They wouldn't be more expensive, they would be the same price.
Nintendo will never ever ship a console that requires always online.
That's not the point, developers and apps depend on Google Play services for their software to run. If Nintendo ditches them then it has the task of trying to build replicates, just so third party software can operate normally. Trying to replicate Google's vast range of services is a phenomenal task.
Further reading:
Googles iron grip on Android: Controlling open source by any means necessary
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2013...rolling-open-source-by-any-means-necessary/4/
Most of the services that would be required for gaming would be easily replicable.
There would be work involved with porting from Google Play services to Nintendo services, but I suspect DeNA's role is to minimize that work as much as possible, and it would also be far less work than porting to any of Nintendo's current platforms.
Yes developers won't be able to take a Google Play version of their game and ship it for NX with no extra work, but it would be far less work than what doing similar would be today.
if they're the same price, then i wonder the advantage of having two different mediums would be? just the ability to make more off the far fewer discs they would manufacture, i suppose?
Sell cards for a handheld and discs for a console. Include a code that adds all the other versions of the game to your account at no extra charge. The discs and cards work just like they do today, but you just download the other versions of it.
Presumably a big part of why Nintendo would go down the avenue they are describing with NX is so they can more easily convert people who own their handheld consoles into being people who also own their home consoles.
I imagine the Wii U would be selling a lot better if 3DS owners could play all the games they own on 3DS on the Wii U.
I don't know the security rammifications of this, but from a development perspective, this has to be good right, on the assumption it's true?
Android-based? I wonder if Nintendo will be able to prevent widespread piracy which I imagine would be a very serious problem for them (unless all their new content is F2P).
That's all true for a phone/tablet - but for a console nintendo can build their own services on top of that - i'd say that'll be part of DeNa 's job.That's not the point, developers and apps depend on Google Play services for their software to run. If Nintendo ditches them through an Android fork then it has the task of trying to build replicates, just so third party software can operate normally.
This doesn't mean much except that Nintendo made a good descion wrt maximizing their available software engineering talent, i.e. there is no reason to reinvent the wheel and all these guys are free to work on other stuff.
Sony's ps4 runs BSD, that doesn't mean ps4 is a server doing server stuff. Saying Nintendo is using Android as the bases for their next hardware tells us virtually nothing about it.
That's not the point, developers and apps depend on Google Play services for their software to run. If Nintendo ditches them through an Android fork then it has the task of trying to build replicates, just so third party software can operate normally. Trying to replicate Google's vast range of services is a phenomenal task. Remember, the whole point of adopting Android, according to the source, is third party support and cost reasons. Forking Android wouldn't solve these problems.
[/I]
I wonder if I would have access to Google play apps or it would be a custom branch like Amazon's Kindle Fire tablets.
Android OS at least implies ARM processor? wtf?
Vanilla Android is pretty secure. As far as real security is concerned it's usually vendor customisations that open up the platform to exploits. Samsung used to be notorious for this.Nintendo better get the security locked down.
That's not the point, developers and apps depend on Google Play services for their software to run. If Nintendo ditches them through an Android fork then it has the task of trying to build replicates, just so third party software can operate normally. Trying to replicate Google's vast range of services is a phenomenal task. Remember, the whole point of adopting Android, according to the source, is third party support and cost reasons. Forking Android wouldn't solve these problems.
Further reading:
Google’s iron grip on Android: Controlling open source by any means necessary
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2013...rolling-open-source-by-any-means-necessary/4/
Taking the Android app ecosystem from Google seems easy: just get your own app store up and running, convince developers to upload their apps to it, and you're on your way. But the Google APIs that ship with Play Services are out to stop this by convincing developers to weave dependence on Google into their apps. Google's strategy with Google Play Services is to turn the "Android App Ecosystem" into the "Google Play Ecosystem" by making a developer's life as easy as possible on a Google-approved device—and as difficult as possible on a non-Google-approved device.
If you use any Google APIs and try to run your app on a Kindle, or any other non-Google version of AOSP: surprise! Your app is broken. Google's Android is a very high percentage of the Android market, and developers only really care about making their app easily, making it work well, and reaching a wide audience. Google APIs accomplish all that, with the side effect that your app is now dependent on the device having a Google Apps license.
Besides the piracy issue, Android is an awful platform in some respects for games. Audio often has anywhere from 40 to 100ms of lag depending on the device and API used, the NDK is a mess to develop on (native code debugging in the IDE was only just announced at Google I/O last week), and if it's a mobile console, most mobile GPUs have shittacular drivers. Is this rumor is true then it might be an extremely customized version of Android.
Based on iwata's quote about Wii U architecture. But that quote is so vague it could mean anything. It's this one:Would be possible from now on that to have the whole Nintendo library since NES, without much architecture hassle, and Android working as a virtual machine?
In a similar note I've seen mentioned that NX will be backward compatible with Wii U, where that claim comes from?
While we are only going to be able to start this with the next system, it will become important for us to accurately take advantage of what we have done with the Wii U architecture," Iwata said. "It of course does not mean that we are going to use exactly the same architecture as Wii U, but we are going to create a system that can absorb the Wii U architecture adequately."
Afaik it's not - you can compile a version of android without the google services included - as the google services need an explicit license from Google, while the android OS itself is open source.I was thinking about this, and yeah, taking out the whole Google APIs part of android is a ton of work, that I don't believe Nintendo will want to do.
3DS already runs on an ARM processor.Android OS at least implies ARM processor? wtf?
Android OS at least implies ARM processor? wtf?
Android OS at least implies ARM processor? wtf?
I guess you missed the news where Nintendo announced they were going to make some mobile games now.
Edit: Please do not assume that the NX is an Ouya or a Smartphone. None of those things are implied. This is merely about the software architecture of the operating system.
Could the various people claiming disappointment elaborate as to why? Do you think Nintendo has the expertise to come up with something better than Android or would you have preferred they went with another external solution?
To me it signals Nintendo is finally trying something different and willing to part with some of their insular philosophy in favour of focusing on where their own strengths lie.
3DS already runs on an ARM processor.
IIRC, Android can work with x86 architecture.
That there is nothing WTF about nintendo's next handheld running on ARM? That's non-news and highly expected.And your point is?
http://consoleos.com/Link? I cant find anything official. Any device currently that have?
I hope. The idea of console and handheld sharing titles deeply interests me.Makes sense. It allows for console and handheld platform unity.
Could the various people claiming disappointment elaborate as to why? Do you think Nintendo has the expertise to come up with something better than Android or would you have preferred they went with another external solution?
To me it signals Nintendo is finally trying something different and willing to part with some of their insular philosophy in favour of focusing on where their own strengths lie.
Actually Nintendo will provide content, DeNa the infrastructure.DeNa will make mobile games for Nintendo, you mean.
That there is nothing WTF about nintendo's next handheld running on ARM? That's non-news and highly expected.
http://consoleos.com/
Download & install android on your PC right now.
Link? I cant find anything official. Any device currently that have?