Reply With QuoteI really don't think its a console, its probably just something through the pc gaming alliance.
http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/51806
I find this interesting. I dislike console titles because it offers very little in terms of creativity. More often than not the only creativity a developer can bestow upon its game is within the confines of a specific tried-and-true genre. PC gaming to me has always been the low-cost alternative to big name, wide-audience titles. It's where ideas are born and where all famous game designers got their start. One of the bigger issues of development has always been the hardware standard.
Well, raise your hand if you'd embrace a non-proprietary, non-licensed hardware standard for game development? *raises hand*
The only reason I love PC gaming, despite its hobby developing nature, is it is a free exchange of ideas and risk taking.
I could see this type of console system taking off big time with many indie developers finally making that push into console development. If I'm a hardcore gamer and I agree with this move, then that should say a lot.
I really hope Acer makes the move - it would be revolutionary. On the flip side, however, my $6000 computer will be be regulated to development purposes rather than a split between both.
I really don't think its a console, its probably just something through the pc gaming alliance.
The news article states that they are considering, amongst other things, a "console or console-like game system". I may be dreaming here, but I'd absolutely love something like that...Originally Posted by rjcc
that's not really what he said, its how it was understood. cuz if that's what he meant, there's a little problem of "actually making money off of the thing" that they'll have to overcome.
I think selling the hardware at above cost could take care of that, just like any other hardware manufacturer. Not everyone has to sell their consoles at below cost like MS. But I do believe this is one of the reasons why it is still in 'consideration' phase. Tying more revenue into an open gaming system is hard to do - but if done right it could be achieved. It's a niche market that gaming as a whole desperately needs. I don't see how they couldn't make money.
Then again, I'm not an expert in economics - I just have foundational knowledge...
but if they sell it above cost, who would buy it?
sure, enthusiasts would love a machine that's open for hacking, can install any os and is sold for a profit. problem is they all already have one, its called a pc.
everyone else who would rather pay less and have less configuration options, they have 360s and ps3s
and if no one buys it, who would make games for it?
and if no one makes games for it...who would buy it? sure they could corner the indie market...with whatever copy protection it might have or not, but no one is paying above cost to do what a pc already does.
its a gaming pc.
I think they are trying to create a gap in between what's considered a PC and what's considered a console. The way I see it, they are trying to create a machine that is free to develop for, but still has the constraints of a regular console - things like dedicated OS, limited HDD, and built-in copy protection.
There is such limited information to go on, and I can't do anything else but speculate. However, it is a great direction to go into. A moderately priced laptop goes for $500 these days. Without the added extras like a screen or OS I could see them selling the machine around $350.
PC is ever-changing. That's one of the biggest issues when it comes to developing for the PC, second to only piracy. A stable, PC-like platform with assured hardware capabilities market-wide and built in copy protection could separate itself from the PC market.
Mm. I dunno. One of the major reasons I play games on PC is the mouse and keyboard interface. Two others: it's right next to my internet computer, whereas my consoles are a few feet away, making it awkward to alternate. And I can have 100-some games installed simultaneously, so that a switch of game is a couple of clicks away. So they'd have to hit those sweet spots for me to be interested.
Also, I'm not sure it'd play in retail, and that's something that tends to be an sales issue.
While I like the vision, I somehow fear that it would end up as yet another "but it runs Linux!" gizmo that gets:
-the usual bunch of emulator ports.
-ScummVM.
-a couple homebrew tetris clones.
And then the "community" goes onto the next niche contraption that comes out.
But yeah, I'd love to see an open mainstream console.
they built that, it was called the xbox. sure it wasn't free to develop for, but thats not the reason it couldn't compete with the playstation.
Good luck grabbing shelf space from the L600 and the ApeXtreme, guys!
Can you explain this position please? Because it looks like a bunch of lunatic nonsense from the reading I'm giving it. Lately, I'd say there's some truth to it - there's not a massive amount of creativity on the HD consoles, as they start to resemble high-end PC games more and more, while the PC freeware scene is really awesome and full of ideas (to a slightly lesser extent, so are handhelds and the Wii). But before the last couple of years? PCs haven't been a wellspring of imagination since the C64 era.
Oh boy, I was just looking to find a replacement for my Phantom, which is starting to show its age, and along comes Acer to fill the gap. Thanks, Acer!
Has any of these things ever shipped other than the 3DO?
Wouldn't that kind of defeat the purpose of a closed-box paper-weight if it has no fixed hardware/software standard?
Heh. Innovative PC games. Good one. Maybe consoles will finally get games like Animal Cr...oh, wait. I meant Guitar He....hmmmph. Peggle?
The Wii is sold above cost.
the wii is a gamecube with a waggle sensor. any modern technology will likely cost a bit more to produce
Well, we really don't know what's inside this theoretical system. Also it's not like it'd come out this Christmas, but be a year or two down the road at least.
You lost me after...
This is a crazy/stupid/insane idea, that wouldn't work.
On the other hand - the eepc is a dumb/stupid idea. I had no doubt that it wouldn't work - but it seems like they didn't take my advice, built the sucker, and made a few quid.
So, why isn't this idea entirely laughable:
- when you look at games being written for PSN/xbl they're typically already cross-platform, fairly simple games and there's no obvious reason that they couldn't/wouldn't be ported to a new machine. There's also a ton of DS/PSP games that I guess could be ported, if there was a market?
- the Wii has roughly the same processing power as a coffee-maker, but it's innovative/fun - and it seems that there is a vast market for 'fun' rather than 'cutting edge, 92-bit graphics on a 1028 inch screen'.
- if the system had low/no licensing fees for developers, then if acer shift a few boxes, people (at least with xbl/psn/psp/ds games) would at least look at the system?
- with the current generation of consoles/PCs being so completely different in storage/display/accessories/processors/gpu design/memory, I'd imagine a lot of games are 'generic enough' to run on almost anything. Porting to 'yet another system' wouldn't be as much work as it could have been - especially if it was well designed/documented? (obviously more work for AAA titles - but it's unclear whether acer need/wants them?)
- if acer can sell the boxes for a profit, there's no obvious reason to not try this?
- with PC gaming reportedly 'dead', I'd assume that NVIDIA/ATi would both be interested in any proposal like this.
- there are 'some' people would buy such a console for the 'open' nature, the possibility that it would attract 'mod groups', and the strange fact that so many games today allow user-created content that this has a strange amount of merit. (*if* they could get a form of DRM that was acceptable to everyone involved - e.g. allow modding, but keep proper copy-controls in place).
I don't think acer will do this, and I don't think it would entirely work - but that's not to say it wouldn't make someone a few bucks.
Not by much it's not. Not when you factor in shipping, marketing, the cost of controllers and shelf stocking fees and all that other stuff the iSupply guys don't take into account.
It's certainly not sold far enough "above cost" to satisfy Nintendo. They're not making a good 30% or something. And neither are retailers - their margins are so thin on systems they're not worth stocking except that they make way better margin selling the games.
If there were no royalty structure for the Wii, if it were an open system anyone could developer for and publish on for free, the MSRP would have to be around $350 or so. Wholesale price would need to be something like $40-50 higher, and retail markup about 25% higher than that. I'm not sure they'd be flying off the shelves at the same rate were that the case.
Anyway, the idea of an open console system probably wouldn't be competitive in a lot of ways. You have to lose too much money up front in R&D and manufacturing and marketing.
I don't know about retailers' margins, but..
With this article listed as the source.
I can't imagine them spending 40 dollars per person to get people to buy it. But yeah, I guess all the other related costs for retailers might eat into those margins by quite a bit. However, given how much of a multiplayer system the Wii is, they may make up for much of it just on accessories alone.
Edit: But granted, I'm not sure how the shitty dollar affects this. It probably cuts into Nintendo's profits. But given all the hurdles for yet another new console, it's unlikely a new console would be a success. IMO, the Wii rode the success of the DS as much as it was its own success.
Last edited by Mordrak; 03-18-2008 at 10:36 AM.
You either need to get out more or a dictionary.
Reading the original post, the 3D0 was the very first thing I thought of as well. From my understanding, their business model was to make the hardware relatively open to both hardware and software developers and charge extremely low royalty rates ($3 per game).
Of course, that means a much higher initial cost for the system, $700 upon release, in order to pay for the hardware production, development, support and marketing.
These days, if a small developer of unique games is looking for a platform, wouldn't the iPhone be much better place to look than this proposal?
But would you buy a console/gaming PC that was as powerful as the Wii and didn't have the wiimote or Nintendo's game library?
I was right:
http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/51869
Clarifying comments made earlier this week, PC manufacturer Acer has stated that it will not be releasing a dedicated gaming console.
"Acer is not going to release any game console but the idea is to develop a high-end PC (so not a console) targeted at the serious gamer," a company representative explained to videogaming247.
"That was a major misunderstanding as [Acer senior VP James T Wong] was wrongly interpreted," the rep noted.
Posting Permissions