lordfroakie
Member
Are game engines supported as well like game maker, ue4, rpg maker and etc?
So are you privately finding the prototyping or is part of the campaign money going towards that?There is a lot of work and expense to prototype a consumer product and to do it right. Our team is confident that the architecture and circuit design they have spent almost a year on will work as planned. We have been fortunate to already have the shell and cartridge prototypes and controller prototypes all in hand and that is a large part of this venture. We have established relationships with the largest electronics distributors in the country and have a local contract PCBA manufacturer ready and waiting to start producing. The prototyping of the console electronics itself will come together soon after we are funded.
Are game engines supported as well like game maker, ue4, rpg maker and etc?
So are you privately finding the prototyping or is part of the campaign money going towards that?
Why not just go the rest of the way and get a working prototype then? Would show everyone that you are fully invested in the project and would let us see the games running. Because currently we are getting promises of a new console and promises of games for said console.We have privately funded the cartridge and console tooling. We will be using a % of the funding from the campaign for various levels of board prototyping to get us to the "production board".
Next, to address the prototyping situation and Kickstarter. We've had a variety of conversations directly with them, especially since OUYA never showed anything near a prototype, and also after seeing a current (laughable) campaign like this get approved: https://www.kickstarter.com/project...onsole-without-microtransaction?ref=discovery
We've come a long way already. The user interface and industrial designs are far along. Our prototype is up and running.
My concern about this is that I want this to succeed
and not see it fail! I have zero concerns regarding Mike and his team's reputation and pedigree here. It has to be terribly difficult to get a project like this into
the general public's hands. They've been nothing but
upfront and "transparent"
First off, OUYA didn't need to show a prototype because that requirement wasn't in effect until September of 2012, OUYA's campaign launched in July of 2012. Secondly, they did so anyways:
Also from their Kickstarter:
I agree that the NoMo console is laughable but if you find that funny then you should appreciate why people might laugh at yours. You seem to have a love-hate relationship when it comes to comparing your console to OUYA. You object to us comparing the hardware to OUYA but you welcome comparisons to OUYA's success. Would you be more comfortable if we compared you to NoMo?
What you are seeing in that video is more than likely an Nvidia Eval board not anything they built. It obviously isn't the board inside the Ouya as it doesn't fit. We could do the same thing with our processor eval board, but that isn't technically a prototype. And you did see the controller getting cut out of a block of wood?
We are light years ahead of where they were when they launched their campaign.
Also, they show a menu on a TV. Nothing there is a working prototype. All smoke and mirrors.
The only reason I do mention OUYA is they are really only one of a few successfully funded game console hardware campaigns. There really isn't much of a track record with consoles on any crowdfunding platform.
MIke, if you don't get what you need through crowd funding. Do you have VC investors that could help fill that gap if you are short? I believe in what you want to do but capital is hard to come by and we all have concerns about dropping $300+and you getting 90% to the finish line. Hell, it could fully fund right away and I am worried for nothing. But you do understand why some of us are concerned about IGG.
Those are some pretty high and mighty words coming from a cardboard aficionado. Also, did you notice you glued the HDMI where the power should be and vice versa?Nothing there is a working prototype. All smoke and mirrors.
How is that not "technically a prototype"? Because it's not production-ready? It's a physical development that works the way they want the final product to. Prototypes by definition are not ready to ship to the public.
I've never seen a project that is so averse to showing off their work. If you truly are "light years ahead" of them, why no show it? That would be some appropriate and effective damage control.
Those are some pretty high and mighty words coming from a cardboard aficionado. Also, did you notice you glued the HDMI where the power should be and vice versa?
How is that not "technically a prototype"? Because it's not production-ready? It's a physical development that works the way they want the final product to. Prototypes by definition are not ready to ship to the public.
I've never seen a project that is so averse to showing off their work. If you truly are "light years ahead" of them, why no show it? That would be some appropriate and effective damage control.
Those are some pretty high and mighty words coming from a cardboard aficionado. Also, did you notice you glued the HDMI where the power should be and vice versa?
You're technically right about prototypes, but when you're building an electronic device, running code on an off-the-shelf dev board is meaningless. It doesn't prove anything about hardware design progress. So Mike is right to make the distinction.How is that not "technically a prototype"? Because it's not production-ready? It's a physical development that works the way they want the final product to. Prototypes by definition are not ready to ship to the public.
I've never seen a project that is so averse to showing off their work. If you truly are "light years ahead" of them, why no show it? That would be some appropriate and effective damage control.
Those are some pretty high and mighty words coming from a cardboard aficionado. Also, did you notice you glued the HDMI where the power should be and vice versa?
You're technically right about prototypes, but when you're building an electronic device, running code on an off-the-shelf dev board is meaningless. It doesn't prove anything about hardware design progress. So Mike is right to make the distinction.
You're technically right about prototypes, but when you're building an electronic device, running code on an off-the-shelf dev board is meaningless. It doesn't prove anything about hardware design progress. So Mike is right to make the distinction.
Regarding the paper & glue mockups, that's normal. What's not normal is the general public getting to see that process. It's obviously enjoyable for a dev team to see these mockups come together, and it's a bit of fun to share it - not some kind of deception.
I'm equally cautious about funding starting without a prototype though. I watched the Pandora get developed on pre-order funding and saw just about everything that could go wrong, go wrong. Although they got there in the end. Then I watched the iCP2 get built on KS funding, and that was an unmitigated disaster.
Admittedly, they were much more complicated projects being crammed into multi-layered mobile-sized PCBs. A vastly bigger challenge than the RVGS. But we're in an age where any serious hobbyist can get their design protoyped. So I'm wondering why that can't happen here before the campaign starts.
Wouldn't it prove that they have those components working with one another? The GCW Zero started their Kickstarter with a production-ready handheld but the HDMI out has never worked and doesn't look like it ever will.
I should also remind you that they're planning to include an FPGA chip, which has never been used in a mass market device. It's supposedly able to do things that normal PC hardware can't do so it stands to reason that it would be important to show it working on a dev board.
I've got a prototype that I did about 2 years ago with some ancient technology.. Nowhere near as complex but technically they're not the first to develop a new cartridge based console that's reconfigurable Doesn't have as nice a case though..
z80 @ 6.25mhz (yes, that means programming in assembler)
8K SRAM
FPGA with configuration prom on the cartridge so each game could theoretically have it's own graphics / sound hardware. The one and only core I did had 2 scrollable tile-based layers, 32 sprites @ 16x16 and 64 palettes of 4 colors.
Onboard speaker + amp
VGA out
2 standard Atari joystick pins.
Total cost: ~$30 including PCB...
-Mux
Not really, it'd be an Altera (or whomever) FPGA development board. Best case scenario, they could show an FPGA dev board connected to an ARM dev board connected to a cartridge connector and a game controller. Which admittedly would be a lot better than what OUYA showed off, but might scare off less technical people than us...If the RVGS team were to show their FPGA in action, that would have to be custom hardware.
Maybe not mass market, but the two most popular NES flash carts, Everdrive and PowerPak, use an FPGA.I should also remind you that they're planning to include an FPGA chip, which has never been used in a mass market device. It's supposedly able to do things that normal PC hardware can't do so it stands to reason that it would be important to show it working on a dev board.
For some reason I thought FPGA boards were far more expensive than that. Strange.In the discussions over at AtariAge, a guy showed off his own prototype board he made that does include "cartridges", Atari controllers, and has an FPGA chip!
http://atariage.com/forums/topic/235430-how-has-this-not-been-posted-yet-retro-vgs/?p=3323751
Wow.
Wow wow wow wow wow wow!!
They don't meet Kickstarter's minimum requirements. Alternatively Indiegogo lets you keep the funding even if you don't reach the funding goal.
I'm absolutely astounded that anyone is even thinking of throwing money into this. The red flags are so glaring and obvious that it boggles my mind that people would give them money.
Now they've switched to Indiegogo? This is a cash grab, nothing more. They couldn't meet Kickstarter basic requirements and now they want to make sure they keep any cash pledged?
Maybe you should read the threads you post in Just a few posts ago this was said:Now they've switched to Indiegogo? This is a cash grab, nothing more. They couldn't meet Kickstarter basic requirements and now they want to make sure they keep any cash pledged?
Next, Indiegogo also offers a Fixed Funding option which works just like Kickstarter. We don't get the money unless we reach our minimum goal. So please don't immediately jump to conclusions without learning more about that venue
OUYA did this very same thing - but not until a month after their Kickstarter was completed. Their one-month update stated that they had just gotten back from PCB manufacturers in Asia, and they were about to get started designing their first PCB for their first prototype. Of course, they hadn't gotten a controller design yet, except for its shape. As for "professionally managed from pitch to delivery", you are forgetting how OUYA shipped two months late while claiming to be perfectly on time (because they had shipped 200 of their 60,000 units on the last day of the month they said they would ship in...no more shipments until two months later), some Kickstarter pledgers didn't get theirs until after it hit retail stores. The communication towards the end sucked.do they mean to say they're "light years ahead" of OUYA because they're skipping a step and going straight to discussions with PCB manufacturers? I don't know enough about hardware development but I trust how OUYA went about it because regardless of what you say about the console (and yes, I rip on them too) the fact is that they completed theirs and the project was professionally managed from pitch to delivery. What happens if components (innevitably) don't work and the board needs to be redesigned? I'm sure every trip to the factory with a new design costs money and they've already changed their design more than once without even having a running board.
AGS and Visionaire too I'd hopeWe will be working on plugins for the major gaming making suites. Certainly Unity and Game Maker.
Agreed. It's the quickest way to clam up most of the dissent in regards to the whole "it's just a concept/no physical hardware yet" thing.Also I think it would be a pretty good idea to have an off the shelf dev board showing the games running on the tech they are putting into the machine. Currently there is no physical board or software to show off all it's promises.
In the discussions over at AtariAge, a guy showed off his own prototype board he made that does include "cartridges", Atari controllers, and has an FPGA chip!
http://atariage.com/forums/topic/235430-how-has-this-not-been-posted-yet-retro-vgs/?p=3323751
Wow.
Wow wow wow wow wow wow!!
Maybe you should read the threads you post in Just a few posts ago this was said:
OUYA did this very same thing - but not until a month after their Kickstarter was completed. Their one-month update stated that they had just gotten back from PCB manufacturers in Asia, and they were about to get started designing their first PCB for their first prototype. Of course, they hadn't gotten a controller design yet, except for its shape. As for "professionally managed from pitch to delivery", you are forgetting how OUYA shipped two months late while claiming to be perfectly on time (because they had shipped 200 of their 60,000 units on the last day of the month they said they would ship in...no more shipments until two months later), some Kickstarter pledgers didn't get theirs until after it hit retail stores. The communication towards the end sucked.
Because that guy's design (which is awesome) is extremely basic in comparison. The RVGS will also integrate a system-on-chip (like a mobile phone or regular game console) allowing modern game engines to run. It's complicated, expensive and requires the use of specialist manufacturing facilities.So why does Retro VGS cost $350?
Maybe you should read the threads you post in Just a few posts ago this was said:
All I can say is that if funded we will bring this product to market as promised and everyone will get to enjoy cartridge based gaming again.
Finally I can (not) buy another machine that plays hot new (been released on PC and everywhere else for a while) games on my TV with (expensive) cartridges.
FFS, who thinks this is a good idea?
How are they not light years ahead, when OUYA was less advanced a month after their pledge drive ended? I'm not saying OUYA had it easy because they used off the shelf parts, I'm saying they showed no prototype whatsoever, they had a Tegra 3 dev test board that they showed themselves holding a couple times in their video. They never showed it hooked up to anything let alone running, and they had a fake demo running on a PC controlled by a PS3 controller showing a mockup of a menu with games that never arrived on the system. If you want something similar from Retro VGS they've said they have dev boards, they could show themselves holding them just like OUYA did, and it would be just as meaningless. I mean I could buy a Tegra 4 dev test board, would you consider that a prototype of a new game console I claimed to be making? It wouldn't be any different than if I got an Android tablet, took the case off, and said that was my prototype.Well, no. That's the point, RVGS and OUYA clearly aren't doing the very same thing. That doesn't make any sense and RVGS definitely isn't "lightyears ahead" with nothing to show.
You can't say that "oh OUYA had it easy because they just used off the shelf parts to make a prototype! RVGS hardware wouldn't work on an off the shelf dev board, so we don't even have to do that step... give us your money!" Umm... NO!! If anything the fact that they're using an out of the ordinary chip means they should have an even higher burden to show that their idea works. There is no excuse not to when they're asking the public to fund their vision.
In short- A prototype is a prototype, it shows off your work. OUYA started their crowdfunding with something, RVGS currently has nothing.
Sounds like you're learning a lot about manufacturing today. Perhaps you could spend more time reading about it instead of continual attempts to drop bombs in this thread.You know what I just learned?
The Jaguar II had a prototype board and this thing doesn't.
Holy shit. What did I do to end up in this alternate time line?
I find it interesting how unproven devs with artwork and no gameplay can get games funded easily via KS but everyone is so skeptical over this. Mike seems like an honest guy to me and not one to run away with people's money. It's apparent he has already invested a decent amount of his own money into this and it's way beyond the "idea phase".
The price will be too much for me most likely, but I like the idea of this a lot.
Also KS is just as shady as Indie Go Go (with the fixed amount option), no one has any obligation to provide what was promised.
How are they not light years ahead
How are they not light years ahead
How are they not light years ahead
How are they not light years ahead
How are they not light years ahead
Sounds like you're learning a lot about manufacturing today. Perhaps you could spend more time reading about it instead of continual attempts to drop bombs in this thread.
Was this ever meant to be anything other than an idea of what the PCB will look like when it's in the console and nothing more? I mean, you can even see the paper with the printout right behind it. I don't think it was intended to baffle people into thinking the PCB actually existed and was in that photo.
I have confidence in my team who have a career in software/hardware development to deliver in spades and ship this product within a years time. So just check out our campaign when it goes live and make your decisions based on all the final information. We will be bringing our backers on the front lines of console development, from the extensive prototyping to production and everything in between via weekly updates and videos.