Spring RTS Engine

luckywaldo7 wrote:You guys are not discussing his main point, which was actually excellent. The patent system, which was designed to help protect inventors, has grown into an outdated encumbered system for feeding patent trolls and killing innovation.

Remember invention = making something new. Innovation = inproving on existing imventions. Reinventing the wheel for every invention slows progress. Also, did I mention the patent trolls? D:

If that was his point, he has a point, i withdraw my pre-post, and ask for forgivness.

KaiserJ wrote:i thought android only did java and openGL 1, why not use something good?

you're describing a gaming pc, but with added restrictions...

Imho, the true inevitable "universal standard gaming platform" is the Web, just like how it is becoming the standard for other applications. HTML5 + WebGL brings you all the GUI effects you'd need. The performance bottleneck would be the client code (Javascript = slow), and Google is trying to work around that with the Native Client projects.

KaiserJ wrote:i thought android only did java and openGL 1, why not use something good?

First off, the use of the Android NDK allows the writing of performance critical parts of the application in native code (that's a semi-quote from the android site)... but I'll agree that some kind of game/media specific OS would be more ideal...

KaiserJ wrote:you're describing a gaming pc, but with added restrictions...

the basic ideas is that there is some kind of simple interface built on a standard level of technology... so, while a "gaming pc" costs $1000+ the target price for one of these would be closer to 300-500... like a ps3 or 360... but that anyone could make games for without paying licensing fees or whatever...

the key component would be the "Minimum Performance Benchmarks" so that developers could make a game for the system with the knowledge that it's performance would be consistent on all platforms for their target benchmark... instead of how PC developers tend to design for a wide range, with the best features only available to the highest end machines.

operating system aside, i just can't understand why this would be good

instead of scaling options for game settings, you'd rather have fixed requirements so a game can run only in a set mode?

we already have performance benchmarks available to everyone online; if you're not sure if your computer can run a game, there are tons of utilities available (such as that performance lab website) as well as minimum system requirements for each game printed clearly on the side of each box

developing for PC, you already have a platform where you don't have to be licenced to release software

just like with a xbox or a ps3, if your system is obsolete, you wont be able to run the latest games anyway.

TL:DR what are the advantages to your plan? am i missing some basic point here?

built on a standard level of technology

I think PCs are more standard than any console who always have a new architecure, need "dev kits" etc.

anyone could make games for without paying licensing fees or whatever...

Sony, Microsoft, Nintendo do NOT want anybody to sell games for their consoles.

ololol iam playing on my new console! yeah pretty awesome.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KWbLOFGSEDo
not.

Also: PC + gamepads = console

KaiserJ wrote:TL:DR what are the advantages to your plan? am i missing some basic point here?

knorke partly answers this

knorke wrote:Also: PC + gamepads = console

Essentially, what I guess I'm saying is

PC + Minimum Requirements "Standard" + Low Overhead OS + Simple "TV compatible" Interface + Kinect/Wii/Move style control scheme/peripherals = Best most awesome console evar

what is the point of the enforced minimum requirements standard? this eludes me

buy a 5 year old pc, a wireless presentation pointer and an xbox 360 controller. anything with a dvi or hdmi port can plug directly into a television

i made a flash app about 5 years ago that captured motion from the webcam for the sake of user interaction... bounce a virtual soccer ball off your head

im having trouble grasping what is new or "best evar" about your idea :/ i realize this is opinion based, but all of the stuff you're asking for already exists, except without the described restrictions!

if i were to design an "ultimate console", it would start off with beefy processor and memory and have the option to use a keyboard and a pointing device. and yes, i've just described a gaming pc.

help me understand

Honestly, for me the winning move would be to try and set up a steam-like distribution system for home-theatre games for HTPCs.

Look, anybody who wants to make a gaming hardware platform for the living room is going to go for a lock-in. When Apple finally makes an AppleTV that doesnt' suck, it will have an app store. All the consoles make money off of licensing. Nobody is going to try to compete with that by releasing comparatively-overpriced set-top boxes to consumers.

Better to market to people who *already* have a media-centre PC. A nice layman-oriented TV-oriented Steam-like distribution system would probably work well if you set some standards (must work with X-Box or X-Box-compatible gamepads)... hell, you could even sell an X-Box-like gamepad through your store.

It's a business puzzle more than a software/hardware puzzle.

KaiserJ wrote:what is the point of the enforced minimum requirements standard?

okay... I thought that part was clear.

Console developers design their games to work on a specific collection of hardware with a specific known set of capabilities.

PC developers design their games to look incredible on high-end systems so that their trailers look incredible and when I buy this game and try to play it I have to tweak the settings until I get a playable frame-rate...

So the Unified system developers I propose would choose a particular set of requirements that they are developing their game to work on... then they get the advantage of knowing that everyone who buys their game is going to get a known minimum experience... they'll probably still produce their trailers on better computers and when it comes down to it just listing a minimum system requirements on a steam like interface would basically do just as well... but this way companies selling computers could say "meets the SMR 2010 1.0" and game companies could say "For SMR 2010 1.0 or better systems" and steam could have a filter to only show games "playable on SMR 2010 1.0 or worse" systems... you could even have an application I could run on my computer that would calculate me my SMR 2010 score for a system I built myself.

You could also have For "SMR 2010 1.0 systems, requires [special peripheral standard]"

Microsoft already did that with the "Windows experience index" tool.

Ultimately, it will always come down to two options:
1) Proprietary hardware that means paying the hardware owner to offer your software product.

2) Open hardware that means supporting every possible hardware configuration.

Nobody is going to sell an open standardized platform because the competition will kick their asses on price-point, because they sell consoles for cheap and then take money from the developers who make the games. It's how it works in the gaming industry.

Pxtl wrote:Microsoft already did that with the "Windows experience index" tool.

Ultimately, it will always come down to two options:
1) Proprietary hardware that means paying the hardware owner to offer your software product.

2) Open hardware that means supporting every possible hardware configuration.

Nobody is going to sell an open standardized platform because the competition will kick their asses on price-point, because they sell consoles for cheap and then take money from the developers who make the games. It's how it works in the gaming industry.

Then all hope is lost.

Console developers design their games to work on a specific collection of hardware with a specific known set of capabilities.

Yet there are console games that have FPS lag. Probally they try to port in across all consoles and to the pc too.
Consoles ports are some of the worst thing to happen to games...

My idea for "ultimate gaming PC that is as easy to use as a console:"
-Some average hardware bla that is reliable & silent
-case that is small but does not break on being moved.
-connection plug in stuff (power, screen,keyboard, mouse, usb, LAN, audio) all easy to reach or wireless
-all the basic non-in-game stuff (like selecting which game to start, booting) can be done without a keyboard+mouse plugged in just by controllers
-OS would be windows because all the games are for windows (yesyes olol quake olol tux racer)
-some sort of recovery system: easily revert the system to a working state without inserting a CD.
Not sure how this would work but I am sure it can be done.

I see absolutely no need for a console if you can just take a laptop, connect it to the TV, and start playing. Would just take some setting up at first and buying some long usb cables.

just build what you described yourself, and use the existing benchmarking systems

Prognostication:

Google TV, within 2 years, will have the technical balls and peripherals needed to take on Wii/Kinect/Move and you will all be telling me how right I was.

Also, 3D Augmented Reality Goggles will replace 3DHD tv's within 5 years.

KaiserJ wrote:just build what you described yourself, and use the existing benchmarking systems

That is super true.

KaiserJ wrote:just build what you described yourself, and use the existing benchmarking systems

I have.
It was just to show that there is nothing a gaming console can do, that a PC could not.

knorke wrote:

KaiserJ wrote:just build what you described yourself, and use the existing benchmarking systems

I have.
It was just to show that there is nothing a gaming console can do, that a PC could not.

Is there a good "Windows Experience Index" style standard for Linux?

Whats a "Windows Experience Index"?
*googlegoogle*
Oh some score to tell how good your PC is.
Whats that good for?
If you use Linux you probally have enough computer knowledge that you do not need this...

knorke wrote:Whats a "Windows Experience Index"?
*googlegoogle*
Oh some score to tell how good your PC is.
Whats that good for?
If you use Linux you probally have enough computer knowledge that you do not need this...

This is, kinda, the core idea I would leverage for my proposed system...

Let's say that this year's "Standard" is as follows:

CPU = dual core 2.0Ghz is a score of 2010_1.0 (so a quad core 2.0Ghz would have a score of let's say 2010_1.5 or a dual core 3.0Ghz would have a score of 2010_1.8... math is made up BTW)
GPU = one that is capable of pushing 30 FPS at 1080p with 10000 tris or whatever has a score of 2010_1.0
RAM = 2GB of ram with a good read time or whatever get's a 1.0

then if you designed you game to be playable on a computer that scores at least 1.0 in all of these categories you could say you are compatible with the 2010_1.0 standard... Is there any existing system similar to this for Linux?



Also, with market equipment (let's say 2 decent web-cams capable of seeing infrared and with built in microphones and a iPod or other smart phone with an accelerometer or wahterver with an infrared LED light source flickering at a specific frequency... either a simple circuit powered by a bettery or plugged into the peripheral jack on the smartphone) we could totally get Kinect+Move/Wii style controls without having to hack anything.

Let's say that this year's "Standard" is as follows

this years?
and next year i need to buy a new system?

we could totally get Kinect+Move/Wii style controls without having to hack anything

http://www.free-track.net/english/
I used this and also a similiar software (forgott name) to controll games years ago...