Slashdot Mirror
Star Wars Galaxies Console Versions On Hold
Thanks to an anonymous reader for pointing to a Gamespot news story indicating that the console (PS2 and Xbox) versions of Star Wars Galaxies are now on hold. Although they were announced at E3 in 2002, and may appear eventually, a Lucasarts spokesman said of the MMORPG: "We are currently focusing all of our efforts on the successful launch of the PC version of Star Wars Galaxies." Meanwhile, the Star Wars Galaxies official site at its publisher, Sony, has links to some new mini-previews and E3-released gameplay movies from this title, which also has a thorough fanpage at RPGPlanet.
I think this is a very good move considering how many problems the PC version has right now. Then they will have to figure out whether console players will be on the same server etc.
Courage is fear holding on a minute longer. George Patton
First, how are the two going to communicate. I won't go further keeping in mind that keyboards for the consoles aren't out yet and not everyone wants to hear a whiny 9-13 year old kid's voice through their speakers/headphones. Second and more importantly, how is the user interface going to work? History has shown that computer interfaces are usually overly complex for controllers while console interfaces tend to be unappealing and dull to PC users.
I feel a sudden disturbance in the force ... As if millions of consumers cried out in longing, and were suddenly silenced.
People are dumb and don't know how to use computers.
All the best games from Sony and Nintendo are ONLY released on consoles which forces the people who want to play them to buy the respective console.
Personally I think everyone would win if game companies stopped making consoles and focused strictly on PC games.
You're right, I wouldn't steal a car. But if it were possible, I sure as hell would download one!
The availability of games only on PC is a gating measure which keeps those of obviously insufficient age (say, single-digits) out of situations for which they are socially and emotionally not ready. Grade-school kids thrive on console games, and the inclusion of them in the wider MMOG community would in many cases create significant customer support problems.
I can only hope that this ends up being permanent, but since there's money to be made, that obviously won't be the case.
Unfortunately, programming console games is a real pain. (I have yet to try writing anything complex, but believe me, even a simple Test Drive 2 clone can be a real pain in the a*s.) Targeting PC's is easier not only because of superior hardware quality and better performance, but also (or maybe should I say, first of all) because of cryptic APIs and subtle differences between platforms, while with PC you have just one target, you only have to master DirectX (which can be hard sometimes, of course, but there's only one standard to learn) and this is why some of the great gems aren't being published for the console market. I really do hope that when console manufacturers start to use Linux as their official operating system, this situation will change, as they will be one standard for console programming (glibc, SDL, OpenGL, OpenAL, etc.). But meanwhile, I guess, I'll just have to play Star Wars Galaxies on my PC... *sigh*
Karma: Positive (probably because of superiour intellect)
[ed. note: in the following text, former FreeBSD developer Mike Smith gives his reasons for abandoning FreeBSD]
When I stood for election to the FreeBSD core team nearly two years ago, many of you will recall that it was after a long series of debates during which I maintained that too much organisation, too many rules and too much formality would be a bad thing for the project.
Today, as I read the latest discussions on the future of the FreeBSD project, I see the same problem; a few new faces and many of the old going over the same tired arguments and suggesting variations on the same worthless schemes. Frankly I'm sick of it.
FreeBSD used to be fun. It used to be about doing things the right way. It used to be something that you could sink your teeth into when the mundane chores of programming for a living got you down. It was something cool and exciting; a way to spend your spare time on an endeavour you loved that was at the same time wholesome and worthwhile.
It's not anymore. It's about bylaws and committees and reports and milestones, telling others what to do and doing what you're told. It's about who can rant the longest or shout the loudest or mislead the most people into a bloc in order to legitimise doing what they think is best. Individuals notwithstanding, the project as a whole has lost track of where it's going, and has instead become obsessed with process and mechanics.
So I'm leaving core. I don't want to feel like I should be "doing something" about a project that has lost interest in having something done for it. I don't have the energy to fight what has clearly become a losing battle; I have a life to live and a job to keep, and I won't achieve any of the goals I personally consider worthwhile if I remain obligated to care for the project.
Discussion
I'm sure that I've offended some people already; I'm sure that by the time I'm done here, I'll have offended more. If you feel a need to play to the crowd in your replies rather than make a sincere effort to address the problems I'm discussing here, please do us the courtesy of playing your politics openly.
From a technical perspective, the project faces a set of challenges that significantly outstrips our ability to deliver. Some of the resources that we need to address these challenges are tied up in the fruitless metadiscussions that have raged since we made the mistake of electing officers. Others have left in disgust, or been driven out by the culture of abuse and distraction that has grown up since then. More may well remain available to recruitment, but while the project is busy infighting our chances for successful outreach are sorely diminished.
There's no simple solution to this. For the project to move forward, one or the other of the warring philosophies must win out; either the project returns to its laid-back roots and gets on with the work, or it transforms into a super-organised engineering project and executes a brilliant plan to deliver what, ultimately, we all know we want.
Whatever path is chosen, whatever balance is struck, the choosing and the striking are the important parts. The current indecision and endless conflict are incompatible with any sort of progress.
Trying to dissect the above is far beyond the scope of any parting shot, no matter how distended. All I can really ask of you all is to let go of the minutiae for a moment and take a look at the big picture. What is the ultimate goal here? How can we get there with as little overhead as possible? How would you like to be treated by your fellow travellers?
Shouts
To the Slashdot "BSD is dying" crowd - big deal. Death is part of the cycle; take a look at your soft, pallid bodies and consider that right this very moment, parts of you are dying. See? It's not so bad.
To the bulk of the FreeBSD committerbase and the developer community at large - keep your eyes on the real goals. It'