Topic: The OFFICIAL Big N rumor thread *bring your own salt*

[Louieturkey]

Sony is showing off more than just games.  They have tvs, computers, bluray players, etc.  They need more space for those different revenue streams.

[MegaByte]

No, they only show games (and their 3D TVs with the games). They always have a huge booth, though it helps to show off certain things like Eye/Move.

[MysticGohan]

It's because they are trying to compensate for something

[ShyGuy]

This thread is a dry dry desert. DRY BONES!

[MysticGohan]

I prefer the thought of Dessert It's alot better, eh?

[ShyGuy]

Moist Dessert. Tres Leche Cake.

[MysticGohan]

The cakes a Lie!

[Ymeegod]

Actually MS booth is the largest for GDC, that and they have several smaller booths as well.  Nintendo in the front with Sony and MS has the back along with Valve and Epic who has large booths as well; being engine makers it does make sense for them to have large booths.

[BlackNMild2k1]

Supposedly Valve might be unveiling the "Steam Box" @ GDC, so if that turns out to be true, they'll be showing off more than just an engine, since they now have a car to put it in.

[Ymeegod]

If that was true, I'll eat my hat. 

Love it, a state of the art gaming machine at a LOW price that's going allow developers/publishers no royalities fee, sure and the damn thing prints MONEY to boot.

Another Phantom in the works or an early april's fools day joke.

 

[Killer_Man_Jaro]

I don't know where else to say this, so...

Assassin's Creed III to be a Wii U launch title?

A handful of sites have it listed, and we did, of course, get various comments at last year's E3 regarding an unannounced (at the time) Assassin's Creed game on the new console. Supposedly, Ubisoft is doing a big reveal for AC3 in less than two day's time, so if it is to be released on Wii U, I'd have thought they would mention it then.

[tendoboy1984]

If that was true, I'll eat my hat. 

Love it, a state of the art gaming machine at a LOW price that's going allow developers/publishers no royalities fee, sure and the damn thing prints MONEY to boot.

Another 3D0 in the works or an early april's fools day joke.

Fixed.

[Kairon]

allow developers/publishers no royalities fee

Huh? I'm pretty sure that Valve takes a cut of every sale, so I think that's effectively the same thing, isn't it?

[TJ Spyke]

Kairon is right, Valve DOES take a cut out of every game sold on Steam. They even mention in their FAQ:

"4. What is your revenue split?
We don't discuss our revenue split publicly. Once we take a look at your game, we'll get to those details. "

So don't expect that to change with any proposed Steam Box.

[Ymeegod]

If you read the report it states how it's allowing EA's Origin and other services to be used without fees--hense everybody can use it free of charge. 

Also states how it's going play PC games which for the most part uses MS's API's, though there's an handful of Mac (CoCoa) and Linux (opengl) games, which means MS wouldn't have to approve this as well.

[Chozo Ghost]

If you read the report it states how it's allowing EA's Origin and other services to be used without fees--hense everybody can use it free of charge.

That's because hardware wise its a PC which will be running windows and/or Linux. That means anything which can run on those OSes can also run on this steambox. The only way they could stop it is if they closed the architecture and made it essentially like a console, but in that case software support would be limited and the thing would probably flop.

[TJ Spyke]

The only way they could stop it is if they closed the architecture and made it essentially like a console, but in that case software support would be limited and the thing would probably flop.

Which is what Apple does with their computers, and why there really are so few Mac games (compared to Windows games).

[tendoboy1984]

If you read the report it states how it's allowing EA's Origin and other services to be used without fees--hense everybody can use it free of charge.

That's because hardware wise its a PC which will be running windows and/or Linux. That means anything which can run on those OSes can also run on this steambox. The only way they could stop it is if they closed the architecture and made it essentially like a console, but in that case software support would be limited and the thing would probably flop.

Why would it flop? Game consoles are closed platforms, yet they still get plenty of developer support. Developers already know what to expect when developing for a game console, so why should a SteamBox be any exception?

[Adrock]

Which is what Apple does with their computers, and why there really are so few Mac games (compared to Windows games).

That's what Apple does with iOS because Apple can demand absolute control of the platform. Outside of jailbreaking, users have to get software directly through the App Store. My understanding is that OSX is considerably less closed, much to the chagrin of Apple and especially the late Steve Jobs. The reason it has far less software is because developers have to make a Mac version and the userbase is significantly smaller than Windows. It's up to these companies to decide whether it's worth porting to OSX. Every Nintendo fan should be familiar with that reasoning. It's gotten significantly better. Mac gets more major software. Apple has made it easier since switching from Power PC to Intel though they're trying to exact more control of the platform with the Mac App Store and the rumors of them dropping support of disc drives. Not adopting Blu Ray despite being on the BDA is just the beginning. They want people to have to go through the Mac App Store.

[NWR_insanolord]

The Mac is not a closed platform in any way, shape or form. You need to follow certain rules to get on the Mac App Store, but you can release software outside of that that doesn't have to follow any rules. Also, the amount of games on the Mac has increased by a lot in recent years, thanks to the switch to Intel, the increasing market share and the introduction of a Mac version of Steam.

[TJ Spyke]

Maybe things have changed in recent years (I have no desire to own a Mac), but Mac used to be very closed and in some ways it still is. If Apple didn't want your content on their platform, it wouldn't be allowed.

[NWR_insanolord]

That is not true and has never been true, at least as long as I've been using the platform, going back to about 1996.

[TJ Spyke]

Well, it was true. They may have eased up a little since, but no software gets on Mac without Apple's approval.

[Ceric]

Linux, Windows, and OSX are open platforms. 
Especially compared to all the Phone OSes and Consoles\Handhelds.

Where it really differs is what standards and APIs are available with them.
In General out of the 3 OSX is the most restrictive.
Linux if there is enough demand someone will make it. A lot of the time if its good from what I can tell OSX will also use is it.

Microsoft supports tons of standards.  A lot they have no real intention to ever use with there own product offerings.  They also have had a vested interest in gaming because it was a differentiator from the Apple offerings.  Thats how Direct X came into being.

Now Apple on the Hardware side is historically limited. Original iPod only worked with Macs,  Displays that used connections that were Apple Specific, etc.  Now days Apple couldn't get away with that.

With all that in mind today it honestly doesn't much matter who you go with.  None of them are really going to limit you in any way.  That battle has moved on to the phones.

[NWR_insanolord]

Well, it was true. They may have eased up a little since, but no software gets on Mac without Apple's approval.

That is absolutely false.