EVO Linux Gaming Console Opens Pre-Orders 247
Engadget is reporting that Envizions, maker of the EVO Linux game console, has finally announced final specs and opened the doors to pre-orders. All bets are off until users actually see the hardware, but it will be nice to see a new player in the market. Of course, this assumes they put some time into a little polish that is usually expected from the gaming community (that website, yikes) and some effort into a killer game library. "Envizions say that the console will run a modified, quick-boot distro of Fedora called Mirrors (which can be upgraded to a beefier build named Mirrors Evolution X), and will feature a "cloud" service stacked with Amiga (!) games and an Akimbo-based video service. Beyond that, proper titles will be sold online and on SD cards for around $20." I'm sure they won't forget to send Slashdot a beta review copy with a couple of games.
So... what will it play? (Score:5, Insightful)
What, exactly, does "proper titles" encompass?
Will it run PC Games?
Maybe ANY games from any other console?
Will developers need to write games specifically for this? Why would they do so?
Or are we simply going to be limited to the vast selection of Linux Games on the market?
I predict... (Score:5, Insightful)
That this will become a hackers toy, rather than a gamers toy. They're targeting a pretty small market if they feel the need to advertise their Amiga library. Maybe they want to go for the nostalgic and hacker audiences, but unless this brings something to the table that the Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo can't patch into their current consoles I just don't see it gaining any steam.
Sold at a profit? Wildly successful. (Score:4, Insightful)
Subject says it all: if they are able to sell the system at a profit then they will be wildly successful. Why? Because the machine has excellent specifications for the price (love that footprint) and if it is at all reliable then it's going to be a moneymaker. I'll buy one to replace my Xbox as the system which runs XBMC, since I now have an HDTV and the Xbox can't really handle drawing the XBMC interface fluidly at 1080i (and doesn't have 1080p at all.) I've bought two (ooh, two) Xbox games at full retail; while you might laugh about the $10 in licensing fees that netted Microsoft, I bought the console used so they definitely didn't eat anything there. If these guys can make a profit (any profit) on the hardware and then make a few bucks per owner on games, they're in the money.
Yay (Score:2, Insightful)
Price of an XBox... (Score:3, Insightful)
So for the price of an XBox 360, I can buy a console that doesn't have -any- video games that were written this decade yet, and future games will cost $20.
Newsflash: Game developers want to charge more than $20 for games. They aren't going to bother making games for this thing when they could make them for 360 or PS3 and sell them for more.
Re:$380... (Score:5, Insightful)
Idiots.
Re:Looks all right (Score:5, Insightful)
No it's not. It a very bad sign. See, every so often a company comes along and sees how profitable the gaming industry is. They then think to themselves, "well, that's EASY! I should get a piece of the pie!" Then they spare no imagination (literally, none at all) in creating the most generic "game console" known to mankind. Without fail, they always copy the PS2 controller design. (Which isn't even that great to begin with.)
Then when they stroll into the market thinking they're going to pick up a few dozen studio partnerships and get about the business of selling this generic piece of plastic. Except, shock and horror! None of the game studios are taking them seriously! Why oh why?!? Don't they see how awesome and moneyful* this venture will be?!?!
Eventually, the company runs out of money and hangs their heads in shame. Those stupid game studios. It's all their fault.
Cases in Point (Note the controllers):
Indrema [wikipedia.org]
Mattel Hyperscan [mydigitallife.info]
Phantom Game Console [bbc.co.uk]
If you ever see a game console that uses a rip-off PS2 controller, run the other way. FAST.
* Hey, it's a perfectly cromulent word!
How the hell did this ever get funding? (Score:5, Insightful)
Seriously, what a horrible idea. I don't see how this has any hope of competing with the three consoles that are on the market now. It doesn't have an impressive graphics chip, so it isn't going to blow people away with visuals. At the listed price point, it doesn't have any real price advantage (you can get a 360 for $300, a Wii for $250, a PS3 for $400). It doesn't seem to have ANY new games, much less games that you can't get on another console. So what's the draw?
OSS isn't an answer. Consoles gamers really don't care. The reason people like to buy consoles is to get cheap hardware to play games and no problems. They aren't buying them to write their own software. For that they buy, well, a computer.
I cannot see how the hell they expect this to succeed.
Re:The video is less than old ATI 9800 series (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Price of an XBox... (Score:3, Insightful)
Newsflash: Game developers want to charge more than $20 for games. They aren't going to bother making games for this thing when they could make them for 360 or PS3 and sell them for more.
You might be right about current game developers - but isn't there a huge start-up cost to break into that industry? An open console like this might provide a new opportunity (or reduce barriers) for new players to enter the market. Perhaps we'll actually see something new and innovative come out of it.
Re:Looks all right (Score:5, Insightful)
XBox - Buttons in approximately the same locations/quantities + the white and black buttons.
The important difference is the location of the left analog stick.
Every game controller outside of the Dual Shock -- including the original PSX controller -- is designed so that the primary inputs on both sides are directly under the relaxed thumb. Thus you get the face buttons on the right where they are in every controller, and the left analog stick where they are on everything that isn't a Dual Shock. On the original PSX controller and other pre-analog controllers, the D-Pad was in the primary position on the left. For the Dual Shock, they just added the two analog controllers to the existing PSX controller without changing the primary input locations 1) in case analog didn't take off on PSX and 2) to not mess with playing older games. The analog stick was intentionally placed in a sub-optimal place. It stayed that way on the PS2 and PS3 because of brand recognition.
When a new game company starting from scratch with no history or anything decides to emulate the Dual Shock and not fall back on basic principles, this is indicative of a deep problem with that company.
Re:Nobody knew PlayStation or Xbox (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Seems like a weird time to enter the market (Score:2, Insightful)
Or you could just get a PS2 [joystiq.com]
And there's 1900 games for it (plus 1200 PS1).
Good luck competing with that.
Pre-order? (Score:4, Insightful)
You mean reserve. Not sure why we accepted the newspeak gamestop was pushing, it's exactly the same old annoying process by which you give someone money and they promise to give you something at some point in the future.
If there is a difference, it's that game retailers (again gamestop) try to punish those who don't "doubleplusadvanceorder."
Re:Nobody knew PlayStation or Xbox (Score:5, Insightful)
Nintendo wasn't a huge multinational company when they entered the video game market.
But they were also not a no-name company. They were a 90 year old company when they moved into the electronic gaming market. Before then they were well-known company in Japan who made card games and all sorts of toys. So while not a multinational company like Sony or Microsoft they weren't a no-name like EVO. Secondly, by the time they had come out with their first gaming console, they had built up a reputation in arcade games both in Japan and America. So unlike this company, Nintendo actually had it's name out their long before they released the Famicom/NES.
Re:Long term support (Score:3, Insightful)
>> you get to play a static, old version of Linux ...just shows how little you know.
>
> You mean like the kernel of the Long Term Support versions of Ubuntu OS?
LTS versions of Ubuntu will get new kernel releases. That's rather the point of the S in LTS.
Plus, you can install any other kernel you like. Some of us weirdos even have versions of the
stock kernel running on their copies of Ubuntu LTS.