Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Linux powers "cloud" gaming console

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #11
    Originally posted by Melcar View Post
    If we stick to Linux, that HD3200 is good enough to run most open source games, and I would think that the main purpose of the console is Linux based gaming. I do think, however, that for the price it will be going for such a chip seems rather small.
    Well they are advertising 1080p HD gaming and that 3200 is gonna have one hell of a time with that. Plus it's going to be cheaper and more flexible to build a cheap PC then to use that thing.

    Comment


    • #12
      Originally posted by deanjo View Post
      I'd have to agree. This is just going to end up as another dead console unless they can get some massive deals with the software publishers going and I'm pretty sure that isn't going to happen. This thing doesn't even have close to the graphics power to run head to head with other consoles and I doubt the developers are going to be thrilled having to "lighten" the system requirements of their games.
      Exactly. If they can do what Apple did for the iPhone Games, then perhaps there is a legitimate proposition. I really doubt it though. The iPhone had a large user base before the games started pouring in.

      In my opinion, these folks need to push their price and specs a little down and chase after Indie dev studios for games (even if they are just ports). Studios that have a tight budget and can work out the balance sheets with this kind of platform. For studios to sign-up, there needs to be a user base, and for users to buy, there has to be a lot of software for it. Oh, chicken and egg, why do you rear your ugly head all the time?

      Comment


      • #13
        Originally posted by niniendowarrior View Post
        Exactly. If they can do what Apple did for the iPhone Games, then perhaps there is a legitimate proposition. I really doubt it though. The iPhone had a large user base before the games started pouring in.
        Some big differences though:

        -Apple is a well known brand
        -Apple had a well known delivery system with iTunes
        -You can be sure that Apple will be there a year or two down the road and not disappear into nothingness
        -They could supply a large number of units right off the bat and adoption was anticipated to be quick
        -Apple had the money and marketing to successfully pull it off.
        -You can't build an iPhone yourself

        Apple had a huge advantage in consumer confidence because of these reasons. It's something that the EVO could only dream of. Plus it reminds ALOT of another console that showed big promises but never materialized, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Phantom_(game_system)

        Comment


        • #14
          Originally posted by deanjo View Post
          Some big differences though:

          -Apple is a well known brand
          -Apple had a well known delivery system with iTunes
          -You can be sure that Apple will be there a year or two down the road and not disappear into nothingness
          -They could supply a large number of units right off the bat and adoption was anticipated to be quick
          -Apple had the money and marketing to successfully pull it off.
          -You can't build an iPhone yourself

          Apple had a huge advantage in consumer confidence because of these reasons. It's something that the EVO could only dream of. Plus it reminds ALOT of another console that showed big promises but never materialized, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Phantom_(game_system)
          True on all accounts. EVO faces an uphill climb to build something useful AND credible.

          That Phantom console was such a funny thing when it was first being talked about. It really became a Phantom. lol.

          In my opinion, the way they could address that credibility problem is by turning it into an "AMD game platform", but I'm not sure if AMD wants to burn bridges with Nintendo, and Microsoft.

          Comment


          • #15
            Originally posted by niniendowarrior View Post
            True on all accounts. EVO faces an uphill climb to build something useful AND credible.

            That Phantom console was such a funny thing when it was first being talked about. It really became a Phantom. lol.

            In my opinion, the way they could address that credibility problem is by turning it into an "AMD game platform", but I'm not sure if AMD wants to burn bridges with Nintendo, and Microsoft.
            Another thing that comes to mind as well is that if you are a gamer, are you going to smack down $600 for a machine that can play a dozen or so titles that really don't come close (this isn't a smackdown, just a bit of reality) to matching the eyecandy and title selection that the other consoles offer at a cheaper price? Let's face it, compared to even an original xbox title like Halo, the opensource games have a ways to go to catch up to even that.

            Comment


            • #16
              Originally posted by deanjo View Post
              Another thing that comes to mind as well is that if you are a gamer, are you going to smack down $600 for a machine that can play a dozen or so titles that really don't come close (this isn't a smackdown, just a bit of reality) to matching the eyecandy and title selection that the other consoles offer at a cheaper price? Let's face it, compared to even an original xbox title like Halo, the opensource games have a ways to go to catch up to even that.
              Yeah. The price point is totally wrong in my opinion and on the software side, if you're banking on killer apps like Minesweeper and Kill Bill, we're in bad shape fellas.

              Software-wise though, they need to have those game dev studios on board, probably under them as a digital publishing house like what Phantom was supposed to be. Just not the fly-by-night Phantom company.

              There's a long laundry list of what they ought to do. And you did mention about Apple being a recognizeable and credible brand. Look how long it took them to finally deliver games on iPhones?

              Comment


              • #17
                Originally posted by niniendowarrior View Post
                Yeah. The price point is totally wrong in my opinion and on the software side, if you're banking on killer apps like Minesweeper and Kill Bill, we're in bad shape fellas.

                Software-wise though, they need to have those game dev studios on board, probably under them as a digital publishing house like what Phantom was supposed to be. Just not the fly-by-night Phantom company.

                There's a long laundry list of what they ought to do. And you did mention about Apple being a recognizeable and credible brand. Look how long it took them to finally deliver games on iPhones?

                Exactly, and if I'm a commercial game developer am I really going to develop for a platform that small of an audience? I would probably get more profit from running a 50/50 draw at a minor sporting event. Sorry to say this but this platform is doomed before it is even released.

                Comment


                • #18
                  Originally posted by deanjo View Post
                  Exactly, and if I'm a commercial game developer am I really going to develop for a platform that small of an audience? I would probably get more profit from running a 50/50 draw at a minor sporting event. Sorry to say this but this platform is doomed before it is even released.
                  Nailed shut, dead on water. I think concepts like these are so easy to get VCs to buy into that they all probably thought it was a ground breaking concept. That's just a shame. Wasted money, wasted time, and wasted effort.


                  EDIT:
                  I've been browsing their game store: http://www.evo-phase1.com/gamestore/
                  For a company that pushes Linux OS and games, they seem to be going back several steps from that direction. With Windows titles on tap, I wonder if that puts them head to head against Steam and GoG.

                  I think they were better off selling with built-in Windows copies instead of Linux since that's probably what people are looking for in their games. This still does make a person shell out $599 for that instead of say... a PlayStation 3.
                  Last edited by niniendowarrior; 20 October 2008, 04:21 AM.

                  Comment


                  • #19
                    A gaming system with no discrete GPU, but "liquid cooling" (I hope they mean heat pipes), dual Ethernet and biometric security?

                    Also, from their online store:

                    YES! Add Download Insurance
                    Do you want to store a backup copy on our servers for 18 months?
                    More info USD 3.95
                    "Do you want to pay us extra for something we have to do anyway?"

                    Don't all of the major online distribution platforms (XBLA, PSN, Wiiware, Steam) offer redownloading for free?

                    Comment


                    • #20
                      Originally posted by Ex-Cyber View Post
                      A gaming system with no discrete GPU, but "liquid cooling" (I hope they mean heat pipes), dual Ethernet and biometric security?

                      Also, from their online store:

                      "Do you want to pay us extra for something we have to do anyway?"

                      Don't all of the major online distribution platforms (XBLA, PSN, Wiiware, Steam) offer redownloading for free?
                      I know Wii's VC and WiiWare download services allow redownloading for free based on some bits on its registers.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X