Slashdot Mirror


The Tiny Console Killers Taking On the PS4 and Xbox 720

An anonymous reader writes "As the next generation of consoles looms, we've seen a growing trend towards low price, compact alternatives such as the Ouya and GameStick, many of which run on the Android mobile platform. But this article on the trend raises a very good point: through the use of cloud computing and game streaming technology, it's entirely possible these machines will be able to keep pace with the powerhouse technology inside the Sony PS4 and Microsoft Xbox 720, and perhaps even overtake them. After all, if these little boxes can simply stream from powerful servers, how can the stalwarts of gaming keep up?"

250 of 349 comments (clear)

  1. how can the stalwarts of gaming keep up? by Bananatree3 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Rural areas. Dialup and satellite internet suck in this application. 3G? Unless one has a large data cap or uses their console infrequently.

    1. Re:how can the stalwarts of gaming keep up? by RyuuzakiTetsuya · · Score: 3, Insightful

      By focusing on profitability and not marketshare.

      Sell enough to a dedicated group of people with good internet access and ensure that your profit center IS the console and you're set.

      Although that GameStick controller looks simply awful. I wish they built a better joypad.

      --
      Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
    2. Re:how can the stalwarts of gaming keep up? by rolfwind · · Score: 3, Informative

      The summary doesn't make it clear but what the article is talking about is streaming from your own more powerful PC via Wi-Fi, which apparently one of the products has the ability to do so.

      Now I don't really buy into that as coinciding with what people want but at least the concept is plausible no matter where you are situated or your Internet situation. (Consoles usually stay at home as well).

    3. Re:how can the stalwarts of gaming keep up? by Pseudonym · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Rural areas. Dialup and satellite internet suck in this application.

      You already need decent broadband on current consoles for some DRM-laden games.

      --
      sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
    4. Re:how can the stalwarts of gaming keep up? by frovingslosh · · Score: 3, Informative

      Don't forget bandwidth caps on wired Internet "services", such as that sold to you by the good people at AT&T. The little old lady next door already got hit with huge overages because she likes to watch netflix, I can imagine how bad the overages would be if I was playing a high resolution game for similar amounts each month. And I also don't believe that a "cloud based system" will ever be able to generate as good of quality of game video and then deliver it with as low of latency as a system co-located with the user.

      --
      I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
    5. Re:how can the stalwarts of gaming keep up? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 5, Funny

      And don't forget Blizzard's innovative Massively Singleplayer Online RPG experience in the latest iteration of the Diablo franchise...

    6. Re:how can the stalwarts of gaming keep up? by grantek · · Score: 1

      Rural areas. Dialup and satellite internet suck in this application. 3G? Unless one has a large data cap or uses their console infrequently.

      A "preloaded USB stick" service would be nice from an internet-only store, say if they could do an 8GB stick for $5 and you have the game within a week. You'd still need the dialup connection to decrypt the USB stick files and install to your console, but if you're on dialup you're not going to be playing multiplayer over Internet, so you can safely tell your console not to attempt to update whenever a patch is pushed.

    7. Re:how can the stalwarts of gaming keep up? by Waccoon · · Score: 1

      It's funny. I know very well that nubs work really bad as analog sticks, but when I saw that controller, my first thought was, "Why the hell do gamepads still need a Select and Start button?"

    8. Re:how can the stalwarts of gaming keep up? by cheesybagel · · Score: 2
      Larry Ellison wants his NetPC back. Remember that one? I agree that streamed games are still not a viable option for a lot of people.

      These consoles are interesting in that they leverage cell phone chips to compete with current consoles. Yes current console specs are getting to be that long in the tooth.

    9. Re:how can the stalwarts of gaming keep up? by RoboJ1M · · Score: 2

      Backward compatibility

    10. Re:how can the stalwarts of gaming keep up? by RoboJ1M · · Score: 1

      I still don't believe in this streaming gaming thing.
      Maybe (Probably) it's just a UK thing but 10 seconds of buffering for streaming SD content and sometimes laggy multiplayer gaming even when you're rendering it locally does not fill me with confidence.
      I suppose maybe the latencies are approaching workable but they can still wander up to 100ms.

    11. Re:how can the stalwarts of gaming keep up? by SternisheFan · · Score: 1

      Rural areas. Dialup and satellite internet suck in this application. 3G? Unless one has a large data cap or uses their console infrequently.

      This Ars article covers the best satellite currently seems to be able to offer:

      "ViaSat's Exede service launched last year as a major improvement over WildBlue. It offers 12Mbps down and 3Mbps up across all of its plans, differentiating tiers not by speed but by data usage. Usage is unlimited from midnight to 5am, but metered at all other times of the day. $50 a month gets you 10GB per month, $80 equates to 15GB, and $130 provides 25GB.

      Hughes charges between $40 and $100 a month, with speeds ranging from 10 to 15 Mbps down and 1 to 2 Mbps up, and data limits of 20 to 40GB per month. Satellite bandwidth is not limitless: both Hughes and ViaSat have optimized their service for download speeds, saying in their experience customers care much less about upload speeds.

      While Dish Network or DirecTV services are one-way broadcasts, Hughes and ViaSat home systems receive and transmit.

      http://arstechnica.com/business/2013/01/satellite-internet-15mbps-no-matter-where-you-live-in-the-us/

    12. Re:how can the stalwarts of gaming keep up? by Sigg3.net · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Rural areas. Dialup and satellite internet suck in this application.

      You already need decent broadband on current consoles for some DRM-laden games.

      And SSH into girlfriend's PC to kill Transmission (or equivalent).
        Guns don't kill people. Lag kills people.

    13. Re:how can the stalwarts of gaming keep up? by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

      "Why the hell do gamepads still need a Select and Start button?"

      Two more buttons. They're often used for pause and options/save. And also backwards compatibility. The PSone had them because it was originally designed as an SNES addon and PSone games used them...so the PS2 had to have them and PS2 games use them too, and so on with the PS3.

    14. Re:how can the stalwarts of gaming keep up? by genner · · Score: 1

      It's funny. I know very well that nubs work really bad as analog sticks, but when I saw that controller, my first thought was, "Why the hell do gamepads still need a Select and Start button?"

      I don't know about select but start makes a good pause button.

    15. Re:how can the stalwarts of gaming keep up? by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

      Any console DRM isn't bandwidth intensive.....but the built in audio chat the consoles and most games have is for certain. Besides, the PS3, 360, and Wii don't even have connections for phone lines, only wireless and/or ethernet. The PS2 did, but I think only a few games support playing over dialup, two being MMORPG's without voice chat. I think the 2002 version of THPS does too, (Has built in support for USB modems AND supports the Network Adapter)

    16. Re:how can the stalwarts of gaming keep up? by artfulshrapnel · · Score: 1

      They're still useful, they should just be renamed. "Start" should be "Pause" or "Menu", "Select" should be "Info" or something like that.

    17. Re:how can the stalwarts of gaming keep up? by Admiral+Llama · · Score: 1

      Some games let you mash the both at the same time to do a rage reset.

    18. Re:how can the stalwarts of gaming keep up? by neorush · · Score: 1

      I have Hughesnet and had Wildblue before that. The cost for the amount of bandwidth is ridiculous compared with other wired options. We get 400MB / day for $80 / month, relisitically we can do ~300 kb/s down, but if you add multiple downloads the total available it drops like a rock, probably related to bandwidth overhead. Hughesnet allows you to have a "rollover" pool double your bandwidth allotment. So most days we do start with 800MB available. But when windows pushes an update with the 7 machines in the house we do normally run over. If you spend ~60 mins watching YouTube you are out of bandwidth (that is only 10 mins per person in the house!). I have to start downloading a Steam game, watch the bandwidth, and pause it when it is getting low, then start it again the next day. It is an enormous pain in the butt.

      Bottom line, anyone who says Satellite is "almost" as good as cable or DSL has never tried to live with it on a daily basis. It is waaaay better than dialup though.

      Also as a note, Wildblue has a 30 day rolling total, and Hughesnet is daily, we switched because if you went over with Wildblue you were stuck for 30 days until your bandwidth speed limit was removed. We tried offering them money to remove it but they said we were stuck. Hughesnet on the other hand is daily, so if you go over, it resets 24hrs later, and you can pay about $2-$3 to restore your bandwidth, or use when of the free restore tokens they give you every month.

      --
      neorush
    19. Re:how can the stalwarts of gaming keep up? by neorush · · Score: 1

      Also, there is no cell service of any kind at my home, it ends about 6 miles away, and I live in NY.

      --
      neorush
    20. Re:how can the stalwarts of gaming keep up? by JackieBrown · · Score: 1

      I guess this is why Netflix has failed....

  2. simply stream from powerful servers by Osgeld · · Score: 4, Insightful

    yea you know what, my shitty internet has trouble streaming from youtube sometimes

    1. Re:simply stream from powerful servers by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 5, Funny

      They don't want you to know this; but the various 'cloud gaming' startups are actually part of an attempt to uncover enough precogs to set up a practical precrime unit.

      With latency what it is, only limited precognition allows the player to perform as well as they would locally. With online leaderboards, it becomes a relatively simple matter to screen for players who play more effectively than the limitations of the game would ordinarily allow.

    2. Re:simply stream from powerful servers by Osgeld · · Score: 1

      that took some imagination at this hour, I hope you get modded up

    3. Re:simply stream from powerful servers by qwak23 · · Score: 1

      I wish I hadn't just spent my last mod point on another thread.

    4. Re:simply stream from powerful servers by 228e2 · · Score: 2

      Why don't you have a seat over here.

      --
      Since when does being a Socialist mean 'someone who has a different opinion than me'?
    5. Re:simply stream from powerful servers by Osgeld · · Score: 1

      he is talking about minority report in a sarcastic tone or are you struggling to keep up?

    6. Re:simply stream from powerful servers by hawkinspeter · · Score: 1

      Best post I've read for ages and here I am with no mod points.

      --
      You're a temporary arrangement of matter sliding towards oblivion in a cold, uncaring universe
    7. Re:simply stream from powerful servers by The+MAZZTer · · Score: 1

      My FIOS has trouble streaming from YouTube. The problem is on YouTube's end.

    8. Re:simply stream from powerful servers by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

      I have them but I posted already. The thought on my mind was:

      "That deserves a +5 funny at least, but you know that might really be a workable way of testing if there's actually precognitive people out there"

      But then I realized I had read a bit too much sci-fi.

  3. They will fail because by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Most people don't have fast enough internet to stream high quality without lag and a lot of people have data caps. If you can't even stream a Netflix movie without it buffering all the time or using up your data how are you supposed to game for hours on end?

    1. Re:They will fail because by skids · · Score: 5, Funny

      How can you say this!? It's Cloud! And Streaming! I bet they've even got plans for BYOD, VirtualSomething YetAnotherSomethingOverIP and CrowdSourcing.

    2. Re:They will fail because by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 4, Funny

      And it's social! Like AIDS!

    3. Re:They will fail because by White+Flame · · Score: 1

      This is especially true as people move to mobile devices as their primary computing interface. And you thought your crappy cable/DSL internet was bad.

    4. Re:They will fail because by aliquis · · Score: 1

      Are they even supposed to stream games? I thought they would run the games on the chip they had?

      i have plenty fast Internet. It's obviously not "without lag" though. I don't have any data cap.

  4. latency by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    We've talked about this a thousand times. After your normal input lag gets sent to a server, the video gets rendered and sent back, your latency is so bad that twitchy games are unplayable. I'm sure it would work fine for slow-paced games, but then... what do you need the server for?

    1. Re:latency by TheLink · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The sad thing about latency is the networking bunch may do their jobs fairly well but the input/output hardware and software people often don't or can't.

      So each router hop on the internet might only take 1ms or less whereas a mouse button click or keyboard key press might take 16 milliseconds (debouncing etc) and a crap TV might take another 16-50 milliseconds or even more.

      Of course if you're unlucky to be an ocean or two away from the servers your ping goes up by 200 milliseconds or more. But if you're not, don't be surprised how little latency might be added by the network and server.

      For instance my ping to www.google.com is coming back within 5 milliseconds.

      But if the game server and client bunch leave Nagling on that often adds another semi-random 200+ milliseconds. I personally think Nagling belongs in the past and no longer should be enabled by default - causes more problems than it solves. It is a kludge that does something at the network layer that should more properly be done at the application layer.

      --
    2. Re:latency by Iceykitsune · · Score: 4, Insightful

      i seem to have beaten borderlands just fine over onlive.

      --
      GENERATION 24: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social exper
    3. Re:latency by viperidaenz · · Score: 4, Informative

      You need to add data transmission time to the network latency. You need to wait for an entire screen to be transferred before it can be displayed. If it's compressed, there's latency in the compression too. That's why VOIP codecs sacrifice quality for latency, waiting for 1152 samples before encoding an MP3 frame takes too long.

    4. Re:latency by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 3

      Trouble is, unless you've got a decent internet connection(preferrably uncapped, if you plan on doing much 'cloud' gaming), the effective latency is a combination of your basic ping time and the time to transfer whatever data are needed to paint the next frame of video. Your keystrokes going out aren't likely to be all that much bigger than an ICMP packet; but unless you can pull a good 10Mb/s down or better you'll be choosing between pixel soup and slideshow mode...

    5. Re:latency by StarWreck · · Score: 5, Informative

      1ms?!? What fantasy world are you living in? 1ms is what you'll get between 2 computers on your own home LAN. You're not going to get as good as 1ms from your own ISP.

      --
      ... and in the DRM, bind them.
    6. Re:latency by flimflammer · · Score: 1

      Borderlands is hardly twitchy gameplay.

    7. Re:latency by TheLink · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I said: "EACH router hop on the internet might only take 1ms"
      And: "my ping to www.google.com is coming back within 5 milliseconds."

      So go figure what fantasy world I live in. Seems pretty real to me. Not everyone uses AOL or whatever you are using.

      See also:
      Tracing route to www.google.com 74.125.135.106
      over a maximum of 30 hops:

          1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms redacted
          2 <1 ms 1 ms 1 ms redacted
          3 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms redacted
          4 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms redacted
          5 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 211.25.27.81
          6 2 ms 1 ms 1 ms 203.121.17.2
          7 3 ms 5 ms 4 ms 211.25.27.122
          8 8 ms 7 ms 8 ms 223.28.2.53
          9 4 ms 4 ms 3 ms 223.28.2.70
        10 4 ms 4 ms 4 ms 211.25.221.2
        11 4 ms 5 ms 5 ms 209.85.242.246
        12 5 ms x 5 ms 209.85.250.237
        13 x x x Request timed out.
        14 5 ms 5 ms 4 ms 74.125.135.106

      Trace complete.

      You can try that yourself and see the ping differences between hops, there will be some anomalies as in mine due to asymmetric routing (packets taking a different path back). Your first hop might be high latency if you are using a 56k or ADSL modem, but the other hops might only have a diff of a few milliseconds.

      --
    8. Re:latency by Jmc23 · · Score: 1
      I remember in the beginning of the 90's measuring pings in seconds. 3 years ago I had ~400ms in Vancouver. 2 years ago ~220ms in a small town in Mexico. I could hardly believe your claim of 5ms, but i'm getting a pleasant 25ms which is pretty good for Canada.

      With lags cut down, faster rendering, 17mbs instead of 56k, I actually find surfing the web for information more tedious today :( So much high bandwidth garbage out there... though arguably better than Time Cube coloured geocities pages.

      --
      Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.
    9. Re:latency by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The closest IP to your endpoint which you listed is 211.25.27.81 Which is located in Australia (South Brisbane specifically) according to whois records.
      I just ran a traceroute from the Primus Telecom looking glass server in Brisbane, and you're topping 140ms. A trace from Telstra's server in Melbourne shows 134ms right now.

      I'm not familiar with all the companies involved who show up in your specific trace path, but I have a suspicion your ISP has a direct peering circuit with Google reserved just for Google-bound traffic. Try popping some traces to blizzard's servers, etc. and see how they stack up.

      Point being that the trace you posted is highly abnormal and not what most people experience over the general internet. If these companies have any hope of "taking on" the big console makers they are going to have to put a shitload of money into localized servers all over the planet, and probably will have to setup direct peering relationships with ISP's as well. That's not cheap, so unless they are planning on only competing in dense population areas, I just don't see this working out well for them.

    10. Re:latency by Firehed · · Score: 1

      Where the hell are you? My ping to Google is 15ms and I'm less than ten miles away from Mountain View.

      --
      How are sites slashdotted when nobody reads TFAs?
    11. Re:latency by ModelX · · Score: 1

      But if the game server and client bunch leave Nagling on that often adds another semi-random 200+ milliseconds. I personally think Nagling belongs in the past and no longer should be enabled by default - causes more problems than it solves. It is a kludge that does something at the network layer that should more properly be done at the application layer.

      No sane programmer using TCP sockets for real-time interaction would keep Nagling on. Flash protocols (used by many web games) disable it by default. For best performance it's not really necessary to do your own UDP protocol. One can use UDP for loss-tolerant low latency updates and TCP sidechannel to handle the rest. In my experience TCP without Nagling works just fine until your connection bandwidth is overloaded, at which point your performance will degrade using whatever protocol.

    12. Re:latency by TheLink · · Score: 1

      I think many MMO developers enable Nagling: WoW ( http://www.guildportal.com/Guild.aspx?GuildID=236446&TabID=1990410&ForumID=1110924&TopicID=6371439 ) and Guild Wars ( http://www.codeofhonor.com/blog/whose-bug-is-this-anyway )

      Note that the listed Windows "fix" doesn't actually disable Nagling - it just turns off selective acknowledgement (the MSMQ registry setting does nothing to the game stuff, since it's only for the MSMQ and not global as far as I can tell).

      Furthermore it has no effect on the servers - if they have nagling enabled you're still stuck with it.

      It's a shame really. Yes TCP has higher overheads but it really doesn't have to be that crap, and much of the crappiness seems to be due to selective acknowledgement + nagling.

      --
    13. Re:latency by Vintermann · · Score: 1

      This does seem like it could work if you live in Kansas city, though.

      --
      xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
    14. Re:latency by TheLink · · Score: 2

      I believe OP is talking about:
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OnLive
      https://www.onlive.com/launch/trial/borderlands
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5qD8KOcre7w

      In which case it's rendered on the server.

      The problem I see is the speed of light is too slow, so the latency can be too high for many customers unless such services locate their servers around the world.

      --
    15. Re:latency by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The closest IP to your endpoint which you listed is 211.25.27.81 Which is located in Australia (South Brisbane specifically) according to whois records.

      You need to look a little further down the whois output. APNIC itself is located in South Brisbane, but that net block is assigned to TIMENet in Malaysia. Sure Google likely has a presence in a data centre in Singapore, but I still don't believe a 5ms RTT.

    16. Re:latency by Inda · · Score: 1

      I don't get it. I know it's not My Thing(tm) but if I was presented with the problem of running a game over teh internet, I wouldn't be streaming the rendered video back.

      Why can't the dumb box be more than a dumb box?

      Why can't the textures and sounds be downloaded to a cache on the machine before the game starts?

      Instead of a video stream, why can't the frame be described? A polygon here, a sprite there, and the GUI under that?

      We played Quake over 56k and the latency wasn't a big problem. I know my pings are under three digits these days too. Is it really as big an issue as everyone is making out?

      --
      This post contains benzene, nitrosamines, formaldehyde and hydrogen cyanide.
    17. Re:latency by franciscohs · · Score: 1

      Maybe you should try hrping or some other high resolution ping utility, you'd be surprised. (Hint: latency to your first hop is much less than 1ms)

    18. Re:latency by LoRdTAW · · Score: 1

      At that point you might as well call the dumb box a computer. Its not that simple either, all that texture and pixel data must be crunched at once to determine lighting and other effects. You may as well move the GPU to the dumb box. Then your left with streaming the game content into memory on loading. That could be in the gigabyte range so its time to install local flash or hard disk storage as a cache. Then your back to having a full computer instead of a dumb box.

      There was a time where I naively thought streaming game video from mainframe like systems over cable TV could work (this was in the 90's). The idea was who needs expensive game consoles when cable could deliver a gaming service through their networks. Then I learned about computer architecture and programming which snapped me into the reality. You needs tons of bandwidth which didn't (and for the most part still doesn't) exist and the latency of sending the signal from the controller -> mainframe render the frame -> your TV. You're better off using cloud services for serving you games into a local cache and then running them on the local CPU and GPU.

    19. Re:latency by tepples · · Score: 1

      I'm sure it would work fine for slow-paced games, but then... what do you need the server for?

      For communication with other players. And for verification that each player has purchased a license to play the game.

    20. Re:latency by PPalmgren · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure you realize how small of a latency effects gaming. I bougth a PVA panel some years ago and proceeded to buy a cheap TN panel in a week, because the 20-30ms increase in total latency (the scaler in PVA panels add latency to the process). It made RTSes and FPSes horrendous. I still have both monitors side by side and use the PVA for web viewing and background stuff. Recently I did one of those little click games that tests your mousing dexterity on both screens, the PVA score averaged out at 35% lower. This is for a 20-30ms increase. We're already on the cusp of delay ruining our gaming experience, any increase by cloud gaming is sure to destroy it.

    21. Re:latency by aliquis · · Score: 1

      I get 13.x ms from Sweden. Using Bredbandsbolaget.

    22. Re:latency by aliquis · · Score: 1

      Btw, seemed like typical console frame rate was 30 FPS and a typical TV likely got a quite high input latency. Rendering always have to occur.

      So who knows, maybe sending the input onwards, have the pictured rendered and sent back and have it show up in the next frame on the TV but at a rate of 30 FPS on something like the Eizo Foris FS 2333 would be as good or better.

    23. Re:latency by TheLink · · Score: 1

      Oh, I do. My mouse allows me to set the click latency down to 3ms (or lower - not sure if it really accepts the lower typed values, 3ms is from the drop down) and there's actually a difference (I think the default/higher settings are when the mouse button switches get older and more flaky). And I notice the keyboard keys have higher latency compared to my mouse button (when set to 3ms),

      But for me the biggest latency contributors appears to be the pacific ocean and nagling by the game servers and client.

      --
    24. Re:latency by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      "Why can't the textures and sounds be downloaded to a cache on the machine before the game starts?
      Instead of a video stream, why can't the frame be described? A polygon here, a sprite there, and the GUI under that?
      We played Quake over 56k and the latency wasn't a big problem. I know my pings are under three digits these days too. Is it really as big an issue as everyone is making out?
      "

      well, there's steam for that. if you start moving textures to the end machine you might just as well stream every bit of the content.
      point about onlive is/was that the "console" is cheapy cheap.because it's a dumb box. it's not a smart box. it can't render the things. if it was a smart box it would be your pc.

      also there's non-trivial massively online benefits from having all the player comps at a single place and only streaming the images to the users, but afaik onlive never did anything cool with this.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    25. Re:latency by schlachter · · Score: 1

      I understand that we've discussed latency a thousand times.........but I'm just now understanding.

      --
      My God can beat up your God. Just kidding...don't take offense. I know there's no God.
  5. Streamed Games are Awful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Bandwidth use, control lag etc.

    A 6 year old kid can notice the lag in Lego Batman when used on a Smart TV not in Game mode and be irritated by it.

    Even under the best conditions the lag by the 'games streamed entirely from servers' is worse.

    I'd accept PS1 era graphics and tight controls over 'real-life' quality streamed graphics and horrible lag.

  6. That's not how you do that. by iYk6 · · Score: 1

    I'm not sure the anonymous reader understands how computers work. You can't just stream CPU power. Plus, one of the main reasons for using a console is that it "just works", and having to have it connected to the internet whenever you play would be a huge pain.

    1. Re:That's not how you do that. by sandytaru · · Score: 1

      Well, not really. Consoles have built in wireless these days. I don't have to think about putting my PS3 online - it's online by default.

      --
      Occasionally living proof of the Ballmer peak.
    2. Re:That's not how you do that. by jellomizer · · Score: 2

      Technically if you had enough CPU power and bandwidth to get a near real time video feed. So where you send you often 1 byte command and then you get your updated screen withing a human response level of time 1/120 of a second. Then you can stream CPU power. As all the hard work of game physics, graphics rendering... Can be done else were.

      We do not have such bandwidth (affordable) yet for this, but it could happen.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
  7. I don't understand by TheGoodNamesWereGone · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The console-killer always has been the good old PC. A reasonably specced-out PC with a mid-range graphics card is far, far better than any console. But nobody listens to me. Nobody loves me.

    1. Re:I don't understand by mjwx · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The console-killer always has been the good old PC. A reasonably specced-out PC with a mid-range graphics card is far, far better than any console. But nobody listens to me.

      Well yes and no.

      You may not be old enough to remember but back before the Playstation and Xbox PC-pretenders turned up consoles were about casual, accessible games like Mario Kart. PC's were about in depth games, shooters like Doom and adventure games like Star Control 2. Then the PS/XB pretenders came a long and pretended they could be "hardcore" gaming machines. This was until Nintendo released the Wii and proved that consoles were about casual, accessible games like Mario Kart and made money hand over fist whilst it took the Xbox 360 and Playstation 3 half a decade to achieve profitability (the PS3 still hasn't recouped it's investment yet).

      Now mobile is muscling in on the casual game and this is where the "traditional" console is doomed. Casual audiences will be attracted to the cheapness, ease of use and multiplayer capabilities of the tablet-consoles (Tabsoles, Conslets?) and "hardcore" games will come home, back to the PC.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    2. Re:I don't understand by Osgeld · · Score: 1

      I agree, and theres room for both hardcore games and more casual games, but the market wont need 3 devices to support 2 overall categories. Though it may take a bit longer than people think as there are untold amount of people who want that hard core action, and just functioning on a PC is an achievement, even now in 2012 where its 99% point n click to get stuff running.

    3. Re:I don't understand by failedlogic · · Score: 2

      It used to be though to get the reasonably specced PC you had to spend $800 - 1000. When the PS3 / X360 and before their release that was true. $300 (or whatever it was) for a sound card just to place Wing Commander 2 with voice pack ..... ah the memories

      I'm a PS3 owner because of the Blu-Ray player, and I'm a fan of a few Sony exclusive game franchises.

      I think most people buy platform X or Y not on technical merits but on system-exclusive games. If the next-gen don't have any system exclusives that are worth buying the console for, then PS4 and 720 have something to worry about.

    4. Re:I don't understand by StarWreck · · Score: 1

      mod parent up

      --
      ... and in the DRM, bind them.
    5. Re:I don't understand by AK+Marc · · Score: 2

      Consoles were also arcade-at-home devices. The funny controllers (joysticks, more than 2 buttons), and boxes with graphics that rivaled the arcade machines.

    6. Re:I don't understand by RyuuzakiTetsuya · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Seriously? Street Fighter? Final Fantasy? Romance of the Three Kingdoms? No More Heroes? The World Ends with You? *Dragon Quest*?

      None of these games have "depth?" I think what you mean is "ridiculously thick manual and awful UI."

      Anything that can plug into a display and spit sound out of it somehow can be full of casual or "teh hardcorez" gaming anyway. The PC, for example, is nothing but a final resting place for casual games and shovel ware and Pokemon is a ridiculously deeper game than it lets on.

      If the traditional console is dead, then it is going the way of the arcade, screwed by the industry that spawned it or destroyed by non-gaming forces beyond it's control.

      It's sad that we perpetuate myths, like consoles killed arcade games or there must be one dominant platform, so that way tech writers have something to write about and so fanboys can argue about these things.

      It's funny, rarely in other industries do you ever hear that a product or product line will completely eviscerate another product. As far as I know, neither Canon or Nikon have wiped each other off the map nor do they have plans to.

      --
      Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
    7. Re:I don't understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The console-killer always has been the good old PC. A reasonably specced-out PC with a mid-range graphics card is far, far better than any console. But nobody listens to me. Nobody loves me.

      Yes most good console games are available for Windows on the PC but only in a story about non-PC gaming does the Windows PC become the precipice of computing brilliance, the woes of driver issues are ignored, virus and malware issues are ignored, the slowdown over time is ignored, the constant updating, etc. Everything that is used to troll this website as an argument for why Microsoft Windows is terrible and OSX and Linux are awesome is ignored in the face of an alternative to PC gaming (even if it is Linux-based). Apparently nothing beats Windows.

    8. Re:I don't understand by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

      No don't because he's wrong. Anything with Microsoft running on it is far from a console killer, quite the contrary.

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    9. Re:I don't understand by mjwx · · Score: 2

      Consoles were also arcade-at-home devices. The funny controllers (joysticks, more than 2 buttons), and boxes with graphics that rivaled the arcade machines.

      Exactly, the casual market grew out of the kinds of people who went to arcades. This is why old acrade games like Glaga, Tetris and Street Fighter remain console favourites.

      And there's nothing wrong with that.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    10. Re:I don't understand by samkass · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The console-killer always has been the good old PC. A reasonably specced-out PC with a mid-range graphics card is far, far better than any console. But nobody listens to me. Nobody loves me.

      The console killer was the iPod Touch, iPhone, iPad, etc. Apple sells as many iDevices each year than all the consoles that have ever been made, and has more games available in the App Store for its platform than for all consoles that have ever existed combined. They just announced their 40 billionth unique (non-upgrade, non-redownload) app sale, most of them games. Consoles and PC game rigs are both niches now.

      --
      E pluribus unum
    11. Re:I don't understand by RyuuzakiTetsuya · · Score: 1

      Street fighter is an arcade game, you might be too young to remember but street fighter debued in the arcade (the arcade is where you played casual games before the home console became popular, you're probably too young to remember this too. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Street_Fighter First released in the arcade in 1987.

      Okay so I made a slip up but you didn't negate my point. Anything that has a screen, takes user input and maybe plays sound can have deep games or really shallow ones. Your insistance that PC gaming must be the one true path for hardcore is ridiculous.

      This is how it is in the console world. It was dog eat dog. Nintendo ate Atari and Sega, Sony tried to eat nintendo... The first company to release a decent tablet/console hybrid will eat the others (smart monies on Nintendo, they seem to understand the market).

      The console market does not abide competition. Having three players is the largest it's ever been and right now, two of those three players will have trouble staying in the game.

      But that's not how it MUST be. In other markets, you can easily have multiple competitors and a reasonably healthy market. Not only can it happen, but it HAS happened in regionalized examples. In America, the Genesis made a lot of money for Sega while the Super Nintendo was making a LOT of money for Nintendo. In Japan, the PC Engine(AKA Turbo Grafx 16) was making pretty good money while the Famicom was absolutely DOMINATING that space. So was the Neo-Geo during both of these eras.

      That's because you've got Pentax, Panasonic, Fijifilm, Olympus, Leica and many others competing in DLSR, Point and Shoot, Enthusiast and many other markets. Also Canon make more than just cameras. The only way this compares to consoles in when we ask "what happened to Kodak" and answer "they bet on film when the market went digital".

      I picked one random example out of the air where there are multiple competitors and no one in the press is screaming that one MUST DOMINATE OR ELSE.

      There's nothing special about games consoles that dictate that there is ONE true console and ONE true platform. Have good games, make more than you spend and make sure your follow up products don't suck or whither on the vine.

      It's obvious you're young and haven't researched much about the console market, you might want to do that before making ill informed posts.

      You clearly know nothing about gaming or the history of gaming. Please stop embarrassing yourself.

      --
      Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
    12. Re:I don't understand by AlphaBro · · Score: 1

      Funny you say that because the console to kill is Microsoft's. But anyway, he is right, the PC running Microsoft Windows will be superior to consoles for the foreseeable future.

    13. Re:I don't understand by mjwx · · Score: 1

      Okay so I made a slip up but you didn't negate my point.

      No, you went one further and proved my point.

      Consoles are about casual, accessable games, this is the core of the console market.

      There are so many deficencies with console hardware it's not funny. This is why there still isn't a successful strategy game on consoles. To make truely in depth games (I refuse to call them "hardcore") you need a platform that is extensible, not a limited platform.

      But that's not how it MUST be.

      But that is how it IS. That is how it HAS ALWAYS BEEN.

      You're not going to break that cycle just because you wish it.

      BTW, the NeoGeo and Turbo Grafx were so good that the companies who made them no longer exist. Feel free to go on about how technically superior the 3DO was too. You're proving my point for me. Hard core consoles pretending to be PC's just dont work.

      I picked one random example out of the air where there are multiple competitors and no one in the press is screaming that one MUST DOMINATE OR ELSE.

      You picked a random example out of thin air that DID NOT MAKE ANY SENSE as it does not relate one iota to the console gaming industry.

      Stop pretending to know about things you clearly have no idea about.

      Consoles depend on the casual gamer, mobile and console gaming now occupy the same market. As a result of this, the console and mobile gaming market will merge. PC-Pretenders will dispensary (like the Turbo Grafx and 3DO, which were both quite powerful but ultimately failures) as consoles become tablets that can connect to a TV and bluetooth input device to become traditional consoles.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    14. Re:I don't understand by exomondo · · Score: 2

      Now mobile is muscling in on the casual game and this is where the "traditional" console is doomed. Casual audiences will be attracted to the cheapness, ease of use and multiplayer capabilities of the tablet-consoles (Tabsoles, Conslets?) and "hardcore" games will come home, back to the PC.

      I've got a PC (which, thanks to my job is kept pretty up to date with eng samples from intel, amd and nvidia) and I've got an XBox and PS3, i play games on all of them (probably the ps3 not as much mainly because i prefer the xbox controller) and I don't see any reason why I would abandon the consoles to play on the PC exclusively even though it is a pretty decent PC. They all have their place.

      I don't have a Wii because I'm not much into those sorts of games - I have a Kinect and I'm not really a fan of that either - and the same goes for tablets and smartphones, sure these 'Tiny Consoles' replace casual gaming in that sense but outside of casual gaming I see no reason I would restrict myself to just the PC.

    15. Re:I don't understand by Omestes · · Score: 1

      death of hardcore gaming consoles

      What is a "hardcore gaming console"? The PS3 or 360? They are commodity hardware, there is nothing "hardcore" about them. My aging PC is "harder core" than them, most PCs you can buy cheap at Fry's are "harder core" these days.

      What the hell do you mean by "hardcore" anyway? That is a term that long since lost pretty much all of its meaning.

      --
      A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
    16. Re:I don't understand by mjwx · · Score: 1

      I've got a PC (which, thanks to my job is kept pretty up to date with eng samples from intel, amd and nvidia) and I've got an XBox and PS3, i play games on all of them (probably the ps3 not as much mainly because i prefer the xbox controller) and I don't see any reason why I would abandon the consoles to play on the PC exclusively even though it is a pretty decent PC. They all have their place.

      The problem you have is that you are not the average console player.

      Consoles are primarily played by casual players. The Wii outsold the Xbox and Playstation 2:1 until they both dropped their prices to cater for the casual market. The average console player plays Mario Kart, Wii Sports, Rock Band and the like. The top selling game on the Xbox 360 is Kinect Adventures, Gran Turismo on the PS3 which is really an arcade game.Without the casual market, consoles cant compete against PC's which are more profitable per unit and a lot more powerful.

      I've got a Wii, it's got it's place as a casual gaming device. Something I play with gamer and non-gamer friends alike. This is where consoles excel. I mean they do really well here. Simple, fun games.

      The world isn't going to abandon consoles, but the PS3 and Xbox 360 were so unprofitable for so long that making another generation could easily sink Sony in it's current state, MS less so because they can afford subsidise their games and entertainment divisions. However Nintendo proved that causal was where the money was in consoles. Put simply, the console market is no longer supporting consoles like the Xbox 360 and Playstation (there's a long history of this in the console world, powerful consoles like the Turbo Grafx and 3DO were beaten by less powerful consoles because that was what the market wanted).

      What I think is going to happen is that consoles and tablets will merge, they'll be tablets on the go but will have HDMI out and Bluetooth connectivity for controllers. Processing power is getting up there with Nvidia's Tegra 4. All that's needed is the back catalogue of games.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    17. Re:I don't understand by Omestes · · Score: 1

      the constant updating

      Sadly consoles have this now, too.

      I don't get the passion on this topic. Play what you want, on what you want. I don't see myself getting a new console for a long time, since there is no point. I already own a PC with decent hardware, and most of the games I like, or genres I like are also on the PC as well as on consoles. I'm also not young anymore, so there aren't any games I need to own anymore (perhaps thats just because Squar...Squenix sucks now), so consoles aren't as seductive.

      If I didn't own my PC, or still inexplicably thought PCs are made of forbidden magic (sorry, bad parental tech support day), a console would fulfill my needs nicely.

      Though, to go back to your point, yes, PCs have problems (not that I've run across any on your list in the last 10 years), but your forgetting the first years of the 360, and its rings of doom. I'm guessing the next generation of consoles will also be problematic in the beginning, and might be moving towards a level of consumer hostility that some people won't really want to tolerate. Who knows?

      --
      A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
    18. Re:I don't understand by exomondo · · Score: 2

      And the best selling game for the PC? The Sims 2! The second best selling game for the PC? The Sims! Not something I would consider to be 'hardcore' gaming titles. The PC looks a lot more casual gaming than consoles, certainly don't see anything to suggest consoles are more casual-gaming focussed.

    19. Re:I don't understand by RyuuzakiTetsuya · · Score: 1

      No, you went one further and proved my point.

      Consoles are about casual, accessable games, this is the core of the console market.

      There are so many deficencies with console hardware it's not funny. This is why there still isn't a successful strategy game on consoles. To make truely in depth games (I refuse to call them "hardcore") you need a platform that is extensible, not a limited platform.

      Dragon Quest is a casual game series? Get real.

      Street Fighter x Tekken is strictly console only. Don't tell me it lacks "depth."

      Watch some tournament videos sometime, go try to play as well as even low tier players and come talk to me.

      You have no idea what you're talking about. At all. Okay so the GPUs and CPUs of the current generation of consoles haven't kept up. Big stinking deal.

      That doesn't mean that consoles are relegated to "casual, accessible" games.

      This is also assuming that inaccessibility means depth. Which is just stupid.

      --
      Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
    20. Re:I don't understand by RyuuzakiTetsuya · · Score: 1

      My aging PC is "harder core" than them, most PCs you can buy cheap at Fry's are "harder core" these days.

      Usually when I think hardcore these days, I think of anything that can run Excel and Word.

      Yup. Sounds hardcore to me!

      --
      Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
    21. Re:I don't understand by Hatta · · Score: 1

      And every one of those console ports of DOOM sucks. I've played them all. Console gamers got their first decent FPS (goldeneye) in 1997, 4 years after DOOM released and just 1 year before Half-Life.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    22. Re:I don't understand by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

      Consoles are about casual, accessable games, this is the core of the console market.

      They are? I must be imagining games like Final Fantasy, Might and Magic, Dragon Quest, Nobunaga's Ambition, Romance of the Three Kingdoms, Carnage Heart, the original X-Com, EQOA, FFXI, DCUO, Disgaea, Skyrim, Falout 3/New Vegas.

       

      This is why there still isn't a successful strategy game on consoles.

      What are you talking about, there were such things years ago, but being a PC gamer you just didn't know or hear about them.

      To make truely in depth games (I refuse to call them "hardcore") you need a platform that is extensible, not a limited platform.

      Define "in depth". Which is funny because you mentioned DOOM, which is a PC game that got more "casual gamers" playing PC games. pre-doom the PC game market was more RPG, flight sim, adventure game, turn-based hex game centric. DOOM is more like an arcade game than anything else.

      BTW, the NeoGeo and Turbo Grafx were so good that the companies who made them no longer exist.

      They WERE sucessful...in Japan...the US is not the only market. SNK and NEC are still around, though they don't make console hardware.

      Consoles depend on the casual gamer,

      I think your ideas of what console gaming are were set back in 1985 or something.

    23. Re:I don't understand by Hatta · · Score: 1

      No, Final Fantasy and Dragon Quest have no depth. I love both series, but there is nothing complex about them whatsoever.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    24. Re:I don't understand by tepples · · Score: 1

      I get to have a bigger screen (12" more than the PC)

      Virtually all HDTVs have inputs for PC signals. If your PC outputs HDMI or DVI, connect it to the TV's HDMI input. If not, connect it to the TV's VGA input. Then you can use your PC to surf the web from the couch and play PC games from the couch.

      a controller that is less general-purpose than a keyboard and mouse combo

      More and more games on Steam are starting to support controllers, especially with the new Big Picture launcher.

      I do have games on the PC, but those are games that by their nature (genre) require a different kind of user interface that is not (comfortably) possible or available for consoles.

      For AAA games, it's the genre. But for others, it's possible that an indie developer hasn't yet had a chance to pay its dues to the establishment in order to satisfy the console makers' requirements and has thus resorted to a PC release.

    25. Re:I don't understand by Hatta · · Score: 1

      the arcade is where you played casual games before the home console became popular

      Who says arcade games are casual? Go play Robotron 2084 and come back and tell me that's a casual game.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    26. Re:I don't understand by tepples · · Score: 1

      the casual market grew out of the kinds of people who went to arcades. This is why old acrade games like Glaga, Tetris and Street Fighter remain console favourites.

      And there's nothing wrong with that.

      So if such games are best played on consoles, what's the most efficient way for a startup company to build "relevant video game industry experience" and "financial stability" so that it can qualify to release such games?

    27. Re:I don't understand by Hatta · · Score: 1

      Dragon Quest is a casual game series? Get real.

      Yes. Just because it takes 90 hours to complete a dragon quest game doesn't mean there's anything complex about it. There's nothing about dragon quest that even comes close to Pool of Radiance or Baldur's Gate.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    28. Re:I don't understand by tepples · · Score: 1

      The console killer was the iPod Touch, iPhone, iPad, etc.

      Porting games from consoles to this particular console killer requires a different approach to user input because unlike the buttons on a console's controller, the touch surface of a tablet is a flat sheet of glass. How, for example, would a four- or six-button fighting game give the player a feel for what button is under his thumb at any given time?

    29. Re:I don't understand by Hatta · · Score: 2

      There are so many deficencies with console hardware it's not funny.

      What makes you think you need powerful hardware to make a good game?

      This is why there still isn't a successful strategy game on consoles.

      Played Advance Wars? It may not be everyones favorite game, but it's one of the best turn based strategy games I've played. Strategy RPGs like Tactics Ogre or Fire Emblem work very well on consoles too.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    30. Re:I don't understand by TheGoodNamesWereGone · · Score: 1

      My first computer was a Sinclair ZX-81. I go back a ways... :-)

    31. Re:I don't understand by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

      Consoles are primarily played by casual players.

      They are? Perhaps the Wii is, but the 360 and PS3 aren't. You even call those two "pc pretenders" and they play games that are also on the PC.

      The Wii outsold the Xbox and Playstation 2:1 until they both dropped their prices to cater for the casual market.

      The Wii outsold the PS3 and 360 because Nintendo was selling consoles to people like "grandmothers" that didn't normally buy them. The wii was selling to a totally different market than the PS3 and 360 were. And the 360/PS3 price drop was because they were able to make the hardware at lower cost, not just to sell the things to Wii owners.

      The average console player plays Mario Kart, Wii Sports, Rock Band and the like.

      On the Wii, perhaps but the best selling PC game is the Sims series...not some turn-based hex strategy game.

      Gran Turismo on the PS3 which is really an arcade game.

      Nope, it's a simulation a different "style" of simulation than the PC racers but still a simulation. In fact GT2 came with TWO discs, one for the "arcade mode" which no one used and the other "simulation" mode which is the one people played.

      However Nintendo proved that causal was where the money was in consoles.

      No they didn't because as they found out, they sold lots of Wii's but not a lot of games. There are people with wii's whose only games are Wii Sports and perhaps Wii Sports 2 and Wii Fit, and that's it. Your average PS3/360 owner has more games. I have 24 disc based PS3 games, and other games as digital downloads (DCUO, Home, FreeRealms, Flower, Little Big Planet, etc etc).

      powerful consoles like the Turbo Grafx and 3DO were beaten by less powerful consoles because that was what the market wanted

      Ha ha, no. The TG16 was beat because of GAMES selection. It was also in some less capable than a SNES. The 3DO while originally competing with the likes of th e SNES and Genesis was hurt by the lack of third party support, high price and eventually was curbstomped by the Saturn and PSone. which are superior to it AND cheaper. The early Saturn and PSone libraries had several ports from the 3DO, the famous 3DO version of Road Rash for example. Return Fire was another game that found new life on the PSone. The PSone is essentially the 3DO "done right"

    32. Re:I don't understand by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

      I've played Command & Conquer: Red Alert 3 on the PC and the PS3. Same game (mostly), totally different user experience, because of the way the interface to the player is built/designed. Hated it on the PS3, love it on the PC; so IMO the RTS is one genre that is built for a PC kind of device.

      Does RA3 on the PS3 have USB mouse support? The old PSone RTS's always did have PSone mouse support.

    33. Re:I don't understand by benwad · · Score: 1

      I hope you're right. I'd like to see a return to the simplicity of 'casual' consoles like the N64, except with the self-starter mentality we've got with phones and tablets. Not everyone wants the next photo-realistic Battlefield of Duty Modern Ops 5 for £50 to play on their £400 console, there are some great indie developers out there who, given the right demand for their games, could make some great stuff. The only issue is whether casual gamers would adopt it: mobile games are so successful because loads of people bought smartphones for reasons other than gaming. The big consoles will always have the upper hand on marketing so that'll be the difficult part.

    34. Re:I don't understand by RyuuzakiTetsuya · · Score: 2

      "Not as complex" isn't the same as "Casual."

      Nice try trying to shoehorn Dragon Quest into the same game category as Bejewelled or Peggle.

      --
      Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
    35. Re:I don't understand by Hatta · · Score: 1

      Yeah it pretty much is. Complexity and difficulty are two defining characteristics of hardcore games. Dragon Quest has neither. Any Dragon Quest game can be completed without much thought at all, by simply logging hours in game grinding. Any two people who play Dragon Quest will have much the same experience, with little room for skill to differentiate between them. Even Zynga games provide for a more personalized experience than Dragon Quest.

      I'm not saying I don't like Dragon Quest. It's a great game for what it is. But what it is is an interactive anime, it's not a game that excels based on rich and nuanced gameplay.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    36. Re:I don't understand by Omestes · · Score: 1

      I'm not arguing the point, there are plenty of "hardcore" games on consoles, obviously; and obviously consoles currently dominate the market. The OP is probably around my age (mid-30s), and is somewhat stuck in the golden age of PC gaming, when consoles were 100% casual.

      Judging from recent experience, most people in my age group are still completely clueless about computers, and somewhat scared of them. This isn't just true of morons, but also of some of the smartest people I know (pilots, doctors, and some engineers). I have friends who can completely disassemble a $100 million fighter jet, who are frightened of changing a graphics card.

      This is why consoles will always be the dominant platform. Or will be until people stop being frightened of computers, and actually understand them.

      That said, I still find PC gaming to be superior, from an actual performance, play, and technological point of view. This doesn't mean they are better for people, or should kill consoles. But if you have a good PC, there is no reason to ever buy a console, ignoring exclusivity. If given a choice between one or the other, ignoring other factors, the PC will always win based on merit (and cost effectiveness).

      --
      A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
    37. Re:I don't understand by Omestes · · Score: 1

      Some of us here don't hate Windows. Actually some of us actually haven't taken sides on the Great OS Wars. I rather like some versions of Windows. Win7 was damn good, as good as any of the competitors. As was XP, for its time. Win8, like Vista, isn't nearly as bad as the internet wants it to be (not perfect, flawed but perfectly usable). At various times, I've had all three running in the same house on different machines. And at various times of my life, I've preferred each of them over the others.

      Windows has been a mature OS for a long time. Barring last week, I haven't had a BSOD, or minor system crash, over the full lifetime of Win7. My old Vista box had a similar record. I haven't had a malware or virus problem in over 10 years. I really haven't had any driver problems since the first days of Vista, with the exclusion of changing out hardware (which is still a problem in Linux, and pretty much moot in OS X). Last weeks problem would have killed any Desktop OS, since it was traceable to hardware failure (the PCB on my HDD has scorch marks = drive corrupted and dead). I have some driver issues now, since I switched to Win8 out of curiosity and a low price ($14), and Creative's support process is atrocious.

      OS X was a bigger pain, with its updates introducing pointlessly minor API changes, forcing you to either forgo upgrading software, or buy the newest version, every year. Linux still isn't quite ready to be considered 100% painfree computing, either. Its coming closer, and has been for the last decade and a half, but it still isn't quite ready. Don't get me wrong, some distros are VERY usable (Mint, Ubuntu, and OpenSuSe, which is my flavor of choice). I would use them if the software was there, and if that software was to the same standards as Mac or Windows software. Currently I need Lightroom, Photoshop, and a robust office suite with good revision control. This pretty much means Linux isn't an option (barring dual boots, which is just annoying, or VMs, which is also a bit annoying). Currently none of these areas are well implemented on Linux. No, Gimp sucks, and LibreOffice has serious compatibility issues and sucks at certain things (Google Docs is actually a bit better, which is a depressing statement).

      Also, gaming. You need Windows since it is the most common OS, and thus the one devs shoot for, not because Windows is better for it. If OS X was suddenly the most popular, or Linux, that would be the gaming OS with the best driver support and ports.

      This isn't, again, to say that Windows is perfect. It just works best for me, at this particular moment. This could, and probably will, change again. The point isn't that one OS is better, it is that they are all equally good, but fit different needs, expectations, and work styles.

      I don't much like Microsoft, but that doesn't make Windows less competent.

      --
      A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
    38. Re:I don't understand by AlphaBro · · Score: 1
      If the current leader, the 360, is a zombie, then the same is even more true for the PS3.

      For Microsoft it wasn’t until 2008 that it began to see an upturn, while for Sony it wasn’t until 2010. However despite these late improvements, it doesn’t even come close to making a dent in the expenditure. In total Microsoft saw a loss of just under $3 billion, while Sony accounts for much more of the total, itself racking up losses of just less than $5 billion.

      Sorry buddy, but MS won. And while I don't regularly play games on the 360, I've found some of the titles to be enjoyable while remaining quite fit.

    39. Re:I don't understand by donaldm · · Score: 1

      Consoles depend on the casual gamer, mobile and console gaming now occupy the same market.

      The choice of a game depends on the person playing the game. I personally prefer "Action Adventure" and RPG's and IMHO a console is excellent for this although if I am traveling to or from work by train or bus a game of "Angry Birds" on my mobile makes the traveling time much more enjoyable.

      Mobile gaming is mainly hand-held which is completely different to console or even PC gaming that normally display to much larger screens with the console screen (ie. HD TV to 1080p) normally being the larger. When comparing consoles to PC's IMHO the PC always wins performance wise since it is up-gradable compared to a console, however the console's "ease of use" and it's targeted inbuilt ability to connect to a TV (mainly HD for best viewing) makes the console the preferred gaming machine for casual to hard core gamers. I am well aware that PC's can connect to the HDMI port of a HD TV (I have one that can do this) however consoles are purpose built to do this.

      Comparing games is dependent on the person and what environment that person wants to play the game in. The most general purpose gaming environment is access to the TV since it is the most social and comfortable and this is the area the console excels at. PC's on the other hand are sociable if they are online and they are excellent for fast paced (ie. FPS) and more involving games such as SIMS however the line between PC and console gaming has blurred considerably. Hand held gaming with it's small screen and limited on-line capability is less sociable although like I have said before what type of gaming machine people prefer depends on the person and the games they like.

      --
      There ain't no such thing as proprietary standards only proprietary formats. Standards are by definition open.
    40. Re:I don't understand by donaldm · · Score: 1

      Dragon Quest is a casual game series? Get real.

      Yes. Just because it takes 90 hours to complete a dragon quest game doesn't mean there's anything complex about it. There's nothing about dragon quest that even comes close to Pool of Radiance or Baldur's Gate.

      I actually found Dragon Quest much more enjoyable to play than Baldur's Gate. Even though Baldur's Gate was much more involved I actually found it boring after a while. The same can be said for games like "Oblivion" which came out for both PC and console. Still most RPG's consist of the main quest, side quests and hopefully character development as well as story line which is what I like in roll play game playing. Having said that both games have merit and none are casual games. A casual game IMO is a game with very little depth to it and you can play for 5 to 15 minutes at a time without any loss of continuity. This is not to say that a casual game is inferior to a hard core game since a game is only played by a person that is interested in playing that type of game.

      --
      There ain't no such thing as proprietary standards only proprietary formats. Standards are by definition open.
    41. Re:I don't understand by RyuuzakiTetsuya · · Score: 1

      I cheated through DQ IX on my second run through and got utterly destroyed by Psaro in one of the retro dungeons(also cheated so I could unlock the bloody thing; turns out not living near a place with a lot of JRPG fans means I wasn't going to unlock shit).

      Try again?

      --
      Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
    42. Re:I don't understand by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

      Funny you say that because the console to kill is Microsoft's.

      How do you kill a zombie? Because that is what Microsoft's machine is. It's the walking wounded. If Microsoft is stupid enough to go around again, it's more millions down the bottomless pit, and who cares about it. There is only one word for the gaming experience on XBox: derivative. Anybody who is happy with that is the sort of person who is also overweight.

      Woohoo, you Microsoft zombie spinmods did not like that one little bit!

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    43. Re:I don't understand by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

      Sorry buddy, but MS won

      Hey, you are a real comedian. Sure, MS won just as much as Rome won around the time it got sacked by barbarians, the first time.

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    44. Re:I don't understand by AlphaBro · · Score: 1

      The 360 has been the top selling console for almost a year and a half now. Keep grasping.

    45. Re:I don't understand by Omestes · · Score: 1

      I find that extremely hard to believe.

      Its mind boggling, but true. I'm not saying that they are technically incapable of doing it, it just isn't even something they would ever think of, or even know they could do. They don't have the very basic knowledge of computers that we take for granted. I can switch between 4 operating systems in a day without any issues, while some of my friends can't handle new software or even just the movement of a single GUI element. This is because I "get" computers, I've been on them for 20 years, building them for 15, I get the underlying concepts, and thus the surface stuff flows freely. Most people don't.

      My friend who works on jets didn't grow up on computers, and didn't really use them until the late 90's early 00's. She see's them differently than I do. She see's them as something that can do task "A" and task "B", and I see them as a big collection of hardware, logic, buses, APIs, drivers, etc... A computer is an information toaster to her. And most other people I know.

      Car analogy: Its like the difference between a driver and a good mechanic.

      --
      A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
    46. Re:I don't understand by hkmwbz · · Score: 1

      No, iPod, iPhone and iPad were not console killers. If they had been, the Wii would have never sold as insanely well as it did.

      The console killer is crappy games. Look at the Wii again. They made games people wanted to play, so the consoles flew off the shelves. As soon as they stopped making mainstream games, Nintendo went down the drain.

      The iDevices can never compete with dedicated gaming systems because they lack the dedicated gaming controls. But some games may work well on touch screens, and that's where they can sell a lot. But the biggest sellers on Wii/DS completely destroy any iDevice game, ever, in sales.

      --
      Clever signature text goes here.
    47. Re:I don't understand by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

      Rome was the top selling global empire for 450 years then it got sacked by barbarians.

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
  8. Wrong by BitZtream · · Score: 4, Insightful

    They won't keep up.

    Mommy may want to buy some shitty Ouya console cause its cheap, but little Jimmy won't want to play this shitty half assed games on it.

    Seriously, do you think people WANT to phone quality graphics on a 60" TV? No, they don't even want to see it on a 15" laptop.

    Anyone who thinks streamed games have chance hasn't played a game. Even for turn based games, lag that is noticeable sucks ass, and no ones internet is lag free all the time. Even if the last mile doesnt' lag, there are plenty of other hops to cause problems and introduce lag.

    Consoles, current or next gen, have no worries at all about being beat out by a Gamestick or Ouya console, local or streamed. Anyone who thinks this is utterly disconnected from reality.

    --
    Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    1. Re:Wrong by theurge14 · · Score: 1

      Did we learn nothing from the Nintendo Wii?

      You better believe mommy and daddy and grandma and grandpa and little Suzy will play "phone quality graphics" on a 60" TV. They've been playing Wii Bowling for years on it.

    2. Re:Wrong by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

      Mommy may want to buy some shitty Ouya console cause its cheap, but little Jimmy won't want to play this shitty half assed games on it.

      Ha ha, you're funny. And nobody is playing a game on their phone right now. Oh wait, *you* are! What a dick.

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    3. Re:Wrong by gman003 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Fact:

      The "winner" of at least the last three console wars was the cheapest console.

      The Wii outsold the Xbox 360 and the PS3. At some points it was outselling them *combined*, until Microsoft and Sony dropped their prices.

      The PS2 outsold the Gamecube, Xbox and Dreamcast, which is generally credited to a) it being a cheaper DVD player than many dedicated DVD players, b) massive third-party support, itself caused by c) its low price.

      The PS1 outsold the N64 and Saturn. Even though the N64 was slightly cheaper, it was also two years late, and had lower TCO since the games were CD-based, not cartridge-based. And don't even bring up the 3DO.

      Ouya, Gamestick, Piston, Shield, and all the other microconsoles... I'm not worried that the graphics will hold them back (well, maybe Gamestick). The thing that's more likely to keep them from succeeding is a small game library. Ouya is close enough to many common Android tablets that it should be fine. Shield seems almost like a fancy demo for Nvidia's new hardware, so I doubt they'd panic if it flops. Piston (and the other Steamboxen) have one publisher behind them, which is at least enough to survive in the marketplace (ain't that right, Nintendo?).

    4. Re:Wrong by thatkid_2002 · · Score: 1

      OP is correct. A good hard dose of truth! Though, personally, I think the Ouya has a chance of giving the casual low-fi game sector (where Nintendo is currently king) a big shake up. Just don't pretend that it is even close to a solution for serious gaming. Maybe in 3+ years when mobile graphics are stepped up a couple of notches.

    5. Re:Wrong by mjwx · · Score: 1

      The "winner" of at least the last three console wars was the cheapest console.

      The Wii outsold the Xbox 360 and the PS3. At some points it was outselling them *combined*, until Microsoft and Sony dropped their prices.

      This is exactly what I mean. The console market relies on the casual gamer for profitability. Not that there's anything wrong with casual gaming.

      Of the last console generation I owned a PS2 and a Xbox360, I owned one game on each before the PS2 became a glorified DVD player (which is sucked at) but the Xbox fared better, chipped and running XBMC it served as a media centre until 2010, nether were useful gaming machines as any games released on them that I wanted to play came out on the PC anyway. This generation I bought a Wii and used it for playing games.

      The real winner of the console wars was IBM, who made the CPU for the Wii, PS3 and Xbox 360.

      Ouya, Gamestick, Piston, Shield, and all the other microconsoles... I'm not worried that the graphics will hold them back (well, maybe Gamestick). The thing that's more likely to keep them from succeeding is a small game library.

      The first company to get a good back-catalogue wins. Probably Nintendo, they've got a good history at acquiring back catalogues of other console manufacturers (Sega, Atari).

      The microconsoles you mentioned are pretty much version 1.0. They wont sell in huge numbers but will pave the way for future versions.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    6. Re:Wrong by kamapuaa · · Score: 1

      Wait a minute. You say the winner of the last three console wars was the cheapest, and then admit that the PS1 wasn't the cheapest, the PS2 wasn't the cheapest, and the Gamecube won because it sold the most, even though there were no games for it and people who are into games have basically ignored it for the last four years?

      Why even make a point, which you yourself immediately contradict with facts?

      --
      Slashdot: providing anti-social weirdos a soapbox, since 1997.
    7. Re:Wrong by tibit · · Score: 1

      I guess kids these days just don't have imagination :(

      When you stream a game, it doesn't have to mean that you're streaming what's on the screen directly. In a game engine, there may well be content that's expensive to calculate, but has very relaxed latency requirements and can be essentially treated as pre-caching of sorts. What you do is look at the client and look for where it ails, and basically offload stuff that may be precomputed a bit in advance. For low-latency GUI, you still have a low-end GPU, but it can, for example, use some shadows computed elsewhere, some matte textures to approximate higher quality content, have advanced AI offload, etc. There's a lot of ways to make stuff look good even on low-end GPUs, as long as you can throw a bunch of computing power a couple of seconds ahead of the frame. It requires out-of-the-box thinking, perhaps, but it's not exactly a brand-new technique. I've seen it applied in the 90s on some flight simulators.

      --
      A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
    8. Re:Wrong by jezwel · · Score: 1
      Nvidia Tegra 4 Android 10" tablet http://reviews.cnet.com/tablets/vizio-10-inch-tegra/4505-3126_7-35567328.html running at 2560x1600.

      Remains to be seen if this chipset is ok for intense gaming at 1080p, however I'd assume it won't be terrible at casual 1080p gaming if it's already fluid at 2560x1600.

      Exciting times.

      Last night I ordered one of these 'Android stick' devices, it was about $60. Pretty sure I can afford to replace that every year and keep increasing capability of that casual mini console.

    9. Re:Wrong by Waccoon · · Score: 1

      Why even bother looking at the hardware? Consoles sell because of the exclusive titles. That's the way it's been since the days of the 2600 and Coleco Vision.

      What killer app is coming to the Ouya? For a long time, people didn't even believe the dev kits would ship at all. Wake me when there's something worth playing.

    10. Re:Wrong by Sigg3.net · · Score: 1

      Most games I see kids (under 15) playing requires Adobe Flash or HTML5 browser.

      Kids know what fun is, and are not impressed by polygons and pixels like you and me.

      Kids around 30 however.. gimme that high-end graphics card, I can do another week on mac and cheese!

    11. Re:Wrong by ikaruga · · Score: 1

      I agree with you, but for entirely different reasons.

      Seriously, do you think people WANT to phone quality graphics on a 60" TV? No, they don't even want to see it on a 15" laptop
      False, see Nintendo users. After playing a little with the 3DS, I guarantee you millions of people don't care about graphics. The wii success is another proof. BTW, a Tegra 3 machine is capable of great graphics(better than anything on the wii). If Ouya can bring Infinite Blade iOS games for Android, that would be sufficient proof. The major problem with most iOS/Droid games is the lacking content and gameplay. Even then, lately I can say for sure there have been huge improvements in this areas as well, as android has taken most of my handheld gaming time(barely touch my PSP, vita and recently acquired 3DS anymore).

    12. Re:Wrong by Mockylock · · Score: 1

      How well is the Wii Console doing now that it's obsolete? The 360 passed it up, and now their flagship Wii U didn't sell squat on its launch, using it's previous business model. It came at the wrong time, considering the Xbox and PS3 prices have dropped sub $300, but they tried to save a few bucks using essentially the same hardware, which really won't be able to hang this time around.

      The other thing that was the end of the Wii, which will be the demise of the handhelds, is the ease of Homebrew/Cracking. The second the Wii was easily cracked, developers quit putting effort in to it. It's not like they had a lot of power to open up their coding freedom, but that's still quite a bit of losses considering the amount of consoles that were compromised. I know the PS3 and XBox were also cracked, but the ratio was FAR less, considering nobody wants to brick their console or have it banned when they're far more valuable.

      On that aspect, you will probably see quite a bit of cross-platform gaming for phones and the new micro-consoles, but you can guarantee those consoles will be cracked in a heartbeat and free APK copies will be scattered about. Granted, they're not the same as the retail consoles, but when the founder of the company touts how she wants people to hack with the console, I can't see developers putting their heart and soul into Jaw-Dropping titles that are going to produce the "wow" factor that new-generation consoles like the "720" or "PS4" will be capable of. I'm not sure what these new micro style consoles are capable of, but I'm not guessing that they'll be able to draw you into the screen and actually blow your mind with extreme detail that even current consoles do. I'm sure the shield will be able to keep up with CURRENT technology, but you KNOW when people see newer consoles they're going to be pretty speechless, especially when you can guarantee they'll probably be capable of much more than just graphics.

      They WILL sell, but the lifespan will be limited. They'll sell as cell phone apps do, but don't expect kids to migrate to it, (or their parents).. when Microsoft, Nintendo and Sony have already accomplished the level of Apple in the console "status" world.

      Overall, it ends up being apples/oranges. If they do sell, they'll be used for a pack-and-go console or as a side-cart console where it's fun to have around to use between other game title releases, but it will ultimately be stacked next to a more expensive console. I also can't see them carrying the power to host 20 players from the console as well, and I'm not certain that a company that's having all of its software pirated is going to want to put up servers to help them out. I guess an account-based software would work, but it's still iffy.

      (on another note) keep in mind how many dreamcast consoles were sold until the CD exploit brought it crashing down. There are quite a few things to consider.

      --
      "Please, shut up. Just when I think you can't say anything more stupid, you speak again." -Archie Bunker.
    13. Re:Wrong by bogjobber · · Score: 1

      You're right, but it's not because of graphics. The Wii has shown that you can be clearly behind on graphics and it doesn't particularly matter. Little Jimmy doesn't want to play "video games." Little Jimmy wants to play Zelda. Or Black Ops 2. Or Final Fantasy, or whatever it is.

      Consoles live and die by their branding, and the lion's share of that comes from their games. This has been true since at least the PSX.

      If they can get quality games that people actually want to play, they will be successful. I have my doubts about their ability to compete with any of the established players in this regard, and if they're just porting phone games then what the hell is the point of buying a standalone console?

    14. Re:Wrong by gman003 · · Score: 1

      Er, I never said that the PS2 wasn't the cheapest, or that the Gamecube won. Because it was, and it didn't, respectively.

      The PS1 was more expensive at launch, and never dropped to absolute-cheapest levels, but TCO was lower. That's the most I stretched the "cheapest wins" rule, and it's not too much of a stretch.

    15. Re:Wrong by Mockylock · · Score: 1

      The xbox is 10 years old. I've got a few tablets, consoles, laptops and gaming desktops and still use the consoles more than anything, just for convenience. I quit using the PC because of upgrade garb and it's full of online cheats, etc. After 4 months, you can't game online without massive exploits running rampant. I love the PC, but it just doesn't do it for me anymore.

      I used my laptop running an NVidia 4200M over HDMI and the graphics were slightly better than the 360, so I'm not sure what you're smoking when you say an iconica with a tegra 2 would outperform it. If it were true, they'd be developing games like BF3 for tablets. As for 1080p, it is true 1080p, but some games drop to a lower resolution to gain framerate. The same goes with AA. The 360 is capable, but they dropped the requirement for it. Even with AA missing from games, it still doesn't have the Jaggies that the PS3 has. They're both still great (I own both), but I get tired of the sharp edges on some of the PS3 games.

      I'm not trying to fuel the flames or start an argument with you, as much as just add some input on it. You're still talking about 10 year old technology vs something that's relatively new and more efficient. Regardless of the outcome, it's win/win for us on every end. We'll have cheaper toys and cheaper games, and the big name consoles will have to change their business model to compete, which usually means competitive pricing. The thing we need to worry about the most is whether those companies will pull Apple BS and start scrutinizing patents.

      Another thing that may be a plus and minus is whether or not they're going to keep the programming the same across the board. With that many new mini-consoles coming out, they don't want to split up the development and kill each other off because of fragmentation and dilution. I WANT to see these guys succeed because I love games, regardless of the media they're on... BUT, I look for these to be an addition to a gamer's toolbox, rather than a replacement for higher-powered system that allows for larger titles. In that aspect, is IS apples and oranges.

      Considering the price, you're not going to see people buy these smaller consoles and just quit there. Like the other guy said, the kids are still going to want the big console... whether it makes sense or not, parents buy what kids want. My kid plays on everything, and I'm currently running a 6400, Wii, WiiU PS1, PS2, PCs, 360, PS3, Genesis and intellivision in one room. They seem to like the 360 better (and my daughter likes her tablet), but there's no doubt in my mind that I'll probably end up buying a few of these things just to fill in the blanks. Will it replace the high end consoles? Doubtful.. but it's more stuff for us to enjoy, and the more that are out there, the cheaper it is.

      --
      "Please, shut up. Just when I think you can't say anything more stupid, you speak again." -Archie Bunker.
    16. Re:Wrong by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

      LoL, people like the Xbox 360 graphics, that's still standard def with no AA.

      What? There are 360 games that output 1080P! And I know there's 360 games with AA...hell there's PS2 games that have it.
      The 360 is standard def only when hooked to an SDTV.

      40% of their sales came after the price drop in their respective units. People want cheaper consoles for casual gaming,

      Correlation does not equal causation, because perhaps people waited to buy a cheaper 360/PS3 and then played Oblivion, Fable, or Skyrim on it.

      Anyone who thinks that console and mobile gaming don't occupy the same market is delusional.

      They're not the same market. Tablet owners play Angry Birds while riding the bus or waiting at the doctors office. console owners are playing Street Figher X Tekken, CoD, X-Com, DCUO, or Skyrim. Totally different markets.

    17. Re:Wrong by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

      Of the last console generation I owned a PS2 and a Xbox360, I owned one game on each before the PS2 became a glorified DVD player (which is sucked at) but the Xbox fared better, chipped and running XBMC it served as a media centre until 2010, nether were useful gaming machines as any games released on them that I wanted to play came out on the PC anyway.

      If you only bought one game for each, why did you buy them in the first place if you consider the PC superior and consider yourself a PC gamer. And since you only bought one game, perhaps you don't know the PS2 and it's games very well. Sitting next on the shelf to my 24 PS3 disc based games I have 34 PS2 games, and MORE PS2 games in boxes not on that shelf. Some PSone games too, about 15 of those, and more stored away.

    18. Re:Wrong by Jaysyn · · Score: 1

      Phone quality? You must have one hell of a phone!

      http://i.imgur.com/SmKsy.jpg

      --
      There is a war going on for your mind.
    19. Re:Wrong by DarthVain · · Score: 1

      As other people mentioned Wii, etc... Where graphics is secondary to gameplay.

      Also it might be a 60" TV, but it is still only 1080p at best resolution. At that resolution it isn't exactly hard for halfway modern hardware. I mean the PC started to be able to do that what, two decades ago? How is it do you think those aging PS3's and Xbox360's have been able to keep up? Resolution cap on the video card making it a level playing field. It isn't like a PC that has to be able to handle the latest and greatest gajillion resolution from those three linked 30" monitors.

    20. Re:Wrong by hkmwbz · · Score: 1

      The Wii was cheaper and with far worse specs than the 360 and PS3. But what made it sell was the games. The GameCube did not sell well at all.

      --
      Clever signature text goes here.
    21. Re:Wrong by hkmwbz · · Score: 1

      How well is any console doing when it's obsolete? The Wii sold insanely well, but the market was on the down turn. Then Nintendo stopped making games people want to play and moved on to the Wii U.

      The Wii U is nothing like the Wii. The Wii was made for the mainstream market, while the Wii U, by Nintendo's own admission, aims for the hardcore gamer. That's why it fails. The games are not appealing to the mass-market.

      The Wii was always easy to do homebrew on. In fact, it got harder as the console matured and Nintendo figured out new ways to block homebrew. So you are wrong about that, too.

      The fact is that it's all about the games. Wii had several games that appealed to a mainstream audience, and sold very well as a result.

      --
      Clever signature text goes here.
    22. Re:Wrong by hkmwbz · · Score: 1

      The Wii was an exercise equipment fad? Huh? The best selling game that wasn't bundled was Mario Kart. New Super Mario Bros. sold more than 25 million copies.

      And fad? It sold well from the very start, and for several years!

      Angry Bird is no competition. The top selling games on the Wii completely destroyed it. And that was despite being way more expensive.

      And you don't think Angry Birds is gathering dust? LOL.

      --
      Clever signature text goes here.
    23. Re:Wrong by Mockylock · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I'm wrong on all fronts and you're right. My mistake. From reading the rest of the posts, it seems like a trend. I've got 2 wii's and didn't have any problem cracking either one, even to this day. But, I'm wrong about it. Post whatever you want from this point on, I won't respond, because regardless of what point I make, you're a fucking douche and will continue to come up with some meaningless retort. Great job, you've proven you're a prick. Have fun trolling. What a fucking joke. Btw... "fact".. "fact".. fact.... Learn a new word jackass.

      --
      "Please, shut up. Just when I think you can't say anything more stupid, you speak again." -Archie Bunker.
    24. Re:Wrong by hkmwbz · · Score: 1

      Old Wiis were easy to crack. Newer Wiis were much harder to hardmod, and software updates made it increasingly harder to softmod.

      But all of this is just a side discussion. The main point is that you are mistaken about the Wii and Wii U.

      --
      Clever signature text goes here.
  9. GameStick by viperidaenz · · Score: 2

    They claim one of their selling points is the large amount of existing Android games available.

    Can someone tell me how I'm going to play a touch-screen based game on a controller based TV console?

    1. Re:GameStick by bfandreas · · Score: 2

      Easily. The better ones already have controller support. I've hooked up a PS3 controller to my android tablet. All you need is Bluetooth or USB.
      Also there is DosBox + Bluetooth mouse for your Master of Magic and Dungeon Keeper needs.
      And with the newly announced SoC you can have independent display on your tablet and your HDMI connected viewing screen. Which sounds awefully like that new Nintendo thing.
      All the standard stuff has already been there for some time.
      Fun fact: I even give presentations with my tablet hooked up to an HDMI projector and control it with a PS3 controller. Afterwards I usually get asked by members of the audience where they can get all that stuff. simple: from a shop. As long as it doesn't have an Apple logo on the outside, of course.
      It is iApple stuff that's left out in the rain. They don't do any of those. What with no emulators and non-standard connections and such.

      Still: Caution! Google inside.

      --
      20 minutes into the future
    2. Re:GameStick by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      Price too. If I want an OUYA Console, it'll cost me $NZ215. I can just walk down the my local store and pick up an xbox 360 for $248, a wii for $268 or a PS3 for $349.

      They're all in the same price bracket, apart from the PS3 being a little high and the OUYA not existing yet and has only shipped dev kits. GameStick also doesn't exist. None of them have any compatible games either as the entire catalog of Android games require a touch screen.

    3. Re:GameStick by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      These are not tablets you can plug in to your TV, they have no screen.
      To play a game with out a touch screen requires complete support - menus etc., not just game controls.

    4. Re:GameStick by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      My 5 year old plays Total War Battles Shogun on a tablet-touch and a PC-mouse. He play whichever of daddy's devices is not in use, with no particular preference for one over the other.

    5. Re:GameStick by bfandreas · · Score: 1

      So? You can navigate stock Android with a PS3 Controller.

      --
      20 minutes into the future
    6. Re:GameStick by slim · · Score: 1

      The projected price for the Ouya is US$100 == NZ$120. OK, there's usually more to it than a simple currency conversion, but hey, you don't live in one of the 'big' target geographies; being an early adopter will always have issues.

      If the Ouya succeeds in coming out on time, at the expected price point, it will be cheaper than a used Xbox/Wii/PS3. If developers latch onto it, it should quickly gain a large catalogue. But especially, I'd expect a lot of indie games from people who don't want the pain of dealing with MS/Sony/Nintendo - quirkier, edgier games.

      I wish them well. The big risk is lack of takeup from developers and customers - which is chicken/egg.

    7. Re:GameStick by bfandreas · · Score: 1

      I will get an Ouya since I know that there are a lot of games on Android with controller support. And here's to hoping that the remaining ones will patch it in for the extra revenue.
      Simulated twin stick controls are horrible. Same goes for this move-your-device controls. I had hooked up my Transformer Prime to my monitor(playing it with 3D glasses on...because I can not because I enjoy it) and played Riptide with my PS3 controller. I kid you not the experience is completely different. The game gained a lot of depth.
      Sure, a game like Zen Pinball works absolutely fine on the tablet with on-screen controls. But that's fucking Pinball! Two buttons and that's it! I wouldn't even dream to play Sonic without my controller. And why Samurai Vengeance 2 doesn't support controllers is beyond me. I don't know how Machinarium can be played with a controller, but Puddle already(obviously) has support.

      My point being is that there are already a lot of games with controller support and a lot of games that can have that easily patched in. And a LOT of current gen indie games are being ported. People are BEGGING to have Grimrock on Android. BEGGING!

      --
      20 minutes into the future
    8. Re:GameStick by tepples · · Score: 1

      Strategy games that use a mouse to give menu commands to on-screen units adapt well to touch control. Games designed for a gamepad to make a single unit move and fire a weapon, not so much.

    9. Re:GameStick by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

      How? Besides, I haven't seen any Android games that can match the quality of what the 3DS and PSP can do, let alone the Vita.

    10. Re:GameStick by bfandreas · · Score: 1

      You navigate the apps on your screen with the right stick. One of the four buttons starts a selected app. Start buttons gets you to the home screen. And so on.
      Quality wise there is alot of crapware.
      But there are games like Puddle, Machinarium and so on. You need to know what to search for. Riptide is actually a very nice jet sky arcade racer that showcases what tablets were capable of a year or so ago. There is a quite nicely done Sonic port and a lot of PS2 games have been ported, too. Can't vouch for them for lack of interest.
      ...but you have to sift through a lot of crap and need to visit an Android gaming site.

      --
      20 minutes into the future
    11. Re:GameStick by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Have you not played (or even seen) the ones where the entire tablet face becomes the gamepad? Left thumb move, right thumb shoot, like a gamepad, but without dedicated buttons. I'm not saying everything goes back and forth natively, but that solutions to the problem are in the wild and working well enough.

    12. Re:GameStick by tepples · · Score: 1

      Have you not played (or even seen) the ones where the entire tablet face becomes the gamepad?

      Yes. When I tried tried playing NES games in Nesoid, I kept accidentally pressing another button or the space between the buttons because I couldn't feel where on the screen one button ended and the next button started.

    13. Re:GameStick by exomondo · · Score: 1

      If the Ouya succeeds in coming out on time, at the expected price point, it will be cheaper than a used Xbox/Wii/PS3. If developers latch onto it, it should quickly gain a large catalogue.

      I suspect developers will port existing games to it if the process is simple, i doubt it will have much in the way of exclusivity because it's Android so if you're going to develop for Ouya you might as well develop for all the various Android consoles and devices. As a developer it would be pretty silly to restrict yourself to the Ouya.

      But especially, I'd expect a lot of indie games from people who don't want the pain of dealing with MS/Sony/Nintendo - quirkier, edgier games.

      I dunno, XBL arcade has worked well for titles that are decent, like Limbo, and since virtually everybody has a PC the install base for an open platform is already there for indie developers. Ouya will probably just be 'all the games you have on Android, on your TV', and it's openness will probably lead to it being used more as an XBMC box than a gaming console.

  10. How does streaming make it more powerful? by js3 · · Score: 1

    I'm tired of reading bullshit articles day after day from idiot bloggers. What makes systems like xbox and ps3 so powerful isn't necessarily their hardware specs but their dedication. Anything with stock android isn't good for jackshit, and will force you to buy better and better hardware just to make it go faster, a problem the ps3 and xbox gaming consoles excel at.

    --
    did you forget to take your meds?
    1. Re:How does streaming make it more powerful? by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

      Xbox 360 and PS3 aren't powerful, they never were, they're actually pretty shitty.

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    2. Re:How does streaming make it more powerful? by kamapuaa · · Score: 1

      They're seven year old hardware, where the games ultimately look about the same (if not as good) as with a modern PC. While of course the PC would win the Pepsi challenge, it's a hell of a lot smaller difference than (say) PS2 v. PS1.

      --
      Slashdot: providing anti-social weirdos a soapbox, since 1997.
    3. Re:How does streaming make it more powerful? by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

      They were both shitty the day they came out, then they got worse.

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    4. Re:How does streaming make it more powerful? by VortexCortex · · Score: 1

      They're seven year old hardware, where the games ultimately look about the same (if not as good) as with a modern PC. While of course the PC would win the Pepsi challenge, it's a hell of a lot smaller difference than (say) PS2 v. PS1.

      I'm a game developer. It takes far less time and effort to make a cross platform game with features coded & content authored to the lowest common denominator -- or average common denominator then slightly improve or dumb down features / fidelity (except for textures, those are pretty easy because resampling can be automated). The PC has FAR more memory than the 360 or PS3, yet those Witcher2 models had the EXACT same vertices and animations; It's really noticeable in the hair. So, the only real difference was the particle effects and pixel shading, maybe some higher res detail textures. Re-Topo for various LoD and different baked bump-maps, and re-rigging them, just to make the game look as good as it can on each platform? No. That doesn't happen, publishers won't pay for that, so if you want it to run on the 360 or PS3, then the PC graphics suffer. You can't really compare a cross platform AAA game between platforms and say "The PC's only a little bit better!", you fool.

    5. Re:How does streaming make it more powerful? by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      You obviously don't understand the concept at all. The SERVERS run the games, the device just handles the input/output. So it doesn't matter what the requirements are for a game 3-5 years in the future, it's make absolutely no difference to the device. Get it? Consoles actually suffer from having fixed hardware. They're usually some way behind a gaming PC at release, and fall way behind during their lifespans. The problem this causes for PC players is the amount of shockingly bad console "ports" that the developers push out, with low res console quality textures, ridiculously sloppy controls, lack of pre-loading content to avoid delays between levels, and all manner of other limitations that should exist for a PC game. Consoles are a huge problem, and I hope the likes of the Piston Steam box, and the new Nvidia device kill the PS4 and Xbox stone dead.

      Consoles have been good at one thing - tricking idiots into paying far more money over their lifetime than if they'd spent a bit more on a PC to start with, to benefit from cheaper games (which also opens up modding, unlike the locked down consoles). It's only going to get worse now as Sony lock games to a single console to prevent resale (MS are bound to do the same). Not even considering whatever Nintendo put out, as their consoles are so far behind the curve that you can't see them over the horizon any more. They're just a toy seller.

      MS and Sony already have killers for these in that scenario. they're called the xbox360 and ps3. xbox360 is like 130 bucks in sale - today.

      btw this is the first time I've seen anyone tie cloud gaming to these cheap android boxes. they're indie friendly. that's what they are. streaming isn't, that needs huge infrasructure and these companies don't have it.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    6. Re:How does streaming make it more powerful? by bfandreas · · Score: 1

      They were released with not enough memory causing all sorts of problems. And today, now, they are complete and utter crap.
      Your filet mingon today will be your crap tomorrow.

      --
      20 minutes into the future
    7. Re:How does streaming make it more powerful? by bfandreas · · Score: 1

      Well, we get high-res content patches. So that's good.

      --
      20 minutes into the future
  11. Cloud gaming - the next emperor's new clothes by rs1n · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Even with a cloud network that comes equipped with millions of graphics cards, I just don't see how they are going to get around the bandwidth bottleneck. Unless the only games being offered are board games, I just don't see how anything like an FPS being played via cloud computing due to obvious things like: 1. bandwidth needed to download the images to update the gamer's display 2. network latency causing input delays Even with great compression algorithms, you're still looking at a problem of somehow refreshing the display at a minimum of 30 fps. I cannot help but speculate you would need either large bandwidth with low latency or special hardware to uncompress the image stream. But the most important question is, what the hell happens when either the cloud is down, or when you lose your internet connection?

    1. Re:Cloud gaming - the next emperor's new clothes by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      MMORPGs are "cloud gaming" in that the game is hosted online elsewhere. Seems to work for the most popular game ever.

      And it always amuses me how so many on slashdot are narrow-minded Luddites. "If I can't think of a solution, then it's impossible." A flash game takes less data than the image that results from it. It isn't hard to stream data to render, then render it in a simple manner. You have to have a video card of some type, and so far, most run android games, rather than "cloud" games. None of the current (or near future ones) run remotely. They all run on local hardware, so I'm not sure why so many put the "must run remotely" requirement on it, then misrepresent what that would take, so not only are they arguing something that isn't true, they are doing so with very flawed arguments. Why not just say "I irrationally hate change." That way people wouldn't waste time actually trying to inform the irrational Luddites.

    2. Re:Cloud gaming - the next emperor's new clothes by Gaygirlie · · Score: 1

      MMORPGs are "cloud gaming" in that the game is hosted online elsewhere. Seems to work for the most popular game ever.

      Only the game-logic is running on the server, and even then not all of it actually is; the reason why so many wall-hacks and such work so well is exactly because the logic for those runs on the client. The graphics itself is NOT streamed, so your comparison is utterly silly.

      It isn't hard to stream data to render, then render it in a simple manner. You have to have a video card of some type, and so far, most run android games, rather than "cloud" games. None of the current (or near future ones) run remotely. They all run on local hardware, so I'm not sure why so many put the "must run remotely" requirement on it, then misrepresent what that would take, so not only are they arguing something that isn't true, they are doing so with very flawed arguments. Why not just say "I irrationally hate change." That way people wouldn't waste time actually trying to inform the irrational Luddites.

      Uh, the article itself literally talks about it, not Slashdotters. The article suggests that games -- including all their rendering -- happens on the server and the end-result is being streamed, so yes, "must run remotely" becomes a hard requirement. Alas, your comparison to MMORPGs already showed you have no idea what you're talking about.

    3. Re:Cloud gaming - the next emperor's new clothes by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      The graphics itself is NOT streamed, so your comparison is utterly silly.

      What current or proposed gaming device streams graphics from the cloud?

      Uh, the article itself literally talks about it, not Slashdotters. The article suggests that games -- including all their rendering -- happens on the server and the end-result is being streamed, so yes, "must run remotely" becomes a hard requirement. Alas, your comparison to MMORPGs already showed you have no idea what you're talking about.

      I read the article, and I didn't get from it what you assert it says.

      It mentioned streaming games from a PC (not the cloud) and it mentioned Android games (none of which are currently or proposed to stream graphics over the cloud). So yes, please point out where in the 3 links it mentions a console or game that streams remotely generated graphics from the cloud (not a PC with hints about future "cloud" capabilities). I don't see what the problem is with MMORPG, it's remotely generated content, displayed locally. Wall hacks and such don't happen in WoW. That's only when you have a non-cloud server solution for Counterstrike or whatever. "The cloud" has enough processing power to verify client inputs. Or do you know of any wall hack that works on WoW? If not, then you are the one that doesn't know what he's talking about. I found a few references to hacks that are 5+ years old, no longer working, but nothing anywhere remotely recent.

    4. Re:Cloud gaming - the next emperor's new clothes by Gaygirlie · · Score: 1

      The graphics itself is NOT streamed, so your comparison is utterly silly.

      What current or proposed gaming device streams graphics from the cloud?

      Onlive, for one. Nvidia's Project Shield for a second.

      It mentioned streaming games from a PC (not the cloud)

      "Cloud" is just a fancy word for server, and it doesn't matter if it streams from your own server or from someone else's -- it's still streaming.

      So yes, please point out where in the 3 links it mentions a console or game that streams remotely generated graphics from the cloud (not a PC with hints about future "cloud" capabilities).

      Nvidia's Project Shield: "this clever contraption also streams games from your PC to wherever you are over Wi-Fi, including anything you’ve downloaded from Steam, and you can hook it up to your TV to play them too."

      I don't see what the problem is with MMORPG, it's remotely generated content, displayed locally.

      It's still rendered locally, which is a completely different thing altogether.

      Wall hacks and such don't happen in WoW.

      Oh, yes, they do. You've never met any of the hundreds of bots that usually roam under the landscape, farming mineral veins and herbs? Going under the landscape is still a wall-hack.

      That's only when you have a non-cloud server solution for Counterstrike or whatever.

      Heh. The naivety.

      Or do you know of any wall hack that works on WoW?

      No, because I don't use such and therefore haven't needed to research them. But go ahead, look up. There's STILL plenty of bots going under the landscape to farm stuff, and they go under the landscape exactly so that players wouldn't be able to attack them or target them.

    5. Re:Cloud gaming - the next emperor's new clothes by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      You've never met any of the hundreds of bots that usually roam under the landscape, farming mineral veins and herbs?

      If I can't see or target them, how would I have met them? Though a search online and I didn't find anything. The only bots I found were for ones that try to not get caught (play like humans) not feed impossible data to the servers (likely to get a perma-ban).

  12. "rural" = anything but FIOS by Bananatree3 · · Score: 2

    just sayin'

  13. Not called Xbox 720 by locopuyo · · Score: 1

    There is no way in hell they will call it Xbox 720. It would be a terrible marketing.

    1. Re:Not called Xbox 720 by ustolemyname · · Score: 1

      It's Microsoft. Do the words "Zune" and "Squirt" ring a bell?

    2. Re:Not called Xbox 720 by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

      There is no way in hell they will call it Xbox 720. It would be a terrible marketing.

      And Microsoft never does that. Oh wait... Seinfeld... butt wiggle... bald headed men squirting... oh my.

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    3. Re:Not called Xbox 720 by Agent+ME · · Score: 1

      As opposed to 360?

    4. Re:Not called Xbox 720 by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Xbox 365? Xbox 2? Xbox (branded "the new Xbox" in stores, a la iPad)?

    5. Re:Not called Xbox 720 by VortexCortex · · Score: 1

      Forget Zune and Squirt -- the company is named Micro-freaking-soft!!! What the hell kind of "dropped straight out of bad 1950s SF" name is that???

      It's only micro when it's soft, baby.

    6. Re:Not called Xbox 720 by synapse7 · · Score: 1

      Kin

    7. Re:Not called Xbox 720 by Jaysyn · · Score: 1

      Xbox 24/7

      --
      There is a war going on for your mind.
    8. Re:Not called Xbox 720 by Westwood0720 · · Score: 1

      It's only micro when it's soft, baby.

      Anyone else read that in Duke Nukem's voice?

  14. Power is irrelevant when your content is boring by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Power has nothing to do with it.

    The quality of the content does.

    And for quality content, you do not need a giant octo-core monster with a dedicated GPU that will burn through the PCB without a proper heatsink and fan. You need power to produce another shitty cookie cutter game running off UDK, hence the reason for the Xbox 360 and PS3.

    I played plenty of games in 1997-2004 that were astoundingly awesome (and still are today via emulation). For those kinds of games, even the OUYA is drastically overpowered because it runs Android and they didn't feel like writing their own OS. Seriously, if someone started from the ground up and built their own console with their own OS and their own SDK, you could pull off some impressive things with a 500mhz processor and 256MB of RAM. If you think that's bullshit, then you need only look into the history of gaming to say otherwise.

    So, yeah, I suppose what qualifies as a "tiny" console today could give the 360 and PS3 a decent kicking if they got enough talented developers on board who actually had an interest in making solid games (and game engines) rather then barfing up some more crap in UDK or Unity.

    1. Re:Power is irrelevant when your content is boring by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 1

      Power has nothing to do with it.

      The quality of the content does.

      And for quality content, you do not need a giant octo-core monster with a dedicated GPU that will burn through the PCB without a proper heatsink and fan. You need power to produce another shitty cookie cutter game running off UDK, hence the reason for the Xbox 360 and PS3.

      I played plenty of games in 1997-2004 that were astoundingly awesome (and still are today via emulation). For those kinds of games, even the OUYA is drastically overpowered because it runs Android and they didn't feel like writing their own OS. Seriously, if someone started from the ground up and built their own console with their own OS and their own SDK, you could pull off some impressive things with a 500mhz processor and 256MB of RAM. If you think that's bullshit, then you need only look into the history of gaming to say otherwise.

      So, yeah, I suppose what qualifies as a "tiny" console today could give the 360 and PS3 a decent kicking if they got enough talented developers on board who actually had an interest in making solid games (and game engines) rather then barfing up some more crap in UDK or Unity.

      While I would hardly disagree with the notion that today's gaming market is loaded with derivative crap(not that the past wasn't: how many crap re-sprites of Mario Brothers did the world get to endure?); your proposed solution seems counterintuitive:

      Derivative crap comes about for some combination of 1. Customer demand, 2. Publisher risk aversion, 3. Tight deadlines, and 4. Very high development costs that essentially require a game to be a big seller lest it be a massive money pit.

      How does increasing the amount of low-level(and technically challenging) engine optimization grovelling that developers need to do help any of this? Barring a few exceptionally talented outliers, that seems mostly like a recipe for more bugs(and more hard-lock-to-desktop stuff, not just quest logic issues) and less time spent on storytelling and gameplay tweaking in favor of writing yet another pseudo-newtonian physics engine or making sure that the shader code doesn't crash on specific GPUs. Somebody has to do it; but there isn't a whole lot of benefit to having everybody reinventing the wheel badly when they could be using tools built by people who know how to build tools in order to build actual games...

    2. Re:Power is irrelevant when your content is boring by exomondo · · Score: 1

      And for quality content, you do not need a giant octo-core monster with a dedicated GPU that will burn through the PCB without a proper heatsink and fan. You need power to produce another shitty cookie cutter game running off UDK, hence the reason for the Xbox 360 and PS3.

      Then how do you explain Infinity Blade? Just about everyone has at least a low-power PC, it's an open platform with such a large installbase that it's ubiquitous, any talented developer can build a game for it and reach an enormous audience bigger than any console game...and very few do, these low power consoles won't change that.

  15. Re:Wii outsold PS3 and XBox 360 by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

    The only problem is it doesn't exist yet.

  16. Worst idea ever by slashmydots · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So it's like the current games but with 100x more financial reason to shut down the multiplayer servers after a couple years. That sounds like a great idea! Just ask PC gamers how much they love that.

  17. The Whole Point of Consoles... by AdamStarks · · Score: 1

    is to avoid a fractious market. This lets developers focus more on the actual game, and less on supporting all the different hardware/OS combinations. This also lets consumers spend more time playing games, and less time diagnosing problems.

    For example, I got a new computer back in the summer, and found that it played a couple games incredibly slowly for no good reason (Warhammer Spacemarine and the new XCOM). The games ran fine on friends' computers, but chugged on mine even at minimum settings. I eventually found out that this was an issue with certain versions of certain motherboards and that the solution was to update my BIOS. I'd never done this, and had read stories of people bricking their computers as a result of BIOS flashing gone wrong, so I was understandably nervous about just trying a bunch of solutions. After further research, I found the BIOS upgrade I needed, and proceeded to try installing it. Woe unto me, the BIOS installer couldn't read my flashdrive, and the only clue as to why was some mention on some old forum of thumbdrives larger than 512 mb not working. Fortunately, our IT guy at work had an old 256 mb drive buried somewhere and let me borrow it. I copied the files over, booted into the BIOS flasher, and everything went smoothly. When the computer finished restarting, I was very pleased to find both games now running at perfectly playable framerates.

    On my Xbox, I put the disc in and the damn thing just works. Will that still be the case if we have umpteen different consoles?

    1. Re:The Whole Point of Consoles... by RyuuzakiTetsuya · · Score: 1

      Err... what?

      Game consoles came out nearly simultaneously as PCs did. Game consoles meant you can have an arcade like experience at home. In fact, the Altair 8800 came out 3 years after the first console, the Magnavox Odyssey.

      Game consoles were meant to play *games* and facilitate that goal, not be general purpose computers that are devilishly locking you out.

      --
      Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
    2. Re:The Whole Point of Consoles... by AdamStarks · · Score: 1

      Please run a Windows DOS game on Windows 7. If you can't (without video or audio issues, and without using virtual machines), then please lick my butt.

    3. Re:The Whole Point of Consoles... by RyuuzakiTetsuya · · Score: 1

      Or I can take out my Xbox 1 and put the Xbox 1 game into it and play.

      I mean, eventually there are going to be no working Xboxes, but, in the long run we're all dead.

      Did anyone shed any tears that the SNES didn't support NES games?

      --
      Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
    4. Re:The Whole Point of Consoles... by tepples · · Score: 1

      Please run a Windows DOS game on Windows 7. If you can't (without video or audio issues, and without using virtual machines)

      Why not use virtual machines? That's what Nintendo uses to sell classic games from cart-based systems in Wii Shop.

    5. Re:The Whole Point of Consoles... by AdamStarks · · Score: 1

      Because my whole point is that consoles require less hassle. If Nintendo sets up a VM on the console, that's not additional hassle for the user. But if I have to set one up myself on my PC, then it is. For instance, should my VM be Windows 95? 98? XP? Maybe I need to set all three up, since certain games only run without issue on certain operating systems.

      And even then, setting up a VM frequently isn't enough, as processor/video/audio errors can still appear. For example, when I played through Grim Fandango back in the fall of 2008 I hit a point where I can't run along a conveyor belt that you have to traverse. Turns out that section of the game has framerate dependencies and my processor was too fast. So I had to download a special program to tie up my processor and slow the game down enough for me to beat that section. This is FAR more hassle than consoles generally (I'll grant, not always) require.

  18. A Real Console by jabberw0k · · Score: 1

    VT05, now that was a real console.

    1. Re:A Real Console by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

      rxvt on a PS2/PS3, now that was a console on a console. (Yes, I've actually done it)

  19. Escalation by fredprado · · Score: 4, Insightful

    That is one of the most stupid applications for cloud computing. Centralizing processor hungry processes. Can anyone take a guess how badly it will become as this escalates?

    1. Re:Escalation by slashmydots · · Score: 2

      Considering how game makers dump servers ASAP when a game's sales stop, I would say it'd do quite the opposite of escalate.

    2. Re:Escalation by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      That is one of the most stupid applications for cloud computing. Centralizing processor hungry processes

      Irony: being right for the wrong reason. It IS one of the most stupid applications for cloud computing, but not becase it's processor-hungry. It's because it's bandwidth-hungry and latency-dependent. Cloud computing is a valid concept only because centralizing processor-hungry processes makes sense!

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    3. Re:Escalation by fredprado · · Score: 1

      No it does not. It is much easier to deal with processor hungry processes client side. You can never beat the costs of using the CPU power of client hardware for free, especially considering how powerful client side CPUs are at the present. Certainly latency and bandwidth are also problems, but MMORPGs, for example, deal with it reasonably well. Processing power is not so easily dealt with.

    4. Re:Escalation by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      It is much easier to deal with processor hungry processes client side.

      Easier than what? You're deluded. It doesn't matter where the processor is as long as you can submit work to it and get results in a timely fashion, which is where the problems with bandwidth and latency appear in the picture.

      You can never beat the costs of using the CPU power of client hardware for free,

      You're not making any goddamned sense. You can't beat the costs for free? Everything has a cost. I can sit here and state obvious things all day but it won't move the conversation forward.

      especially considering how powerful client side CPUs are at the present

      Their benchmark scores are irrelevant, the only thing that matters is whether supply exceeds demand. If you want to deliver some types of games to some types of gaming device, you're going to need additional external processing power.

      Certainly latency and bandwidth are also problems, but MMORPGs, for example, deal with it reasonably well.

      Actually, they don't. There are conversations going on right now in this thread about how bad latency is for MMO players.

      Processing power is not so easily dealt with.

      Are you kidding? There are scads of technologies for offloading processing power, either through a job-submission interface or even as a single system image. However, they all face the same problem, which is to say that the remote processor has to have access to the local data, which has to be copied, replicated, or whatever needs to happen to get enough of it to the other end to do something useful with it. Therefore, the problem is one of bandwidth. And as a gamer, who expects something to happen by a certain time, the problem is also one of latency.

      The idea of using your PC to do processing for your handheld is not an inherently bad one. People commonly do this for video to provide support for file formats which do not work on their device, e.g. with Plex or PS3MediaServer. But in that case, there is no latency issue, only one of bandwidth. And since these solutions are designed to be used locally (i.e. on a LAN) the bandwidth problem is not a serious one for most people, wireless interference aside.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    5. Re:Escalation by fredprado · · Score: 1
      Delegating processing power to a server only works when the individual load or the demand is small. Costs do not escalate linearly with processing power demand, actually they escalate very badly, because you end need bigger data centers, special cooling, complex database and redundancy systems and a lot of other problems that appear as the demand grows. Albeit bandwidth and latency are problems too, processing power is the main problem in centralization for this kind of application, that is why popular database licenses use number of processors to charge and not the size of the data flow.

      Their benchmark scores are irrelevant, the only thing that matters is whether supply exceeds demand. If you want to deliver some types of games to some types of gaming device, you're going to need additional external processing power.

      Their benchmark score is very relevant. The cost to buy a more powerful client device is irrelevant next to the service costs users would have to pay to keep the games running in a centralized model. The game market is very competitive and when you have to charge a lot more than the alternatives to be able to deal with server power escalation you will close shop quickly.

  20. Simple answer by drolli · · Score: 1

    After all, if these little boxes can simply stream from powerful servers, how can the stalwarts of gaming keep up?"

    By *not* streaming from servers. I like the idea of turning a thing on and start to play, even if the service has gone out of bussiness.

  21. Umm, it's quite obvious by Lunix+Nutcase · · Score: 1

    After all, if these little boxes can simply stream from powerful servers, how can the stalwarts of gaming keep up?"

    By building their own systems utilizing their larger amounts of revenue, infrastructure investments and personnel resources?

  22. Looking forward to new Sony and Msft products by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

    I'm looking forward with tremendous anticipation to new products from Sony and Msft. I will be on the edge of my seat watching those two paragons of evil beat each other to a pulp again and lose more $billions. A Tweedledee vs Tweedledum extreme mud wrestling cage fight. And I need to see if they can manage to burn a few houses down between them this time, especially since Microsoft got oh so close last time.

    --
    When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    1. Re:Looking forward to new Sony and Msft products by bfandreas · · Score: 1

      I predict a lot of drama when they announce that their new consoles won't play current gen console games.
      The first batch will die due to manufacturing problems.
      The first games will be gimicky show-offs of the next gen console's party trick.
      Sony will introduce angular vaguely disk-shaped objects for storage. While Microsoft goes for roundish bovine expulsions.
      ...and the fanbois will declare war on each other totally forgetting that they own both a XBox360 and a PS3 and have been for quite some time and silently.

      The entertainment these consoles offer is endless.

      --
      20 minutes into the future
  23. Yes and no... by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 1

    This 'cloud gaming' stuff seems severely overrated; but there might be another way in which cheapie consoles do cause real trouble for their more expensive brethren:

    Because(with the historical exception of Nintendo) consoles have been sold at a loss(and have also generally been somewhat odd ducks, with a fair amount of custom architecture thrown in), with the economic logic being built around massive volume sales of officially blessed games that pay a tithe for the privilege, the present sales model is only viable if it is assured that they will be sold in large numbers to customers who will buy lots of games for them. If the sales numbers suffer, or the attach rate goes to shit, the available subsidy will dwindle considerably.

    We've certainly seen a rather dramatic shift on the mobile side, with 'free-as-in-you-already-own-one' cellphones and cheap downloadable games striking a certain amount of fear in the hearts of dedicated mobile console makers. Notably, they haven't done this by being objectively better(if anything, pure touchscreen gaming is sort of mediocre, and a lot of cellphone games are worth all 99 cents they cost); but they sure are convenient.

    On the home console side, we could end up seeing a very similar squeeze from the low end if Google or Apple's attempts to move their mobile ecosystems into set top boxes end up working, or if one or more cable/satellite companies decide to kick out a set top box that doesn't entirely suck. The effect on dedicated fans of Medal of Halo: Gears of Assault will be limited; but lazier and more casual players could easily skip the console if they can download games from their set top box in 30 seconds for less than the cost of a new xbox AV cable... On the top end, the longer the consoles go without a refresh, the relatively cheaper PC gaming becomes.

    Given the inherent weaknesses of 'cloud' gaming, and the fact that nasty little mobile SoCs aren't as powerful as CPUs that cost several times as much, the little guys aren't going to match the consoles; but the traditional console model depends on a big market in order to be viable. The more sales they lose, the harder it becomes to offer the subsidies that make console gaming cheaper than PC gaming and the AAA several-hundred-million-dollar platform exclusives that help drive sales.

    1. Re:Yes and no... by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

      We've certainly seen a rather dramatic shift on the mobile side, with 'free-as-in-you-already-own-one' cellphones and cheap downloadable games striking a certain amount of fear in the hearts of dedicated mobile console makers. Notably, they haven't done this by being objectively better(if anything, pure touchscreen gaming is sort of mediocre, and a lot of cellphone games are worth all 99 cents they cost); but they sure are convenient.

      The Cell phone gaming market is not the same market as say the PSP/Vita gaming market. The people buying phone games are the people who don't own PSP's, Vita's or carry their DS's around with them.

    2. Re:Yes and no... by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 1

      They certainly aren't; but they don't seem to be doing the sales of PSPs or Vitas any favors, and there is a sales number below which the availability of worthwhile titles for the premium portable consoles starts to drop, which gets to be a vicious circle fairly quickly. Because of the relatively high fixed costs of developing a console and a stable of good games, possibly some exclusives, you don't need to wipe out the die-hards in order to kill the platform, you just need to lower sales enough that there are no longer enough units sold to reasonably amortize the costs. Once that happens, even the die-hards get priced out.

  24. There is no console killer. by dadelbunts · · Score: 1

    When will people understand that there is no console killer. Just like TV didnt kill radio. Computers and consoles didnt kill TV. Consoles didnt kill PC's. Consoles are good at what they do and fill that niche market. Nevermind that the devices mentioned are consoles themselves. If Ouya can produce quality blockbuster titles then it will do well, if not, it will most likely go the way of the Jaguar, 3DO, Virtua Boy and other failed consoles. If not then it will fill its own niche market but never truly compete with next gen consoles. Cloud Gaming or w.e they want to call it is nice on paper but since broadband speeds are relatively slow in the US and not everyone has high speed internet, you lose a huge chunk of the market.

  25. I don't doubt that cloud game will work, but... by Scorpinox · · Score: 1

    Sure, cloud gaming can work. Despite what people may say, OnLive works, and some people have a good time playing on it, but those people are knowingly making a sacrifice to play their game on OnLive. Cloud gaming will be fine, but even the tiniest lag is a step backwards. It's adding one more thing on top of all the other things that cause lag, and cause a game to feel bad.

    Call of Duty has some of the fastest response times for any game -- that means when you pull the trigger, it feels like you instantly hear the gunshot and see the muzzleflash. Not everyone can pinpoint why a game like Call of Duty "feels" better, but it's in large part to that minimum delay, and I have no doubt that it played a not insignificant role in the success of that particular franchise.

    Adding a trip across the country through your ISP is a step backwards, and it's a trade off that some people may accept -- and that's fine, hardware can be expensive after all -- but it's not a trade off that I want to see.

    1. Re:I don't doubt that cloud game will work, but... by bloodhawk · · Score: 1

      OnLive works? arrr didn't they go bankrupt because it DIDN'T work, as in people didn't want it?

  26. Is this a joke? by AlphaBro · · Score: 1

    After all, if these little boxes can simply stream from powerful servers, how can the stalwarts of gaming keep up?

    Assuming streaming is the future of gaming (and I don't think it is at all) the major players could keep up and surpass the little guys by simply buying more powerful servers.

    1. Re:Is this a joke? by Osgeld · · Score: 1

      oh it will eventually be the future of gaming, but not when you have some people on FOSS, and others on 36k dialup

  27. streaming will need a lot of data centers by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    streaming will need a lot of data centers all over the place to keep lag down. And even then people in some areas will be left out. Also 3G / 4G lag sucks.

    1. Re:streaming will need a lot of data centers by faedle · · Score: 1

      At least on a well-engineered LTE network, "4G's" lag is no worse than a DOCSIS 3.0 cable modem.

      The problem is all the LTE backend hardware vendors are still working out software bugs. I work at a regional LTE provider, and you can't imagine the kinds of bugs that are still cropping up in the handoff and load-sharing stuff.

  28. only hackers by currently_awake · · Score: 1

    only hackers buy a console for the hardware. Everyone else buys them for the games.

  29. *facepalms* by lightknight · · Score: 1

    Dear God, this is the worst version (or a contender for it) of how things are supposed to work with the internet.

    It seriously ranks up there with people who repeatedly stream the same YouTube clip or NetFlix movie over and over again. You're supposed to download things locally, then use them; not stream / tether them to a server. Why? Because it's the equivalent of driving your car to the super market to buy a single can of coke, driving back home, drinking it, then driving back to the store again...and so on, a few dozen times. As bad as it is for the environment for you to be driving your car as such, so it is bad for traffic on the internet.

    Do you know why the people behind VOIP and other fun techologies want to regulate the internet (aside from the control / money angle)? It's because these idiots are creating so much traffic with their tethered apps; so much traffic, that (and this is the head trip), rather than inform the customers / providers that this shit needs to stop (use a cache you morons, and a big one), they're going to give them priority over other, non-latency specific traffic (like you downloading a regular file). Anyone who has studied networking should be facepalming at the thought of this design.

    But no, the content providers like it, because it keeps people tethered, and their *precious* (said in Golum's voice) safe from thieves.

    For the longest period of time, I couldn't understand why MS / Sony shipped their consoles with such tiny HDs. It now makes sense.

     

    --
    I am John Hurt.
    1. Re:*facepalms* by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

      For the longest period of time, I couldn't understand why MS / Sony shipped their consoles with such tiny HDs.

      Price? And the fact that you can't beat the bandwidth of a truck full of blu-rays. The hard drive was originally intended to be used for media, game caches and saves, and relatively small downloadable titles, not downloadable versions of massive mega gigabyte full size games that would normally be on disc. The hard drives are also upgradeable. Current model PS3's ship with bigger hard drives than launch models did..... much bigger. The smallest hard drive shipped with a PS3 in the US is now 250GB, there is also a 500GB model. They do a 12GB model for PAL territory, don't know why.

  30. Consoles had had bad firmware updates / isses like by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    Consoles had had bad firmware updates / issues like a pc only with alot more forced ones.

  31. Re:Because Onlive tried it and failed? by Osgeld · · Score: 1

    cause the idea has been around since the atari

    and FAILED?

  32. It will fail by thetoadwarrior · · Score: 1

    This will fail just like every other cheap android console solution. These people don't get console gaming. They assume consoles are just cheap PCs so therefore making the cheapest POS equates to a win and it won't.

    1. Re:It will fail by Mike+Frett · · Score: 1

      Yeah but a lot of those games for Android ans other Mobile OS's are pretty sweet and the graphics aren't that bad at all. I don't own a Phone but I have a Linux box and a lot of the games are ported to my system. I usually pay the few dollars in the Software Center and have my fun. An example would be RC Mini Racers, very fun racing game that is very similar to the game 'ReVolt'; and the graphics are great too. All casual games mind you, things you can jump into and have fun; Isn't the whole point to have FUN?. But of course we have the *cough* Windows games like Call of Duty...I can pretty much guess those will not be on these devices and would turn off a lot of 12 year olds. Of course the 12 year olds are a small % of the market since most gamers are late 20's and early 30's. Gamers are getting older and with age comes inability to play these twitch based FPS games and more consumers look towards the 'casual' market for games that have a slower pace. As for me personally, I do plan to get an Ouya but this is the first time I have heard of the GameStick, seems to require WiFi and I only use wired connections in my home, which the Ouya has. Wired is just a personal preference for me and at this point I'm rambling and mustn't continue.

    2. Re:It will fail by MrMickS · · Score: 1

      If older gamers are unable to play twitch FPS games who is buying them? I guess I shouldn't be as I'm approaching 50 but I play console FPS games casually. I'm not rabid about my stats, my K/D ratio, or any of the other rubbish that dominates the testosterone filled minds of the kids, but that doesn't mean that I can't play at a decent level and get some fun out of it. People will play the games that interest them regardless of age. You don't suddenly get a pipe and slippers and resort to board game simulations once you turn 40.

      The cloud based devices will garner some success but won't challenge consoles for during the lifetime of the next console generation. The main reason is that the additional lag and contention caused by cloud gaming will disrupt the experience. It doesn't matter if the lag is slight, some lag is lag and people notice it. With my console I can switch it on as long as I've power. I don't need a network connection, I don't need certain performance out of the network, it just works. Why would I swap that for buying something that may not work?

      --
      You may think me a tired, old, cynic. I'd have to disagree about the tired bit.
  33. OnLive by Zelos · · Score: 1

    G-cluster’s Games Machine is a new contender in the game streaming space currently dominated by the likes of OnLive.

    That's the OnLive that nearly went bankrupt and apparently only ever had 1,800 concurrent users?

  34. That doesn't make any sense by Punto · · Score: 1

    There's 2 flaws in that argument, 1) if you want to stream games from a "powerful server", you need to own a powerful server to stream games from. Who's more likely to own those servers, Microsoft and Sony, or some dude who can put together a SoC? 2) The whole idea of "cloud gaming" is ridiculous, why are we still pretending that it's real? Games need the lowest latency of almost all software. If anything, the next generation of consoles will try to tie you to the cloud (because owning all the infrastructure instead of having it in your user's living rooms makes more business sense), and that's why they'll fail.

    --

    --
    Stay tuned for some shock and awe coming right up after this messages!

  35. Yes, under 1ms per hop by Moskit · · Score: 1

    Routers (devices that forward your packets along the way) add much less than 1ms of delay. Single core router can add as low as 20ns. OP is obviously correct on this count.

    You are right that it might be confusing what is added by the hop itself (router and light propagation delay in fiber), and what is user perceived latency. Your "ping" time is affected for example by how long it takes to process it on the target machine before sending back, and on your own machine before the result is displayed. Also count in relatively larger delays for access line (DSL/wireless) compared to core links.
    Those "ping" times are usually (much) larger than pure transmission times.

  36. how they can keep up by MrKaos · · Score: 1

    if these little boxes can simply stream from powerful servers, how can the stalwarts of gaming keep up?

    By using every dirty trick in the book.

    --
    My ism, it's full of beliefs.
    1. Re:how they can keep up by bfandreas · · Score: 1

      Not sure. Handheld devices are absolutely fine for casual games and a gaming pc doesn't have to be expensive due to a lot of games still bein in the DirectX 9 bracket. Rumor has it that nVidia got snubbed both by Microsoft and Sony for the next gen consoles. So they may very well be very serious about pushing their new SoC as a serious gaming contender.
      Consider this screen-duct-taped-to-XBox-controller contraption a proof of concept. they are showcasing Tegra4 and not that thing. How else would you present a bnew chipset? If there aren't any gadgets using them atm, simply glue one together yourself.
      Don't hold your breath waiting for this thing to appear in any store soon.
      Pricing those new consoles will be a bitch. And since Valve has also thrown its hat into the ring it might be time to break out the popcorn.

      --
      20 minutes into the future
  37. Re:LAG? HAVE YOU HEARD OF IT? by slim · · Score: 1

    Did you try OnLive?

    I played Duke Nukem Forever on the OnLive demo, and it was OK. Not to my taste, but responsive enough for me.

    Some games rely on millisecond twitching - Quake 3 is one - but lots of games do not. I can't play Quake 3 against online opponents because my brain is too laggy. I'd happily play, say, a recent Prince of Persia on OnLive.

  38. Logistics? by gtirloni · · Score: 1

    How is Ouya or any other indie console maker going to deliver their products to people in South America and Asia? They look awesome for the biased views of Silicon Valley entrepreneurs but reality is things are more complex than that.

    --
    none
  39. Oxymoron by SternisheFan · · Score: 1
    Isn't "Serious Gaming" an oxymoron, like "Civil War"? I mean, unless you're making 'serious' money at it, you're just playing a game. Gamers take themselves too seriously, in this neckbeards opinion.

    - - -

    "What a world. What a world..." - Last words of 'The Wicked Witch of the West'

    1. Re:Oxymoron by Kartu · · Score: 1

      By "serious games" people normally mean "performance intensive" games.
      But if you define it as "something, making money", take a look at Korea and it's pro Starcraft gamers. Heck, they even have a TV channel dedicated to SC.

    2. Re:Oxymoron by SternisheFan · · Score: 1

      Thanks for that, every field has their elite, the best of the best. I must admit that my head was spinning a bit after reading through all the posts here, seems serious gaming is not for the timid (picks up rectangular Super Nintendo joystick and sighs).

  40. how can the stalwarts of gaming keep up? by JTsyo · · Score: 1

    With AAA exclusive titles. Each console has its collection of games that fanboys enjoy. This will ensure those games stay on the system and attract other players.

  41. I keep hearing DRM is bad by Kartu · · Score: 1

    I keep hearing DRM is bad, "always online" requirement is bad and now someone wants to outsource my PC?
    Bigger latency, less control over my own stuff, why on Earth would I do that?

  42. Difficulty of pirating GameCube discs by tepples · · Score: 1

    If the winner of a particular generation is all about difficulty of making and running infringing copies, then why didn't GameCube win? Its nonstandard format (80 mm DVD, six pinholes in the lead-in whose positions are stored in the BCA, reshuffled physical sector format) made it the hardest of the sixth generation to pirate, if I remember correctly.

    1. Re:Difficulty of pirating GameCube discs by Mockylock · · Score: 1

      PS2 was pretty much dominating, and the xbox released 2 months later. Besides, it was pretty obvious that nobody really wanted to develop for the gamecube for some reason. Honestly, can't say much about that.. but I do know the Dreamcast died because of it. I'm pretty sure that I didn't say that was the deciding factor for the "winner", but something that needs to be considered when it comes to claiming a console is going to make enough money for developers to not be skeptical.

      --
      "Please, shut up. Just when I think you can't say anything more stupid, you speak again." -Archie Bunker.
  43. Wii U GamePad vs. Archos GamePad by tepples · · Score: 1

    And with the newly announced SoC you can have independent display on your tablet and your HDMI connected viewing screen. Which sounds awefully like that new Nintendo thing.

    True, a lot of the functionality of a Wii U GamePad can be simulated through a 7" Android tablet connected to a PC through Wi-Fi or a 7" Android tablet connected to an HDTV through HDMI. But the Wii U GamePad also has physical buttons for those parts of a game where physical buttons are superior to a flat sheet of glass. The Archos GamePad is an Android tablet with buttons, but it's not out yet in North America.

    1. Re:Wii U GamePad vs. Archos GamePad by bfandreas · · Score: 1

      I repeat myself: there has been support for Bluetooth/USB connected gamepads since at least Android 4.0. Possibly honeycomb. If it works under Windows without a driver, it will work on Android. Not sure about the 2.2 batch. But who wants to have that on a tablet anyway. You pair an Android tablet with a PS3 controller by connecting it via USB once. Paired via Bluetooth forever. Couldn't be simpler. I personally prefer 360 controllers, but a PS3 controller fits better in my geek manbag.

      --
      20 minutes into the future
  44. "Entire" is a strong word by tepples · · Score: 1

    If I want an OUYA Console, it'll cost me $NZ215.

    How so? I thought Ouya was 100 USD, and 100 USD exchanged to 119 NZD. Is it shipping or customs that's so high?

    the entire catalog of Android games require a touch screen.

    "Entire" is a strong word. I am aware of multiple games for Android that already support keyboard control even prior to the Ouya's release, and Android on my Nexus 7 tablet translates USB gamepad presses into keyboard presses.

    1. Re:"Entire" is a strong word by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      I'm not entirely sure how I got $US179. It's only $119 with international shipping, which is $NZ142

  45. Sonic actually works by tepples · · Score: 1

    I wouldn't even dream to play Sonic without my controller.

    Provided your tablet is compatible (some aren't, unfortunately), Sonic 4 is one of those few games whose on-screen gamepad actually works. There's really only one button, and I'm told the way it simulates a D-pad (displacement from initial point of contact, so you can lift and press to recenter) is comfortable to use. Where it gets difficult is any game that has both jump and fire buttons.

    1. Re:Sonic actually works by bfandreas · · Score: 1

      I've got a PS3 controller connected to my tablet so I never tried that.

      I'm personally hoping for Giana Sisters: Twisted Dreams to be ported to Android. Obviously it wouldn't have the DX11 fidelity(which is gorgeous beyond measurement) but I wouldn't care. Some things I am perfectly willing to pay for twice.

      Also Grimrock? Pretty please? You mad Finn, stop boozing and port it already! Take my money, PLEASE!
      We already have a very competent Bard's Tale port, why not this?

      --
      20 minutes into the future
    2. Re:Sonic actually works by tepples · · Score: 1

      I've got a PS3 controller connected to my tablet so I never tried that.

      You do; most of the rest of the audience does not. And it's hard to bundle a controller with every copy of a game downloaded from Google Play Store the way a controller is bundled with Wii Play or Rock Band.

  46. Temporary name by tepples · · Score: 1

    "Xbox 720" is a temporary name adopted by the press, much like "GCNext" before Revolution (pre-production name for Wii) was announced or "Wii 2" before it was officially called Wii U. It expresses the same meaning as "Microsoft's eighth-generation video game console" with far less text.

  47. "home bound" by tepples · · Score: 1

    Buying a console, is not option to me. Not everyone is home bound.

    I don't fully understand what you mean by "home bound", but Nintendo 3DS? PlayStation Vita? Buying a console and running its HDMI out to your existing desktop PC's monitor?

    Not to mention, that when I move, I have to sell everything

    I don't understand why. A console fits in luggage better than a full-size PC tower ever would.

  48. Not worth it by DarthVain · · Score: 1

    Most people live in cities. More people move from rural areas to cities. Been that way for years, and will remain that way for the forseeable future. Why target a small market, that is hard and expensive to reach, and that is in decline?

  49. Re:Consoles had had bad firmware updates / isses l by AdamStarks · · Score: 1

    Consoles have issues, yeah, but they are much less frequent than they are on PC. And when the console itself isn't defective in some way, all games generally run without issue.

  50. There just isn't the bandwidth yet by blandcramration · · Score: 1

    Maybe when the standard has become 10mb/sec download/uploads this could be a reality. Until that point, I'm going to go ahead and say the XBOX 720 and PS4 will come out and have a traditional console life. The following iteration of consoles will probably have something to fear.

  51. DOSBox included with GOG purchases by tepples · · Score: 1

    If Nintendo sets up a VM on the console, that's not additional hassle for the user. But if I have to set one up myself on my PC, then it is.

    Then it's a good thing that old DOS games purchased from GOG.com come with DOSBox.

    1. Re:DOSBox included with GOG purchases by AdamStarks · · Score: 1

      It is a good thing, and Steam and GoG have eased a lot of the complications that come with PC gaming. However, it's not a fix-all. For instance, I'm not aware of any reliable method (even involving DOSBox) for getting System Shock to run on a modern computer (and it's not likely to ever be available on GoG), and not even any unreliable method that's not a great deal of hassle. I'd also have trouble finding the parts to build a Windows 95 machine. However, it's very easy to find an old SNES somewhere and play Super Metroid (released the same year).

  52. Something extra to carry by tepples · · Score: 1

    there has been support for Bluetooth/USB connected gamepads since at least Android 4.0

    Which is something extra to carry, at least compared to a Nintendo 3DS or PlayStation Vita. It's also something extra to buy, and application developers can't depend on end users already owning one. Video games that require a specialized controller tend to be popular only when bundled with that controller (like DDR or Guitar Hero or Wii Fit), and that's possible only for games that come on a disc or cartridge, not for purchased downloads.

    You pair an Android tablet with a PS3 controller by connecting it via USB once. Paired via Bluetooth forever.

    I tried doing that with a Wii Remote. It worked with my Nexus 7 tablet under Android 4.1, but the update to Android 4.2 "swapped out an essential component of bluetooth with a different solution" that broke the driver application. I don't own a PlayStation 3 console, so before I buy a controller, will PlayStation 3 controllers continue to work even through Android upgrades?

    Couldn't be simpler.

    It could be simpler if the PS3 controller broke into two pieces that snapped onto the sides of the tablet. Otherwise, the player has to put the tablet down and pick up the controller to do a controller part of the game, then put the controller down and pick up the tablet to do a touch part of the game.

  53. A flood of me-too titles by tepples · · Score: 1

    But especially, I'd expect a lot of indie games from people who don't want the pain of dealing with MS/Sony/Nintendo - quirkier, edgier games.

    This alleged "pain" ensures that a console's app store won't be dominated by "a bunch of wannabe game developers making a ton of shovelware tetris/bejeweled/sokoban clones", as CronoCloud put it. A flood of me-too titles already nearly killed the video game market once three decades ago.

  54. 576p for better shaders by tepples · · Score: 1

    What? There are 360 games that output 1080P!

    Not all of them though. A lot of the major titles, such as Call of Duty series and reportedly Final Fantasy XIII, render in 576p so that they can use better shaders. Then they scale it up to 720p or 1080p depending on the machine's TV settings. I don't own an Xbox 360; my cousin does, so I haven't had a chance to investigate whether the HUD is added before or after this upscaling. True, 576p isn't "standard def with no AA" as mjwx claimed, but it's not HDTV either. Resolutions up to 576i are considered SDTV; resolutions up to 576p are EDTV.

  55. Who else likes this? Metered plan ISP and others! by girlinatrainingbra · · Score: 1

    Re: the content providers like it,
    And the internet service providers like it because they can charge you for each time you download it, especially when they can charge metered rates on your ISP or your telephone contract. And the advertisers like it because google gets to serve you more ads each time you re-view and re-load the youtube page. And nielsen and soundscan like it because they get to add a metric called "repeated viewing" for videos and "repeated play" for songs.
    .
    My cousins and and aunt and uncle were also totally totally surprised when I showed them how they could take their collection of CDs and put them onto their own itunes application on an apple. They'd bought my cousin an ipod touch about 4 years ago and installed itunes on a PC and they'd been giving him money and gift cards to keep repurchasing songs which they already had in their home collection/library of discs!!! They were seriously shocked when they realized that the $40 bucks a month they'd been giving him for buying music (why can't my parents be this crazy at throwing money away?) had just been used to repurchase songs which they already HAD!!! Anyway, I believe the answer to why people keep doing this sort of repeat purchasing and repeat streaming is that they are idiots, they are stupid, they are stupid idiots who do not know any better about how the internets ought to operate.

  56. The Ultimate Console Killer is... by Oflameo · · Score: 1

    still The Personal Computer!

    --
    Perlsix - Second system dun goofed.