this kind that can easily be ported to devices with a small keypad and a tiny (monochrome) display.
There are many companies like Smilie, with a track record for games development on a variety of different platforms - wireless gaming is simply another development platform, with a different set of specs.
Gaming isn't about fancy hardware and good graphics (although they can help! ;). Those who say 'people who want games will buy a PocketPC' (or similar) do make a valid point - but on the other hand, who here has played 'Snake' on a Nokia? Who's played Tetris on a Gameboy? -- neither of these games require powerful hardware, and both can be considered fun and (somewhat) addictive.
Regarding communities: A gaming community can still develop without immersive multiplayer games (in the sense of Q3A for example), it'd simply be a community of people who play the same game(s), and 'hang-out' together - whether in virtual space (eg: in a chat-room, via SMS, on mailing-list, in a forum) or in 'meat space'. SmilieGames for example has a large community - and not a first-person-shoot'er in sight!
Multiplayer gaming (of a few kinds) is still possible on low-bandwidth devices - don't think RocketArena Tournament: think Snake Tournament (or Tetris Tournament) - eg: two players are picked off of a queue, they start their game at the same time (synced by the server), and the final scores are then sent back to the server to decide who wins, (and to enter the global highscore table, etc) - I'm sure you get the idea....
All that said, it might not matter how good or bad the product is if it's marketed well, and backed by the right brand name (or a brand's character - such as that Pikachu thing), a lot of people will probably buy it anyway.
All IMHO anyway - I did develop games myself for a good few years.. :o0 (don't anymore though)